MaceMadunusus
-
Posts
123 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
News Articles
Tutorials
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by MaceMadunusus
-
-
On 9/25/2023 at 6:38 PM, STOIK said:
I was doing this so I wouldn't be restricted to using 1 of the few in-engine fonts and allow me to do more with the appearance and design vs just throwing text on the screen but it doesn't seem like .menu files can layer each other with those below it still being accessible.
Yeah this is a limitation of the game, it is possible to work around but requires changes to the code. We were able to make the change for Movie Battles and it made UI creation way easier. However, if you're just wanting to limit the mod to UI-only that does limit you quite a bit.
I forget what exactly what the process was for fixing it as it was 8 years ago, but it is possible to fix.
Also just a personal preference thing so don't take it too harshly, but this just feels like every other modern game, like there is no more soul. If that is what you like then fine, but just feels sterile. The way it is currently setup won't work very well on first launch, that text will get all blurred out and impossible to read. Will only work if people can change to an HD resolution before launching kinda thing. -
12 hours ago, PreFXDesigns said:
Isn't there a faster way to solve this or do I really need this bounce? It seems that this is causing such a long compile time.
There is probably more at play here than just simple compile lines, like sun shader settings, detail vs structural not simple enough, unrestrained lightgrid, an underpowered computer, etc. For a map like this, I don't personally see the point in doing a bounce compile.
PreFXDesigns and Aldro Koon like this -
On 1/16/2022 at 4:55 AM, PreFXDesigns said:
The issue I have is that the playermodels tends to be very dark in most spaces with a fast light compile. However only in the stadium (Anfield) it seems to be rather okay. Perhaps this is due to the larger open space?
The -fast compile parameter is the cause of that. If you read what fast actually does below, you'll kind of understand why it does that.
Quotefast
- Enables light envelopes for area (shader) lights. This includes radiosity lights. Results in a much quicker -light compiles, but darkens all enveloped light sources considerably—this can be compensated for easily by raising your surfacelight values.
You can do what the wiki says above to compensate, but you can also do things like a key of _mingridlight in the worldspawn, with a light value for the value and it will bump up the light grids ambient value only rather than the entire map. However, I would just recommend removing the fast parameter from the compile and doing things the normal way.
On 1/16/2022 at 4:55 AM, PreFXDesigns said:You might think, why not go for a final long compile? Well, I tried this for only 1/3 of the map and this already took over 8 hours (still at bounce 2 at that moment ...).
I have personally found bounce 2 to not be worth the compile time. The detail is negligible in-game and most people wont notice unless you have a specific case that takes advantage of it. Which these maps definitely do not do. I usually do bounce 1 instead.
Using super is also part of your issue, again to quote the wiki:
Quote-super <N>
- Enables arbitrarily ordered grid supersampling of lightmaps. This is much, much, much slower than -samples, by the way.
This is the light parameters I use for a majority of levels:
-light -patchshadows -v -samples 4 -thresh 0.1 -bounce 1 -bouncegrid
Depending on the level, I'll add things like -filter, -samplesize, -bouncescale.
Aldro Koon and OCD2 like this -
Fake Bump mapping/Normal mapping in Jedi Academy
Things you need:
- GTK Radiant 1.4 or 1.5
- Adobe Photoshop
- Nvidia Normal map Filter Plugin for PS
- Any program you can use to edit/make textures (such as Photoshop or Gimp)
- And of course the game itself.
Once you have the texture, and the Nvidia Normal map plugin installed, load up Photoshop (If it isn't already) And load your texture.
When your texture is loaded, go to Filter>Nvidia Tools> Normal map filter. This window should pop up.
There you have to play with some of the settings till you get a result you like. Note: With JKA you do not want a highly detailed normal map. Use the scale window to change how much depth it will have. 10-20 should be alright for now.
When you are done you should have something similar to this.
