DescentBB

Anyway, realizing that Descent2 would look really cool with modeled weapons, I decided to give it a go. In artistic liscence I added a few details to make the models more interesting. The downside is that the models have about 6000 faces and 3000 verticies. If you guys want em, I'll give them to you. If you don't like the greeblies or want a lower polycount, that's fine too. I made all of these except for the pheonix. Comments? Criticisms?

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116 ... eapons.jpg
I've never used photobucket before, hopefully you guys will see that...

looking kick-ass there.

Wow!

Can you do them in OOF format? And ... ummm ... decrease face and vertex count, like 1000 - 1500 faces? How about skins? Are the models closed? No overlapping faces in the same submodel? Do adjacent faces share the same vertices (no disjunct vertices at the same coordinates)?

Yes, I *think* lithunwrap can export to .oof.
I can probably decrease the count a lot by lowering the curverature on the little bubble things. The geometry *should* be perfect, I'll probably send them to you for examination before they are put in.

About the skins...well...how its interesting. I'll show screenies in a bit with them with their textures, but ive never been a good mapper.

I can probably get the secondaries done too, those will probably be easier.

Okay, I got they keys all done. I tried to lower the face/vertex count on the models, but it only decreased the count a little. I got the laser from 3500/1800 to about 2100/1100, but the Fusion only went from 6000/3000 to 5500/2800 (approximates). I guess whatever helps is better. Besides, in final, the model should be about 200 kb, which isn't bad.
Yes, I realize the geometry is kinda funky. I'm working on it.
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116 ... 7/keys.jpg

Anyways, since
1. Models use less memory
2. Models can cast shadows (desirable?)

I am now trying to model all of the objects, except the floatie bubble ones like cloak or energy. The key has a 2000/1000 face to vertex count, which shouldnt be too bad considering that I don't think more than one ever comes on the screen at once in the normal levels.

I realize that this will be partially conflicting with Dizzy's highres textuers, which, although I love them, I think that most powerups can be more well done as models. Has anyone heard from him lately? I love his highres missiles and would love to see them ingame as...models.

Diedel, do you want me to send you some models so you can check their geometry? I don't want to release anything without it working with shadows properly, and it'd be nice to have good model geometry in the first place.

How do those keys have 2000 faces each? Jeez...

They're really detailed keys. Well, not really, just the chamfering on the sides adds a lot of faces. Maybe they're not necessary, I don't know. I optimized the key a bit and it uses less faces and verts now, because I awknowledge it was a little obscene.

Anyways, I've got the Ammo Rack, Vulcan ammo, and full map done, and am going to get headlight and quad lasers done soon. I'll also do a 3d version of the cockpit, which may allow for side views and such, since the entire cockpit will be one model.

This however, makes one thing an issue: will Diedel be able to draw different textures onto the model in realtime, efficently, and looking good? I don't know D2xl supports glowmaps, or how this can be best done, because the lit up portions will always need to be rendered at full brightness regardless of shadows, or we could just ignore shadows but that would be a bit lame, in my opinion.

Wohoo! Got a few objects modeled. How do they look? I decided not to greeblie them to the extent I did my primaries, because they generally aren't seen that much, except for vulcan ammo which needs to be redone anyways.
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116 ... items1.jpg

One thing I kept in mind was vertex and face count. So: (name: verts/faces)
Ammo Rack: 480/948
Full Map: 246/488
Converter: 800/1612 (I know I went over my limit, but its so darned CIRCULAR)
And...ehh...
Vulcan Ammo: 3878/7752...
This WILL change, as soon as I figure out how do do one little thing.

I'd also like you guys to take a look at my cockpit and tell me what I still need to do with the front. I'm currently shifting towards the back but the front is more important. Thoughts? Oh, and pay no attention to the seat. I've only spent about five minutes on it so far, and I don't know why it's black and blue.
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116 ... ockpit.jpg

Constructive criticism, please.

Oh, and the cockpit is 891/1774.

