The "Bug-Me" Thread: Your Questions for Croteam

[GeForceNoob]

O_o

Ragdoll physics = already in SS2.

CSG = are you kidding me? No way that should appear again in SE3!

The "making a room takes so much time to do it's tedious" argument is just....wrong. It takes SECONDS to make a room in SEd2. Why not before making arguments like that, you try to use the Editor for at least one month. Christ....

What would be a good use in the next editor is a more user-friendly GUI and more options for UV-mapping like in Maya/3Ds max (UV-map export with different quality settings for example). Also, it would be good if in the 2D views, an reference image could be inserted. Yes, it can be done in 3D using polygons and textures, but still...Every good modeling app has that option.

Don't really care about Macros/Lua, even though Lua sounds pretty interesting.

[Rosco[CoF]]

When do we get to see a video of SS-HD or SS3 in action?

I assume if it is going to be released this autumn there ought to be enough to tease us with a good zerg video.

[Deepblue]

Originally Posted by GeForceNoob

The "making a room takes so much time to do it's tedious" argument is just....wrong.

No.
It's wrong in that for some it is not tedious
It's right in that for some it is.

Modelling experience will be what determines the tediousness and length of time it takes to make a room.

[Fiendian]

Originally Posted by GeForceNoob

CSG = are you kidding me? No way that should appear again in SE3!

Would you mind explaining why?
(I know CSG was poorly implemented in SE1, but it isn't the only available option of its kind)

[GeForceNoob]

Originally Posted by Deepblue

No.
It's wrong in that for some it is not tedious
It's right in that for some it is.

Modelling experience will be what determines the tediousness and length of time it takes to make a room.

Modelling experience...in making a room? How...making a cube and pressing Shift+F is tedious and requires a lot of modelling experience? Remember we're talking about making a ROOM, not some hall with a pool in the middle, with pillars surrounding it and uber lighting+HDR with 209324890x209324890 size textures and shadow maps and 3.0 shaders.

Infact, I'm sure that some people don't even try.

Originally Posted by Fiendian

Would you mind explaining why?
(I know CSG was poorly implemented in SE1, but it isn't the only available option of its kind)

Actually, why would you want to see an old technology like that used in newest editor? Unless you aim for the visual details on the par with SS:SE, I kinda understand, but seriously, who would want to see that in a game which utilizes the newest graphical technoliges?

In fact, after using Hammer and SEd1 for so damn long, I am very negative for this idea being implemented in the future Editors for SS games.

[Fiendian]

You did not answer my question.

And by the way, your rant above was amusing, making it seem like the shader model version and texture resolution have an impact on the difficulty of making maps.

[GeForceNoob]

Originally Posted by Fiendian

You did not answer my question.

And by the way, your rant above was amusing, making it seem like the shader model version and texture resolution have an impact on the difficulty of making maps.

Actually, I have. It doesn't require a lot to get it.

It wasn't a rant too, more like an opinion. An opinion about an old method which shouldn't deserve CT's time. They have better things to concentrate on.

" making it seem like the shader model version and texture resolution have an impact on the difficulty of making maps"

Erm...yes it does. But it wasn't a point. Someone said that he couldn't even get a room made in SEd2 because it was so tedious to do, so go figure....

[Fiendian]

I have never opened up SEd 2 before so I wouldn't know, but to me it is an unnecessary complication to force mappers to use modelling for even the simplest of shapes, unless there are presets of course, similar to the primitives in SEd.

How does SM3.0 and 209324890x209324890 textures make mapping more difficult anyway (aside from requiring a crazily fast GPU with lots of vRAM)?

[Deepblue]

Originally Posted by Fiendian

Would you mind explaining why?
(I know CSG was poorly implemented in SE1, but it isn't the only available option of its kind)

Two words. CSG Holes.
If you were unlucky, you'd get them in a room when you tried to join it to another room no matter where you put the doorway leaving you to cut and cut away at the polygon, increasing the poly count depending on how bad the hole was and take time to figure out where to cut.

Also high poly stuff as one object created lots of little holes.

[GeForceNoob]

Well, that's the problem right there. You didn't even open the Editor.

Just check out my Showcase thread, when I started using SEd2 my modelling experience was pretty damn awful. Did it stop me from using the Editor though? No. I had my time and I learned it, it's an very good Editor. For me, just a few more tools would be great for mesh/uv-map editing, not some old CSG operations of which I had nightmares.

"How does SM3.0 and 209324890x209324890 textures make mapping more difficult anyway (aside from requiring a crazily fast GPU with lots of vRAM"

Okay. If you look it from artistic perspective, it does require a lot of time to pick the right shaders/materials and textures.
If you look it from technical perspective, it requires crazily fast GPU with lots of vRAM.
If you look it from ****-all-perspective, it doesn't make the mapping more harder to do, but in the end it results in a horrendous map.

[Fiendian]

Originally Posted by Deepblue

Two words. CSG Holes.

