New Map System Revealed

Status
Not open for further replies.
New Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2009
Messages
223
Best answers
0
Wow as much time to wait?!
Thank's Epedemic_Optikz.
 
Last edited:
Freelance Mappzor
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
17,065
Best answers
0
Wow as much time to wait?!
Thank's Epedemic_Optikz.
That was a joke. Since the superstition of the Mayan callendar says the world will end that day ^^
 
ESF Coder
🌠 Staff
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
585
Best answers
0
That was a joke. Since the superstition of the Mayan callendar says the world will end that day ^^
wrong -.-
please tell the truth...and not the 2012 theory which gets proposed everywhere...

tha maya calendar doesn't end 2012. its like the 31.12.1999 where the new millenium started( 1.1.2000 ). the same is with this maya thing. its just a new period
 
Only go forward sideways
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
🎈 Advanced
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
482
Best answers
0
-

Regarding the map system, it has been mentioned that the map area can be virtually unlimited but pointless in doing so because it would take too long to get anywhere. My question is, is there a way to loop the map? like fly in 1 direction continously and it would be like circling the globe? that would make it rly cool for a sort of single player game mode with all the DBZ story campaign. You also said that all the map is prerendered basically, so prolly this would affect the loading time of the game but it would be worth it if u ask me :smile:
 
Freelance Mappzor
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
17,065
Best answers
0
No. And while the space is virtually unlimited the map area itself is not.

The map is as big as the mapper makes it. But going over certain limits would cause lag or maybe even lockdown. So while you can fly in one direction for 3 hours if you want, youll be doing so in a terrainless empty space, because the terrain has limits that the mapper has to keep.

Though to prevent people from falling off of the edge of the terrain, we seal in the players by using special barrier like textures, that only apear when close to them. So it looks like a shield of sorts when you get next to the map border.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
3,913
Best answers
0
im curious, does this prettymuch lock out destructable terrain?

not that it was ever really succesfully used. lol
 
Freelance Mappzor
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
17,065
Best answers
0
Id say that if the coders really wanted to bother writing something like that in it would require a major overhaul on the entire map system.

So yea i think you can rule that out. Ofcourse THX to bullet three are certain possibilities with using the env_model entity >=]
 
Project Manager
🌠 Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
1,729
Best answers
0
Id say that if the coders really wanted to bother writing something like that in it would require a major overhaul on the entire map system.

So yea i think you can rule that out. Ofcourse THX to bullet three are certain possibilities with using the env_model entity >=]
actually it wouldn't be so hard for us to do it, but the thing is that we would lose probably most of the users on the "old-pc" end since destructable terrain cannot be something optional, and doing it in a way that you don't lose too many FPS means doing it with current middleware, e.g. ApaX and PhysX making, giving the ATI guys a kick in the nuts, not that I would care too much about ATI anyways for reasons stated various times and other coders will know. Just saying it could be done, but for a price.
 
Everyone's Favorite Weirdo :D
🌠 Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 31, 2001
Messages
1,423
Best answers
0
now.. do you guys really want that price is the question.. Nvideo = perfection... ATI = epic loss... what that means is.. anyone running an ATI and we do this destructable terrain, that means, you cant play ESF.
 
Only go forward sideways
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
🎈 Advanced
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
482
Best answers
0
-

Well i would love it xD but then again ive got nvidia so cant really talk. And i said it before and ill say it once more, you can never take benchmarks between ATI and Nvidia seriously because of Nvidia's physx. Physx is a major thing in games that has nothing to do with the comparison of performance. I would gladly give up on some of the FPS in a game over more realistic movements of objects for more immersion.

Regarding my previous question i dont think it has been answered. Is it possible or not to loop the map? Think budokai 3 type of free roaming. I understand that the map has limits but is it possible to, for example turn those map barriers into a sort of portal that when u go through it it re-runs the map from the other end. I dont know if im being understood here lol. Im saying like lets say u keep flying towards the left hand side of the map till u reach the barrier and as u go through u find urself in the right hand side of the map that way it seems like u fly continously but u're just cycling the map over and over again.
 
Last edited:
Freelance Mappzor
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
17,065
Best answers
0
Probably would be possible if we got a portal like teleport system on a major scale.

Is it worth it?

Defenitly not. Our maps are HUGE so the need for such a system simply doesnt exist.
 
NOT IN THE MANGA™
★ Black Lounger ★
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
3,276
Best answers
0
the thing is that we would lose probably most of the users on the "old-pc" end since destructable terrain cannot be something optional
You already overdid it with SSE2, which isn't optional, so I don't really see why you wouldn't be adding something as cool as that.
 
Freelance Mappzor
✔️ HL Verified
🚂 Steam Linked
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
17,065
Best answers
0
Well SSE2 is old. 6 years is enough to make a super computer crappy in comparison. Besides if you have even a remotely good CPU then you have SSE2 support already.

Destructable terrain on the other hand looses every person who has a ATI card. Doesnt matter weather its new or old. It simply wont be able to play if you nave an ATI. Thats the different. Having a ****ty comp by todays standards or having a GFX card thats from the wrong manufacturer even if it performs better than the majority of users have.
 
New Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2010
Messages
26
Best answers
0
Well if you think that destructable terrain is a good thing for the game and you dont want to loose ATI users, then you should make the destructable terrain in a patch or something else.
So if someone want to enjoy seeing destructable terrain, he will need to have an nvidia card and then install the patch.
otherwise if he is an ATI user he can just play the game with no patches.
 
New Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 29, 2003
Messages
4,765
Best answers
0
Patching wouldn't work. Destructible terrain would become part of the gameplay, and you can't just patch gameplay issues for one side of the people and not the other side.

That said, why would one need PhsyX? Destructible terrain has been around far before PhysX ever existed. Hell, one of the first games that had a good degree of terrain destruction was Red Faction, a game released on the PS2 (mind you that the PS2 has a measly 300mhz processor). Even now, there are stand alone games that allow for completely changeable terrain without using something like PhysX.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N30GvYz7MXk Miner Wars doesn't use PhysX at all, but allows you to 'dig' tunnels through asteroids (and no, they aren't pre-determined tunnels, they are completely 'customizable') or even blow entire parts of an asteroid (again, not pre-determined, you choose what you want to blow off)

PhysX just allowed for more complex calculations without needing a really powerful CPU. Before PhysX was around, physics calculations were mostly done by the CPU and weren't that intensive. Just have less physics going on, something exploding doesn't need to burst in a million pieces, a dozen pieces could be enough. 95% of todays games don't even use PhysX: Crysis, Half Life 2 both contain VERY advanced physics systems, both don't use PhysX to calculate it.

Even if you MUST use PhysX, when ATI people would still be able to get a standalone PhysX card (if they are still being sold? Or did nVidia buy the entire company?). Though I think you could perfectly make a believable destruction of terrain without using PhysX at all. Just be careful with the amount of debris you create when letting something be destructed. A glass window pane, being destroyed and falling apart in 5 smaller pieces looks somewhat believable (more so than no destruction at all), but wouldn't tax your system that much.

@DT: Though I normally would agree with you that nVidia is far superior to ATI. I can't say I currently agree. ATI has always been the winner in the price/performance ratio, being much cheaper (though, in general, nVidia has always been the more powerful card at a much higher price), ATI's current flagship is more powerful than nVidia's (not too sure though, has the 480 already been released?) and ATI was the first to release a card with DX11.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top