Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Arts & Talents => Topic started by: Ryx on November 22, 2002, 07:53:56 pm
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-01.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-02.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-03.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-04.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-05.jpg)
After seeing Mik's RBC mesh, I wanted to give hi-poly modeling another go. Since all my previous attempts at hi-poly have ended badly, I haven't really bothered with it. I figured an Orion would be a good learning experience.
So far (on the Orion), I have only made a basic model of the Orion, no added details, just plain copy. Well, actually, my Orion is somewhat wider than the original. I'll probably fix that later.
This will eventually, I hope, be the large turrets on the Orion. I modelled it with 2 barrels, but I will try and get the third back in. I will model something different for the middle power-generator-thing in the rear. :)
The poly count for the turret (what you can see in the later pics) is ~6700. This is for All the stuff that make up the turret. :)
That's it for now. :p
-
I see you rounded off the bottom of the upper half. That looks excellent. :D
-
ryx when u get the orion modellled do try to convert it to LW (i see some nice renders for TT) :D
-
Nice turret.
Too bad it isn't like the ones on the Orion. ;)
Sorry, but it's not FS-y. FS does vertically oriented turrets mostly.
-
Originally posted by Shrike
Nice turret.
Too bad it isn't like the ones on the Orion. ;)
Sorry, but it's not FS-y. FS does vertically oriented turrets mostly.
cut the bull with all-has-to-be-linear
maybe the time has ACTUALLY moved on and the turrets were upgraded SINCE the game came out.....
-
he's right, the orion's turrets have not changed since fs1 and need to be updated..
-
Originally posted by Ashrak
cut the bull with all-has-to-be-linear
maybe the time has ACTUALLY moved on and the turrets were upgraded SINCE the game came out.....
So what? Sure, the detail should be updated for a high poly model, but that doesn't mean the basic design is wrong and should be changed. You want to make an Orion, at least make one that looks right.
-
Allright then, It'll be an Orion variant/retrofit/whatever. (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/smiley/whipcrack.gif)
:D
-
I.e how an orion would look like if it was actually built..
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
I.e how an orion would look like if it was actually built..
You mean with vertically oriented turrets? :p
The twin-turret design can be a variant, but I don't see why having a turret higher than it is long is a bad thing.
-
Originally posted by Shrike
You mean with vertically oriented turrets? :p
The twin-turret design can be a variant, but I don't see why having a turret higher than it is long is a bad thing.
Hmm, I missunderstood(sp?) you earlier then. I intend to put more stuff on top there, so It will be more vertical than it is. Just have to figure out what to put there.
-
Just remember that the dorsal/ventral turrets have a primary role of covering the dorsal/ventral arcs. Yours looks more like a broadside-style one.
Just some commentary.
-
Make those turrents chrome and get rid of that blue/yellow combo (It's not working for me).. as for not being "freespacey"??? :wtf:
simply AWESOME! I love those turrents! I wanna mount them on my EDF fleet!. Right now I learned some stuff cause of a texture name problem and ended up getting the Xanthus textured cause I was sick of it being invisible. Here it is!
(http://photo.starblvd.net/Star_Dragon/2-1-5-1039732973?m=0&pg=1&ro=0&co=4)
(http://photo.starblvd.net/Star_Dragon/2-2-4-1039831946?m=0&pg=1&ro=1&co=3)
Of course this was just a first attempt and since I have no skills I just renamed textures until I found some that fitted.. .POF still needs thrusters/engine glows but WORKS IN GAME!
-
that's just the mesh colours, no material has been given yet, don't rush things man ;)
Anyway, the turret design is cool, but I have to agree with Shrike, that's not what I would imlagine for an Orion turret. It should be more blocky, more like a ... a box, I'd say. In fact, I would ( ok, that's what I did with my herc2 anyway ) import the pof, and use the mesh as a template and build around, to keep the proportions right.
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion_01.jpg)
Just the basic shape.
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-06.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-07.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-08.jpg)
~11000 polys. Figuring that middle thing out and cleaning boolean's what taken up most of my day, thus far.
-
:nod: Looking good. Though I have no idea what parts of the ships those are :D
-
Originally posted by Pera
:nod: Looking good. Though I have no idea what parts of the ships those are :D
You are looking at one of those large turrets. :)
Here's a better pic (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-09.jpg).
-
wheres the :drool: smilie when you need it?
-
the turrets look super good :yes:
but they dont look like theyd be much use in space combat because they cant turn directly upward? tell me if im wrong but they look like they only have limited traverse, a bit crap if your trying to engage ships directly above or below you.
-
Originally posted by Shrike
Too bad it isn't like the ones on the Orion. ;)
Sorry, but it's not FS-y. FS does vertically oriented turrets mostly.
Shrike's right. To that end, I'll be getting rid of that Mjolnir model. Its got entirely too many extraneous bits for a Freespace model--and besides, its nothing like the V-maps anyway.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Shrike's right. To that end, I'll be getting rid of that Mjolnir model. Its got entirely too many extraneous bits for a Freespace model--and besides, its nothing like the V-maps anyway.
your kidding.....right?
-
He better be sarcastic cause there is no way that I can see getting rid of an amazing work of modeling over not looking like a low-poly game's version.
-
he just means he'll make a new one :p
-
Nope. Shrike's right. Its not Freespace enough. I didn't model it like a Volition Mjolnir, so its gotta go.
Of course I'm being sarcastic.
-
Thank god. Thought for a moment there that someone took Shrike's advice. That'd be a crime. :D (j/k Shrike)
-
Very nice. I like. :yes:
Originally posted by HeX
Thank god. Thought for a moment there that someone took Shrike's advice. That'd be a crime. :D (j/k Shrike)
:lol:
-
The barrels will actually be ably to elevate to a near* vertical position, question is how to model the parts beneath the turret. Would they use some sort of hydralic system, like on they do on (some types of) trucks?
*How high would depend on how it looks finished.
-
I would have to agree with Shrike here. The turrets look nice, but nothing like the Orion ones, and not in the same style, either.
-
Besides the Database on campaigns, there should me a model database. OR more specifically a parts section. It would be cool for those people :nervous: with no modling skill (ok just me) to go and download bits and pieces and join them to gether to build a Hybrid ship... Think of Mr. Potato Head (But for FS2)? say you like X's main body, but Y's turrents, and Z's engine attachment... With a modular assortment ship design and construction might go faster and easier. I figure some people like to do certain things more than others... Some might like Bridges and others turrents ect... Granted not everything would be compatible BUT I think this would be a cool database project and would influence model making in the future (As well as get some cool ships constructed though one might lack the skill to make the individual parts, they have an idea of what it should look close to)...?
