Search the Community

This is what I personally know about it: No diffuse means "skip the diffuse path code for this light" essentially means don't add/mix this light color/texture color info unto the surface, only use it as a simple b&w light. No specular is essentially the same but for specular textures, it skips the specular component/code/calculation and makes the light less heavy by removing the specular effect. About performance impact, for today GPU's, I don't think is as important as it was in 2004, but still, I'm sure it does have a small impact on performance, for the better of course, specially if done for many lights, but will also make them way more unrealistic. Btw lights with both no diffuse and nospecular, were used for the "projected shadows" or lights used to project fake "shadows" unto surfaces, this was used in Doom 3 to simulate basic, shadow mapping, for rotating fans and grid materials that use alpha textures, all because stencil shadows ignore those. Now that TDM has real shadow mapping, IMO such lights are less necessary and I wouldn't recommend their use for such effect. Thou lights with no specular and no normal mapping, are still useful for some effects, like simulating casting colored light from painted glass, like something bellow, and they are faster then normal lights:

I am going to sort-of reveal that this is loosely like the nature of my upcoming mission. I noted it here when JackFarmer asked about things that are coming along in this post: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/profile/37993-jackfarmer/&status=3943&type=status It too is a builder church. The player is requested by a hopefully famous character in another mission to handle some business that is affecting the congregation. I am looking to invoke some info and history laid down in other missions as a hook story.

I created the page: https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Lightgem In the source I placed the following text: <!-- Page text made by forum user Fiver: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22327-how-can-i-create-an-account-on-the-tdm-wiki/&do=findComment&comment=491145 --> Personally I think the page isn't really necessary because the info is already present under HUD.

I don't know if it's mentioned anywhere else on the Wiki, but it's worth mentioning that the first global keywords are for sound: // Use on of the predefined surface types like: // none, metal, stone, flesh, glass, wood stone And this: //surftype15 //description "carpet This is a carpet texture." I think this is sound as well, but I also think 'description' does other stuff, for example for using with vine arrows: stone description "vine_friendly" If someone has a list (or link to code) where all this is defined for TDM so mappers are aware, that would be useful. I would also move the 'special keywords' section up so it's before the obsolete stuff - that old stuff needs to be relegated to the very bottom. I would also change the title of that section from 'No ambient and frob -stages needed' to something like 'Deprecated stages' and say it's just there for historical reference.

This can be removed as well, you don't need to specify texture map slots you don't use. In some cases you even shouldn't.

The problems with the lightening texture has vanished, moreover, the camera screens work now perfectly, I had here and there strange results (glass texture not showing up, lights do not show up) in 2.11 and the previous beta. Thank you @stgatilov

No warnings during dmap re: the patch, how do I check if a patch has a "[0..1] non-overlapping texcoords"? Is it correct in interpreting that to mean the texture has been fit to the patch? If so then yes. This is the patch copied from DR if that helps: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <map version="1" format="portable"> <layers> <layer id="0" name="Default" parentId="-1" active="true" hidden="false"/> </layers> <selectionGroups> <selectionGroup id="415" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="416" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="417" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="418" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="420" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="421" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="423" name=""/> <selectionGroup id="424" name=""/> </selectionGroups> <selectionSets/> <properties> <property key="EditTimeInSeconds" value="20837"/> <property key="LastCameraAngle" value="69 332.186 0"/> <property key="LastCameraPosition" value="20.0088 1653.64 531.677"/> <property key="LastShaderClipboardMaterial" value="textures/darkmod/nature/snow/snow_rough01"/> </properties> <entity number="0"> <primitives> <patch number="0" width="3" height="3" fixedSubdivisions="false"> <material name="textures/darkmod/weather/rain2_heavy2024mtr"/> <controlVertices> <controlVertex row="0" column="0" x="-448.000000" y="1712.000000" z="720.000000" u="0" v="0"/> <controlVertex row="1" column="0" x="-448.000000" y="1568.000000" z="720.000000" u="0" v="0.500000"/> <controlVertex row="2" column="0" x="-448.000000" y="1424.000000" z="720.000000" u="0" v="1.000000"/> <controlVertex row="0" column="1" x="-76.000000" y="1712.000000" z="720.000000" u="0.500000" v="0"/> <controlVertex row="1" column="1" x="-76.000000" y="1568.000000" z="720.000000" u="0.500000" v="0.500000"/> <controlVertex row="2" column="1" x="-76.000000" y="1424.000000" z="720.000000" u="0.500000" v="1.000000"/> <controlVertex row="0" column="2" x="296.000000" y="1712.000000" z="720.000000" u="1.000000" v="0"/> <controlVertex row="1" column="2" x="296.000000" y="1568.000000" z="720.000000" u="1.000000" v="0.500000"/> <controlVertex row="2" column="2" x="296.000000" y="1424.000000" z="720.000000" u="1.000000" v="1.000000"/> </controlVertices> <layers> <layer id="0"/> </layers> <selectionGroups/> <selectionSets/> </patch> </primitives> <keyValues> <keyValue key="classname" value="worldspawn"/> <keyValue key="difficulty0Name" value="easy"/> <keyValue key="difficulty1Name" value="medium"/> <keyValue key="difficulty2Name" value="hard"/> <keyValue key="shop_skip" value="1"/> </keyValues> <layers> <layer id="0"/> </layers> <selectionGroups/> <selectionSets/> </entity> </map>

