CP Mangy's Artpass Thread

cyked

L3: Member
Dec 18, 2009
132
89
C WAS NOT A CIRCLE BEFORE AND YOU MADE IT A CIRCLE! DQ DQ DQ DQ! IM CALLING ZEEEE PEEEE QUEEEEEEE! /jokes

I will probably do a paintover of an idea i have after i move in to college this week.
 

Beamos

L2: Junior Member
May 14, 2008
80
43
Oh no, Mangy!

I was doing something similar for some of my side passages :(

But really, it's looking great ;3 We need some before/after pictures.
 

grazr

Old Man Mutant Ninja Turtle
aa
Mar 4, 2008
5,441
3,814
You've pulled off curvey spytech quite well but those red support beams need to either be flat at the top (and/or slanted to one side) or require more curve detail.

Your steps too. It's like you want to add more detail but are afraid it will be too much on resources. Trust that Source can handle a couple more triangles for some smoother step curves.
 

Beamos

L2: Junior Member
May 14, 2008
80
43
I'm sure there will be plenty of overlap. Don't be afraid enough to drop a vision due to convergent creativity- see your plan through :)

Thanks for the encouragement; luckily the difference in design is large enough to prevent any issue... :blush:
 

Draco18s

L9: Fashionable Member
Sep 19, 2009
622
136
You really only need "enough" sides to get the point across.

Though if you want to up the smoothness, you could turn them into low-factor displacements (4 disp quads take the same amount of rendering as 1 brush quad) though they use more complex collision physics.

Chet Faliszek to Left 4 Dead Mappers said:
From two different sources.

Scott:
We tend to use displacements because we can give the environments a more organic look while still having the benefits of using BSP, such as lighting them via light maps, blended textures, quick iteration, etc. Rooftops can sag, streets can be bumpy, and so on, which helps each structure look unique and natural. Poly for poly, displacements render faster than BSP, but they have their own tradeoffs, including more expensive collision.

Matt followed up with:
Last I checked with a rendering programmer, 4 disp quads equal 1 normal bsp quad. Since you cant tessellate < 4 per face, it's a wash as long as you are only drawing the faces that you need to.

You could probably get away by using half as many brushes horizontally and having each dispacement be 2 (or 4) steps. Would give you twice the resolution in your curve, use one quarter (or one eighth) as may brushes as you'd be using one (displaced) face for both the rise and the run.
 
Last edited:

IrishTaxIDriver

L6: Sharp Member
Sep 27, 2008
271
149
Can you illustrate what you mean here?

artpass_mangyg0001_2.jpg

He means you should subdivide the arch with the light again, which I think would improve the area a lot. My eye is being drawn to them because of the lighting and they look blocky.

Also I'd say the rooms a little too tan. I think you should work out a new ceiling to get a little more definition into the room.

One last thing, lighting! Spytech stuff is usually pretty bright and sterile looking. Bump up your lights intensities by a couple hundo's and increase the angles on your light_spots.

Besides those things, I think you've got a great start. Looking forward to seeing the final.
 
Last edited:

Gerbil

aa
Feb 6, 2009
573
846
You better as hell make a cool map with the same theme to make up for this ]:<

good luck with your schoolwork!
 

Beamos

L2: Junior Member
May 14, 2008
80
43
Mangyyyy :(
 

FreeLance_FoX

L6: Sharp Member
Sep 6, 2008
353
173
Release as is and win anyway?

:p
 

lana

Currently On: ?????
aa
Sep 28, 2009
3,075
2,778
It was a distraction! He wanted us to forget about how he's good at mapping!
 

Goombac

L4: Comfortable Member
Mar 27, 2010
172
84
C looks amazing IMO. Although I can hardly recognize it. But maybe that's a good thing?