Newbie DarkRadiant Questions

[greebo]

 

10 hours ago, datiswous said:

I have a problem with resizing lights. When I'm resizing (by dragging with left mouse button outside the light box), the light also moves with my mouse movement. Could this be a bug, or is this some kind of setting, or I'm missing something?

Maybe that light has a weird rotation matrix applied? Like one that is mirroring the light planes?

[datiswous]

Can somebody else on Linux test the latest version? See if this issue ocurs on their DR installation too?

Edit: the only thing I did in the example is right-click create light and then try to resize that light.

Edited May 29, 2021 by datiswous

[datiswous]

I deleted the file user.xml in .config/darkradiant. At startup of DR the file was recreated and the issue is gone.

Edit: I still have the old file, if needed.

Edited May 30, 2021 by datiswous

[thebigh]

6 hours ago, datiswous said:

I deleted the file user.xml in .config/darkradiant. At startup of DR the file was recreated and the issue is gone.

Edit: I still have the old file, if needed.

Does a diff on those two files show anything interesting?

[datiswous]

Not really (I can't find anything). I think the user.xml file was still from DarkRadiant 2.11 and some of the new settings might not have worked with the old configs, or something.

[DeTeEff]

Not a questioon but damn! Today I learned that you can resize brushes that you've converted into func_statics WITHOUT first reverting to brushes, by pressing the tab key. THAT will save me tons of time, especially in situations where the func_static or entity is littered with spawn args, like when you need to resize a trigger box or those clip boxes inside chests etc...Before knowing this I used to copy the entity and drag it aside to save all the spawn args, and then reverted the original brush to worldspawn, resized it, and remade it to a func_static, and then added all the spawn args from the copied box...

[Geep]

I have a problem that my 'total loot gold' objective is not firing when I exceed it (e.g., over 1800 with a goal of 1150). Is it that the component item should be something other than "Overall (component-specific)", which I think is what "A-Z" seems to recommend? If so, what should it be? Thanks. Have to solve this before I release to beta.

Details of Objective from Objectives Editor

Description: Get into Four Flags, and enrich myself at least 1000 ducats
Difficulty: All Levels
Flags: Mandatory, Irreversible, Visible

Components:
1. Acquire 1150 entities

   Type: Player possesses item
   Flags: Irreversible
   Item: Overall (component-specific)
   Amount: 1150

BTW, the amount here is set to 1150 because the player will have at least 150 before reaching Four Flags.

[joebarnin]

@GeepMy loot objectives look the same, except I don't set the Irreversible flag (both places). Try unchecking those and see if it works.

[Geep]

'Tis odd, but will try that.

Update: For testing, I temporarily added a stack of coins at player start, with inventory value changed to 2000

Unfortunately, clearing the objective's irreversible flags made no difference, nor did checking "player responsible" on the component. Objective still not being satisfied.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Geep

[Geep]

SOLVED. I had to edit the .map file directly. Evidently this objective was originally checking a location, and when I changed it to instead check a loot value, it let behind some location cruft. That wasn't visible in the Objectives Editor, but kept the objective from working.

[thebigh]

37 minutes ago, Geep said:

SOLVED. I had to edit the .map file directly. Evidently this objective was originally checking a location, and when I changed it to instead check a loot value, it let behind some location cruft. That wasn't visible in the Objectives Editor, but kept the objective from working.

@greebo will probably want to know about this.

[Geep]

@thebigh, for now I've logged the details in my "possible bug reports" folder. When I have more bandwidth later in the summer, I'll revisit the issue to see if it's reproducible.

[joebarnin]

Is there a script call that will tell me if an entity is in the player's inventory? Or, a call that enumerates all of the items in the inventory? getNextInvItem() isn't appropriate, as it actually modifies which inventory item is active to the player.

[MirceaKitsune]

Playing with mapping again so a question for something I may need: Does the engine allow portals to rest against one another? As in can you form a T shape with two portal surfaces, if one is perfectly touching the center of another?

[Destined]

8 hours ago, joebarnin said:

Is there a script call that will tell me if an entity is in the player's inventory? Or, a call that enumerates all of the items in the inventory? getNextInvItem() isn't appropriate, as it actually modifies which inventory item is active to the player.

