Why make maps on the Natural Selection 2 engine? Here is why! - Developers

Please excuse me if you don't find the relevance of the topic to the forum section it encompasses. I will say that if you like using Source because of it's ease of use, or you are frustrated with some of it's technical constraints, this thread will definitely appeal to you. I will start from the beginning if you are completely foreign to what this is all about. [I][B]What is Natural Selection?[/B][/I] Natural Selection is popular a Half-Life mod made with the GoldSrc engine. In multiplayer, a team of aliens and marines are pitted against one another and excellently combines elements of an FPS and an RTS together. Over time, NS has won many "mod of the year" awards and still to this day has a very active community and is widely played. [B][I]Natural Selection 2?[/I][/B] Natural Selection creator Charlie 'Flayra' Cleveland came back with his newly established indie company Unknown Worlds and announced that a NS2 game was in the making in 2006 . While the team remains very small, most of the employees hired have real industry experience in making AAA game titles. Later in 2007, a video revealed that NS2 was being made under the Source engine. A year later, the team announced that it would be using a custom engine dubbed "Evolution" made by their team's programmer Max McGuire because of flexibility and licensing costs. Since then, the team has raised $200,000 through pre-orders and $500,000 through angel investors. This gave them the resources to established an official studio office, showing their commitment to making the game. The team is now growing close to an alpha release of the game to all who pre-orderer. At the moment, they offer the editor and a pre-alpha build of the engine with a simple scripted gamemode to those who pre-order. Please read through the website in full. [url]http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/[/url] I will cover the most notable features of the engine and development tools that will benefit you. I will also draw some comparisons between Source and the NS2 engine. [B][U]Notable Features:[/U][/B] - [U]Face-based geometry[/U]. The main advantage to this is that whatever you [I]do[/I] create, it is concerning what is actually visible. No need in applying the no-draw tool texture. - [U]Non-PVS rendering system[/U]. NS2 uses a real-time occlusion culling method to render scenes. This also means that you won't be constrained to making brushes with faces that have to be coplanar. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rza--bGIkbE[/media] - [U]Scalable props[/U]. Props you use in NS2 can be stretch in along each axis. Does that railing not quite reach the end of the platform? No problem, just stretch it out the remaining distance. - [U]WYSIWYG[/U] (What you see is what you get) The editor renders scenes exactly the way it does in-game. Elements such as lighting are seen directly in the editor can be can be changed at run-time. This greatly reduces the amount of time spent working. - [U]Handles more entity/world data and supports far larger map sizes[/U]. Just in case Source is just too small for what you have in mind. - [U]No compile phase[/U]. The Evolution engine is a "real-time" engine. Most, if not all of it's elements are done in real-time. - [U]Proper specular lighting over geometry[/U]. Specular lighting can be used on all geometry, including faces you made. Source cannot do this, it uses a pre-compiled form of specular lighting for primitives called envmask that is not accurate. - [U]Fully integrated lua extension[/U]. Perhaps the most exciting feature, gamemodes are scripted in lua. The NS2 gamemodes is almost completely scripted in lua, proving it to be very versatile. [URL="http://www.unknownworlds.com/decoda"]Decoda[/URL] also comes packaged with the SDK. - [U]Lighting[/U]. All of NS2's lighting is rendered in real-time, casting beautiful dynamic shadows that interact with all objects. Ambient light entities are specifically used to simulate global illumination. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH-SH1Iw6TY&feature=player_embedded[/media] If you are an avid level designer, support these guys. They have a great community surrounding them and are very aware of the importance of giving tools to the community that are easy, stable, and are capable of creating anything that the modders come up with. Because of their small team, the technology and tools made are much more suitable for us just like they are for them. Most of their efforts in the meantime are directed towards finishing the game. Finishing the release of the game, they will begin adding things that modders want. But don't wait now, they post updates every week on the website and update the tools and game/engine build on steam that is currently available to users who pre-order. So go pre-order! Every cent help them develop the game faster! This post will be updated later and streamlined for easier reading. In the meantime, if you have a question just ask and I will answer you.

It's gonna. Be. Awesome.

Here's why not. I would rather only pay 10-20 bucks for ep2 than pay 50 bucks for this. It uses much more processing power and graphics card capability, so not everyone can run it, especially not fast. Why would we map for NS2 when we want to make stuff for source. It's not like you can port it easily. An avid level designer wants options, and not be restricted to just a few primitives and props. And finally, THIS IS THE GARRYSMOD SECTION. IF YOU WANT TO ADVERTISE GAMES GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. Thank you and goodnight. Ns2 mapping requires almost no skill. You can only make blocks and place props/lighting, while in regular source you have to practice, get good, learn the ins and outs, and use complex i/o.