@Geep Regarding 0.24 vs 0.25 font scale. I think there was purpose, though I can't say now which exactly. Maybe it was to ensure that all the text fits, maybe it was to make vertical padding symmetric. Anyway, why do you think 0.24 and 0.25 differ? I did not look in the code yet, but I think what engine does is 1) choose most suitable image, 2) render quad texture with it. Indeed, we can avoid some blurring if the pixel size of the quad exactly matches the image size. But I guess the engine counts font size in 640x480 virtual resolution. So even if the font size would be "12", it would later be stretched over whatever width you really have (if your aspect ratio is 16:9 then height would be stretched equally, but otherwise it would be stretched with different factor).

Likewise in subtitles; the "T" has a similar artifact. The implementation of the Stone font has known glitches, including poor spacing of "J". Probably made worse by the fact that no 12pt Stone is currently available, only 24pt and 48pt. So what you see is scaled down from 24pt. The images for the text characters are in a grid within a single .tga file (for a given base font size). Stray pixels come from adjoining letters in the grid. IMHO, it is possible to overcome such shortcomings, but not quick and easy. A good project for 2024 and TDM 2.13

@Frost_SalamanderIt has been a good minute since i've played with particle collisions with rain, however I decided to revisit it after seeing your post and I can't seem to get it working. @stgatilov could you please confirm if this is the right flow as it doesn't seem to be working in my map: 1) Create a .prt file containing: particle rain2_heavy2024 { { count 100 material textures/particles/drop2 time 0.500 cycles 0.000 bunching 1.000 distribution rect 0.000 0.000 0.000 direction cone "0.000" orientation aimed 0.000 0.040 speed "1000.000" size "0.500" aspect "1.000" randomDistribution 0.000 fadeIn 0.200 fadeOut 0.000 color 0.040 0.040 0.040 1.000 fadeColor 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.000 offset 0.000 0.000 0.000 gravity 0.000 collisionStatic mapLayout texture 512 512 } } 2) Create a .mtr file containing: textures/darkmod/weather/rain2_heavy2024mtr { deform particle rain2_heavy2024 qer_editorimage textures/editor/rain nonsolid noshadows { //needed to emit particles blend filter map _white } } 3) Create the appropriate patch in game applying the above texture to it (with the texture fit to it and it facing down) 4) dmap missionname.map 5) runparticle missionname.map But ingame the rain just ignores the brushes and falls right through: Even using "particle_collision_static_blocker" "1" on this water entity, had no impact

hmm i should have thought about that when i noticed the built in ram on the lunar lake, though also usable on a micro computer it makes more sense for mobile. 4070 ti super sounds like a good deal if the price is right, not so sure about the other models ?, performance wise they are already up there but may lack a bit more memory for higher resolution gaming, 12 gb iis mostly ok though, strangely it seemed the 4060 16 gb model was a flop but being the lowest model of the midrange cards might have been a hinderance (not performant enough to warrant the memory increase) the 4070 should have the muscle to make it a hit though. agree on the m4 socket still being popular and actually a smart move to also make the 3d cache chips availiable on those boards, looking forward to see the performance.

In the first post of the other topic Geep proposed: Then Stgatilov's answer: But I think applying subtitles in different languages shouldn't be too hard I would think, but I don't know how the current translation system works. The engine should apply the correct subtitles based on the applied language setting, this doesn't need a whole new language system I think. Not sure who's going to write those subtitles though. I can only do Dutch and English and nobody needs Dutch I think. I suggest further discussion of this to take place in topic https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/21741-subtitles-possibilities-beyond-211/

