I used to like using the replace function to exchange them for nodraw in one sweep. But then I thought "What happens if one of those dev faces was visible to players, and now I am making them see the void, or enabling them to see through some brushes?" Now, I prefer to keep the dev textures, letting the compile process remove them for me. If I have done all my detailing and brushwork right, then I should have no dev faces in the finished BSP. If there are remaining dev faces, though, then as you said, Crash, it's probable I have missed some faces. But it could also reveal more serious problems.
I like the cleverness of the system, in the way it removes faces that do not need to be drawn during the compile, such as faces in the void, or touching faces. I have also grown to prefer seeing textured brushes on the outside of my map, as opposed to nodraw, because I find it easier to tell them apart.
I wonder if I would be able to do what I suggest by decompiling the BSP in to a new VMF, loading it up in Hammer, and checking the materials browser. It would be more convenient if Hammer could accommodate my desire, but I rarely output any finished work anyway!
I like the cleverness of the system, in the way it removes faces that do not need to be drawn during the compile, such as faces in the void, or touching faces. I have also grown to prefer seeing textured brushes on the outside of my map, as opposed to nodraw, because I find it easier to tell them apart.
I wonder if I would be able to do what I suggest by decompiling the BSP in to a new VMF, loading it up in Hammer, and checking the materials browser. It would be more convenient if Hammer could accommodate my desire, but I rarely output any finished work anyway!
