Clarifying Mapping In Dark Mod

[hatching-a-plan]

So, most of the basic questions about how to map are already answered. But what I want to know before I dive right in is this.

 

How do the maps work in Doom 3 vs Thief 3? With thief 3 most of what you see is just static meshes, however this creates a big problem as those static meshes HAVE to be made in 3ds max (or at least need to be converted to 3ds max and then exported from 3dsmax as a .tim file). This is to say of course until someone comes up with a converter or a python script for blender that would allow you to export direct from Blender as a .tim file. Does Doom 3/DM work on the same principal of static meshes?

 

If so, what are the file types? Do I need to get a specific program to make them? Am I still just as limited as I was before with thief 3 or am I given more wiggle room?

 

Pretty much I want to know what its going to be like in there. Am I going to spend most of my time bsping or building stuff in Blender and exporting it? In thief I spent something like 15 hours setting up the BSP in the level and hindsight being what it is I realized I could have cut that down considerably. However I've spent much more time OUTSIDE of the editor working on creating meshes and making custom textures for them etc. Am I going to find a similar method of working if I switch over to doom3/dm? I don't prefer either method over the other per se. Although using Static Meshes really does make the level look much nicer.

 

Really more than anything I want to keep blender cause I know how to use it fairly well and I'm comfortable with it, so I need to know what file types I'm going to be dealing with for objects and meshes (if doom uses them). Cause if I'm stuck using 3ds max still then its not worth it for me to even bother.

 

Edit: I did forget one last question. I noticed that you could start mapping just using Doom 3's built in editor. So I assume that the conversion between dark radiant and normal radiant will be simple enough. What are the advantages disadvantages to making things this way? Are there problems that have already started cropping up as far as making things in radiant and then importing them into dark radiant goes?

Edited October 31, 2007 by hatching-a-plan

[sparhawk]

You can do a lot with brushes and patches directly in the editor. I'm not really good at this, but good mappers are quite happy with the amount of detail you can create this way. For more complex stuff, it's better to use an application though. Personally I prefer Blender, but Lightwave is directly supported and also the workflow with Blender is pretty easy to do.

 

So there are all options open to you, how you want to work and in what level of detail.

[greebo]

Seconded.

 

If so, what are the file types? Do I need to get a specific program to make them? Am I still just as limited as I was before with thief 3 or am I given more wiggle room?

Doom 3 can handle Lightwave's LWO, 3DSMax/Blender ASE and MD5Meshes (the latter for character models primarily). You are not limited to Blender for creating these models, you just need an application which is able to export your model to one these three types.

[Baddcog]

Problems starting with Doom Edit and ending with Dark Radiant. AMinly how the menus are laid out, you'll get used to one and will have to readjust.

Other than that I'm not sure.

 

Hopefully you won't need alot of custom content right away. Custom content became more of an issue with T2 because everyone had seen the same stuff over and over so many times. Everything will be new when people play Darkmod.

Of course you are free to do whatever you wish.

 

I hadn't seen greebo's post when I started posting, he covered the files pretty good. It should be easy for anyone to add custom stuff with whatever program they can get.

 

lwo's and ase's work for static meshes, md5 for anything animated.

 

Also, you can create an object in Doom Edit (like a staircase) and export is, import that into a 3d program and mess with it more if needed, export it and import it into Doom. So alot of basic objects and static meshes can be created in the editor itself and either exported as an object or saved as a prefab (terrain brushes like multibrush in T2) You also have great control over verts and with patches can make some cool shapes that weren't possible in other thief editors (actually not sure what you can do with T3 edit as I barely even looked at it)

[SneaksieDave]

You can build pretty much anything you want with brushes and patches in the editor. This ain't no clunky FrankenUnreal. Beyond that, anything which is too hard to make with said brushes and patches can be modeled in your editor of choice, and exported/converted as LWO or ASE. IMO, while static meshes have their place and do make maps look nice and are easy to build with, overuse leads to Morrowind syndrome where everything looks the same and the mind numbs with complete lack-of-possibilities gameplay. 'Why bother searching over there? I've seen that prefab before, and it holds no secrets...'