I agree with laptopman. In almost every way. Also. I cannot be the only one getting tired of seeing other editor work being posted here, am I?

Absolutely not. If you look at the forum structure it says "Home > :siren:[B][highlight]Garry's Mod[/highlight][/B]:siren: > Mapping If you want to post something from another engine or game, go do it in the video game section, not this one. [B]edit[/B] Also, adding to what I said earlier, with the ns2 engine, anyone can make something that looks good. How would you feel if you had been working with that editor for a year or two, and then some guy who's never touched a computer comes along and makes something better than you? That doesn't happen in source. Ever.

And then we have UDK which does all of the listed things and more, for free, and isn't restricted to mapping only, you can also make games :D

Look people. I don't care if you talk about other engines. But there's a proper place to do it. Right [B][url=http://www.facepunch.com/forumdisplay.php?f=110]here[/url][/B] And don't come back until you want to discuss the source engine. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Backseat Moderation" - Terrenteller))[/highlight]

I've only seen this engine do indoor environments. Because it's face-based it really doesn't seem like it can do outdoor geometry and design very well. Seems rather limited, maybe it'll get better soon; but right now every map on this engine consists of metal rooms and hallways

[QUOTE=laptopman;22521477]Here's why not. I would rather only pay 10-20 bucks for ep2 than pay 50 bucks for this. It uses much more processing power and graphics card capability, so not everyone can run it, especially not fast. Why would we map for NS2 when we want to make stuff for source. It's not like you can port it easily. An avid level designer wants options, and not be restricted to just a few primitives and props. And finally, THIS IS THE GARRYSMOD SECTION. IF YOU WANT TO ADVERTISE GAMES GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. Thank you and goodnight. Ns2 mapping requires almost no skill. You can only make blocks and place props/lighting, while in regular source you have to practice, get good, learn the ins and outs, and use complex i/o.[/QUOTE] 1. NS2 is $30. 2. That's a given, money is tight for some. There have been some users reporting that they played the alpha engine build with a Radeon 9600. Natural Selection 2 supports all shader model 2.0 cards and above. 3. You want to make stuff for Source because everyone plays on Source games. Plus, it's relatively easy to make maps for Source. I am offering you an alternative that's even easier than Source, and your results are better, with less time spent. 4. I don't even understand that statement. 5. If you read the first paragraph, the thread mainly covers some differences between Source mapping and NS2 mapping. It roughly fits in the forum section. Anyway, there is no better place to put the topic. I could place it elsewhere, but what is the use of discussing level design in a general games forum where hardly anyone is a level designer? 6. With Source, it's 25% "skill" and 75% patience. This is an egotistic statement. You still need artistry skill to make pretty maps in NS2. The difference is that you can properly change your lighting at runtime, which cuts down the amount of time you would be spending during a compile phase in Source. [QUOTE=Hazrd24;22521684]I've only seen this engine do indoor environments. Because it's face-based it really doesn't seem like it can do outdoor geometry and design very well. Seems rather limited, maybe it'll get better soon; but right now every map on this engine consists of metal rooms and hallways[/QUOTE] If you were making a game, you would not be bothered with making content that does not bring you any closer to finishing the game. As I said, and as the Unknown Worlds team said, that comes later after the game is released. It's obvious that the priority is the game first. In the level processing video, he makes a direct comparison between PVS and their rendering method, mentioning that theirs is more suitable for "outdoor environments" as well as indoor. I am positive that after the games release, new content will emerge to support such things. I'm positive because they said it themselves. [QUOTE=laptopman;22521603]Absolutely not. If you look at the forum structure it says "Home > :siren:[B][highlight]Garry's Mod[/highlight][/B]:siren: > Mapping If you want to post something from another engine or game, go do it in the video game section, not this one. [B]edit[/B] Also, adding to what I said earlier, with the ns2 engine, anyone can make something that looks good. How would you feel if you had been working with that editor for a year or two, and then some guy who's never touched a computer comes along and makes something better than you? That doesn't happen in source. Ever.[/QUOTE] Why are you so aggravated? I posted a topic that appeals best to the type of people who are in the forum section. I spent a lot of time writing up this thread and you shitpost and backseat moderate everywhere in the thread in less than 15 minutes. Check the Map Pimpage Thread and see my latest work, I made that in one nights work. Do you feel butt hurt now? By the way, I guess the guy who never touched a computer and outdid me must be a hell of an artist. I don't think you quite understand. Do you really feel like those guys at Unknown Worlds made an engine that just hides their artistic blemishes? Ok, I'll put this in an analogy. Every editor is like a paintbrush. If you have a better paintbrush that fits to your hand better and has higher quality bristles, you're going be able finish that "painting" faster. Now give someone with no artistic skill that better paintbrush and see if he can do better than you. You know what I'm going to say.

