Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
yes, only a batch compiler solves it. If you wonder it's still compiling or not go to your task manager and look at mem usage. About improving hammer, in hammer 3.5 i was able to use the camera when the texture editor was open. This allowed me to rotate around a object for example and select all faces. In the hammer of now as soon as i click on the camera button my texture editor closes which makes certain tasks harder. It would be really nice if that gets back like how it was. And for another improvement, it would be nice to have clones. This way i can make a pilar for example, change the shape and the texture of the original later and it will be applied to all. for the rest hammer is a nice program and it does his job, althought making it open source would be nice. This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. This would sacrifice flexibility over speed. I couldn't give a toss about how long it took, as long as it works and I can do what I want with it. a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window *BuildFaceLights: 1...2...3...*etc. I'd call that a progress bar... also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev There already is in the 3D camera drop-down with *Wireframe*, *Textured*, etc. say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. I don't understand what you mean by profiles. Why wouldn't you want custom content to load? Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine All crashes generate an MDMP file for you to debug with in Visual Studio / view with *windbg* (I think) A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing There is a page on VDC which shows what dimensions players can fit under / in. inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping There is an entire HTML documentation for mapping in L4D... I'm sure they'll do it for their future multiplayer games, rather un-necessary for singleplayer. Plus there are hundreds of tutorials all over the internet. I like *interlopers.net* best for help and assistance. make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf I thought it was in the *sourcesdk content* folder somewhere? Corerct me if I'm wrong. Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them It's a wiki you're free to help and edit. it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file I find that the Source SDK is nicely organised into folders and filters in Visual Studio. It's a very steep learning curve but you soon get the hang of where things are and what calls what, etc. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
I think that it needs to make $100 bills shoot out of the DVD drive. I think that would appeal to the entire community. :) On 8/29/2009 4:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
I don't think that's quite true Saul. Our copy seems to differer from theirs because they keep breaking ours and not theirs. :p On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Saul Rennison saul.renni...@gmail.comwrote: You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Hi I welcome what you have said. for one the weapons defs are used to make premade code that can then be changed The progruss bar needs to show total progruss The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion. although valve considers themselfs first thay put alot of work into the sdk also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. also $100 bills out of the dvd drive would be useful but counterfiting using a dvd drive say using lightscrube is like making a map that is designed on the desktop, cool but near impossable Thanks for the feedback so far Thanks Vbitz Saul Rennison wrote: For one there needs to be a weapon generoratoe that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. This would sacrifice flexibility over speed. I couldn't give a toss about how long it took, as long as it works and I can do what I want with it. a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window *BuildFaceLights: 1...2...3...*etc. I'd call that a progress bar... also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev There already is in the 3D camera drop-down with *Wireframe*, *Textured*, etc. say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. I don't understand what you mean by profiles. Why wouldn't you want custom content to load? Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine All crashes generate an MDMP file for you to debug with in Visual Studio / view with *windbg* (I think) A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing There is a page on VDC which shows what dimensions players can fit under / in. inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping There is an entire HTML documentation for mapping in L4D... I'm sure they'll do it for their future multiplayer games, rather un-necessary for singleplayer. Plus there are hundreds of tutorials all over the internet. I like *interlopers.net* best for help and assistance. make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf I thought it was in the *sourcesdk content* folder somewhere? Corerct me if I'm wrong. Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them It's a wiki you're free to help and edit. it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file I find that the Source SDK is nicely organised into folders and filters in Visual Studio. It's a very steep learning curve but you soon get the hang of where things are and what calls what, etc. