[QUOTE=Fat-Corgi-Guy;38407788]The stock textures are all blurry as hell! The dimensions of the original textures are 512x512 pixels. The new ones are all 2048x2048, greatly increasing the texture detail. Changing the stock textures also won't screw up the look of HL2. I'm keeping the textures as close as possible to the originals, unless changes need to be made to make them fit in certain areas of a map (which most likely they will all fit without changes).[/QUOTE]I agree that they look somewhat blurry and outdated, but I also think that 2048x2048 is going a bit overboard. In the source engine (hell, in almost any game engine), larger textures will seem too crisp to be considered realistic, especially from far away. A perfect example of this is your Barney texture ([url]http://i.imgur.com/TigG4.png);[/url] you can see that the cloth is jagged and very sharp, which is not always the desired effect. Lowering the size of the textures to 1024x1024 should help, if not fix, this.
[QUOTE=Bumbanut;38408148]I agree that they look somewhat blurry and outdated, but I also think that 2048x2048 is going a bit overboard. In the source engine (hell, in almost any game engine), larger textures will seem too crisp to be considered realistic, especially from far away. A perfect example of this is your Barney texture ([url]http://i.imgur.com/TigG4.png);[/url] you can see that the cloth is jagged and very sharp, which is not always the desired effect. Lowering the size of the textures to 1024x1024 should help, if not fix, this.[/QUOTE]
I'm sure we can fix this, maybe using some post processing magic, mipmaps, lod, etc.
[QUOTE=Bumbanut;38408148]I agree that they look somewhat blurry and outdated, but I also think that 2048x2048 is going a bit overboard. In the source engine (hell, in almost any game engine), larger textures will seem too crisp to be considered realistic, especially from far away. A perfect example of this is your Barney texture ([url]http://i.imgur.com/TigG4.png);[/url] you can see that the cloth is jagged and very sharp, which is not always the desired effect. Lowering the size of the textures to 1024x1024 should help, if not fix, this.[/QUOTE]
2048 is not necessarily overkill as high resolution does not necessarily translate to low texel scale. There's always 4 pixels of texture for 1 world unit in Hammer, with the default scale.
If you're gonna have a texture that's repeated everywhere, a 2048 is fine, really.
But on models... most of the time, you'll be too far away, you'll have a mip level lower than 2048 displayed, making it kind of a waste. 1024 + detail map is more than enough in most cases.
For the love of everyone's bandwidth, please don't make every texture uncompressed, like a certain someone.
[QUOTE=vexx21322;38408466]For the love of everyone's bandwidth, please don't make every texture uncompressed, like a certain someone.[/QUOTE]
Believe it or not, most of the Fake Factory filesize is actually from his soundtrack, "hd" models, and props.
[QUOTE=IM BATMAN;38408506]Believe it or not, most of the Fake Factory filesize is actually from his soundtrack, "hd" models, and props.[/QUOTE]
While that may be the case, I remember someone exposing a lot of the textures as being massive filesizes that they didn't need to be.
[QUOTE=vexx21322;38408604]While that may be the case, I remember someone exposing a lot of the textures as being massive filesizes that they didn't need to be.[/QUOTE]
Wasn't his latest release somewhat over 20 gigs and had to be downloaded via a slow torrent.
Well rest assured, even without gcf mounting, we are NOT going to have a uber huge filesize. If there is something that largely increases the filsize to the point where its ridiculous, we will make it a side download and not have you download the whole thing over a slow ass torrent.
[QUOTE=Bumbanut;38407432]That is correct, all textures will be made into high-definition and certain models will be made higher polygon.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://gamebanana.com/css/skins/26626[/url]
Now if you excuse me, i need to go to shit some high poly bricks.
[QUOTE=killer89;38409909][url]http://gamebanana.com/css/skins/26626[/url]
Now if you excuse me, i need to go to shit some high poly bricks.[/QUOTE]It's not high-polygon, it's only a more 'realistic' retexture.
However, I can confirm that the cinder block polycount will be increased from 50 to 13,000.
Whatever you do to the textures, please don't make the mistake of making a bunch of really tiny scratches, dots, and scrapes to add "detail" for everything.
I've seen too many texture packs do this, and it just makes the textures look badly aliased and like someone shit film grain on them from a distance
Unlike FakeFactory, this is a collective team effort. Everyone has a chance to point out flaws and prevent something obtuse or out of context from being in the final product.