Yeah it would be cool to see some more detailed statistics and it’s a shame they aren’t really captured. Since we are talking about fan mission platforms, where players also make the content for the game, I feel like the best thing we’ve got is you can look at the number of content releases for the games. Keep in mind the graph counts campaigns as single missions - so for example NHAT and TBP both count as 1 mission. A good year for TDM has has approaching maybe 50% - mostly we’re 25-30%. https://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152494 You could also look at the number of ratings thief missions get on https://www.thiefguild.com/ vs TDM ones, but that is pretty iffy in that you could chalk that up to more awareness of the site in the thief community than TDM Out of curiosity is there a reason a thief player can’t be a new player? I kind of think a player is a player and new players would be ones who are playing the dark mod who weren't? Is there disagreement the base of players most likely to pick up the game are fans of the thief games? They are certainly the most fruitful place to find feedback on the game beyond the sphere of this forum that I have seen. When we were trying to finish up SLL there was a lot of discussion on the forums about how long it had been since there was a release for the game. I am thankful that the stats show at least some stability over the years in terms of releases for TDM, but the trend for all of the games is decline. Not doing anything is a valid response if that’s what the devs want to do - it is not possible to provide evidence that any effort will slow that inertia. As a player and content maker I would just prefer trying to find feedback where it is offered from players who were willing to try the game but ultimately could not engage with it and see if there is anything that can be done within reason to ease them into the game. The game has a lot to offer imo. All those players are potential contributors - contributions in turn attract players - it’d be nice to see the cycle go on as long as it can.

DarkRadiant does not care about engines at all, it only cares about file formats. Whether you can use DR with your Godot-based game will therefore depend on whether your game's assets are arranged in the same way as TDM. More specifically: Your game will need to read map data from the Doom 3 .map format. If it does not, there will be no way to save your map from DarkRadiant in a form that your game can access. Export to OBJ is available but if all you want to do is produce OBJ models then DarkRadiant isn't the right tool for the job (you should use a proper 3D modelling app like Blender/Max/Maya/LightWave etc). Your game assets will need a tree of .def files defining important entities to be placed in your map, including certain "fixed" entity types which are used directly by DarkRadiant itself. There will need to be a light entity defining light volumes, a func_static entity defining a static model, an info_player_start entity to define the starting position, a speaker entity to define sound sources, and probably several others. If these entity types are not defined, then built-in features like "Create light" and "Place player start here" will not work correctly. Your game will need a tree of .mtr files defining material shaders, referring to image paths which will be resolved to either uncompressed .tga files in a textures/ hierarchy, or compressed DDS files in a dds/ hierarchy. If these material shaders are not defined, no materials will appear in DarkRadiant. DR does not make any attempt to load "raw" image file hierarchies which are not referred to by material shaders. Your game will need to define a hierarchy of 3D models in ASE or LWO format. No other formats will show up in the model selector. These models can be stored directly on disk (there is no "model shader" tree required like with materials).

Yeah, you can start here: https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Creating_Multiple_Skins_For_A_Model You can make a custom skin for just about every model in TDM. DR also now has a skin editor which makes this process a bit easier

I have been quite careful to ensure that making the subtitles narrower for barks (but not story verbosity) is not potentially breaking. Examples of this treatment have been included in all my more recent testSubtitles... releases. Yes, this is "crucial" for me. Regarding the padding issue, to restate: TDM 2.11 and on through the 2.12 released beta version use a subtitle right text padding of 20 px. While some padding is necessary, this does a poor job of centering the text visually in the backing field. This is obvious with a short bark. My redo of this, with padding of 7.5px on both sides, fixes it, while I believe not causing any problems for word wrap of subtitles with the given compressed font & scale. I'm provided several versions above of this fix (code hidden as Spoiler). Most recently, this was with snatcher's suggested tabbed location ring and vertically-tighter backing field, here This version will also be incorporated into testSubtitlesDrunk, to be released tomorrow just released. I would urge you to incorporate this code (or a close variant) into the next beta release.

...and if the model of your fan should also have a rotation (as for example in the greenhouse in HH VF), then proceed as follows: 1. convert the unrotated model of the "real" fan into a func_rotating (A) as described by dragofer. 2. depending on the orientation, select the x or y_axis property (if you enter zero for both, the fan will rotate around the Z axis) 3. now give A the desired rotation 4. clone A, place it in a blue-room and convert it into a func-static (B) 5. give A the property "bind" - B"

I feel like I've seen spinning fans in vents before on maps I've played in the past, but going through the models/prefabs/etc in DarkRadiant, I can't find anything pre-made for it, and searching the Wiki didn't turn up anything I could find. I know Entities can be moved in DR (hence doors, windows, elevators, etc) but what would I need to do to make a fan blade model spin on its axis inside a fan frame?

Normally this is done by setting clipcontents, which is a number that represents the sum of all enabled bitflags for clip towards i.e. bodies, moveables, AI vision and opacity. Each combination of bitflags has a unique sum. I dont know - and doubt - there's a separate keyword that alters some of these bitflags. When ai_see 0 is used in a material it means that a light that uses this material will not increase the visibility of objects in its radius towards AIs. I dont think theres any effect when used in a regular material for world or model surfaces.

