Question for JLV?
Re: Question for JLV?
I wasn't being defensive. I was just saying he is almost done making his textures. It says in one of his above posts that he only has 4 tracks left, so why stop now?
Re: Question for JLV?
Will we have to buy that installer?jlv wrote: It will be an installer that installs both the newest mx.exe and a saf file with the new textures.
Re: Question for JLV?
Doubt it if you have already bought the full game.
-
- Posts: 4891
- Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:22 am
- Team: Privateer
- Location: Southern Vermont
- Contact:
Re: Question for JLV?
gordy wrote:yeah the on track dirt looks like it needs to be lighter, and i reckon a bit more variation in the texture would be nice.
Not necessarily. Budds Creek did a piss poor job prepping and watering their track last year. Usually the color of the dirt is darker than the picture DJ posted, and lighter than the one JLV made.
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f222/ ... G_0544.jpg
MXoN.
Most people loved the track, saying it was perfect.
But then again, different parts get watered more, so you could add some variation in. For instance the uphills and downhill get watered a lot, but with the corners at Budds there usually is only an inside and outside line, so the inbetween doesn't need to be so dark.
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f222/ ... G_0536.jpg
Re: Question for JLV?
My dirt was too dark. I just took a Budds Creek photo, used the perspective tool to remove the perspective and then used the resynthesizer to turn it into a texture (this is all in gimp). What I neglected to do was account for the shading. Since the sun wasn't directly overhead in the photo the ground already had some diffuse shading. But when the game draws it, it has even more shading added. So the texture was getting double shaded. I just had to divide by the shading value to offset it.
No.frederick wrote:Will we have to buy that installer?
Re: Question for JLV?
Here's another screenshot. Do you guys think it's worth blending in a lighter texture like in the top image?
Re: Question for JLV?
id go with the top one, the track seems to have more definition in it.
Also the decals look a tad oversaturated, gives the track a bit of an unnaturally orange look.
Also the decals look a tad oversaturated, gives the track a bit of an unnaturally orange look.
instupitious.
Re: Question for JLV?
i like the bottom one but gordy has a great point
Re: Question for JLV?
The whoops in the top one look like they are defined much better than the bottom one, but the tracks in the bottom one stand out better. I agree with Gordy on the saturation, but don't take too much of it.
But man, that looks fantastic. I think you should make some more 3d tree's for the side of the track. The billboards work well for the background, but the 3 next to the track in that screenshot need to be replaced by 3d ones. Some bushy ones. Sort of like the ones on my Old Goldberry track, but better quality.
But man, that looks fantastic. I think you should make some more 3d tree's for the side of the track. The billboards work well for the background, but the 3 next to the track in that screenshot need to be replaced by 3d ones. Some bushy ones. Sort of like the ones on my Old Goldberry track, but better quality.
Re: Question for JLV?
once again i have to agree 3d trees are kinda whats in now maybe some like you see in toys just have them as billboards except they dont move but its like 2 trees ontop of each other were they make a +
Re: Question for JLV?
Eww, that would look worse than a billboard.
Re: Question for JLV?
really i always pictured it to look better but ehh....
Re: Question for JLV?
Well i got speed tree so maybe i could "donate" some tree models?
-
- Posts: 4891
- Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:22 am
- Team: Privateer
- Location: Southern Vermont
- Contact:
Re: Question for JLV?
What looks the best for trees:
Model the trunk of the tree, with a fair amount of detail ,5 sides maybe, just enough to get the roundness.
Then for the top, i.e. branches, you do what Puma said, but instead of having 2 billboards cross, make around 6-7 planes throughout, and have them so they aren't perfectly aligned with every other one. That will make the tree look randomish, and it will still look fairly good. Also, if you model in braches and then have planes coming off those, (alot like how it is now) but have much higher res textures and more natural leaves it would look much nicer.
Really, I think the real problem is that there is absolutely no overgrowth, and the heightmap doesn't match up with the skyboxes. Not sure if this is possible, but with a lot of engines you can extend the heightmap into more 3d space, but you can't ride it. It's just there for looking at. I know a few games that do this are Richard Burns Rally, and Mount and Blade.
Adjusting the fog can also make the world feel bigger, but there is still a gray outline on the far away places. I haven't played with it so much that you can't see those, but what I do know is that the fog doesn't effect the skybox. If it were to make the skybox get cut off in the same way the terrain did, it would look really nice.
And, some sort of lighting, shadows, etc. would make the game pop more, along with under/overgrowth, nicer trees, and the new textures you are making that look great. I say top one, but less orangish. It has more definition in the bumps, but still looks good.
Model the trunk of the tree, with a fair amount of detail ,5 sides maybe, just enough to get the roundness.
Then for the top, i.e. branches, you do what Puma said, but instead of having 2 billboards cross, make around 6-7 planes throughout, and have them so they aren't perfectly aligned with every other one. That will make the tree look randomish, and it will still look fairly good. Also, if you model in braches and then have planes coming off those, (alot like how it is now) but have much higher res textures and more natural leaves it would look much nicer.
Really, I think the real problem is that there is absolutely no overgrowth, and the heightmap doesn't match up with the skyboxes. Not sure if this is possible, but with a lot of engines you can extend the heightmap into more 3d space, but you can't ride it. It's just there for looking at. I know a few games that do this are Richard Burns Rally, and Mount and Blade.
Adjusting the fog can also make the world feel bigger, but there is still a gray outline on the far away places. I haven't played with it so much that you can't see those, but what I do know is that the fog doesn't effect the skybox. If it were to make the skybox get cut off in the same way the terrain did, it would look really nice.
And, some sort of lighting, shadows, etc. would make the game pop more, along with under/overgrowth, nicer trees, and the new textures you are making that look great. I say top one, but less orangish. It has more definition in the bumps, but still looks good.
Re: Question for JLV?
one thing i was thinking about lately. there needs to be an option in the editor for objects to be always vertical. something like when you select an object you press a button to make it straight up and down no matter what the terrain is. This would come in handy for a lot of things. sometimes i place banners on the side of the hill and they are angled so much when in real life they would be straight up and down.