Tempest those are VERY COOL!! Nice work

Tempest wrote:I realize that this will be partially conflicting with Dizzy's highres textuers, which, although I love them, I think that most powerups can be more well done as models. Has anyone heard from him lately? I love his highres missiles and would love to see them ingame as...models.

Man dont give it a thought, I am not only software limited in that deptment Im also limited in low poly creation, I totally agree about the models would be nicer, and in a way its kinda a tease to have such high poly models presented in the sprite aniz, I was finding, man my weapons will look like crap next to these really high poly aniz.
Man If you guys can get the models in the game, I think Its a better deal myself.Im jus prolly not gonna be much help on that front, abate I am still workin on it. Keep up the good work man, looks really good I think

I think you shouldn't use so many polys on the weapons' power terminals. Heck, use less polys on small curved surfaces in general. Or make LOD models (that's a good idea actually. Diedel?).

On the converter, the outer two \"pipes\" or whatever have different connectors on the ends and are significantly smaller in diameter than the middle pipe.

I think the Helix should be modelled more like its real firing pattern of five in a line. Also, the Spreadfire doesn't spread nearly that much. These flaws are present in the original D2 powerup bitmaps.

Otherwise, really nice work there

Your models are more detailed than a lot of \"next-gen\" power up models!

But then D2X doesn't have normal mapping, which would eliminate the need to physically render out all of the little grooves and ports.

I would just say, be careful about a couple things

- If you make your models too high-poly, the framerate may tank if a player's spew in multiplayer is sufficiently large.

- There is a point where you can have too much detail on a model. You can have so many polygons in a model that the fidelity of the screen resolution cannot actually see them.

Yeah, I've since then removed a lot of the detail that couldn't really be seen. The problem with the polys on the curved surfaces is that the app I use to model will only let me rotate things around an axis in a circular way, otherwise I'd have 1/8 of the detail on the power terminals and they'd look about the same.

The converter is supposed to be like that. I used the .gifs for a strict reference every time. If you're talking about the edges of the middle pipe, they are mathematically the same as the top and bottom pipes.

Eeek...the Helix is a POS, honestly, which is unfortunate because the helix is my 2nd favorite weapon. Gauss FTW! Anyways, I'm going to redo it eventually. The interesting thing about the Helix is I ADDED a fifth barrel in its center, before it only had four, and so it was *really* weird. I tried to keep it looking like it was in the .gif, however. Again, with the spreadfire, I copied the .gif as much as I could because I wanted a faithful translation. If everyone is OKAY with me editing it to have a smaller angle, I will, but I thought it was safer to make them as exact replicas as possible.

I've been working on de-polyizing the models for some time. I did the afterburner and quadlaser, both of which I'm not happy with, and I've done some more cockpit work which I'm a bit happier about.

I submitted my work to Diedel earlier but he hasn't responded yet. He wanted them in .oof or .pol but I can't find a converter for either...but I know there are some. I can take .oof's and put them in something else, but not the other way around.

About the LOD models, does D2 support them? I could do them and reduce the polycount tremendously if I was assured the player would not see them upclose, because I could remove the smoothing details and such, which would lower the count tremendously.

And Dizzy, I'm glad you're back, because you're the undisputed champion of texture creation. I think I remember you saying that you can't export your models, but what is the format you're working with them with? Maybe you could put your models in instead of the anis, which would use way less memory, and cast shadows, and look better, and not look the same from evey angle (that always irritated me about the default stuff).

And I bring a question as well:
With a modeled cockpit, I don't know weather to model the cockpit window bars like they are on the ship or as they appear in the 2d cockpit. On the origional, 2d one, they are slightly curved, and I know that's not just perspective, because I've played with the same highres pyro with the cockpit submodel on it in FS2 and they are DEFINATLEY straight. How would you guys like it? Oh, and what do you think of the cockpit in general?

Sigh...here is the final set of items. The items themselves are far from final, however.