BTW I love what you did to the back housing of those turrents! Please make a LP version though cause they really should be used and not just admired! (even if it is from just the recieving end...."Boy this ship is MURDER...Cool turrents though..AHHHH!...") :lol:
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Shrike's right. To that end, I'll be getting rid of that Mjolnir model. Its got entirely too many extraneous bits for a Freespace model--and besides, its nothing like the V-maps anyway.
You're being an idiot. :rolleyes:
Originally posted by HeX
Thank god. Thought for a moment there that someone took Shrike's advice. That'd be a crime. :D (j/k Shrike)
You're being an idiot too. :rolleyes:
You guys seriously don't get it do you. It's not that it doesn't look exactly like the Orion turrets, it's that it looks nothing like the Orion turrets. It doesn't even have enough barrels! If you're making a replica, you should aim to combine accuracy and style. But when you get multiple people looking at it and saying 'that doesn't look like X' you know something isn't right.
Look, it's a great turret, and it's got excellent detail. Personally, I've given up on 11k turrets myself, they tend to drive the polycount way up when you add a dozen to one model, but that doesn't mean it's bad to do put those kinds of details on them. And a reasonable amount of time has probably been done on this, which probably means it's all the harder to give it up. But doesn't it make sense to make it so someone will look at it and say 'yep, that's an Orion' then when they zoom in, go 'wow, look at all the details!' instead of 'something just isn't right'?
Something like a Mjolnir is easy, the original model is very basic and you can do a lot of superdetailing without getting away from the basic design. (although I figure the outer 'wings' were the heat sinks and would have modelled them differently, but that's irrelevant to the discussion) You can look at the Mikheal's Mjolnir model and go 'wow, look at all the detail' and imagine that's what it would look like in high-polygon glory. Why? Because he was faithful to the basic design and didn't take any significant liberties, he did an excellent job of converting the Mjolnir to a high-poly format and put his own touches in the details.
Why not save the turret for your own ship - no sense wasting it - and do replacement ones that are close to the FS turrets? I can't force you and I wouldn't bother even if I could. It's your model. But someone has to be a critic.
-
Originally posted by Shrike [/B]
What he said. :nod:
-
My opinion pretty much matches Shrike on this. The turret I'd say would be perfect for say the Aeolus which has that gritty WWII style two-barreled turret.
Anyways I should keep my mouth shut on this mostly because I'm not too skilled at modeling yet ;)
-
Originally posted by Shrike
You're being an idiot. :rolleyes:
Note the admission of "sarcasm" in my previous post up there. ;)
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-10.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-11.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-12.jpg)
Polycount: ~13500
Right I feel I've spent enough time on those generator things. Time to return to the actual turret. Now I feel, I have to model some sort of mechanism, that moves the barrels up and down, so that's what I hope to do today. I am still going to try to get a third barrel in there! :)
Here's a screenshot (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretscr01.jpg) from the perspective view port in MAX. :)
-
you know, just make the main body of the turret "taller" and the barrels shorter, and that would probably work fine for an orion turret.
Btw, Shrike, in movies like in games, there's lods, such a turret would be used only for close ups, I always found a bit reidiculous to provide super detailled meshes w/o the lods ( even max has a LOD modifier, not named like that, but still ).
-
ACK! I see a red X-box
your linkies are broken Ryx
-
Pics load fine for me....
Small update
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-13.jpg)
hmm, I could try resizing the barrels. Problem is, I like the big barrels. I'll look at it anyway. :)
-
holy smackers make an orion like that and do remembre to make turrets seperate from model :D also LW conversion :D
-
damn....where is that jaw smiley when you need it....
:eek2: :eek2: HOLY CRAP THAT IS AWESOME!!!!!!
meh...that is no substitute...
-
Personally, I was never really a big fan of the Orion, probably because I didn't get to play FS1 too much, but whether or not you use that on an Orion or some other ship, that is one awesome looking turret. :nod:
[Edit] One thing I noticed is that the 3 barrel turret is a little crowded, not by the barrels, but down in front on the base where the 3 little triangular prong thingies (lol, sorry.. I sound like an idiot) it looks kinda crowded down there. Sorry I can't provide like an alternative, but you might want to look into something. Or not! It's you're model, and I haven't modeled anything in my life, so...:ha: [/Edit]
-
Wow, those models are actually quite beautiful, in their own way. The high poly stuff being produced by you guys is really impressive :yes:
-
Originally posted by Ryx
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/turretl-11.jpg)
Polycount: ~13500
Right I feel I've spent enough time on those generator things. Time to return to the actual turret. Now I feel, I have to model some sort of mechanism, that moves the barrels up and down, so that's what I hope to do today. I am still going to try to get a third barrel in there! :)
You might want to burn a few more polys on the hairpin bends on those tubes. :D Of course, you'll almost NEVER see them that close, but still... ;)
-
Originally posted by mikhael
You might want to burn a few more polys on the hairpin bends on those tubes. :D Of course, you'll almost NEVER see them that close, but still... ;)
Well, when I resized stuff for the third barrel, I had to redo those hoses and they look a bit better now. Otherwise, I think tweaking around with the smoothing should work pretty well.
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretl-14.jpg)
As per Venom's suggestion, I scaled the turrets down 60%, and it turned out pretty well.
There are a few minor details I want to put in, but otherwise modeling is finished. At least, I can't think of anything more to do.
-
Very nice. There's a few flat surfaces that I'd add detail to, but you'll probably use textures for that. :D
-
nice cant wait to render with that :)
-
Man, now I'm losing interest in my own ****. Quick, gimme an estimate on how long that took so I can feel better.:D
I give it four idolatries out of five. Waiting on the completed for the last.
(http://www.the-underdogs.org/forum/images/smiles/icon_bow.gif) (http://www.the-underdogs.org/forum/images/smiles/icon_bow.gif) (http://www.the-underdogs.org/forum/images/smiles/icon_bow.gif) (http://www.the-underdogs.org/forum/images/smiles/icon_bow.gif)
-
oh, I don't know, 3-4 days.
-
Originally posted by Shrike
You're being an idiot too. :rolleyes:
Yeah well we all got our hobbies. :p
Regardless, I'm interested to see what the Orion could look like with these kind of turrets. Could be interesting. Might even look better then the original design which I found to be....blah. Honestly, the Orion turrets were IMO absolute crap looking. A totally unique design could add much.
-
And from what I'm seeing, this is going to be a DAMN impressive model. :eek2:
-
Just so long as he doesn't decide to model the entire crew, too :nervous:
-
Turret looks great .... just I have to agree with Shrike....just doesn't look .... FS-ish to me.
