ZavaroTucson, ArizonaJoin Date: 2005-02-14Member: 41174Members, Super Administrators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
Well, you know, the movement in Half-Life is... sort of Half-Alive/Half-Mechanical, so yeah.. Source should be much better for marine/alien animations, making them much more fluid than they are currently. Also the great lighting should make the game feel darker, and have more of an ambient feel of a gigantic starship/space station... and Infestation will look awesome. hopefully.
aeroripperJoin Date: 2005-02-25Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited April 2005
Just had another idea... in source they could use the camera function for commander mode instead of a hacked spectator mode like they do now. Then later on incorporate like a Picture in Picture kind of thing where you can choose one structure\marine to monitor and follow (Although IIRC in half-life2 you can only view one camera at a time so they would have to be cycled through. Not sure about comm chair camera they would hafta figire it out)
EDIT: I wonder if the VGUI system in hl2 could be utilized to provide more a more windows-esk GUI. Ie... menus that you can drag around and close or minimize. Another idea is say a marine needs health when you click the go to button for meds it can open (optional) another window that zooms to his location.
I've played hl2 mods, and its pretty obvious that air strafing is gone or reduced significantly. If it is removed in ns:s, how will lifeforms function? Lack of bunnyhop would mean either more ambush spots and/or increased run speed for skulks. More importantly, how would fading work? I don't know the answer to this question, but I thought I'd throw it out there for the other forum go-ers that aren't interested in which graphics card you'll need and which engine is better.
<!--QuoteBegin-Steel Monkey+Apr 19 2005, 12:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Steel Monkey @ Apr 19 2005, 12:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I've played hl2 mods, and its pretty obvious that air strafing is gone or reduced significantly. If it is removed in ns:s, how will lifeforms function? Lack of bunnyhop would mean either more ambush spots and/or increased run speed for skulks. More importantly, how would fading work? I don't know the answer to this question, but I thought I'd throw it out there for the other forum go-ers that aren't interested in which graphics card you'll need and which engine is better. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not impossible to put bunnyhopping or air-strafing back in; you could make HL2 look/feel exactly like HL1 if you wanted, so dont worry. If the devs decide to take bunnyhopping out, they'll balance it another way, so don't worry
This is probaly a Valve issue but boy could we do with having multipul screens to watch the match from... I can think of one clear situation this would be good in. HLTV, spec or recorded matches, Map over view on screen with 2 screens to the right, one with an alien team member (randomly jump to another or selected depending on User) and the other a random marine member with the same options above.
At my lan gaming centre NS is kinda taken off (apart from the hell of annoying issue that Valve hasn't setup the Steam Café server to support 3rd party mods for HL) and normally during any form of match (couple of clans are not practicing the game) we have HLTV running speccing the match via our incentre projector.
It would be a great additonal options to include different POVs at the same time, especially if you use such a system as I said above because it won't matter about the smallness of the screens since the projector already blows them up in size.
<!--QuoteBegin-aeroripper+Apr 19 2005, 08:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (aeroripper @ Apr 19 2005, 08:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You should like john carmack... they had to beg him to put ragdoll into doom3. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> He does have a point. Right now it's a gimmick. And on the ragdoll comment. It's not needed and in 90% of the games it behaves like garbage and is usually unrealistic. Doom3's are too stiff HL2's way too lose. And personally I'd rather my cpu usuage being used towards the actual game and not some stupid can bouncing around that the only thing it affects is my fps and adds nothing more to the game
<!--QuoteBegin-aeroripper+Apr 19 2005, 09:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (aeroripper @ Apr 19 2005, 09:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You should like john carmack... they had to beg him to put ragdoll into doom3. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yea, he did make the doom 3 engine as a GFX engine, and I quite believe why he wouldnt want to code its own physics.
Why they didnt code a 3rd party physics library in is beyond me, there are mods out already that fix Doom 3s physics tho, and the 1.1 patch fixed the ragdolls.
He does amazing render device work--and c-shell design for engines. When it comes to development however, he is stuck in the past. That isn't a bad thing. Nintendo also believes this to be the correct route.
Ragdolls and physics--if well implemented enhance the gameplay orientation and the fun factor.
Death animations as of now--are simply tired out from the development community. They are a waste of time to create, especially when ragdolls have the ability to out-source animation frame blends. Ragdolls are also very easy to calculate at this time.
The dependency of physics overall is based on a games development scale.
