my hammer dont has that! -> <img src="http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4994/hammerut7.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That little guy? I wouldn't worry about that little guy.
You have Hammer 4.1. He's showing a shot from Hammer 3.5.
Isn't that for creating routes or something? I vaguely remember that tool from the short period, years ago, when I first tried to use the Hammer editor. Before I got stuck and fed up and uninstalled it. Thank god for 4.1 and all its cool help material and easy set up, plus all the easy to follow tutorials. I love that wiki!
<!--quoteo(post=1650468:date=Sep 19 2007, 02:22 PM:name=SamR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SamR @ Sep 19 2007, 02:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1650468"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->making levels with a high end 3d app like 3d studio max generally produces the best environments imo. the source engine, though pretty nifty with physics, is pretty demanding with some of it's effects (it's recommended you don't even use water in a multiplayer map), and still quite boxy to map with despite the addition of subdivision geometry.
halo 3 for instance is going to have some incredible sculpted landscapes, i assume they are using 3d max or another similar 3d program.
i do love hammer though, and feel that source is best for interior environments as opposed to exterior... which is perfect for NS 2 <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Limiting the use of water is recommended for most multiplayer games.
Using a 3d app like 3dsm is certainly important, but it's the spec limits that ultimately determine the quality of graphics. For example:
- the standard size of character and world textures for UT3 will be 2048 x 2048 while HL2 is 512 x 512 for world materials and some 1024 x 1024 for models
- character models in UT3 will be 3000-12,000 poly (not including the detail mesh) while HL2 is about 2000-4000
- the larger scenes in UT3 peak at about 500,000 to 1,500,000 rendered triangles, and while I don't know the count for HL2 off hand, I'd guess that it's about 100,000 or lower
When you compare the numbers, you can't expect the same quality regardless of the tools used. Of course, with engine scalability, you can push HL2 further, but then you wouldn't be going with the HL2 specs anymore, and from what I've read, NS2 is going to use HL2s specs as a guide. The devs may want to consider using HL2 Episode 2 as a guide instead.
You also have to keep in mind the trade off between graphics and the system specs that will be required to run it. UT3 will require a pretty powerful system to run smoothly with all the details. HL2 may not have as much detail, but more systems will be able to run it, and if you focus on gameplay with smaller scenes, you don't need to be as concerned about pushing the poly count.
For the best results, it's important to use the right tool for the job, and to optimize your work. Displacements work well for terrain, but it doesn't make much sense to use them instead of models for smaller details. The best way to approach a scene is to first break it down into brushwork, models and materials. Even with heavy use of models, UT3 still uses a level editor.
There are a couple important differences between HL2 and NS to keep in mind when mapping/modeling:
First, HL2 has lots of large open scenes, and it uses LOD heavily to control the poly count. On the other hand, NS typically has small enclosed areas that limit opportunities to use LOD. Therefore, it stands to reason that NS2 can use map design to control the poly count instead, and have models with higher poly counts and less use of LOD than HL2.
Second, there's a big difference between the two when it comes to the brush count. For the NS1 map that I made, Saturn, I used about 7200 brushes fully optimized, and by that I mean that if it's a convex shape with 32 faces or less, it's one brush. In HL2, the brush limit is 8192, and the average map uses about 2000 brushes. The difference is partly due to the use of models and displacements, but also due to design. For example, like real life, HL2 walls tend to be flat, and in NS, walls tend to be curved in some way with lots of details sticking out. <i>If your home has curved walls with things jutting out of them, you may want to get it checked for structural integrity.</i> Joking aside, I think that even with the use of models and displacements, NS2 maps will have higher brush counts than the average HL2 map. People that want to make large detailed NS2 maps by using brushes for most of the work may run into problems.
<!--quoteo(post=1651083:date=Sep 21 2007, 07:16 PM:name=INKEDOUT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(INKEDOUT @ Sep 21 2007, 07:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1651083"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Isn't that for creating routes or something? I vaguely remember that tool from the short period, years ago, when I first tried to use the Hammer editor. Before I got stuck and fed up and uninstalled it. Thank god for 4.1 and all its cool help material and easy set up, plus all the easy to follow tutorials. I love that wiki!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, it's the path tool that's used to create paths for trains and monsters, and thus more useful for single player mapping.