Scarey thing is my GF agreed .... and she's only caught a few glimpses of FS2 this weekend after I finally reinstalled it.
But like i said ... the model itself looks excellent ! :D Damned good job
-
Bah, who cares if it isn't FS-ish? Methinks the Orion could use a bit of a redesign anyways!
-
Well hey if it's an Orion MK II go for it :D
just saying Shrike has a point,... you can't really call a design a repilca if you're not trying to be as close to 100% to the original as possible.
-
Originally posted by Warlock
Well hey if it's an Orion MK II go for it :D
just saying Shrike has a point,... you can't really call a design a repilca if you're not trying to be as close to 100% to the original as possible.
*cough*
Originally posted by Ryx
Allright then, It'll be an Orion variant/retrofit/whatever. (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/smiley/whipcrack.gif)
:D
*cough*
:p
-
LOL OK got me ... I was half asleep when I read the thread last night :D
-
ARRRRRRRRGHHHH!!!!!!! :mad: That's it, I'm making my own Terran Huge Turret hi-poly model that LOOKS like the one on the Orion. I can't stand having this on there.
-
Here, just some quick fiddling around in Rhino. Needs work, obviously, but it's what I'd like to see.
-
*must see in-game one day...*
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretl-16.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretl-17.jpg)
A bit better. Now I want to put a little colour somewhere, but where?
I was thinking about putting some kind of text on the side of the turrets, but what should it say?
Anyone have any ideas for a better colour on the 'main' turret bit? I was thinking brownish, but I'd thought i'd ask first. :nervous:
Originally posted by GalacticEmperor
Here, just some quick fiddling around in Rhino. Needs work, obviously, but it's what I'd like to see.
I suggest you continue modeling that then. I'm not changing mine, at this point. :p
-
Looks great but get rid of the glowing lights it makes it look all cheap sci fi instead of real gritty millitary hardware.
-
Originally posted by Ryx
I was thinking about putting some kind of text on the side of the turrets, but what should it say?
Anyone have any ideas for a better colour on the 'main' turret bit? I was thinking brownish, but I'd thought i'd ask first. :nervous:
Serial numbers/letters seem appropriate for turrets (it's not like the gunners would be outside the ship to paint it with something else). As for color, steel grey really seems most appealing, or perhaps a dull black. Something really neutral. Of course, on the orion they were yellow, but I think this has gone past that point long ago.
-
Originally posted by StratComm
...Of course, on the orion they were yellow...
ShivanBubba: Hey Carl! Look! They made sure we could see their turrets real clear like!
ShivanCarl: Yeehaw doggie! Lets defang'em, Bubba!
Just say no to yellow turrets. ;)
This is also a good reason to avoid glowing bits on turrets, but glowing bits look better than yellow plating. ;)
-
looking good
What i'd recommend is sthinking about those nice and easy-to-pop cables that possibly power the gun?
Freespace2 orions have a very blue metal-outlook with a matte finish, so try working that into the cannon. Add some details around the flat areas as well if you can be bothered :)
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretl-18.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretl-19.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Turretl-20.jpg)
Just to show of the lights I added to the mesh and some new extrusions. :)
So what's better? lights, or no lights.
Originally posted by wEvil
looking good
What i'd recommend is sthinking about those nice and easy-to-pop cables that possibly power the gun?
Freespace2 orions have a very blue metal-outlook with a matte finish, so try working that into the cannon. Add some details around the flat areas as well if you can be bothered :)
Added some extrusions. :)
Yeah, I thought about that too, but decided against doing something more "real", 'cause I don't think many people will do render's with the turret so up-close you'll notice. :nervous:
Originally posted by StratComm
... As for color, steel grey really seems most appealing, or perhaps a dull black. ...
Right now the colour's a greyish-blue. :) See pics. I have decided to leave the text bit to another day.
-
I was thinking about putting some kind of text on the side of the turrets, but what should it say?
"This space for rent" :D
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
"This space for rent" :D
Better yet, the ever classic "Shoot Me", as seen on the bottom of target drones. ;)
-
///caution///
--stand clear--
:ick
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
///caution///
--stand clear--
listen to bob, kids :D
-
:sigh: If the glows are so horrible I might as welll remove 'em.
-
I was thinking about putting some kind of text on the side of the turrets, but what should it say?
How about 'Hot' on one side and 'Cold ' on the other?
-
I wouldnt say the glows are "horrible" they just dont fit the gun....
-
:yes:
I LOVE THEM!
I see you went with the chrome (good choice, Jabba is pleased) ;)
The glows really make it stand out (especially feels like it's powered up and ready to fire!)
-
:eek2:Excellent
Excellent :nod:
-
Originally posted by Bobboau
///caution///
--stand clear--
Drawing inspiration from Bobboau's idea and "Caution: contents may be hot after heating," I nominate "Avoid the beam and you won't get hit" ;)
-
Looking good! I like the details on the cannons.
When do you think you can get it completed???
-
There are some stuff left to do on the front section, but otherwise that's finished.
I should point out now, that it isn't a texture-to-mesh thing. My skillz are not there yet. Polycount for the nearly completed section's ~16k, IIRC.
-
:eek2:
*2 hours later*
:eek2:
im seeing an animation right infront of my eyes
beautiful ....
-
thanx :)
-
Ok an update for real this time.
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion02.jpg)
Made an error here (below)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion04.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion07.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion13.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion20.jpg)
Forward dock point.
And finally...
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/orion15.jpg)
As, I said - not exactly texture-to-mesh. I should have used booleans more often then I did, 'cause the MAX booleans started to act funny.
I'm going to put windows on those extrusions, but I can't seem to find a good way to do it (short of modeling them). Any ideas?
-
*jaw drops*
Woooooooowwwww!!!!!
How do you do all that detail, anyways?
-
model them! :D
(at least give it a shot, and keep going on them until someone posts a better idea, instead of waiting around, so that if nobody has any good ideas then you won't have wasted all this time waiting around :) )
-
Um, dude, those are the models. :D
-
purdy..thats going to be an utter ***** to texture though
-
I'm going to assume that's all a disp mapper so that I don't have to beat you over the the head for having infinitely more free time than me.
-
Funny, I had always thought of those lights as recessed rather than extruded.
Why aren't you smoothing the curve?! :eek:
-
"sweeeet"-Eric Cartman
-
but with the turrets, make the base square, not round.
-
The base is square. It just has a circular turntable so the turret can rotate. Note the notches for the rotation gears.
Lots of attention to detail, very good. :D
-
Thanks all. :)
All is created with extrude, bevel, inset, shapemerge, etc. I made best friends with the Create poly tool for all those nasty overlapping faces. It's all geometry no dicp. maps at all.
