Radix

On 8/3/2018 at 1:38 PM, Radix said:

It seems like CS:GO community mappers can now use the static prop combine ("autocombine") feature which is used in new official CS:GO maps (especially de_nuke) to improve performance significantly.

So we have a guide how to use this: https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Static_Prop_Combine

Not as easy as I hoped, because we will need the source files of every model (*.qc etc.). But still good to know.

Did anyone manage to make use of this feature already?

I'm currently trying to make it work, but no success yet...

Probably I'm the last person to know this but afaik no one shared this so far:

It seems like CS:GO community mappers can now use the static prop combine ("autocombine") feature which is used in new official CS:GO maps (especially de_nuke) to improve performance significantly.

So we have a guide how to use this: https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Static_Prop_Combine

Not as easy as I hoped, because we will need the source files of every model (*.qc etc.). But still good to know.

1. Player models are missing! -> Walking errors atm

2. Do we have a template for the new radar background somewhere? Or did you make it yourself?

Doesn't really surprise me...

On 6/19/2018 at 10:19 PM, Radix said:

 Germany dropping out in group stage.

The German team had serious problems with defensive teams, because they don't really have good strikers or someone who can win offensive 1v1.

In general it's the tournament of the defensive teams so far. Most goals are penalties or other dead-ball goals. Don't really enjoy this tbh...

Interesting tournament so far. I think Belgium can win the trophy. They have the best players and a working team while most of the favorites had a disappointing start.

But scripting is pretty obvious.

I mean: Italy and Netherlands missing. Russia always wins. Germany dropping out in group stage. Ronaldo being even more overpowered than in FIFA 18. Come on, this is ridiculous!

On 5/29/2018 at 11:37 PM, Oskmos said:

A pity that an atmospheric lighting like this is impossible in CSGO because it would be literally unplayable. But I'm sure you will find a good compromise.

Still looks pretty cool now, even though it suffers a lot from the stupid lighting bug that Valve refuses to fix for more than a year now (influence of local lights (light_spot) on props is too strong since ~march '17, makes them appear too bright). (-> snow pile props too red/bright)

Anyway - looking forward to play this.

Intense first trailer of the upcoming Battlefield V:

- WW2 setting

- scheduled release date: October 2018

- more information here: https://www.pcgamer.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-battlefield-5/

Don't understand the numbering of this game series though...

Btw... in my opinion the map looks a lot better/more harmonic since the latest changes. 

Quote

Onde é o link para baixar esse mapa?

Not the final version of this,  but pretty similar:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=143208598

Seems like there is a limitation for these (I tried it myself). It always only shows next room +  another one at once.

You will probably have to hide it via fog or map geometry...

On 3/15/2018 at 5:22 PM, Mocherad said:

How many time you think I need to learn in CS GO hammer, level design(looks like easy) + other parts, render setting, materials, source formats, game logic, physics all?  

You should ask yourself what you want.

Do you actually want to make Maps for CS:GO/TF2/Portal2/L4D2/HL2 etc.? Maps that are fun to play and look great? Make maps that actually are played by people, maybe get added to a CS:GO Operation? Or just want to focus on gameplay, want to test some ideas or whatever?

-> start now!

Or do you just want to mess around with a modern 3d Engine, get good looking results fast.

-> Maybe it's better to forget about Source Engine. And use something else like UE, CryEngine etc.

The Hammer Editor itself is pretty simple and fast to learn, but it takes a lot of time to create good looking maps. It's hard to say how long it will take you to handle the editor (some people learn fast, others slower), but if you are willing to spend something like 100 hrs just to learn the editor/engine, you are fine, I think.

The more time consuming part is learning how to create assets (models, textures etc., but this is not made in Hammer of course),  and how to put things together so that it looks good.

If you want to make maps for CS:GO, the (by far) most challenging part is (imo) to create a good layout. I personally started to make CS maps in 2000, made a break ~2003-2012, but all in all it's been some years now. And I still have absolutely no idea what I'm doing.

Newell: "Now we're going to start shipping games again."

On 3/9/2018 at 8:50 AM, leplubodeslapin said:

Yes. Artifact.

1 hour ago, RaVaGe said:

He probably has more chances to talk to a wall when you speak about money with Valve.

True. But sad actually.

If I was at Valve, I would hire him immediately before any other company does, pay him what he wants, and just let him make his maps.

(Same with some other guys who hang around here)

Well, all in all pretty impressive how much effort you have put into this project.

I mean, even if this gets added to an Operation, the payment seams a bit too low for two years of working full time (?) on this. Maybe you should talk to Valve (You probably really should. lol)

Gameplay seems to be good, even though I don't really like one-way (drop down) routes.

But, as already said by some of the others, visually atm not your strongest submission.

