News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register | Log in
Quake Re-release!!!
Id/Bethesda just announced a new release of Quake with a bunch of enhancements.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vi-bdUd9J3E

More info: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/Quake/9P1Z43KRNQD4#
First | Previous | Next | Last
 
Maybe the medkits are having a negative effect on Ranger's vision. 
When I See An Explosive Box 
In E2M1 on the path across the pool while going for the gold keycard, I also get blurry vision. But with a strong red tint. Because it shouldn't be there. 
#179 
A very subtle detail that I really liked in the KEX lighting is that it casts a bright but small lighting around all flames. This fixes the problem of fullbright flame models with low lighting values looking out of place in very dark places.

It's not as effective as the effect I've implemented to fade out the flames, but it fixes the problem without changing the original behavior of the flames.

I can accept the wrongly lit item boxes so long as they're only used for items, as it does make them stand out more in the scene.

In that case, none of the items should get ambient lighting, including the armor, weapon and powerup pickups. It doesn't make sense for some items to get ambient lighting while others don't. Neutral lighting values for all.

And items with neutral lighting should have the same treatment of flame models in the KEX engine, with a bright but small dynamic light being cast from them, to make sense for them to be bright in dark areas.

The light in the super shotgun spot in E1M2 is an evidence that id Software originally wanted for all items to cast a small light on the environment, but they probably gave up on the idea because of technical issues: dynamic lighting on all items would impact the performance too much, and switchable lights would raise the filesize & memory requirements.

I'm still unconvinced by lightmapped liquids, particularly when combined with translucency.

That's what user options are for. 
 
In that case, none of the items should get ambient lighting, including the armor, weapon and powerup pickups. It doesn't make sense for some items to get ambient lighting while others don't. Neutral lighting values for all.

I'd be OK with that.

Quake 2 made lighting on bonus items pulse with time. It's also just as easy to set a minimum light level on any EF_ROTATE item.

Ultimately it's a game, and it comes down to "how does this contribute to gameplay?" Highlighting items you can pick up in some way is something I'd be perfectly OK with. (I draw the line at bouncing though, but some form of adjusted lighting is fine with me.)

You're absolutely right about the SSG spotlight in e1m2 and there's similar spotlights on the GL and SNG in e1m3. These aren't dynamic lights though, they're baked into the static lightmap. But it's definitely evidence that id did wish to draw attention to these pickups. 
 
Yup. All I advocate for is to have a consistent visual language, just that. 
 
Yup. All I advocate for is to have a consistent visual language, just that. 
 
Major update is out.

Just downloading now, ~700mb so it looks pretty major indeed. Haven't read the change logs yet, but word is there's quite a few fixes in this one. 
Did They Rename The Hell Knight? 
 
#189 
Nope 
Slowly Getting There 
Correct music in the EXm5 maps, it's already something! Sadly, not everything seems to be addressed, such as MD5 versions of the SoA/DoE weapons, missing default.cfg in ID1 pak0.pak and still no colored lights for DoE.

Don't want to rant too much though, the update shows their commitment. Fingers crossed they won't stop too soon before everything is the way it should be. 
Hell/Death Knight 
Hmm... still no "add-ons" besides Quake 64. Glad to hear they restored the level 5 music, though.

And since metlslime mentioned it, does anyone know why it was necessary to change Death Knight's first name to "Hell"? He may have been referred to as "hknight" internally, but the Quake manual called him "Death Knight," and the original code said "Player was slain by a Death Knight" when he killed you. So that was the final name that Id settled on, and I don't understand the logic behind the name change in Copper or in this re-release.

Just curious. I tend to think of "Hell Knight" as a weaker, pale downgrade of the Baron of Hell from Doom... whereas the "Death Knight" is a stronger, deadlier upgrade of the Knight. 
 
Even in Quake Champions he is called Death Knight. 
Death Vs Hell 
Well, since all the text files are now external, you can always edit the English loca file on your own. It should be changed officially, though. 
My Review Of The New Mission Packe 
Here follows my summarie of my throughplay of the newest Quake mission packe "Dimension of the Machine". :3c

For the impatient ones, it was worth every second, and the environments look good, but the game is starting to show its age when it comes to the enemies and the weaponry:
https://twitter.com/Colonthreee/status/1447706055736188934

Also please excuse the threading but it seems Twitter did something stupid here. 
Lightmapped Liquids Are Official 
Some maps in this rerelease does feature lightmapped liquids.