Now before we go and try to compile this, we need a shader. Its very simple and easy to use, here ya go:
[i] textures/amace_leviathan/wall3 { q3map_normalimage textures/amace_leviathan/wall3_normalmap qer_editorimage textures/amace_leviathan/wall3 q3map_lightmapsamplesize 1x1 { map $lightmap rgbGen identity } { map textures/amace_leviathan/wall3 blendFunc GL_DST_COLOR GL_ZERO } }[/i]The q3map_normalimage is of course your actual Normal map image file location. the Q3map_lightmapsamplesize is what quality it will be made during the compile, lower number = higher quality but more space on the BSP.
(Of course edit it for your own texture paths and other needs)
Now once you have the shader, the images, and the shader applied somewhere in your map close to a good lighting source you should get a good result, although it is very picky at times. (Once you compile)
How to apply Func_Groups in-editor to make your map less GFX intensive.
Here is how you should put this method into your maps. Select whichever brushes or patches you wish to have the normal map on. Right click on the grid and go to func> Func_Group in the menu.
Once that is done and you still have the brushes or patches selected hit N on your keyboard.
Add these keys and values into the properties of the func_group.
Key: _lightmapscale
Value: .0125
The value number you may choose for yourself. The lower the number, the higher the quality. The High the number the lower the quality. (Default is 1)
This allows it to single the high lightmapscale to the one area rather than the whole map, making your map more optimized and better performing as well as taking less time to compile.
Now compile your level and go check it out!
Here is my result after getting it in-game.
For those that are wondering in the comments, there are many ways to changing how the normal maps work. One of them is just using -patchshadows compile line in the Light stage of the compile. (That one you see above, with everything else the same)
Note: This only works when using your normal maps on Patches.
Among that being one method to changing how your normal maps look, you can also use this line which you see in the shader above:
q3map_lightmapsamplesize 1x1
Increasing the numbers lessens the quality and amount of Light Data needed in the normal map.
-MaceMadunusus
===Mac notes===
Note that there is no mac-compatible Nvidia Normalmap Filter Plugin for PS. Normal Map Generator achieves pretty much the same thing.
Lwkill likes this -
I just find it odd that GameSpot is assuming digital sales still don’t compare to physical sales.
They don't compare when you're talking about console. A significant chunk of people with consoles do not have the harddrive space to keep large games on their drive, or the download speeds to reliably download them over and over. As a result they go the disk route.
EA's CFO: “We do think the industry will end calendar year 2017 probably above 40%" when speaking of digital sales compared to physical.
"We do think the industry will end calendar year 2017 probably above 40%,” he added. That’s close to half of the industry’s sales being done online, which is a big step.
That said, EA’s own digital share will lag behind the competition, thanks to FIFA. The game is very popular in places with limited access to high-speed bandwidth, and in countries where buying digital goods isn’t the norm, so it’ll always sell better on disc. And with it being the company’s biggest game, it will reduce the overall percentage of digital revenue for EA.
So, EA themselves is saying that 60% of their game sales (Remember, digital figures often include things like DLC bought after launch) is predicted to be from physical this year.
So that is actually a pretty huge chunk.
-
The one here is an old build, but I doubt it was malicious. Probably a technical problem then.
Yeah, I even downloaded the build he commented on to check it out. There is nothing in it that could cause that. My only guess could be that something is wrong with his drivers (specifically opengl) that is causing that.
-
...why does EOC4 include both the JK2 and JKA assets, and also JKG stuff? There's no readme for any of the JKG stuff either, let alone proof of permission.
Can confirm that it is also using content from Movie Battles II. MBII assets do not have a readme attached either, and again no proof of permission (I haven't recently given permission for any FX files found in MBIIs RC level, but here they are here.)
Just looking through the files, it is a massive attempt at using content from everywhere else but your own.
-
I'm not defending EA. I'm not denying the game has issues. I just stated that I think it's fun that people should try it.
