Digital Paint Discussion Board
Development => General Development => Topic started by: jitspoe on March 03, 2011, 07:01:42 PM
-
I'm going to be focusing on high resolution textures for a bit.
Goals of the pack:
- Improve the visuals of the game.
- Standardize high resolution textures for fairness in game play.
- GPL compatibility (all textures will have source available - be that photographs, scripts, PSD files, or whatever - and be free to edit, use, and distribute under the GPL license).
You can browse the textures here:
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/
Or download the full zip here:
http://dplogin.com/files/hr4_gpl.zip
I'll be actively taking feedback and suggestions on IRC (#paintball on irc.globalgamers.net) while I'm working on the textures (~9pm+ EST), and I'll try to check this thread at least once a day.
-
atta girl
-
Nice i really like your textures :). Crates look cool
But i have few suggestions maybe someone could confirm or refus it if its not just my video settings
1.X_tile.jpg - seems to overbrighten for me. When it is in shadow its ok but when sun shines on it, it hurts my eyes
2.wizwood1_2,wizwood1_3 - looks for me like non hq idk why from distance it looks like there was some huge texture. The other woods that looks common are good (wood1_1,w_wood5) but those 2 that i mentioned looks like smoothed maybe
Anyway +1 with those textures the game looks awesome :)
-
I saw, that you have two hr4 skies in the zip. Here are some more:
clouds - bLiNdThInG (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=21277.msg205175#msg205175)
pbsky3 - Zorchenhimer (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=5762.msg66629#msg66629)
sand - Zorchenhimer (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=5762.msg66629#msg66629)
Download: ftp://otb-server.de/pub/HR4_sky.zip (ftp://otb-server.de/pub/HR4_sky.zip)
I've also two flames (self made from gif pictures) which i can upload, if you want to add them.
-
Here is the post with my opinions from the "Re: jitspoe's .plan" thread:
The few hr4 textures from 2011 on dplogin.com (i don't know, if you want to keep or remake the other ones, so i only talk about the new textures) are looking good. Especially "city6_8", "rock4_2", "rocks19_1", "rrock1_2" and "wood1_1" are very nice ingame. But there are also three textures, which i personally don't like or which can have a little tweak in my opinion. Let's start with the texture, which needs the tweak: "stonewal". There is a little bit too much red in it. And now the textures "metal2_5" and "metal5_8": They look completely low res, too rusty and too brown ingame. The normal low res texture is grey instead of brown. The color of your new textures is more like "metal2_6" and "metal8_1", but only the color. They look too low res to only rename them.
What do you think about this ones (metal2_5 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal2_5.jpg), metal5_8 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal5_8.jpg))?
Here are screenshots, how it looks ingame with the low res textures (img 1), your new textures (img 2) and the one, i suggested (img 3):
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0916.jpg)
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0917.jpg)
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0918.jpg)
Edit: Here are two more screenshots. Low res and official hr4.
rrock1_2: Looks really good in the background and ok from the near.
w_metal1: Looks too much detailed and because of that unrealistic. Maybe make it with big plain areas and not so much perforated. The structure from b_tile.jpg could look really good for that.
metal2_5: Like the pictures above this "edit"-part. Too much rust, brown instead of grey and the points need to be brighter to see them as good as in low res. Maybe bigger plain areas (for the background) with only 10-20% rust looks better. If you don't want to use the one from above, i would prefer to make something very similar to that one. It looks pretty nice, detailed and clear ingame.
metal4_8: It's yellow, but the texture itself isn't that bad. I would like to see how it looks ingame with only 25% and 50% of the yellow stripes. That we can see more from the part, which is in the background now.
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0919.jpg)
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0920.jpg)
Without a picture:
- metal1_2.jpg: looks also low res ingame.
- metal2.jpg: Looks pixelated and without clear borders around the points. Maybe a toooo high compression?
-
I swear that these HD textures were there before the dinosaurs were around! Are you improving them?
-
I swear that these HD textures were there before the dinosaurs were around! Are you improving them?
Narga, some of these textures are a couple of years old, however jitspoe has resumed work on them and has produced a number of new textures in the last week. Try clicking on the first link and looking at the date column.
Gotta agree with T3RR0R that the slimy metal plates look perhaps a little too slimy, so that they are more yellow instead of neutral. Although pretty much everything looks amazing :D
While you're doing all these, perhaps you could make a half-height crate texture for future use by mappers? The current technique of squashing a crate texture to 0.5Y can produce some odd-looking results.
-
ugliest textures i have ever seen.
-
On the metal5_8, I've attached the original texture (scaled up). Most of the standalone textures were rushed to avoid copyright issues, so I'm kind of picking the best between the original and standalone or making a hybrid between the two. This one is pretty much 50/50 original and standalone.
New high res:
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/metal5_8.jpg)
Standalone:
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/metal5_8.jpg)
The texture you've suggested as an alternative does not look like either the original or standalone. It's too flat. It also looks low quality (looks like it was scaled up, blurry, and there are jpeg artifacts visible). It tiles terribly as well (looks like a giant grid from a distance). Discovery is a bad map for looking at this texture, as it uses it on a huge amount of area with almost all uniform lighting.
Original:
-
I've only played the standalone version of this game, not the mod. So i have never seen the real original texture and the standalone one is the original for me.
If you want to give the game his real original look back, ok. But remember, that 99% of the players doesn't know it and you'll give the game a completely new look after many years (instead of clear and detailed textures, what i thought). I can't say if the players like or hate it. Also, almost all actual maps are made to look good with the standalone textures. I don't know, if the mappers are happy with a new look of their maps or if we get two different versions of each map with the same name (and need to download another version from each server...) - that won't happen, the most mappers are too lazy to do that :P
Another thing, i noticed: Why do the new textures have so less details? They are in a higher resolution and that looks of course better than the low res ingame, but they are also mushy. I miss the details. Where are they?
The new textures look like this one (in my opinion):
(http://otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/beispiel_1.jpg)
Why not like this one (clear and with much more details)?
(http://otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/beispiel_2.jpg)
Have you looked at the textures from the near ingame? You can also see some (jpeg ?) artifacts. It's a bit pixelated (and without clear borders around points). Like i said, metal2.jpg is the worst. Look at it on airtime. Is this, how hr4 should look?
(http://otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0922.jpg) (http://otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0922.jpg)
-
I'm not sure I follow - you're suggesting this:
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal5_8.jpg)
Looks sharper and more detailed than this?
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/metal5_8.jpg)
Also, "w_metal1: Looks too much detailed and because of that unrealistic." I'm getting mixed feedback. Are the textures too detailed or not detailed enough? I'm just having a hard time figuring out what you want.
I don't see the jpeg artifacts in metal2. JPEG artifacts look like this: http://dpfwiw.com/images/jpeg_artifacts.jpg
Airtime is kind of a bad example because it scales the texture up and has it sideways. Pretty much any texture you put there is going to look low res. Sadly, it's about the only map that uses that texture. I can make the shadows harder, but that won't change the fact that the texture is blown up in that map.
Nice i really like your textures :). Crates look cool
But i have few suggestions maybe someone could confirm or refus it if its not just my video settings
1.X_tile.jpg - seems to overbrighten for me. When it is in shadow its ok but when sun shines on it, it hurts my eyes
2.wizwood1_2,wizwood1_3 - looks for me like non hq idk why from distance it looks like there was some huge texture. The other woods that looks common are good (wood1_1,w_wood5) but those 2 that i mentioned looks like smoothed maybe
Anyway +1 with those textures the game looks awesome :)
Could you post a screenshot of the overbright tiles? I didn't think they were that bright. I agree about the wood. The problem is, some maps *cough*propaint1*cough* have huge surface areas of wood, and smaller grain textures look bad on them. Also, the original textures had large grain. I'll probably make another pass at them later. I'm trying to at least make a first pass of all the high res textures first.
-
I'm not sure I follow - you're suggesting this:
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal5_8.jpg)
Looks sharper and more detailed than this?
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/metal5_8.jpg)
I like the top one better because it looks cleaner and more realistic.
The bottom one looks rusty and worn down and is better for maps that take place in old, abandoned building.
-
Yes, i maybe write a little bit too much. Its hard to follow, what i mean.
I hope, i think right and you mean this part:
And now the textures "metal2_5" and "metal5_8": They look completely low res, too rusty and too brown ingame. The normal low res texture is grey instead of brown. The color of your new textures is more like "metal2_6" and "metal8_1", but only the color. They look too low res to only rename them.
What do you think about this ones (metal2_5 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal2_5.jpg), metal5_8 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal5_8.jpg))?
Of course, "my" metal5_8 texture doesn't look sharper and more detailed. But it looks more like the standalone one (where i thought, they were the original), has more / a bigger similar surface (not each pixel in another color; very hard to explain, because i dont know all the exact words in english) and in my opinion better on the places where it is used ingame atm.
You say, it is too flat. You're right, it is flat if you have your texture beside it. How should it look? My opinion: Your one looks like metal under a microscope and my one looks a bit more like in the real world, so if i buy a lot of metal plates and make a wall of it, they are looking flat. Thats why i use metal and not stone.
Like i said, its very hard to explain what i mean with "bigger similar surface" and "detailed". I hope, this two screenshots can show it a bit. Both are ingame screenshots from the exact same place and both are in a bad quality. The first one has too much details for the bad quality, so there are no clear borders around the points and almost each pixel has another color. BUT, the level of details would be nice to have, if the texture quality itself would be as good as the last picture below. The second one has ~25% of the colors and bigger similar surfaces of the same kind of colors. That looks better on such a bad quality and the points are much better visible. The borders around the points are also not clear and the artifacts are very ugly.
(http://otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0928.jpg) (http://otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0928.jpg)
(http://otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0929.jpg) (http://otb-server.de/hr4/screenshorts/sshot0929.jpg)
Don't laugh, this is made from the first few pictures, which i found with google :P What do we need, to have such a clear and detailed/structured texture (if i stand directly in front of a wall) ingame?
(http://otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/demo02.jpg) (http://otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/demo02.jpg)
-
I think the point is that the metal5_8, with all the smoothing it got in game, looked rather flat as far as metal goes, and was used in maps looking like that. T3RR0R's HR4 textures fits that use well because it's fairly flat with enough scratch marks etc. to show it's metal. Whereas the new gpl hr4 version may be more true to the original idea of the texture as rough metal, it's too much like bare noise to fit in all the current maps where it's used as a nice smooth floor/wall etc.
What do we need, to have such a clear and detailed/structured texture (if i stand directly in front of a wall) ingame?
HR8 ;)
-
bare noise
yup, it does look like that.
-
I suggest to let Jitspoe finish his entire pack, and before releasing it asking for feedback.
This way we'll end up discussing about 3 textures for the next couple of months, instead of making some real improvements.
-
HR8 ;)
I thought this game should have multiple texture packs.
lr240p, lr360p, lr480p, hr720p, hr1080p, etc.
-
metal5_8 doesn't look flat at all, though. It's pretty noisy both in the standalone and original versions, and I guess the noise is what you're complaining about.
Finding the right balance is difficult. If I add too much noise, obviously, it just looks like a bunch of noise. If there's not enough, though, the texture just ends up looking really flat. Flat textures can work if the maps have enough detail, but PB2 maps are very low poly, and maps just end up looking like cardboard cutouts if there's not enough detail/noise in the texture.
As for texture "quality", what you're referring to is just resolution. Obviously, more pixels means you can store more detail. On the plus side, most of the textures I've done are built with filter forge and it's simply a matter of rendering a larger image to get a higher resolution texture. On the minus side, I don't want to have some 10 GB texture pack, and most video cards won't be able to handle that much texture data. I am curious what a 16x version of that texture would look like, though...
-
I've redone metal5_8 and metal2_5 a bit. Less noise, stronger lighting (added in the hard shadows I've been working on). Do you think they look better now?
-
Yes, of course. Can you make them a bit brighter too?
I've played a litte bit with gimp and both new textures. Here are two results:
http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal2_5.1.jpg
http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal5_8.1.jpg
http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal2_5.2.jpg
http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/metal5_8.2.jpg
Especially the second one doesn't look ingame as bad as i thought (but it has too much blue in it).
-
Scale down the textures.
I like most of the metal's in your pack, as well as the boxes. But, you should use a smoothing filter on all your wood planks because they look noisy and unrealistic.
The barrel sides are really nice.
I think it was more your rock walls and grasses that needed to be scaled down. But I don't think you've worked on them that much yet. 'rrock1_2 and rocks19_1' are the main ones that I looked at. (more so Rocks19_1 and the grasses)
---- If this becomes a mandatory pack, are we going to be able to scale the textures to our liking?
Last comment --- I know you have not touched this yet, but please try to improve on the wwall1_1.jpg texture. It's been around for a while and most packs use the less detailed version of it instead of the one in your pack.
-
I dont think, rrock1_2 and rocks19_1 are so bad.
The wwall1_1 texture itself is good, but it doesn't look good ingame. It need to be changed completely. I had this one (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/wwall1_1.jpg) before, maybe something similar to that one would be nice.
What do you think about my two versions of "metal2_5 (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=22225.msg207620#msg207620)" and "metal5_8 (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=22225.msg207620#msg207620)" jitspoe?
Another thing 1: When you make the top of the barrels, can you please change the barrels too? In my opinion, they have too much slime and i would like to see a rusty border on the ground.
Another thing 2: I also didn't like the ?_metal1 texture. I've made another one from the dark places of the ?_tile textures. They are not perfect, but you can have a look, how it could be ingame. I like them much more than the actual ?_metal1: b_metal1 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/b_metal1.jpg), r_metal1 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/r_metal1.jpg), p_metal1 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/p_metal1.jpg), y_metal1 (http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/y_metal1.jpg)
-
I downloaded the hr4_gpl.zip folder recently. The textures aren't as bad as I thought. In fact, I realised that just because there's a lot of detail, doesn't mean it isn't clean looking.
The only problem is the barrel top textures. They look like LD textures.
-
The only problem is the barrel top textures. They look like LD textures.
That are low resolution textures. Jitspoe is working on it, but the pack isn't complete atm.
-
MyeRs: I don't think scaling down the rock textures would look good. It would just look like a bumpy surface instead of a large rock wall, like most maps use them for. I tried to keep the scale pretty close to the originals. I don't really care if people scale them, but if we do a strict HR4 pack, then there will either be one set of textures that everybody can use, or just a few possible selections - you wouldn't be able to tweak textures (unless they became officially approved, or however we handle that).
Of course wwall1_1 could use more work, but I think it looks decent and true to the original (attached):
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wwall1_1.jpg)
What, specifically, do you think needs work?
T3RR0R15T: I didn't reply earlier, but I made some changes to the metal2_8 and 2_8 to make them brighter. Any brighter than that, and it looks bad, I think. Your second one looks too greyscale. I'd like to have a little more color. See what you think of the new ones.
The _metal1 textures could stand to be redone, but I'm going to try to finish up the other textures before I get to them.
-
MyeRs: I don't think scaling down the rock textures would look good. It would just look like a bumpy surface instead of a large rock wall, like most maps use them for. I tried to keep the scale pretty close to the originals. I don't really care if people scale them, but if we do a strict HR4 pack, then there will either be one set of textures that everybody can use, or just a few possible selections - you wouldn't be able to tweak textures (unless they became officially approved, or however we handle that).
Understood. It just was a huge difference from the basic 'non detailed' textures most people have been using. So it did take some time to adjust, but now it's a noticeable improvement over any other textures currently being used.
wwall1_1 -- I don't have any specific arguments against it, I just found it did not look nice in game, so I always used the less-detailed one in T3RR0R15T's post above. I'm going to put it back into my textures so I can give you better feedback later.
