Tempust85 Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 This isn't a cry for help but more a "hey, I found this". I compiled my map in 1.6.4 (from 1.5) and: - glass that allows the player to see the skybox goes fullbright and has wierd colors (only happens to me if only one side of a brush is glass, and the rest is caulk) Add yours if you know any, to help anyone else who is thinking about making the switch from 1.5 to 1.6.4. CaptainCrazy likes this
mrwonko Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 I compiled my map in 1.6.4 (from 1.5) and: - glass that allows the player to see the skybox goes fullbright and has wierd colors - switches do not work the same as 1.5 ("start_off" switch doesn't start off)Did you change anything or just use 1.6 to compile? start_off being off could indicate the *_entities.def being wrong, but since it's saved as spawnflags X that should not happen unless you change/create the entity in 1.6, if it's even wrong in the first place. Could you elaborate on the glass? Provide some screenshots, maybe?
Tempust85 Posted September 23, 2013 Author Posted September 23, 2013 1.6.4 doesn't like glass to have only 1 side of it as glass, and the rest of it as caulk. Switches was some wierd thing with my shaders, that oddly enough happened when I tried 1.6.4 lol but it works now. Everything looks to be as it should, however I see no real difference over 1.5. Compile times are the same, that's for sure lol.
mrwonko Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 You shouldn't use caulk for the sides of glass in the first place, that's what nodraw_solid is for. Or make the glass a detailbrush. Otherwise chances are it'll be determined to be solid as far as vis is concerned, keeping the stuff behind it from being drawn.
CaptainChar Posted September 23, 2013 Posted September 23, 2013 I found that issue in 1.5.0 the caulk and glass or forcefields, tend to go weird, but went to nodraw_solid
Pande Posted September 25, 2013 Posted September 25, 2013 You shouldn't use caulk for the sides of glass in the first place, that's what nodraw_solid is for. Or make the glass a detailbrush. Otherwise chances are it'll be determined to be solid as far as vis is concerned, keeping the stuff behind it from being drawn.Caulk and nodraw_solid are identical shaders
mrwonko Posted September 25, 2013 Posted September 25, 2013 Caulk and nodraw_solid are identical shadersnodraw_solid has surfaceparm nonopaque, which I believe is taken into account by vis?
Pande Posted September 25, 2013 Posted September 25, 2013 Surfaceparm trans is what deals with vis, whereas surfaceparm nonopaque was introduced to allow light to pass through a surface (even structural ones) but I suspect may be completely deprecated now (trans takes on the same properties). I think it used to be that surfaceparm nonopaque would allow you to completely let light through even without surfaceparm alphashadow, but now you need surfaceparm alphashadow and surfaceparm trans to do that.
lil_binger Posted January 15, 2014 Posted January 15, 2014 the glass problem I believe with the wierd lighting is caused by a structural brush nearby or the glass being structural itself, Try turning the glass brush or some of the brushes nearby into detail brushes. Basically the vis compile is adding a space behind the glass and when looking at the glass the space is not visible due to the vis node created.
eezstreet Posted January 15, 2014 Posted January 15, 2014 ? Surfaceparms are used at runtime, not at compile, aren't they? So they ought to be irrelevant to vis/lighting and instead baked into the geometry.
mrwonko Posted January 15, 2014 Posted January 15, 2014 ? Surfaceparms are used at runtime, not at compile, aren't they? So they ought to be irrelevant to vis/lighting and instead baked into the geometry.Nope: { "nonopaque", 0, S_CONT_OPAQUE, 0, 0, C_TRANSLUCENT, 0 }, /* setting trans ok? */ /* all translucent brushes that aren't specifically made structural will be detail */ if ( ( compileFlags & C_TRANSLUCENT ) && !( compileFlags & C_STRUCTURAL ) ) { compileFlags |= C_DETAIL; } eezstreet likes this
eezstreet Posted January 15, 2014 Posted January 15, 2014 Nope:{ "nonopaque", 0, S_CONT_OPAQUE, 0, 0, C_TRANSLUCENT, 0 }, /* setting trans ok? *//* all translucent brushes that aren't specifically made structural will be detail */ if ( ( compileFlags & C_TRANSLUCENT ) && !( compileFlags & C_STRUCTURAL ) ) { compileFlags |= C_DETAIL; }Aha, thank you for the clarification.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now