 

BSPing even large maps does not take very long; it's on the order of a few seconds for small maps to perhaps 15 minutes for large ones, depending also of course on the speed of your system.

 

Edit: late as usual!

[Komag]

I think the most important single factor placing it FAR above Thief 3 editing is PATCHES. You don't have model everything, because you can create some nice curvy/bumpy/organic looking stuff with simple in-editor patches that work very well. You could make a whole mission never making a custom model (although you would probably want to)

[hatching-a-plan]

wow, quick responses. That really does answer most of my questions. Sounds to me like there are quite a few different avenues I can travel down which is awesome. The fact that it supports Blender is a big plus too, as at this point I'm kind of a Blender fanatic and I've spent enough time with it to know how to do most stuff. I've got a map more or less planned out, but I found out right quick how much of a pain in the neck it was to map for thief 3 ed.

 

"Hopefully you won't need alot of custom content right away. Custom content became more of an issue with T2 because everyone had seen the same stuff over and over so many times. Everything will be new when people play Darkmod."

 

I dont understand. They haven't released any content yet except to the beta mappers. So anything that is made has to be done from scratch. Any static meshes/objects etc. unless there is something I missed in my lurking.

[Baddcog]

I dont understand. They haven't released any content yet except to the beta mappers. So anything that is made has to be done from scratch. Any static meshes/objects etc. unless there is something I missed in my lurking.

 

 

Well, I guess I wasn't thinking of it from a perspective of building without the mod sorry, was thinking more about building with it after it's released.

[Tels]

This building was done entirely in DarkRadiant - except a few textures I made myself, and a few premade objects like lamps/ladders that I just selected from the model list:

 

 

Technically, there is no reason why you cannot build your entire level in DarkRadiant (or even Doomedit, but DR has some advantages like working on Linux

 

Making models for static meshes is sometimes done, but not really nec.

[Tels]

I dont understand. They haven't released any content yet except to the beta mappers. So anything that is made has to be done from scratch. Any static meshes/objects etc. unless there is something I missed in my lurking.

 

Ah, yes if you are not a betamapper, this can be a problem. However, I would advice against you making your own static meshes for small things like stools etc. In that case you will only replicate the work the darkmod team has already done.

 

Likewise big static meshes for level - these tend to make the level look like "heh, why do all the houses look the same", you are better of making them in the editor with brushes and patches as this adds individuality.

 

In any event, if you are really interested in working on mapping even making models, the DarkMod team can use your talent! You should apply, and then you have access to the beta mapper assets, and your contributions can go into the big pool.

[New Horizon]

In any event, if you are really interested in working on mapping even making models, the DarkMod team can use your talent! You should apply, and then you have access to the beta mapper assets, and your contributions can go into the big pool.

 

Yes, send me a PM with some samples of previous work.

[Dram]

@hatching-a-plan: Have you seen the new ingame video of "the way to Blackheart Manor"? If so then pretty much everything you see there was done in-editor with patches

[jdude]

The only downfall to using dark-radiant over Doom3edit is that D3edit has dynamic lighting in the 3d preview functioning properly where-as Dark-radiant does not. However, I find DR to actually be easier to use that D3ed and far more stable. It's quite honestly one of the best level editors out there right now in terms of functionality, I love it to pieces You can build literally anything you want using patches and brushes, you don't even need to use a model editor, which is great for me because I don't know how to use any model editors. And the mod has a huge variety of great textures, but you may end up making a couple yourself if it cannot fulfill your needs.

[demagogue]

All of this sounds exciting.

An Thief(esque) editor that is actually inviting for once!

I can't wait to start building in it.

[Komag]

Wasn't there someone who was going to work on a new renderer, or fix the one we have to make good shadows, or something? I feel like I remember a new guy coming in saying he could do that, maybe a few months back or so.

 

I LOVE Dark Radiant, but I really do miss having the real-time lighting in the 3D view rather than always having to see it in game

[Baddcog]

I actually don't mind the in editor lighting. Sure the shadows aren't precise but it's pretty easy to tell where the light is coming from. Going in game isn't as nice as T2. Still, if we do get in editor real-time lighting working it might slow down the editor, might be good to have a toggle like F3 for lighting mode (F3 is WAY better than typing light_bright, even quicker than Dromed custom menu's)

 

But now I'm comparing to a different editor, sorry.

