GTKRadiant 1.6.4 Wierdness

[DT.]

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.

[mrwonko]

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?

[MoonDog]

Use q3map2gui to compile your maps.

[DT.]

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]

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]

I found that issue in 1.5.0 the caulk and glass or forcefields, tend to go weird, but went to nodraw_solid

[Pande]

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]

Caulk and nodraw_solid are identical shaders

nodraw_solid has surfaceparm nonopaque, which I believe is taken into account by vis?

[Pande]

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]

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]

? 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]

? 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]

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.