Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - argoon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
id Tech 4 Discussion / Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« on: November 15, 2017, 12:33:05 PM »
So why don't you GFY and stop advising people on using idTech 4 for commercial production?!

Quote from: Argoon
... i also agree that idtech 4 has it stands is not really the best choice for comercial games...

You are not only a guy with a really poisonous personality you also have reading disabilities...

id Tech 4 Discussion / Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« on: November 15, 2017, 08:29:27 AM »

I don't care what anyone is using for development, projects, design, rocket science or even quantum physics in their spare time. It's their right to be stuck in the past, use ancient or modern technology or anything they want. People are still using Quake and Doom deriative engines!

Exactly, that is something guys like Motorsep don't understand.

I don't think anyone is slagging whatever people do as a hobby for fun, people can even use Torque or GameGuru if they want.  The implication is concerning "serious" development and the OP was talking about commercial use.  There's no need to be defensive about what at this point are facts, not opinions.

Motorsep has called on people including me for still using this engine, going has far has to say that he is here to remind us everyday that we are wasting our time.

Yes the op was talking about comercial usage and i among others explained why the engine saw few comercial realeases, and i also agree that idtech 4 has it stands is not really the best choice for comercial games but i don't care if anyone wants to make a comercial game with it, i will certainly not call those people stupid or stuck in the past.

TDM is certainly an impressive achievement in many ways but the fact remains that the engine still can't handle wide-open detailed worlds (even by 2004 standards) and modern polycounts, and this isn't going to change.  Much of the content is on-par with mobile gaming by now, I would say.  This is mainly due to lack of "real" LOD, so I don't mean swapping models off the hard drive but actually having the stages in the vertex buffer.  Every time some new trick is implemented like fake-PBR or some post-processing shiny or soft shadows, the performance hit and possible affect on minimum system requirements is usually intolerably bad and not worth it compared to what engines like UE4 can already do with the same hardware and much higher framerates, with a LOT more content getting chewed and digested.  This is simply fact.

A Commodore64 emulator written in Java that requires 8GB RAM and quad-core CPU at minimum before it will even show the splash screen, bogged down by layers upon layers of abstraction, does not impress anyone.  And yes, they do exist.

TDM is indeed a great achievement and that is in part the way that community is very mature and focused and because idtech 4 was fortunately open enough for their needs.

Yes idtech 4 has no real "wide-open detailed worlds" and that is a petty but in now way does it make the engine useless, if it can't do that, don't make a game with it that needs that capability, play with the engine strengths not weaknesses and if your game really needs that (and you don't have the ability to change the engine internals) then go to other engine, i'm not saying that to attack you in any way, i would do the same if my current idea needed wide open spaces fortunately it does not.

No one is claiming idtech 4 can do everything what UE4 can, no one is claiming idtech 4 is easier to use than UE4, for the contrary, i'm just saying idtech 4 is not a useless engine, it has it's place and it's charm, i specially like the cleanness, sharpness of its render, contrary to UE4 and Unity, but that is me, is just a preference.

Quote from: Motorsep
I am confident that you won't be able to make anything but Doom 3 mod that plays and feels exactly like Doom3 (or worse)

And this is why this guy should not be taken seriously, there's many examples of idtech 4 games and mods that feel very different to Doom 3.

Quote from: Motorsep
Even recent attempt to integrate Vulkan into BFG engine stopped when the author dug deeper and discovered there half of the engine needs to be refactored.

Of course Sherlock ANY engine will need heavy refactoring for Vulkan, is a total different way to code renders and shader's, this new API needs engines to be made from the ground up with it in mind, any engine slapping a Vulkan render onto their old architecture will never rip it real benefits, this came from the mouth of Croteam engine developer Alan Ladavac and the Khronos Group it self. Btw, i would love to read the post, where the idSoftware employee working on this Vulkan render, claimed he stooped because he didn't knew needed to change the engine to much for it, i pretty much doubt that a professional engine developer/ coder would be so ignorant about the engine he worked before (unless is a totally new employee that only worked with idtech 5 and 6).   

id Tech 4 Discussion / Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« on: November 14, 2017, 03:40:05 PM »
motorsep's right, doom 3 tech isn't very flexible.  it does what id designed it to do very, very well.  TDM plays on it's strengths very well.  TDM has also been in development for about 14 years.  With previous id game GPL releases there were several games based on the GPL engine released within ~5 years of release. 

As for a specific reason D3 tech hasn't been popular is, to me at least, a very simple reason: only the engine is GPL, no weapon, AI, shaders, etc. available.   For Quad Cowboy the hardest part was writing all those basics.  Wolf3D, Doom, Q1, Q2, Q3A, RTCW, etc. all have everything you need to make a game except assets where as Doom 3 is lacking, basically, the whole gameplay part of the game: someone could make a clone of one of those games in months with just asset work.  Doom 3 requires more code to get to the point where you can have some gameplay going.