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Valve won't have a problem with that ( as long as everything is correct ) That's what the wiki is for... Joshua Scarsbrook schrieb: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that contains a detailed expiation of what each coding file does. With all of this said I think that the source sdk and Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them. Also worth noting, that it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file. What I propose is both employees of valve and the coumumatiy surrounding them do this as to continue communality support for years to come. Though these improvements would require a lot of development, I think that they would appeal to the entire communality. Thanks, Vbitz ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Well please run a spellcheck on it, format it into neat paragraphs and get someone to proof read it before you post it. That first message here nearly killed me. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that That's probably because your computer really wouldn't be able to calculate the lightmaps in realtime. What do you think vrad spends those minutes doing? The progruss bar needs to show total progruss Once you know the process of compiling a map you can easily tell how far through you are. I can at least. No need for a progress bar. Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Why would you even want the map to work without added stuff? That's what modding is about. ADDING STUFF. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly Err no, It's like 58 or 64 units isn't it? It can be measured in hammer easily. finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion Sure it does, but that's not valve's no.1 priority. Why don't you go out there, learn the source engine and add some useful stuff to it yourself? also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. Well actually wait what??? Nope, we have the same thing they do. We just don't get access to the engine itself. We have everything we need to make a game like TF2/L4D without engine access anyways. Tony, I for one am actually satisfied with the source SDK, you're doing a great job. The only thing I'd like in future is for valve to add more functionality to the engine itself. Dynamic model scaling, DirectX 10 support and other stuff that would put the engine at a commercial and featurewise par with UE3 and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing. A defeat visleef system would be a very powerful improvement to show things the player would be seeing and only that. The hammer editor is treated very much like a cad program and should be made easier to understand and with inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping, the doc would be placed as tooltips and info in the entries window. In addition, it would be important make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf. In addition, improvements need to be made to the documentation of the source sdk, such as a separate wiki that
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
The progruss bar needs to show total progruss I'm sure you can figure out how much it's done. But an ETA would be welcomed. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that I'm pretty sure there's a *Ray-traced* option in L4D which is exactly what it says on the tin. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly There is *definately* a page on either VDC or *interlopers.net* which shows exactly what I said in my previous email. thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. VALVe creates Counter-Strike: Source, L4D, TF2, etc. the same as we create our mods. The only advantage they have is that they can branch the engine off and have free rein over the engine code. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com Hi I welcome what you have said. for one the weapons defs are used to make premade code that can then be changed The progruss bar needs to show total progruss The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion. although valve considers themselfs first thay put alot of work into the sdk also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. also $100 bills out of the dvd drive would be useful but counterfiting using a dvd drive say using lightscrube is like making a map that is designed on the desktop, cool but near impossable Thanks for the feedback so far Thanks Vbitz Saul Rennison wrote: For one there needs to be a weapon generoratoe that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. This would sacrifice flexibility over speed. I couldn't give a toss about how long it took, as long as it works and I can do what I want with it. a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window *BuildFaceLights: 1...2...3...*etc. I'd call that a progress bar... also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev There already is in the 3D camera drop-down with *Wireframe*, *Textured*, etc. say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. I don't understand what you mean by profiles. Why wouldn't you want custom content to load? Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine All crashes generate an MDMP file for you to debug with in Visual Studio / view with *windbg* (I think) A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also a importing thing There is a page on VDC which shows what dimensions players can fit under / in. inbuilt documentation to help newcomers to mapping There is an entire HTML documentation for mapping in L4D... I'm sure they'll do it for their future multiplayer games, rather un-necessary for singleplayer. Plus there are hundreds of tutorials all over the internet. I like *interlopers.net* best for help and assistance. make the skeathup plug-in more available though it is hidden in the source sdk gcf I thought it was in the *sourcesdk content* folder somewhere? Corerct me if I'm wrong. Valve Developers Wiki is out of date and both need an improvemt considering the amount of people that use them It's a wiki you're free to help and edit. it is too hard to change basic game play rules and they should be in a collective header file I find that the Source SDK is nicely organised into folders and filters in Visual Studio. It's a very steep learning curve but you soon get the hang of where things are and what calls what, etc. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content. Another thing would be to add crash tracking in the engine, the report bug system is not implicated enough and most map devs will understand technical details. A micro-engine in hammer to test whether a player can fit under a league is also