By the way, use the Hamming filter for your mipmaps
it's the best one
[QUOTE=Fat-Corgi-Guy;38407788]The stock textures are all blurry as hell! The dimensions of the original textures are 512x512 pixels. The new ones are all 2048x2048, greatly increasing the texture detail. Changing the stock textures also won't screw up the look of HL2. I'm keeping the textures as close as possible to the originals, unless changes need to be made to make them fit in certain areas of a map (which most likely they will all fit without changes).[/QUOTE]
512x512 is standard, it aligns with the 128x128 unit walls (1 hammer unit = 4 image pixels)
2048x2048???? are you serious...
not only would that be so high res that it would likely just scramble without constant mip map aid when aligned to a wall, you'd have to press your eye ball to a wall then suit zoom to see all of the detail. Not to mention it would make the game extremely demanding on your v-ram.
If you used a massive texture like that on a wall, you would have to squish its resolution in hammer editor, making it a redundant scrambled mess.
Textures that huge should only be used for grass / dirt in wide open areas where tiling can get ugly, and in areas where the full texture can be seen without scaling it down in hammer
512x512 looks just fine.
if you want extra close-up detail use $detail textures
[QUOTE=Barbarian887;38415490]512x512 is standard, it aligns with the 128x128 unit walls (1 hammer unit = 4 image pixels)
2048x2048???? are you serious...
not only would that be so high res that it would likely just scramble without constant mip map aid when aligned to a wall, you'd have to press your eye ball to a wall then suit zoom to see all of the detail. Not to mention it would make the game extremely demanding on your v-ram.
If you used a massive texture like that on a wall, you would have to squish its resolution in hammer editor, making it a redundant scrambled mess.
Textures that huge should only be used for grass / dirt in wide open areas where tiling can get ugly, and in areas where the full texture can be seen without scaling it down in hammer
512x512 looks just fine.
if you want extra close-up detail use $detail textures[/QUOTE]
1) Detail textures can end up making things look quite tacky, and they're still blurry close up.
2) I have tried said sized textures in a pack I made for portal, on my old computer from 2004, ran perfectly fine, no frame drop or lag at all.
3) Yes you will have to re-size all the textures in the maps, but considering as there will most likely be missing textures/errors in parts of the maps that need to be fixed, why not just fix everything? (errors from decompiling)
4) if you look at the walls in HL2, they get extremely repetitive. The way to solve this? Make new textures that 1 are seamless, 2 do not have many (or any) details that will become repetitive, minus brick placement and the like. 3 use decals to add extra detail to the walls, stains, graffiti, papers, ect.
5) Mip-map works fine with 2048x2048 pixel textures.
6) The HL2 walls look VERY blurry even from just 5-8 feet (in-game) away.
[QUOTE=Fat-Corgi-Guy;38416379]1) Detail textures can end up making things look quite tacky, and they're still blurry close up.
2) I have tried said sized textures in a pack I made for portal, on my old computer from 2004, ran perfectly fine, no frame drop or lag at all.
3) Yes you will have to re-size all the textures in the maps, but considering as there will most likely be missing textures/errors in parts of the maps that need to be fixed, why not just fix everything? (errors from decompiling)
4) if you look at the walls in HL2, they get extremely repetitive. The way to solve this? Make new textures that 1 are seamless, 2 do not have many (or any) details that will become repetitive, minus brick placement and the like. 3 use decals to add extra detail to the walls, stains, graffiti, papers, ect.
5) Mip-map works fine with 2048x2048 pixel textures.
6) The HL2 walls look VERY blurry even from just 5-8 feet (in-game) away.[/QUOTE]
1. I guess that's your opinion on detail textures but I think if used properly it can make a big difference
2. did you try it on a wide variety of hardware configurations? Or just on your l33t thousand dollar gaming rig?
3. if you mess with hammer's default 0.25 texture scaling it can get ugly and scrambled / moiré
4. only some of the stock textures tile badly, not all. Even the ones that do can still be used in right moderation.
5. Not if the texture is squished down to be fitted to a 128x128 wall.
6. No more than it needs to be
[editline]11th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;38411112]By the way, use the Hamming filter for your mipmaps
it's the best one[/QUOTE]
I'd say Gaussian from instinct but after comparing I think I actually do prefer Hamming
What made you choose it?
[editline]11th November 2012[/editline]
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/gaussian_vs_hamming.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=Barbarian887;38416685]1. I guess that's your opinion on detail textures but I think if used properly it can make a big difference
2. did you try it on a wide variety of hardware configurations? Or just on your l33t thousand dollar gaming rig?
3. if you mess with hammer's default 0.25 texture scaling it can get ugly and scrambled / moiré
4. only some of the stock textures tile badly, not all. Even the ones that do can still be used in right moderation.
5. Not if the texture is squished down to be fitted to a 128x128 wall.
6. No more than it needs to be
[editline]11th November 2012[/editline]
I'd say Gaussian from instinct but after comparing I think I actually do prefer Hamming
What made you choose it?
