• Half-life 2 Cut Content - Is it me or dose the cut content look better than what we got?
    5,003 replies, posted
[QUOTE=t h e;48370317]I don't doubt the validity of your source but at the same time I can't imagine it would be that difficult to implement if you just had the textures of numbers 0-9. What do I know about coding, though.[/QUOTE] I think the source engine at the time couldn't apply textures above textures
[QUOTE=Pigbear;48370730]I think the source engine at the time couldn't apply textures above textures[/QUOTE] Yeah, we had decal support for models in... 2011, I think. When Mannconomy striked.
speaking of DOG, wasn't the original model from the leak ported?, im prety sure i have his model some where
[QUOTE=Milkyway M16;48366065]Can't you just re-uv it to match the old textures? Seems like significantly less islands with those textures.[/QUOTE] In theory, yes. In practice, ball-ache of a job. Also considering some of the old UV positions are crappy (giving stuff like stretching textures) It'd almost be better to retexture it almost from scratch.
[QUOTE=Pigbear;48370730]I think the source engine at the time couldn't apply textures above textures[/QUOTE] There are other ways to do it. Like each area with a number could be a submodel with 10 skins randomized by code. Kinda like Black Mesa facial generation system. Would be pretty lightweight and functional.
[QUOTE=Mech Bgum;48372561]There are other ways to do it. Like each area with a number could be a submodel with 10 skins randomized by code. Kinda like Black Mesa facial generation system. Would be pretty lightweight and functional.[/QUOTE] A skinfamily would be enough which is even more lightweight, and that's been a thing since Goldsrc.
[QUOTE=ProZak;48374357]A skinfamily would be enough which is even more lightweight, and that's been a thing since Goldsrc.[/QUOTE] Oh yes, totally, but I mean, If we wanted to go with, let's say, full range of 3 digit numbers, then it still could be possible my way. (I refer to these btw) [IMG]http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/half-life/images/b/b9/Combine_soldier_beta_back_logo.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090604145931&path-prefix=en[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Pigbear;48370730]I think the source engine at the time couldn't apply textures above textures[/QUOTE] Decals (blood/holes, for example) are exactly that - a texture overlaying a texture. So how's that 'not possilbe for Source'? [QUOTE=ProZak;48374357]A skinfamily would be enough which is even more lightweight, and that's been a thing since Goldsrc.[/QUOTE] Skins are less of a convinient way to go, because they'd take up more memory. With multiple skins on a model you have all the skins loaded at the same time. Why do that if you can instead project a decal on back of a soldier?
Hey I might remake some Half-Life 2 beta stuff for hard-surface practice. Send me some pics of stuff that'd look cool if it was redone.
[QUOTE=MilkBiscuit;48386747]Hey I might remake some Half-Life 2 beta stuff for hard-surface practice. Send me some pics of stuff that'd look cool if it was redone.[/QUOTE] [img]http://combineoverwiki.net/images/9/9c/Airex_truck_fixed.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Cvoxalury;48377575]Skins are less of a convinient way to go, because they'd take up more memory. With multiple skins on a model you have all the skins loaded at the same time. Why do that if you can instead project a decal on back of a soldier?[/QUOTE] Let us say you just create 10 skins (one for each number from 0 to 9). They'll be around 3 KB each but let us say 6 KB for fun. That's 60 KB you load into memory. I think we'll survive this one.
[QUOTE=ProZak;48388568]Let us say you just create 10 skins (one for each number from 0 to 9). They'll be around 3 KB each but let us say 6 KB for fun. That's 60 KB you load into memory. I think we'll survive this one.[/QUOTE] Alright, I guess. It's just that some time ago I read, on the dev wiki, that using skinfamilies is actually a perfromance hit and shouldn't really be favored. But that likely doesn't matter for these really small textures.
[QUOTE=ProZak;48388568]Let us say you just create 10 skins (one for each number from 0 to 9). They'll be around 3 KB each but let us say 6 KB for fun. That's 60 KB you load into memory. I think we'll survive this one.[/QUOTE] but that only lets them have the numbers 0-9 doesn't it?
[QUOTE=Pigbear;48390142]but that only lets them have the numbers 0-9 doesn't it?[/QUOTE] Ahm, you make three such models with random 0-9 numbers and parent them to a soldrier's back, thus allowing for any three-digit combination.
[QUOTE=Cvoxalury;48395316]Ahm, you make three such models with random 0-9 numbers and parent them to a soldrier's back, thus allowing for any three-digit combination.[/QUOTE] wouldn't just one 0-9 texture and a script to put it on their back be more efficient though?
