News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register | Log in
Why Not Use Q3 Bsp For Q1 Sp
It's possible to load q3 bsp in darkplaces, and play the normal quake game.
I dont think anyone have used this possibility (zombie had tried, but didnt release afaik)

IMHO its a good way to overcome quake map/compiler limits and bring advanced graphics to q1. And darkplaces is pretty stable and powerfull engine that can be tuned to run pretty fast even on old cards (like GF1)
Why not?
First | Previous | Next | Last
Cause... 
.. last 2 releases of DarkPlaces engine are buggy and are unable to load my last map, when FQ and aguirRe's engine are able to... though... 
Fascinating. 
This should be a sticky.

Not everyone wants to have to use a custom engine with different graphics. Some people just want to play Quake as Quake.

You're not interested in Quake any more so don't waste your time worrying about it. 
Here Is A Poll 
Urgh 
maybe someday someone codes an engine using q3 and q1 sources that renders q1 maps faithfully to the pixel but has many of the q3 modernity advantages. That option wasn't in the poll so i didn't vote.

It should be fast and good and get rid of a lot of those pesky q1 map limitations and compile stupidities, but I think maps would need to be recompiled for that to work meaningfully.
Q3 looks a bit washed out for some reason, I don't know why. Q1 has the palette issues but it works pretty well, at least with id textures.

I don't want to start fucking around with shaders and curves and whatnot. 
 
there are already great compilers - q3map2, its light alone is probably the best quake engine game compiler out there
+ bonus of using quality textures and patches
(shaders are not fully supported afaik)

it means more freedom and less troubles for mappers and better looking maps for players

is requiring DP too much of a price?

bamb: some-day-maybe-in-future engine is out of question, this topic is about what we have now available

sham: no pointless flaming plz 
!?!?! 
why should we use darkplaces??? i dont like darkplaces much... why dont release the maps like Zaka make??? normal q1.bsp and then textures set in 24 bits for people that want to use then! 
Trinca 
there are many more benifits of using q3 bsp format (patches, much more complex geometry, detail brushes, bigger maps etc) 
But 
does q3map2 compile q1 .maps? So at least a part of old maps with q1 .map files available could be compiled for the new "standard".

I'm not willing to map in gtkradiant since it doesn't have the shear operator and whatnot.

And what about the palette when making and converting maps? Q3 textures look bad in q1. (just check shine.bsp) 
Heresy !!! 
there are many more benifits of using q3 bsp format (patches, much more complex geometry, detail brushes, bigger maps etc)

DO NOT DENATURATE THE GAME (Q1) TOO MUCH !

Q1 maps are for Q1 game, and Q3 maps are for Q3 game... That's all...

Maybe it is easier to build complex geometry for Q3, while Q1 have less possibilities (regardless the used editor, and also regardless of the embedded macros that differ from an editor to another one)... so, why not do complex stuff by hand ?

When you see some very nice and complex architectural stuff in Q1, you know that the mappers have, let's say a real "talent"... I mean I will be much more impressed by a "fabulous" map that has required many time to build, rather than another one who use "pre-mapped" stuff.... Just note I also like very much Q3 game, and yes, it's helpful to have embedded macros in editors: I'm not against technology progress.. doh !....

As well for detail brushes, that have to be turned into func_wall most of the time in Q1... As you for sure know, in Q1 you have to manage more things in big maps (FPS, r_speeds, packet overflow, edicts, fullvis processing time, etc...) that make a real good map than in Q3...

But I'm pretty sure the complexity level of each engine (Q1/Q3) is very different...

And concerning bigger map possibilities, it already exist some powerfull engines (compared to standard Quake engine ), i.e. FQ, aguirRe's GLQuake, Nehara engine, etc.. etc... in which you just have to set your screen settings to the highest resolution to have "Q3-like ingame effects"...

As well, remember most people do enjoy to play new incoming maps with original Quake engine...

Though.... 
 
i like to play maps with clients like qrack,tremor or joequake that load the textures of id maps and some extras... if the textures are new i play with gl with no textures... that�s all

q3 maps are poor in textures in my opinion... some Quake maps that have orinal textures in 24 bits are better then q3... look at schloss or skull that were made by Zaka... 
Oh Yeah 
This is going to be awesome 
Personally 
I think less is usually more, generally in maps and certainly in the case of engines.

Limiting newly released maps to one engine also severely limits the accessability. I'm sure there are a lot of people who still play Quake because their computer isn't powerful enough to play newer games [or rather, they're happy with Quake so don't see the need to upgrade]. 
Mmm.. Worms... 
I think less is usually more, generally in maps and certainly in the case of engines.
i don't :) these days, i like to pour in tons of detail and spend hundreds of brushes on one set piece or one single area. i like putting trim on everything etc etc, but usually this runs up against quake's limit (either clip nodes or faces). that's my latest 'mood' for mapping, and sometimes i'm a little disappointed that i had to cut things down.
ie: i had a great idea for a map, but it was so detailed that keeping it as one map was impossible and splitting it into two maps wasn't an option either because of the layout.

Q1 maps are for Q1 game, and Q3 maps are for Q3 game... That's all...