Despite the Kex engine itself being unable to render lightmaps on liquids, those maps will now be able to be rendered with lit liquids in all engines that supports this feature. 
 
Cool. I could do with some eyebleach after seeing those cartoon textures though. 
 
Good. Hopefully people will be able to see it now, realise it looks crap, and get this fad out of their systems. 
Mh 
Except it looks great? Not sure why you're still hung up on this.
Anyone who thinks this is a downgrade is just blind...
http://born-robotic.net/spog/litwater2.gif 
Re: 198 
too bad for you that most every mapper enjoys lit water. 
 
Yeah I think it adds a lot of depth, and helps reduce the repetitiveness. 
 
Let's get this much clear from the outset.

I have an (unreleased) engine that can do lit water too. It's not lughtmapped, it's real-time lighting of water surfaces using the same lighting equation as was used by the original light.exe, but just run in real-time rather than precalculated.

I say this to emphasise one thing: I have seen it and I know what it looks like.

You won't convince me by showing static screen shots, nor a .gif that animates between with/without.

You need to see it move, you need to move around in a map that has lughtmapped water, see how water areas actually look while you're actually playing the game.

Here's why it sucks.

First of all you can't see the turbulent surface animation in dark areas. It just looks like solid black. Yes, I know the obvious counterargument here, but losing the turbulent animation is a worse tradeoff than losing the lightmap.

Second, it doesn't interact properly with translucent water. Nobody's going to pretend that Quake's lighting is physically correct, but there are degrees of what can or can't be accepted, and light should just go through translucent water.

Lughtmapped water overall reminds me of those gratuitous eye-candy features that people used to do back in 2001 or so. Everybody had their own variant of a sexy 32-bit particle system, for example, and it's only with the benefit of hindsight that we can finally say they were all horrible.

People get excited about these things because they're seeing something new for the first time. But the fact that it's new doesn't automatically make it good.

So no, I'm not hung up on it and I'm certainly not hating on something I don't know about. I've been there, done that with other features, I've seen lightmapped water in action, I know where it doesn't work well, and I know enough to classify it among other features that the community was similarly initially excited about but ultimately rejected.

It would be just nice if we didn't drag everyone through the bit in the middle this time. 
 
"You need to see it move, you need to move around in a map that has lughtmapped water, see how water areas actually look while you're actually playing the game."

hey dude in case you didnt know mappers have seen it in game and still enjoy it. were not just fellating to static screenshots, weve seen it in game and prefer lit water. 
Mh 
You can't see anything when it's too dark to see. That's not a reason to make it fullbright. And surely your concern about transparency can be solved in the implementation? Ericw's compilers seem to handle it just fine. 
Mh 
I know your history with it, which is why I said "STILL hung up on it".

I still disagree with all your points, and yes you're not the only one to have played with lit water, we have as well, and you're the only person I know so far that hasn't preferred it.
Unlit water makes absolutely no sense at all, even if it's transparent, and it's a bane to all mappers.

"Can't see the turbulent surface in dark areas" so what? That's on the mapper. You know if I make a pitch black area in a map, the player won't be able to see anything in it either, and will complain, that's on me, the solution isn't making the game fullbright.

"It doesn't interact properly with translucent water" I don't understand this at all, yes it does, modern light.exe even lets us have light going through transparent water be reduced by the alpha value of the water, it looks great!

"gratuitous eye-candy", again to me this is on par with stuff like basic fog, colored lighting, and skyboxes, all of which have been pretty much fully adopted by the mapping community.

This is an opt-in feature anyways, if mappers don't want to compile with lit water that's up to them, not sure why you'd have a say in how we decide our maps should look. 
 
Funny how a bunch of technical posturing and false equivalences didn't correct everybody's personal preference.

For my part, I thought DarkPlaces, JoeQuake, etc. looked like technovomit from day one, but I still like lit water. I think it's a development that works with Quake's visual style rather than against it. 
First | Previous | Next | Last
You must be logged in to post in this thread.
Website copyright © 2002-2021 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors.