KungFuSquirrel

Got the basic structure of my Roundhouse level for TF2 sealed up and compiled after cleaning the hell out of my original blockout instances:

[attachment=0]arena_roundhouse_05-03.jpg[/attachment]

Well, uh, let's not get out of hand here, I made that comment more as light-hearted self-deprecating blame than anything else Hopefully that Ep2 issue gets sorted quickly. I'll pass along anything else I hear.

Oh, btw, regarding instances - there does appear to be a bug with tool brushes inside your instance (hint, areaportal, etc.) not behaving properly. They know about it, but it's a much lower priority fix than the Ep2 issues. Plan accordingly!

UED has never been BSP friendly, but beyond that...

It's so weird that UE3 has what may be the most powerful BSP editing tool, but it's lost behind by far the worst BSP interface. I recall it getting some upgrades between UT3 and UDK, but haven't messed with it much lately.

Anyway, let's not degrade this into the engine debate again since there's some useful information here pertaining to people wanting to get things done in Hammer.

Word is they've identified the black grid/model rendering issue - It only occurred in Ep2, not TF2 or DoD, which is probably why not everyone saw it. Not sure when a fix is coming, but should be soon.

Hopefully they'll also fix the arrow keys being broken when using the texture app tool. So frustrating being unable to change the camera angle whilst texturing.

Dude what. Hold down space and move with your mouse, much more accurate and faster

Z key to toggle freelook+mouse scroll movement! this also helps reduce the number of embarrassing cloned object farms if you happen to jump over to Radiant

sirocco: I wouldn't look at it that way. They didn't have to make new updated features publicly available for an old version of their toolset. Unfortunately, some things broke in the transition from internal dev to external release. They'll track them down and fix them, and you'll have a stronger Hammer than you did before out of the deal.

Bic: Instanced geometry is combined into the map at compile time, and leaks behave accordingly. If the instance covers the hole, the map will seal and compile. The point entity represents the world origin of the instanced .vmf file. If you rotate it, it can be tricky to line up correctly, but you'd also want to plan for that as you build it. Think of it like the pivot of a model. You want it at a point where it will line up with geometry. For a full stand-alone building or structure, you can just center it and call it good. For something that lines up with a wall, line it up flat against the appropriate axis. For the case of my circular structure, I built them so every instance is placed on the world origin and rotated in place, which allows all the edges to line up - I cut the edges off by creating a wedge of two brushes and carving the sides to create precise rotational seams. Fun trick I learned in UE3 from a friend at GBX that also works nicely here with the new update.

So some of the issues supposedly should have been addressed already (such as the missing grid issue), but if you're still having issues, list them in as much detail as you can give, with steps to repro (if applicable, some stuff is more readily apparent). I'm passing this link to the guy I've been talking to so he can help get the info collected. Rick Johnson has been doing a good job from what I've seen of scouring the issues posted to the Steam forums, and if you talk to anyone else with issues, make sure they get passed along to the appropriate place.

You've got an internal tool set on a specific range of hardware and software being merged into a huge install base, so unfortunately some stuff is going to slip through Hopefully can be addressed quickly. It really is a nice update when it's working!

Pogo, in the shot everything highlighted in yellow is part of an instance. Each instance is a single point entity (func_instance) that references a separate .vmf file. That file is then combined with your map at compile time. Any change you make to that .vmf file will automatically update every single use of it in your level. This is super useful for anything you want to repeat often ( you can instance a blockout version of a piece of geometry, for example, then detail it or change it without having to copy/paste every use of it ), or any complex geometry you want to throw into your level at crazy angles (you're rotating a point entity, not brushwork, so all precision from the original file is maintained).

Most of mine have been in the 4 hour range. I've had two full 8-hour day interviews as well, each involving talking to 8-10 people. And I've had shorter interviews with almost 15 people in on them. I guess technically I had about an 8 hour interview to come here, too, but it was split between two different on-site interviews... the studio was in the process of moving from Salt Lake City to Austin, so I had one interview in SLC with half the team and another in Austin with the other half of the team.

Pretty sure you can blame me for this one. Don't think they were planning on releasing this stuff publicly until a friend of mine let slip they had this stuff in the Orange Box branch and I pestered him to get it included in the release build

But, when it's working, it's a tremendous update. The new show/hide almost entirely eliminates the hassle of visgroups (which, good lord, are such a terrible setup). I'm curious to learn more how the manifest stuff works, too. And good lord, the instancing is glorious. The biggest win isn't just that you have a "prefab" referencing an actual file that propagates the changes throughout, but that you can build an axial structure but place it however you want within the level with none of the usual geometry precision errors. COD has used this extensively to build large non-axial arrangements, and they also added it for L4D2 and used it similarly. I'm currently using it to get a rotationally precise modular set of walls and roof pieces in this kind of arrangement:

[attachment=0]arena_roundhouse_editor_003.jpg[/attachment]

Yeah, they don't seem to like updating the news. But, open up Hammer for the Orange Box and the new stuff is there.

