Rage

[Mr dk]

I seem to recall one of the first RAGE videos suggested some editing of the mesh would be possible in the editor. Perhaps this just refered to texturing though, similar to QW maybe?

[obsidian]

I too seem to recall the ability to lift or lower the mesh of the terrain. Though a lot of rock formations shown in the screenshots are definitely models.

[AEon]

Hmm... that reminds me of Far Cry editing, only without "proper" vegetation. Change of terrain + models, lets you create interesting maps, but without quick and easy changes in geometry that got old quick for Far Cry... well... we'll see how things work out.

[scythe]

From everything I've read, it looks like idtech5 will make game development easier for pros, but it's not going to be at all friendly for the lone amateur mapper. A shame, but it looks like modding is going to become more and more of an exclusive club.

[AEon]

The biggest problem I had with modeling tools was the pains you had to go through for the most trivial geometry changes, i.e. things I could build in GTKradiant in less than a minute would almost take an hour. Sure, geometry manipulation tools, like stencil (I think it was called that way) are really nifty to spiff up otherwise boring e.g. boxes, and it really would be a pain trying to do that in GTKradiant, but... hmmm.

[grumble]From what I remember from gmax, things were terrible... it's like all the intuitive, good, and simplified editing was removed from that tool to make *everything* a "major operation". Do modelers really tick that differently? Or do they have some built-in high tolerance for pain, i.e. non-didactic interfaces are just tolerated? As a programmer I really was thinking, almost all the basics need to be rewritten in gmax.[/grumble]

Maybe I'm just getting too old for that kind of thing

From everything I've read, it looks like idtech5 will make game development easier for pros, but it's not going to be at all friendly for the lone amateur mapper.

Understandable... they want to sell the engine to "pros". Folks that know their modeling tools, who can probably add new models as quickly as "we" could build them in GTKradiant (the more trivial models that is). But then comes skinning, etc...

[obsidian]

To each it's own strengths. A level editor with brushes is still the fastest ways to prototype a map out and come up with the core layout and playability. This is what id Studio looks like for Rage, I think it is still a basic brush-based editor with some extra tools loaded on for texturing, road placement, terrain deformations, etc. But I'm sure you could still build a room in the editor out of brushes as you always have. Models are great for other things, where you don't have to stay on the grid and you have complex angles and shapes that you can't do in an editor.

It sounds like skinning and texturing in id Studio will be less finicky so skinning doesn't have to be perfect. Currently, if I wanted to make one of those rock pillars from the screenshots, I would have to have the model perfectly UVW mapped and skinned, trying to hide all the texture seams. Then I would have to figure out some way of doing all the right texture blends to bury it into the sand. With the megatexture stamping tools, it sounds like I can just apply a really basic texture and do a quick box or cylindrical texture projection onto the model, then stamp over all the seams and blend the textures into the ground.

[Castle]

The idea that block meshing is faster in radiant vs max is a myth perpetuated by how easy it is to accidentally abuse the extra power you gain from superior precision. In reality, your proficiency is really the main factor and both options are equally optimal in trained hands.

With that said I still to this day prefer UBER/COD radiant 3d camera movement with UEDs closely behind over the camera in max for level design...

[phantazm11]

Post moved to this thread

[AEon]

Everyone please use the new thread on the OT topic:

• Content creation & mod-ability of newer games

Could you please copy your post into the new thread phantazm11, thanks.

(I'll delete all the posts OT posts later, or delete your own posts if you will.)

[phantasmagoria]

New stuff:

Trailer: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/quake ... rage/54146

Tom Willits: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/creat ... rage/54283

[Infernis]

Found some screenshots here. There was also a preview in Dutch stating that they were impressed.

[Hipshot]

Does id Tech 5 not use brushes at all?

[d3mol!t!on]

Not sure if I'll get killed for saying this, but the graphics remind me of CryEngine 2. What'll be most interesting is to see how they do DOOM 4 on this engine, if indeed that is what they'll actually be using. Impressive none-the-less.

[obsidian]

id Tech 5 still uses brushes among other things.

Doom 4 will also likely be using the same engine (though IIRC, Carmack said he would do some additional work on it) and it will have a much richer graphics fidelity to it. I'm looking at the Rage screenshots and I find it difficult to fathom what Doom 4 is supposed to look like.

[Hipshot]

Because a friend said that it doesn't use brushes any more, but I find that hard to believe, that iD just would abandon it just like that. And, yes, Doom 4, that was what I was thinking of, if they are going for more of a Doom 1/2 direction, then it would probably be build around something brush based (even though it doesn't have too).

[-Dash-]

I prefer the ID Tech 3 tbh, even if it's dated. ID Tech 4 and 5 have this dark bulging look to them which is atrocious.