The turrets are circular, though, but those smaller turrets are more square.
I don't expect the texturing to be easy, no. :sigh:
-
Originally posted by Unknown Target
Um, dude, those are the models. :D
i was talking about the windows that he says he wants to do...
-
A few things... first off... WHY DIDN'T I SEE THIS BEFORE?!!!?!?!??!?!?! :D
Second: for the turrets, can I recommend you increase the diameter of the barrels by 20% or so? They look disproportionatly small to the turret itself.
Third: I agree with GE on one count - I always thought those windows were recessed, not extrusions or on extrusions.
But I think that having the fore-dorsal ( = Top-front for you land-lubbers! Yar!!) "curve" as distinctly angled flat sections is uber-cool. :D MAke sure to leave smoothing for that section off! :p
Fourth: on those hull extrusions that stick up the most, model a reason for the season - give 'em some grilles on their sides or something... or you could just texture their sides with grilles.... whatever. I just like things to look like they have a purpose of some sort. :)
Fifth: Did I say: :JAW:!!!!!!! :D
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Fifth: Did I say: :JAW:!!!!!!! :D
Yes, but I think you meant :eek2: :D
-
I'd just add some window portholes on the sides of the vertical extrusions Sandwich mentioned, as it makes sense that some of the areas would be observation decks or quarters for officers, etc. (there would be plenty of quarter space for such a crew in the front "nose" especially considering that probably the entire rear and center section is for the reactor and reaction-mass save for the hangar and ordinance areas. Also just because the top and bottom extrusions have viewing portholes doesn't mean that those areas of the hull are weak ;)
-
*avoids commenting on the turrets*
Looks good so far, although it seems wide.... could just be the fact that it's not the entire hull.
-
Hey, BTW, how do you do those panels?
-
Originally posted by Shrike
*avoids commenting on the turrets*
Looks good so far, although it seems wide.... could just be the fact that it's not the entire hull.
It used to be wider, actually. but it's pretty close now compared to my converted fs2 Orion, IIRC. I'll check again to make sure, though. :)
Also I have decided to go with geometry windows. :)
-
well, it sure is too wide, the front section is almost a square section, it's nearly two times too wide I think... Then again, maybe I'm just plain wrong, I admit I didn't see the orion mesh for quite some time...
Just checked, I'm plain wrong :P seems I'm already becoming senile, I'm losing my memories, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
btw, looks great so far.
-
Nice work.
*also avoids commenting on the turrets*'
-
oh man convert it to LW too its like WOW!!!!!!!! some coool rendering opertunities :D
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion23.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion24.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion25.jpg)
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion26.jpg)
Don't mind the textures too much, just a test. :nervous:
-
Originally posted by Ryx
Don't mind the textures too much, just a test. :nervous:
Ahh, ok - I was worried! :p
Lookin' good! :)
-
1: **** ME!!!
Damn this is damn good dude !
Great details ! on the front section;)
I realy need to learn how to model.
*Go's back to model a cube and a shpere*
-
Originally posted by Ashrak
oh man convert it to LW too its like WOW!!!!!!!! some coool rendering opertunities :D
In the conversion process the thing ends up as pure triangles. Let me tell you: Ryx Orion as pure triples HURTS MY MACHINE. And its just the front end, with no turrets. :D
-
Originally posted by mikhael
In the conversion process the thing ends up as pure triangles. Let me tell you: Ryx Orion as pure triples HURTS MY MACHINE. And its just the front end, with no turrets. :D
dont tell me it cant be converted....
-
Of course it can. It just becomes very polylicious due to conversion. And you'll likely have to redo the textres/surfacing yourself--if Ryx releases it.
Which reminds me. Class is over. Gotta finish these models for Narol so I can get back to the Herc, and then the Medusa.
-
Originally posted by Ashrak
dont tell me it cant be converted....
It can be converted. Problem is, conversion tends to bad things to the poly-count.
The .dxf-format, for instance, loads all triangles non-welded. At least, in my experience. :sigh:
-
Originally posted by Ryx
It can be converted. Problem is, conversion tends to bad things to the poly-count.
The .dxf-format, for instance, loads all triangles non-welded. At least, in my experience. :sigh:
yeah, a DXFformat won't keep the UV settings either. BTW, you probably can untriangulate the mesh in LW, so that's not a big pb.
-
Originally posted by venom2506
yeah, a DXFformat won't keep the UV settings either. BTW, you probably can untriangulate the mesh in LW, so that's not a big pb.
Not without a plugin. LW doesn't have any default functions for seeking coplanar neighbors and merging with them. As one of the Lightwave greats said, "Adding Polys easy, getting rid of them is hard work."
-
mmh... rather tahn polys, search in the edge tools. untriangulating has, actually, nothing to do with polys :P It's just a matter of turning some edges invisible.
-
I'm probably not being terribly clear: I can merge polys just fine. Pick poly A, pick poly B, hit SHIFT+Z. two triangls become1 quad.
that's not the problem.
Meshes like Ryx's Orion, have about 100000 triangles. And there's no handy tool in lightwave to SAFELY remove edges like that.
Reduce-Polys will merge polys and drop edges--but it very often makes polys disappear for no discernible reason. Even on its most conservative and "safe" settings, it will make some 3 pt polys just vanish. Just to make sure, I tested it again on my HercMk1 model and watched it kill have the tail end of the main body. Very simple geometry back there, no degenerate polys or anything.
-
Looking absolutly :jaw: :jaw::jaw::jaw::jaw: droppingly good Ryx and you guessed it, i'm here trying to recruit for the Realization project, and seeming as this is the most realistic model ever produced do you wana join?
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Meshes like Ryx's Orion, have about 100000 triangles. And there's no handy tool in lightwave to SAFELY remove edges like that.
oh yeah, didn't understand right.
Tho I can't understand that either, how the hell can a conversion add polys? Just like ryx is applying a meshsmooth modifer right before converting :doubt:
-
Originally posted by venom2506
how the hell can a conversion add polys?
3dsMax->Lightwave generally converts all faces to triangles, Venom.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
3dsMax->Lightwave generally converts all faces to triangles, Venom.
and how does that increases the number of faces in any way?
a polygon is made of triangles, if it conerts your quads to triangles, you still have the same number of polys, nothing is changed. So I don't understand. :blah:
-
what? how would coverting quads to triangles not increase polycount? you're not making sense, venom.