Biggest issue is probably the sky color. You chose a very warm, bright, nearly turquoise blue. It doesn't fit the setting imo and makes the snow look grey.

I would like one of the following better:

- a cold steel blue (no stars, few clouds, probably better no snowfall)

- a nightsky (slightly green if you want to keep a (more subtle!) aurora borealis)

- a grey cloudy sky (+snowfall)

That lighting + aurora issue is probably the best example why it feels a little "wrong" atm:

You have aurora borealis vs day time. Sun vs stars. A nearly clear sky with only a few little clouds (which move too fast imo) but you also have snowfall (which is falling in the opposite direction the clouds move (wind) btw).

That's all too much imo. You can't have it all at once. Make a decision.

You should not make things that don't make any sense just because you think it looks awesome. It's similar to the rainbow in de_santorini which also didn't make sense imo: clear sky, no rain, sun at high noon -> no rainbow!

Furthermore some areas of the map are probably a little overdone already. Sometimes it's better to let a wall just be a wall.

Maybe you just want too much in general while searching for the holy grail of CS level design...

Don't get me wrong. Still an awesome map. But it's not finished yet. Hope this helps a little.

Really nice map!

Found some (very small) mostly cosmetic issues:

https://imgur.com/a/Srk1G

On 3/1/2018 at 6:17 PM, FMPONE said:

As part of a 3 day ramp-up to releasing Subzero, today Wingman Killhouse was released.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1317130948

Pretty interesting map!

I personally enjoy the Wingman mode and it's obviously a pretty popular mode in general.

It's also a lot easier for community creators to create 2v2 maps (smaller, much easier to test...)

So I'm wondering if Valve will add Wingman community maps to future "operations"...

Pretty good summary of the latest changes:

1 hour ago, Corvus said:

1. Yes, you can use it in the game, but you'll have to delight the textures somehow or just use 1 particular side of the mesh.

Probably not a big deal. What you have made there already looks pretty awesome.

1 hour ago, Corvus said:

2. Yeah there's a 30 days trial.

I hate these limited trials. Pretty good to find out if the investment is worth it, but frustrating when you already know that you can't effort to buy it in the end.

13 hours ago, Corvus said:

 

 

This looks pretty interesting. So you get a textured 3d mesh after all, that could be used e.g. as a 3d skybox in a game, right?

13 hours ago, Corvus said:

After all of that you do the usual thing in AgiSoft photoscan.

But we are talking about a software that cost 3500$ if I actually want to use this feature and not just playing around a little (demo version), or am I wrong?

1 hour ago, Pivac said:

I've seen many pro players and analysts complain about this and I agree with them.

Yeah, maybe this should be tweaked a little but it's still an essential idea of the map.

In my opinion dust2 was never meant to be a map for pro players. It's the map to catch new players and keep them playing.

43 minutes ago, blackdog said:

Well the first walkthrough I found today by some guys was a continuous “oh wtf” “oh what the shit this is shit” cos couple corners are changed? ?

Well, it was obvious that this would happen. But it's still just stupid. Unfortunately these guys are usually pretty loud so it's hard to ignore them. But Valve will just have to.

The gameplay of the map is as close to the previous version as it can be. There are just a few small changes, that are probably intended and absolutely make sense to me.

The visuals are really amazing, imo it's (by far) the best looking CS:GO map atm.

But on the other hand it might be frustrating for ambitious community creators, because Valve have raised the bar so high that only a few will come even close to this level when creating custom maps.

I feel so empty and unmotivated right now. lol

Well, the first pic was "okay" but this one totally impressed me. Is this really good old Source1 which makes me suffer every day?

Definitely looks like how it should look like in 2017.

30 minutes ago, Anduriel said:

By the way: Why is the UV unwrap on your picture larger than the texture. Any reason for that?

This model is from cs_militia (+some other official maps), I just imported it to Blender for learning purposes.

It doesn't matter if the UV unwrap is larger than the texture. The texture just gets tiled then. But the texture has to be seamless in this case.

This rock texture is used on a couple of different rock props. For small rocks the UV unwrap will be smaller than the texture, while (like in this case) for bigger rocks it can be larger than the actual texture, just to avoid that it gets blurred/pixelated.

30 minutes ago, Anduriel said:

So I watched that tutorial and it looks amazing what this guy does, but it's hard to follow at some points. I don't know if I can reproduce that with my low skills

Anyway thanks for the help Radix, I think I understand it now. What I need to do is cutting the UV in two halves and then just use blenders built-in texture paint to edit my diffuse map until I got rid of all visible seams. I will try that.

Yeah, a lot of new stuff if you are a beginner (I'm pretty new to making models as well). So maybe just go step by step and start with something easy. I don't think that your rock props really need to be seamless (pretty much all CS:GO default rock props are NOT).

Don't forget to switch to smooth shading (screenshot you posted above).