I just saw UDK there but it doesn't work for me But, that's fantastic news.

Hey guys,

For those of you still poking in Hammer, there's a new Source SDK/Hammer update that adds some neat stuff. .vmf instancing a la L4D2, manifest/layer support, some show/hide stuff, and some updates to the displacement tool (a new "sculpt" tool). May be some other stuff, since I can't find a proper changelist anywhere... just trying to get what I can from a former Raven colleague out at Valve.

If I find a proper changelist, I'll post it here - I encourage you guys to do the same

Bungie wouldn't buy back their independence from MS to go work on someone else's property. It's also in Activision's best interests to continue to develop COD internally. They'll use Treyarch and Sledgehammer for that. Maybe someone else now. Who knows. Bungie won't be doing COD either way.

As far as them making a deal with Activision, they'd have been working on this for months, long before the IW issues came to light (though there may still be some Bungie employees having the same reaction many of us are). In addition, they probably get a far better deal comparatively by a) not being an internally owned studio and b) being far more established than IW was at the time that they joined.

I still think this is a terrible idea - there's a reason id split from Activision as they began developing Rage. Activision's interests will always be with their internally developed products first and foremost, at the expense of third-party projects.

Well, I don't get a dishonest or misleading sense out of it, but I'd just be wary of it possibly causing confusion. Sounds like your own instincts are probably spot-on.

As for your sig, we use BBCode here instead of HTML. Try this:*

[url=http://www.linkedin.com/in/skysilcox]

[img=http://www.linkedin.com/img/webpromo/btn_profile_bluetxt_80x15.png]

[/url]

*I take no responsibility if this doesn't work properly

One thing I did not like was that in your resume you have your individual projects listed as experience. While it technically is experience, it is not the type of experience you would expect to find listed in a resume I think. Your individual projects stand for themselves in the portfolio, so they don't really need to be listed here. I believe you run a risk of some people thinking that you are trying to "fool" them into thinking that you have more experience than you have, and that could potentially cost you job opportunities if the recruiter is petty.

I've been meaning to ask about this with a few portfolios posted here. Is this actual coaching/direction from the Guild Hall curriculum to do this? Having gone through a lot of GH portfolios over the years, as well as having taken part a couple interviews with candidates, this has been a consistent negative point that stands out. What ends up happening is undue importance gets placed on things that aren't always that notable.

Your work appears pretty good, but your resume has some of this same "bloated" look of other GH resumes I've seen. The resume serves the purpose of a quick-glance reference of your entire experience. You'll be asked more detailed questions in your phone and on-site interviews. It is extremely rare that a single level is notable enough to deserve multiple bullet points in this context; your portfolio and your descriptions there handle this. A good rule of thumb has always been your resume should be a single page; I don't follow this exactly (my own is a little over a page), nor do I think you need to, but that might be a good comparison to keep in mind as you look things over.

What I would recommend is keeping your team projects separate as these do involve wider responsibilities. Then, I'd merge your single projects into at most single-sentence bullet points under a "Levels" entry, with the first bullet point being a one-to-two sentence overview of the category (for example - "Created a series of short-deadline levels in multiple engines as part of the Guild Hall design curriculum"). As you gain professional experience and more involved experience on larger commercial projects, you'll probably condense these much further.

That's a lot of rambling; I don't think your resume as it stands will actually hurt you, but I think a cleaner and simpler presentation can boost you a bit further as people are sorting through piles of resumes.

I completely disagree, actually; I think the lighting needs work but the second shot has great subtle tones and blending. The best colored lighting is rarely the most saturated. I think a bigger problem is the non-descript darkness that comes out of a few of these shots. There's a really cool top-to-bottom gradient to the second and fourth shots (to the point it could even become a vertical navigation aid/reference), but only the second shot really has a totally smooth natural feel - I think that should be the benchmark of the lighting to go with.

That said, I think you would benefit from some enhanced intensity and contrast, but more at the light sources than over the entire scene. It's hard to know for sure just eyeballing it, but I think picking up some more accents near the light sources and letting those blend in to the base lighting could look really good - but depending how you've set up your lighting so far, it might totally hose everything.

Do you have another angle of your third shot? That one seems the least flattering, but I'm wondering if that's just the angle.

Anyway, looking good so far!