Also, the two grasses you posted in #paintball looked great in game!
-
My opinion about these textures aren't good at the moment...
They are verry how i can say... strange...
I used it on airtime, ub cliff propaint pforest and it doesnt look good. But if jit is going to do it better i wll try it again but at this moment it is not possible to use it...
-
Of course wwall1_1 could use more work, but I think it looks decent and true to the original (attached):
Yes, it looks great as a hr4 texture from the original file. You said before, that you scaled down the original textures because of copyright things to get the actual low res textures. How do you made it for this texture? They (wwall1_1_original and the actual low res wwall1_1) are completely different (+different resolution). Or do you have another low res file with the same resolution as the original?
Original:
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/wwall1_1_original.jpg)
Low res:
(http://www.otb-server.de/hr4/T3RR0R15T/wwall1_1_lowres.jpg)
If you remake it with the other resolution, can you maybe make it a bit more flat? It's often used with other flat textures (like stonewal) and should fit to it.
My opinion about these textures aren't good at the moment...
They are verry how i can say... strange...
I used it on airtime, ub cliff propaint pforest and it doesnt look good. But if jit is going to do it better i wll try it again but at this moment it is not possible to use it...
What exactly doesn't look good? Color, brightness, ...?
Edit: The brightness from the metal textures is much better now.
-
Sporti: I can't do it better with vague feedback like "strange" and "doesn't look good." What, specifically, makes the textures so bad they're not even possible to use?
T3RR0R15T: I never scaled down the Quake textures. Those are the original sizes. I remade most of the textures from scratch when the game went standalone. wwall1_1 is pretty much just a grid of lines and some noise because it was quick to make. The original had more detail and character, so I made the hr4 version closer to that. The images aren't really different "resolutions". They just have a different number of pixels. Resolution doesn't change unless the texture is scaled in game. They both have the same scale. The second one just repeats less often. If it's possible to make good looking textures that are smaller and have more repeats, it saves memory.
-
http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/pbcup_renoir_hr4_wip.jpg
DT wondered if his maps would look good with the new textures. Starting to look pretty decent, I think.
-
http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/pbcup_renoir_hr4_wip.jpg
DT wondered if his maps would look good with the new textures. Starting to look pretty decent, I think.
cool!!
-
ooooo I don't remember seeing Rock5_2.jpg posted in #paintball or here, just saw it got changed from that screenshot. It looks very nice in every map I've seen it in.
For people checking this texture it's on -- Wobluda/zpar11_beta/Pbcup_renoir/Shazam22 ---> that's all I have noticed it on right now.
EDIT: My only complaint about this texture, rock5_2.jpg , is that I think it could use a little brown/redish like the previous hr4 version you had of it.
-
ugly.................. the only thing that looks nice is the water.
-
ugly.................. the only thing that looks nice is the water.
You're going to have to provide a little more feedback than that if you want to see improvements. What, specifically, is ugly, and what needs to be done to improve it?
-
The bricks on renoir seem a bit too gritty for me. I'd like to see a cleaner/brighter version, I think. I can't really form my opinion into solid words yet, but what I can say is that the texture you got now didn't manage to look high res at spots with low lightning and at higher angles. I'm only going by that picture though.
Another way to explain it would be that the texture doesn't feel happy to me O.o
Edit: The gritty/not happy thing is just an opinion/preference of mine and has nothing to do with what's actually better.
-
[18:10:51] <PvtJimmy> <jitspoe> http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/wgrnd1_6.jpg
[18:10:59] <PvtJimmy> this texture looks like i'm walking in a candy production hall
[18:11:29] <PvtJimmy> the "mud" should definitely be smaller to make it look better in game
-
[18:10:51] <PvtJimmy> <jitspoe> http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/wgrnd1_6.jpg
[18:10:59] <PvtJimmy> this texture looks like i'm walking in a candy production hall
[18:11:29] <PvtJimmy> the "mud" should definitely be smaller to make it look better in game
First off, that's the low-res version. This is the high-res: http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wgrnd1_6.jpg
Second, it's supposed to be rocks, not mud.
I'm not sure what you mean by a candy production hall. I can't say I've ever been in one.
-
To me, it looks rather fancy than realistic. Now that you say it's supposed to be rocks, I can indeed see it, but still it looks "too much" for me.
(http://img6.imagebanana.com/img/t7mubon1/thumb/sshot0003.jpg) (http://www.imagebanana.com/view/t7mubon1/sshot0003.jpg)
(screenshot from pbcup_renoir)
In case you do not want to make the rocks smaller, consider decreasing the amount of rocks in the textures.
-edit-
(http://img6.imagebanana.com/img/pj1a2mnn/thumb/sshot0004.jpg) (http://www.imagebanana.com/view/pj1a2mnn/sshot0004.jpg)
(screenshot from pbcup_renoir)
The above screenshot is with my old texture pack activated (Vipers pack). To me this is more what I'm looking for in a standard ground/grass texture.
-
The mapper used the low res texture with stones, not the one without stones. So thats not jitspoe's fault.
-
I can certainly make the rocks smaller. I was just trying to match the original texture.
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/city6_8.jpg - I did some work on that one to try to make it look a little more 3D and blend in better with other textures (the lichen stood out a bit too much).
Edit: Doesn't tile well - trying to find a better variation.
-
pbsky3 - Zorchenhimer (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=5762.msg66629#msg66629)
sand - Zorchenhimer (http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=5762.msg66629#msg66629)
I fixed the links in those posts so they work again.
-
Is this more what you were thinking with the smaller rocks?
-
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wgrnd1_6.jpg)
Increased the contrast in the rocks and made the rocks just slightly smaller than the original. Now it doesn't look quite so flat in-game.
-
this definitely looks better (warning! just my opinion). I will probably need some time to get used to that texture (compare it to my current texture), but it looks way more realistic than the other one.
-
thats grass texture would look 100 times better without rocks or just maybe 4 or 5. imo. but good job that grass texture is really nice. maybe make the grass a tiny bit brighter.
-
thats grass texture would look 100 times better without rocks or just maybe 4 or 5. imo. but good job that grass texture is really nice. maybe make the grass a tiny bit brighter.
There are other grass textures without rocks. DT chose to use the texture with rocks when he made the map.
-
Updated the 'full' zip: ftp://otb-server.de/pub/hr4_gpl_2011_04_01_incomplete.zip (ftp://otb-server.de/pub/hr4_gpl_2011_04_01_incomplete.zip)
This pack has all existing gpl hr4 textures from this folders:
pball/env
pball/textures/pball
pball/textures/sfx/causics
pball/textures/sfx/flame
-
these are ss of my textures i think they are the nicest but i guess u guys will decide. sorry the ss quality sucks.
Pbcup_pforest - http://img858.imageshack.us/i/sshot0000.jpg/
Carpathian - http://img705.imageshack.us/i/sshot0001.jpg/
Wobluda - http://img806.imageshack.us/i/sshot0002.jpg/
Zpar_11 - http://img191.imageshack.us/i/sshot0003h.jpg/
Pbcup_renoir - http://img8.imageshack.us/i/sshot0004.jpg/
Castle1 - http://img202.imageshack.us/i/sshot0005.jpg/
enjoy :) imo nothing will ever get nicer
-
these are ss of my textures i think they are the nicest but i guess u guys will decide. sorry the ss quality sucks.
If you got over the fact that the texture's Jitspoe's making are not the same bright grass on every map and see it as 'what would you want if you just downloaded the game' -- Pretty sure nice, detailed textures are way better then bright ones. The bright ones are ugly, you're just used to them so now the noticeable colour change bothers you.
Is it just me or are all the screenshots horrible quality? -- Btw, try Jitspoe's textures for a week and you'll agree they are nicer.
-
agreed, quality > brightness
-
yeah but when u have a poor computer, quality means nothing.
-
lol w/e i like this textures :D
-
http://digitalpaint.org/ - Posted a news update about this.
-
Will you implement a check, if someone use the official hr4 textures or own ones (like the light-colored barrels)?
-
Will you implement a check, if someone use the official hr4 textures or own ones (like the light-colored barrels)?
I already have one, but I'm not actively banning people right now. I will probably allow some of the existing hr4 variations, but obviously not all of them.
-
Oh, good. So we have something for webhead's new wiki :)
-
The hr4 textures are excellent work , but , where is the hr4 guns textures?
-
Chemical - Your Carpathian is ugly your wobluda is even worse. Most of those textures aren't even wall textures, or at least don't look like it.
-
The hr4 textures are excellent work , but , where is the hr4 guns textures?
Good point that actually, I doubt jitspoe will be making any HR4 gun textures though, or if he is, they certainly wont be the priority.
-
Good point that actually, I doubt jitspoe will be making any HR4 gun textures though, or if he is, they certainly wont be the priority.
I'll remake the models first. No point in putting high res textures on the old low-poly models.
-
I'll remake the models first. No point in putting high res textures on the old low-poly models.
+milion
-
I'll remake the models first. No point in putting high res textures on the old low-poly models.
It is a good news! New high-poly models based in the actual models. The Game needs the new visual ;D
-
It is a good news! New high-poly models based in the actual models. The Game needs the new visual ;D
http://dplogin.com/dplogin/featurevote/feature.php?id=10099
Feature vote for high-poly weapon models.
-
doesnt those textures affect people with slow computers?
-
doesnt those textures affect people with slow computers?
buy new computer
-
doesnt those textures affect people with slow computers?
Maybe, i don't know. But there is an option to turn the hr4 textures off, so you can play with the same low res textures like now.
-
doesnt those textures affect people with slow computers?
My experiences with HR4 textures tend to make my FPS lower. I got 60-100 FPS without HR4, 60 on pbcup_renoir near the towers, and 100 on smaller maps like airtime or pbcup. When I put HR4 textures on, I got around 20-50 FPS which was painful at times. So I stick to the default textures now ;D
-
Looks nice, the graphics needed the boost.
-
well work jit :P
-
Is this the final pack? or are you still working on it and this is like a beta pack?
-
Is this the final pack? or are you still working on it and this is like a beta pack?
Still working on it.
-
I cannot put new textures.
but one has to put her uza alone or why not changed anything if anyone knows how to move them work help me ..todas as noites e manhãs estarei on para ver se alguem respondeu
-
I've updated the 'full' zip again: ftp://otb-server.de/pub/hr4_gpl_2011_06_28_incomplete.zip (ftp://otb-server.de/pub/hr4_gpl_2011_06_28_incomplete.zip)
This pack has all existing gpl hr4 textures from this folders:
pball/env (30)
pball/textures/pball (135)
pball/textures/sfx/causics (32)
pball/textures/sfx/flame (78)
-
I have just seen hr4 textures are now 30mb. It's about 80% of full paintball install.
Maybe:
1.Give versions both with hr4 textures and without. Or make ingame option to download them.
2.Update without hr4 textures? And switching update minimum version to 20 or 23?
-
This is awesome, nice work.
I have just seen hr4 textures are now 30mb. It's about 80% of full paintball install.
Maybe:
1.Give versions both with hr4 textures and without. Or make ingame option to download them.
2.Update without hr4 textures? And switching update minimum version to 20 or 23?
Not a bad idea but 30 mb is not that big, you can download pack in less than a 2-3 min if you have average download speed :P
-
I have just seen hr4 textures are now 30mb. It's about 80% of full paintball install.
Maybe:
1.Give versions both with hr4 textures and without. Or make ingame option to download them.
2.Update without hr4 textures? And switching update minimum version to 20 or 23?
Most people these days that want to game will actually have decent PC's to work with. I'd rather the full install have highres and low res, and then have an alternate install somewhere else for those who wish to only have low res, due to downloading via satellite or something, or has a excrementbox like me that can only just cope with them. And yeah, 30mb in todays standards aint much for most people, just those out in the country side sitting on satellite or dialup will have issues there.
-
I would like to ask if -after releasing official texture pack (OTP)- it will be the only available and nonbannable pack. Because most of the players i know are not really satisfied with this texture pack and my opinion tend to be same. I dont think textures from this pack look better then for example from OTB pack. So my suggestion is, let community decide. I think the best solution would be some kind of vault in which all players could deposit their texture packs. And after some time make forum poll in which community would vote for the best texture pack. And that one would become the official one. Sry jit if i offended your textures but i really think this would be better solution
-
Feel free to post feedback on textures you don't like - it is still a work in progress. I'm going to try to finish the set before I make changes to the existing textures, though.
-
I kinda dig this pack. Didn't think it was so great at first, but after playing on it for a bit, I got used to it. I think it looks a little more realistic.
-
Ok so here is my feedback
+1 for crates and the wood is ok too
metal seems ok and i definetelly like your snow
I dont like most of your grass texturess especially grass1_2, grass1_3,grass1_4,grass1_7 - they look ok outside the game but ingame it doesnt look that good
I like half of your rock textures but rock1_2,rock4_2 is too dark for me and also it looks like creased papper painted to grey
-
boah everything going to the wrong direction, first sounds now textures(like my own pack much better ) gg
-
inb4 leaking committee info
This was an idea I posted in the committee section some time ago.
What about creating some public server where people can upload their own textures. Those textures should be available for everyone in the community, but only after Jitspoe (or anyone else appointed by Jitspoe) accepted them. This way we can create a database of legal textures.
I was thinking of some kind of FTP or picture upload solution. This is going to cause quite a lot of work for someone to set it up, but I guess it's the best of all bad solutions we can pick from.
How are the thoughts on this? Don't forget someone has to set up such a server and keep it moderated, etc.
-
Wasn't there something like that planned (together with a new wiki)?
-
@pvtjimmy
That was exactly what i meant in my post. Definetelly +1 on this.
-
I'd prefer only one allowed texture pack. So maps would exactly look the same for everyone and exactly the way a mapper want to have it. Lots of texture packs doesn't fit well with the maps.
Temporarily, it certainly would be an acceptable solution for all players.
-
Hm ok then why not improve jimmys idea. When there is enough texture packs uploaded on server make forum poll so community can vote on the best pack which would be stated as the official one. But usually when you have your pack you think this pack is good and fits well with most of maps the way you like it. This way, mappers can make their maps compatible with official pack but when someone wants his game to have different textures let it be his choice.
BTW:This option might be big plus comparing to other fps games. Not many games have this option ;)
-
These are all awesome textures!!! :D
-
not to be rude the new official texture pack is really low quality compared to some other HR4 packs out there icys hr4 is by far the best pack ive seen the new hr4 just dosen't look very good the graphics arent good compared to todays graphics in alot of games
-
1024x1024 pixel doesnt make make sense if for example tons only are allowed to have 8 sides because of the r_speeds... I think it´s really time for the quake3 engine. Of course it hasn´t to be done from one day to the other but i think that this would give more possibilities for mappers(and maps of course) and there could also be more features for ingame which makes playing more attractive.
(i hope my english is understandable)
-
I dont understand what opportunites you are pursuing for mappers. There are bunch of really good looking maps but they are not played, because everybody are busy playing shazam22.
So shut the intercourse up.
-
Of course a new map format would be cool and could improve the game a lot, but it's not that easy to implement. It would be a longer process, because it's not just a setting or a value of the game that could be changed in 5 mins.
-
@blaa
Maybe because no server has the new maps...
But i admit thou.
@Chef-killer
I know, but i only wondered for many times why it hasn´t been done yet. I mean i found a thread of the year 2003 where jitspoe talked about it.
Of course it would be a longer process. I have to say i don´t really know much about all the stuff, i only wanted to ask why it wasn´t done yet. Would it be possible to overtake all improvements that are now done on the quake2-engine to the quake3 engine?
