Note: LucasForums Archive Project
The content here was reconstructed by scraping the Wayback Machine in an effort to restore some of what was lost when LF went down. The LucasForums Archive Project claims no ownership over the content or assets that were archived on archive.org.

This project is meant for research purposes only.

Map tutoriel

Page: 1 of 1
 LukeKatarn
03-16-2004, 1:02 PM
#1
Will someone please make a map tutorial I have gtk radient but I do not know how to do stuff.
 fahtajorj
03-16-2004, 2:30 PM
#2
sigh...

http://richdiesal.jedioutcastmaps.com/tutorials/)


please please use the search function. (i know im guilty of not using it, but from now on i will)
 LukeKatarn
03-16-2004, 6:39 PM
#3
Originally posted by fahtajorj
sigh...

http://richdiesal.jedioutcastmaps.com/tutorials/)


please please use the search function. (i know im guilty of not using it, but from now on i will) Thankyou.
 Autobot Traitor
03-18-2004, 7:14 PM
#4
Don't use jk2radiant like Rich suggests, use GTKRaditn from www.qeradiant.com)
 Jedi Luke
03-20-2004, 9:12 AM
#5
Also some of the tools for JK2Radiant (some also in Gtk) are pretty flawed, such as the 'Hollow' tool, CSG Subtract, etc, etc. It's best not to use those tools if you don't want to have any problems with your map (compiling, level loading issues, etc.)
 lassev
03-20-2004, 11:24 AM
#6
Originally posted by Jedi Luke
Also some of the tools for JK2Radiant (some also in Gtk) are pretty flawed, such as the 'Hollow' tool, CSG Subtract, etc, etc. It's best not to use those tools if you don't want to have any problems with your map (compiling, level loading issues, etc.)

There's nothing wrong with those tools. However, Jedi Luke is still right in a certain sense: Until you know what those tools exactly do and have some experience with the practise and theory, you might avoid some problems by not using them. However, later on those tools are helpful in certain situations.
 Autobot Traitor
03-20-2004, 11:40 AM
#7
Originally posted by Jedi Luke
Also some of the tools for JK2Radiant (some also in Gtk) are pretty flawed, such as the 'Hollow' tool, CSG Subtract, etc, etc. It's best not to use those tools if you don't want to have any problems with your map (compiling, level loading issues, etc.)

I found that to be true in earlier versions of GTK, but I havent had any problems yet with the most recent version.
 Jedi Luke
03-20-2004, 12:10 PM
#8
Originally posted by Autobot Traitor
I found that to be true in earlier versions of GTK, but I havent had any problems yet with the most recent version.

Yeah, the earlier versions were buggy and flawed like that but I've never used those tools in the later versions, simply because I've gotten into the habit of, for example, creating a room myself than using hollow, just as an example. I guess I just feel it's best not to use them to be on the safe side.
 Autobot Traitor
03-21-2004, 6:48 PM
#9
Originally posted by Jedi Luke
Yeah, the earlier versions were buggy and flawed like that but I've never used those tools in the later versions, simply because I've gotten into the habit of, for example, creating a room myself than using hollow, just as an example. I guess I just feel it's best not to use them to be on the safe side.


I'm on the other end of the fence; I cant live without my hollow and substarct:rolleyes:
And creating doorways with the clipper always drove me crazy.
 WadeV1589
03-21-2004, 7:18 PM
#10
Clipper all the way for me! Failing that, model it in Max! :p
 lassev
03-21-2004, 8:02 PM
#11
Originally posted by Autobot Traitor
I'm on the other end of the fence; I cant live without my hollow and substarct:rolleyes:
And creating doorways with the clipper always drove me crazy.

Wow. I always clip the doorways. How can you otherwise know beforehand what kind of pieces you will get? It will be a bother later on, when you build the final wall forms, if you have different pieces the left of the door compared to the right of the door.

I use hollow to make most of my initial room shapes. I have found out that it greatly helps envision the final size of the room. It's some additional work to remove the overlaps of the edges, but you get used to it...