With all this talk of particle collisions, there is a new small update for Written in Stone now available at a local TDM Mission Downloader near you. It is mostly bug fixes, but there are a few quality-of-life improvements, a new model or two, and a small handful of climbing/mantling fixes that should hopefully make a thief's life a little more painless.

Normally the aiSee property is set on the light entity, and in this case the property has been set on the light's material. The property sets whether the light makes things more visible to AIs, so its not meaningful to set this property on model materials. If you want to stop AIs from reacting to an object you need to disable its visual stim, and if you want AIs to be able to see through it you need to give it a material that doesn't contain visual clip. Id say we can be grateful someone had the foresight to implement this as a material keyword, too, in cases like this one where you probably can't set spawnargs.

Because that we would have to copy/paste all rain materials to introduce "deform particle" version. Note that we cannot delete "deform particle2" versions because they are already used, and they cannot be replaced that easily. Then we would have to copy everything again in order to add versions with collisions. But I'm sure mappers might want to create rain patches of different size, so we'll probably have to have versions with layout texture 1024 1024, layout texture 512 512, layout texture 256 256, etc. And then different mappers might have different feelings about the balance between quality and waiting time in case of layout linear, so we'll have many versions of snow too. All of this causes combinatorial explosion, and we'll get at least ten times more materials and particle decls than we have now, causing a lot of confusion. Perhaps combinatorial explosion can be avoided if these settings are specified in another file. I guess at that moment I was not brave enough to introduce a new type of decl files.

Particle collisions cannot be computed in realtime, particles are purely graphical effect which cannot interact with collisions. So the collisions have to be precomputed beforehand, just like dmap precomputes triangulations of brushes. Most of the nuances grow from here. It was possible in theory to run it automatically during dmap (just like e.g. you never have to run aas tool directly, because dmap calls it automatically), but I'm afraid it would annoy everyone because it may take quite a lot of time depending on settings. Now that some people have some practice with this, should we change it? Most importantly, collisions are precomputed statically. If you move the emitter, the collision information becomes wrong. All objects which seem dynamic are automatically excluded from precomputation, so the particles will still go straight through all the guards and moveables. What do you mean by "default" behavior? Default behavior of what? particles? Like make all particle emitters stop on collisions automatically? What about cases when mapper wanted particles to pierce walls? What about moving particle emitters? The goal was to reduce amount of work actually. As soon as you are able to set one huge particle emitter over the whole map, I think you don't have to mess with it any more, just remember to execute runParticle occasionally when you want up-to-date collisions. Before that, mapper had to split the rain patch into many patches and manually tweak every patch so that it stops at proper height. As far as I understand, it was very time-consuming and painful. As for areaLock, it does not restrict particles to single area. It only disables the whole system if renderer proves player does not see the specified area. As long as the door is open, you should still see rain falling indoors, no? Yeah, this is a tough question. Texture layout: Only works properly if particle evolves exactly the same way if emitted from the same location. Interacts with texturing: requires you to set non-overlapping texcoords in 0..1 range on the emitting surface. The only option in TDM 2.08. Ok for straight-falling rain, but snow is out of question. Linear layout: Only works for a periodic system, i.e. the whole system exactly repeats itself after some time. Precomputation might take a lot of time, especially if you insist on a large period. [problem for maintainers like me] If particle code is changed in TDM engine, the collisions must be recomputed. Was added in TDM 2.09. Supports pretty much any kind of particles, although snow was the main goal.

I just recently became aware of this feature: https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Particle_collisions_and_cutoff Unfortunately I completely missed it, as when I went to create weather effects in my FMs I just followed this (which doesn't mention it): https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=A_-_Z_Beginner_Full_Guide_Page_3#Rain_and_Snow The point of this thread is to a) make people aware of it and b) gather feedback from any mappers that have used it so we can get some mapper-focused documentation in the Wiki. The page above is great for background information about how it works, but as a mapper I really just want to know: What are the limitations of this (i.e. when should it be used and when shouldn't it be used)? Why isn't it the default behaviour? Why all this work to get it into the map? What built-in support for it exists (particle definitions, materials, etc). Do I need to create all this stuff myself? Texture layout vs. Linear layout: what's the difference in the end, pros/cons, why would I use one over the other... Why does it need a separate command (runParticle)? Can this just not be bundled in with dmap? A clear, step-by-step instruction on how to implement it in a map from beginning to end using a simple use case. Tagging some users who have relevant experience with this: @stgatilov @Goldwell @Amadeus