I support the natural selection team, but about the dynamic lighting in the editor and no compiling. Doesn`t Hammer have a lighting preview built into it also? And how the guy said about waiting 30 minutes to compile. If it takes that long to compile on a source map that usually means that it isn`t very well optimized.

He mentioned engines that use compiling in general, not Source specifically.

[QUOTE=DeanWinchester;22521636]And then we have UDK which does all of the listed things and more, for free, and isn't restricted to mapping only, you can also make games :D[/QUOTE] Haha, free? I think not. Go buy Microsoft Visual studio for compiling your C++ programming and 3DS Max. It's not so cheap now is it? Even if you got those tools for free, modelling levels, UV wrapping them, and programming in C++ is much more time consuming than using an easy scripting language like lua. You would need to get very serious about it, get a few other dedicated people to help you with the project and be ready to spend about 2 - 5 years making the mod depending on the size of the mod. [QUOTE=Cruma;22522018]He mentioned engines that use compiling in general, not Source specifically.[/QUOTE] 2nd sentence of the OP. [I]"I will say that if you like using Source because of it's ease of use, or you are frustrated with some of it's technical constraints, this thread will definitely appeal to you."[/I]

[QUOTE=DeanWinchester;22521636]And then we have UDK which does all of the listed things and more, for free, and isn't restricted to mapping only, you can also make games :D[/QUOTE] but mapping is done in models and you have to model your maps in a separate program and then split them up for bsp and then export them into the editor and then you have to compile it and mother fucker it's annoying [editline]02:41AM[/editline] But yeah NS2 looks awesome and I wish I had the money to buy it

[QUOTE=Juniez;22523678]but mapping is done in models and you have to model your maps in a separate program and then split them up for bsp and then export them into the editor and then you have to compile it and mother fucker it's annoying[/QUOTE] No you don't.

it's recommended that it is

It's got some good features, but it's got some bad/non features. The biggest problem for me is that I don't want to map for an engine. I want to map for a game. And I'm not interested in NS2. [editline]04:39AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Hostel;22522259]Haha, free? I think not. Go buy Microsoft Visual studio for compiling your C++ programming and 3DS Max. It's not so cheap now is it? Even if you got those tools for free, modelling levels, UV wrapping them, and programming in C++ is much more time consuming than using an easy scripting language like lua. You would need to get very serious about it, get a few other dedicated people to help you with the project and be ready to spend about 2 - 5 years making the mod depending on the size of the mod.[/QUOTE] Get an express version of visual studio and one of the many awesome free model editors. Also UDK has a scripting language, with support for dlls. I don't know why people think editing maps in a model editor is such a sin. You praise them for when you want small props because of the detail you can achieve, but god fucking forbid you want the wall the prop goes on to be any more than 2 faces. No offense but you've gone straight for the worst case scenario on everything you just said. It's kind of stupid.

[QUOTE=Pj The Dj;22524406]No offense but you've gone straight for the worst case scenario on everything you just said. It's kind of stupid.[/QUOTE] Guilty. I think Lapto got me all worked up, I do sound pretty stupid. I did't know that the express version of VS was free, that is a pretty nice thing. Programming in C++ is still a lot more time consuming, even if the performance gains are substantial. As for modelling levels, the industry software like 3DS Max or Maya is the best to use. Software such as blender or milkshape is good enough for props. As derogatory as I made it sound, is quite a pain unless you have a team together. UV wrapping is notorious for being a pain as well. I know some pretty good modelers who hate it. I don't want to map for an engine either. I don't have any projects for NS2, but I do keep myself acquainted with all the tools because the game shows extreme promise for modability. Half-Life 2 and Counter-Strike are probably the most modded games out there. If the tools for NS2 keep getting updated like they are now, lots of people will definitely want to start making new mods for the game. Basically, because the tools for the SDK are great easy to use, I think mod makers will feel more inclined to create their mod idea there.

I tried it. I hated it.

When I make something nice in hammer it feels like more of an achievement. I feel like that guy with the legos that made a whole motorised city, ykno?

Source is larger in it's community and it's options. So I think I'll stay here, thanks.