\"But Tempest, look at the quad laser! It's...it's...only got one pipe thing!\"

Yes, I am aware of that. That pipe is the most annoying thing to model I've EVER done. It won't intersect the plane on one side, it won't take a reduced curve to reduce pollies. But the worst part is that it refuses to mirror. Gah.

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116 ... items2.jpg

Anyway, now that I have the basic geometry down for the models, what face/vertex count will everyone be happy with?

the modelling is the easier part, now go uv-map and texture that neat stuff

anyway, thats some good work tempest.

Tempest,

why don't you go for some substancially less detailled models that would be substantially easier to build and texture? That would already be more than good enough for Descent.

If you're having trouble with the modelling tool, ideally you need a better one - or perhaps to learn the one you have better. Shouldn't be restricted by it in either case.

I'm using an engineering tool- solidworks. It's made for making parts for machines, so it doesn't handle some things well. That said, I've been told that Softimage XSI is a good program, and I may eventually switch to it. Maybe it will make things easier? Thank GOD I can export things, with no polylimit with solidworks. My dad uses it too, for stuff he does, and I've asked him questions and he didnt know the answer, and he's been using it, professionally, for about eight years.

Substantialy less detailed models? Hmm...I could. I was just going for what Dizzy was doing, making models that are highly detailed but true to the origional. Diedel, will the models rotate with the player as the anis did or will they not rotate so you can see the bottom? If you cant see the bottom, or top, I can pretty much remove all the stuff in that area. Or I could go for the default look, in which case, you won't have the grainy stuff anymore, but they'll look the same. I just wanted to add the breaks in the model to help it flow better and look less weaponry. I got those very weapons ingame in FS2 and they work, so I was happy with that. I
guess that since most weapons are one domainant color with a few backups, the additional detail won't be noticed.

http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o116 ... cannon.jpg
What if they were all more like that?

Making 3d models rotate doesn't necessarily mean you'll never see their top or bottom. You rather will, should I make them rotate.

The simplified model already has more than enough vertices and faces. What causes that high number of vertices and faces for the model in the image? The buttons on top of the gun? The barrel doesn't look that complex. Maybe try not to make stuff too neatly round.

It's two factors, the buttons on the top and the chamfering around the edges. You don't see the detil begause the jpegs are compressed and small.

I wasn't talking about the spinning rotation- I was referring to the fact that the powerups look the same no matter what angle you look at them from. Will you be doing this with modeled powerups?

=Tempest= wrote:I wasn't talking about the spinning rotation- I was referring to the fact that the powerups look the same no matter what angle you look at them from. Will you be doing this with modeled powerups?

Ofc not. It will be a fully 3D object you can fly around and view from every angle. So everybody will be able to appreciate your breath taking works.

As much as I like the ability to see the objects from different angles, i'm sure SOMEONE will complain \"It's not staying true to the origional!!!!\".

Anyway, I'll probably get most everything textured by about this weekend. The afterburner, vulcan ammo, helix cannon, and gauss cannon still need to be redone. I'm just happy that the descent2 models have simple, easy colors and shapes. Phew.

If people want to stay true to the original, they can turn the 3D weapon models off. Or build a legacy machine, install D2 DOS and play it in all its pixelated 320x200 glory (cough).

Or do you think, smoke, shadows, colored dynamic lighting, weapon fx, etc. are true to the original? D2X-XL is not for purists, it is for those who want the original D2 game mechanics spiced up with some nice gfx.

Staying true to the origional is generally describing that the look and feel should still be of D2 and not something completely different.

For example making the weapon models or powerups look like something other then what they were. The point is to update D2, make it look more modern, not to make it look like a completely different game.

I don't really think you'll need any more detail on these weapons than D3 had, though. Cylinders with any more than 8 sides are pretty much wasted because the powerups are rather small; likewise, excessively articulated spheres or other rounded features are not really necessary.

