Search the Community

Here's my playthrough of The Terrible Old Man:

I may know why the builders and guards suddenly go all aggro, and it has nothing to do with a window. If you wait long enough, eventually Malachi gets killed by the elevator and they don't think it was because they elevator lacks safety features. I did a playthrough and Malachi was killed by the elevator but I had knocked out all the other roving builders that would have seen him. After I finished, I went in and set up on the table by the elevator that had a candlestick on it. Eventually old Malachi got chewed by the elevator and they all alerted. Sometimes other people get killed on the elevator at that point and sometimes it says I failed the don't kill anybody objective and sometimes it doesn't. Don't know if it'll happen every time. My first attempt either I didn't wait long enough or it may be some triggers need to happen. The second time I still waited quite a while but Malachi eventually died on the elevator again. So if that isn't intentional, that may be what starts the issue.

I thought it would be convenient to collect in one place a list of all mods\addons\improvements created by the community for TDM. After surfing the entire forum I collected the following list of mods, and I present to you their list below. I will be glad if you correct me and provide any other links to mods that I may have missed. Graphic mods Fresnel Mod (MoDB link) Flame Glare Mod (MoDB link) ModPacks Unofficial Patch (MoDB link) TDM Modpack (MoDB link) (with the possibility of separate installation) Gameplay mods Augmentation Mod Wearable disguises Player Lamp (beta) Adjust player speed with mouse wheel Stealth Statistics Tool & Loot Stealth Stat (MoDB link) Textures TDM Texture Mod Small UI tweaks Reflections to all materials containing specular maps Sounds New Footstep sounds Collection of adjusted sounds by Anton Thiefier Sounds Blackjack Draw/Sheath SFX (MoDB link)

I feel I should add - due to my blunder with the volumetric lights shadows I didn't realize I that I was looking at soft shadows for maps instead of stencil when I was comparing them. After some more playing around I definitely see that soft shadows with stencil looks better. So I get what all the fuss is about now.

Both mean basically the same thing. Stencil is incapable of shading anything other than geometry so if you want textures that have transparent parts to cast shadows from the non-transparent part of the texture you need to accept that stencil mode will look different to maps mode. Likewise if you want shadows to render onto the semi-transparent part of textures.

Sorry - my response was a long way of saying I'd be fine with going to maps only as a strategy. I voted option 1. But this is without understanding some things in your top post. What is an 'Alpha-tested shadow occluder' and how does it affect me as a mapper? What is an example of a translucent object that won't cast shadows?

I thought I've read somewhere that if you enable shadow maps, that on some lights, stencil shadows are still forced, for some reason. Correct? I'm not sure if I should vote. This seems more for fm-bakers. Edit: I would go for option 1

I'd like to remind that the core question is: what should we do now? Stencil shadows don't support a lot of things, but they are pixel-perfect in exchange. Indeed, stencil shadows won't be removed while shadow maps look like crap here and there (and are not even self-sufficient).

Not to start a discussion on this but just for correctness, that is not true at all, unless you are using a really low polygon shadow mesh, if you see a pixelated shadow with stencil, then that is a shadow map or a mix of both stencil and shadow maps. Stencil shadows are crisp and well defined, they have no resolution setting or quality setting (besides turning off shadows), because they are literally geometry (triangles) being projected unto surfaces, while shadow maps are pixels (textures) so you can control how sharp they are. TDM has a mix shadow system, where some effects even in stencil shadow mode, will use shadow maps, for example volumetric lights shadows, are shadow maps. Stencil shadows Shadow maps

I'm no graphics nerd, but I can barely tell the difference between the two. What I can tell from messing around a bit: soft shadows of low quality look like garbage with both maps and stencils (EDIT: wrong, I didn't realize I was looking at shadow maps for a volumetric light shadow. Stencil definitely looks better). increasing soft shadow quality decreases performance in both implementations. I think the CPU/GPU of the end user would influence which is gives better performance both maps and stencils can produce a pixelated shadow if you look close enough. (EDIT: wrong. Again, was looking at a volumetric light shadow). I tend to use maps, because for whatever reason I seem to get a few more FPS out of them. As a mapper, I am certainly NOT interested in endlessly tweaking a scene to make the shadows look perfect. I just don't care enough. If they look shockingly bad I will put some effort into it though (which will probably mean just disabling them for the offending entity). It's rare that I feel this is necessary though. So I guess I don't really get the argument that stencils are amazing and maps are crap. I just don't see it or am too dense to notice. (EDIT: indeed I was being dense. I was comparing shadow maps with shadow maps because I was looking at a volumetric light shadow). Also, in my last couple of missions I had graphical bugs that only showed up with stencil shadows enabled. It would be nice to not have to deal with that all the time.

