|Posted by Mindcrime on 2005/10/05 11:26:50|
|I've found that adding to the Obscurus thread for Nehahra related stuff is moderately depressing, so with some substantial Nehahra releases in the future, I thought it best to give it its own thread.
This is the place to voice any comments or suggestions on Nehahra, as it is being revamped and the final official episode of the main Nehahra/Quake storyline is in development.
Progress in that department can always be found at:
It would be especially helpful to mention any bugs noticed when trying to play and/or map for Nehahra. Chances are I'm aware of it and have rectified it or intend to do so.
Suggestions for new features are welcome, even though there's already a truckload of those in the game (not to mention a lot of cleaning up -- where possible -- of wonky setups to certain features). Maybe I'll share some that I didn't share on the revamp page on here in the future. For the most part, once the release happens including the Devkit2.txt, a mapper with the intention of making a Nehahra map will have such a broad range of freedom and options that it might well result in them being committed to a local sanitarium.
Speaking of that, if anyone is working on a Nehahra map or episode that I don't know about. Clue me in. You can count on my interest. I know of several already.
The ones that I do not know the current status of are:
(what happened to this?)
(Glassman needs to answer his emails!)
#26 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/11 16:35:31
Sorry, somehow I missed post #24. Eyes zipped right over it.
The Merit Of Crouching
#27 posted by R.P.G.
on 2005/10/11 19:53:32
If you stand over a corpse and crouch up and down very quickly it looks like you're trying to hump the corpse. Mind you this is only useful in coop or deathmatch modes.
#28 posted by distrans
on 2005/10/11 20:14:57
#29 posted by gone
on 2005/10/12 01:51:00
can you make a progs.dat that would have all the mapping features, but would not need Neh to be installed (ofcourse that means no new monsters/models)
#30 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/12 06:14:00
When the re-release happens, of course, there are now game modes, settable in the maps (for the mapper's convenience), settable by CVAR (for the player's which trumps the former). Player has choice of play.
Nehahra has a vanilla quake mode.. where if you load up a standard Quake map, you would be hardpressed to tell the difference. It plays the same (the original monsters... behave as they originally did.. at least those who underwent some changes in AI or whatnot.. but Nehahra entities, when used, are there, i.e. mapping features, additional monsters).
I will be releasing a version of Nehahra that plays on other engines (It's not as if this is that difficult). My only hitch on this concerns engines that do not support some of the most important features, like alpha/transparency, the lack of which may compromise the integrity of a map or more specifically the intention of the mapper. The other stuff is chiefly take-or-leave it (like dynamic red light on gaunt boomerangs and stuff like that .. and there won't be Nehahra .dems included as I think the DP engine is the only engine that supports that demo protocol).
I'd rather not like a situation where I have 6 or 7 different progs.dat for each engine, but perhaps one progs.dat that checks for extensions. My focus is not on this at the moment, of course, but I have been preparing for this and will be doing it... despite my being a champion of the new Nehahra engine.
Did I answer your question somewhere in there? (:
#31 posted by Trinca
on 2005/10/12 06:27:54
Mindcrime said: "I will be releasing a version of Nehahra that plays on other engines" perfect for me :) i can use qrack,joequake,fitzquake,tremor,fteqw or any other in my choise :)
hey mind did u know anything about glassman and the other guy?
On The Note Of "all Engine"
#32 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/12 06:36:45
I had discussed this with metl some and will much more before I'm through.
It may be inevitable that different progs.dat files are required in the end. I know from my experience with my stint with 'Nehahra Nekkid' that Nehahra maps that made heavy use of transparency for use as glass look sh1t without the transparency... this would perhaps lead to tacking on ugly hacks to remove the brushes that used .alpha (which is a lesser of two evils).
Some engines support fog, some don't. Most engines support skyboxes, a few don't.
It will be done but might prove to be tricky.
Speeds: also.. in response to your question which I guess I didn't quite answer...