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Dynamic model scaling http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Prop_scalable DirectX 10 support The shader system supports it... it just doesn't implement it. What improvements would this bring that would be worth the money it would cost to implement? featurewise par with UE3 I'm pretty darn sure that that isn't VALVe's main goal. The engine is purely for their game-creating needs, they've only had a handful of licensees IIRC. Doesn't Source Engine have a greater MOD community than UE3? It definately had a bigger fan-base / players. and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. We'll see how pretty Episode 3 is when it's released. It will blow UE3 out of the fucking water. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Harry Jeffery harry101jeff...@googlemail.com Well please run a spellcheck on it, format it into neat paragraphs and get someone to proof read it before you post it. That first message here nearly killed me. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that That's probably because your computer really wouldn't be able to calculate the lightmaps in realtime. What do you think vrad spends those minutes doing? The progruss bar needs to show total progruss Once you know the process of compiling a map you can easily tell how far through you are. I can at least. No need for a progress bar. Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Why would you even want the map to work without added stuff? That's what modding is about. ADDING STUFF. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly Err no, It's like 58 or 64 units isn't it? It can be measured in hammer easily. finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion Sure it does, but that's not valve's no.1 priority. Why don't you go out there, learn the source engine and add some useful stuff to it yourself? also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. Well actually wait what??? Nope, we have the same thing they do. We just don't get access to the engine itself. We have everything we need to make a game like TF2/L4D without engine access anyways. Tony, I for one am actually satisfied with the source SDK, you're doing a great job. The only thing I'd like in future is for valve to add more functionality to the engine itself. Dynamic model scaling, DirectX 10 support and other stuff that would put the engine at a commercial and featurewise par with UE3 and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition,
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Well the doc is almost done. Lighting RENDER, not really just real time the compile map is good and a bar is not too hard to make since valve was so kind as to give us the source for the compile apps added stuff. we need the maps to work for alot of people, i have seen ugly custom texture problems and the wiki, working on it right now and finaly adding directx 10 to source would be wonderful but i think that thay are doing that for ep3 and lfd2 Thanks for all the coments Vbitz p.s. i have alot of stuff to work on and you are almost the first to complain on my grammer, no offence p.s.s. thunderbird likes my spelling and sending it to word would take to long Harry Jeffery wrote: Well please run a spellcheck on it, format it into neat paragraphs and get someone to proof read it before you post it. That first message here nearly killed me. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that That's probably because your computer really wouldn't be able to calculate the lightmaps in realtime. What do you think vrad spends those minutes doing? The progruss bar needs to show total progruss Once you know the process of compiling a map you can easily tell how far through you are. I can at least. No need for a progress bar. Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Why would you even want the map to work without added stuff? That's what modding is about. ADDING STUFF. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly Err no, It's like 58 or 64 units isn't it? It can be measured in hammer easily. finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion Sure it does, but that's not valve's no.1 priority. Why don't you go out there, learn the source engine and add some useful stuff to it yourself? also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. Well actually wait what??? Nope, we have the same thing they do. We just don't get access to the engine itself. We have everything we need to make a game like TF2/L4D without engine access anyways. Tony, I for one am actually satisfied with the source SDK, you're doing a great job. The only thing I'd like in future is for valve to add more functionality to the engine itself. Dynamic model scaling, DirectX 10 support and other stuff that would put the engine at a commercial and featurewise par with UE3 and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there needs to be a massive improvement in the source software development kit. For one there needs to be a weapon generator that uses tags and xml to define a weapon a basic weapon to speed up development of new weapons. For two there needs to be a technical improvement to hammer. Hammer as said by many members of the community is out dated and needs to be improved; a simple improvement would be to add a progress bar to the run map window, also there needs to be a lighting render button to give a preview of the dev. In addition, there needs to be profiles added to the engine, say like a dev mode, which does not load custom content.