DooM 3 was very much so enhanced by the ragdoll-que system and the physics engine itself. As was Half-Life 2, Max Payne 2, Deus Ex 2...etc.
There are exceptions--but these are growing very small as calculcated process speeds are increasing.
Ragdolls follow rules easier then animation blends. They can be swapped off and on with a keyframe blend, and often are easier to tick with a ratio death.
Physics right now--are reaching a testing time. We are lucky to have a development team like Valve drive this time foward. Turning gimmick into effect.
I don't have a problem with cpu use, but I hate bumping into barrels and bouncing all over the place like in cs:s, I dislike losing control when playing a game.
<!--QuoteBegin-Polykarbon+Apr 20 2005, 12:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Polykarbon @ Apr 20 2005, 12:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Physics right now--are reaching a testing time. We are lucky to have a development team like Valve drive this time foward. Turning gimmick into effect. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Valve did nothing new.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> John Carmack isn't the best developer out there.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You should read his job title more closely.
As for programming, without him games progress would have been much slower, Half-life may have never existed, nor any of its subsequent games. He is widely known as the father of FPS gaming, and its only recently - due to valve worship - that he doesn't get any respect from gaming communities. He is the programmer everyone aspires to become, the man is a bloody genious. His games have contented more people at any one time than ANY game in history, thats one hell of an achievement.
Hehe, woo, some of my textures <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Now if only the ns team would hire me to make better ones.... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+Apr 16 2005, 04:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ Apr 16 2005, 04:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Vehicles CAN be used for multiplayer, they're just handled server-side. There's no prediction for it since they were developing a singleplayer game, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible for a MP mod to use vehicles. Look at source racer... that's a released HL2 mods that uses airboats... you'll see what's the problem, but you'll also see that it's not impossible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> In most games, the vehicle code is usually entirely implemented in areas that the mods can change. So there would probably be nothing stopping a serious mod from making vehicles predicted, or client-side. Or reimplementing them from scratch.
I didn't say it was easy, only that it wasn't a hard limitation. For an idea of the kinds of crazy things mods can do to the netcode, I suggest you check out "Unlagged", the Quake 3 mod that was one of the first to implement server-side latency correction. Of course that was Q3A and this is Source, but I mention it only to give an idea of the kinds of things that can be done in modern mods.
To the original topic of a Source port, my position is that I would rather see a purely direct port with no changes at all, at first. That is to say get out a port as fast as possible. Once you have that, then worry about updating maps, models, textures, and so on, in future updates/patches/releases.
I would prefer this because this allows you to get all the architechtural advantages of Source right off the bat. Even if it doesn't LOOK better, you still get things like support for surroundsound, and a server that is WAY more optimized for the kind of entity-heavy usage NS makes of it. There are other side benefits too. Even without updating the lighting on maps, you still get the advantage of the vastly superior lighting engine. It isn't an EFFECTIVE use of the new lighting system, but it is still a big step up from HL1.
I think my biggest reason for desiring a direct non-updated port as the first release is to get surroundsound, but there are others; there are so many little things that are improved by the virtue of simply having a newer engine.
aeroripperJoin Date: 2005-02-25Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-Guspaz+May 5 2005, 10:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Guspaz @ May 5 2005, 10:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+Apr 16 2005, 04:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ Apr 16 2005, 04:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Vehicles CAN be used for multiplayer, they're just handled server-side. There's no prediction for it since they were developing a singleplayer game, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible for a MP mod to use vehicles. Look at source racer... that's a released HL2 mods that uses airboats... you'll see what's the problem, but you'll also see that it's not impossible. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> In most games, the vehicle code is usually entirely implemented in areas that the mods can change. So there would probably be nothing stopping a serious mod from making vehicles predicted, or client-side. Or reimplementing them from scratch.
I didn't say it was easy, only that it wasn't a hard limitation. For an idea of the kinds of crazy things mods can do to the netcode, I suggest you check out "Unlagged", the Quake 3 mod that was one of the first to implement server-side latency correction. Of course that was Q3A and this is Source, but I mention it only to give an idea of the kinds of things that can be done in modern mods.
To the original topic of a Source port, my position is that I would rather see a purely direct port with no changes at all, at first. That is to say get out a port as fast as possible. Once you have that, then worry about updating maps, models, textures, and so on, in future updates/patches/releases.
I would prefer this because this allows you to get all the architechtural advantages of Source right off the bat. Even if it doesn't LOOK better, you still get things like support for surroundsound, and a server that is WAY more optimized for the kind of entity-heavy usage NS makes of it. There are other side benefits too. Even without updating the lighting on maps, you still get the advantage of the vastly superior lighting engine. It isn't an EFFECTIVE use of the new lighting system, but it is still a big step up from HL1.
