Search the Community

dear oDDity:) I ll try to fix the face.. Of course i was more like architectural and mechanical modeller for years... I think i should stick with making just furniture and stuff like that for this mod and keep my time trying to fix things.....I mean of course i can change, add so many other props to your base model but really it doesnt do anything good for my skills which im really trying to improve. I was making cartoon 3d characters for TVs but not that much humanoid characters. And for some time (springheel knows the reason) i may have some anatomical problems.. I think it s better for me not to try anymore on character models... Because really this team has the best.... so the best must create the final characters...I mean we should not give away the quality... So i think .I m not gonna try to make character for this mod again... and I even do not put any kind of picture on LW modellers background. Not even a logo. I mean i force myself to not copy the actual stuff..So for me it s not even an option to put a model and change it...I mean it may take months for me to make a good proportional model or a face but it s ok really i dont have rush After many occupations in this visual art fields i started to focus on modelling mmm couple of months ago.. So i think im still so amateur... i was focusing on so many other things when i was making that woman. i mean my mind was divided in three things as i was making it....It was really so hard for me to work in 3 different PCs on 3 different stuff.... but this is not an excuse... of a bad modelling ... And i admire your work...It s not a good thing for me to mess with it best (with us)

Oh crap, my first editing mistake. Sorry Spar, hit edit instead of reply. I tried to reconstruct your post as best I could. Ah, you're right, of course. So it will require two potential interactive 'buttons'. Still easier than the main menu. You're right, it would. I don't think that would be too hard, although getting them to look like they mesh with the page might. I'll look into it. Hmm, not sure what you mean by this, Dave.

I don't think that this would be good idea. It'd be rather hard to place the two objects correctly together in the D3 editor. wouldn't it be easier to make it a md5-mesh object and animate it ?

I'm giving my support for some kind of compressed textures. Either in a rar archive, or convert them all to .jpg and have people batch convert them back to .tga after they've downloaded them. I know that managing an archive is hard, but what about the batch .jpg idea?

THat's another great piece. Reminds me a little of my NB pirate with the one piece mask and hood. Do you paint these digitally or the old fashioned way? Cloaks are not hard to model, it's just animating them or a game engine that's the pain in the ass, especially for a game like this with all sorts of sneaking. crouching. mantling, and climbing.

I suppose this is off topic more than anything else - figure I may as well brag about the system that I'm building. Been meaning to put together a sweet workstation for a while now, so I'm using income from my first real job (whoo!) to cover it. So far, is about 1000 dollars, plus an anticipated 500 more over the next 6 months or so. 2.8 Ghz Xeon with 800 MHz frontside bus 200 GB ATA 7200RPM HD (Maxtor) Sony DRU-540 DVD +/- Burner GeForce FX Ultra 5950 256 MB 1 gig PC2700 DDR RAM ASUS NCCH-DL motherboard (sweetest motherboard I've ever seen for under 300 dollars - supports dual xeons up to 3.2 GHz, plus 4 DIMMS of DDR and an 800 MHz FSB with built-in Promise RAID controller, 6 SATA ports, 4x USB 2, built-in optical audio out... hot damn) Unfortunately, it took me about 3 weeks to convince ASUS that their mobo is dead, so I'm now waiting on a replacement. Whee. I'll be sad if this never comes together... Long-term goals: a second 2.8 xeon, another gig or two of RAM, SATA hard drives... The works. Gotta love it. For the curious, I'm basically waiting to get this system built before I continue the Thief model - my current one cries.

There is such a thing as inflation in terms of subscription prices. But you're also used to technology becoming cheaper, so perhaps you've noticed it less than some. As games have become more popular over the years, the price has stayed the same (about £35 for a new PC title, £40 for a console one, dropping to £30 and £35 respectively after a few weeks), whereas house prices and music prices have all risen fairly dramatically (partly because of the piracy problem with the music industry). In the US, I could live in a far bigger house than I can in the UK. These are all simple economic changes based on supply, demand, economies around the world. Bottom line: I don't believe that Valve are trying to spy on us, treat us as criminals, or anything of the sort. There is no spyware or adware with Steam beyond what Valve sell through it, and you're not bombarded by popups. I think they're just trying to avoid giving all of their hard-earned profits to Vivendi, who are a faceless corporation, more concerned with profit than the quality of their games. Expensive applications have had this kind of copy protection for a while now, I'm not too bothered.

Argh! Yes, I've seen that! And some places like... what was it - it might be napster or maybe those apple music sites? I can't remember - anyway, they have a subscription fee. So, if I understand correctly, you join up and get whatever you want (from what they have) but you pay monthly to use it. What is happening to the world! Good lord. Stop accepting it, people. I tell you what, this ensures one thing for the future. Everything owned = stolen. Everything owned = stolen. (Repeating it was not a typo.) Does anyone care realize that when UO starts a subscription at 9.99/mo, and EQ follows, and then EQ goes to 12.99, and then EQ2 goes to 14.99, everyone else follows suit... etc - there is not going to be a downward trend, only upward. Their "maintenance profits" have increased by 50%! Was $5 million a month in fees not enough? How about cars costing $6K when I was a kid, and Cadillacs were the "rich man's car", but today, you're hard pressed to find a freakin' Honda for less than $25K - and there are Chevys that cost as much as your neighbor's BMW? Something's wrong. Stop accepting it! Oh man don't get me started on this! I beg. *deep breath* Doom3world.org seems to be the hot place. List more if you know them!