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
We'll see how pretty Episode 3 is when it's released. It will blow UE3 out of the fucking water. (I still dunno how to do a quote :p) Why wait for Ep3 when Ep2 already blows UE3 out of the water? If you look at most UT mods you can recognize them in a snap as a Ut mod for one reason. Their bump/normals look incredibly fugly/odd and I can tell almost any UE3 mod from it. It's also very brown and generic, least as far as Gears of War, UT3, etc. Mirrors Edge is an exception but it's also liscenced from Unreal and not made by them. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.comwrote: Well the doc is almost done. Lighting RENDER, not really just real time the compile map is good and a bar is not too hard to make since valve was so kind as to give us the source for the compile apps added stuff. we need the maps to work for alot of people, i have seen ugly custom texture problems and the wiki, working on it right now and finaly adding directx 10 to source would be wonderful but i think that thay are doing that for ep3 and lfd2 Thanks for all the coments Vbitz p.s. i have alot of stuff to work on and you are almost the first to complain on my grammer, no offence p.s.s. thunderbird likes my spelling and sending it to word would take to long Harry Jeffery wrote: Well please run a spellcheck on it, format it into neat paragraphs and get someone to proof read it before you post it. That first message here nearly killed me. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that That's probably because your computer really wouldn't be able to calculate the lightmaps in realtime. What do you think vrad spends those minutes doing? The progruss bar needs to show total progruss Once you know the process of compiling a map you can easily tell how far through you are. I can at least. No need for a progress bar. Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Why would you even want the map to work without added stuff? That's what modding is about. ADDING STUFF. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly Err no, It's like 58 or 64 units isn't it? It can be measured in hammer easily. finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion Sure it does, but that's not valve's no.1 priority. Why don't you go out there, learn the source engine and add some useful stuff to it yourself? also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. Well actually wait what??? Nope, we have the same thing they do. We just don't get access to the engine itself. We have everything we need to make a game like TF2/L4D without engine access anyways. Tony, I for one am actually satisfied with the source SDK, you're doing a great job. The only thing I'd like in future is for valve to add more functionality to the engine itself. Dynamic model scaling, DirectX 10 support and other stuff that would put the engine at a commercial and featurewise par with UE3 and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of massive improvements that *you get to work on them*, or pick an engine that already has the features and tools you need. Paul On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tony I think that the source sdk is a bit out dated; I think that with the realece of hl2ep3 or just after it, there
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Well dinamic prop scaling works well for cubes but valves phys is a little ficle with different scales DirectX 10 is well worth it but it needs be put in something like a mod to the lost coust first Unreal Engine 3 is a really good engine from what i have seen but source is valves thing and having a powerful engine is not what thay want. there main goal for the engine is making good games not flashey ones Anyway the SDK we use is powerful and the first cs was made with the goldsrc version. Valve has alot on there plate right now and my ideas where some things for when thay get some extra time. And the Doc is done :) Thanks Vbitz Saul Rennison wrote: Dynamic model scaling http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Prop_scalable DirectX 10 support The shader system supports it... it just doesn't implement it. What improvements would this bring that would be worth the money it would cost to implement? featurewise par with UE3 I'm pretty darn sure that that isn't VALVe's main goal. The engine is purely for their game-creating needs, they've only had a handful of licensees IIRC. Doesn't Source Engine have a greater MOD community than UE3? It definately had a bigger fan-base / players. and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. We'll see how pretty Episode 3 is when it's released. It will blow UE3 out of the fucking water. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Harry Jeffery harry101jeff...@googlemail.com Well please run a spellcheck on it, format it into neat paragraphs and get someone to proof read it before you post it. That first message here nearly killed me. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that That's probably because your computer really wouldn't be able to calculate the lightmaps in realtime. What do you think vrad spends those minutes doing? The progruss bar needs to show total progruss Once you know the process of compiling a map you can easily tell how far through you are. I can at least. No need for a progress bar. Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Why would you even want the map to work without added stuff? That's what modding is about. ADDING STUFF. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly Err no, It's like 58 or 64 units isn't it? It can be measured in hammer easily. finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion Sure it does, but that's not valve's no.1 priority. Why don't you go out there, learn the source engine and add some useful stuff to it yourself? also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. Well actually wait what??? Nope, we have the same thing they do. We just don't get access to the engine itself. We have everything we need to make a game like TF2/L4D without engine access anyways. Tony, I for one am actually satisfied with the source SDK, you're doing a great job. The only thing I'd like in future is for valve to add more functionality to the engine itself. Dynamic model scaling, DirectX 10 support and other stuff that would put the engine at a commercial and featurewise par with UE3 and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what *you* need, or maybe what *you think the community needs*, it's not what Valve needed. I suggest if that if you have list of