And people said Insurgency took a long time

Don't want to be an ass but its looking like the the Nightwatch of HL2 modding, it's not like they're trying to reinvent the wheel either ;(

Single player is evil unless you do it by yourself. Why not release it in 2 or 3 parts rather than attempting the entire thing, modders usually underestimate the importance of getting something released to give them a massive motivation boost, great mods are never "done" when they are first released.

It's certainly one of the two biggest things I did wrong at the time, but I can also completely understand how they might feel that after going this far they need to "finish" it - even if that is a trap (and the other biggest thing I did wrong on NW - committing to the original path out of pride and trust in our team and their work rather than reacting to what was actually best for the entire project).

Even doing an episodic release after this much time and effort has gone into it might require a significant shuffle of where they've got people and what levels they've focused on. But, it's absolutely the way to do it. One concern that comes up is whether you can maintain the releases following, but I think after all this time they're one team that probably wouldn't come up short in that category since so much work has been done.

":jvkghcdj]I can tell that Singularity is using the same engine as wolfenstein did, therefor i hope there's not a lot of exteriors in this game, cos the engine is definitely a set back for this, and wolfenstein was the proof where the interiors were actually pretty freaking impressive, the exteriors lacked a lot.

Incorrect. Wolf = massively overhauled Doom III. Singularity = UE3.

Wolf exteriors were shaky, but depended on more than just tech. Farm level turned out stellar compared to what was possible in the early days. Midtown as it shipped was a mish-mash of level bits hacked up and lingering from early 2006. That branch of the tech is actually better than most people will ever realize

I barely recognize this game anymore, but it looks nice from that. Hope it turns out well for you guys

I don't think so, a lot of players don't know about that moves in companies so the "Call of Duty" brand fanboys won't see the possible difference in quality of new IW's games.

But, don't forget, who would have expected back in the day that this newfangled "Call of Duty" game was going to unseat Medal of Honor for the next decade?

I don't think that we'll see an immediate effect for this year's COD, people are already mostly immune to the developer swap going on there, but when Respawn's game hits it'll be with the biggest proverbial guns they have blazing.

Things REALLY get crazy in the off chance they win the suit against Activision. But that'll probably settle out of court; these things usually do.

Yeah, it's a super nice way to get results, especially when you're dealing with flat textures. Almost all of Quake 4's level textures were built that way: http://iddevnet.com/quake4/ArtReference ... ngTextures

it's been done before, with project: quantum leap and issues.

So if you used to follow the HL1 mod scene you might recall "Project Quantum Leap" that took levels from 20 different authors to make a crazy unpredictable single player experience -- it's where Adam Foster's Someplace Else was originally released, among other awesome levels. I signed on for PQL2, "Issues," which added a plot about going through dimensions to find a missing scientist. For PQL3, "Reissues," we added a hub level component and some really cool HL1 set pieces, but Spirit of Half-Life bugs really marred our release... Anyway, my point is, this has been a really great community thing and I have experience in participating in it, which is why I'm reviving the concept for a possible PQL4 as a mod for Half-Life 2: Episode 2.

This is the fourth entry in that series

http://twitpic.com/1ahcyz

I think I was 14. But still... ha, I had no idea what I was doing. (And maybe to some extent I still don't!) I was just happy to be in this team setting that was really supportive and nurturing. Seeing Ken's RMFs made me scream, they taught me so much about brushwork and how to build stuff, and I feel like I'm forever indebted to you for the opportunity and trust.

(When's that NW post-mortem coming out, by the way? Because here's what I think went wrong -- we should've cut half the game, polished it, and released it. But hindsight's 20/20.)

I need to get around to writing it yet. I have bullet points! Your post pretty much covers it, though - the best thing (team setting) and the worst thing (not stepping back and finishing the damn thing properly). I still look back on it fondly, though. Glad to see you do too!

It's such a terrible attitude for any developer to have. And I'm sure that's just one guy out of a company of a lot of dudes with a lot of viewpoints and he doesn't represent the whole studio, but talent, skill, and knowledge even today are still far more valuable than the specific knowledge of any one tool set and can be transplanted into virtually any tool that exists. I mean, sure, prior knowledge of the tools you'd be using is valuable if it's a company that has made their tools available, but brushing someone off on those grounds, particularly someone who has developed some mad technical chops in another engine, is just poor form.

Hey CampaignJunkie, I thought you were in the industry already? You were making kickass levels like 5+ years ago Your old Half-Life maps holds up very well!

Only 5? I think we rolled him into NW almost 7 years ago, and he had some damn fine skills dating back farther than that.

God I feel old. CJ, weren't you, like... 11 at the time?