[New Horizon]

Wasn't there someone who was going to work on a new renderer, or fix the one we have to make good shadows, or something? I feel like I remember a new guy coming in saying he could do that, maybe a few months back or so.

 

There was, but there seemed to be a misunderstanding and he left to work on the opendarkengine project.

 

From where I stand, it came down to complete and utter silliness. I messaged him at TTLG and invited him to work on the Dark Radiant renderer. His apparent assumption was that this meant access to the TDM assets, which it didn't. TDM and Dark Radiant are separate code bases, and you don't need TDM assets to work on the Dark Radiant Renderer...because it already works natively with Doom 3...which he obviously had because he was working on a doom 3 model something or another. If it was another part of Dark Radiant, like stim/response...then yes, I could see it...but not for the renderer.

 

I LOVE Dark Radiant, but I really do miss having the real-time lighting in the 3D view rather than always having to see it in game

 

I know, I would like to see it improved too. I've been pouring over coding forums, it's not an easy sell.

[demagogue]

Is it really that much of a challenge? You've got so many improvements in there so far, but I guess the renderer is its own beast.

[New Horizon]

Is it really that much of a challenge? You've got so many improvements in there so far, but I guess the renderer is its own beast.

 

I think there is another component that would have to be rewritten before even tackling the renderer...scenegraph maybe? I'm not sure, but yeah...it's a pretty big job.

[Crispy]

Yeah. OrbWeaver and greebo are planning on overhauling the renderer in the long term (or would that be the medium term? not sure), but they want to tackle the scenegraph first. Which makes sense, since the operation of the renderer is pretty heavily impacted by the scenegraph design. Actually everything else is too, but especially the renderer.

[OrbWeaver]

Is it really that much of a challenge? You've got so many improvements in there so far, but I guess the renderer is its own beast.

 

Beast being the operative word, of course.

 

As the others have mentioned, the renderer is heavily dependent on the scenegraph (which is the in-memory data structure used to maintain the current set of objects in the map) whose implementation is absolutely piss-poor at the moment, delivering abominable performance which cannot support a more complex renderer at this time.

 

Writing a new renderer is probably not that difficult but it does lie outside the areas of coding with which myself and Greebo are currently familiar, which means it will necessarily take longer than if it were being done by a 3D expert.

[SneaksieDave]

One thing from this user's perspective --

 

There could be two render modes:

1. The current lit mode, as a fast lit preview / working mode, and

2. The new proper light/shadow mode

 

Since the modes could be toggled, the user could work in #1 all the time, and only turn #2 on when needed, meaning the performance could get away with being terrible (initially, at least).

 

Of course if that ends up creating more work, it may not be worth it.

[jdude]

I've never worked in light/shadow mode because of the performance hit it already has on it. It should really only be used to work on the lighting, otherwise lit mode is the best way to go. Maybe if we even had an option in radiant, a light editing option, which made it so you can edit the lighting and only the lighting [maybe that would increase performance] while calculating shadows and stuff.

[Ombrenuit]

I've never worked in light/shadow mode because of the performance hit it already has on it. It should really only be used to work on the lighting, otherwise lit mode is the best way to go. Maybe if we even had an option in radiant, a light editing option, which made it so you can edit the lighting and only the lighting [maybe that would increase performance] while calculating shadows and stuff.

 

My computer can't even handle real time shadows. Is it a ram or a video card thing?

[demagogue]

My guess is a video card thing, because going back in time to lower cards and less ram, cards start hitting the limitations sooner. Anyway, I know that the card is my limitation.

 

Re: two in-editor lighting modes, that's not too different from Dromed. For ~90%, or whatever, of the building you're doing it all quick-lit, and usually it's just when you want to work on the lighting or some shadow effect, you do ray- or object-casting. And if it's a complex level you have to wait forever for the whole level to be lit to see the lighting changes ... and even then you can just me-only the room you're working on, so it goes by fast. So you learn to build with that in mind, and it's not such a big deal. I know it's a little different, but anyway, it won't be unfamiliar if you do it that way.