That's what I've always said. BTW, you asked, so I spoil it for you - YES, the scenery does change eventually. Well, the tension comes from that a monster can spawn or break out behind your back at any time, but what makes it scarey is that it looks so damn realistic. This game engine is so awesome. So awesome that they didn't even need to make a real game Heheh. Doom 3 is okay. It's not like the repetative battles are actually hard. I just played my way through with a frame rate that was 4-8 fps half of the time and 15-30 fps the other half of the time, and every battle can be played the same way as Doom 1 and 2. Each monster has a "best" way of killing it, that you soon learn: Imps - Wait till their fairly close, dodge the last fireball, and run right into their face and fire the shot gun. Can even be done easily with multiple enemies around. Etc. etc. I won't tell you my tactics for all the others, cause I'm not sure what youve' seen so far (so as not to spoil it), but they are all as fairly straight forward as that. And then the general tactics - which basically consist of - if there are multiple enemies, backtrack to a choke point and shoot them as they come through one by one. (The level designers obviously knew about this, so sometimes you open a door and find some enemy in your face that wasn't there before. It's usually just a soldier or imp, and their main weakness is a shotgun blast to the head. Works really well.) Or if stuck in a tight spot, run to the nearest corner and jump out and shoot them when their footsteps are loud enough. I don't know what exactly you liked more about Doom 1 and 2 over 3. They played exactly the same way as Doom 3, and a few slight scenery changes that were really just different textures. Everything still looked like the same old boxy graphics. Doom 3 just has more cooler features, like better graphics and physics. And when the scenery does change, it REALLY DOES change.

No. Copyright infringement issues. Seriously, that's how you get nailed hard.

Hey, this modelling stuff isn't that hard to learn Here's the result of about 2 hours work - a small coffee table, that'll fit into our victorian mansion style:

great work ! but it's hard to tell whether it's already ok or if you should change something, without a texture...

Wow, this whole scaling thing really seems to be a pain. Giant lamps and miniature tables. Hopefully it isn't hard to rescale it.

Looks good! Great work indeed. I told you that Blender is not THAT hard to learn.

yeah, really some great stuff --> bookmarked. unfortnately are the pictures rather small. they're great for inspiration, but it'd be hard to make textures of them.

The interface is very simple. It shouldn't be hard to give it a chance

Well, when I open the zombie .dds files, I get this: I don't understand what the significance is of the repeating-into-infinity images. I also have a hard time telling what image belongs to what body part. I think I'm going to focus on the skybox for now, so if you'd like to tackle this, feel free.

I talk to Rgun on occasion, I think I might've mentioned the spiderwebs in my last conversation with him... They are just regular textures, Spring...it's just hard to find a good one. You could probably draw a even better one up in about 5 minutes to tell the truth, make it high res and slap it on a purple background and we're good to go.

hm, not sure if I like the version with the specular. it looks good in a way, but it also looks unrealistic. rather hard to explain - surrealistic might be the right word

Yeah, it wasn't all that hard to do either...all I did was change the background colors and delete individual bricks til I came up with this... The normalmapper added the depth and made it perfect. Oh, and I added a specular, improved the quality of the texture by quite a bit..

Don't forget the coding. Well, but this is not really hard to do. We only need to calculate the distance. Or do we ignore the distance and always make lootglint? From the coding perspective we have to do the following. Read the distance parameter. If an object is visible and within distance the glint will be activated. It is pretty much the same like the frobhighlight. I would say that we have two parameters for this. A global loot glint option to switch it off entirely. And a per/item lootglint distance. If it is set to 0 we will activate it depending on the global setting. If it is not 0 we take the lootglint distance and use this but it is ignored when the global option is turned off. This way we can determine for each object an indidual distance. I think that this could help a lot as we don't want to have the glint being visible through a hallway. And you can set a lower distance for smaller object and a larger one for bigger objects (or vice versa). Personally I'm not really fond of the glint. It takes the fun out of searching for the loot. I don't like the loot hunt if you have to go for every last item, but the glint made it way to ease. So if this suggestion is acceptable then I will add it to the item design.

Yep. Wouldn't be very hard though. You just put a shader on every loot item right?

Yeah, the original render was large to show off detail, and the screenshot was just a quick drop in photoshop. It looks good as it gets smaller, although I'd be concerned that it will be hard to see the direction indication if it gets too small. The color of the gem itself...erm...sure I guess. A material shader with a shader parm representing the desired gem color might be possible. Getting the light color in the area might not be too difficult either. Don't really know at this point.

The overall shape is great, the proportions are perfect, it would be excellent as a low poly game model - but isn't this supposed to be the high res version to source the nomal maps from? You seem to be very tight-fisted with the polys, when you should be writing blank cheques. The main problems as I see it, is the geometric uniform nature of the organic shapes - legs and arms are not perfect cylinders, leather in real life is not flat and perfectly smooth. Eceyting need to be messed up a bt, like it's had a long hard life. And as you say youself, and I pointed out earlier, a lot of the detail still looks injection molded like it's all been beveled out. I have to say, and this is possibly my worst crit - it looks like you're trying to emulate the T3 Garrett model, which I considered risible when I saw in untextured in Lightwave.

Everything everyone has mentioned about basing our creatures on anatomy from real life, rings true. Look at any good, "beleivable" monster from any high end movie, and you can see elements of our real world animals in them. Evolution worked hard to come up with the unique things it did, so we should pay attention to it. Things that are purely made up, tend to look just like they were. Darkness Falls the monster from T1 and T2 you are basing your drawing on, IS based on a crab. You can tell. From the strange mouth, to the plates of shell on the body, and the pincers, it screams "humanoid crab". I should know by now, I've run into enough of those damn things...