Yes, I could make a progs.dat with Nehahra mapper features that require no additional files. Okay.. that require just a few files (explodable brushes need rubble MDLs). But if the capability to use new monsters is there (and there's quite a few more added to the list with Episode 4) why in god's name not have them there for use?
#33 posted by gone
on 2005/10/12 07:23:58
only to be able to make a standalone map that doesnt need Neh to be installed
#34 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/12 07:30:35
Not a big problem. But is a map that has its own progs.dat "stand-alone"?
Yes, I could do that. You realize, absent of fog and skyboxes and transparency and the like which are engine based, there's not a trigger or function in Nehahra that wouldn't work on any engine (software included).
It might be nifty to put together a little package like that.
#35 posted by JohnXmas on 2005/10/12 10:51:05
After having played and enjoyed Nehahra several times, an anguishing question is bugging me: are they chances the new "all engine" release version will include MacNehahra?
#36 posted by Mindcrime on 2005/10/12 11:02:57
I don't know about a Mac port to the nehahra.exe... You would have to talk to Bengt. Find his page off the engines page on the nehahra website (his engine is the first listed). Engine stuff is not my department.
However, the new nehahra progs should run fine with the original EXE too...
#37 posted by aguirRe
on 2005/10/12 11:37:56
or Linux versions from me. But as Mindcrime says, older Neh versions should also work as there (so far) aren't any new engine requirements.
#38 posted by Mindcrime on 2005/10/12 11:58:41
What aguirRe said!
#39 posted by grahf
on 2005/10/13 02:24:32
And darkplaces works on Mac too, you can compile it yourself or get it from Nexuiz.
Hi mindcrime! If you really have a complete hub system just waiting to be dropped into Nehahra, and it won't break other things, then why not go for it... I'm sure *somebody* would do something cool with it.
Actually, I'm curious as to how it works and what data is carried between maps. Health/armor/ammo I assume, but what about monsters killed and items picked up? Will they regenerate when I return to a level? and what about cross-level triggers or the multiple player starts needed in the hub?
#40 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/13 09:23:42
I hope no one is particularly fond of this monster as it is. I do not know what charm that modified Q1test model with the spikes and the weird skin had for me during Nehahra development the first time around, but it doesn't work for me this time. I'm going to change the concept of it a little, still retaining the weapon options. Model and sounds might be completely replaced.
Considering it was one of the least popular monsters.. I don't expect I'll hear many objections.
#41 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/13 09:33:31
Well, putting the hub system won't be as easy as a drag and drop.. but it wouldn't be overly difficult.
For that system, parms and info are smuggled/updated via cvars, stuffcmded aliases, and execing config files... Entering a map where you've already been is technically loading a saved game on a map, only the code catches the player as he reenters, updates items, accounts for some lost time, and repositions the player.
(I probably just gave a bunch of QC coders some bright ideas eh? :>)
Downside: No multiplayer.
Odd Man Out
#42 posted by HeadThump
on 2005/10/13 09:37:24
but the Tsemoch hunters were my favorite monsters to fight.
Tsemoch :| Oof
#43 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/13 10:18:27
Headthump: Would it bother you to see a different model and hear different sounds though? Tactically, AI-wise, I can't change them much. It would damage the integrity of the intended gameplay in neh1m9, for starters.
Since You Asked For It
#44 posted by necros
on 2005/10/13 10:50:55
i'll give one suggestion, and that would be to rework some (if not all) the new monster models, in particular, the jagger and gaunt/archgaunt models are pretty bad.
their animations are rather wooden (esp nehah.mdl but also max.mdl->walkanim), and in some cases, poorly timed (the gaunt's death animation).
also, skins could use a bit of work (the jagger's eyes... black circles with solid red pupils and paint.exe spraycan tool red for blood splatters)
also, completly agree, the hunter tsemoch is one ugly model (not even mentioning the skin)
and (i think you mentioned it?) the baron needs some work. his animations are really nice, but they've got some pretty bad vertex dancing in places and from the side, all his vertices look like they were rounded off to the nearest integer coordinate in a very coarse grid... remnants from the conversion process?
heh, hope i don't anger everyone by criticising the 'epic' quake mod of all time. :P
but yeah, i think with some clean models the monsters would really benefit.
