Black Mesa Source V5 - "They're still working on Xen?"

[TextFAMGUY1]

[QUOTE=Xubs;47389536]also, TextFAMGUY1, I know your team is trying to make Black Mesa a bit closer to HL1's experience, at least difficulty-wise, but I hope you guys are doing this only within reason. I personally don't think HL1 was a perfectly balanced game, and in some ways I think it, too, was a little too difficult at times, Black Mesa just amplified it.

I hope you guys take some different directions with Black Mesa's balancing other than just saying "Half-Life 1 did it better, we'll do it exactly like that."

I think it'd be smartest to look at how HL2 did things as well and try and make a middle-ground, there's elements of both you can pick and choose from to make an overall better experience.[/QUOTE]

It's well within reason. We've only shifted things where we thought it would be improved by doing so. We're very far from just saying "do things exactly like Half-Life 1," that was never Black Mesa's direction and still isn't. Most of the places where we have changed things to be more like HL1, we're still pretty far from doing exactly like them. It's a delicate line that we walk. It's just that there were plenty of places where the mod would have been improved by being a bit more like HL1. That was made quite clear to us, both from our own opinions, and the communities'.

I think it is a bit unfair to suggest we're following HL1 mindlessly in our "new" direction, actually. I've tried very hard in everything I've said about our changes to articulate the reasoning, to show that we're not doing things mindlessly, a lot of thought and care goes into it. That, and most of the HL1 aligning changes we make are not done solely for difficulty. They're for fun. We're trying to make an awesome, fun game. That's difficult! And, after all, HL1 IS the game we are remaking. We don't have to do things exactly how HL1 did it, but you never really explained why doing that would be bad anyway.

We don't really consider HL2 in our decisions for what to do with BM. It's a totally separate beast, honestly.

[TornadoAP]

[QUOTE=TextFAMGUY1;47389362]They are as they were in the mod.
[/QUOTE]

Well that sucks. It would be amazing if the Black Mesa team would take a look at them and basically redesign them rather than fully cutting them or keeping them in.

You see the problem with cutting them is that without them, you really don't get an idea of how expansive the Black Mesa Research Facility is. Without the Vent mod, it feels like all the sections are apart from each other, not all connected in some way or another, and without the On a Rail bits, the Facility doesn't feel nearly as massive.

[TextFAMGUY1]

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;47390086]Well that sucks. It would be amazing if the Black Mesa team would take a look at them and basically redesign them rather than fully cutting them or keeping them in.

You see the problem with cutting them is that without them, you really don't get an idea of how expansive the Black Mesa Research Facility is. Without the Vent mod, it feels like all the sections are apart from each other, not all connected in some way or another, and without the On a Rail bits, the Facility doesn't feel nearly as massive.[/QUOTE]

The team isn't willing to do that, and I'm personally not willing to do that either - as the [I]creator[/I]! The version of On a Rail which was released in the mod fits the vision of what the team wanted for that chapter. The decision to cut it down was a conscious one, not an issue of time/resource constraints, like Surface Tension's cuts were. It's not how I would have done it personally, but it's not my decision. How my mod turned out is also not how I would do it, not anymore, which is a big part of the reason why I'm not happy to have it in either.

I also completely disagree that you don't get a sense of how expansive the BMRF is without them. The maps cut from the original OaR looped in a spiral, upwards, around the rocket. You hardly traveled any lateral distance whatsoever when you looked at it on an overview map. Their omission just makes OaR's journey in particular feel a lot smaller, but I think extending that logic to the entire facility is a bit of a stretch. The vast majority of the other maps in BMS are sized up from their originals, both in distance and just general size. 2 of the maps cut from OaR were literally loops. We had huge discussions about all of this in the OaRU thread on the BMS forums, back when I started on it.