I think my biggest reason for desiring a direct non-updated port as the first release is to get surroundsound, but there are others; there are so many little things that are improved by the virtue of simply having a newer engine. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> i agree, although i don't they'll end up porting it as fast as possible and want to have one huge release. If that happens we won't see it for at least a year or more... that's a long time to wait.
<!--QuoteBegin-Guspaz+May 5 2005, 11:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Guspaz @ May 5 2005, 11:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> There are other side benefits too. Even without updating the lighting on maps, you still get the advantage of the vastly superior lighting engine. It isn't an EFFECTIVE use of the new lighting system, but it is still a big step up from HL1. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Porting the maps to the Source version of Hammer (4.0+) only saves the architecture, from what I understand. Entities will have to be put in again, and each map will require retexturing and relighting. Still, porting the maps will be much easier than remaking the originals, because good architecture is the hardest part.
aeroripperJoin Date: 2005-02-25Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited May 2005
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Porting the maps to the Source version of Hammer (4.0+) only saves the architecture, from what I understand. Entities will have to be put in again, and each map will require retexturing and relighting. Still, porting the maps will be much easier than remaking the originals, because good architecture is the hardest part. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
IIRC, it just marks them as "obsolete" but they are still in the level you just have to rename them to their updated equivilant.
As for textures can't they just import the texture .wads they used for the original map and make them a .vmt?
Can't imagine it being to incredibly hard, no more than maybe a week or two of fixing and tweaking the entities. If the lighting is drastically different that'll probably hafta be fixed as well.
It took me, literally very few hours to make a straight (and half-working) port of bast on the source engine, lighting included (although very few areas had the right lighting).
aeroripperJoin Date: 2005-02-25Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited May 2005
<!--QuoteBegin-Mendasp+May 6 2005, 05:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mendasp @ May 6 2005, 05:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> It took me, literally very few hours to make a straight (and half-working) port of bast on the source engine, lighting included (although very few areas had the right lighting). <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Did you make bast? Just curious to see what it looks like on source and how the new lighting interacts with the architecture... pics! :-P just for curiosity
It doesn't look very good since it was a straight port (and I didn't refine anything, this is not even to the level of HL: Source). It's not special since it was just a test... I would only show pictures if I tweak some areas so they look decent...
Comments
EDIT: I wonder if the VGUI system in hl2 could be utilized to provide more a more windows-esk GUI. Ie... menus that you can drag around and close or minimize. Another idea is say a marine needs health when you click the go to button for meds it can open (optional) another window that zooms to his location.
It's not impossible to put bunnyhopping or air-strafing back in; you could make HL2 look/feel exactly like HL1 if you wanted, so dont worry. If the devs decide to take bunnyhopping out, they'll balance it another way, so don't worry
At my lan gaming centre NS is kinda taken off (apart from the hell of annoying issue that Valve hasn't setup the Steam Café server to support 3rd party mods for HL) and normally during any form of match (couple of clans are not practicing the game) we have HLTV running speccing the match via our incentre projector.
It would be a great additonal options to include different POVs at the same time, especially if you use such a system as I said above because it won't matter about the smallness of the screens since the projector already blows them up in size.
He does have a point. Right now it's a gimmick. And on the ragdoll comment. It's not needed and in 90% of the games it behaves like garbage and is usually unrealistic. Doom3's are too stiff HL2's way too lose. And personally I'd rather my cpu usuage being used towards the actual game and not some stupid can bouncing around that the only thing it affects is my fps and adds nothing more to the game
Yea, he did make the doom 3 engine as a GFX engine, and I quite believe why he wouldnt want to code its own physics.
Why they didnt code a 3rd party physics library in is beyond me, there are mods out already that fix Doom 3s physics tho, and the 1.1 patch fixed the ragdolls.
He does amazing render device work--and c-shell design for engines. When it comes to development however, he is stuck in the past. That isn't a bad thing. Nintendo also believes this to be the correct route.
Ragdolls and physics--if well implemented enhance the gameplay orientation and the fun factor.
Death animations as of now--are simply tired out from the development community. They are a waste of time to create, especially when ragdolls have the ability to out-source animation frame blends. Ragdolls are also very easy to calculate at this time.
The dependency of physics overall is based on a games development scale.
