mrwonko

The easiest way to fit him to the Jedi Academy skeleton may be to create a custom skeleton so he can be posed and use that to pose him in a way that he fits the Jedi Academy skeleton.

Not enough pixels. Try this:

Also, don't use notepad.

Fun Fact: XBox 360 is almost 10 year old. Well, not quite, but yeah... not such a big compliment.

You'll need to hexedit the character's model.glm, changing the models/players/_humanoid/_humanoid path early in the file to something else (while making sure not to change the address of anything after it), then copy the _humanoid.gla to that location and do the changes there. Note that this only works in Singleplayer - Multiplayer player models must use models/players/_humanoid/_humanoid.gla

You could load the model into Blender with my plugin, duplicate it, create a new UV map for the original, then bake the old texture on the new one so you don't have to retexture it. Keeps the weighting intact, can just be re-exported once done. (I actually did that before for a badly UV-mapped but nicely textured model.)

If you discount some custom maps for the likes of Age of Empires 2 and Settlers 3, I really started modding with Jedi Outcast at some point prior to JKA's release. Only maps at first, custom shaders, scripts and textures later. Started modelling around 2005, which was also when I did some Oblivion modding (including custom models). Got into coding through JKA's MP SDK around the same time. Always had a knack for the technical stuff - i.e. "how do I do X?", so long as X is not "make it look good". Which makes coding a natural fit, so that's what I'm focussing on now. Naturally that makes JKA's source release the coolest thing ever to me.

Okay, I've set up a DropBox, what's everybody's name?

The amount of C++-ification that is possible is limited by having to keep the interface to mods the same. I'm not sure if it's something that should be done in OpenJK. Personally, I plan to start my own fork at some point, which will be mostly C++ and Lua and abandon mod compatibility in favor of modernization.

For the most parts it's just like any other kind of modelling in Blender. What experience do you have?

At least I think anything bigger could easily be too much work. Feel free to challenge that, but I'd rather stick to duel. I didn't have anything particular in mind when I proposed it, except lots of curves since that's traditionally hard to do with brushes (and even patchmeshes). And it could even be animated. So maybe the inside of some huge creature, like the Leviathan in Devil May Cry 3. Having a beating heart in there would be cool. Yeah, we should do that. I'll look into it later, don't have enough time today. I'd love it if all the details were actually modelled in high detail and then baked onto a lowpoly mesh, but that might be too much work? Agreed on whiteboxing, agreed on verticality. But it can easily be done using Blender and spawnflags 2 as well.

You were talking about vehicle and npc count limits, and that's changed in the source code.

And they included the source code. But even then you'll likely have to get their permission to relicense as GPL.

It could possibly be fixed for future mods that work differently from the previous ones, but existing mods can't be retroactively fixed by anyone but their author.

I suggest we get a better idea of what we're trying to achieve first. I'll be out of town for most of next week starting wednesday, by the way.

I very much doubt that patches net a better performance than brushes or models... And if they do, that's crazy. A proper LOD system is in order. I'll note that on my big list of cool features JKA lacks but doesn't have to anymore since we have the source now.

Maybe we should make a new VIS help thread where people can send me their maps and I can show them how to do proper VIS... Yes, having a PVS at all makes some things inherently worse, and adding an optional additional portal/antiportal system might help, especially for large outdoor stuff. But that would also benefit from some LOD'd terrain, for example. In general the lack of LOD on anything but playermodels makes huge levels impractical anyway... Yeah, there are a lot of things we could improve about Jedi Academy. But I don't see how manually doing the PVS work Q3Map2 usually does for you helps.

I still don't get it. That page mentions Q3Map2 already predetermines the visibility during the VIS stage, there's no runtime PVS calculation. If you want to influence the VIS, just add some antiportal/hint brushes?

So just doing the vis manually? I don't see how that would be helpful, wouldn't that just be a source of bugs without any actual benefit? How does it help mappers?

We may need a coding category... Yes, we can finally do everything we always wanted to now. If only I remembered what I always wanted to do though...

You don't need to decompile the map to change the entities, that's what Q3Map2's -onlyents is for.

A BSP can't be losslessly converted back to .map. The only way in which a BSP can currently be changed without losing information is changing the entities.

No, they can only help in cases where the creators made them the copyright holders. So if we have to use the mp3code stuff to enforce a GPL release, we'll need the original creators/copyright holders to do it, it appears.

I was under the impression that using GPL-incompatible libraries in GPL code was fine... Until I read about it some more. Found some interesting things: "Can I write free software that uses non-free libraries?" and "What legal issues come up if I use GPL-incompatible libraries with GPL software?" from the GNU GPL FAQ talk about this. Looks like it's actually only possible if you add an exception to the license. Well, not you, only the copyright holder can do it, i.e. Raven. So have fun trying to add Oculus Rift support. Looks like the GPL sucks more than I thought. Also of note: "Can I apply the GPL when writing a plug-in for a non-free program?" when dynamically linking a plug-in that shares data structures with the program then the result is a single program with the GPL applying to all of it. So we can't stay backwards compatible because we may only support mods released under a GPL-compatible license? Great. Despite all this, according to "Who has the power to enforce the GPL?" only Raven has the power to enforce the GPL. I don't think they care too much. So you'll likely be able to get away with violations. As will every modder basing closed-source modifications on the GPL modbase.

What is this about stuff not being GPL compatible? We're not using JKA in Xvid, we're using Xvid in JKA. (Well, we're not, but we're talking about it.) There's nothing wrong with using a closed source library in a GPL project.