You have to understand the huge workload we already have on our plate. People keep saying about stuff like OaRU, STU, Hazard Course, etc, etc - oh, just take them, redesign them to make them better, and put them in officially. It's absolutely not that simple. It's months of work, from every department. We're already overloaded without this stuff as is. We do want to actually release the game at some point, constantly adding to our workloads is a surefire way to block ourselves from that goal.

It will be there in mod form if you want to play it, and will be as simple as clicking the "subscribe" button. If my work doesn't satisfy people, well, a talented modder can always do better than I did, fire up the SDK and make a better vision themselves! That's exactly what I tried to do back when I started. I will probably revisit Surface Tension Uncut from scratch someday, especially knowing I'm a massively better mapper now than I was 3 years ago. OaRU? Less likely, but it's on the cards too...in the distant future.

[QUOTE=Xubs;47389754]good, I was hoping and thought you were being smart about it but a few comments you made about bringing the experience closer to HL1 made me wonder if you guys were going to take it too far. I was sure you guys wouldn't, but I just wanted clarification.

I'm afraid if I explained my reasoning behind why I don't think HL1 is a perfect game it would inspire some infighting, so I'll just leave the topic by saying I don't think HL1 is perfect and I simply wanted clarification that you guys would improve the game where it mattered from a balance perspective. Those comments about "bringing it closer to HL1" awhile back simply inspired some lingering doubt in me and I just wanted clarification. That's all.

And personally I think it's invaluable to look at a series as a whole and compare how games did certain things differently, to reach a final conclusion on stuff like balance and gameplay. Perhaps it's ultimately irrelevant to Black Mesa's dev cycle and I can't justify it for you guys since it's your mod and your ultimate vision, I just think it's a healthy exercise and was thinking you may have considered it at some points. But it's too late now and I understand that. What I think ultimately doesn't matter since it's your product and I shouldn't try to change your vision.

Make the mod how you want, I just wanted to be sure we were both on the same page.[/QUOTE]

Well, just to put your doubts to rest, literally nobody on the team thinks that HL1 is perfect, not even the most hardcore purists among us. We're trying our best to balance the two perspectives - to create a modern experience by today's standards (gaming has changed a lot in 17 years!) while reimagining and staying true to the incredible original experience. Most of what we're doing presently is going off of feedback which you guys have given us!

[Maestra Fénix]

I must be the only one who find ridiculous how fast the RPG rocket flies.

On my first try agaisn't the tank, I died as it couldn't turn over an obstacle and exploded near me.

[IceyMalone]

sk_grenade_rpg_airspeed lets you change the speed iirc, it's default is 6250 but I have it around 4000 and it's about right there.

Most of my issues with the mod are just personal preference that a few convars can change

[NicknineTheEagle]

About jump height, according to HL1 and HL2 source code, jump velocity equals square root from 2 * gravity * jump height.

pmove->velocity[2] = sqrt(2 * 800 * 45.0);

Jump height in HL1 is 45 units and gravity is 800. Default gravity in BM is 600 so if you want to make the jump height exactly the same as in HL1 set bms_normal_jump_vertical_speed and bms_normal_jump_crouch_vertical_speed to 232.379 (or 232.3790007724450 for full float precision).

[Old Hermit]

Quote from Aron Eneqvist (CastielLord) on the Classic Weapons thread on the BMS forums:
[QUOTE]Complete bummer getting banned for no reason... Whatever.

About the style of reloads I do for this pack, it's supposed to look alike the original weapons, so go ahead and look back at HL's reloads when you look at mine.

Anyways crowbar it is, it's easy to animate and it is getting close to finishing the pack!
I also just wanted to give a shoutout to Tobias Bünger for donating! This render is for ya.
[t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/112406676/ss%2B(2015-03-26%2Bat%2B01.34.32).jpg[/t]
It may be little but, it's something.
I hope to get a better crowbar model than this.
Also excuse the laziness with having my old 2014 background there.
[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvGdTFpMTP0&feature=youtu.be"]video of the weapons with better lighting[/URL]
If you consider donating, the information is in my old post... I swear if I get banned again then wow.
[/QUOTE]
Looks like the weapons are really coming along. I may have to consider donating to this guy.