I tried it with several members of the MB team, we all stopped playing it pretty quickly out of disappointment. The game could have been so much but it just failed on so many levels that it just isn't fun for me. The biggest casual things I wanted were stripped out of it entirely (Solo bot play) and is something I really wanted and would really have helped with the longevity. I seriously cannot justify anything in the product at all and I haven't been more disgusted since EA rushed Mass Effect 3's ending. I wanted a modern battlefront, I got a stripped down SW CoD. I got about 20 hours, just couldn't do it anymore. Refunnnddddddd
Circa, Stoiss, TheWhitePhoenix and 1 other like this -
I don't see me doubling back and rephrasing my arguments. I've said the same thing this entire time, simply because you cannot read doesn't mean anything because clearly other people like shadow can understand me just fine.
The fact that I have been a part of making a modification that is referenced all of the time when even talking about AAA EA SW titles on its own while also having content in many actual video games gives me a little more weight than you think I actually know what I'm talking about from experience if you really want to bring ego into this. You're just sitting here attempting to insult people. I gave facts, reasoning, statistics. You're just a dick.
If you dislike me so much, just ignore me using your account settings.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
Thanks Shadow, reading comprehension on this forum is abysmal. There is a reason I didn't quote you in my previous posts JAWS, because you weren't blindly defending the game even though you enjoyed it. You were being a reasonable person in that regard, yet you come back at me with insults about potentially liking trump and needing to go outside more? Please grow up.
(For the record: Trump is a fuckwit, so is Hilary)
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
Just because the general consensus thinks a game is bad, it doesn't mean someone can't still enjoy it. It just means that the majority thinks it's a bad game.
Of course, but ignoring complaints, saying the game is fine because they have fun, is the problem.
Example quote from Circa: "Go play it if you haven't yet. It's pretty dang fun." Yeah, exactly the problem. People have, and the majority including myself have said it sucks. Completely ignoring all the complaints helps no one.
If DICE just looked only the people who said they are having fun they would think their game is good because of confirmation bias. Yet the majority says otherwise. Not looking at both sides and just saying the game is good because you're having fun is the same thing.
Lets also not forget about sunk cost fallacy.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
Not sure why I was quoted there. None of that had anything to do with my question.
And yeah, I agree with Sithani. I love the game. Other people's opinions aren't going to change mine.
Go play it if you haven't yet. It's pretty dang fun.
I answered the question, if you want to know why read my post. Specifically the part that says you don't need to play the game to know how shit it is at this point simply because of word-of-mouth. Multiple news articles are citing Battlefront's sales problems to word-of-mouth.
I don't care about some dudes reviews. I play it and I love every second of it
If someone still hasn't played it and says this game sucks because someone else said so it grinds my gearsGlad to know both of you are suffering from Buyer's Stockholm Syndrome. Completely unwilling to change your opinion based on tons of new facts that you are clearly ignoring simply because you think it is fun. Some of the biggest logical fallacies I've seen in a while. Do you even understand how much flak the MB team would get if we thought something was balanced but in reality and statistics wise isn't? Don't be blinded by your own confirmation biases.
Oh look, TB now does the Multiplayer only problem just like Jim Sterling.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
Have you even played it?
Over the course of the last few weeks, average PC player counts have dropped 30,000 players, PS4 had dropped 70,000 players (41% of initial week avg). Battlefield 4 had more players all day today than Battlefront on PC and Battlefield 3 was only 2-3,000 behind over the course of the day. Earlier today, more people were playing the original counter strike (not source or go) than were playing battlefront on pc.
After reviews came out, EA's stock dropped 6%. A few weeks later, Gamestop, Xbox, Amazon, GMG all had $20 off sales on Battlefront (an attempt to boost sales not at all aiming towards their 13 million projection) and as a result dropped EA's stock another 5% (Nasdaq is attributing it to the early price drops). After reviews stating the game lacked content and multiple concerns from players, they announced more free DLC outside of Jakku. EA executives also admit that battlefront 'may' lack content.