-
All Non Triangular Faces are converted to Triangular faces, presenting you with a lot more edges, more normals, etc. A mesh tha is composed of nothing but rectilinear polys is faster to render in realtime and manipulate than one composed of triangular polys. 100K quads vs 200k triangles creates a huge performance hit.
-
mmh, no.
the edges are still there, just not visible, the vertex count hasn't changed I bet, so you can't have more olys right? anyway, not gonna argue with you. just ask Ryx how many polys he has in max ( max gives you only triangulated polycount, that's for a reason ).
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion29.jpg)
And ~15.3 kpolys :)
-
Originally posted by venom2506
mmh, no.
the edges are still there, just not visible, the vertex count hasn't changed I bet, so you can't have more olys right? anyway, not gonna argue with you. just ask Ryx how many polys he has in max ( max gives you only triangulated polycount, that's for a reason ).
No, the vertex count hasn't changed, but a TWO TRIANGLES have twice as much ancillary data (you know, normals, UV and surfacing information, etc) than ONE QUAD. There /is/ a difference. If there was no difference, I wouldn't have mentioned it, would I? Fire up Lightwave and give it a shot so you know what I'm talking about.
-
hit"q" or "a" ( dunno, english keyboard stuff) to be sure.
anyway if it's 15.3 k, there's no way even if it was an untriangulated mesh it would turn to be more than 100k.
see my point? there's obviously something else.
-
Originally posted by venom2506
hit"q" or "a" ( dunno, english keyboard stuff) to be sure.
anyway if it's 15.3 k, there's no way even if it was an untriangulated mesh it would turn to be more than 100k.
see my point? there's obviously something else.
Venom, the 100k vs 200k numbers were picked as an illustrative example of the difference between quads and triangles NOT AS NUMBERS FROM RYX' MESH.
You seem to be confusing me talking about Ryx's mesh and me talking about the differences between quads and triangles (both of which are polys AND faces).
Are you clear now, or do you need me to explain it in more detail?
-
Originally posted by mikhael
No, the vertex count hasn't changed, but a TWO TRIANGLES have twice as much ancillary data (you know, normals, UV and surfacing information, etc) than ONE QUAD. There /is/ a difference. If there was no difference, I wouldn't have mentioned it, would I? Fire up Lightwave and give it a shot so you know what I'm talking about.
No: the quads are still dealed as triangles, , like it or not, coz otherwise explain me how... hmm... an exemple... yeah: there's still one normal per triangle, otherwise how would the prog deal a spheric UV mapping on a non planar poly? Damn, I sure think all I've learned about 3D basis during my max formation wasn't pure crap :rolleyes:
Don't wanna fire up LW as you say (couldn't even find the polycount key anyway ), but I can get a look at the max file if Ryx can provide it to me
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Venom, the 100k vs 200k numbers were picked as an illustrative example of the difference between quads and triangles NOT AS NUMBERS FROM RYX' MESH.
You seem to be confusing me talking about Ryx's mesh and me talking about the differences between quads and triangles (both of which are polys AND faces).
Are you clear now, or do you need me to explain it in more detail?
I took ryx mesh as an exemple too, just try, a sphere made with quads, and the same sphere triangulated, make a render, compare the render times. it's that simple
-
Originally posted by venom2506
...but I can get a look at the max file if Ryx can provide it to me
What's your version of MAX?
I modeling this in MAX 5.
-
Originally posted by venom2506
I took ryx mesh as an exemple too, just try, a sphere made with quads, and the same sphere triangulated, make a render, compare the render times. it's that simple
Take a 100k quad sphere and rotate it in realtime. TIME THE UPDATES.
Triangulate the same sphere. Now its 200K triangles. Rotate the sphere in realtime. TIME THE UPDATES.
Shock! Horror! Gasp! Surprise! The 200k Triangle sphere takes much longer per frame to update than the 100k Quad does even though the vertex count is exactly the same. I'm not talking about renders, I'm talking about dealing with the mesh.
-
Originally posted by mikhael
Take a 100k quad sphere and rotate it in realtime. TIME THE UPDATES.
Triangulate the same sphere. Now its 200K triangles. Rotate the sphere in realtime. TIME THE UPDATES.
Shock! Horror! Gasp! Surprise! The 200k Triangle sphere takes much longer per frame to update than the 100k Quad does even though the vertex count is exactly the same. I'm not talking about renders, I'm talking about dealing with the mesh.
well, what can I say? [stupidity removed too, coz it was unfonded criticism] there's not a single difference in max. Anyway, think what you want, I need not prove anything. Case closed for me.
Ryx: I use Max5 too, but it's a prerelease version, so it might not be able to read the file :(
-
[edit]stupidity removed[/edit]
-
sweet looking windows, keep up the excellent work :D:yes:
-
How render in game:
Got Wildcat? :eek2:
Seriously, I'm impressed.
-
heard there might be the need of this here
http://www.kaydara.com/partners/sdk/fbx/index.php
its a file format that will allow transfaer of 3dmodels from any package to any other(well teh main ones anyway)
enjoy
-
Originally posted by KillMeNow
heard there might be the need of this here
http://www.kaydara.com/partners/sdk/fbx/index.php
its a file format that will allow transfaer of 3dmodels from any package to any other(well teh main ones anyway)
enjoy
Useful--but only for people who have one of the following:
3ds max 4, 4.2, 4.3, 5
maya 4.0, 4.5
Softimage 3.8sp2, 3.9, 4.0
lightwave 7.0, 7.5
XSI
Us LW6 users are right out. :(
If it supported LW6/6.5 and Truespace, I'd say we had a winner. :D
-
i'd try it anyway lw 7 still uses the lw 6 file format - a model modeled in lw 7.5 and saved as normal will open happily in 6
-
Originally posted by KillMeNow
i'd try it anyway lw 7 still uses the lw 6 file format - a model modeled in lw 7.5 and saved as normal will open happily in 6
I thought there were some differences between LWOB between 6 and 7. Isn't LW7 using LWOB-2.5 instead of LWOB-2.0?
-
not 100% but when i got ot export models i can save as lw 5.lwo but not lw 6.lwo
as i said worth a try
-
mein gott!
heilige scheiß
great work
-
Thanks. :)
I'm going to try and redo the front.
This bit here;
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion02.jpg)
So polycount is down to ~13.5 kpolys. :)
Windows are finished. Problem with both Boolean and shapemerge tools, make adding more windows very difficult. :(
-
Is that the same pic as before?
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Is that the same pic as before?
Yes. I just wanted to show what part, I was changing. :)
-
you don't have to try and bring down the polycount when it's only 13.5k. large ship models like that usually go up to ten times that much.
-
Originally posted by Carl
you don't have to try and bring down the polycount when it's only 13.5k. large ship models like that usually go up to ten times that much.