[iAmaNewb]

[QUOTE=Old Hermit;47404784]Quote from Aron Eneqvist (CastielLord) on the Classic Weapons thread on the BMS forums:
[I]great weapons[/I]

Looks like the weapons are really coming along. I may have to consider donating to this guy.[/QUOTE]

Man, his guns are better than the mod's.

[TextFAMGUY1]

[QUOTE=iAmaNewb;47404822]Man, his guns are better than the mod's.[/QUOTE]

Models made in 2014/15 are better than the mod's weapon models, most of which are more than 5 years old? No way! They're very different, stylistically, from what our mod was trying to achieve. On a technical level, well, can't really argue with that.

Jokes aside, our retail weapon models are looking pretty darn nice, too. Can't wait to show em off to you guys, hopefully [I]soonish[/I]™. Stylistically they're mostly similar to the mod's weapons, but are significantly beefed up on a technical level. At any rate, we look forward to seeing this guy's work on the workshop too, so everyone can play with what they like :smile:

[Coffee]

Is the black mesa mp5 meant to have a suppressor on it or not? I can't tell too well.

[E Quantifier]

[QUOTE=TextFAMGUY1;47405240]Models made in 2014/15 are better than the mod's weapon models, most of which are more than 5 years old? No way! They're very different, stylistically, from what our mod was trying to achieve. On a technical level, well, can't really argue with that.

Jokes aside, our retail weapon models are looking pretty darn nice, too. Can't wait to show em off to you guys, hopefully [I]soonish[/I]™. Stylistically they're mostly similar to the mod's weapons, but are significantly beefed up on a technical level. At any rate, we look forward to seeing this guy's work on the workshop too, so everyone can play with what they like :smile:[/QUOTE]

Is the MP5 model closer to the original HL1 model now? Not that the current one is bad, I just really like the HL1 rendition.

[Dantz Bolrew]

I doubt it since the mod is aiming towards realism, though there is a guy remaking them in high definition along with the original arms.

[WhyNott]

Does the new engine have support for subsurface scattering? I'm working on a BMS map that could really benefit from it, and it seems just stupid that valve had disabled SS in newer versions of source like that

[B-Bud]

I don't remember Source ever having subsurface scattering.

[Plaffy46]

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;47389057]
[B]The Gluon Gun[/B]: I can't really make a comment on this. It's pretty much perfect. It's a laser gun what do you expect.
[/QUOTE]

Ha, I remember the good ol' times in HL1 when the gluon was OP and when I would fire bursts of 0.2 seconds, not enough time to use 1% ammo, but enough to kill a vortiguant. Nostalgia.

[jackfu]

[QUOTE=Bernie Buddy;47414149]I don't remember Source ever having subsurface scattering.[/QUOTE]

Well, the guys behind C17:EP1(RIP) actually implemented it into Source '07, and after it died, they decided to release all the assets, subsurface scattering included.

So yes it is possible, but they haven't announced the features for the new engine, so we'll have to wait and see.

[Sableye]

[QUOTE=Tommyx50;47321388]I think some of the Half-life 2 props do fit. I think that the Black Mesa of HL1 was perhaps a little too clean, and it gave conflicting information since some of the environment told the player that Black Mesa was fairly careless (constantly exploding equipment and radioactive material leaks), while the textures were mostly overly clean (perhaps due to graphical limitations and trying to avoid obviously repeating textures).

The dirtier HL2 props could make Black Mesa has a more cohesive vision as over-funded snobs, which was always their original point.