User reviews put Battlefront at a 4.4/10 frequently likening its longevity to that of Titanfall or Evolve.
According to this video EA sold only 1.5 million copies between the first week/two weeks. Fallout 4, GTA 5, etc sold over 10 million in the first week.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/116485-Star-Wars-Battlefront-Review
Battlefronts initial week sales lagged behind Fallout 4, Blackops 3, FIFA 16 to take spot #4 worldwide (several local markets were different). It also was ranked 13th for all Black Friday sales figures across all retailers: http://www.gamerevolution.com/manifesto/star-wars-battlefronts-mixed-reception-appears-to-have-significantly-affected-sales-35621
The game is full of completely questionable game design problems ranging from being able to equip multiple grenades on a 10 second cooldown (Totally no grenade spam) to the lack of sheltered spawns that have been present in any objective based game since before Team Fortress 2. Or other things like the Falcon having a shield that can ram the Slave I to instantaneously get rid of the enemy heroes aircraft in Fighter Squadron. While were at it, lets mention the horribly obvious incompetence in the QA team where walkers dying in the first phase of Sullust get stuck, or TIEs crash into star destroyer debris on spawns on the brand new Jakku map. Lets just entirely forget about the logic behind Imperials being able to pick up anti-vehicle pickups when Rebels don't even posses ground vehicles. Oh, and why can't we voice chat with our partner exactly? The entire game is full of cheese.
They wanted to make a game that appeals to a large number of people, particularily more casual players yet they forget one of the most casual things in the original battlefront. Being able to play the base gamemodes against bots locally and with split screen. That is one of the things that makes any game instantaneously more accessible to people. Especially those without internet or with crappy internet.
Not to mention the fragmenting DLC practices that have been continued and will be offering less for the same price as Battlefield 4 Premium.
The battlefront subreddit is full of people speaking with support about refunding their game, especially from PC and Austrailian/New Zealand markets as well as tons of people with issues with matchmaking to the point where they cannot even play the game and create joke images instead https://jkhub.org/images/pR9Kyzd.png, as well as a massive amount of bugs, balance problems.
Jim Sterling goes over the new AAA Multiplayer-only trend found recently in Battlefront and Rainbow 6: Siege.
Where he states that these games have cut out singleplayer in the hopes of creating more multiplayer content. However, in neither of the games that theory has not actually been found in practice. Battlefront has less vehicles, less customization, less ui options, less weapons, less maps per gamemode than DICEs previous Battlefield 4.
At this point everyone knows that it is not worth its purchase price. No one needs to play it at this point to know that. Anyone that states otherwise is subject to Post-Purchase rationalization also known as Buyer's Stockholm Syndrome because they want to justify their purchase so badly they are willing to overlook everything wrong with the game.
You wanna know something? TotalBiscuit referenced Movie Battles specifically when talking about Battlefronts lightsaber combat and how inadequate it was on his Co-Optional Podcast. He referenced a fucking 13 year old modification when talking about a brand new AAA title from DICE and talked about it (and JK in general) having superior lightsaber combat.
TheWhitePhoenix and DT. like this -
Ugh. The OG Battlefront had more maps. Less modes but still more maps.
Actually a good thing that it did. Usually more modes fragments the community base extremely far when you get into excessive amounts (more than 4 or so imo) (Titanfall suffered from this) and they all eventually gravitate to one or two gamemodes. In Battlefront Walker Assault definitely will be one, supremacy probably another. That isn't saying having a ton of modes isn't fun but there will always be ones people prefer over others, and as a result of diminishing playerbase over time the less liked gamemodes just wont be playable at all after a certain point in time. With Jakku they're supposedly adding yet another gamemode to the mix, which makes the problem worse. I would much rather a company focus on making one gamemode great than making 10 gamemodes okay.