I know:

Originally Posted by Fiendian

(I know CSG was poorly implemented in SE1, but it isn't the only available option of its kind)

As Shrinker has said in the past, the CSG holes are caused by a bug, and last time I checked bugs can be fixed.

[Zocky]

look guys, i did work some in TFE looong ago, and did in ss2 too. And to be honest, i find it uterly funny that there are people who actually wants to see sed1 style (CSG) rether the ss2 style. Everyone has his own opinion, but really, there is no choice between those two. Try making human head in TFE and let me know of result. I did make human head in early days of ss2 with SED2, and it didn't even take too long at all.
Yes, ss2 style requires some learning if you want more complex architecture, but there is no easy way to make it anyway. CSG like in SED1 may be good for some extremly basic stuff, but when you try to make really complex archicture, CSG especially SED1, fails completly.

For example, try making this in SED1:

in reasonable amounth of time. Good luck with that. I, on the other hand, did try to make that in sed2, and with little practise, it's not too hard. There are some areas that really needs improvment in sed2, like uv mapping tools, but even without it, you can produce faaar better results in sed2 then sed1 in short period of time.
As i said, it does take some time to make complex arhictecture but hey, if you are serious into these things, you will have to learn modelling sooner or later anyway.
So sed2 is only harder to learn because it's can do soooo much more the csg and sed could have never even imagened. And that complexity is requires some more learning.

Also, as somewhat already said, do create box, weather it is maya, 3ds max, sed2,or anything, it's pretty much down to pressing a single button, and maybe seet properties, like size. That's it. How hard can that be to learn?

Geez people, stop complaning and stop being lazy, if you put half of your effort into actually learning a little modelling in sed2 instead of complaints, you would make fantastic maps for ss2 by now.

--edited--
as GFN said, how is it logical to complain about something you haven't even tryed? You pretty much don't know what you are talking about (sorry for being harsh here ), yet you complain about it (or however you see it). Making cube in maya or LW is probably even easier then in sed1. In maya, and some other apps, you press one single button and you already have cube(room). How hard it is to press one button? It's not rocket science and it defenetly doesn't require superb modelling skillz.

[Fiendian]

I never said CSG operations should replace modelling, that would just be stupid, the two could co-exist, similar to UEd supporting both BSP and static meshes.

But if it really is that simple to model simple shapes (one press of a button) then I guess it makes CSG rather redundant.

[GeForceNoob]

Originally Posted by Zocky

Geez people, stop complaning and stop being lazy, if you put half of your effort into actually learning a little modelling in sed2 instead of complaints, you would make fantastic maps for ss2 by now.

Alright. Zocky wins a cookie from me.

[Valerie Valens]

I am with Fiendian here, there is no reason that CSG couldn't co-exist with modelling. There's a few of us who would rather spend mapping time creating better gameplay and scripting than to worry about the level of detail. There is no reason simple architecture couldn't look good either. Just take a look at Discy's Mazaera beta.

[Zocky]

there is no logic into making two ways to make the same thing, when you can make cube just as fast in sed2 as you can in sed1. To make that, CT would have to put lots of effort to combine those to types, and that makes as much sense to me as trying to convince slawww that something has enough details. It's juat a big fail.
To me, there simply is no reason to put so much effort into implementing something like that in sed3. Sed2>sed1 in this aspect, so requesting it in sed3 would make no sense, it would be like hoping to get something that is less efficient and less productive and outdated just so that some old fans won't have to learn some new things.

Also, there is another good side to it. Since sed2 is similar to LW, to make more complex models in sed2, you could just lern by watchin LW, 3ds max or even maya tutorials. All those apps have the same tools, so you actually learn the ways, techniques of making some specific model, so it can easilily be applied to sed2, once you know how to use the basic tools.

--edited---
@val,
And there is no reason why you couldn't to that in sed2 even easier and with less time then in sed1.
Val, and fiendian, both of you should put more time into learning sed2, to really geta feelling about it. Then we can talk about it.

As i see it, this topic really has nothing to do which is better, csg or modelling, but the fact that some of you are used to csg and are not willing to learn something new.
I can understand that to a point, but do understand that sooner or later, you'll want to create model complex architecture, and then you will have to learn modelling anyway.
But even if you don't want to, making simple archi in sed2 is just as simple (even much easier) then in sed1 with csg. So how does it make sense to put so much time and effort to implement something that is slower and less productive then the thing you already have?

Implementing CSG would take a lot of time into making CSG support, it would also make new users just far more confused, what to use, it would make sed3 much more complex then it should be and therefor slower and less efficient. So of you ask me, there is pretty damn good reason why those two couldn't and shouldn't coexists.

[Valerie Valens]

You assume that we have time to invest in it. You also falsely assume that we are arguing a dichotomy between both when in reality we are arguing for idea of implementing more choice for the user. It's not one or the other, we are all for both at the same time.

PS: I remembered trying to learn to model in an app., it took me an entire day just to learn how to make a cube, a cone and a sphere.

