Battlezone Forums

Using the new makemap utility, and I like it very much. I was wondering though, what the other 16 bit and 32 bit format are for, do maps made with these switches have a specific function in the engine or do they just provide better color depth? (I have only used the -565 switch so far).

The main distinction is between opaque (model) and translucent (interface and effect) textures. Until recently, Battlezone hardware rendering supported only 8-bit opaque textures and A4R4G4B4 translucent textures. I added tool and engine support for the other formats so I could make "high quality" texture packs. It turns out that 16-bit was be the best compromise between size and quality; it looks far better than 8-bit and almost as good as 32-bit. I haven't tried any kind of texture compression but the textures are small enough that the size reduction isn't worth the reduction in quality. (Battlezone textures are at most 256x256 and each unit or building uses one or at most two.)

SW: all 8-bit (obviously)
HW8(S/L): 8-bit opaque, 8-bit additive (looks weird)
HW16(S/L): 8-bit opaque, A4R4G4B4 translucent
HW16Q: R5G6B5 opaque, A4R4G4B4 translucent
HW32Q: X8R8G8B8 opaque, A8R8G8B8 translucent

Ok, I have been experimenting some with these, and the 32 bit alphas are great, check out my 16 bit texture post at battlezone1.org for details.

Can we apply textures larger than 256x256 to units and buildings? This would allow some pretty sharp tank detailing.

Larger textures should work though I can't absolutely guarantee it. Higher-detail textures would also stand out relative to other textures in the game, and would also take up a lot more space. (I'm using uncompressed texture formats so a 1024x1024 16-bit texture would be 2 megabytes.)

It does look good, almost too good.

why is there a space ship in orbit?

If it's the 1960s, get the Enterprise right.

-- GSH

OH lol, kool. Viewing the image by itself shows the whole thing.

The forum cut off to just a small sliver of the saucer section showing.

Nice. This confirms that large textures actually work.

256x256 was typical of the era due to memory limitations and also turned out to be maximum texture size supported by the popular 3Dfx Voodoo graphics card series. The engine didn't otherwise restrict texture size, though. (Well, the file format limits the texture to a width of 65535 since it packs it into an unsigned 16-bit integer but that's not much of a restriction.)

I can't see the posted pic, but i tried a 384x512 32bit alpha masked texture of the milky way and 1.5 choked on it. So maybe nonsquare textures are not working? I will try a 512x512 and see if 1.5 likes that. the 256x256 milky way looks pretty good, but with all the star haze, 512 (at least high) would be better.

Most hardware requires that mipmapped textures have power-of-two dimensions. A 256x512 texture should work but a 384x512 would only work if it were not mipmapped (usually a UI texture).

ah, gotcha.

512x512 works good, but oddly, the galaxy just didn't look that much better than the 256x256 version. I'll keep the smaller one, or maybe replace it with another nebula.

Ideally one texture pixel corresponds to one screen pixel. If the texture is a lot larger, the renderer will use a smaller mipmap to get closer to 1:1.

so, this means that its possible now to replace the stock models for High poly ones and maybe particles?

Do want