Posts by SnipaMasta

  • idiots arguing

    Of course, we shouldn't use it on the things that are in the player's face 100% of the time, we should use it on things like shoving normal maps and coloured spec. maps on things the player runs past. I've been such a fool.

  • idiots arguing

    Quote

    I've never once played CS:S and thought my gun was blurry/ugly so I don't think your assertion that it's very noticeable holds. It is noticeable if you specifically look for it

    Well I do notice it so my assertion still holds, you just disagree with it. You could say "it only looks blurry if you look at it" about practically anything - it's noticable because the gun texture looks blurry. That's that.

    Quote

    Also remember how old CSS is now these days, its what 2-3 years old now?

    2 and about 10 months, I think. Assuming it was December. I'm not complaining about Valve if that's what you're getting at - I'm saying that since they were using some 2048X1024's in a game that old it's common sense that it would be used more now. Considering how most/a lot more people are running on 256mb cards now.

    Quote

    Agreed, Defrag. And lol @ 'completely prove you wrong'The CSS textures are fine for what they do - the next time you notice yourself, in the middle of a game (with other people in the server..), staring at the gun I will give you a cookie. It's even a rifle that you spend 50% of your time using it looking through the scope, and 40% of the time with your pistol out after quick-switching. It's all relative, frankly, and if you can't make important decisions based on the gameplay potential then, unlucky.

    More to the point the gs3g1 is SMALLER than the AWP and they still needed to use a larger map. Wasteful in my opinion, and unprofessional.

    lol@quite clear proof?

    I think saying that "oh you don't spend your time looking at it" is rather flawed - whether it's the focus of the entire game or not blurry textures are quite noticable and I'm certainly not the only person to think this - pop over to a custom site like CDG or FPS Banana and start claiming that the default textures are defined enough. The response won't exactly be positive. The AWP isn't the only weapon, I was using it as an example. If you can't realize that taking screenshots of every single weapon would be a complete bore for me, not to mention a waste of time, then unlucky.

    Also, the AWP looks horrible, and the G3 looks nice. Not unprofessional at all. The G3 and Sig550 were improved since their original versions. This image of the M4 also shows how blurry the textures are - take, for example, the back of the carrying handle. I mean, if you're saying that's fine then I don't know what recent games you're playing.

  • idiots arguing

    Quote from Rick_D

    the CSS guns don't look blurry - that's ridiculous - the quality of the CSS stuff is superb.

    Sorry to completely prove you wrong on that

    Red highlights areas where there is bugger all definition in the texture. The G3SG1 is at 2048X1024, the AWP is 1024X512. The difference is very noticable.

    Bitmap, you used a texture size that's been used in games over 2 years old. You don't need to scale it down at all, although it'd be easier on a single 204X1024 next time.

  • idiots arguing

    Detail on something that's constantly in the players face and is the centre point of the game is kind of important. Take a look at default weapons in games compared to custom made content - custom stuff generally has far sharper textures that are quite noticable ingame simply because they use high resolution textures. The default CSS assault rifles are mapped at 1024X512, and have extremely good UV packing - and look how blurry guns like the M4 look! The AWP's even worse! However, the Sig550 and the G3SG1 both use 2048X1024 textures which is why they don't look so awful and blurry ingame.

  • idiots arguing

    Quote from Pericolos0

    uhh if its a viewmodel, theres no way you need that much texture space, your model will never take up that ammount of pixels on your screen. Not even in the most nextgenerationestest of games! A waste of memory is still a waste of memory eventhough there is more available now. Looks good tho

    As models get more detailed - more texture space is used. Whether it takes up more space on the screen is pretty irrelevant - more separate geometry = more UV space needed. Not to mention a 1024 map spread across a view model model is still very blurry.

  • idiots arguing

    Quote from Rick_D

    Not trying to be picky, texture looks really nice and crisp, just I've noticed a lot of mods and custom content creators are using massive texture sizes "just for the fuck of it"

    Or because it's not 2003 anymore.

  • The random model thread!

    I've done these. I'll try doing the others tonight.

  • The random model thread!

    The alternative was just a 512 and I don't see how it would fit on without being blurry. I'm getting conflicting opinions on the grungyness, though - out of curiosity have the people saying it's too grungy played Kingpin? I thought it kind of fits with how dirty and run down the environments were.