Edit:
Peak PC player counts for today:
Battlefield 4: 27,536
Battlefront: 34,174
Team Fortress 2: 62,620
ARK Survival Evolved: 39,841
Grand Theft Auto 5: 35,573
Garrys Mod: 34,252
Football Manager 2016: 59,511
So many games that have been around for quite a while already are beating the PC player counts for battlefront. Consoles still have pretty high player counts, but if you include those for several of those games the same can be said, but the numbers are already dropping from launch.
-
I find myself reluctantly agreeing with you, even if you're remarkably annoying.
The game is amazing but extremely limited. Regardless I enjoyed it.
Being annoying about something I believe in is fine with me. I'm glad you like the game, I enjoyed it too. Just not $60 AAA title enjoyed. Most of my gaming community and MB developers feel the same. In fact most have already stopped playing. EA is now promising more free content outside of Jakku DLC to respond to the points the reviews brought up over the lack of content and their stock prices dropping 6% after those reviews were released. That is a positive, but we shall see where that goes. They're still doing maps for season pass crap.
-
"I'm never going to insult someone for liking a game. You can like what you want. You are a complete idiot for pre-ordering though. If you want to have even better games STOP PRE-ORDERING"
Just had to point out the amount of hipocrisy there. Anyway, the game seems to have obvious flaws but you know what? YOLO. Imma sit my fat ass down, play this game, and screams curses at the television when I feel like the game is bullshit. But you know what? Someone else's opinion determine whether or not I play a videogame. That'd be like ming pizza because one of my friends hates pizza. That's cool but when I got a chance at pizza imma eat. So basic message: Stop trying to convince bruh because ain't nobody give a crap about your idealistic "SCREWEA SWAGBAG 2015" campaign.
Liking the game and preordering are two completely different things, you can like the game but not have preordered and you can preorder the game and not like it. There is no hypocrisy in my statement. Pre-ordering is WANT not LIKE.
Also reviews for this game came out real good mates, basically everyone of them saying it doesn't have enough content to be worth $60. Great on y'all.
-
@@MaceMadunusus You're acting like it's a scientific fact that the game is bad. However, different people care about different aspects of the game. There is no way you can truly call any piece of media "bad". It's all personal preference. And what difference does it make whether you pre-order the game or buy it when it comes out. You still end up paying the same amount of money either way, and if you don't like it, you can still sell it or return it.
This comment made it clear you didn't read a single thing. I even linked videos that tells you why not to pre order and then you ask what the hell the difference is. Watch the video, and get some reading comprehension if you want me to take you seriously. I hate being rude like that but come on dude... I'm not going to repeat myself because of your own inability to read or take the time to watch things I have posted. The game isn't necessarily bad but its inherently broken and overpriced. It was fun to play, but is it $60 fun to play and will it keep my interest past a few weeks? Nope.
Remember, I had the alpha, did they fix the community complaints about the flight controls on PC in beta months later? Nope, they tweaked it so it wasn't as bad, but its still bad. Yet the community was as unanimous about the flight controls sucking in the alpha like they were spawns sucking in the beta.
They've made many basic game design sins that just don't even make sense from a company with as much experience with DICE.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
Not generally, no.
I'm sorry that I'm offending you with my video game purchasing habits.
That is incredibly unwise practice. No wonder.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
Because reviews probably wouldn't make any difference in my decision. I'd rather play it myself and form my own opinion. I don't think I've ever read a review on a video game before buying it.
Yet, you probably read reviews for PC parts and other things more than a couple of dollars? That is beyond illogical.
Thanks for encouraging egregious pre-order schemes that lock out parts of the game for zero reason for the rest of us who actually care about our money.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
now there is a new launcher, MBII staff should know how helpful were tier websites like Moddb or Jkhub to inform players and keep a download link alive when the previous forum shutdown.
That's why it would be nice to put the launcher on jkhub and Moddb too, not only on your MBII forum, and to provide mirrors
https://community.moviebattles.org/threads/launcher-fix-released.272/page-3#post-2691
Waiting till verified stable and working for a couple days before I upload to sites that need approval processes
therfiles likes this -
Also, I loved AC Unity and Arkham Knight.
