Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Shaviro

Members
  • Content count

    10550
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Shaviro

  • Rank
    Team Future Chief

Recent Profile Visitors

1535 profile views
  1. That is such an arrogant hand wavey response to a sincere piece af advice coming from experience. You also skip all of the details in my post and assume there is no plan for anything. Things are not always super simple and depending on what you're building, "fun" isn't an easily defined concept. Sometimes you have to let the visual design come in and be part of that iterative process and feedback "loop". Reducing it to be "set dressing" has its own host of problems that will work in some games, not in others. It's an extremely simplistic way to view the creation process. But I'm glad you've found the one true way for every single person to build every single type of game with 3D environments. That must be awesome! :)
  2. Just to elaborate on this iterative process. We actually used to use more placeholders and make less detailed versions of the levels with a lot of caulk (texture) brushes and low detail rooms. We did this with the intention of adding in the "awesome" later on. The positive side of this is that you get some instant gratification and you make a lot of progress fast. Another win is that you're able to quickly prototype some of the macro-level parts of your game or levels. The gotcha is that you don't really get a good sense of the style you're building for and you don't get a realistic picture of how much work is required. Another problem is that it quickly turns into an "and then" fest where you keep on adding stuff to your map because it's just so darn fast. I need this AND THEN that AND THEN this AND THEN that. We had some humonguous levels that would never work in reality, but we didn't figure this stuff out before we started trying to make it good in all relevant aspects. For us this was very much equivalent to "fix it in post" or the star wars prequel approach to cinema where you quickly cover the scenes and then figure out how to make it look great later. Internal talks in the team had this stuff labeled as "postponing homework" and staying in the wonderous concept phase for as long as possible. The thing is that when you finally do get into the nitty gritty, the early version you made quickly becomes incompatible with your newfound experiences. We could call this process breadth first as you're kinda trying to represent as much of the level or the game as quick as possible. I think we started opting for a depth first approach somewhere in the middle of the process and that's where we really started to gain traction and speed. From the get go you don't really know what style to build. For me, the easiest way to do this is to find some specific detail, area or whatever and then build it. From start to finish. This helps me figure out the level of detail I should aim for and I can extrapolate the larger scale features from this piece. In Phobos, we struggled with the style for the intro house areas for a long time. When we one day built a complete skybox with houses, bridges, a light house etc. everything started to come together and we built the rest of the scene around this. It just seemed natural. We knew that we wanted to show off some specific things in the skybox, so that lead to creating windows that allowed for this. The room itself was then created around the windows. I'm not saying that the other way to do it does not work. Obviously it does work for many people and amazing games are created like this, but for us trying to get to that vertical slice of a level, a style and a concept as soon as possible made it much easier for us to plan, schedule and actually complete this thing. I'm just trying to provide an alternative approach to it that helped us a lot :)
  3. I'll do the 180 and recommend building these things inside the editor. Practically everything in Phobos is being made with the original DOOMEdit. We sometimes do models, but they're almost always pieces of geometry made inside the editor that are turned into models so we can tweak things or cut down on the number of clip models. All of this certainly feels like a daunting task at first, but I think once you get a hang of it it will be worthwhile. Of course, once you're doing organic things like caves or whatever it's extremely difficult to do with brushes and patches. We also use models for those, built for that exact purpose. I've been craving a spline + extrude method like you suggest many times, but all in all I'm not sure it would save us that much time. It would be faster, no doubt about it, but more often than not you can get to the same result with a few copy/pastes. At this point I wouldn't really say that building stuff is slowing us down. Building good stuff slows us down and the bottleneck here isn't the tools but creativity, vision and persistence. We also don't really make caulked box maps first and then add in detail later. For us it's an iterative process where idea leads to detail/specific implementation which in turn leads to a better idea and so forth. Not that there is a "right way" to do this, but this one has been the most successful for us.
  4. Shaviro

    Ludicrous Levels of Optimization

    i9-9900ks, RTX 2080 TI with 32 GB ram running at 3440x1440 at Ultra Nightmare settings. Framerate is usually in the 150-200fps range. Loving the short load times!
  5. Shaviro

    This does not feel like a Doom game

    I'm currently playing the "Super Gore Nest" map and that's probably the most Doom level yet. It's really good.
  6. Shaviro

    Is anybody else seriously disappointed with Eternal?