I use the CSG Subtract when I need to make polygonal holes in other brushes. May sound like a touchy business, but I'll be damned before I start to cut 18 angled holes with the clipper tool.
 Jedi Luke
03-21-2004, 8:57 PM
#12
Originally posted by WadeV1589
Clipper all the way for me! Failing that, model it in Max! :p

Ditto that. :) Clipper all the way! Clipping brushes is part of the fun of mapping.
 Autobot Traitor
03-21-2004, 11:20 PM
#13
Originally posted by lassev
Wow. I always clip the doorways. How can you otherwise know beforehand what kind of pieces you will get? It will be a bother later on, when you build the final wall forms, if you have different pieces the left of the door compared to the right of the door.

I use hollow to make most of my initial room shapes. I have found out that it greatly helps envision the final size of the room. It's some additional work to remove the overlaps of the edges, but you get used to it...

I use the CSG Subtract when I need to make polygonal holes in other brushes. May sound like a touchy business, but I'll be damned before I start to cut 18 angled holes with the clipper tool.

I usualy plan ahead for what i want, so i dont have to guess up what i need. acutaly, a really good mapping trick i use for planning is to build a small scale mock-up of it out of lego:D
 lassev
03-22-2004, 8:10 AM
#14
Originally posted by Autobot Traitor
I usualy plan ahead for what i want, so i dont have to guess up what i need. acutaly, a really good mapping trick i use for planning is to build a small scale mock-up of it out of lego:D

Then you do know the CSG Subtract tool far better than I have bothered to learn it. For if I were to cut a doorway into a wall, I couldn't really tell beforehand what kind of wall pieces the tool would produce in the process. I can, however, tell beforehand that those pieces are hardly ever symmentrical considering the left and right side of the doorway. And that is a reason big enough for me not to use the tool for that purpose. So, it's not really lack of planning...

The only mock-ups I have ever used are pieces of paper and a triangle ruler, when I have tried to figure out complicated rotations with the script command rotate... (rotation around all three axis. Man, that really strains the brains).
 Jedi_Vogel
03-22-2004, 10:31 AM
#15
Originally posted by WadeV1589
Clipper all the way for me! Failing that, model it in Max! :p

Some of us run on a budget and can't afford Max. However, I know I will have to model eventually, but is GMax (with that extra addon thing for glm export and the only one I can afford!) ok for modelling. yes this is the mapping forum, but if I ask this question in moddeling I'll prolly get ignored!!
 WadeV1589
03-22-2004, 11:18 AM
#16
It's totally fine for modelling....just it lacks the renderer and some of the save/export features. But it can export MD3.
 Autobot Traitor
03-22-2004, 1:13 PM
#17
Originally posted by lassev
Then you do know the CSG Subtract tool far better than I have bothered to learn it. For if I were to cut a doorway into a wall, I couldn't really tell beforehand what kind of wall pieces the tool would produce in the process. I can, however, tell beforehand that those pieces are hardly ever symmentrical considering the left and right side of the doorway. And that is a reason big enough for me not to use the tool for that purpose. So, it's not really lack of planning...


I see what you mean. For me, I never really make very elaborate doorways to begin with so CSG Substract has always served me well. I envy you for not being so dependant on it:p
 Jedi_Vogel
03-22-2004, 1:17 PM
#18
Cut a hole in a wall and then put stuff around it, and voilа a door, including "elaborate" ones! I've never used CSG Subtract, but I guess there's always time...
 Jedi Luke
03-22-2004, 8:49 PM
#19
Originally posted by Jedi_Vogel
Cut a hole in a wall and then put stuff around it, and voilа a door, including "elaborate" ones! I've never used CSG Subtract, but I guess there's always time...