Not sure if this is possible directly, but you could use a hidden objective to change state or a script with a variable, when the player picks up the item, and have a script check the state of the objective or the variable. If the item is droppable, it would have to be reversible, of course.

[thebigh]

8 hours ago, MirceaKitsune said:

Playing with mapping again so a question for something I may need: Does the engine allow portals to rest against one another? As in can you form a T shape with two portal surfaces, if one is perfectly touching the center of another?

I just tested this. I made two rooms and a visportal separating them, then I made a 2nd visportal dividing one of the rooms in half and meeting the 1st visportal at right angles, thus:

 

I didn't get any leaks or dropped portals, but it's not obvious to me what doing this sort of thing would accomplish. What are you trying to do?

[HMart]

Unless I'm missing something, I don't think that portal configuration does anything useful, to me it pretty much makes the purple portal useless.  

[thebigh]

4 minutes ago, HMart said:

Unless I'm missing something, I don't think that portal configuration does anything useful, to me it pretty much makes the purple portal useless.  

I think so too, but I may have misunderstood what MirceaKitsune was asking.

[HMart]

That is what I understand of what he is asking as well, so is not a problem in your example, I just don't understand what a T shape portal configuration would accomplish.

[MirceaKitsune]

3 hours ago, thebigh said:

I didn't get any leaks or dropped portals, but it's not obvious to me what doing this sort of thing would accomplish. What are you trying to do?

Thanks. As for why I might need this, let's just say it's part of the struggle to find smart ways to portal large outdoor areas for decent performance when the geometry doesn't make it easy to do so.

[Destined]

I assumed as much, but as HMart pointed out, this will make the purple portal completely useless. It makes mor sense to create two portals instead, each one touching one of the brushes left and right of the blue portal. That way, either the right part or the left part is culled, depending on where you stand. With the T-shaped setup neither is. Do you have a more precise scheme of what you want to portal? This could help to understand, why you would try this setup.

[MirceaKitsune]

I was thinking of creating a horizontal portal covering the entire area who's face touches against the top of the bottom-most brush, then portaling multiple small areas against the sides of the same brush: This way the top half would be one portal while lower zones would be divided. I might be able to find a better way though... if not I'll just limit the detail I have outside in a worst case scenario.

[OrbWeaver]

You need to consider the sightlines and work out exactly what is going to be culled by each portal you propose to add. Will there be any vantage points from which your proposed portals will actually close, or at least substantially reduce what is seen through them? If not, then your portals are worthless.

Portals are not go-faster stripes. You can't just dump them haphazardly into your map and expect to see performance improvements just because "I have lots of portals now". They need to serve a specific, technical purpose in restricting visible geometry.

[Destined]

2 hours ago, MirceaKitsune said:

I was thinking of creating a horizontal portal covering the entire area who's face touches against the top of the bottom-most brush, then portaling multiple small areas against the sides of the same brush: This way the top half would be one portal while lower zones would be divided. I might be able to find a better way though... if not I'll just limit the detail I have outside in a worst case scenario.

Ah, the T-shape comes from a horizontal portal laying on top of vertical ones. In this case, it can actually make sense. E.g. when the player steps on one of the balconies, a horizontal portal above would cull the statues above it and one below could cull stuff on the ground from certain views. Here it would make sense to have a couple of smaller ones, so they open subsequently, when you also have other sealing geometry on the ground. This way at least some of the stuff is culled, depending on how far onto the balcony the player steps. I am not sure, if the oval towers are a problem for horizintal portals, however. On the other hand (at least from the balconies) a large vertical portal would be sufficient, as they are not in view at that time, anyway.

In general, keep in mind, what OrbWeaver said: consider lines of sight and how portals would affect them.

[OrbWeaver]

12 minutes ago, Destined said:

E.g. when the player steps on one of the balconies, a horizontal portal above would cull the statues above it and one below could cull stuff on the ground from certain views.

If a model is out of view it will be culled anyway. There's no benefit in trying to use portals to do "manual view-frustum culling" when the engine already has automatic view-frustum culling to do the same job.

If the idea with that screenshot is to make a huge horizontal portal flush with the top of the selected box, I struggle to see any viewpoint from which such a portal would provide any culling whatsoever. But perhaps testing with r_showPortals and r_showTris would prove me wrong.