[editline]11th November 2012[/editline]
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/gaussian_vs_hamming.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
I don't have a very expensive computer, never have. Mine are all pretty low-medium end computers.
What is this scrambling you're talking about? Care to show a picture?
98% of textures in HL2 you can tell are tiled, imo.
Care to show the mip-map not working on a scaled 2048 texture?
Are you saying the textures [I]need[/I] to be blurry? Why, why do they [I]need[/I] to be blurry?
Just a suggestion, but you might want to mark the three pictures there, say which one's which.
EDIT: If [B]TONS[/B] of people think I should just stick with the default 128x128, then I will, but I for one think that it will just make it look...less than spectacular.
Forgot to label :v:
the Gaussian is the less-defined mip, if that helps.
__
right so with the tiling of hl2 textures, some are bad, most are fine. In most situations you won't notice tiling unless you're really looking for it.
I understand striving for perfection but the bottom line is no one but you will notice or care about these things.
When I make textures, I always make sure there is as little repetition as possible, but if I want to use a stock texture and the situation in which I use it doesn't highlight on the poor tiling it's good enough in my opinion.
from what I understand of mip maps they switch to a lower resolution when viewed at a certain distance. So if a texture is too high resolution fitted to too small a brush, it will moiré before it gets a chance to mip.
I'm saying they can't be perfect, so the right is required
[editline]11th November 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Fat-Corgi-Guy;38417308]
EDIT: If [B]TONS[/B] of people think I should just stick with the default 128x128, then I will, but I for one think that it will just make it look...less than spectacular.[/QUOTE]
IMO you should be a lot more concerned with brush work and lighting. Overall atmosphere and cinematics.
I for one welcome our new texture overlords.
I think time would be better spent improving maps and models, but that's just me
There are a few places in hl2 with rather noticeably low texture resolution, but other than those few places it's not really an issue.
Stick to your guns, and work with higher resolution textures as you've already planned. If the new textures don't work out, then at least you can back it up with experience.
I'm also gonna add that it makes it hard to recycle vanilla content, as any 512x512 texture will stick out in a bad way next to the high resolution ones
[QUOTE=Barbarian887;38415490]not only would that be so high res that it would likely just scramble without constant mip map aid when aligned to a wall, you'd have to press your eye ball to a wall then suit zoom to see all of the detail. Not to mention it would make the game extremely demanding on your v-ram.
If you used a massive texture like that on a wall, you would have to squish its resolution in hammer editor, making it a redundant scrambled mess.
Textures that huge should only be used for grass / dirt in wide open areas where tiling can get ugly, and in areas where the full texture can be seen without scaling it down in hammer
512x512 looks just fine.
if you want extra close-up detail use $detail textures[/QUOTE]
2048x2048 doesn't change the "resolution" you're thinking of, [B]the texel scale in source is fixed[/B] unless you change it. this will effectively make a 2048² texture tile [I]four[/I] times less, because it occupies four times the space of a 512² texture.
get yer facts straight before making posts like it's a national scandal!
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;38418491]2048x2048 doesn't change the "resolution" you're thinking of, [B]the texel scale in source is fixed[/B] unless you change it. this will effectively make a 2048² texture tile [I]four[/I] times less, because it occupies four times the space of a 512² texture.
get yer facts straight before making posts like it's a national scandal![/QUOTE]
I have my facts stright. You are misunderstanding me.
I'm saying that taking a 2048x2048 texture and squishing it to fit onto a 128x128 unit wall in hammer will scramble the hell out of it and look ugly
[QUOTE=Barbarian887;38418535]I'm saying that taking a 2048x2048 texture and squishing it to fit onto a 128x128 unit wall in hammer will scramble the hell out of it and look ugly[/QUOTE]
But no one is planning to do that...?
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;38418551]But no one is planning to do that...?[/QUOTE]
then why would you make wall textures that resolution????
[editline]12th November 2012[/editline]
why would you use it on a normal size wall????
[editline]12th November 2012[/editline]
have you even been following the conversation?
Barbarian, it really sounds like you don't know what you're talking about. We understand what you're saying and it's just wrong.
I barely even know what the hell is being said and I can tell Barbarian is wrong. :v:
what is it not based on distance or something?
[editline]12th November 2012[/editline]
I'm open to enlightenment but all that gets said is "ur wrong" "ur dumb"
[editline]12th November 2012[/editline]
woooooow i just did a test and that didn't happen
i could have sworn that happened
wtf was i thinking about then why would i think that help help im retarded
Question, would it be good to do a blood system like in L4D2 and Black Mesa (except make it look MUCH more like blood, rather than BM's weird white edged sludge), where when you hit a combine,headcrab, etc., with a crowbar, it gets bloody?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