When I first started using 4.1, I thought I just needed time to adjust to the new editor, but the more I use it, the more I prefer 3.5 - at least for certain things.
For anyone that's interested, 3.5 is still available here:
It's good to have as a backup if steam or your internet connection craps out. You can use it to do brushwork, and just import into 4.1 as rmf to texture (4.1 will crash if you import a map file).
Comments
my hammer dont has that! -> <img src="http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4994/hammerut7.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That little guy? I wouldn't worry about that little guy.
You have Hammer 4.1. He's showing a shot from Hammer 3.5.
halo 3 for instance is going to have some incredible sculpted landscapes, i assume they are using 3d max or another similar 3d program.
i do love hammer though, and feel that source is best for interior environments as opposed to exterior... which is perfect for NS 2 <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Limiting the use of water is recommended for most multiplayer games.
Using a 3d app like 3dsm is certainly important, but it's the spec limits that ultimately determine the quality of graphics. For example:
- the standard size of character and world textures for UT3 will be 2048 x 2048 while HL2 is 512 x 512 for world materials and some 1024 x 1024 for models
- character models in UT3 will be 3000-12,000 poly (not including the detail mesh) while HL2 is about 2000-4000
- the larger scenes in UT3 peak at about 500,000 to 1,500,000 rendered triangles, and while I don't know the count for HL2 off hand, I'd guess that it's about 100,000 or lower
When you compare the numbers, you can't expect the same quality regardless of the tools used. Of course, with engine scalability, you can push HL2 further, but then you wouldn't be going with the HL2 specs anymore, and from what I've read, NS2 is going to use HL2s specs as a guide. The devs may want to consider using HL2 Episode 2 as a guide instead.
You also have to keep in mind the trade off between graphics and the system specs that will be required to run it. UT3 will require a pretty powerful system to run smoothly with all the details. HL2 may not have as much detail, but more systems will be able to run it, and if you focus on gameplay with smaller scenes, you don't need to be as concerned about pushing the poly count.
For the best results, it's important to use the right tool for the job, and to optimize your work. Displacements work well for terrain, but it doesn't make much sense to use them instead of models for smaller details. The best way to approach a scene is to first break it down into brushwork, models and materials. Even with heavy use of models, UT3 still uses a level editor.
There are a couple important differences between HL2 and NS to keep in mind when mapping/modeling:
First, HL2 has lots of large open scenes, and it uses LOD heavily to control the poly count. On the other hand, NS typically has small enclosed areas that limit opportunities to use LOD. Therefore, it stands to reason that NS2 can use map design to control the poly count instead, and have models with higher poly counts and less use of LOD than HL2.
Second, there's a big difference between the two when it comes to the brush count. For the NS1 map that I made, Saturn, I used about 7200 brushes fully optimized, and by that I mean that if it's a convex shape with 32 faces or less, it's one brush. In HL2, the brush limit is 8192, and the average map uses about 2000 brushes. The difference is partly due to the use of models and displacements, but also due to design. For example, like real life, HL2 walls tend to be flat, and in NS, walls tend to be curved in some way with lots of details sticking out. <i>If your home has curved walls with things jutting out of them, you may want to get it checked for structural integrity.</i> Joking aside, I think that even with the use of models and displacements, NS2 maps will have higher brush counts than the average HL2 map. People that want to make large detailed NS2 maps by using brushes for most of the work may run into problems.
Yeah, it's the path tool that's used to create paths for trains and monsters, and thus more useful for single player mapping.
When I first started using 4.1, I thought I just needed time to adjust to the new editor, but the more I use it, the more I prefer 3.5 - at least for certain things.
For anyone that's interested, 3.5 is still available here:
<a href="http://collective.valve-erc.com/index.php?go=hammer_beta" target="_blank">http://collective.valve-erc.com/index.php?go=hammer_beta</a>
It's good to have as a backup if steam or your internet connection craps out. You can use it to do brushwork, and just import into 4.1 as rmf to texture (4.1 will crash if you import a map file).