In arguments like this the irony is lost by almost everyone: epic/valve fans for decades claimed id was nothing but an engine tech company that made games to show off tech.  The reality became that valve & epic are engine tech companies & id is still a game company but nobody's hollering it off the roof tops like when id made mega-hit game after game decades ago.  :)

Motorsep is not "right" is has real arguments, and i agree with some of them, but his way of presenting them and the way he pretty much calls anyone using idtech 4 has a dumb person, even ones making mods or just fan's of id engines, removes from him any reason whatsoever.
Yes the vanilla idtech 4 is to old, that is why i'm using fhdoom, yes the original tools are old, not artist friendly and not very stable, but you have better alternatives for some of them and they do their job well. Yes the engine lacks many modern features like open spaces and stuff, but for corridor shooters is just fine. What i see here is a guy that instead of going to other engines if idtech 4 is not right for him or instead of trying to work with what he has, like some of the others that already finished mods and games in idtech 4, he complains and worse he actively tries to make other people stop using the engine (to the detriment of his own BFG modification), and that is Motorsep, if you condone this kind of behavior i don't. I don't mind people complaining about idtech 4, i also complain about it, what i don't agree are those that complain and instead of helping improving the engine/tool/documentation instead go out of their way to kill it. 

Second the TDM mod has indeed been worked for 14 years or so but these new engine features are not something that took 14 years to make, it was a resent addition to the engine because they add new coders and they also add other idtech 4 modifications and i stress MODIFICATIONS from hum they got some of their tech and you don't see them complaining and lamenting they are stuck with a "garbage engine".

Yes only the engine is GPL the game assets are not, but even if they were i'm pretty sure that would not matter, many would still complain the engine lacks many of the capabilities of modern engines, and so would not use it, hell even Cryengine 5 a modern engine with state of the art tech is full of "motorseps" on their forum, grass is always green on the other side.

And motorsep i've used Unity 4 for many of my exploits and even played with UE4 and Cryengine a little but in the end i prefer using this garbage engine, but that's me.     

id Tech 4 Discussion / Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« on: November 13, 2017, 06:24:22 PM »
"argoon" stands for "I like pointless arguments" - I don't see any track record of you making games. I've worked with idTech 1, idTech 4 and UE4 and I can tell you that id tech 4 is not malleable and is not versatile, it' was made to run Doom 3 and that's it. If you want to make something else you have to essentially rewrite it. Even recent attempt to integrate Vulkan into BFG engine stopped when the author dug deeper and discovered there half of the engine needs to be refactored.

The reason idTech 4 isn't used is simple - it's not flexible, it's limited and it's old. Once can make 3 games using UE4 before you make one game using idTech 4. Even Splash Damage ditched it at the end.

Tell me mister "I've made one game now my opinion matters more than yours", if the engine is not versatile why are people working on different versions of it, including rewriting it into a completely different programming language, some guy even made a fantastic VR version with it, etc? The TDM team has even announced they implemented multi-core support, OpenGL 3.2, soft stencil shadows and many more features, in their spare time, you on other end have nothing to show on your awesome UE4 game.

No I've never made a game nor mod and that is because i really never add that intention and had other things to do, for me this is a hobby period, but that in no way invalidates my point, at lest i don't waist my time complaining and hating on a engine forum i don't like, contrary to you.

id Tech 4 Discussion / Re: Why so few uses of Id Tech 4?
« on: November 13, 2017, 01:12:49 PM »
You guys do love to complain, specially motorsep that loves this kind of threads, any opportunity to shit on idtech 4 and glorify UE4 and Unity is a most for him.

Why so few uses of idTech 4 by comercial AAA studios? Id contrary to Epic is not focused in the engine business so they didn't tried to sell the engine that strongly, even tho id sold licenses to their engines, they didn't worked on the tools to make them very easy for other developers, they expected them to get used to the tools or make their own or not bother at all and many didn't so idtech 4 saw few uses from outside teams.
Id tech 4 also came about when the engine market was imploding, everyone and their mother add now access, almost for free, for engines that were prohibitively expensive before. Engine tools also improved to the point that now, engines like idtech 4 that don't hold your hand, are not very noob friendly and don't make a single developer a power house are deamed has inferior, etc.

Taking that out, Idtech 4 is a very versatile engine and very maliable, to do big changes it does require developers with experience in c++ and OpenGL, but if you don't try to get to much outside of what the engine already provides, you can do pretty awesome stuff with it, motorsep only likes to mention comercial games, but there's some really cool mods made with idtech4, some with very unique stuff on them.