-
These actually look pretty good. Just browsing around after probably 3 years, glad to see things are still somewhat alive you could say. =P
-
i'm just wondering is there going to be anymore progress any time soon?
-
not sure if this has been said, but the hole at the top of the barrels are multiplied. at least they are on my textures.
-
not sure if this has been said, but the hole at the top of the barrels are multiplied. at least they are on my textures.
If i remember correctly the top of barrel isn't HQ yet. When the pack is finished it shouldn't be multiplied anymore.
-
Well which textures are allowed now? are ic3y's or Sunmans allowed?
-
So I've finally gotten around to making some barrel top textures. I made some new barrel side textures to match, since a lot of people didn't like the last ones I did. I think they were too smeary, so I've cut back on that a bit and made the rust more realistic. Here's some samples:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/w_brt1.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/b_brt1.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/b_brt2.jpg)
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/w_brl1.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/b_brl1.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/b_brl2.jpg)
-
They look great.
-
+1
Good job!
-
+1
Really good ingame :)
-
Lol that barrel is ALL rust. GO BROWN TEAM
-
Which texture should I work on next?
-
what haven't you done?
the only thing i can think of are the flags and base tiles (if not already done)
-
r_brt1 (pale, doesn't fit to the newest r_brl1)
p_brl2
r_brl2
y_brl2
b_flag1
p_flag1
r_flag1
w_flag1 (new, maybe)
y_flag1
b_arrow1
p_arrow1
r_arrow1
w_arrow1 (new, maybe)
y_arrow1
And i personally don't like the *_metal1 textures. They have a too abrasive surface.
-
You sure you're using the latest barrel textures?
-
I don't like Rockp2_7 - I only looked at it on Pbcup_sassault - but it feels over-sized... and looks odd. Maybe it's cause I'm not used to it.... Or maybe it's just the map... But definitely could be scaled down.. I think that goes for MOST of your textures you made. They look odd in-game as they feel over-sized. -- Mostly the rock textures, maybe a few grass ones.
Next ones you could work on:
IMO - most important: Rockp2_2 / Rockp2_1 (On oth and I think Crimethink).
Haystack top/sides - although the one's used in most HR4 packs are pretty nice. They look nice in other packs cause they look clean.
wizwood1_2 - wizwood1_3 --- both could use some updating. They don't look nice in game.
wood1_3 ---- (Shazam22 barriers)
grassp2 -- (The dirt/grass mix)
bark1_1 -- (airtime ground) --- there's a nice one in most packs people already use. I can post it later if you want.
I still find wgrnd1_6 to look odd in game (Pbcup_renoir grass) - I think there's too many rocks showing... but that's not a big deal. Probably not used to it.
I personally don't like: uwall1_1 (the Propaint1 brick) - I'm not to sure how to improve it though... I liked the other-less detailed one. Maybe I just prefer the clean look to the detailed.
-
Oh, my fault. The barrel textures are complete.
I have two other textures for the list:
grassp2
grassp3
-
the white tiling
-
just saw this.. the dirt in razzle.bsp in base
-
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/b_flag1.png)
I thought it might be useful to separate the flag from the metal texture so mappers could place it on other materials. There's an rscript included in the hr4 zip file now to place the flag on the metal texture by default.
-
Looks fine ingame.
-
First picture: what happened?
second picture:I would make textures for grassp2&3
-
Seems that you don't have the rscript hr4.
-
oh thanks.
-
also missing brick1_2
-
whys it small O.o
-
Hehe, looks like DT used two different textures for that and now one texture is low res and the other one is high res :P
I don't have the small bricks, maybe you put the textures in the wrong folder (low res in the hr4 folder)?
-
Nope i got the hr4 texture and put it in textures/pball/hr4.....??? Ill check it out when i get home in a few days.
-
You put the lowres brick texture in the hr4 directory.
-
I didn't know if you noticed but you are still missing a few hr4 textures. They are the ones that arent used alot. such as sew_1 and sew_2. There is only 1 sewer texture that is high resolution when i downloaded this texture pack.
-
Yeah, it's still a work in progress. There are a bunch of textures that haven't been done yet.
-
Jitspoe are thease textures good?
-
this is what happeds when i try to use hr4 pack from jits
-
whats wrong other than your missing ice textures? those are the same textures as everyone else who uses that pack...
-
Jitspoe are thease textures good?
The rock texture is fine (it's the first iteration of that texture that I made). The grass is a bit light, though.
I finally got around to making the dirt-grass transition textures. I guess I can do some development while I'm on this laptop.
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/grassp2.jpg
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/grassp3.jpg
I might see about installing Filter Forge and working on some more textures as well. Any textures you guys really want to see completed?
-
Maybe:
sand2
*_arrow1
wizwood1_4
wizwood1_6
wizwood1_7
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/sand2.jpg
Not sure which maps use this offhand, so I haven't tested it in-game get, but here you go. Let me know what you think.
-
I think it's a bit too dark, it looks like really wet sand. I would prefer it a bit more bright.
-
Yes, brighter would be better. The map anubis use it (Chef-Killer should re-texture the map, all the new hr4 textures doesn't fit together in that style he used them there).
-
Ok. I've made it brighter.
-
Looks good :)
-
Jits im using this one cuz they are loking rlly nice on my laptop
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/b_arrow1.jpg
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/p_arrow1.jpg
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/r_arrow1.jpg
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/y_arrow1.jpg
Haven't tested in-game yet, but they're pretty close to the originals.
-
Do you want me to upload it and send it to you?
-
Haven't tested in-game yet, but they're pretty close to the originals.
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wood1_3.jpg
-
What texture should I work on next?
-
Maybe one of this?
sew1_5
wood1_5
woodp1_1
wizwood1_4
tudor1
tudor1l
tudor1r
tudor1rl
tudor1x
tudor1pil1
dung01_4
hay_side
hay_top
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/sew1_5.jpg
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/hay_side.jpg
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/hay_top.jpg
-
Those look great, especially the sewer one. Keep working on em.
-
The sewer texture is so nice!
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wood1_5.jpg
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wood1_2.jpg - think I should bother with the nails in this one?
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/bark1_1.jpg
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wood1_2.jpg - think I should bother with the nails in this one?
yes pls. =D
-
Good job.
-
Could you re-make rocks16_2, please?
-
Could you re-make rocks16_2, please?
That one is currently in the pack: http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/rocks16_2.jpg
What would you like changed about it?
-
In small it looks ok, but on great walls it looks horrible in my opinion...
Can't really explain, but here is a comparison with the rocks16_2 texture from ascras hr4. For me, it looks much better.
(http://s11.postimg.org/w5fh1u1bj/rocks16_compare.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/w5fh1u1bj/)
-
In small it looks ok, but on great walls it looks horrible in my opinion...
Can't really explain, but here is a comparison with the rocks16_2 texture from ascras hr4. For me, it looks much better.
(http://s11.postimg.org/w5fh1u1bj/rocks16_compare.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/w5fh1u1bj/)
Hm, thanks for the screenshot, but the one on the left looks better to me...
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wizwood1_4.jpg
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/brick1_2.jpg
-
Looking good jitspoe. GREAT Job.
-
Should sew1_6 (http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/sew1_6.jpg) be a metal or concrete texture? I had always considered it as a metal texture, but after looking at rick's map, I wonder if it should be concrete instead...
-
I always thought it was metal.
edit-- yes looking at ricks map it looks like its sectioned off concrete blocks.
2nd edit-- I say make it a concrete texture because there aren't that many of them.
-
We need a new hr4 texture of ground1_7. The base and low on razzle looks pretty bad.
-
Not really any good concrete textures really thats why i used the grave textures for the ground in inpsiration
-
Should sew1_6 (http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/sew1_6.jpg) be a metal or concrete texture? I had always considered it as a metal texture, but after looking at rick's map, I wonder if it should be concrete instead...
Maybe just do both? :) Can always call one a different name.
-
Maps that have it:
tfs2 - could probably go either way
university - probably makes more sense as cement
tents - either way
splatmesa - probably metal
pbcup_everglade - makes more sense as cement to me
pbcup / arctic - could go either way
mirrorr, mirror2 - either way
jump - probably makes more sense as cement, but could go either way
chamber/chamber2 - probably cement
I think it'll work better as cement in most cases. I'm trying to avoid adding more textures since we already have so many. It's taking forever to go through them all.
-
Which textures are left that are still low res?
-
i don*t care whether it is metal or cement as long as it looks good :)
And you are right in university cement woul make more sense :D
-
I think it'll work better as cement in most cases. I'm trying to avoid adding more textures since we already have so many. It's taking forever to go through them all.
already have so many? i always have a hard time finding textures that work well with each other..
-
already have so many? i always have a hard time finding textures that work well with each other..
Spend a few hours on each texture... now 200+ textures is a LOT. :)
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/ground1_7.jpg
-
Spend a few hours on each texture... now 200+ textures is a LOT. :)
What are you making them with?
-
Most of them I'm making with Filter Forge. Some I'm just using photo sources.
-
Most of them I'm making with Filter Forge. Some I'm just using photo sources.
Ah I remember a thread about that, couldn't remember the name of it but.
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/lit2_3.jpg
-
http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/lit2_6.jpg
-
Very nice pack actually.Like it alot ;)
-
http://youtu.be/OyshZpO_W28
-
http://youtu.be/OyshZpO_W28
Side by side images would probably be a better format than video, unless you're actually going to do side by side comparisons and talk about what you like and why. This is just screenshots with music followed by, "Official sucks." This is not constructive feedback at all. What about it sucks? Which textures do you not like, and why? What can be done to improve them?
Some of the alternative textures look really bad, ex: 1:43. I can't picture anybody saying that looks better than the official textures.
-
EVERYTHING IS BETTER THAN OFFICIAL TEXTURES
-
EVERYTHING IS BETTER THAN OFFICIAL TEXTURES
Care to be more specific?
-
More specific? Guy, do you have eyes? Look at this screens it's horrible - for example c1 the grass is soo ugly, one look and I'm sick.
The only thing that I like on the official textures is mid ramp on airtime - the rest is sux
-
Side by side images would probably be a better format than video, unless you're actually going to do side by side comparisons and talk about what you like and why. This is just screenshots with music followed by, "Official sucks." This is not constructive feedback at all. What about it sucks? Which textures do you not like, and why? What can be done to improve them?
Some of the alternative textures look really bad, ex: 1:43. I can't picture anybody saying that looks better than the official textures.
OTH is only one map, where official textures dont look bad.
Wall is taken from Selda's pack
Grass and barrels from Sunman's pack
But take a look on for example Castle1. Do you really like your grass more?
-
It depends what you're looking for....
The problem is that jitspoe is going for a more realistic look, which has never appealed to quake communities. That's why everyone in quake live uses the max picmip value.
-
It depends what your'e looking for....
The problem is that jitspoe is going for a more realistic look, which has never appealed to quake communities. That's why everyone in quake live uses the max picmip value.
Give yourself a slap
-
Give yourself a slap
I agreed with you...but I spoke english....
-
It depends what you're looking for....
The problem is that jitspoe is going for a more realistic look, which has never appealed to quake communities. That's why everyone in quake live uses the max picmip value.
quake live<3
-
I agreed with you...but I spoke english....
In that case, you can be proud of you! *applause*
-
The only difference I am really seeing is the contrast, and couldn't stand looking at those brighter ones for long periods of time.
More specific? Guy, do you have eyes? Look at this screens it's horrible - for example c1 the grass is soo ugly, one look and I'm sick.
The only thing that I like on the official textures is mid ramp on airtime - the rest is sux
Yes, 'Guy' does have eyes. Currently you're complaining about a game that you have downloaded FOR FREE, developed mainly by ONE PERSON, and when improvements are made to the low-res stuff we've had to live with for a while, all you do is whine? Cool, people have made other texture packs. Problem here is advantages are given, for example those barrel textures Aveiro was banned for (~cyan on blue, obvious advantage). You could be productive here and actually HELP OUT with making new textures.
Also, saying something is ugly is not descriptive at all. WHY is is ugly. WHAT makes it ugly. DESCRIBE your issue. For example (since you gave one), that grass texture on c1 is 'soo ugly'. Cool, so its not ugly on other maps? It might be ugly in comparison to other textures, maybe in the light level it doesn't look good, but thats not a fault with the texture. If you would like to continue this example and have time to prove your point (which I currently don't), go and find other maps with that same grass texture, and prove THAT texture is the issue, not just in that map. If you can do that, then more discussion can be made about your issue with the texture, otherwise I'd call it an issue with the map more than the texture.
-
The only difference I am really seeing is the contrast, and couldn't stand looking at those brighter ones for long periods of time.
Yes, 'Guy' does have eyes. Currently you're complaining about a game that you have downloaded FOR FREE, developed mainly by ONE PERSON, and when improvements are made to the low-res stuff we've had to live with for a while, all you do is whine? Cool, people have made other texture packs. Problem here is advantages are given, for example those barrel textures Aveiro was banned for (~cyan on blue, obvious advantage). You could be productive here and actually HELP OUT with making new textures.
Also, saying something is ugly is not descriptive at all. WHY is is ugly. WHAT makes it ugly. DESCRIBE your issue. For example (since you gave one), that grass texture on c1 is 'soo ugly'. Cool, so its not ugly on other maps? It might be ugly in comparison to other textures, maybe in the light level it doesn't look good, but thats not a fault with the texture. If you would like to continue this example and have time to prove your point (which I currently don't), go and find other maps with that same grass texture, and prove THAT texture is the issue, not just in that map. If you can do that, then more discussion can be made about your issue with the texture, otherwise I'd call it an issue with the map more than the texture.
Are you serious? At first glance, the official textures are absolutely disgusting ..
Actually what did you do for this community if you are suggesting players to improve official hr4 textures pack?
But OK.
I show my opinion what should be improved and the grass is pretty ugly in all maps..
.. there is really no point in arguing with you, even if there is no interest to do anything else - just still repeat the same excrement all over ..
We're the bad guys, you never did any mistakes, right?
From your behavior we deduce you want to grief the matchscene, so we do not want to see how Digital Paint : Paintball 2 is dying under your hands.
Vůbec seru na to banda přizdisráčů...
Kurva to je hic..
User banned for this post
-
Are you serious? At first glance, the official textures are absolutely disgusting ..
Actually what did you do for this community if you are suggesting players to improve official hr4 textures pack?
But OK.
I show my opinion what should be improved and the grass is pretty ugly in all maps..
.. there is really no point in arguing with you, even if there is no interest to do anything else - just still repeat the same excrement all over ..
We're the bad guys, you never did any mistakes, right?
And again, you've not explained why they are disgusting. Your problem is not going to be resolved by saying this. I'm currently sitting in a lecture with a mate, got him to look at the video that someone posted, and he picked the official almost every time. YOUR opinion may be that they are 'disgusting', but others don't have to agree with you. Pretty ugly in all maps. WHY is it ugly, you can't just say it is, it holds no weight. These 'mistakes' you're talking about have been happening for too long, and I'm not surprised at all that jitspoe has just had enough and slaps these bans down. Like foxhound said in the other thread, its not hard to ask if you're allowed, people are pretty responsive on the forums. Also, for your information, been on the committee, made my attempt at making maps and actually listened to feedback unlike some people these days, made a basic elo ranking system for Rick to use, and also haven't really complained about a game I downloaded for free.
Btw, I repeated myself alot to get the message across since it looks as if you're using a translater.