[Zocky]

Yes val but why? The one way is better and faster, so why?
Telling you don't have time to invest is kinda redicilous. If you had time to learn sed1 and you have time to do all the mapping, you defenetly have couple of days to learn basics of sed2.
And as i said, it might be the same to you, but it would also take much more time for CT to implement something that can already not just be done as it is, but can be done easier and better, so that would make no sense for them, and it would also make sed2 more complex then it should be, and it would make newcomers more confused.
Did i say with modelling you can make archi faster, easier and better looking with sed2, then sed1?

[Valerie Valens]

You could have just said that modelling apps nowadays have operations that are the same as CSG, but with more flexibility and features. I actually agree with you, but your reasoning was kind of poor.

More questions :

Will the engine have features like model swivel points and jigglebones that can be used in the editor app?

Will the engine be able to employ distance occlusion and only display certain objects when they are a certain distance to the player/camera? If that is so, then it leaves the opportunity open to theoretically create vast plains as large as a whole country.

Would it be possible to create refraction effects with transparent objects?

Will the editor come with neat features like "Carve a Canyon" "Fill with water" and "Paint a forest"?

Will the games on the new engine support automatic content downloads if the server happened to run a custom map, or if a player with a custom model is joined to the game?

Will it be possible to alter the weapon parameters (Bullet-spread, recoil, ammo ratio, damage ratio etc) server-side?

[gdfsgdfg]

The secrets/easter eggs will be the same in SSHD?'

edit:
Serious engine 3 will have ragdoll physics ?
i mean in never saw ragdoll physics in ss2

[Wytas]

Question: With the brand new Serious Editor 3, will we get export (or) import plugin for MODO 3D, like there was one for LW with SEd2?

[Deepblue]

Originally Posted by gdfsgdfg

i mean in never saw ragdoll physics in ss2

It's not activated straight away, you have enter in a code ingame like you would to unlock the secret menu

Ragdoll physics are only really implemented well on humanoid enemies like the Orcs anyway. Other larger enemies like the Albino fall into a crumpled heap on the ground.

Originally Posted by Valerie Valens

Would it be possible to create refraction effects with transparent objects?

Pleas explain this in more detail.
The refraction shader is transparent anyway.

Originally Posted by Valerie Valens

PS: I remembered trying to learn to model in an app., it took me an entire day just to learn how to make a cube, a cone and a sphere.

Well of course when you first learn something you're going to take a while do anything.
All modelling Apps are different so they require different methods of doing something.

For example, I only just about made a room in SED2 when I first got it and now I can make a simple square room in a least 30 seconds fully textured with lightmaps included.

Blender though? **** me if I can ever get that working. But then I've only been working with it for 2 weeks now, it's pretty much impossible to completely learn an editor or modelling app in less than 2 weeks.

I'll bet we'll all still have learning difficulties with SED3 when we first receive it, albeit less than with SED2 but only because some of us wil already be familiar with SED3 seeing as it uses SED2 as it's basis.

Originally Posted by Valerie Valens

There's a few of us who would rather spend mapping time creating better gameplay and scripting than to worry about the level of detail

Yet I got complaints about some of my mapping stuff being too boxy (They were't just simple square rooms with nothing in)

[Zocky]

well deep, sooner or later, as i said, you will want to go out of 'box' mode with your levels anyway.

[dmn_clown]

Will SS: HD be ported to Linux so ungrateful Linux users such as myself can continue to delude ourselves that our platform is not important outside of graphic workstations, render farms, and web servers?

[Loggitt]

Well, you guys with all your editor BS have ruined another good communication thread with Croteam, again...

[Fiendian]

And you just made it worse. Zocky is collecting questions in the first post anyway for this exact reason, so Croteam members don't have to go through the posts to find them.

[Finzy]

[SS:HD/SS3] Is Gamespy still used for online multiplayer?

[SS:HD/SS3] Will there be any improvements to the server browser interface, say a chat lobby with a list of players?

[SS:HD/SS3] Will there be voice communication support so players can talk to each other?

[SS:HD/SS3] In the editor, will there be an option to automatically pack levels into .gro files? SS2 had this, but as far as I can tell, it required additional tools to work, and didn't work perfectly.

[SS:HD/SS3] Are chapters still used?

[SS:HD] Will there be new music and sound effects in HD? Or Sam quotes? Will the voiceacting be re-recorded for better quality as well?

EDIT:

You also forgot to add Discy's question to the first post:

Originally Posted by Discy

With this Serious Sam HD... is this a loose remake of Serious Sam FE like what Serious Sam Forever is trying to be? I was hoping us old players wouldn't get this 'oh, I've already done this before' and 'I know what happens around every corner' feeling.

Or just reshape it to say, will the levels be changed anyhow, are there any neat gameplay additions so old players won't feel too familiar with what they're seeing?

[Zocky]

@loggit,
What do you mean ANOTHER thread with CT? Are they answearing questions in any other thread?
Anyhow, i'm right now at work, when i get back home, i'll update first post.

[Gimli]

Please do, so we can get working on the e-mail with the questions.

[Zocky]

Ok questions added. Big thanks to Jasser for doing most of the work.