Arkham Knight was removed from the god damn steam store until they fixed the game and GMG changed their refund policy specifically for the game.
Watch the video.
What is the harm in you buying the game on launch? Like it costs the same in most cases, the only thing it requires you is patience. DONT PREORDER. You aren't going to die because you waited for a product to release before purchasing.
yeyo JK, JAWSFreelao and TheWhitePhoenix like this -
You guys need to chill out. The game hasn't even come out and you're at each others' throats.
Okay, so you called me an idiot because I preordered. Why is that different than just buying it when it releases? Why does that make me an idiot? The game looks great, so I'm going to buy it. That's how it works.
I swore to myself I'd stay out of this thread but meh.
Because buying at release time usually means theres reviews out for the game provided there is no post-release embargos (and in which case is usually a dead giveaway that the game is crap like batman arkham knight and assassins creed unity) that include the full content more than just the beta. Like for example, Total Biscuit could have his review out on release which gives you a more full picture of what the game is like than a few trailers. Read reviews before you buy anything people. That is why you are an idiot if you preorder. Do you go buy PC parts without reading reviews? Nope. Do you go buy a car without reading reviews to see if it has high maintenance for example, nope. Would you go to a movie if you knew the reviews were crap (I'm not talking about the meh 5-7 range, more like a 2-3/10 range)? Nope. Should you buy anything without reading reviews? nope. Then why are you doing it with a video game?!
Are reviews out for Battlefront yet? Nope. Then should you buy? Nope.
Video is 2 years old but a lot still applies. Protect yourself. The pre-order bonuses are not worth you potentially getting figuratively shot in the gut by a terrible game.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this -
@@MaceMadunusus is it just us, or do people just wanna brush EA's shitstorm with Battlefield 4 under the rug just so they can be biased and give their money to the WORST Video Game Company ever? That golden trophy statue isn't just the only proof of how much EA sucks.
Wait, don't you mean brushing Warfighter, Battlefield 4, Hardline, Mass Effect 3, Sim City, Sims 4, Titanfall, Need for Speed, The Old Republic, under the rug?
-
I disagree that it is only a $30 value, but this has become pointless. Neither of us are changing our opinions, so we might as well end this conversation.
You completely missed the point where EA is going to be making a 70-80% profit on it. Which means the value per box is $12-18. It becomes $30 because they still have to make a profit. BUT OKAY LETS IGNORE THAT.
You cannot disagree that it is only a $30 value. There is no opinion for that. It is a fact that based on numbers alone, you are overpaying.
TheWhitePhoenix likes this
If someone still hasn't played it and says this game sucks because someone else said so it grinds my gears
STOIK's Menu Design
in WIPs, Teasers & Releases
Posted
We did it through MBs game code, which uses the original SDK release rather than the source release. So unknown if anyone else did anything similar. It isn't in our OpenJK fork.
Well you can look at the .menu files here on our text repo: https://github.com/MBII/TextAssets it is set up pretty modularly in comparison to the old MB UI, and probably in comparison to the base UI as well (been too long since I've looked).
Yeah, I'm just talking about the initial launch where JA starts at 800x600 resolution. If you use a higher resolution font so that it doesn't pixelate out for higher res monitors, the text becomes unreadable on that initial launch which also makes changing the resolution to 1080p+ a bit of an eyesore. MB makes an attempt at bypassing that a bit through our launcher.
To be clear, I'm not saying the original UI doesn't need a facelift, overhaul, and updates to its flow. I just think this goes too far, and that a lot of the UX "best practices" have resulted in everything looking and feeling the same. You can have a good UI without following the rule book to a T and still having a unique look. I have found many modern UI/UX people think making the screen look clearer/cleaner is actually better for UX, when in fact it adds way more clicks and time to navigate menus. Sometimes just put all the character customization on the same page, but make it look clean, rather than putting each separate option behind its own fancy animated menu kind of thing if that makes sense.