Aperture Science has already taken the aesthetically clean vision where they "dress up" in a struggle to appeal to investors, anyways.[/QUOTE]

ya in the few chemistry labs ive been in, they look clean from the doorway but physically approaching everything you realize how dirty and grimy a daily used lab table can get

[WhyNott]

Shit, I actually meant paralax mapping. I have no idea how I mixed up the two

[BloodShot12]

[QUOTE=Old Hermit;47404784]Quote from Aron Eneqvist (CastielLord) on the Classic Weapons thread on the BMS forums:

Looks like the weapons are really coming along. I may have to consider donating to this guy.[/QUOTE]

Man, the size and positioning of the glock are just fucking [I]perfect[/I]

[Hell-met]

What was the recent "arg" all about? nothing happened since then.

[Old Hermit]

[URL="http://www.polycount.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2274434&postcount=87"]So Juniez just posted some more shots[/URL]
[QUOTE=Juniez]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/hKO2WJ1.gif[/img]
[t]http://i.imgur.com/TFNBTn4.jpg[/t][/QUOTE]
I'm seriously starting to lose it waiting for this shit. If I had money I'd donate the shit out of it to these guys.

[Samuel2213]

[QUOTE=TheRealRudy;47422179]I hope he will upload these to the Black Mesa Workshop. Would love to mix and match various addons.

Hell, the Black Mesa Workshop is such a brilliant idea. In 5 years time, Black Mesa will probably still look amazing with all kinds of graphical mods, like Skyrim.[/QUOTE]

Depends how much they modify their branch of the engine.
The Black Mesa mod already pushes Source to its limits.

[Tuskin]

I'm surprised valve hasn't added workshop to their back catalogue

[Old Hermit]

Fucking dammit Juniez stop making my dick break my desk
[t]http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/96/95390/marktworender.jpg[/t]
[editline]this just in[/editline]
Apparently this is the [URL="http://www.moddb.com/mods/opposing-force-2/images/of2-mkii-hand-grenade#imagebox"]same model[/URL] he's submitting to OF2
So does that mean that his OF2 RPG may end up in the pack, as well?
[t]http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/11/10775/smaw.1.png[/t]

[BloodShot12]

idk, that rpg seems fairly different from the HL1 rpg (which I assumed his pack was going for since the weapons are high detail remodels of the low poly hl1 designs)

[austin.paquette]

[QUOTE=Old Hermit;47423796]Fucking dammit Juniez stop making my dick break my desk
[t]http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/96/95390/marktworender.jpg[/t]
[editline]this just in[/editline]
Apparently this is the [URL="http://www.moddb.com/mods/opposing-force-2/images/of2-mkii-hand-grenade#imagebox"]same model[/URL] he's submitting to OF2
So does that mean that his OF2 RPG may end up in the pack, as well?
[t]http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/11/10775/smaw.1.png[/t][/QUOTE]

GOD

DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN

[Juniez]

[QUOTE=Old Hermit;47423796]Fucking dammit Juniez stop making my dick break my desk
[t]http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/96/95390/marktworender.jpg[/t]
[editline]this just in[/editline]
Apparently this is the [URL="http://www.moddb.com/mods/opposing-force-2/images/of2-mkii-hand-grenade#imagebox"]same model[/URL] he's submitting to OF2
So does that mean that his OF2 RPG may end up in the pack, as well?
[t]http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/11/10775/smaw.1.png[/t][/QUOTE]

NO

[editline]30th March 2015[/editline]

no..

[Old Hermit]

[QUOTE=Juniez;47424952]NO

[editline]30th March 2015[/editline]

no..[/QUOTE]
Wait, no to what?
To the RPG being reused for the pack?
[sp]or to me telling you to stop making my dick break my desk :V[/sp]

[WhyNott]

Repeating the question: will the new engine support parallax mapping?

[Tuskin]

[QUOTE=WhyNott;47425292]Repeating the question: will the new engine support parallax mapping?[/QUOTE]

Don't think so, I have not seen it used in any of the new screens.

The dev team would probably not add it unless they intended to use it them selves.