-
And again, you've not explained why they are disgusting. Your problem is not going to be resolved by saying this. I'm currently sitting in a lecture with a mate, got him to look at the video that someone posted, and he picked the official almost every time. YOUR opinion may be that they are 'disgusting', but others don't have to agree with you. Pretty ugly in all maps. WHY is it ugly, you can't just say it is, it holds no weight. These 'mistakes' you're talking about have been happening for too long, and I'm not surprised at all that jitspoe has just had enough and slaps these bans down. Like foxhound said in the other thread, its not hard to ask if you're allowed, people are pretty responsive on the forums. Also, for your information, been on the committee, made my attempt at making maps and actually listened to feedback unlike some people these days, made a basic elo ranking system for Rick to use, and also haven't really complained about a game I downloaded for free.
Btw, I repeated myself alot to get the message across since it looks as if you're using a translater.
Cameron ty šourek, drž si kouličky, jedeme z kopce.. User banned for this post
and again..
just still repeat the same excrement all over ..
What is the difference between your arguments and a bucket of excrements?
Bucket.
Look at Sunman's textures - nice at all
Official textures - disgusting
If you still don't know why are they disgusting, open your eyes..
Deal with it.
-
http://youtu.be/OyshZpO_W28
pp1:
White Grass vs Green Grass ; The white doesn't even look like grass?
Wall Textures ; I like all.
Solid Barrels vs reg Barrels ; The solid ones look excrement, and that's not Av's pack? Didn't he have baby coloured barrels?
Inside Wall Texture ; I do like Av's more.
Rugged:
Dat Grass again, doesn't look good.
I like the wall texture of Sunmans, but look at Av's? It's bricks for god sake.
Wood is basically the same.
Jitspoe's boxes look the best.
I also notice there is wood instead of metal for the cap? So Jits wins again...
castle1;
Again, thats not even Av's textures.
Jitspoe's grass looks way nicer, actually looks like grass.
I like Jitspoe's walls better, gives a nice warm feeling.
Hardly anything different besides those things.
OTH:
LOL, why are you even comparing these? Jitspoe's Walls are way better then the others.
Jitspoe's grass is way better.
Even Jitspoe's water is better.
airtime:
lol.
Compare the grounds to Jitspoe's, ones super dark and ones super light, looking for an advantage?
Av's textures look horrid.
Jitspoe's ramp texture is nice.
pforest:
Again, look at Av's textures... How is that not for an advantage?
Sunman's wall is excrement.
Flag is excrement. (Sunmans).
I like the grass, but I like Jit's grass too.
carp:
Lol. Don't even have to compare. Jitspoe's looks sweet.
From what I've seen in your video, Jitspoe's textures rock in most comparisons.
We get it man, you're angry over Av's ban. It's very obvious. But the fact is, the official textures do look good.
Edit: Just showed the video to a friend that doesn't play this game and he chose the official for everything but rugged.
-
Haha calling me excrement in another language? Have a nice break. Unlucky that your translator won't know what that means.
Look at Sunman's textures - nice at all
Official textures - disgusting
If you still don't know why are they disgusting, open your eyes..
Deal with it.
I'm not the one that has to deal with it, you do, I'm happy with the official textures. You're being an ignorant kid that only thinks the only opinion about this game that matters is yours and maybe a couple of your friends. I've voiced mine, and told you how to make your opinion stronger, and yet you just ignore and repeat yourself. Yes, I'm not the only person repeating myself here.
I can also tell you now, the level of detail you are giving is not going to resolve any problem you have with the textures, and the way you're posting about it isn't helping either.
-
Official textures - disgusting
If you still don't know why are they disgusting, open your eyes..
Deal with it.
Let's try flipping this around. I'll just start with the first picture in the video and give an example of constructive criticism -- like what I would like to see -- on how to improve textures.
First up, we have sunman's pack on Propaint1.
The wood texture on the wall does not have much of a natural looking wood grain. It's all vertical lines. JPEG compression artifacts are visible and cause it to loose definition up close. At a distance, it has a very unnatural repeating pattern, causing it to look like horizontal stripes and not appear like wood at all. It's also the wrong color. It should be more of a faded greenish grey, like treated lumber, to match the original texture and fit in with the themes mappers originally used it for.
The barrels are almost solid red. They're unnaturally bright, saturated, and lacking in value range. If you look closely, you can see there is some definition of the barrel rungs, but they really need to be brought out more with some more highlighting and shadow. There's really no discernible texture. There is no wear, dirt, or anything to give them definition or character. They don't look like they've been on a paintball field. They also don't feel grounded. The bright color pops so much that they just look like they were cut out and placed there in 2D, not like they're part of the environment.
The grass has a weird kaleidoscope appearance to it. Instead of being tiled properly, it looks like it was mirrored in 4 directions.. It does not look like grass from a distance. It also does not tile well and has the appearance of lines/rows at a distance. It is a completely different shade of green from the original texture. Its considerably brighter and has less saturation. It really changes the feel of maps that were designed for the darker colors and has an out of place, bright, sun-bleached look to it. It looks out of place and unnaturally bright next to the other textures.
The hay texture (which really shouldn't be used as a bunker, anyway), lacks texture and is a bit too yellow. It almost looks like a stick of butter in this screenshot.
The red metal texture comes from the official HR4 pack, and, by definition, is the most hideous thing I've ever seen in the entirety of my existence and makes me want to vomit simply by knowing it exists.
Now that you have some examples of constructive criticism, try constructing a full paragraph about a texture, what looks bad about it, and what can be done to improve it.
-
Guys who arent playing this game shouldnt talk ;)
Every dude who is not playing anymore think that he knows whats best for the game. In fact, they are sitting on the forums and suggesting things that are good for themselves even if they arent playing anymore. Time changes so do the people who are playing. And fact is that most of the people dont like jitspoes textures.
And dont tell everyone to post constructive critic. Yes, it is true that our english isnt as perfect as yours, maybe thats why we dont post in here. Every time you dont know what to post you tell us to learn english.
Have a nice day. Hope you understood the russian!
-
Guys who arent playing this game shouldnt talk ;)
Every dude who is not playing anymore think that he knows whats best for the game. In fact, they are sitting on the forums and suggesting things that are good for themselves even if they arent playing anymore. Time changes so do the people who are playing. And fact is that most of the people dont like jitspoes textures.
And dont tell everyone to post constructive critic. Yes, it is true that our english isnt as perfect as yours, maybe thats why we dont post in here. Every time you dont know what to post you tell us to learn english.
Have a nice day. Hope you understood the russian!
See, the problem is, people keep making posts like this without one single iota of information on how to make the official texture pack look better.
-
See, the problem is, people keep making posts like this without one single iota of information on how to make the official texture pack look better.
Yes, thats true. Did you ever think why it is like that? Because people dont think they get listened to if they write something on forums. Because you listen, most of the time, to older player who arent playing anymore. And our english isnt that good for constructive critic. Oh yeah maybe it is a bad excuse as you would think.
Edit: Why should we post critic? We say something bad - then there is another dude who isnt playing anymore says why its good and thats it. Yes this how argueing works but i think most of the guys dont want to look at each texture and describe why its bad/good. They just want to use a pack they want. Every human has another wishes.
-
Guys who arent playing this game shouldnt talk ;)
Every dude who is not playing anymore think that he knows whats best for the game. In fact, they are sitting on the forums and suggesting things that are good for themselves even if they arent playing anymore. Time changes so do the people who are playing. And fact is that most of the people dont like jitspoes textures.
And dont tell everyone to post constructive critic. Yes, it is true that our english isnt as perfect as yours, maybe thats why we dont post in here. Every time you dont know what to post you tell us to learn english.
Have a nice day. Hope you understood the russian!
Actually, its the fact you post something unconstructive in the first place. ANY post with good constructive feedback, even if the English is horrible is better than 'disgusting', or 'we dont like them'.
-
Yes, thats true. Did you ever think why it is like that? Because people dont think they get listened to if they write something on forums. Because you listen, most of the time, to older player who arent playing anymore. And our english isnt that good for constructive critic. Oh yeah maybe it is a bad excuse as you would think.
Edit: Why should we post critic? We say something bad - then there is another dude who isnt playing anymore says why its good and thats it. Yes this how argueing works but i think most of the guys dont want to look at each texture and describe why its bad/good. They just want to use a pack they want. Every human has another wishes.
Could you go through this thread and highlight all the feedback I failed to listen to?
-
Haha calling me excrement in another language? Have a nice break. Unlucky that your translator won't know what that means.
I'm not the one that has to deal with it, you do, I'm happy with the official textures. You're being an ignorant kid that only thinks the only opinion about this game that matters is yours and maybe a couple of your friends. I've voiced mine, and told you how to make your opinion stronger, and yet you just ignore and repeat yourself. Yes, I'm not the only person repeating myself here.
I can also tell you now, the level of detail you are giving is not going to resolve any problem you have with the textures, and the way you're posting about it isn't helping either.
Man, seriously shut the intercourse up, when you don't know what are you talking about. You don't know me so I'm "an ignorant kid". Oh yeah, maybe a few years ago it was true, but okey it's your opinion and you win - i will not talk with you anymore, because I'm not interested to argue with primitive.
And yes - I'm talking in another language, because I'm proud Czech - so yes, naser si.
Let's try flipping this around. I'll just start with the first picture in the video and give an example of constructive criticism -- like what I would like to see -- on how to improve textures.
First up, we have sunman's pack on Propaint1.
The wood texture on the wall does not have much of a natural looking wood grain. It's all vertical lines. JPEG compression artifacts are visible and cause it to loose definition up close. At a distance, it has a very unnatural repeating pattern, causing it to look like horizontal stripes and not appear like wood at all. It's also the wrong color. It should be more of a faded greenish grey, like treated lumber, to match the original texture and fit in with the themes mappers originally used it for.
The barrels are almost solid red. They're unnaturally bright, saturated, and lacking in value range. If you look closely, you can see there is some definition of the barrel rungs, but they really need to be brought out more with some more highlighting and shadow. There's really no discernible texture. There is no wear, dirt, or anything to give them definition or character. They don't look like they've been on a paintball field. They also don't feel grounded. The bright color pops so much that they just look like they were cut out and placed there in 2D, not like they're part of the environment.
The grass has a weird kaleidoscope appearance to it. Instead of being tiled properly, it looks like it was mirrored in 4 directions.. It does not look like grass from a distance. It also does not tile well and has the appearance of lines/rows at a distance. It is a completely different shade of green from the original texture. Its considerably brighter and has less saturation. It really changes the feel of maps that were designed for the darker colors and has an out of place, bright, sun-bleached look to it. It looks out of place and unnaturally bright next to the other textures.
The hay texture (which really shouldn't be used as a bunker, anyway), lacks texture and is a bit too yellow. It almost looks like a stick of butter in this screenshot.
The red metal texture comes from the official HR4 pack, and, by definition, is the most hideous thing I've ever seen in the entirety of my existence and makes me want to vomit simply by knowing it exists.
Now that you have some examples of constructive criticism, try constructing a full paragraph about a texture, what looks bad about it, and what can be done to improve it.
Hmm.. Sure.
Sunman's textures doesn't look real? OK - but they are nice to look at them.
And if you really think, that your textures looks real or even nice, you're wrong.
Your choise, idk.. you lost the most active clan on this game. Be proud of you. You are really great in devastation of this game.
Try to think why other active people / clans agree with us.
-
pp1:
Solid Barrels vs reg Barrels ; The solid ones look excrement, and that's not Av's pack? Didn't he have baby coloured barrels?
I changed the barrels, becouse Clipz warned me they are illegal. If i knew others textures are ilegal i would do the same.
And dont tell everyone to post constructive critic. Yes, it is true that our english isnt as perfect as yours, maybe thats why we dont post in here. Every time you dont know what to post you tell us to learn english.
Yeah that's true, my english isn't best so I can't make a discussion about textures even if I would like.
Let's try flipping this around. I'll just start with the first picture in the video and give an example of constructive criticism -- like what I would like to see -- on how to improve textures.
First up, we have sunman's pack on Propaint1.
The wood texture on the wall does not have much of a natural looking wood grain. It's all vertical lines. JPEG compression artifacts are visible and cause it to loose definition up close. At a distance, it has a very unnatural repeating pattern, causing it to look like horizontal stripes and not appear like wood at all. It's also the wrong color. It should be more of a faded greenish grey, like treated lumber, to match the original texture and fit in with the themes mappers originally used it for.
The barrels are almost solid red. They're unnaturally bright, saturated, and lacking in value range. If you look closely, you can see there is some definition of the barrel rungs, but they really need to be brought out more with some more highlighting and shadow. There's really no discernible texture. There is no wear, dirt, or anything to give them definition or character. They don't look like they've been on a paintball field. They also don't feel grounded. The bright color pops so much that they just look like they were cut out and placed there in 2D, not like they're part of the environment.
The grass has a weird kaleidoscope appearance to it. Instead of being tiled properly, it looks like it was mirrored in 4 directions.. It does not look like grass from a distance. It also does not tile well and has the appearance of lines/rows at a distance. It is a completely different shade of green from the original texture. Its considerably brighter and has less saturation. It really changes the feel of maps that were designed for the darker colors and has an out of place, bright, sun-bleached look to it. It looks out of place and unnaturally bright next to the other textures.
The hay texture (which really shouldn't be used as a bunker, anyway), lacks texture and is a bit too yellow. It almost looks like a stick of butter in this screenshot.
The red metal texture comes from the official HR4 pack, and, by definition, is the most hideous thing I've ever seen in the entirety of my existence and makes me want to vomit simply by knowing it exists.
Now that you have some examples of constructive criticism, try constructing a full paragraph about a texture, what looks bad about it, and what can be done to improve it.
Ehm.. You want to make your textures more realistic but tell me why? It's game where people jumping/flying and it's so unreal. So why you care if the wood texture isn't natural looking wood grain.. even if it look's better and lighter.
-
Man, seriously shut the intercourse up, when you don't know what are you talking about. You don't know me so I'm "an ignorant kid". Oh yeah, maybe a few years ago it was true, but okey it's your opinion and you win - i will not talk with you anymore, because I'm not interested to argue with primitive.
How are you still not ignorant? I kept telling you, and so did jitspoe, to post constructive feedback and all you do is keep putting jitspoes textures and himself down without much reason, it's gonna get you nowhere. Also, I never intended for it to be an argument. I initially started out giving you guidelines to provide the feedback, and it turned into and argument when you started insulting me.
-
I changed the barrels, becouse Clipz warned me they are illegal. If i knew others textures are ilegal i would do the same.
Ah! Sorry for the confusion.
Yeah that's true, my english isn't best so I can't make a discussion about textures even if I would like.
Just do your best :) I'm sure someone will be able to understand, you seem to be pretty good at English.
-
I think it's hard to make official textures for all people. People like different things. I like simple, bright textures but as I see Jitspoe prefers detailed realistic textures.
For me its like choose between Counter Strike 1.6 (Jitspoe's official hr4) and Counter Strike Source (My pack). I will always choose the newest version rather than older one. I think my textures looks visually newer than Jitspoes so I prefer playing with them.
I don't need to play with realistic textures becouse it's just simple game for me. If I wanted to play something what looks realistic I would choose some newer game to play, like MW3.
Jitspoe should talk to people what they prefer and he should be able to comply them. If he will not, they will rather use Sunman's hr4.
-
I think it's hard to make official textures for all people. People like different things. I like simple, bright textures but as I see Jitspoe prefers detailed realistic textures.
The purpose of the high resolution textures is to provide high quality versions of the existing textures. That means maintaining roughly the same hue, saturation, and brightness of the original textures with more detail. If you want less detailed textures, just keep using the low res ones. If you want bright textures, well, that's a problem, because it can put you at a notable advantage over people using the stock textures.