Maybe it is easier to build complex geometry for Q3, while Q1 have less possibilities (regardless the used editor, and also regardless of the embedded macros that differ from an editor to another one)... so, why not do complex stuff by hand ?


using the q3 bsp format is not just so that you can use curves, but because that format, and the compilers that turn out that format handle complex geometry (whether generated by an outside program (ie: terrain generator) or done by hand) much better than the q1 bsp format.
a good example: make a big slab of terrain (in which ever way you choose-- by hand or terrain generator) and compile it for both quake and quake3. you'll get hung up on bad brush expansion more in quake than q3.


god knows i'd love to use the q3 bsp format (and some of DP's features) to make my maps and coding since it can handle terrain and complex geometry better, and (i believe?) has support for nonstandard sized bboxes for monster collision detection, but i don't like darkplaces, because:
-i dislike the quakeworld movement physics
-it looks washed out, and i don't know how to fix that (and likely others don't either, so any map i make for that will look ass... well not that they don't look ass already, but that's another story :P)
-there's a bug (apparently on all quakeworld based engines?) that will stop you from jumping when bunny hopping randomly. since i move around like that often, it bothers me quite a bit
-poor documentation on all the new stuff, so it takes forever for me to figure out how to turn something i hate off (ie: most of the 'fancy' effects) and i don't like sitting for 10 minutes in the console trying different commands to experiment-- that's a waste of time
-there appear to be builtin effects that get used for no apparent reason/completly automatically (ie: a projectile weapon i coded automatically has a green glow effect applied to it (no flags or anything of the sort are set), but the model is blue, and thus looks moronic)

one thing i'd really love to see in an engine (which i haven't yet) is real rotating brushwork, not the fake version in Hipnotic.
I heard there is rotation code in the engine but it was disabled by iD?

anyway, yeah. 
 
I'm not willing to map in gtkradiant since it doesn't have the shear operator and whatnot.

that shouldn't be an issue: map in WC (or whatever) then convert to q3 .map format via aguire's compiler, then compile with q3map2.

obviously though, you won't get detail or patches or anything like that, but you could still use skip and hint (since those are just texture names) 
Necros 
-there's a bug (apparently on all quakeworld based engines?) that will stop you from jumping when bunny hopping randomly. since i move around like that often, it bothers me quite a bit

This is simply not true at all. If bunnyhopping was broken in ANY qw engine, no sane qw player would use said engine for obvious reason. This bunnyhopping issue you are talking about was specific to Darkplaces only and additionally, it has been fixed by LordHavoc a long time ago.

Actually this bug was the sole reason I had stopped using Darkplaces at some point in the past as it was bothering me way too much. However it has been fixed a long time ago now.


P.S: The people whining that Darkplaces doesn't look like GLQuake should take a look at the console variables. You can disable pretty much every single thing Darkplaces adds to the game graphics: bumpmapping, decals, etc, etc and make it look like vanilla GLQuake. 
And 
If you think that's too much of a requirement to make the player go through DP docs to turn everything off, there is an easy solution: if you make a Q1 map that uses Q3BSP and requires DP, make it use a custom gamedir and simply put an autoexec.cfg that turns off all "additional gfx" stuff into the gamedir so the player of the map doesn't have to do any work. 
 
...because someone would first need to provide some good textures as Q1 replacements that don't look like complete ass. Ikbase would be the only usable set. 
A Lot Of Misconceptions 
Necros: DP is not QuakeWorld based; there is gamma/brightness control. It lacks documentation indeed.

Whoever: Gtk has shear, in 1.5 you just have to operate on edges and verts (you can select several).

JPL: How come you say that q3 editor has autobuild/macros stuff and "pre-mapped" geometry, or were you thinking of UT2k. Q3 has some mapmodels, but no one sais you should use them (especially mapping for quake). BTW Radiant can be used for any quake game. Making good q3 map is as hard, its just that you can make a more complex level, without compiler/engine problems (as Necr said)

scampie: but you dont have to use q1 textures, textures are loaded from pk3, just like in q3
TGA/PCX/JPG

and whoever is calling skull nicely textured map ... uhh 
Good Discussion 
You have other engines besides Dark Places that have Q3 bsps so the limitations of DP does not need to be an issue.

It is up to the mapper really. If Kinn's next map specifically comes with a custom Dark Places executable for it to accomadate the bsp format used, are you not going to play it because of THAT? Because it would crash poor, old, buggy, not a proper implementation of OpenGl standards, GLQuake? At most the additional executable would add a half meg to the download with compression. 
*cough* 
There's no need to start a new thread for this

http://www.celephais.net/board/view_thread.php?id=24406 
Jago, Speedy 
jago:
well, all i know is i discussed it with lordhavoc briefly, and he told me it was in all QW engines, or something like that, and that basically i should live with it. i guess that sort of turned me off to DP since it didn't look, at the time, that he was even willing to fix it.

also, if there are new versions up, where can i get them? the DP site always lists the old versions.

P.S: The people whining that Darkplaces doesn't look like GLQuake should take a look at the console variables. You can disable pretty much every single thing Darkplaces adds to the game graphics: bumpmapping, decals, etc, etc and make it look like vanilla GLQuake.
as i already explained, since none of those settings are documented (not even mentioning those effects that seem to be applied automatically) it is difficult to find them.

speedy:
DP is not QuakeWorld based
Ok, cool, i didn't know that. However: it still feels like QW in that you seem to be able to move faster, and there's also a strange thing like in Q2 where you can 'catch' edges of brushwork and jump again, which i absolutely detest.

ps: lol kinn. :P but you know we like to rehash old threads anyways. ;) 
# 24 
in that thread is particurly good

#28, sorry fella, you sound a bit naive there. 
HeadThump 
.. #24 and #28 in which thread ? 
In 
Uhm... 
I for one would use q3 bsp format for quake right away if I could (I don't like DP so much), but mostly for the actual bsp stuff, details, hints, etc. For lighting, textures, and the rest, I like the old school quake feel better. I just want to be able to make more complex maps that run and compile faster. 
First | Previous | Next | Last
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2020 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.