Don't bother. As long as you can clip. :)
 Jedi_Vogel
03-23-2004, 7:34 AM
#20
Originally posted by Jedi Luke
Don't bother. As long as you can clip. :)

If you can't clip in this job, you'll have issues :lol:
 Autobot Traitor
03-26-2004, 11:43 AM
#21
Ugh...I hate the clipper tool, I guess I have issues:p
 Jlowry1974!
04-03-2004, 2:53 AM
#22
I am very new to mapping but I have noticed in the compile info that when you make a simple one room map it cuts down on resources used/ time if the room shell doesn't overlap like the hollow tool will cause it to do. It is faster to use though;) if compile time is the only factor then maybe easier is better.
 Jlowry1974!
04-03-2004, 2:54 AM
#23
........ or not:)
 wedge2211
04-03-2004, 3:55 PM
#24
It's not just compile time...it's game engine issues. If you have textures being drawn offscreen (because they are on a brush that extends into the next one), that will suck up resources. Also, you'll get sparklies--a nasty visual effect that makes maps look very unprofessional. It's best to cut the edges of the walls to fit each other. 45-degree joints between brushes that make a 90-degree angle are best, like so:

____
____/|
||
||

When you get into making rooms more complicated than a cube, you'll want to NOT use the hollow tool. ;)
 lassev
04-03-2004, 8:12 PM
#25
Originally posted by wedge2211
It's best to cut the edges of the walls to fit each other. 45-degree joints between brushes that make a 90-degree angle are best, like so:

What's the benefit of this? Can't you just leave the corners to touch each other?
 WadeV1589
04-03-2004, 8:23 PM
#26
45-degree joints between brushes that make a 90-degree angle are best, like so:
From what I remember 45 degree joins are bad for BSP size and speed; I swear that's true. It's best to make brushes touch in the regular 90 degree way and caulk the face of the brush that touches the other brush.
 Jlowry1974!
04-03-2004, 9:05 PM
#27
[QUOTE]Originally posted by wedge2211
[B]It's not just compile time...it's game engine issues. If you have textures being drawn offscreen (because they are on a brush that extends into the next one), that will suck up resources. Also, you'll get sparklies--a nasty visual effect that makes maps look very unprofessional.


I follow what you're saying, like I said I'm new, good info though thanks
 wedge2211
04-04-2004, 2:55 PM
#28
Originally posted by WadeV1589
From what I remember 45 degree joins are bad for BSP size and speed; I swear that's true. It's best to make brushes touch in the regular 90 degree way and caulk the face of the brush that touches the other brush.

Really? Do you know why this is?

I think Leslie Judge had done some experiments and the 45-degree joints prevented some problems during the light stage, like colored light leaking outside of the walls that were supposed to contain it.

The other thing is that if you have to texture the OUTSIDE of that L-shaped junction, a 45-degree joint will allow you to only have to texture two surfaces, rather than three that you would have to take care of if you did this:

_____
_____| <-- one surface
|| <-- two surfaces
||

If that happens, the engine has to take care of two surfaces that really coincide (I think--that may be old SOF2MAP know-how, back when the -meta flag didn't exist). There are also some shapes that I found the best way to build them anyways was with angled joints. And...I plan to be a real engineer, not just a game engineer, so I like to keep myself rooted in the real world. It may jsut be a matter of preference, but if there are real performance drawbacks, I'll have to keep that in mind.
 WadeV1589
04-04-2004, 3:11 PM
#29
Looking around the best I can find is the reason you should avoid it is it overcomplicates the BSP making it bigger and more complex than in necessary.

In some situations it's probably a good idea though (like your exterior texturing of the L shape there) but if you don't need to texture the outsides then you really should not be mitering them. Also if the tri count is low then the benefits will be insignificant, you only really need to do it when you've got excess triangles on screen and so every little helps.
 Ockniel
04-04-2004, 3:30 PM
#30
Originally posted by Jedi_Vogel
Some of us run on a budget and can't afford Max. However, I know I will have to model eventually, but is GMax (with that extra addon thing for glm export and the only one I can afford!) ok for modelling. yes this is the mapping forum, but if I ask this question in moddeling I'll prolly get ignored!!

what? are you talking about the free dl you can do? cause I dl it and you can only save in (.gmax) or something, how can I change it to (.md3)?
 shukrallah
04-14-2004, 5:47 PM
#31
Originally posted by ahnil8tor03
what? are you talking about the free dl you can do? cause I dl it and you can only save in (.gmax) or something, how can I change it to (.md3)?

Thats what I want to know...
 Jedi_Vogel
05-01-2004, 4:38 AM
#32
Only just spotted this but I think you need to download the free GMax Tempest addon to export md3...
Page: 1 of 1