For me its like choose between Counter Strike 1.6 (Jitspoe's official hr4) and Counter Strike Source (My pack). I will always choose the newest version rather than older one. I think my textures looks visually newer than Jitspoes so I prefer playing with them.
Don't you have that flipped around? CS:S has the more detailed textures, which is what I'm aiming for. I'm not quite sure I understand your analogy. CS 1.6 is more like the original, non-highres texture set.
I don't need to play with realistic textures becouse it's just simple game for me. If I wanted to play something what looks realistic I would choose some newer game to play, like MW3.
Jitspoe should talk to people what they prefer and he should be able to comply them. If he will not, they will rather use Sunman's hr4.
So you refuse to play games like MW3 because the textures look realistic?
-
Nevermind, I tried with my english and now I know you dont understand what I tried to say.
For me are your textures still ugly but in high resolution. You cant make them better only if you make them in high res. Who cares if your textures looks realistic if they look horrible on the map.
If you aiming for more detailed textures, you missed in my opinion.You should try to make some new nicier textures, not only try to improve the old one. You doing these textures for people not only for you, becouse you will never use them in match. Give active players chance say if they would rather use dark/light, smooth/gross textures. Sunman brought something new with his textures and people like it. So you should try too.
I tried to say that if I wanted to play some visual nice realistic game i would play MW3 and not Paintball2. Paintball 2 isnt realistic game at all.
I know you will not listen to my opinion but I tried atleast. Good luck with making next textures, but I know i will probably not like them.
-
I am listening, but all you keep saying is broad generalizations that the textures are "ugly". You need to be a lot more specific. Pick a single texture you don't like say specifically what you don't like about it, and what should be changed to improve it.
-
When I look on your textures, I feel like there are too many distracting factors that you notice every time you are playing a map like wooden walls on propaint1. I have a feeling like I am trapped in some wooden box. When I am playing, I prefer smaller smoother pattern so when I am running it must feel the right way which I can not explain. When I was playing few maps with your textures, I had the same problem as in Guild Wars 2, where colours of the environment are too dark, so after an hour of playing I feel sleepy just after watching the game. Paintball is very fast game, and just the view of the map has to make you feel more energic. Thats why I prefer lighter textures that do not make me feel like I am playing in the evening with lights off.
-
Honestly I think a big problem is to much trying to mirror the original texture rather than improve it. I understand the purpose of mirroring it, but it doesn't give a big enough improvement. I see most of your rocks as good - just some a big oversized. But I can't stand the grasses. General complaint: They seem to be not scaled down enough. It looks weird having a flat surface with long strands of grass. Makes it too busy and unappealing.
Most peoples arguments are: Stop trying to make the game look realistic, when it's an unrealistic game. Most people don't play quake games for realism, as the physics themselves aren't real.
I agree and disagree with that argument. But regardless, they should realize you picked to go with a realistic look, and they should be trying to give input on that realistic look.
I'll try to give specific examples of what I dislike over the next week.
-
How bout just hop off the band wagon and admit they are nice?
-
How bout just hop off the band wagon and admit they are nice?
Are you freaking serious? Did you ever play with them? Or you are another clever forum reader?
-
I play with what was given to me when i downloaded the game build 38. Everything is crisp, rocks look like rocks, grass looks like grass, and the wood looks like its straight from a tree.The only texture I ever used that were different were ice, sand and grass (which didn't even sub out ALL of the textures for every map). How is realistic ugly? so you're saying real life is ugly, so you're basically saying you're emo?
I never changed barrels.. (why would you, they are the same color as the team, not Light or sky blue), I never changed the wood, because why would I other than to gain an advantage? I changed my grass only because i thought reaver's neon green was better than blotchy brown grass, which i might add, has been fixed in the high res pack to look nicer.\
-
Are you freaking serious? Did you ever play with them? Or you are another clever forum reader?
Love it how you treat us as if we don't play anymore.
-
I play with what was given to me when i downloaded the game build 38. Everything is crisp, rocks look like rocks, grass looks like grass, and the wood looks like its straight from a tree.The only texture I ever used that were different were ice, sand and grass (which didn't even sub out ALL of the textures for every map). How is realistic ugly? so you're saying real life is ugly, so you're basically saying you're emo?
I never changed barrels.. (why would you, they are the same color as the team, not Light or sky blue), I never changed the wood, because why would I other than to gain an advantage? I changed my grass only because i thought reaver's neon green was better than blotchy brown grass, which i might add, has been fixed in the high res pack to look nicer.\
Its a non-realistic game where you can fly across the map. So you have to expect that the textures dont look realistic.
-
You wouldn't expect anything if jitspoe never made the game mod-able for anyone...
-
How is this even an argument? I do like sunmans textures, because it gives the game a much cleaner look, but I use jitspoe's because the game should look how the developer intends it to look. If you don't think white grass, and light blue barrels matched with dark blue models provides an advantage over those using the regular/official hr4 textures, then you're an idiot...
-
So you think you are not able to see player standing in front of the barrels? Or blue/red player standing on green grass? If you are colour blind, you might have a problem to distinguish colours, but like the most of the community I think difference between green and blue/red is pretty big.
-
So you think you are not able to see player standing in front of the barrels? Or blue/red player standing on green grass? If you are colour blind, you might have a problem to distinguish colours, but like the most of the community I think difference between green and blue/red is pretty big.
White to blue and green to blue is a pretty big difference...
I don't know where you read that I couldn't see the models on green grass lol..
-
I think I finally understand the arguments that some of you are trying to make. It's not that the official textures are ugly, per se, it's that they have more visual information/noise that make it more straining to play.
There are a few reasons for that. The biggest one being that the map geometry and lightmaps are very low-def and blocky. The textures need a lot of, well, texture to cover that up. I am legitimately trying to come up with a set of textures that makes the game, as it currently stands, look as good as it can. When textures are very flat, they tend to highlight the low map polygon count and blocky lightmaps, making the game look very dated or just flat out bad.
Another reason is lighting. If a texture is flat, it can end up looking completely washed out in bright light. If there is a lot of detail and darker shadows, though, it still maintains some definition.
Tiling is also a big issue. It's probably the most difficult one to address. Normally, textures should really be used for small areas and be broken up by different bits of geometry to avoid obvious tiling. Most paintball2 maps, however, have giant spans of just one single texture, like the walls in propaint1. They don't really make sense (where do you get 300ft/100m wide solid boards?), but the textures need to support that. What that typically means is reducing the macro detail in favor of a more uniform micro detail. Textures need a dense, uniform coat of rust, dirt, grain, etc. to make the glaring repeating patterns.
Finally, I'm trying to push the paintball theme. Nearly everything on a paintball field is worn, weathered, dirty, etc. I realize not everybody agrees with that direction, but this is a paintball game.
Regarding the "stop trying to make it look realistic" comments, this just seems silly to me. Not because people are arguing for a stylized texture set, but because the people complaining about it are using textures that are made from photographs. Many of these were poorly manipulated to tile and have glaring tiling pattern issues. This neither looks stylized nor realistic. It just looks bad.
As for oversized grass, the problem tends to be that if the grass is scaled down to realistic proportions, the blades are just like 1 pixel, so it ends up just being a green noise texture, which doesn't really look good either. Most of the alternative texture packs have large grass blades as well. Plus, when you're zooming around the map at crazy height and speeds, it kind of gives you the visuals that you would see as a normal human walking on grass, so doesn't that kind of fall under the category of not making textures realistic, but catered to the game? That said, if you can give me some specific examples, they can probably be tweaked without too much difficulty. On another grass note, I've noticed that a lot of texture packs (or maybe just specific players) replace all the grass in the game with the same texture. What's the point in having different textures then? Now there's no variation -- might as well make everything look the same.
One final note on the straining/distraction factor. Isn't switching to a texture set that reduces this pretty much define unfair advantage? If the background textures are less distracting, that means it's easier to see players. If you're selecting textures explicitly for this purpose, then you're not really picking what looks best, you're picking what makes it easiest for you to play. Where do you draw the line? Textures with less detail are less distracting than textures with lots of strongly defined detail. Textures that are a completely solid, flat color are less distracting than any texture. Where do you draw the line?
Please give feedback to help make textures that make the game look better.
-
One final note on the straining/distraction factor. Isn't switching to a texture set that reduces this pretty much define unfair advantage? If the background textures are less distracting, that means it's easier to see players. If you're selecting textures explicitly for this purpose, then you're not really picking what looks best, you're picking what makes it easiest for you to play. Where do you draw the line? Textures with less detail are less distracting than textures with lots of strongly defined detail. Textures that are a completely solid, flat color are less distracting than any texture. Where do you draw the line?
When it comes to competetive play, people usually tend to play with rather ugly graphics in order to gain as much advantages as possible.
My quakelive looks excrement compared to what it could look like.Even my crosshair is only a red dot (so i can see it better on the uni-neon-green colored keel skins). I play sc2 and LoL on lowest possible, either.
When I try to be good at a game, I usually do so, because I like the gameplay, not the looks. As a result, I try everything the game allows me to do, to make things easier so I can fully focus on getting better at the game, rather than suffering from lags, fps drops or almost invisible player skins.
But then again, quakelive easily allows you to do so, while newbs in this game do not necessarily know that
-
I think I finally understand the arguments that some of you are trying to make. It's not that the official textures are ugly, per se, it's that they have more visual information/noise that make it more straining to play.
There are a few reasons for that. The biggest one being that the map geometry and lightmaps are very low-def and blocky. The textures need a lot of, well, texture to cover that up. I am legitimately trying to come up with a set of textures that makes the game, as it currently stands, look as good as it can. When textures are very flat, they tend to highlight the low map polygon count and blocky lightmaps, making the game look very dated or just flat out bad.
Another reason is lighting. If a texture is flat, it can end up looking completely washed out in bright light. If there is a lot of detail and darker shadows, though, it still maintains some definition.
Tiling is also a big issue. It's probably the most difficult one to address. Normally, textures should really be used for small areas and be broken up by different bits of geometry to avoid obvious tiling. Most paintball2 maps, however, have giant spans of just one single texture, like the walls in propaint1. They don't really make sense (where do you get 300ft/100m wide solid boards?), but the textures need to support that. What that typically means is reducing the macro detail in favor of a more uniform micro detail. Textures need a dense, uniform coat of rust, dirt, grain, etc. to make the glaring repeating patterns.
Finally, I'm trying to push the paintball theme. Nearly everything on a paintball field is worn, weathered, dirty, etc. I realize not everybody agrees with that direction, but this is a paintball game.
Regarding the "stop trying to make it look realistic" comments, this just seems silly to me. Not because people are arguing for a stylized texture set, but because the people complaining about it are using textures that are made from photographs. Many of these were poorly manipulated to tile and have glaring tiling pattern issues. This neither looks stylized nor realistic. It just looks bad.
As for oversized grass, the problem tends to be that if the grass is scaled down to realistic proportions, the blades are just like 1 pixel, so it ends up just being a green noise texture, which doesn't really look good either. Most of the alternative texture packs have large grass blades as well. Plus, when you're zooming around the map at crazy height and speeds, it kind of gives you the visuals that you would see as a normal human walking on grass, so doesn't that kind of fall under the category of not making textures realistic, but catered to the game? That said, if you can give me some specific examples, they can probably be tweaked without too much difficulty. On another grass note, I've noticed that a lot of texture packs (or maybe just specific players) replace all the grass in the game with the same texture. What's the point in having different textures then? Now there's no variation -- might as well make everything look the same.
One final note on the straining/distraction factor. Isn't switching to a texture set that reduces this pretty much define unfair advantage? If the background textures are less distracting, that means it's easier to see players. If you're selecting textures explicitly for this purpose, then you're not really picking what looks best, you're picking what makes it easiest for you to play. Where do you draw the line? Textures with less detail are less distracting than textures with lots of strongly defined detail. Textures that are a completely solid, flat color are less distracting than any texture. Where do you draw the line?
Please give feedback to help make textures that make the game look better.
Thats good to hear! I will post some maps later and give 'constructive' feedback.
Well, i will try to.
-
Finally, I'm trying to push the paintball theme. Nearly everything on a paintball field is worn, weathered, dirty, etc. I realize not everybody agrees with that direction, but this is a paintball game.
If you are trying to make a "paintball" game, first thing to do so is to try a new engine. With queake2 jump bug is this game more like high speed flying shooter. Only familliar thing with paintball is one shot - you are dead.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/713/4vse.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/829/j0y9.jpg/
When I compare these two textures of the grass, I do not see any difference between spotting the player. He is just there if the texture is brigt or dark. Only a blind person could miss him.
So when I am speaking about the grass texture, your official texture just feel uncomfortable whet it is passing by under player. Maybe you like the static look, but once you start running it looks horrible.
And another texture - http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/fuuq.jpg/
When I am hanging on the ladder like this, I can not really keep my eyes focused on the base high because of the ladder detailed texture. It is not because the texture is awesome but because there is too many dark/light passages that are distracting my eyes. I think this texture is used for the spawn doors on propaint1 too, so you might change the texture to fit both objects.
-
LOL i can't focus when im on ladder because your ladder texture is so EW. give me a break. I have never NOT ONCE lost focus in a match because a side part of my brain went, Omg why would jitspoe use this? this is aweful. You must be part of the fab 5 interior decorators to be that anal while trying to shoot paintballs at someone.
On a side note, people like brighter textures because it puts less stress on the brain. Everything blends better, IE advantage over others. It's just something your brain does naturally.
-
Brightness can also strain eyes though, and that first sshot is too bright.
Jitspoes textures have the person harder to spot from what I can see. Also, isn't a game like paintball or any FPS game like this meant to be somewhere you can blend in, not be seen easily?
With the ladder, the texture is great, the scaling is just wrong.
-
Also, another thing is that you are missing many textures in your official texture pack. I have tried making my own pack (a combination of sunmans/seldas/yours) and i noticed that you missed some or put there just low-res texture. So I dont think this pack is yet to be forced or ban. If you want, I can post list of all textures that i was missing (dunno if you are aware of them or not).
-
If you are trying to make a "paintball" game, first thing to do so is to try a new engine. With queake2 jump bug is this game more like high speed flying shooter. Only familliar thing with paintball is one shot - you are dead.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/713/4vse.jpg/
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/829/j0y9.jpg/
When I compare these two textures of the grass, I do not see any difference between spotting the player. He is just there if the texture is brigt or dark. Only a blind person could miss him.
So when I am speaking about the grass texture, your official texture just feel uncomfortable whet it is passing by under player. Maybe you like the static look, but once you start running it looks horrible.
And another texture - http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/fuuq.jpg/
When I am hanging on the ladder like this, I can not really keep my eyes focused on the base high because of the ladder detailed texture. It is not because the texture is awesome but because there is too many dark/light passages that are distracting my eyes. I think this texture is used for the spawn doors on propaint1 too, so you might change the texture to fit both objects.
I find it hard to believe you can say there's no difference in spotting the player. I find the player on the light grass considerably easier to see. It's not that the player completely blends in on the darker grass, but the brain is much better at processing differences in brightness level than it is colors. It's easier to see a dark blue object on a light blue object than it is to see a medium blue object on a medium green object. Also, consider the peripheral vision case. Peripheral vision has less color and focus than what you're directly looking at. If there's a player near the edge of the screen, you're much more likely to see him if there's a large brightness contrast. I've altered the screenshots you posted to exaggerate this a bit. Keep your eyes focused on the red dot and tell me which player is easier to see.
The degree to which light grass offers an unfair advantage is arguable, but I think it's pretty clear that there is at least some advantage.