No, he's trying to bring it down to ~13.5k polygons.
-
no, no, no.
After i removed the greebles and stuff, and replaced that with new 'blank'* faces, the polycount was ~13,5 kpolys.
* I deleted all those faces and recreated them. Thus 'blank'.
-
Ah, ok - my bad. Apologies to one and all. :)
-
Oh... wow... I've been waiting for someone to do this for... well, since I first played FreeSpace. :D
-
Thanks :)
-
What sort of rig have you got?? if i tried (as if i could :D ) to render anything with a polycount like that, well let's just say "would you like your athlon original recipe or extra crispy?"
burnt athlon anyone? ;)
seriously though, keep up the good work, you have a winner on that one.
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
What sort of rig have you got?? if i tried (as if i could :D ) to render anything with a polycount like that, well let's just say "would you like your athlon original recipe or extra crispy?"
burnt athlon anyone? ;)
seriously though, keep up the good work, you have a winner on that one.
Look in his siggy. :D
-
only a 1900+? hmm, i guess 256mb, with my 2200+ on my kt3 ultra 2 i'd say i need more ram..
-
What, 13500 polys? Hell, that's nothing. It's when they get up into the hundred thousands that you start having lockups. I could field 13500 on my ten-year-old computer with my five-year-old software, never mind on my hardly even obsolete dual. And mosta youse gots even better ****. Like MAX.
-
Originally posted by Ryx
Thanks :)
Don't mention it. Just make sure you finish this thing. ;)
-
Originally posted by Ryder P. Moses
What, 13500 polys? Hell, that's nothing. It's when they get up into the hundred thousands that you start having lockups. I could field 13500 on my ten-year-old computer with my five-year-old software, never mind on my hardly even obsolete dual. And mosta youse gots even better ****. Like MAX.
well, some of us can't afford $3000+ software wish i could get into 3d modeling though, i just don't have the cash (and the educational resources) to do it though..
-
Originally posted by Setekh
Oh... wow... I've been waiting for someone to do this for... well, since I first played FreeSpace. :D
then you missed two interesting threads on the previous page, by Mikhael and me :D
-
can the flames, and get back to modelling. NOW!!! We want more high-poly FS models. NOW!
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
well, some of us can't afford $3000+ software wish i could get into 3d modeling though, i just don't have the cash (and the educational resources) to do it though..
looks like you can afford an internet connection though, *wink* wink* *nudge* *nudge* ;7
-
56k prepaid :sigh:
-
Turnsky: Just so you know, I'm working off of a heavily corrupted copy of a program whose advanced upgrade is $120. They don't even SELL the old one anymore. And my computer's nothing to write home about, either. It can still get up to 200,000 without flinching. So can it.:D
-
yeah, but i live in tassie, where the nearest copy of 3ds max is probably 500 odd clicks away
here's to Gmax eh?
-
Now that is cool ................Nice job.....8) Sumit some of the Pics at the link, they will like it.........8D
http://zaon.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=5
Good Job Dude...........8)
-
Originally posted by venom2506
then you missed two interesting threads on the previous page, by Mikhael and me :D
Mik just pointed them out to me... what can I say. :eek2:
-
Originally posted by Ryx
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion29.jpg)
Ryx, do me a small favor, will you? Re-render that shot, with a human-sized something "standing" on the hull - I wanna get an idea of the scale.
-
err... scale :nervous:
Yeah... I'll throw something together. (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/smiley/theyareontome.gif)
-
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion37.jpg)
Hitman model by IO Interactive.
He, I discovered that I can't do charachter meshes, so I borrowed the Hitman model. :D
A bit hard to see, though. :blah:
-
...So most of the extrusions are about 1 deck, to scale. :yes: Good work.
-
The Orion just seems ridiculously huge when you see it that way, eh?
:D
-
one anoying little remark: there is very little armour between the top of the deck (or the end of a window) and the actual vacuum. just seems a bit odd. a possible explanation though: the extrusions are luxuary lounges for non-combat situations, and a below-deck armour of a couple of feet rolls between te vacuum and the ship when the **** hits the fan
-
Styxx, that always struck me as perhaps FSs biggest problem, you could barely fit a few fighters in the launch bay hole but the size of one man is that big! I know fighters are larger than a man but not that much...
-
can someone make a render or something where you see each shipon it's side,and a human and a scale of measurement (a stick with marked things for meters or something). that way you would be able to see this alot better. you could also make an animation where yoou see the pilots scramble for there ships. or make a scene a la star trek. where you see someone look out of the window, and then the camera moves to a wide external shot of the ship.
just a few sugestions
-
If this is a more "size accurate" Orion then any fighters made in comparison should be scaled accordingly. In other words, MUCH smaller then in game
-
Originally posted by HeX
If this is a more "size accurate" Orion then any fighters made in comparison should be scaled accordingly. In other words, MUCH smaller then in game
uhh? you lost me there, what are you trying to say?
-
Actually, the thing is that fighters ingame are huge too, much larger than any modern day fighter plane...
-
Sooo...... about those turrets.
-
Originally posted by Styxx
Actually, the thing is that fighters ingame are huge too, much larger than any modern day fighter plane...
Can we please change that though? I mean I'm fairly sure I'm not the only one who enjoys the epic feel of capital ships alongside fighters rather than large everything...
-
Just because they are one man doesnt mean they are small, the fighters would have to be HUGE To fit all the systems in, and the cap ships arnt exactly small ;)
-
Originally posted by Mr Carrot
Just because they are one man doesnt mean they are small, the fighters would have to be HUGE To fit all the systems in, and the cap ships arnt exactly small ;)
My fellow edible has hit it - the fighters in FS are appropriately huge. Have you even been alongside a real F-15? They are much bigger than they seem. And in space, you need that much more room for everything.
Oh, and:
Originally posted by Ryx
(http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion37.jpg)
Hitman model by IO Interactive.
He, I discovered that I can't do charachter meshes, so I borrowed the Hitman model. :D
A bit hard to see, though. :blah:
HOLY...!!:shaking:
*wants to have a FS-Serious Sam MOD with the Orion hull as a spacewalk level*
:D :D :D :D
-
Originally posted by kasperl
one anoying little remark: there is very little armour between the top of the deck (or the end of a window) and the actual vacuum. just seems a bit odd. a possible explanation though: the extrusions are luxuary lounges for non-combat situations, and a below-deck armour of a couple of feet rolls between te vacuum and the ship when the **** hits the fan
Yes, I thought of this too, and I have to agree with your possible explanation. :nod:
-
Originally posted by kasperl
can someone make a render or something where you see each shipon it's side,and a human and a scale of measurement (a stick with marked things for meters or something). that way you would be able to see this alot better.
