#49 posted by -
on 2015/05/28 23:27:58
Is this different from what TB does?
Nope, it's exactly what TB does, glad TB does it like that. Worldcraft does a fucked up face move that keeps the face the same size, doesn't scale it based on the adjacent faces, so you have to fix your mitres after resizing things.
I've said before, I used TB for like a year and loved it... but the lack of 2D grid just killed it for me. A few other features I missed were csg merge and texture find/replace.
All Of That Is In TB2 Though ;-)
Get Your PhD Finished!!!
#51 posted by -
on 2015/05/29 07:17:14
#52 posted by Blitz
on 2015/05/29 08:40:04
I always thought Quark was like Qoole in that it had accuracy issues keeping brushes on the grid.
Haven't made a Quake map in...(cough cough) but the last time I did it was GTKRadiant 1.5 and I used to use Worldcraft 1.6
It's Already Pretty Much Feature Complete
but possibly buggy.
#54 posted by scar3crow on 2015/05/29 16:35:19
On the subject of Qoole, I loved the interface but it did have precision issues. The breaker for me though was the edge manipulation would just die after so many uses, on a per map basis. I guess I was just loyal to it because it came from the same guy who did WADED for Doom, my preferred tool of putting Arch Viles and Mancubi every where.
"feature Complete But Possibly Buggy"
#55 posted by Drew
on 2015/05/30 03:51:06
the editor or your thesis?
#57 posted by gb on 2015/05/31 18:34:20
Still use it for creating quick ideas despite having moved to Blender.
Still the best tool for mapping for Quake with q3bsp, and is also the tool of choice for a ton of other idtech-based games. Can also be used for q1bsp mapping. One familiar editor for many games.
Reason: Ability to work mainly in the 3D viewport but having side/front/top views available in a modal 2D viewport. Hotkeys. Ability to fly through the map just like noclipping in the engine. Nice plugins, features.
I'm also very fluid in it and don't need to think much while mapping, which is nice.
UI design might be a matter of taste, but actual brushwork in it is very comfy IMHO. 4 pane view is available for people who like that stuff (personally I can't stand it, I want a big 3D window.)
#58 posted by Lunaran
on 2015/06/02 20:27:09
you can have a grid and a big 3D window, just don't waste screen space on three partially redundant grid views.
TB2 allows you to have one of four layouts: one big view that you can cycle through 3D, XY, XZ, and YZ, or two, three, or one of three layouts where you have one 3D view and one, two, or three 2D views. If you have less than three 2D views, one of them can be cycled through the remaining 2D views.
I call the four view layout the mode for WC fans and anal auto rape enthusiasts.
Changed Over The Years
#60 posted by oGkspAz on 2015/06/08 04:00:17
I started on qoole 2.50 and even now It's still the favourite. Unfortunately the rounding errors absolutely kill it as far as leaks go. I only recently found out about Trenchbroom though and so far I'm loving it.
#61 posted by quaketree
on 2015/06/18 06:15:46
Lunaran: no YOUR mom is linux
YOUR mom is BSD... You guys can make up names for the letters better than I can. :P
Who loves ya baby...
#62 posted by JneeraZ
on 2015/06/18 12:01:19
Hammer In The (*)
#63 posted by adib on 2015/06/24 21:56:44
I bought Qoole CD for $25 at the time (1997). Yes, rounding errors, displaced faces :(
Started my Hammer anal auto-rape by 2002 with the Torque Game Engine. Yes, I'm resilient. I even stepped backward using Worldcraft 3.3, for Quake's sake.
All this time I've been looking for tools that free me from Windows. Tried QuArk long ago, Radiant from time to time, always beaten by the learning curve and getting back to WC, to actually finish stuff.
When I leave WC, it will be to an editor committed to Quake 1. Don't wanna bother learning Radiant if it's leaving classic Quake support behind. But maybe Radiant is the safe, long term choice (so I don't have to learn all the junk all over again). :S
Tried to open a WC level (both RMF and MAP) on Jackhammer few days ago, but it screwed all my texture alignment.
You all are right: one 3D + one switchable 2D screen would be better. Wanna try TB2 when it's out, cause I need 2D and a strongly enforced grid. I'm not modelling a mesh polysoup after all.
#64 posted by JneeraZ
on 2015/06/24 22:14:28
TB1 doesn't produce polysoup. Have you tried it? The grid IS strictly enforced.
#65 posted by Preacher
on 2015/06/26 21:00:57
Worldcraft 1.5, still going strong! :D
#66 posted by adib
on 2015/07/16 22:25:21
Gonna give it a try, then. Does it have something like visgroups?
#67 posted by JneeraZ
on 2015/07/16 22:30:08
No. Not yet...
#68 posted by Qmaster on 2015/11/16 01:30:10
Used Worldcraft 1.6, then WC 3.3 with that extension thing. Tried all the others, but always came back to Worldcraft/Hammer to get stuff done, need my 2D views to know which direction I'm moving stuff. Found Jackhammer and jumped ship immediately, sorry Worldcraft old friend.
Trenchbroom looks awesome but miss my 2D...TB2 sounds amzing if it has the WC fanboy mode! WOOT! Also if it can allow larger map extents.
...unless Jackhammer implements face dragging in 3D view. Also JH's continuous select mode is awesome.
First editor to include lighting preview in the 3D view will win the Quake Master prize though.
#69 posted by Breezeep_
on 2015/11/16 02:04:43
I first tried Trenchbroom, then jackhammer, which is what I used to make my Map Jam 6 submission, and now I've switched over to GTKRadiant 1.5. I'm starting to get the hang of it now.
#70 posted by mankrip
on 2015/11/16 02:29:54
I'm using Jackhammer, and will try Trenchbroom sometime.
I primarily use jackhammer, I use the windows version through wine, as the linux version has borked textures.
I have never had the patience for trenchbroom, although it does intrigue me. I like the 3d editing environment, but without a overview of the whole map it is limiting to my poor feeble brain. I may eventually make prefabs in trenchbroom and import them into jackhammer should these features become available.
And I am super super excited for microbrush and *hope* that at some point wine will support it :) or shrinker releases a version with earlier opengl support.
#72 posted by adib
on 2015/11/16 13:38:52
Used Qoole back in 1998 for Quake. Then moved to Hammer 3.4 for Torque. Then Worldcraft 3.3 for Quake. Then Jackhammer and now I'm happy.
I chose Qoole because it felt robust and easy to use. I got all the others for backwards compatibilty and to reduce the learning curve. I'm very comfortable with this WC-like UI.
#73 posted by Rick
on 2015/11/16 14:36:11
I bought Worldcraft back when both it and Quake were new. I still have the disk and receipt somewhere. The few maps I've released (up until Map Jam 6) were made with it.
Probably the only reason I tried it was because I had used DCK for Doom mapping and figured Ben Morris could probably make something I would like just as well for Quake. I was right.
When I got back to mapping in 2007, I found Worldcraft didn't want to work so well on more modern systems. It got worse when I switched to Windows 7, so I had to find something else.
I ended up on Netradiant. It's not much like Worldcraft but works pretty good once you get used to it. Vertex manipulation is a pain at times because of how it won't allow invalid brushes. Getting where you want to go requires that you avoid making invalid brushes on the way. The clipper works but 3 point is very difficult to use.
I use a very big 3D window, a single tall skinny 2D window to the side and a short wide texture window below the 3D view. Flying though the map in the 3D window is absolutely mandatory and it has to work the same as I play the game. Aim with the mouse, forward-back and strafe left-right with the arrow keys.