And btw I'm not against using both shadow systems, I just think that supporting two systems, is more work, but if the TDM engine team is okay with that, then go for it they have my full support, for what is worth. I just personally don't like that shadow maps are being pushed back is all. But you guys do what you want, this should be a mission makers decision, I'm just a "customer" I will have no choice but accept what you guys decide.

And those pics that Daft Mugi posted do show the problem with TDM maps, but I also have to say, that is a problem with TDM shadow maps, not with maps in general, I never seen such ugly issues in Stalker for example or Call of Juarez and many other games. Perhaps those shadow maps issues arise from people not thinking of shadow maps at all, when creating their lights, shadow maps do require a little more tweaking to look good, specially at grazing angles, because they are literally textures, so perhaps moving the lights a little solves those problems or even increasing the shadow map res. Just think about this, if shadow maps where that ugly, the gaming industry would never deprecate stencil shadows and we would still be seeing a ton of games using them, but is totally the contrary, games with stencil shadows, are the minority, even idSoftware removed them, I think since Rage (i'm not totally sure about Rage...) and up (besides obviously Doom 3 BFG). For example: Wolfenstein II Dishonored 2 Evil within 2 (this particular shot is impossible with stencil shadows, because of the blood that is a particle effect with alpha) etc. For obvious reasons TDM fans have a good opinion of stencil shadows and I comprehend that, they do look very good, TDM and Wolfenstein 2009 are the games with the best soft stencil shadows that I haver seen, but maps can also look good, if given the chance and used to their full potencial. another game with good stencil soft shadows Thou tree shadows on this game seem to use something else or literally stencil shadows because sometimes they look like a blob on the floor instead of seeing the individual leaf.

ok fair enough but you have still not seen TDM using shadow maps to the full potencial, so I would wait until then before making a final decision but ok. Also unlike stencil that looks crisp at any quality level shadow maps only look good at res beyond 1024 and up and also dependes on the tech used, some have noisy edges by nature, because of low res penumbra effects. But to me today they look good enough and the fact they may look less than equal to stencil, maybe the particular TDM implementation, with all respect for those that implemented them. I have played a ton of games with shadow maps that look good at lest to me. Stalker for example: Metro 2033 Dead Space Call of Juarez Arkane Prey made on Cryengine and many many more.

If shadow maps would look good I would agree, but they just don't.

Losing the option for stencil shadows would be extremely sad. TDM has the best stencil shadows implementation I've ever seen, and they look far better than shadow maps. They also perform wonderfully. Stencil shadows not supporting shadows on translucent surfaces is a bummer, but that's a fine tradeoff. Personally, I'd rather not see alpha-tested shadow occluders, because they look awful and are distracting. Shadow maps in general look bad and pixelated -- quite immersion breaking. Another issue with shadow maps is that they substantially increase the usage of the GPU. For those using laptops or integrated GPUs, it could cause performance or heat issues. For those with decent dedicated GPUs, increased wattage (and therefore heat) can and does turn on its GPU fans. The wattage on my AMD RX 6700 XT can become tripled when using shadow maps. That's undesirable. The advice I give players is: There really isn't a "best" shadows implementation these days. Some devs and players prefer one over the other. Regardless of which is chosen, stencil shadows and maps are used where needed. So, I'd try out both and pick the one you prefer. Here's Fen complaining about shadow maps. Complaint #1 (7:28): Complaint #2 (23:46): In his next video (Written in Stone - 4 - Chocolate Coated Brendel Bar), he turned on stencil shadows, and as far as I know, he never complained again. The following area in Written in Stone shows a good example of alpha-tested shadow occluders. Yes, technically the moving leaves cast shadows, but it looks awful in game, in my opinion. I know others like it. The same scene using stencil shadows looks amazing in game. (The screenshots don't do a good job demonstrating how it looks in game.) The current hybrid system is fantastic. It gives people choice. Those who prefer stencil shadows can use them; those who prefer shadow maps can use them. People become attached to the "art" and "style" of a mission, and changing the shadow implementation changes the art and style. If one must be dropped, I'd say shadow maps should be dropped from the menu settings. Use shadow maps for volumetric lights and stencil shadows everywhere else. And, I agree with nbohr1more that defaulting to rules consistent with stencil shadows is a good idea.

