Pages:1
ok How Many of you tried to open the UT2k4 maps in UnEd 3(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: DukeMaster
 ok I did , I did not think it would but I had to try 
Posted by: the G.o.a.T
It gives a few weird errors :/
Although I came close with one level.
Posted by: Kosh
yup. 
Posted by: Hsoolien
It's cause the Staic Mesh's are saved differently in 2004 form 2003. (It was mentioned on some other site) so the old Ed does not understand the package
Posted by: ]LoRE[
Static Meshes are highly overrated. I definitely like the new engine, but were I to map for it, I would place much more stress on brushwork (anyone here remember that word?) than they do in the retail game (thus far).
Posted by: the G.o.a.T
quote:
Originally posted by ]LoRE[
Static Meshes are highly overrated. I definitely like the new engine, but were I to map for it, I would place much more stress on brushwork (anyone here remember that word?) than they do in the retail game (thus far).
I think any UED-mapper will know that word 
And as with everything, static meshes have their advantages but also disadvantages.
Posted by: Hsoolien
Other then Lighting, Static meshes are superior in almost every way.
Posted by: ]LoRE[
How about Detail Texturing? I have seen infinite layers of detail textures in UT on brushes (the closer you get, the more detailed the surface appears), but no such effect on any static meshes.
Also, collision is not computed entirely correctly (as yet) against static meshes. Too often have I ended up "stuck" in one after death, due to ragdoll physics, but that never happens against any of the brushes/BSP in the map.
Posted by: Hsoolien
The detail of the texture is completely relevent to the texture, not that it's on a mesh
As for collision I agree their are issues with Karma and Static mesh colisions (Tried dropping the Bulldog in UT2003 in multiple levels and always got it stuck on staic meshes), however Ut2004 seems to not have this issue
Posted by: DukeMaster
quote:
Originally posted by the G.o.a.T
I think any UED-mapper will know that word
And as with everything, static meshes have their advantages but also disadvantages.
I agree
Posted by: smeerkat
quote:
Originally posted by ]LoRE[
Also, collision is not computed entirely correctly (as yet) against static meshes.
I've seen this UED3 tute on leveldesigner.com, apparently you can build a collision brush that surrounds the mesh. 
http://www.leveldesigner.com/index....tion=doc&ID=160
Posted by: ]LoRE[
quote:
Originally posted by Hsoolien
The detail of the texture is completely relevent to the texture, not that it's on a mesh
I'm not talking about the detail nor scale of a texture. I'm talking about detail textures, which are a completely different thing entirely. They quite simply do not exist on static meshes; they do on the polygons of brushes.
Also, the lighting of surfaces is far superior on brushes than on static meshes.
Smeerkat, that would only make the collision even less realistic.
|
|