-
Before I stopped playing DP2 I had the same arguments as most other people concerning these textures. It wasn't because I wanted super bright textures, but I wanted "clean" looking textures - rather than super detailed ones. Still think clean looks good - but coming back from not playing for a while Jitspoes textures are actually the best ones in the game EASILY. I'd still rather clean, or better yet unrealistic quake style textures - but these are easily nicer than any of OTB/Sunmans/Selda/Spartax packs.
Few comments:
I can't stand Grassp5 - don't know exactly what it is, but that's the one grass I've never liked in your pack. I'll try to get a better explanation.
Not a big fan of ground1_6 --> Looks weird in game still, doesn't look realistic when going for a realistic approach. Don't think mirroring the original texture will ever make this nice. Will need to differ more IMO.
I personally prefer Hay_Top from other texture packs more than yours. Purely for the reason it looks really clean, which obviously isn't how hay looks, but people don't fly off haystacks either. I find your haystacks not to look high res.
I find Rockp2_7 to feel oversized and ugly. Although it mirrors the original (pbcup_sass wall) - I think it could use some improvement. It looks to big compared to the woods.
wwall1_1 I just hate this wall. I think a lot of people agree that the other packs with the "flat" version of this brick looks better. I think this needs significant improvement otherwise most people will use the brick from other packs.
WILL POST MORE IN DEPTH LATER, those are just the few I don't like.
-
@Jitspoe : On the second one it is harded to spot but darn, how can you play on black/white monitor?
-
Before I stopped playing DP2 I had the same arguments as most other people concerning these textures. It wasn't because I wanted super bright textures, but I wanted "clean" looking textures - rather than super detailed ones. Still think clean looks good - but coming back from not playing for a while Jitspoes textures are actually the best ones in the game EASILY. I'd still rather clean, or better yet unrealistic quake style textures - but these are easily nicer than any of OTB/Sunmans/Selda/Spartax packs.
Few comments:
I can't stand Grassp5 - don't know exactly what it is, but that's the one grass I've never liked in your pack. I'll try to get a better explanation.
Not a big fan of ground1_6 --> Looks weird in game still, doesn't look realistic when going for a realistic approach. Don't think mirroring the original texture will ever make this nice. Will need to differ more IMO.
I personally prefer Hay_Top from other texture packs more than yours. Purely for the reason it looks really clean, which obviously isn't how hay looks, but people don't fly off haystacks either. I find your haystacks not to look high res.
I find Rockp2_7 to feel oversized and ugly. Although it mirrors the original (pbcup_sass wall) - I think it could use some improvement. It looks to big compared to the woods.
wwall1_1 I just hate this wall. I think a lot of people agree that the other packs with the "flat" version of this brick looks better. I think this needs significant improvement otherwise most people will use the brick from other packs.
WILL POST MORE IN DEPTH LATER, those are just the few I don't like.
I do actually try to maintain the Ouake style with a lot of these textures. Many of them were Quake textures to begin with. That's actually what wwall1_1 is. If you take a look at the original texture (not the standalone version), it looked like large, rounded corner stones. Like you said, though, that texture tends to be pretty unpopular..
I am a little confused as to why you always mention the rocks being "too large". Rock walls have HUGE rocks -- bigger than cars in many cases. These textures aren't for mason-built stone walls. They're for actual solid rock. Things like this:
http://www.joshuatreerockclimbing.com/pic1-copy.jpg
http://opp.uoregon.edu/smart%20objects/climb/climbing_basalt.jpg
http://www.moonclimbing.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Andrea-climbs-Dietetic-Line-7b-o-1.s.-in-Ceuse.jpg
I'll try to revise some of the textures you pointed out soon. Thanks for providing usable feedback.
@Jitspoe : On the second one it is harded to spot but darn, how can you play on black/white monitor?
The point was to exaggerate things a bit and demonstrate that there is, indeed, some advantage to lighter textures. Like I said, peripheral vision has less color and focus than what you're directly looking at, so this was just to demonstrate how you might perceive something at the edge of the screen.
-
I am a little confused as to why you always mention the rocks being "too large". Rock walls have HUGE rocks -- bigger than cars in many cases. These textures aren't for mason-built stone walls. They're for actual solid rock. Things like this:
http://www.joshuatreerockclimbing.com/pic1-copy.jpg
http://opp.uoregon.edu/smart%20objects/climb/climbing_basalt.jpg
http://www.moonclimbing.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Andrea-climbs-Dietetic-Line-7b-o-1.s.-in-Ceuse.jpg
I understand that rocks are HUGE, but in the maps that rockp2_7 is in it feels really oversized. I'm not sure how to properly explain it, but I haven't found this texture to be appealing. Although it does mirror and improve upon the default texture - it still doesn't look right to me.
-
So finally got time to put my thought about your pack into a post. I like your texture pack, its rly nice and makes the maps look nicer than in any other pack the way they were design (problem i see here, is that people found better looking textures for maps they play and it doesnt even have to be texture which mapper put there eg.:Carptahian - city6_8 from seldas/sunmans pack looks rly nice there).
But i still dislike some of your textures:
1)rock5_2 - dunno whats up with this texture, i just dont find it fitting into any map played (wobluda/pbcup_renoir), maybe trying adding diferent "color" would help?
2)melta4_7 - just cant stand that texture, IMO its the worst looking texture in your pack, it doesnt even look HD to me
3)city4_6 - this just looks weird, i know that all of packs use the same texture, so i thought maybe remake of it would be nice
And here is the list of textures i found you missed in your pack:
sew1_3
sew1_6
box1_1
brick3_2
lit2_2
tudor1
wizwood1_6
wizwood1_7
And they are used pretty often, for example sew1_3 is used on wobluda main_ice
-
So finally got time to put my thought about your pack into a post. I like your texture pack, its rly nice and makes the maps look nicer than in any other pack the way they were design (problem i see here, is that people found better looking textures for maps they play and it doesnt even have to be texture which mapper put there eg.:Carptahian - city6_8 from seldas/sunmans pack looks rly nice there).
But i still dislike some of your textures:
1)rock5_2 - dunno whats up with this texture, i just dont find it fitting into any map played (wobluda/pbcup_renoir), maybe trying adding diferent "color" would help?
2)melta4_7 - just cant stand that texture, IMO its the worst looking texture in your pack, it doesnt even look HD to me
3)city4_6 - this just looks weird, i know that all of packs use the same texture, so i thought maybe remake of it would be nice
And here is the list of textures i found you missed in your pack:
sew1_3
sew1_6
box1_1
brick3_2
lit2_2
tudor1
wizwood1_6
wizwood1_7
And they are used pretty often, for example sew1_3 is used on wobluda main_ice
Thanks for the feedback!
My first iteration of rocks5_2 seems to be one of the most popular textures, so I my switch back to that and see if I can improve on it a bit. I tried to make it more rock-like here, but I guess it needs more work.
metal4_7 was one of the early textures I made in Filter Forge, and I scaled down the default rendered size (600x600, I think) to the appropriate texture size to save time, but that, of course, made it less sharp than it could be. I wouldn't say it's the worst looking texture. It even got an editor's pick and high usage rank on fiter forge's site. It can probably use a little tweaking, though. Do you have any suggestions?
city4_6 I agree needs to be redone. It was photosourced, and the original photo wasn't that sharp and there is some color distortion.
sew1_3 is identical to sew1_4. I'm not sure why we released the game with 2 of the same texture. I was planning to do something like have a remap file so I wouldn't have to have duplicate files wasting space.
sew1_6 is high on my priority list to work on.
box_1 is done. I don't think box1_1 is a standard texture. I don't have it. What map is it used on?
What map is brick3_2 used on? I never made a low res standalone version of that, either.
lit2_2 needs to be done, as do tudor textures.
Not a lot of maps use the sloppy plank boards (wizwood1_6 and 1_7), so they've been kind of low priority. I'll try to get around to them at some point.
-
Revised grassp5 (+ lowres, for comparison):
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/grassp5.jpg) (http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/grassp5.jpg)
Doesn't tile quite as well as I'd like, but that's all I have time for tonight. Might be good enough.
-
Looks much nicer IMO, cleaner.
-
Looks good, but can you please change this dark point?
-
Yeah, that's what I meant by not tiling well. I'll work on it some more and see if I can remove the repeatable patterns.
-
Although I like Jitspoes textures, Ive always preferred sunmans a little, since its just smoother and cleaner. I will provide some deeper analysis when I have more time
-
Revised grassp5 (+ lowres, for comparison):
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/grassp5.jpg) (http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/grassp5.jpg)
Doesn't tile quite as well as I'd like, but that's all I have time for tonight. Might be good enough.
Updated this texture (might need to hit reload on your browser).
-
metal4_7 was one of the early textures I made in Filter Forge, and I scaled down the default rendered size (600x600, I think) to the appropriate texture size to save time, but that, of course, made it less sharp than it could be. I wouldn't say it's the worst looking texture. It even got an editor's pick and high usage rank on fiter forge's site. It can probably use a little tweaking, though. Do you have any suggestions?
It is jsut my opinion, i dont have any exact and well visible reason why i dont like that texture, but i think it is because i looks to me low-res comapred to the "clean" texture (i mean the one without the grass on it)
box_1 is done. I don't think box1_1 is a standard texture. I don't have it. What map is it used on?
What map is brick3_2 used on? I never made a low res standalone version of that, either.
Not a lot of maps use the sloppy plank boards (wizwood1_6 and 1_7), so they've been kind of low priority. I'll try to get around to them at some point.
I will look into these textures and get back to you where they are used. But i am sure i found out maps where they are, becaue i remember when i was making my own texture pack i had to copy quite a few textures to the hr4 folder from selda/sunman, because you didnt have the hr4 version and it just looked weird on maps.
And just that you have idea what i meant by players using totally diferent textures
Your pack
(http://s24.postimg.org/ljq33961h/sshot0017.jpg)
Sunmans+selda pack
(http://s24.postimg.org/tqi2utw45/sshot0018.jpg)
IMO, S+S looks much nicer, but you can never achieve this if you remake default textures into HD even if you make a perfect texture. An interesting thing i found out, is that S+S looks kinda like if you adjusted brightness/contrast option (not in pb, but in photoshop for example).
-
To be very honest, Jitspoes Carp looks way better! That ugly brick texture and plain grass just doesn't look good IMO.
-
I agree with Rick. Jitspoe's textures look way better in this map. That sunman/Selda grass looks diseased, lol. Also, i very much dislike the wall texture too.
-
the second version is duller in colourl, although I recall sunmans pack being smoother on most map. this is one of the examples where jitspoes detail in his textures pays off, although sometimes it just comes off as not clean.
-
Uhm, kinda surprising but ok. Guess its just me, disregard my post then, tho i wanted to show you, how players (probably just a few but still), change wall texture to improve, at least for them, its looks. They use totally diferent texture to the default one. So just take it as an example to get an idea.
EDIT:For me, the grass on carpathian is too dark(too green) in combination with the wall texture there is. Maybe you could try making the grass "less perfect", as it is now, there no yellow grass straws, just perfectly green grass. I dont think this is the way paintball grass would look, because of all the action going there (i could be wrong tho, never been to paintball field).
AGAIN, this could be just me, so lets wait for others to see what they think. I rly like the wall texture on caprathian, tho i dont like the combination of this grass + wall texture.
EDIT2:
I have been going through some maps and found more textures i dont like...
grass1_4 - it looks fine outside the game, but ingame it just doesnt look real to me, maybe adding more of yellow instead of white would help?
rockp2_7 - sass texture, this one just doesnt look 3d or anything to me, i cant really feel the rock in this texture (weird sentence ^^)
About the nonHD textures, i couldnt find where they are used, at least these of which you didnt have low-res version. But, i found other textures which arent HD and are used on maps:
metal4_6 - nhb, used on lights (if its HD then i guess its just stretched weird)
grass1_8 - pbcup_renoir - dirt under water/in sideway
woodp1 - duck, midhigh house wooden "sides"
Going back to rock5_2, another problem i found with this texture is that it doesnt look HD if its next to another HD texture:(http://s17.postimg.org/or48zhh3z/sshot0019.jpg)
-
Tried both texture packs on Carp, although jitspoes are arguably more aesthetically pleasing, i found myself preferring to play on the other texture pack in game due to its simplicity.
the problems with jits' textures are three fold - incompleteness (which is obviously being solved), inconsistency in terms of quality and each texture relative to another on the same map (also, being solved) and a problem a few people have, which is the fact that although in pictures your textures look really nice because of the quality and detail, in game they can be exhausting and just a little out of theme with how the game is played.
-
On the carpathian map, this is the problem with changing out textures to something completely different: the walls are rock. They aren't stone walls with masonry or bricks. Nothing but rock really makes sense there. It just looks weird. If the walls were flat, it MIGHT make sense, but they're not. They're very organic. Even if they were flat, that texture would look out of place in other maps where the rock texture was used as, well, rock.
The S + S grass, aside from being very bright and washed out, does not tile all that well. If you look at the distant ground texture, you see almost a checker pattern of alternating light and dark lighter areas. That particular grass texture is actually from a photograph of real grass, so saying "real grass doesn't look like that" doesn't make sense, because, well, yes it does. There are lots of different grass textures. Some are deep and green, some are lighter and green. Some have a mix of dead and live grass. Some have rocks. I want to keep the variety that's there so mappers can choose the texture that fits their theme. Replacing all the grass with the same texture like the S+S pack is just... bland. Every map starts to look the same.
On the renoir screenshot, that texture is scaled up larger than the rest. That is going to be the case regardless of the texture used. Take a look with a different texture pack.
Hopefully this weekend I'll have some time to review some of these textures and make adjustments based on feedback.
UnRateD: Not to defend my textures, as I know some certainly need the quality improved, but that's the biggest problem I have with most of the texture packs. Some of the textures are OK, while others have glaring issues and just look bad to me. I guess people get used to them and start to think they look good after a while. It's just weird when people post screenshots of, what I think are, really bad textures and say something like "See how much better these look than the official textures?! You need to make the official textures look better!" I'm really not sure how to react to that.
-
UnRateD: Not to defend my textures, as I know some certainly need the quality improved, but that's the biggest problem I have with most of the texture packs. Some of the textures are OK, while others have glaring issues and just look bad to me. I guess people get used to them and start to think they look good after a while. It's just weird when people post screenshots of, what I think are, really bad textures and say something like "See how much better these look than the official textures?! You need to make the official textures look better!" I'm really not sure how to react to that.
I just wouldn't ban them and instead told them that their textures are bad and also they should change them. They would maybe told you what you can improve etc.. It was just example, because I'm not good at design or something like that, I just prefer use things which fits to me best. But there are some people like prozajik who are intrested/knowing in this problem.
-
Made another pass on wwall1_1.
Originals (from mod and standalone) for reference:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/wwall1_1_q2.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/wwall1_1.jpg)
New texture:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/wwall1_1_v2.jpg)
Feedback?
-
The new wall looks great on propaint1. It makes the metal floor look horrific though (although I think this might be a scaling problem, as the details just seem oversized).
-
The new wall looks great on propaint1. It makes the metal floor look horrific though (although I think this might be a scaling problem, as the details just seem oversized).
Oversized on the wall or metal texture?
-
Metal texture on the floor. Should be called something like metal8_1. I think it's just too "rusty" for me, it looks pretty much overused (matter of taste).
Same problem for b_metal1 by the way, though I'm not sure whether it's a general problem, or just a problem on this specific map. If anyone could name me 2-3 more maps where these textures are used I'll have a look.
-
That new texture looks great, just the kind of clean yet detailed texture players are looking for. If all others are done to that standard there can be few complaints. Great job jitspoe.
-
Made another pass at grass1_4.