Yes, but there are qualifiers to that statement. Stencil is more CPU bound ( and fillrate bound ) and Maps are more GPU memory bound and rely more on texture bandwidth. If lighting mechanisms were perfect the hybrid might not be so bad but both systems often overdraw and waste resources on unseen geometry so you end up with significant amounts of scene duplication. Maybe moving to a deferred model would reduce that duplication but then you end up with having to pack data into buffers and the inevitable quality loss and artifacts of compressing everything into a buffer. Trade offs in all directions.

Are you saying using (only) shadow maps in missions with a lot of VL gives better performance than using (both) stencil shadows in combination with shadow maps in those scenes?

I think the short answer is "it is possible... but" with the "but" meaning that we have some serious performance challenges. The first RBDoom3BFG release that supported Shadow Maps only applied them to transparent surfaces ( which stencil cannot do ) but the use of both systems in the same scene carried a heavy toll. As I recall, hybrid stencil mode was eventually dropped there too. Still, stencil can look so much cleaner than shadow maps for large volumes and large casters it's a shame to lose them. And hybrid stencil \ maps rendering is still much cheaper than ray-traced shadows or penumbra wedges so it might be worth it to expand the hybrid mode anyway as a sorta "ultra quality" mode.

I know you didn't asked for non TDM mappers opinion but man this decision makes me really sad, imo after so many years, with both shadow systems and still deciding to hard limit shadow maps, to only stencil can do, is like cutting the wings of a bird. Has a player, I can't wait for the day you guys finally decide to remove stencil shadows from this engine. EDIT: Ups I didn't saw the poll at first so my comment was a tad precipitated sorry about that.

With VL, uses shadow maps in Stencil Shadow mode. Why is it not possible to enable all features that are specific to shadow maps by forcing shadow maps in those situations? Settings menu could have an extra option to force Shadow maps features when using Stencil Shadows. Stencil shadows look much better and give much better performance, but shadow maps have more features. I would use both to get best of both. What are Alpha-tested shadow occluders?

I think this will always be a divide. Engine coders will want a universal behavior that acts the same way across all missions. So if we want to offer the additional benefits of Shadow Maps, we will need to break lots of missions and then work to fix them. Mappers will probably want material or entity flags that force these behaviors so that they can force usage where they prefer. I think defaulting to consistent with Stencil rules is a good idea. Maybe this is a good case for using mission.cfg and have it force the cvars to enable the features?

As everyone know, right now we have both stencil shadows and shadow maps in the engine, and the player is mostly free to choose whichever he likes more. Due to the reasons I provide below, stencil shadows will most likely be dropped in some future, but that future is definitely not here yet. Unlike shadow maps, stencil shadows do not support: Alpha-tested shadow occluders. Shadows on translucent surfaces. Volumetric lights with account for shadows. Soft shadows with contact hardening. Point 4 can be ignored, point 3 has an automatic workaround by forcing lights with volumetrics to shadow maps. Points 1 and 2 result in major difference in behavior between the two modes. For the reference, we have one more technical difference: Front faces cast shadows in shadow maps mode, but don't cast them in stencil shadows mode. I recall how initially volumetric lights had their shadows disabled in stencil shadows mode, and mappers were not happy because that's a big difference in behavior. One issue was that every mission has to be beta-tested in both modes. That's why right now I mostly follow the same strategy: Alpha-testing is disabled when rendering shadow maps (since 2.12), unless you enable r_shadowMapAlphaTested. Shadows are disabled on translucent objects (since today's 2.13 dev build), unless you enable r_shadowMapOnTranslucent. I wonder if this is still what majority of the mappers think is best?

Look pretty useful to me! On a related note, I think we need to resurrect r_showShadows. Biker has been testing maps in both 2.12 and 2.11 and 2.12 always shows higher shadow tris in r_showprimitives even though 2.12 usually runs the missions better.

Now that 2.12 is out and I no longer have any issues with it when moving around outdoors, here's my playthrough of A Bridge Too Far: https://youtu.be/nWa-vTy1WTQ

Knowing this series, they're going to be really large maps which take at least three hours for a hardcore stealth gamer dedicated to minimizing AI casualties like me to finish which makes dedicating time to making videos for them difficult.