I think, because it's heavily inspired by the Source Engine we should allow NS2 mapping in here. I mean, after watching some of the demonstrations I think it looks awesome. I'm tempted to give it a go, what with it's dynamic lighting and sun-shafts and things and the fact they're making it with the modders in mind and not tailoring it to their specific NS2 needs.

Places looks like copypaste.

[QUOTE=oskutin;22530744]Places looks like copypaste.[/QUOTE] I typed it myself. There is some light paraphrasing. For the most, I put a lot of effort into giving as much info as possible. I will outright say that the Spark Editor (NS2) is not better than Hammer, nor is the engine better than Source. All of the tools and the engine itself are still in it's infancy. I understand many, including myself, would not leave the Source modding community because of the huge player base. But all the while, the player base surrounding NS2 is growing larger and larger, and the engine and tools are showing great promise to all modders alike. Such as games like Half-Life 2, you probably play more mods of the game than the game itself. I see the same thing happening to NS2. [QUOTE='[yournamehere];22527354']Source is larger in it's community and it's options. So I think I'll stay here, thanks.[/QUOTE] Fair enough, I can't argue with that. But my message was not to abandon all Source level designing and use NS2. Here is a better generalization - Hey, if you are frustrated with Source's annoying parts like compiling or you just can't get something right with Hammer, I suggest looking into Natural Selection 2, their engine and SDK are in it's infancy but they show great promise for modders in the future. If you would like to get a head start or stick your toe in the water, you can start using NS2's SDK right now. I'm not sure how many times I'm going to have to say this stuff over and over before people stop assuming what I'm saying.

[QUOTE=laptopman;22521477]Ns2 mapping requires almost no skill. You can only make blocks and place props/lighting, while in regular source you have to practice, get good, learn the ins and outs, and use complex i/o.[/QUOTE] How immensely ignorant of you to say such a thing. That's like saying Sandbox takes no skill or artistry to use. Unless you can replicate perfectly what the guys at Otherworld are doing for NS2 using Hammer, then please don't say things like this. Have you even used their editor? You would have had to preorder NS2 to use the editor, and judging from your other statements, it doesn't sound like you did. Anyone who doesn't understand the art involved in level design would jump to such conclusions about an editor more advanced and streamlined than a tool like Hammer, saying it takes no skill. It doesn't matter the tool, it just matters how you use it.

I would try the NS2 editor, if it was free. Maybe the free trial. Having somebody tell me the features wont do it for me.

[QUOTE=Firegod522;22546689]I would try the NS2 editor, if it was free. Maybe the free trial. Having somebody tell me the features wont do it for me.[/QUOTE] Here are some tutorial videos of someone using it. As you can see, they have taken a lot of the best concepts from each editor and put it into one. They are a little outdated and there is quite a bit of new features in the editor now. [url]http://www.naturalselection2.com/storage/spark_editor_tutorial_part1.swf[/url] [url]http://www.naturalselection2.com/storage/spark_editor_tutorial_part2.swf[/url] [url]http://www.naturalselection2.com/storage/launchpad_builder_tutorial.swf[/url]

[QUOTE=Firegod522;22546689]I would try the NS2 editor, if it was free. Maybe the free trial. Having somebody tell me the features wont do it for me.[/QUOTE] whoa what free trial

[quote]- Proper specular lighting over geometry. Specular lighting can be used on all geometry, including faces you made. Source cannot do this, it uses a pre-compiled form of specular lighting for primitives called envmask that is not accurate.[/quote] I was under the impression that every engine did this, or is it like a part in the editor where you can "paint" surfaces with more or less shine?

[QUOTE=TheDecryptor;22550256]I was under the impression that every engine did this, or is it like a part in the editor where you can "paint" surfaces with more or less shine?[/QUOTE] Well, I'll break this down. Other than having the proper shaders to do so, most engines rely on a certain kind of texture that gives info on how specular lighting looks on it's corresponding texture, much like how bumpmaps function. Source has a phong shader for models, which is essentially specular lighting, but the shader cannot be used on primitive/brushes. Instead, we use envmap shader, which is a pre-compiled method that is not accurate what so ever. Brush textures with envmap rely on cube map entity information. After compiling a map, we use the command buildcubemaps in which each entity take a small image from every side. Textures with envmap find the nearest cube map and use the image as a reflection for it's surface. If you look at it this way, envmap is not even a partial form of specular lighting.

[QUOTE=Firegod522;22546689]I would try the NS2 editor, if it was free. Maybe the free trial. Having somebody tell me the features wont do it for me.[/QUOTE] You don't get it free with the game? What the hell?