Remember my previous post about how I thought the unused cover/fire animations for the Citizen/Combine could be re-implemented, and how they were originally implemented through actbusy? Well, I've been looking through the animations and this just doesn't make sense. There are currently three existing parts of each cover animation in the retail animations: the 'getting into cover' sequence, the 'idle in cover' sequence, and the 'getting out of cover' sequence; there is no 'firing' animation where the NPC fires while out of cover, but we can assume this exists but was removed from the animations (there is, however, a similar 'shooting' animation for the Citizen/Metropolice set of Standoff animations.) However, the Alyx cover-shooting actbusy animations are structured differently: there are animations for getting in and out of cover, but the 'peeking out' and 'shooting' animation are a single animation, and the actbusy loops that animation repeatedly for a set amount of time before forcing the NPC out of the actbusy. With this type of implementation the NPC doesn't actually shoot at enemies, it's just animated to shoot in the general area of where enemies are supposed to be. Due to the scope and scale of the old HL2 concepts and the leak, I believe that Valve would never have implemented the cover system this way; it would get painfully obvious very fast that the NPCs were just pre-animated to shoot in a certain direction. Thus, this is probably not the way the cover animations were used. Which brings me to an alternative way these animations could have been implemented and could be re-implemented, one that I think is far easier and far better in terms of both usage and believability. I was looking through the npc_citizen animations again and I noticed that the "Standoff" set of animations were extremely similar in terms of setup to those of the unused cover animations. Both have animations for going into and out of cover, hiding in cover, and presumably momentarily exiting cover to fire off a few shots. It was similar enough to the point where the shooting animation for both were pretty similar in terms of stance. That got me to thinking: what if the unused cover animations were once used as part of a Standoff sequence for cover nodes? It could specify which direction the NPC should be facing, and the NPC would play the cover animations while popping out and firing at enemies. This makes sense for a few reasons. For one, this would make it so that the NPC would have the ability to actually aim and fire at enemies, instead of being forced through an animation to shoot at a certain area. Another thing would be that this would allow the NPC to stay in cover and fire from cover indefinitely, unlike the actbusy which forces NPCs out after the sequence is finished. This also fits in with the way the Barney 'Streetwar' cover shooting sequence was animated, where Barney pops out and takes precise shots. While this would look stupid if used by NPCs who would fire in such a pattern regardless of where the enemies are (which is the case with actbusys), this would fit in with the NPC's ability to freely aim in a custom shooting animation with Standoffs, and most likely the unused cover shooting animations as well. This is my idea; what if we modified the Standoff feature and the info_hint_node entity to support the unused cover animations (for left, left crouch, right, right crouch), where they'd use the Standoff SMG firing animation for actual shooting? Unlike my previous idea I think this is a far better way of implementing the cover system for both Combine Soldiers and Rebels, and I feel like this turn out to be much better.
[QUOTE=Pigbear;48396329]wouldn't just one 0-9 texture and a script to put it on their back be more efficient though?[/QUOTE] Well, for one, a soldier's back has certain curvature so I'd do a central number model and two latteral models. Plus, it won't matter since the textures will only be loaded once.
[QUOTE=Kaleidescoop;48397955]Remember my previous post about how I thought the unused cover/fire animations for the Citizen/Combine could be re-implemented, and how they were originally implemented through actbusy? Well, I've been looking through the animations and this just doesn't make sense. There are currently three existing parts of each cover animation in the retail animations: the 'getting into cover' sequence, the 'idle in cover' sequence, and the 'getting out of cover' sequence; there is no 'firing' animation where the NPC fires while out of cover, but we can assume this exists but was removed from the animations (there is, however, a similar 'shooting' animation for the Citizen/Metropolice set of Standoff animations.) However, the Alyx cover-shooting actbusy animations are structured differently: there are animations for getting in and out of cover, but the 'peeking out' and 'shooting' animation are a single animation, and the actbusy loops that animation repeatedly for a set amount of time before forcing the NPC out of the actbusy. With this type of implementation the NPC doesn't actually shoot at enemies, it's just animated to shoot in the general area of where enemies are supposed to be. Due to the scope and scale of the old HL2 concepts and the leak, I believe that Valve would never have implemented the cover system this way; it would get painfully obvious very fast that the NPCs were just pre-animated to shoot in a certain direction. Thus, this is probably not the way the cover animations were used. Which brings me to an alternative way these animations could have been implemented and could be re-implemented, one that I think is far easier and far better in terms of both usage and believability. I was looking through the npc_citizen animations again and I noticed that the "Standoff" set of animations were extremely similar in terms of setup to those of the unused cover animations. Both have animations for going into and out of cover, hiding in cover, and presumably momentarily exiting cover to fire off a few shots. It was similar enough to the point where the shooting animation for both were pretty similar in terms of stance. That got me to thinking: what if the unused cover animations were once used as part of a Standoff sequence for cover nodes? It could specify which direction the NPC should be facing, and the NPC would play the cover animations while popping out and firing at enemies. This makes sense for a few reasons. For one, this would make it so that the NPC would have the ability to actually aim and fire at enemies, instead of being forced through an animation to shoot at a certain area. Another thing would be that this would allow the NPC to stay in cover and fire from cover indefinitely, unlike the actbusy which forces NPCs out after the sequence is finished. This also fits in with the way the Barney 'Streetwar' cover shooting sequence was animated, where Barney pops out and takes precise shots. While this would look stupid if used by NPCs who would fire in such a pattern regardless of where the enemies are (which is the case with actbusys), this would fit in with the NPC's ability to freely aim in a custom shooting animation with Standoffs, and most likely the unused cover shooting animations as well. This is my idea; what if we modified the Standoff feature and the info_hint_node entity to support the unused cover animations (for left, left crouch, right, right crouch), where they'd use the Standoff SMG firing animation for actual shooting? Unlike my previous idea I think this is a far better way of implementing the cover system for both Combine Soldiers and Rebels, and I feel like this turn out to be much better.[/QUOTE] Can you code? Do you need help implementing this? It sounds really really cool.