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Well unreal 3 is not source good but it is not half bad finaly i got the doc genned for only the files valve added documentation too 400mb for 40files the html was only 1mb though. anyway valve sould put this with the sdk so it still needs hl2 to work Matt Hoffman wrote: We'll see how pretty Episode 3 is when it's released. It will blow UE3 out of the fucking water. (I still dunno how to do a quote :p) Why wait for Ep3 when Ep2 already blows UE3 out of the water? If you look at most UT mods you can recognize them in a snap as a Ut mod for one reason. Their bump/normals look incredibly fugly/odd and I can tell almost any UE3 mod from it. It's also very brown and generic, least as far as Gears of War, UT3, etc. Mirrors Edge is an exception but it's also liscenced from Unreal and not made by them. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.comwrote: Well the doc is almost done. Lighting RENDER, not really just real time the compile map is good and a bar is not too hard to make since valve was so kind as to give us the source for the compile apps added stuff. we need the maps to work for alot of people, i have seen ugly custom texture problems and the wiki, working on it right now and finaly adding directx 10 to source would be wonderful but i think that thay are doing that for ep3 and lfd2 Thanks for all the coments Vbitz p.s. i have alot of stuff to work on and you are almost the first to complain on my grammer, no offence p.s.s. thunderbird likes my spelling and sending it to word would take to long Harry Jeffery wrote: Well please run a spellcheck on it, format it into neat paragraphs and get someone to proof read it before you post it. That first message here nearly killed me. The lighting is not as it is seen inside the engine when you use that That's probably because your computer really wouldn't be able to calculate the lightmaps in realtime. What do you think vrad spends those minutes doing? The progruss bar needs to show total progruss Once you know the process of compiling a map you can easily tell how far through you are. I can at least. No need for a progress bar. Profiles are to test weather the map will work without added stuff. Why would you even want the map to work without added stuff? That's what modding is about. ADDING STUFF. Players fitting under the leage is something that needs alot of testing normaly Err no, It's like 58 or 64 units isn't it? It can be measured in hammer easily. finaly the wiki needs more coding documatasion Sure it does, but that's not valve's no.1 priority. Why don't you go out there, learn the source engine and add some useful stuff to it yourself? also thay do not keep braking ours, thay use a seprate copy that has direct links with true engine heders. Well actually wait what??? Nope, we have the same thing they do. We just don't get access to the engine itself. We have everything we need to make a game like TF2/L4D without engine access anyways. Tony, I for one am actually satisfied with the source SDK, you're doing a great job. The only thing I'd like in future is for valve to add more functionality to the engine itself. Dynamic model scaling, DirectX 10 support and other stuff that would put the engine at a commercial and featurewise par with UE3 and thus earn more licenses and more money for valve in future and give valve greater resources to keep improving the engine. 2009/8/29 Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com: Hi Well the only other engine i liked is irrlicht but source is much beter for indie projects. i hope valve does not mind that i am making my own help file for the sdk, it will take forever to make but it will be preaty cool, it is working right now. with the ok from valve i will put it on the Valve Devlopers Wiki. Hope theres no repeat of last time Thanks Vbitz Logan Baldock wrote: Meh, I like it the way it is actually. I got into modding using the same methods that are there right now, and it just works. Unlike some other engines. You also have to take into account VALVe's priorities are: 1. VALVe 2. Everyone else The Source SDK is basically just ripped from their *src/* folder which contains the engine, VPhysics, Havok, etc. They aren't going to re-organise the entire code base just to suit 20 people who want to save 1 hour per week with the improvement it results in. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/29 Paul Peloski paulpelo...@gmail.com The SDK is improving all the time, but only to the extent necessary for Valve to make awesome games. While an XML-based weapon system might be what
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
It worked fine on my Intel/Geforce XP build, but does the problem you describe on my AMD/ATI Win7 build. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com wrote: This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
A proper complete source document buld is done but it crashes some places and the html set is 151mb or 172,208,128 bytes, that is bigger then most mods it is as big as sourceforts or hl2dmpro or garrysmod 9 but it is some nice documets on the coding. i am now compressing it to only 17mb though. if valve says yes then i will put it somewere. Matt Hoffman wrote: It worked fine on my Intel/Geforce XP build, but does the problem you describe on my AMD/ATI Win7 build. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com wrote: This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