Previous HR4 version:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/grass1_4_v1.jpg)
Original (Q2 and standalone) low-res textures, for reference:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/grass1_4_q2.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/grass1_4.jpg)
Version 2:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/grass1_4_v2.jpg)
Used in antioch series, pball_shreds1, pbcup_pforest.
Made it a little flatter with patches of dirt to closer match the original. Not sure if this addresses the color complaint, but I think it looks natural.
-
I think it looks nice!
-
checked the new grass and the pp1 wall texture. Both of them look way better than the old version, especially low on pp1 is awesome with the new wall texture version. I think that is what the new hr4 pack should be, go on with that, GJ.
-
I think the official hr4 pack is coming along great!
I touched up your latest grass1_4 because it was easier to do that then try to explain my thoughts. Basically I thought yours was a little too murky, and the colors too plain. So I sharpened it, added some bolder shadows, and gave it more "life" (?)
Here is a screenshot with the changed grass on pbcup_pforest and the texture itself.
Regardless, I think the new textures are solid.
- Cusoman
-
I think the Jitspoe's one looks better cuso.
-
Both look great, though I prefer cusos since I'm a fan of sharper bolder colours
-
Good job on the textures, jits, keep it up!
After reading through this forum, I found it hilarious how un-constructive some of the feedback was, even after telling the community specifically to post constructive feedback only. (I guess I'm not the only victim, lol) I personally like most of the textures the way they are. Just work on the textures that don't have hr4 versions yet and most of us will be satisfied.
-
Good to see we're not only getting feedback, but also active support from the community. Good job Cuso!
I think both the new grass textures look great, although I'd personally prefer Cuso's, as it looks more like grass. Jitspoe's version is probably more how a real paintball field would look like, but the "muddy" look makes the map work pretty depressive. As Cuso also stated, his looks more "alive".
-
I think this should be legal:
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=11mdtea&s=5
It shows that DP would be amazing if it were made toonish. (I did not put these textures, someone sent me the screenshot who will rename nameless).
-
Maybe I could do something in between, with a little more shadow definition, but not quite as much as cuso's.
I think this should be legal:
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=11mdtea&s=5
It shows that DP would be amazing if it were made toonish. (I did not put these textures, someone sent me the screenshot who will rename nameless).
(http://memeheroes.com/templates/Futurama_Fry.jpg)
-
I think the problem with Cusomans version is that he completely changed the colours.
The point of the official texture pack is to create high-res versions of the current textures. It seems like this is the point many people aren't understanding. So when you change the colour so drastically it sorta defeats the purpose since it becomes a completely different texture. Whether it looks nicer or not is unfortunately irrelevant as long as the texture in question is so different from the original.
Cusomans version should be its own separate texture.
It is up to the mapper to decide which textures they want to use on their maps, not jitspoe. I think he would agree and doesn't want to be the one who has to basically re-texture every map. He just wants to make higher quality versions of the current textures.
Now if you could convince a mapper to create a new re-textured version of a map and use any of the "questionable" textures, there would be no room for argument on the committe/jitspoes side since the textures would be what the mapper intended.
-
I think the problem with Cusomans version is that he completely changed the colours.
Cusomans version should be its own separate texture.
Exactly my thoughts. Looks like a great texture, but since the colour has changed it needs to be separate.
-
In the original Q2 textures grass1_7 is basically a more defined grass1_4, so we could use it for that. Not what maps use grass1_7 offhand or if the current texture looks good on them.
-
zpar11_beta uses 1_7, but I personally think the current 1_7 you made awhile back looks really nice. I'll upload some comparison shots between current hr4 1_7 and the modified 1_4 I uploaded earlier.
I think the modified 1_4 looks great from a distance, but up close the texture seems overly noisy, especially compared to the current 1_7.
Hope these screenshots help you decide whether or not you want to remake/modify either of the 1_4 or 1_7 grasses.
- Cusoman
EDIT: Actually I quite like the modified 1_4 in 1_7's place now that I'm running around the map a bit. Still looks weird when standing in place though. :P
-
Made another pass at grass1_4.
Previous HR4 version:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/grass1_4_v1.jpg)
Original (Q2 and standalone) low-res textures, for reference:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/grass1_4_q2.jpg) (http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/grass1_4.jpg)
Version 2:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/grass1_4_v2.jpg)
Used in antioch series, pball_shreds1, pbcup_pforest.
Made it a little flatter with patches of dirt to closer match the original. Not sure if this addresses the color complaint, but I think it looks natural.
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/grass1_4_v2b.jpg)
Made another version with more pronounced shadows and other minor tweaks. If I do much more than that, it starts to look pretty unnatural.
-
Yay! That's a good grass!
Different but related topic: Can we increase the number of textures that come with the game? I would love to have new textures to use on maps, that are packaged with the game. I know cpt1 exists, but I'm really weary of using anything from cpt1 or sk89qs models because it requires the server to carry more than just the mapfile, and it requires the players to download them. Many people have those settings turned off, so they can just run around with white diamonds where models should be, or white/checkered walls where a beautiful rock should be. Since you're going through updating all of the current pball textures, perhaps some of the community could make some new textures that you could approve and add to the game.
We have a very small variety of metal textures, for example, which keeps me from doing indoor maps, as most of the texture combinations have already been used :(
Anyway, good work on the hr4 pack!
- Cusoman
-
Yay! That's a good grass!
agreed, looks way better than the previous one.
-
We have a very small variety of metal textures, for example, which keeps me from doing indoor maps, as most of the texture combinations have already been used :(
You can't really do much with metal textures anyway because in bsp the reflective property and distortion property were hastily combined into "warp". It would be a lot more realistic if you could make reflections without watery distortions.
-
That would completely kill the framerate unless you did it with just 1 surface. Something like Q3 style metal using an environment map "shiny" effect with rust and details on top of it would be feasible with r_scripts, though.
-
The wall texture you posted while ago looks rly nice, better than the old one definetelly.
As for the grass, it looks awesome, the only problem i have with it that it looks non-highres if you look closely (i know its for all textures, but this seems lowquality sooner then the other textures). Other than that, the texture looks fine, nice improvement.
EDIT:The dirt patches you added make it look like if it was blured on these places
Also i found another textures which you havent done high-res version of - wgrass1_1 and its used on pbcup_2fort5 which is pretty well known map.
And last thing, i rly like how wizwood1_4 looks (the wood there), but the wizwood1_2/wizwood1_3 doesnt look as nice as 1_4. I guess its because 1_4 is sharper than 1_2/1_3. Would it be possible to tweak 1_2 and 1_3 so it looks sharper like 1_4 does, if others agree?
-
I think the issue with the grass looking low res is that there's a lot of high contrast pixels (bright green grass blades against a dark background), so you can see the jagged pixels easier. I'm not sure that there's much that can be done for that, aside from using even higher resolution textures. I might be able to up the antialiasing, but I'm afraid that will make it look blurry.
wizwood1_4 has shadows. Filter Forge did not support this back when I made the other wood textures. I'll probably make another pass on them at some point.
The problem with textures like wgrass1_1 is that very few maps use them. I'll get to them eventually, but I'm focusing on most-used textures first.
Since I can only work on 1 texture at a time, what's the texture you want to see done (or re-done) most?
I'll probably focus on sew1_6 next.
-
I'd personally like to see HR4 remakes of pbsky1, 2 and 3, unit1_, and arctic1. I know that's 30 high res textures, which is a lot, but it would probably help the most. I can make a hr4 pbsky3 for you if you want.
-
I feel that jitspoes latest grass1_4 texture, although an improvement on before, just seems too grey to be grass, whereas cusomans edited one is more green, more realistic and in my opinion just nicer to look at.
what's the texture you want to see done (or re-done) most?
I'll probably focus on sew1_6 next.
I think the one that DESPERATELY needs work on is the texture of the bridge on pp1, wizwood1_3 (i think?). In your hr4 pack it has begun to look very dull compared to the other textures and i would go as far to say that it makes the rest of the map look bad. Im not saying to make it like sunmans one (as its abit cartoonish), but i do prefer that specific sumans texture to yours without a doubt (On the whole i prefer yours to his i might add).
Personally i think your sewer textures arent the major issue, yours already look good, its the more commonly used textures, the metals in particular. The majority of sunmans metal textures are more pleasant to look at.
-
We have a very small variety of metal textures, for example, which keeps me from doing indoor maps, as most of the texture combinations have already been used :(
- Cusoman
THIS x100000000 I think there are 8 good looking metal textures? Most of them don't even look good together either.
-
THIS x100000000 I think there are 8 good looking metal textures? Most of them don't even look good together either.
Indeed! It is so hard to come up with a good theme to a map these days. The key here is being 'unique', but how can you be unique when all the good combinations are taken. For example, I made a map called sabotage, the map itself is pretty dreadful, but one of the most frowned upon thing of the map is that it looks derivative of carpathian. The bunkers used the best wood combination possible (just like the bunkers on carp) - same for the grass and rock textures.
BUT, the thing is, the rock and grass I used go SO well together, same for the bunker wood textures. I made many different bunker styles in a test map of mine, the combination of wood used in carpathian looks best by far compared to the rest.
Me and omni have been talking about this on ts3 for a while now, when both of us trying to come up with new theme ideas for our maps. Please do consider adding a more variety of textures, I know it's good to focus on getting the current ones to look neat, but at the same time, what's the point of having textures in the first place if most maps look very similar to each other?
-
Well, that's kind of the thing I've been pushing for. The original textures have a pretty large variety of grass and rock textures, but a lot of the texture packs that people like copy/paste the exact same texture 5 times so everything looks the same. There are around 10 unique grass textures and even more rock textures.
-
IMO, we already have plenty of rock-grass maps for everyone. Maybe you (jits) can make more official metal and indoor textures so we can expand the variety of appearances.
If not, then I'm sticking to my previous post that there should be HR4 textures for the skies. Maybe start with pbsky2 cause that's the most commonly used.
-
Well, that's kind of the thing I've been pushing for. The original textures have a pretty large variety of grass and rock textures, but a lot of the texture packs that people like copy/paste the exact same texture 5 times so everything looks the same. There are around 10 unique grass textures and even more rock textures.
Of course there are separate unique textures, but a lack of textures that work WELL together. There are many combinations that look ugly, the best looking combinations are mostly taken.
-
jitzpoe i want to know if i can use these textures can you pls answer if they are legal or illegal
-
Could you first provide me with some insight as to why you prefer these over the official ones? Have you tried the latest official HR4 pack? Here's a link: https://dplogin.com/files/hr4_gpl.zip
I see a few issues with your textures:
- The blue metal texture is wood planks.
- The wood texture in propaint1 doesn't tile very well and has this weird squiggle to it. I know the official one can stand to be improved, but does that one really look better?
- The rock textures are stone wall textures and look really out of place on the boulders and such in carpathian.
- The flag textures are missing the rscript (should be included in the link I posted).
-
What's up with the splat design on the pbcup_pforest one?
-
Jitspoe, your textures are completely fine. My theory as to why some people prefer textures like sunman's is because his textures are much simpler. It's the same reason kids love cartoons. It's because the complexity and realisticness of jitspoe's textures are too complicated for their simple minds.
-
What's up with the splat design on the pbcup_pforest one?
- The flag textures are missing the rscript (should be included in the link I posted).
Jitspoe, your textures are completely fine. My theory as to why some people prefer textures like sunman's is because his textures are much simpler. It's the same reason kids love cartoons. It's because the complexity and realisticness of jitspoe's textures are too complicated for their simple minds.
Most of his textures aren't simple ones, though.
-
I understand when people bring out Sunman's textures arguing that they like them more than Jitspoes (even though I disagree with them). But, some people prefer the clean textures. (even though that pack has 1 grass texture so all maps look similar).
But I do not understand why someone would want brick walls on carp/pforest over Jitspoes.
Jitspoes Carpathian wall is, in my opinion, the nicest texture in the game. It's clean looking, and matches the default version well.
PS- I do like the dark blue borders of using the wood rather than the metal. (in reality, wood makes more sense on PP1 then metal anyways... since it's running along the side of wood, so it's like it was painted). But, I know it was intended to be metal. I just think the darker-more defined blue looks really nice. Rather than the kinda faded-lighter metal thats typically there.
-
The texture selection in propaint1 really doesn't make sense in general, but the textures should not be selected explicitly for that map, as they are used in other maps as well. Having wood planks in the metal details on most other maps would look bad. This is a case where the map could stand to be fixed up with "a fresh coat of paint". Lots of texture misalignments and stuff in it that could stand to be fixed up as well.
-
The texture selection in propaint1 really doesn't make sense in general, but the textures should not be selected explicitly for that map, as they are used in other maps as well. Having wood planks in the metal details on most other maps would look bad. This is a case where the map could stand to be fixed up with "a fresh coat of paint". Lots of texture misalignments and stuff in it that could stand to be fixed up as well.
I'd be happy to work on a propaint1_fix, just fixing up alignments, tweaking choices of textures and fixing any bugs. Think I'd have to get permission from crash first.
-
Back on topic. Jits, the next textures you should work on are wizmetal and the sew one that looks like metal.
Or else you can work on hr4 sky textures.
Or else you can take a break from working on textures and focus on better bots.
-
I'd be happy to work on a propaint1_fix, just fixing up alignments, tweaking choices of textures and fixing any bugs. Think I'd have to get permission from crash first.
IMO pp1 is fine how it is, crash probably wouldn't care you wouldn't be able to get in touch with him. I've met him IRL and could always text and ask him. But after helping him with that map for endless nights I'd prefer it doesn't get remade. If it does ONLY visually no terrain change what so ever.
-
Not bad textures Malibu, I like some of your screens. :)
-
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wizmet1_3.jpg)
I adjusted the alignment slightly so that the shadow is on the bottom. Looked better in the maps I could find that used it, and it'll make it easier for mappers to align (and be more consistent with the other textures).
-
Good work, Jitspoe! It looks similar to the original, but HD!!!!!
-
I'd be happy to work on a propaint1_fix, just fixing up alignments, tweaking choices of textures and fixing any bugs. Think I'd have to get permission from crash first.
Please...leave it alone
-
(http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/sew1_6.jpg)
-
There are some textures like in shock that is not HD
-
Please...leave it alone
All I'd be doing is fixing mis-alignments, not even a visual remake, or anything like that. Just a fix of lighting and mis-alignments. Do you hate me or smth? Can't see why someone wouldn't like me to fix mis-alignments.
-
All I'd be doing is fixing mis-alignments, not even a visual remake, or anything like that. Just a fix of lighting and mis-alignments. Do you hate me or smth? Can't see why someone wouldn't like me to fix mis-alignments.
He thought you was gonna do somethin' to change gameplay. Propaint has perfect gameplay.
On topic: That texture above is supposed to be smoother and shinier IMO but it's your game so you do what you want.
-
Well, I decided to make it look a little more like concrete, since that would probably have more practical use in most maps. I could try to make it look more like metal, if that's what people would prefer.
-
Well, I decided to make it look a little more like concrete, since that would probably have more practical use in most maps. I could try to make it look more like metal, if that's what people would prefer.
Most maps on which I've seen it used use it as a metal texture. I'm using it as metal for New York and the makers of Banliue used it as metal for their map, and those are the two maps on which this texture is most prominently featured in my experience.
I made a custom sky texture for pbsky3 because I was getting sick of the unrealistically huge stars. Basically what I did is I took one of the skies, tiled it 2by2, and stuck it in the hr4 folder. For the part with the moon, I put the sky with the moon texture in one corner and used the same texture for the other three spots. Are these legal?
-
I thought you were using it as a concrete texture. On your map and banliue, it makes more sense as concrete to me. Buildings like that are usually made of bricks or concrete. Metal plates seem out of place...