[QUOTE=Milkyway M16;48403615]Can you code? Do you need help implementing this? It sounds really really cool.[/QUOTE] I can't code, so I need people to help test this out.
I never saw the previous post
[QUOTE=Kaleidescoop;47458611]Copied from the HL discussion thread: So I figured out how the cover system used to work in Half-Life 2 before Valve scrapped it, and then re-implemented it for Episode 2. In the actbusy.txt files, I found that Alyx has entries like these: "Alyx_CrouchHide_01" { "busy_sequence" "CrouchHide_01" "entry_sequence" "CrouchHide_01_enter" "exit_sequence" "CrouchHide_01_exit" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "0.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_NONE" } "Alyx_HideWall_AB" { "busy_sequence" "alyx_LeanWall" "entry_sequence" "alyx_HideWall" //"exit_sequence" "alyx_hackPowerBox" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "0.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_NONE" } "Alyx_Injured_WallLean" { "busy_sequence" "injured_rest1_idle" "entry_sequence" "injured_rest1_in" "exit_sequence" "injured_rest1_out" "interrupts" "BA_INT_DANGER" } "Alyx_Blindfire_Left" { "busy_sequence" "blindfire_left_action" "entry_sequence" "blindfire_left_entry" "exit_sequence" "blindfire_left_exit" "min_time" "12.0" "max_time" "12.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Blindfire_Left_High" { "busy_sequence" "blindfire_left_high_action" "entry_sequence" "blindfire_left_entry" "exit_sequence" "blindfire_left_exit" "min_time" "12.0" "max_time" "12.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Blindfire_Left_Low" { "busy_sequence" "blindfire_left_low_action" "entry_sequence" "blindfire_left_entry" "exit_sequence" "blindfire_left_exit" "min_time" "12.0" "max_time" "12.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Blindfire_Low" { "busy_sequence" "blindfire_low_action" "entry_sequence" "blindfire_low_entry" "exit_sequence" "blindfire_low_exit" "min_time" "10.0" "max_time" "10.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Blindfire_Low_High" { "busy_sequence" "blindfire_low_high_action" "entry_sequence" "blindfire_low_entry" "exit_sequence" "blindfire_low_exit" "min_time" "10.0" "max_time" "10.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_WallCover_Right" { "busy_sequence" "cover_right_action" "entry_sequence" "cover_right_entry" "exit_sequence" "cover_right_exit" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "0.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_WallCover_Low" { "busy_sequence" "CrouchHide_01" "entry_sequence" "CrouchHide_01_enter" "exit_sequence" "CrouchHide_01_exit" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "0.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_WallCover_Low_Timed" { "busy_sequence" "CrouchHide_01" "entry_sequence" "CrouchHide_01_enter" "exit_sequence" "CrouchHide_01_exit" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "6.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Guard_Low" { "busy_sequence" "crouch_aim_pistol" "entry_sequence" "stand_to_crouchshoot" "exit_sequence" "crouchshoot_to_stand" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "0.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Guard_Low_Timed" { "busy_sequence" "crouch_aim_pistol" "entry_sequence" "stand_to_crouchshoot" "exit_sequence" "crouchshoot_to_stand" "min_time" "6.0" "max_time" "10.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } "Alyx_Guard" { "busy_sequence" "pistol_idle_aim" "entry_sequence" "pistol_idle_aim" "exit_sequence" "pistol_idle_aim" "min_time" "0.0" "max_time" "0.0" "interrupts" "BA_INT_SIEGE_DEFENSE" } As you can see, each actbusy calls for three animations. The entry, the action, and the exit. Through Hammer, I found out that if you make Alyx do this actbusy, she ends up going into cover, looping the action a few times (blindfiring, for example) and then exiting cover. So, from all the animation files from the Combine Soldiers and the Citizens, we have animations for entering and exiting cover that could be used for new actbusy entries. Now all we need to do is find (from the HL2 leak) or create a "blindfire" or "shooting from cover" animation, add it into the entry, and voila, we have an actbusy where citizens and combine can take cover and fire from cover. The blindfire has Alyx randomly shoot in the general direction of the supposed enemies. It's all a scripted motion, but the gun during the animation actually fires bullets that can do damage to enemies. I'm not sure how it works, but if we study the Valve animations we might be able to reverse engineer it to make it work for new animations.[/QUOTE]
So I tried slapping the gasmask texture onto Samuel [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/NYklXIB.png[/IMG]
Does anyone know how to rig a vehicle? For example an APC?