I realize it's semi-realistic, but everything looks like it's covered in feces.

[o'dium]

Learn how to light then.

[obsidian]

1) You just bumped a year old thread. Don't do that unless you have a something valuable to add to the discussion (for example, new info or trailer about Rage).
2) id Tech 4 can be well lit, I don't know what you mean by, "dark bulging look". Shadow volumes aren't necessarily dark, and bulging isn't usually a word used to describe light.
3) id Tech 5 uses a completely different lighting system. It will likely use a hybrid of what looks like pre-rendered lighting (kind of like id Tech 3 lightmaps, but probably baked into the megatextures) and dynamic pixel buffer shadows.

[seremtan]

tbh, looking again at that shot on page 1 again, what i notice now is those bits that don't seem as polished as crysis: the gravel slope on the left looks flat (in crysis a similar surface spawns rock/pebble models) and the foreground grass looks a bit natty

[AEon]

I find it disappointing that after all these years id engines simply will not work properly with massive vegetation... see Crysis or Far Cry.

And when Carmack was wondering about some area in Rage that was running really badly, and it turned out the artists had added too much grass, flimsy as it is... this does not bode well. Oh well... I'll admit the desert does have a certain aesthetic but why not put some research into vegetation?

[Hipshot]

Can't iDtech5 handle much vegetation? Where did you find this out Aeon?

[o'dium]

I think its more the issue of "why should it?" to be fair... I mean peopel slated id Tech 4 for its lack of light and terrain, but thats what the engine was MADE for.

If the next id game is set in a jungle you can be pretty damn sure they would bring the rain and make it look totally current, but the simple truth is why bother spending man hours on something when your main team isn't going to make use of it? If third parties need something adding, they will add it (shadow maps, advanced programs, megatexture, all things that D3 never supported but the engine could with some work).

I have this feeling after Doom 4 and Rage have faded a bit, they will announce Quake 5. It just makes sense... And I have this feeling they will return to the gothic roots of the first over the sci fi pap of Quake 4 (Q2 was amazing, just none of its style or soul was in Q4). But if thats the case, then don't expect any lush jungles or cities just yet

Speaking of cities, Doom 4 is set on Earth, so its very likely we will get some new advanced form of vis/hinting to cope with large city scapes.

[dONKEY]

TBH I couldn't care less what it can or can't do. Unless there is a sea change in attitude from game design companies. I'm reluctant to support any game with my hard earned cash that once it's released will have no support in terms of SDKs from the developers. There is no 'official' support for QuakeLive custom content, so why should I believe amateur developers will be supported for newer engines. Quake 4 almost killed the modding and mapping communities. Let's hope idtech5 doesn't complete the job.

[o'dium]

Quake 4 had the same level of support as Doom 3, as ETQW...? How did it nearly "kill" the modding scene...? You want a game with ZERO support, look at the new Wolf. Terrible game with terrible MP that could be fixed if there was a decent SDK but nothing, AT ALL, was released. I think they only released a single patch, even...

It sounds more to me like you are used to making really old art, i.e. diffuse only textures, low poly models, lightmaps etc... To be honest, thats how you come over to me. "I can't be arsed to learn these new and improved methods so I'll just say they are terrible.".

Sure theres a huge learning curve and yeah, these days mappers MUST be modellers to a certain extent as brush work has gone pretty much the way of the dinosour for detail in maps (Now we use brushwork as caulk based hulls). But being against something because its more advanced than you can adapt to is a bit silly. I can't do half the stuff some engines display, but it just motivates me to learn. If you close the door before you even open it, how will you ever even know what works and what doesnt?

As an example, I work on OD, everybody here knows that, and at times yeah its hard work. But I also work on low poly DS/iPhone games, and its ALSO hard work, just two different ends of the scale. Both are fun.

I totally agree that more SDK's are needed but you need to see this from a $$$ point of view... Why bother releasing something that wont make you any more money, and will only be used by a tiny percentage of people...? You and I love SDK's, but average joe wont give two shits about it, and thats where the money is.

[AEon]

I have the feeling the real issue is actually the popularity of the games. And the last id games did not have much impact... I am not saying they were bad - I played D3 and Q3 and liked the new ideas - but you need a *huge* fanbase to get something done in the community. If folks are only "mildly" inspired by playing the game, chances are they won't even bother looking into content creation... even more so, if the next AAA game is only a few weeks away.

Well, we had the content creation process under discussion a while ago. Since things are getting more and more complex (not really the problem), but humongously time consuming, I guess there is nothing much that can be done.

BTW, what is OD? I am totally out of any current games, because the simply do not run on my 8-year-old PC.