And Man Frictional games has made a awesome game (penumbra) with a engine (HPL 1) much more restrictive and inferior to even vanilla idtech 4 even the tools were inferior to those of idtech 4, the problem is not the engine is the ones using it. 

id Tech 4 Models and Animations / Re: Create new af decl
« on: November 09, 2017, 10:14:20 AM »
I don't know if his a bug or why it crash's, but about doing af any other way, what you can do is, instead of clicking "New" af file, just open a existent generic af file, like the one below and change it to reflect your new af, in that way you don't need to ever click "New".

Code: [Select]
File generated by the Articulated Figure Editor
Do not edit this file but launch the game and type 'editAFs' on the console.

articulatedFigure default {

settings {
model ""
skin ""
friction 0.0099999998, 0.0099999998, 0.8000000119, 0.5
suspendSpeed 20, 30, 40, 60
noMoveTime 1
noMoveTranslation 10
noMoveRotation 10
maxMoveTime -1
totalMass -1
contents corpse
clipMask solid, corpse
selfCollision 1

body "body" {
joint "origin"
mod orientation
model box( ( -10, -10, -10 ), ( 10, 10, 10 ) )
origin ( 0, 0, 0 )
density 0.200000003
friction 0.0099999998, 0.0099999998, 0.8000000119
contents corpse
clipMask solid, corpse
selfCollision 1
containedJoints "*origin"


id Tech 4 Mods / Re: Doom 3 BFG Edition sounds
« on: November 05, 2017, 02:29:57 PM »

I'm trying to replace sounds in the BFG edition using RBDoom but nothing seems to works.
The files I trying to replace are voice files. (eg: sound\xian\creepy\vocal_fx\voc_comeonhurry_03.wav, vo\alpha_labs\sarge_radio1.wav)
I'm already using the two parameters (+set fs_resourceLoadPriority 0 +set fs_game @HUN) but the original files are played everywhere.

Please, help me.

I don't work with the BFG engine but in principle, it work's the same has vanilla idtech 4, so lets see, If the original sound files are playing, that means the engine is not finding your replacement files and so defaulting to the original ones, this can be a clue. Are you sure the engine is finding your mod folder? The @ on the name could be causing trouble? See if there's some obvious error on the console. Have you modified the original files path or files names in any way? If yes have you modified the sound shaders for those sounds so the engine knows where the new files are? If you don't know idtech 4 has the ability to play sounds with no sound shaders defined but Doom 3 afaik uses sound shaders for pretty much everything.

Hope this helps.

what format are your wav's in, bfg is really picky about that. 22,050k 16 bit mono wav's work.

I don't know about BFG but past idtech 4 can play 11025, 22050 or 44100 Hz  wav's or ogg's just fine, i'm even playing 227kbps 32 bits 44100 Hz ogg's on fhDoom engine here no problem.   

After many hours of trying to prevent a sound from playing over itself, when pressing a key continuously and inside the player think loop, after going trough the engine code i found some ways to solve this.


Code: [Select]
const idSoundShader *sound = declManager->FindSound( "sound_name" );
// this above is not really necessary you can do the following instead if you want.
//...StartSound( declManager->FindSound( "sound_name" ), SND_CHANNEL_BODY );

// get the sound emitter (speaker) binded to the ingame entity, btw i tried to get a emitter directly from the master entity but it didn't found any and crashed the engine, why i don't know,
// is strange because afaik all entities can be "speakers"...
idSoundEmitter *emit = gameLocal.FindEntity( "some_speaker" )->GetSoundEmitter( );
if (!( emit->CurrentlyPlaying( ) )) // if sound is not playing
        // play it
emit->StartSound( sound, SND_CHANNEL_BODY);


Code: [Select]
const idSoundShader *sound = declManager->FindSound( "sound_name" );
idSoundEmitter *emit = gameLocal.FindEntity( "some_speaker" )->GetSoundEmitter( );
emit->StartSound( sound, SND_CHANNEL_BODY, 0, SSF_PLAY_ONCE ); // SSF_PLAY_ONCE prevents the sound from playing again if it is already playing

Three:  If you don't create a emiter object like above and call the sound directly from a entity it also works. :)

Code: [Select]
const idSoundShader *sound = declManager->FindSound( "sound_name" );
Entity->StartSoundShader( sound, SND_CHANNEL_BODY, SSF_PLAY_ONCE, false, NULL );

That is one of the idtech 4 games with the most complex gui's I've seen, how the hell was he able to do that with so few GUI tutorials? He sure is a good coder no doubt about it, btw i would kill to know how he made the drag&drop functionality for his gui's, is one of the things that i would love to have.

why don't you get in touch with the dev and ask ?

I already did waiting on a reply.