Personally I don't think you need more than 100 faces for any given gun. Maybe 200 if it's a fairly tricky one such as the Helix.

Well, Tyr is right. Ofc there should be some balance. The Descent 1/2 stuff should still look like Descent stuff, just nicer. Changing it a to a certain extent is alright as long as it still makes you immediately think of Descent.

Sirius is right, too, imho.

Yeah, I'm trying to stay true to the origionals (aren't they?). Which models don't stay true to the origionals? I've also got a plan for reducing the polycount.

However, I probably won't have anything out until after finals (1.5 weeks from now) and I find a converter for .oof format. If anyone knows any exporter to .oof, please tell me.

The remarks about staying true to the original were of rather general nature and not coined at your works.

I'm interested in the models from the first post. What formats can you export them to?

Pretty much any mainstream format that isnt for one specific game. I also can convert them to .pof, but of course descent can't use .pofs. If you decide to UVMap them and properly texture them, PLEASE give me a copy. If you want to use them in a mod, I'd like credit. Just don't claim that you made them and I'm happy.

Ah, .3ds .3dms (milkshape format) and whatever lightwave uses. As for giving credit, that's no problem at all. PM me and I'll get you my snaily address, unless you have it hosted somewhere...

http://www.fs2downloads.com/uploads/D2X-XLStuff.zip

That link should work. They're in .obj and .wrl which are both common and fairly well-known formats. If they don't work out I can put them up in .3ds too.

Okay, I've found a hackish method of cutting pollies. I can upload a new version tomorrow when I finish all the new polycutting. It's big.



I can do that for all the other models and cut the polycount to a far more acceptable 500-1500 range. The Fusion was chosen because it ate pollies for dinner more than any other model. Vulcan ammo will be done next.

*EDIT* New Vulcan ammo is only 1300 pollies. I could cut it more if necessary.

*EDIT2* Massive poly reductions have been made. Most models have been reduced to 30-50% of their origional count. Redownload the .zip to get all the more optimized versions. They are also (hooray) scaled more correctly.

cool, thx.

Just wonering but is there a way to select what pat of the model gets the poly cuts? What I'm pretty much saying is....can you take a falt faced part of a gun that might consist of...say.....5 faces and make it into maybe 1-3 faces?

Also for the rounded cylindrical like surfaces....are they NURBS? Apparently poly\\NURB-like surfaces take far too many faces and NURBS take far less. Or so this tutorial says

I'm taking more time than anybody else on my robot model creation strictly because I'm using tutorials to aid me in creating better models. I would tell you a URL but it's a DVD

EDIT: I'm saying this as an inquiry. Correct me if I'm wrong as I'm a modeling noob and like everything that you are doing thus far keep it up.

I have no idea how your modelling software works. How I made the changes is I first deleted the origional power sockets at the top and the handles on the sides and rebuilt them. It's a much lower tech solution but I'm happy with it.

Any time a surface looks really rounded it takes up more pollies. That's because computers only think in lines, so any time you have a curve it's just a bunch of small lines. The big problem there is that you almost never need (or even want) that much detail on the model. The power sockets origionally had around 36 sides, I think, and i reduced it to 12, but the biggest difference was the tops of the power sockets, which were smoothed excessivley. I took off the smoothing and instead only had 1 level of smoothing on the top, which should do fine for ingame and cuts down the polycount a lot.

I made a few robot models too; it was a challenge to get the correct shape. I wanted to use the ones off descent network but they were poor quality models (as in, geometry wise, they looked fine from the outside). I'm not sure how I could do the Internal Tactical Robot, because that would be a challenging shape to make. I'd advise trying as hard as you can to approximate curves using regular lines. Again, I have no idea how your modeling software works and I tried to be more general in my advice.



Oh, and diedel, the list of models D2X-XL accepts seemed to be missing the Vulcan Ammo. The new, 1300 polygon rendition should be fine for ingame use so you might want to add it.

Very nice models. Will fix the vulcan ammo problem in v1.9.101.