[QUOTE=Milkyway M16;48432655]Does anyone know how to rig a vehicle? For example an APC?[/QUOTE] Is a bit tricky as most of the times, the phymodel gives problems, but yes, is doable. Why you ask? You wanna try rig the old Conscript APC into the new one?
don't you just love it when people steal [URL="http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=408071960"]your map[/URL] for use in their moddb mod [url]http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-hyperborea/videos/beta-consul-office[/url] you know how i know it's my map? the small metal grate stairs aren't in the original wc mappack map, and they are in his video. it is also using the retail citadel soundscape, and the crappy chairs have been removed (also in my map). the skybox is also the fixed sky_c17_05, but i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that, because maybe he got a fixed version somewhere else? i dont know
Looks like yet another le old story mod that only exists because it's easier to use some already prototyped maps and is probably never going to be released.
[QUOTE=Maestro Fenix;48434859]Is a bit tricky as most of the times, the phymodel gives problems, but yes, is doable. Why you ask? You wanna try rig the old Conscript APC into the new one?[/QUOTE] Yea I decompiled the retail apc and the rig is really basic and the animations and poseparameters are pretty self explanatory but there are certain things that I'm unsure of when it comes to creating the proper bone-hierarchy. [editline]12th August 2015[/editline] I think I also got frustrated with it and gave up too early because I think I made a stupid mistake. I was hoping someone else has either done it before or knows of a tutorial just to make things a bit easier.
[QUOTE=Jackathan;48445396]don't you just love it when people steal [URL="http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=408071960"]your map[/URL] for use in their moddb mod [url]http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-hyperborea/videos/beta-consul-office[/url] you know how i know it's my map? the small metal grate stairs aren't in the original wc mappack map, and they are in his video. it is also using the retail citadel soundscape, and the crappy chairs have been removed (also in my map). the skybox is also the fixed sky_c17_05, but i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that, because maybe he got a fixed version somewhere else? i dont know[/QUOTE] It's funny that he has the nerve to state that it took "a lot of time" to make.
yeah, thoes kinds of people piss me off, when i was working with the RTB team ( no longer apart of them) we encountered a member who was basicly advertising the project and claiming he worked on the team , he never had any connections with us, and he claimed he made content, why do people do this shit is there anything to gain from stealing and claiming its yours ? do they feel happy knowing that there living a lie?
[QUOTE=Jackathan;48445396]don't you just love it when people steal [URL="http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=408071960"]your map[/URL] for use in their moddb mod [url]http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-hyperborea/videos/beta-consul-office[/url] you know how i know it's my map? the small metal grate stairs aren't in the original wc mappack map, and they are in his video. it is also using the retail citadel soundscape, and the crappy chairs have been removed (also in my map). the skybox is also the fixed sky_c17_05, but i'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that, because maybe he got a fixed version somewhere else? i dont know[/QUOTE] He might have used your map but his entire mod is based on Missing Information. Everything from models to the binaries. [QUOTE=darkspire17;48448378]yeah, thoes kinds of people piss me off, when i was working with the RTB team ( no longer apart of them) we encountered a member who was basicly advertising the project and claiming he worked on the team , he never had any connections with us, and he claimed he made content, why do people do this shit is there anything to gain from stealing and claiming its yours ? do they feel happy knowing that there living a lie?[/QUOTE] Because there's always someone gullible enough to believe them or not care. We've seen this a hundred times with Missing Information. People might think we're very harsh towards people that use our content without our permission but some moron tried to use some of our original content in a Greenlight mod, and I can assume you I will do everything in my power to fuck you in the ass if you try shit like that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.