That is one of the idtech 4 games with the most complex gui's I've seen, how the hell was he able to do that with so few GUI tutorials? He sure is a good coder no doubt about it, btw i would kill to know how he made the drag&drop functionality for his gui's, is one of the things that i would love to have.

id Tech 4 Engine Coding / Re: Getting var values from GUis?
« on: September 30, 2017, 09:04:47 AM »
I tought about your inventory mod and how to realize it.

Can you describe the main algorithm?

Let say:

1. Allocate window in pda.
2. Draw grid, split to units (cells).
3. Fill cells with items indexes based on some items inv. parms.
4. If receive onAction from window then convert mouse coords to cells.
5. Read index (item id) from target cell.
6. Do action.

Something like this?

First i must say i'm not using the Doom 3 pad gui script at all, mine is totally new, but is more or less that, I don't convert mouse coords to the cells location tho, I just set a "gui::Slot_id" var to a number corresponding to the array index that i know a priory that gui slot belongs to, in that way i can go directly to the array index instead of doing a search, I don't know if this is a good way to do it but it works. :)

id Tech 4 Engine Coding / Re: Getting var values from GUis?
« on: September 29, 2017, 07:46:50 AM »
Is official i'm dumb, it was right there in front of my face and i just didn't see it, to "get" values from gui's is just how to "set" values from gui's... just use - set "gui::varname" "value".  :-[

After doing that i was able to retrieve the value.

So this means all other vars in a gui file that don't use the gui::varname system are only visible in the gui scope. I mean they seem to be invisible to anyone outside the GUI file.


id Tech 4 Engine Coding / Re: Getting var values from GUis?
« on: September 29, 2017, 06:06:48 AM »
Well, we can easy get/set entity's keys.
Is it necessary to store info about ltem location in gui parm?

You are certainly right but I want to do this for performance reasons, reading strings from the entities def file and convert them to float for example,  is very performance heavy,  even id recommended not doing that to much, and I will have plenty of information on my inventory to be reading it all from the player def file, but if I have no choice then I will do that.

id Tech 4 Engine Coding / Re: Getting var values from GUis?
« on: September 29, 2017, 05:04:02 AM »
If you can't get the value how do you know you are actually setting it? Neither get or set state functions will inform you if are trying to read or write to a variable that can't be found or doesn't exist. Are you sure your variable can be found?

Hello Phrozo thanks for the reply,  I'm really not sure of anything, I'm still learning this stuff, because gui scripting tutorials are so scarse, I'm learning by trial and error, the only thing I'm sure of, is that when inspecting the gui in the visual studio watch window, I see that at lest the variable name I wrote in the gui desktop is there.

In the case of set, at lest for variables using "gui::varname" I know I'm setting the values from the c++ side  because they work, for other vars I never really tried, I've used namedEvents for the most part,  never tried to "get" a variable value back from the gui.

I also see that Id almost never used GetStateInt or others like it, so perhaps I'm just not thinking this in the right way, but for now I can't see how I could make what I'm trying to make without retrieving a var value from the gui.

Tell me, what would you do, if you add a inventory system where you have a grid based look and you assign different items to each slot (this part already works fine),  the "grid" in the c++ side is just a array of structs, with info like, slot ID, what item is in what slot, a icon path, a item counter per slot, etc, ( I use namedEvents and gui::varname,  to assign the right info to the right "slot"  in the gui file), but then you wanted to have the ability to click in a particular slot (onAction) and have that affect the right array index in the c++ side?

I know I can use set "some cmd name", by using the "handle single gui cmds" function from the player.cpp, like id did but for that, I think I need to do different cmd's to every item in the inventory, if they happen to be in different slots, for example, if I wanted to remove a key from slot 1 in the inventory,  I would need to do,  a remove key1 function,  do another function to remove key2 from slot 2, etc, instead of the a single -  set "removeItem"  function and have that remove the right item from the right gui slot and the right array index. Why I think so?  Because afaik there's no way to tell the c++ code in what window a particular onAction was triggered without using variables ?

Again I may be thinking all this wrong (most likely) and there's a simple way to do that I'm just ignorant about.

AFAIK this works like entity -> somegui -> parm. Then parm is for entity, not for gui itself (not sure about pda gui, perhaps the player is that entity).

That is right and for the pda gui the player is indeed the entity, the pda gui is called from the player def file, still don't know how this can help me, do I need to define the var with gui::varname for "get" like I do for set ? Not near my pc so can't test.

id Tech 4 Engine Coding / Getting var values from GUis?
« on: September 28, 2017, 04:07:16 PM »
Hello guys i know that i can set a variable value in a GUI from the engine code using for example somegui->SetStateInt("varName"); and it works fine, but i can't seem to do the inverse, get a value from a gui variable to the game code, i tried using the somegui->GetStateInt("varName"); but it returns zero every time, no matter to what value i set the GUI variable.

what i'm trying to do is create a grid based inventory system, and when i click in a "slot" i tell the c++ code what slot i interacted with.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19