#45 posted by necros
on 2005/10/13 10:52:14
scratch that. i don't care if i anger anyone. XD
Not At All
#46 posted by HeadThump
on 2005/10/13 11:05:14
It's the hunter AI and its fight combinations that sets the monster apart. Tweaking the monsters or redoing them from scratch is perfectly understandable.
#47 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/13 11:32:27
It's okay to critique, necros, especially in areas that have room for improvement.
Since you brought it up, I'll address the monsters you mentioned individually:
Gaunts and Archgaunts:
A lot of their animations were kinda meant to be stiff, but it's irrelevant to talk about. I'll be replacing both models. They'll look conceptually the same (gaunts have purple flesh, have a monk-like persona.. Archgaunts are tall, gaunt, prudish, have horns, and have green skin [the colorization intentional, as gaunt's skin pigmentation changes with age, not that this ever made it into the SON dialogue). I planned that from the beginning.
I might be replacing him. I have an orgy of sexier humanoid models. If I don't, I planned on tending to the walkanim. In fact, he's based off the hellknight model so just redoing him as he was the first time and keeping the hellknight walk might be the best choice. That walkanim is really only seen in cutscenes, the problems only blatant at certain angles which I tried to avoid when shooting the cuts.. but nonetheless.. I was inexperienced with animating walk frames (now I'd say I'm 'fair' to 'mediocre' at it)
Here you might be knocking horns with most people, as most people like them as they are. I can say.. they might benefit from blood spatter. Sometimes models in Quake just don't look right without the blood :)
The jagger was based off the Blarg, but the Blarg skin was too divorced from the Quake feel and what I wanted. I did consider replacing the Nehahra jagger with the Obscurus jagger completely but too many people seem to like the jaggers as they are.
(The jaggers perhaps rank up there with 'most favorite monsters')
Whether the Ob jagger might come in and have a place of its own, we'll see...
Oh.. I have things planned.. *wink*
Re: Jaggers And The Rest
#48 posted by necros
on 2005/10/13 12:22:00
actually, i didn't mean that the blood didn't belong there, but i was actually refering to the poor use of it. it just doesn't look good the way it is done atm. it's just basically one colour stuck on the ends, which looks kind of cheesy as opposed to say, the fiend, where the blood really looks splattered on-- the claws are completly covered with it, and it gradually gets less thick as you move away from them, not to mention using more than one shade of red to give some depth to it.
also, regardless of what others think, i think the animations are rather poor. :P the legs don't seem to bend much, and i suspect the model looks decent ingame only because of model interpolation whereas it could look truly cool if they were done properly with model interp on top of that.
/shrug again, just my opinions, really. also, keep in mind, i don't really have any problem with their behaviour/AI. iirc, they all acted/attacked etc in cool ways. it's really only the look of them that i'm concerned with at this point.
in response to the others:
regarding the gaunt stiffness, i can understand that they might be intended to look stiff and wooden when moving, but what it comes down to is: do you want them to be animated as you imagine them, and have them look poorly animated, or make some concessions, add a bit more character to the sequences, and have them look well animated. :)
I have an orgy of sexier humanoid models. lol XD
max is actually one of the better made ones, with a lot of expressive sequences (although the run looks a tad unnatural w/regards to shoulder movement), also, the sequences where he jumps back up from lying on his back, could probably do with more undulation. (heh, i'm just getting sidetracked with particulars atm, apologies. :P)
#49 posted by Mindcrime
on 2005/10/13 12:32:48
What you can expect is that all aspects will be better. How much better, dunno, but better is better than nothing. I'll do the best I can with the skill (and time!) I have, and my best is all I can do ;) Given the five year experience gap between then and now, my best might be much better indeed.
(a whole lotta bests and betters in that paragraph)
In the end, we'll see what I come up with.
#50 posted by necros
on 2005/10/13 14:33:20
that's all i can ask.
looking forward to it ^_^
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2023 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.