I hear your pain, bro. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/30 Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Joshua can you please edit your messages so people may understand correctly what you are doing. People will generally ignore your messages if they are too hard to interpret. -- From: Joshua Scarsbrook jscarsbr...@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 9:18 AM To: Discussion of Half-Life Programming hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK A proper complete source document buld is done but it crashes some places and the html set is 151mb or 172,208,128 bytes, that is bigger then most mods it is as big as sourceforts or hl2dmpro or garrysmod 9 but it is some nice documets on the coding. i am now compressing it to only 17mb though. if valve says yes then i will put it somewere. Matt Hoffman wrote: It worked fine on my Intel/Geforce XP build, but does the problem you describe on my AMD/ATI Win7 build. On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com wrote: This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.71/2334 - Release Date: 08/29/09 17:51:00 ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
There are lots of problems with compiling inside Hammer. Compiles are often slowed down because of Hammer using a lot of memory, plus Hammer is frozen while the Compile is going on. And when you finally get ingame, Hammer is still using the memory, and depending on your computer, the game will run slower than it would with Hammer closed. I don't recommend compiling with Hammer open and esspecially not testing with Hammer open. If you want to compile outside Hammer, I suggest you get a copy of VBCT by Quicksilver http://qsextreme.com/vbct/ It's an excellent tool - although it still isn't fully polished - I actively use it for compiling and it has a lot of useful features. I just wish it was Open Source so I could polish it a bit more. ;)// I hear your pain, bro. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/30 Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Lol, obvious troll, nice one Joshua. On Sunday, August 30, 2009, Jonas 'Sortie' Termansen hlcod...@maxsi.dk wrote: There are lots of problems with compiling inside Hammer. Compiles are often slowed down because of Hammer using a lot of memory, plus Hammer is frozen while the Compile is going on. And when you finally get ingame, Hammer is still using the memory, and depending on your computer, the game will run slower than it would with Hammer closed. I don't recommend compiling with Hammer open and esspecially not testing with Hammer open. If you want to compile outside Hammer, I suggest you get a copy of VBCT by Quicksilver http://qsextreme.com/vbct/ It's an excellent tool - although it still isn't fully polished - I actively use it for compiling and it has a lot of useful features. I just wish it was Open Source so I could polish it a bit more. ;)// I hear your pain, bro. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/30 Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- Programmer for Resistance and Liberation www.resistanceandliberation.com Programmer for Red Tribe www.redtribe.com ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
How. Thanks Vbitz Jonathan Murphy wrote: Lol, obvious troll, nice one Joshua. On Sunday, August 30, 2009, Jonas 'Sortie' Termansen hlcod...@maxsi.dk wrote: There are lots of problems with compiling inside Hammer. Compiles are often slowed down because of Hammer using a lot of memory, plus Hammer is frozen while the Compile is going on. And when you finally get ingame, Hammer is still using the memory, and depending on your computer, the game will run slower than it would with Hammer closed. I don't recommend compiling with Hammer open and esspecially not testing with Hammer open. If you want to compile outside Hammer, I suggest you get a copy of VBCT by Quicksilver http://qsextreme.com/vbct/ It's an excellent tool - although it still isn't fully polished - I actively use it for compiling and it has a lot of useful features. I just wish it was Open Source so I could polish it a bit more. ;)// I hear your pain, bro. Thanks, - Saul. 2009/8/30 Jorge Rodriguez bs.v...@gmail.com This is only slightly off topic, but: Every version of Hammer (even back to Worldcraft and before) I've ever worked with, the build window always stops updating about 20 or 30 seconds into the process. All of Hammer then freezes up until the build is completely done, so progress isn't visible. Does this happen to anybody else? -- Jorge Vino Rodriguez ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
I'm going to answer one of the things directly right now; I already made it super easy to add new weapons as it is (with the template) You copy and paste 2 files, rename the class and edit the attributes in the .txt file, edit the enum and the alias table. And if you want a custom ammo type, you just copy and paste another ammo type in sdk_gamerules.cpp and you're done. It's kind of faster to add 5 new weapons at once than it is to just add one, too actually. -Tony ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Possable Improvements to the Source SDK
Good response, Tony. Just wondering if you're in a position to answer any other of the questions? Thanks, - Saul. On 30 Aug 2009, at 03:00, Tony Sergi to...@valvesoftware.com wrote: I'm going to answer one of the things directly right now; I already made it super easy to add new weapons as it is (with the template) You copy and paste 2 files, rename the class and edit the attributes in the .txt file, edit the enum and the alias table. And if you want a custom ammo type, you just copy and paste another ammo type in sdk_gamerules.cpp and you're done. It's kind of faster to add 5 new weapons at once than it is to just add one, too actually. -Tony ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