I was thinking the same thing. Unfortunately Excel won't graph the kind of chart I want it to, so you'll have to live with this chart. Heights/lengths are in meters.
Human 2 Real
Type 6 Shuttlecraft 6 Star Trek
TIE Fighter 6 Star Wars
X-Wing 12 Star Wars
Nial Fighter 22 Babylon 5
Blue Whale 24 Real
GTF Hercules 25 Freespace
Space Shuttle 37 Real
GTB Ursa 54 Freespace
Football field 91 Real
Great Pyramid 146 Real
Corellian Corvette 150 Star Wars
Bird of Prey 157 Star Trek
GTC Fenris 253 Freespace
Enterprise-A 289 Star Trek
Nebulon B Frigate 300 Star Wars
Nimitz carrier 333 Real
Voyager 344 Star Trek
Empire State Bldng 381 Real
Petronas Towers 452 Real
WhiteStar 476 Babylon 5
Enterprise-C 526 Star Trek
GTCv Deimos 717 Freespace
MC80 Cruiser 1200 Star Wars
Narn Cruiser 1400 Babylon 5
Minibari Cruiser 1600 Babylon 5
Imp Star Destroyer 1717 Star Wars
Shadow Battlecrab 2000 Babylon 5
GTD Orion 2023 Freespace
Golden Gate Bridge 2737 Real
SD Lucifer 2777 Freespace
Home One 3200 Star Wars
GTVA Colossus 6117 Freespace
Babylon 5 8454 Babylon 5
Mt. Everest 8850 Real
-
Originally posted by GalacticEmperor
I was thinking the same thing. Unfortunately Excel won't graph the kind of chart I want it to, so you'll have to live with this chart. Heights/lengths are in meters.
Human 2 Real
Type 6 Shuttlecraft 6 Star Trek
TIE Fighter 6 Star Wars
X-Wing 12 Star Wars
Nial Fighter 22 Babylon 5
Blue Whale 24 Real
GTF Hercules 25 Freespace
Space Shuttle 37 Real
GTB Ursa 54 Freespace
Football field 91 Real
Great Pyramid 146 Real
Corellian Corvette 150 Star Wars
Bird of Prey 157 Star Trek
GTC Fenris 253 Freespace
Enterprise-A 289 Star Trek
Nebulon B Frigate 300 Star Wars
Nimitz carrier 333 Real
Voyager 344 Star Trek
Empire State Bldng 381 Real
Petronas Towers 452 Real
WhiteStar 476 Babylon 5
Enterprise-C 526 Star Trek
GTCv Deimos 717 Freespace
MC80 Cruiser 1200 Star Wars
Narn Cruiser 1400 Babylon 5
Minibari Cruiser 1600 Babylon 5
Imp Star Destroyer 1717 Babylon 5
Shadow Battlecrab 2000 Babylon 5
GTD Orion 2023 Freespace
Golden Gate Bridge 2737 Real
SD Lucifer 2777 Freespace
Home One 3200 Star Wars
GTVA Colossus 6117 Freespace
Babylon 5 8454 Babylon 5
Mt. Everest 8850 Real
Well, when you put it that way, I guess things aren't scaled so inappropriately after all. Except for the whole GTF Hercules > Blue Whale bit; I don't care if the cockpit was supposed to give full panaramic vision, that's still just too big. Perhaps on the order of 12 meters would be more fitting...
-
Originally posted by GalacticEmperor
Imp Star Destroyer 1717 Babylon 5
:wtf:
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
:wtf:
:lol: :lol:
-
*smack* Shaddup. Like you never made a mistake.
Can anyone give me the sizes for some of the Homeworld ships?
-
Originally posted by GalacticEmperor
*smack* Shaddup. Like you never made a mistake.
Can anyone give me the sizes for some of the Homeworld ships?
Homeworld ship sizes will be hard... There's a few dozen different sizes from several sources. :p
-
try the official :nervous:
-
Jesus christ.. the Herc can't be that big?
Some of that seems really wierd when you look at it. Like the Star Trek ships, or the Fenris almost being twice as long as the Corellian Corvette
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
My fellow edible has hit it - the fighters in FS are appropriately huge. Have you even been alongside a real F-15? They are much bigger than they seem. And in space, you need that much more room for everything.
The only better than standing next to an F-15 is standing on top of one while its being opened up. I may be able to get some pictures.
Oh. Theres one more thing better than that. Standing next to an F-15B thats undergoing a supersonic engine run. My entire body vibrated.
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
HOLY...!!:shaking:
*wants to have a FS-Serious Sam MOD with the Orion hull as a spacewalk level*
:D :D :D :D
well... maybe it is a bit too big? :p
for the whole size thing: never realized the ursa was bigger than the spac shuttle :shaking: it's more than half a football field :shaking: ( american football I 'spose? )
when I compare things, I realize some things are ridiculously big. when you say 8 km, alright doesn't sound that big in a game... take a louk at the mount Everest :lol:
-
Originally posted by NegspectahDek
Oh. Theres one more thing better than that. Standing next to an F-15B thats undergoing a supersonic engine run. My entire body vibrated.
How about 15 feet from an APC-mounted 0.6" caliber Vulcan cannon ripping apart a concrete high-rise? :D
Originally posted by venom2506
well... maybe it is a bit too big? :p
:ha: Hardly:
From the Serious Engine FAQ (http://www.croteam.com/engine_faq.shtml)
5. Your site mentions "100 square mile" level size. Is this all loaded in memory, or does the engine use a streaming technique?
Serious Engine has specific support for several key-features that enable creation of large worlds. That includes multitexturing, autoanimations, specially optimized physics, heavy use of LOD techniques etc.
Serious Sam game actually does include levels that cover 100 square miles area. In the game, you don't actually walk around all that area. You just sail in a ship along, and all the rest is scenery. Otherwise, you'd spend weeks there. But the point is that the engine can render scenes where things are at so large scales that you can both see the structure of the sand on the floor and a far-away mountain. And you can actually go to that far-away mountain if you want.
:D
-
I wasn't talking about if the game could handle it, but gameplay wise, it might be a bit too big :p Running for hours in a orion, well...
-
Originally posted by venom2506
I wasn't talking about if the game could handle it, but gameplay wise, it might be a bit too big :p Running for hours in a orion, well...