DooM 3 was very much so enhanced by the ragdoll-que system and the physics engine itself. As was Half-Life 2, Max Payne 2, Deus Ex 2...etc.
There are exceptions--but these are growing very small as calculcated process speeds are increasing.
Ragdolls follow rules easier then animation blends. They can be swapped off and on with a keyframe blend, and often are easier to tick with a ratio death.
Physics right now--are reaching a testing time. We are lucky to have a development team like Valve drive this time foward. Turning gimmick into effect.
Valve did nothing new.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> John Carmack isn't the best developer out there.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You should read his job title more closely.
As for programming, without him games progress would have been much slower, Half-life may have never existed, nor any of its subsequent games. He is widely known as the father of FPS gaming, and its only recently - due to valve worship - that he doesn't get any respect from gaming communities. He is the programmer everyone aspires to become, the man is a bloody genious. His games have contented more people at any one time than ANY game in history, thats one hell of an achievement.
Now if only the ns team would hire me to make better ones.... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
In most games, the vehicle code is usually entirely implemented in areas that the mods can change. So there would probably be nothing stopping a serious mod from making vehicles predicted, or client-side. Or reimplementing them from scratch.
I didn't say it was easy, only that it wasn't a hard limitation. For an idea of the kinds of crazy things mods can do to the netcode, I suggest you check out "Unlagged", the Quake 3 mod that was one of the first to implement server-side latency correction. Of course that was Q3A and this is Source, but I mention it only to give an idea of the kinds of things that can be done in modern mods.
To the original topic of a Source port, my position is that I would rather see a purely direct port with no changes at all, at first. That is to say get out a port as fast as possible. Once you have that, then worry about updating maps, models, textures, and so on, in future updates/patches/releases.
I would prefer this because this allows you to get all the architechtural advantages of Source right off the bat. Even if it doesn't LOOK better, you still get things like support for surroundsound, and a server that is WAY more optimized for the kind of entity-heavy usage NS makes of it. There are other side benefits too. Even without updating the lighting on maps, you still get the advantage of the vastly superior lighting engine. It isn't an EFFECTIVE use of the new lighting system, but it is still a big step up from HL1.
I think my biggest reason for desiring a direct non-updated port as the first release is to get surroundsound, but there are others; there are so many little things that are improved by the virtue of simply having a newer engine.
In most games, the vehicle code is usually entirely implemented in areas that the mods can change. So there would probably be nothing stopping a serious mod from making vehicles predicted, or client-side. Or reimplementing them from scratch.
I didn't say it was easy, only that it wasn't a hard limitation. For an idea of the kinds of crazy things mods can do to the netcode, I suggest you check out "Unlagged", the Quake 3 mod that was one of the first to implement server-side latency correction. Of course that was Q3A and this is Source, but I mention it only to give an idea of the kinds of things that can be done in modern mods.
To the original topic of a Source port, my position is that I would rather see a purely direct port with no changes at all, at first. That is to say get out a port as fast as possible. Once you have that, then worry about updating maps, models, textures, and so on, in future updates/patches/releases.
I would prefer this because this allows you to get all the architechtural advantages of Source right off the bat. Even if it doesn't LOOK better, you still get things like support for surroundsound, and a server that is WAY more optimized for the kind of entity-heavy usage NS makes of it. There are other side benefits too. Even without updating the lighting on maps, you still get the advantage of the vastly superior lighting engine. It isn't an EFFECTIVE use of the new lighting system, but it is still a big step up from HL1.
I think my biggest reason for desiring a direct non-updated port as the first release is to get surroundsound, but there are others; there are so many little things that are improved by the virtue of simply having a newer engine. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
i agree, although i don't they'll end up porting it as fast as possible and want to have one huge release. If that happens we won't see it for at least a year or more... that's a long time to wait.
Porting the maps to the Source version of Hammer (4.0+) only saves the architecture, from what I understand. Entities will have to be put in again, and each map will require retexturing and relighting. Still, porting the maps will be much easier than remaking the originals, because good architecture is the hardest part.
IIRC, it just marks them as "obsolete" but they are still in the level you just have to rename them to their updated equivilant.
As for textures can't they just import the texture .wads they used for the original map and make them a .vmt?
Can't imagine it being to incredibly hard, no more than maybe a week or two of fixing and tweaking the entities. If the lighting is drastically different that'll probably hafta be fixed as well.
Did you make bast? Just curious to see what it looks like on source and how the new lighting interacts with the architecture... pics! :-P just for curiosity