Battlezone Forums

Full size image: http://www.moddb.com/mods/qf2-essence-t ... -shape-now


BZ3 yet?

bigbadbogie wrote:BZ3 yet?

Nope.

Honestly artistically it still feels like Minecraft with a realism texture pack.

I also don't quite get why everyone needs to modify the shell so significantly. FE didn't and it certainly could have. It just makes integration and normalization even harder down the road.

What do suggest I do differently then?

bigbadbogie wrote:What do suggest I do differently then?

Oh no, you're fine with what you've done. I think the artistic thing is an engine limitation you can't do much about. HD textures look nice and all but without proper depth of field, lighting, etc, it goes from realistic to surrealistic.

The shell thing is a personal gripe of mine, but if you keep it in a folder that if removed, the shell reverts, I've honestly got nothing to even gripe about.

I think comparing any mod to the idea of a BZ3 is a bad idea though. In 2000 parlance, FE was an Expansion Pack in design (despite being a mod), but in 2013 parlance, FE was BZ3, and then things get muddled because we cross into the 'numberless sequel' zone as the mods get more parallel or contained (FS, FS2, QF, QF2).

I think two things:

1: Those trails could use some texture to them, something maybe slightly cloudy, but still mostly opaque.

2: The QF symbol used by all the units wire frames, seems redundantly blah. I think some cool unit wireframe would look better, something different per unit.

Righto then. I've gone to great lengths to stretch pretty much every engine limitation imaginable with this mod. It's never going to be perfect - but I think it's quite decent considering it is using an engine that was made last century.

I don't mean an actual 'BZ3'. The connotations of the term 'BZ3' are what I'm after - basically a Battlezone game/mod/whatever with modern level graphics. QF2 will never be a real (or 'commercial') BZ3 but as it is likely that nothing else ever will either, I think it's my right to try and fill that void - repeatedly.

@GBD - Those trails are textured, but you can't really see it unless you're up close. And that's not a wireframe. QF2 units don't use wireframes. That's just a spinning logo. I'll probably get rid of it before release. It's just acting as a watermark for screenshots.

i'm thinking BZ^^3 (BZ-cubed). that looks really nice, BBB (B^^3)

QF2 units don't use wireframes.

A genius omission, in my opinion there only there to let you know what vehicle you are in and frankly if you can't remember that then you probably shouldn't be driving Wireframes are very hard to do (to get them looking look good or right) particularly if its a fairly complex model.

You just need to render a wireframe for only your visible faces...
Most people mess this up and render the whole wireframe for every face and get a mess of lines.

Also, you don't need to actually do a wireframe, you can do something else. The Hadeans use an untextured render.
You could use a symbology or other representation of the model or just some interesting render, like a translucent glass model on a pad.

My main artistic issue is that you went beyond the supported range of the engine in some ways and as a result it just looks "wrong", like an uncanny valley for environments.

any plans for the chat and scores parts of the hud?

Red Devil wrote:any plans for the chat and scores parts of the hud?

BBB normally doesn't touch MP, though he might this time.

i'll be encouraging him to

General BlackDragon wrote:i'll be encouraging him to

There are some other options too if he was easier to talk to (IM).

I didn't bother with wireframes because I think my time could be better allocated. That simple.


""My main artistic issue is that you went beyond the supported range of the engine in some ways and as a result it just looks "wrong", like an uncanny valley for environments.""

I don't know what constitutes 'wrong'. It's a video game. It can look any way at all and still be 'right' in my book.

bigbadbogie wrote:I don't know what constitutes 'wrong'. It's a video game. It can look any way at all and still be 'right' in my book.

I was quite specific in my definition of "wrong". You do know what the Uncanny Valley is right? I invoked its name because the principles behind it soundly apply in this case.