Not in - on. Imagine a level where you're on a spacewalk on the Orion's hull. You need to spacewalk because the inside is infested with Shivans, and you need to get from the bridge to engineering the quickest, safest way you can. So you head outside and have a little eyecandy stroll. :D
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Not in - on. Imagine a level where you're on a spacewalk on the Orion's hull. You need to spacewalk because the inside is infested with Shivans, and you need to get from the bridge to engineering the quickest, safest way you can. So you head outside and have a little eyecandy stroll. :D
Then a Shivan breaks through the armor and leaps on you, and you're screwed. :D
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Not in - on. Imagine a level where you're on a spacewalk on the Orion's hull. You need to spacewalk because the inside is infested with Shivans, and you need to get from the bridge to engineering the quickest, safest way you can. So you head outside and have a little eyecandy stroll. :D
so basically you're running on a flat structure with a few buildings extruded from the ground? sounds like Doom to me :D
-
Originally posted by venom2506
so basically you're running on a flat structure with a few buildings extruded from the ground? sounds like Doom to me :D
Bah! Don't pop my little bubble of delusions!
Ok then - how about the Orion from the FS2 intro - holed all the way through. :D
-
Well, I'm about ready to discontinue this one. Here's why:
Originally posted by Ryx
I've stopped working on that temporarily, or permanently. Don't know which yet. This is because MAX has been giving me problems with, mainly, the Boolean function.
_______________________________
Example:
I want to do a boolean add operation - add a rectangle to some part of the mesh. After I've the done the boolean, I discover that It has not removed the parts that were "pressed into" the mesh, so I have to manually delete these faces and then clean up stray vertices and weld them. Quite often, I must recreate faces.
_______________________________
This problem only occurs on old* models. If I start a new model from scratch, boolean works as it should.
Shapemerge makes it a little easier, but not much... :sigh:
I've decided that, If I cancel it, I will release what I have done so far. Maybe someone else will pick it up, or maybe you just want to look at it.
* An old model seems to be any mesh created with a previous install of MAX, even if the previous install was MAX 5.
[/size]
You can download what I've done so far Here (http://w1.520.telia.com/~u52019065/Project/Orion.maxscript.exe)
Just unpack and run the maxscript, or .3ds. Maybe I'll have to go back to MAX 4... :(
-
That problem is easily "fixable" - your mesh is nor properly closed. Select all vertexes on the mesh and weld them before the boolean and, failing that, add a Cap Holes modifier.
:)
-
Originally posted by Styxx
That problem is easily "fixable" - your mesh is nor properly closed. Select all vertexes on the mesh and weld them before the boolean and, failing that, add a Cap Holes modifier.
:)
Didn't help, unfortnutely. After a weld STLcheck modifier reports no errors and problem remains. :blah:
Oh, and I have installed the 5.1 update too.
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Bah! Don't pop my little bubble of delusions!
Ok then - how about the Orion from the FS2 intro - holed all the way through. :D
well, if you make the player jump from destroyed deck to destroyed deck to reach that crashed herc on the upper deck, with the rest of the hole as background, and with shivan and GTVA fighters dogfighting past it, well, that sure would be cool :)
Btw, if you get around to doing that mod ( and if you send me a copy of the game :D ), I can make you a LPM IK rigged shivan/vasudan whatever ;)
-
God. We need UT 2003, and people who play FS and UT. That would look.... big.
-
Originally posted by venom2506
Btw, if you get around to doing that mod ( and if you send me a copy of the game :D ), I can make you a LPM IK rigged shivan/vasudan whatever ;)
Well, I'm seriously considering going ahead with it. Problem is, I leave for a month of reserves on monday. But there are a few basic things I would require the mod to have - obviously rigged creatures and player models would be a main requirement. If you could do either or both, it'd be awesome! :)
For reference, if you have any questions as to polycount, supported IK stuff, whatever - search / ask at http://forums.seriouscommunity.com/ . They'll probably be home base for this MOD.
And the game is only $20!! Buy it! ;)
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Well, I'm seriously considering going ahead with it. Problem is, I leave for a month of reserves on monday. But there are a few basic things I would require the mod to have - obviously rigged creatures and player models would be a main requirement. If you could do either or both, it'd be awesome! :)
you know, high poly rigging stuff is damn hard. LPM, on the other end, is really another story. Why do you think there's that many new player meshes for halflife, unreal, etc? ;)
-
Originally posted by Mulla Mohammad Omar
God. We need UT 2003, and people who play FS and UT. That would look.... big.
The FS universe wouldn't fit UT2003, though. Definitely not deathmatch; bombing run is a CTF hybrid, but that wouldn't really work that well either. FS relies too much on story, which I think is one of its strengths, but doesn't lend itself to UT2003... well, not the way we think of it, anyway. :D
-
Originally posted by venom2506
you know, high poly rigging stuff is damn hard. LPM, on the other end, is really another story. Why do you think there's that many new player meshes for halflife, unreal, etc? ;)
LPM?
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
LPM?
low-poly model/mesh, I think.
-
Originally posted by Ryx
low-poly model/mesh, I think.
Ahh, gotcha. :yes:
So Venom, does that mean you'll cook up some rigged models for me when you have the chance? :)
I'mm attaching what I have set up so far for a MOD - just put the ZIP in the serioussam\Mods\ directory (create it if it doesn't exist), and unzip it there. Then load up Serious Sam, go to MODS, and select Freespace - The Serious War (I know, I know - sheddup :p). It doesn't have anything changed in-game yet, but the menus are in Bank Gothic, and the header title's customized.
Oh, and by the way: if you don't have serious Sam, don't bother with the attachment. :p
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Freespace - The Serious War
This drips of your creative essence, Mike. :D Hey dude, do they make a pack with the First and Second Encounters both inside? :drevil:
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Ahh, gotcha. :yes:
So Venom, does that mean you'll cook up some rigged models for me when you have the chance? :)
yeah, LPM=low poly mesh
well, only if it goes somewhere ( see the red faction mod... ).
-
Heh - thanks, Ed. :p Very funny. :lol:
I don't know if they have a combo pack, but the games are cheap - $20 USD new.
Venom - the problem is that I'll be in reserves for the next month, so I see this character modelling as something you are more than capable of carrying to completion without any sort of input from me. :D
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Heh - thanks, Ed. :p Very funny. :lol:
I don't know if they have a combo pack, but the games are cheap - $20 USD new.
I'm getting really discouraged, because I can't find any of these old games (like, the type I can still play on my P3-500) in the commercial stores anymore. :( FS2 is off the shelves, can't even find the SSOTY Edition (but I was able to secure a copy from my buddy down the road, thanks for the tip on the copying for non-profit clause). I might have to order it online, or something... :nervous:
-
know how you feel, can't even find Sof2 of jedi outcast on shelves anymore :(
sucks to live in a small city..