-
I thought you were using it as a concrete texture. On your map and banliue, it makes more sense as concrete to me. Buildings like that are usually made of bricks or concrete. Metal plates seem out of place...
OK. I'll use it and see how it looks.
Edit: It actually looks really good. Nice work, Jitspoe!
-
Regarding the stars, those are fine to use. I want to do some better ones (current ones, which you used, are not only low res, but have some ugly jpeg artifacts). I'm actually looking to see if I can find some database of star positions and make an accurate night sky.
Any other textures you'd like to see done?
-
unwall1_8 and wgrass1_1 maybe? Both are used in 2fort5.
-
The other metal texture used in banliue that also appears scaled-up on the elevator doors of New York. And the rest of the sky textures.
-
http://dplogin.com/forums/index.php?topic=26600.new#new - not done yet, but this is for you, BASEBALLDUDE. :)
-
I don't particularly think any of the textures are 'good', but out of the ones there are, jitspoes are the best.
I definitely think though, that paintball should have more cartoon-like textures.
I also believe it should, pointless aiming for a photo-realistic art style in this engine as good as it looks now in comparison to what it did look like.
(http://community.us.playstation.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/257125i6B387EEECF42AAAF/image-size/original?v=mpbl-1&px=-1)
Responding to these here, since they seem more relevant to this discussion than scripts.
There are a few issues I have with taking a cartoony/cell-shaded approach to textures.
#1. I have yet to see a cartoony art style in a lower-poly 3D game that I think looks good. It's not that I dislike that style. I enjoy Anime, and sometimes I'd like to see an awesome anime styled game, but it's almost always a disappointment. For example, I came across some artwork for a game called "Elsword", and thought "That looks pretty cool":
http://play-and-fun.com/wp-content/gallery/eslword/raven-2nd-job_reckless-fist02.png
http://www.zonammorpg.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Elsword-copia.jpg
And then when I actually played it, it looked like this:
http://i1-games.softpedia-static.com/screenshots/Elsword_8.jpg
And I was just like, "wow... that looks awful."
#2. Low texture detail means you need high polygon counts to look decent, otherwise it just highlights how low detail everything is and makes it look worse. Some might think something like TF2 style characters are "simpler" when, in reality, they have a ton of detail - probably like 10x's the poly count the PB2 character has:
http://www.gamer.ru/system/attached_images/images/000/281/190/original/tf2_engineer_closeup.jpg
The textures may be simple, but all of the facial features, even down to the teeth, are modeled.
#3. Cartoon style textures have a lot of solid colors and clean, hard lines. This doesn't translate well to textures on a budget. If you have a solid colored texture with a black line on it, for example, unless that texture is really high resolution, the black line will stand out as blocky. More detailed/noisy textures can actually look better at lower resolutions.
#4. The low res lightmaps are really visible with flat textures. They're very blocky, and you can see various artifacts in them. More detailed textures help cover that up.
#5. Low-detail textures tend to get very washed out and ugly looking when lit. Say, for example, you had a texture that was just 2 shades of green. When its in bright light, both those shades of green may end up being "bright green", then the whole surface just looks flat, like it doesn't even have a texture at all. Having lots of variety/shadows in the texture make it have detail even in the dark areas.
#6. Subjectively, some people simply don't like a cartoon styled game and will not play it for that reason. I think there's a broader audience for graphics based closer to reality than cartoon graphics.
As for the idea of maintaining both realistic and toon style... well, that's just twice as much work.
If you have any good examples of how you think the textures should look, though, I'd love to see them.
-
Responding to these here, since they seem more relevant to this discussion than scripts.
There are a few issues I have with taking a cartoony/cell-shaded approach to textures.
#1. I have yet to see a cartoony art style in a lower-poly 3D game that I think looks good. It's not that I dislike that style. I enjoy Anime, and sometimes I'd like to see an awesome anime styled game, but it's almost always a disappointment. For example, I came across some artwork for a game called "Elsword", and thought "That looks pretty cool":
http://play-and-fun.com/wp-content/gallery/eslword/raven-2nd-job_reckless-fist02.png
http://www.zonammorpg.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Elsword-copia.jpg
And then when I actually played it, it looked like this:
http://i1-games.softpedia-static.com/screenshots/Elsword_8.jpg
And I was just like, "wow... that looks awful."
#2. Low texture detail means you need high polygon counts to look decent, otherwise it just highlights how low detail everything is and makes it look worse. Some might think something like TF2 style characters are "simpler" when, in reality, they have a ton of detail - probably like 10x's the poly count the PB2 character has:
http://www.gamer.ru/system/attached_images/images/000/281/190/original/tf2_engineer_closeup.jpg
The textures may be simple, but all of the facial features, even down to the teeth, are modeled.
#3. Cartoon style textures have a lot of solid colors and clean, hard lines. This doesn't translate well to textures on a budget. If you have a solid colored texture with a black line on it, for example, unless that texture is really high resolution, the black line will stand out as blocky. More detailed/noisy textures can actually look better at lower resolutions.
#4. The low res lightmaps are really visible with flat textures. They're very blocky, and you can see various artifacts in them. More detailed textures help cover that up.
#5. Low-detail textures tend to get very washed out and ugly looking when lit. Say, for example, you had a texture that was just 2 shades of green. When its in bright light, both those shades of green may end up being "bright green", then the whole surface just looks flat, like it doesn't even have a texture at all. Having lots of variety/shadows in the texture make it have detail even in the dark areas.
#6. Subjectively, some people simply don't like a cartoon styled game and will not play it for that reason. I think there's a broader audience for graphics based closer to reality than cartoon graphics.
As for the idea of maintaining both realistic and toon style... well, that's just twice as much work.
If you have any good examples of how you think the textures should look, though, I'd love to see them.
My advice: do exactly what you have been doing with the remaining textures that have yet to have hr4 components. I suggest working on the really ugly one that JMR uses in kingdom for the plank ramps and cannon part.
-
@jitspoe:
I was working on a "toon" texture pack about a year before you started your hr4 pack. I remember running around sassault4, and all the colors were very crisp and flat and clean. The main problem, though, was that these textures were pretty far from the normal low res or available hr4 at that time. It was more like giant solid colors that were equal to the average of the low-res textures. They looked pretty cool and I showed them to a few people, but the main problems were lack of consistency of style (its a pretty harsh transition between solid-ish green for grass and solid-ish red for a barrel) and the fact that they didn't look like the normal textures.
I also really like the current hr4 direction. I can't find any textures or screenshots so I must have done them on a different computer, otherwise I would upload some comparison screenshots.
@superman:
The main point I'm trying to raise is that I thought the hr4 pack was supposed to standardize the game-play so that people don't have arbitrary textures, and so that people won't get banned for having alternate textures because there is only one option. How can a toon pack and an hr4 pack be used at the same time?
@jitspoe:
Are there going to be multiple sets of "accepted" textures that come with the game download? maybe some kind of optional package installer? Will we be allowed to mix and match any of the acceptable textures? Or only enable/disable entire texture packs?
If we are doing multiple acceptable sets of hr4 I'm definately on board for toon textures. Maybe look at warsow for a toony look? My textures looked more like a bad windwaker haha
@Everyone:
This post is pretty disorganized, hopefully someone decides to read it and respond :P I'm just happy that standard hr4 is happening at all!
- Cusoman
-
@superman:
The main point I'm trying to raise is that I thought the hr4 pack was supposed to standardize the game-play so that people don't have arbitrary textures, and so that people won't get banned for having alternate textures because there is only one option. How can a toon pack and an hr4 pack be used at the same time?
I was talking about new maps. There is no reason why a mapper can't create a toon-styled map, just don't replace current textures and there is no problem.
There have been so many different textures created over the years and instead of giving unique textures unique names we are just trying to remake the same texture over and over again. If we would give them unique names our texture library would probably be twice as large.
We have some pretty good mappers in this community, I am almost positive that if someone made some nice looking toon textures that there would be some decent maps created. We just need to start adding to the texture library instead of constantly redoing the "same" textures over and over.
Lostbricks3? is a good example of this (lego map). Why not have those awesome looking lego textures in the official pack? Then anyone would be able to make a lego themed map. The same thing can be done with toon textures, we just have to start looking forward instead of constantly retracing our steps.
-
We have some pretty good mappers in this community, I am almost positive that if someone made some nice looking toon textures that there would be some decent maps created. We just need to start adding to the texture library instead of constantly redoing the "same" textures over and over.
+1
Increase the texture pool, give new mappers ability to be more creative. Outdoor maps seem boring now cause its the same few textures used in every map. Even though maps are different, they come across so similar cause of textures.
-
If you have any good examples of how you think the textures should look, though, I'd love to see them.
Wait till first of april, please.
#6. Subjectively, some people simply don't like a cartoon styled game and will not play it for that reason. I think there's a broader audience for graphics based closer to reality than cartoon graphics.
So instead we try to be realistic and fail.
Adding more textures would allow mappers to have bigger variety on maps. But it has various disadvantages: For now there is really no way to control those textures, so most of people (especially new people) will end up with no textures.
I think that first of all, jitspoe needs to do hr4 and enable it by default, so we are all on same level (newbs doesn't enable hr4, all pros do). Then we can move forward to various other aspects. I think first thing to do would be central repository of all known textures, maps, etc. This would prevent issues with missing textures (if downloading from there added in game). Then mappers can easily make new maps with custom textures, so it would be up to them what textures to choose.
I think then if there were good textures, people would start using it after bit of time (since you need to get used to that).
My point is: I believe there is no need to think about textures as game developer, just add way to easily get most of them, and then textures will evolve people like them the most. Same thing happened to maps: Maps started simple with one path, and now we have various great maps with interesting paths.
-
So instead we try to be realistic and fail.
*succeed. Whether or not you like jitspoe's textures is a matter of opinion, but I think he's doing a great job putting together the hr4 pack.
I agree that there should be a check box in the game installation that players could check and it would automatically install hr4 textures into the game for them.
There should also be a guide some where in "general BSP stuff" (jits can edit his original post) that explains how to use custom textures and the CTP1 pack. Maybe some of the cartoon textures, if people seem to like that idea, can go into ctp1 instead of the pball folder.
-
As a mapper, I avoid any non-standard textures as a rule. Absolutely refuse to add custom textures to my maps. Why? Because years ago, I used a ctp1 wall texture in frigid. Almost everyone I showed the map to saw it with "no texture" walls, because the game doesn't come with ctp1, and servers don't universally enforce texture downloads. Some people still don't have the cmp1 tree from oth, because servers don't enforce custom downloads. The only way to ensure that everyone that plays my maps can have the same experience is by using standard textures and models.
I would love to use sk89q's models in my maps, or cpt1 textures, but neither of these come with the game. Even the most popular non-standard texture set, uni's ub_* set, doesn't come with the game, and almost every server plays his maps!
As soon as the texture pool is broadened in terms of the vanilla dp:pb2 install, I'll be using more textures in my maps. Might even go back and re-texture some old maps, just so they don't look so ridiculous.
That being said, there's absolutely no reason to stop the hr4 progress. The standard textures look great with jitspoe's hr4 pack.
Whether or not you like jitspoe's textures is a matter of opinion, but I think he's doing a great job putting together the hr4 pack.
I agree that there should be a check box in the game installation that players could check and it would automatically install hr4 textures into the game for them.
+1
We just need to start adding to the texture library
+1
- Cusoman
-
That being said, there's absolutely no reason to stop the hr4 progress. The standard textures look great with jitspoe's hr4 pack.
Yeah just to clarify what I was saying earlier, I completely agree with this. The current HR4 pack is great in my opinion and I don't think there is anything wrong with upgrading the low res versions of textures. What Jitspoe has been doing is great. It is just the other textures that are completely different but use the same name that I was mentioning above.
-
Felt inspired to work on the tudor wood texture, since I felt the first HR4 version was a bit bland, and I've learned a few filter forge tricks since then.
Original:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/tudorwood1_q2.jpg)
Standalone:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/lowres/tudorwood1.jpg)
HR4 v1:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/tudorwood1_v1.jpg)
HR4 v2:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/hr4/tudorwood1_v2.jpg)
Visible in freedom, siegecastle, and a several other maps.
-
I've had a look at it on siegecastle. The new one looks a bit too dark with that big border (of the wood) in my opinion. It was much better after resizing the new hr4 to 256 x 128.
-
For some reason, it looks a little awkward on freedom. Can't explain why, though. Maybe it's because the gaps between planks are too distinct/big.
-
Is it possible to replace the gun textures?
Or would it be to hard to edit the wrap texture...
Because the high res texture pack that I have is nice and all but the guns still have the default texture.
-
It's possible. I just haven't had the time to do it yet. I'll probably remake the models, first, though.
-
It's possible. I just haven't had the time to do it yet. I'll probably remake the models, first, though.
[off-topic] How are the bots coming along, jits?
-
i know with this inte./grass texture theres maybe an light/shadow advantage. but truly this textures still dont look rly good.
would be great to use this grass texture not illegally. it looks way better than HR4.
In my opinion no 1 uses inte.pack. to have an advantage, they all use it just for the better look of the game.
/new highres.tex. with lighter grass pls. or just use the inte.grass.
no1 will make the player models like green players and white walls. xD cause there would be no fun.
I hope some people agree with me.
loveuall <3 extra.
-
i know with this inte./grass texture theres maybe an light/shadow advantage. but truly this textures still dont look rly good.
would be great to use this grass texture not illegally. it looks way better than HR4.
In my opinion no 1 uses inte.pack. to have an advantage, they all use it just for the better look of the game.
/new highres.tex. with lighter grass pls. or just use the inte.grass.
no1 will make the player models like green players and white walls. xD cause there would be no fun.
I hope some people agree with me.
loveuall <3 extra.
What are your thoughts on this texture?
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/junk/discussion/ground1_1_alterd_to_be_legal.jpg)
It's the texture from the inte pack adjusted to match the brightness of the original texture (and look more like real grass).
In-game:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/junk/discussion/grass_comparison_illegal_adjusted.jpg)
vs. current hr4 texture:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/junk/discussion/grass_comparison_standard.jpg)
-
What are your thoughts on this texture?
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/junk/discussion/ground1_1_alterd_to_be_legal.jpg)
It's the texture from the inte pack adjusted to match the brightness of the original texture (and look more like real grass).
In-game:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/junk/discussion/grass_comparison_illegal_adjusted.jpg)
vs. current hr4 texture:
(http://digitalpaint.org/images/junk/discussion/grass_comparison_standard.jpg)
IMO the tiling is too visible with the new texture, creating unrealistic patterns. That's a tough problem with grass textures: too smooth and it looks flat, too varied and it looks bad due to tiling.
-
IMO the tiling is too visible with the new texture, creating unrealistic patterns. That's a tough problem with grass textures: too smooth and it looks flat, too varied and it looks bad due to tiling.
I agree. This isn't the new official texture, it's just one of the grass textures included in some texture packs darked to a more appropriate level. People can use it as an alternative if they want. I was just curious what people thought about the texture -- if they thought it looked better somehow -- or if people are just using that as an excuse to use bright textures.
-
Got Terragen3 so I can make some better highres skies. Here's the unit1 (sunset) sky redone:
(http://dplogin.com/files/env/hr4/unit1_ft.jpg)
Original:
(http://dplogin.com/files/env/unit1_ft.jpg)
-
Hey, here's some q3/2 skies. Should be pretty good stuff.
http://www.custommapmakers.org/skyboxes.php
-
GJ jits!
Some more real life skyboxes: http://www.humus.name/index.php?page=Textures
-
Insane.