    I'm not really disappointed. The countless videos and pre-release material made it pretty clear what kind of game it is. I'm not gonna lie, once you get a hang of the controls including platforming, the resource management etc. it's not bad. I think they call it the fun zone and sure it's all right. I fail to see how that one narrow approach to shooting is objectively better than any other approach, but it is what it is and it's all right to be "forced" into a different playstyle than what comes naturally to you. Gives a new perspective on things. That said, what bothers me most about this game is that this is all it's going to provide. It's a one-trick pony and I don't see myself ever playing it again once finished. That's no big deal really as it's more or less the standard fare for me with modern shooters. I know there are a loooot of collectibles, secret areas and whatever to find, but I don't really care to drag myself through the levels to collect arbitrary stuff that has zero grounding in the game environment and no real influence on the game past soft or hard cheat codes. I love the rendering. They did an awesome job here. Glass has never looked as good as it does in this game. Geometry detail is through the roof here and there. It's great. The areas show a great sense of scale and imagination. It's just a shame that they never really use these locations for anything past combat. You never form a "relationship" with the areas, even earth is just a static movie-set. It's just on to the next dimension and area. Earth is being invaded? Who cares, look it's that tank guy from Doom3, but with horns and demon like. Want to know what's going on in the story? Read these 300 books you pick up. Everybody has their own subjective stance on what Doom is, but I see Doom as a game comprised of three main aspects; Combat, suspense (or horror) and gravity. Combat is of course what immediately pops into most peoples minds when they think of Doom and that aspect definitely has to be nailed down, but when I think back I recall wandering the dark hallways, low on health, desperately trying to find some medkits. I think of the suspense, the play between light and shadows. Not knowing whether what comes around the next corner is compatible with whatever health and ammo you have. I loved that. Then there's gravity. It's arguably the weakest of the three, but I did feel like a random joe, fighting against all odds to stay alive and maybe even save whatever was left of humanity. It felt like I was placed into this nightmarish world and I would have to navigate through it. In Doom Eternal all of this is gone. There is no longer any kind of play between light and shadows. Everything is practically lit the same. I never really fear going around a corner because the health and ammo doesn't really matter. I can always chainsaw some dude and glory kill some demons. Done. It doesn't matter. And for gravity? It has none. The entire world is centered around you and moves with you. I don't think it's a bad game at all. It's fun, but it's kinda empty and the whole game feels like "surface area". I'm glad that people enjoy it. Not every game, movie or whatever has to cater to everyone's taste. Some times a game wasn't made for you and that's perfectly fine.
  7. Shaviro

    Your first impressions?

    So I've only completed the first level and am currently on the second, but I'm already kinda fatigued on the whole thing. There comes a time in almost any shooter for me when I feel like I've experienced everything there is to experience in the game and the rest is just getting to see the end etc. I don't know if it's because of all the pre-launch material but I kinda feel like I'm already there. It seems to be an expertly crafted game for a very specific and extremely narrow focus, so I'm not trying to knock it. It may just not be for me. Aside from the combat that doesn't really feel like a shooter at all I think what bothers me the most is that the whole setup and presentation is all over the place. Now you're on a barely recognizable earth. Now you're on a weirdass spacestation. Now you're some place weird. The environments seem to be crafted 100% for the combat and then a "location theme" is painted on top. It doesn't really matter if you're in hell, on earth or in...weirdplace...A broken down metro train, weird tunnels or a temple of sorts. It's all the same in the end and so, so inconsequential. Nothing is ever grounded in any sort of context. It just goes from fight to fight in a really predictable way. I do like all the nods to the original games in terms of soundtrack and visuals. I also like what little of the weapons I've tried. I just wish I could have the freedom to play the game in a more traditional way and not constantly be forced to play Star Craft 2, the fps. Again, to each their own. For me it just seems like they took Doom 2016 and doubled down on all the features I found questionable and then ignored the things I enjoyed. Nothing wrong about that as so many people seem to enjoy it. More power to you! I'm of course still going to give it another chance, but so far I'm really struggling to see where the fun lies, so to speak.
  8. Shaviro

    Your first impressions?

    I'm sure the game will pick up, but I had to quit after encountering the 10th popup info screen in like 2 minutes.
  9. Shaviro

    Radiant.NET

    Moving the textures panel from the inspectors window to the XY view is a really nice idea!
  10. I've been a C# developer for ~14 years. If one chooses C# today, I'd recommend jumping straight into .net core rather than the "full" .net framework. While the latter isn't officially being phased out, there's no doubt that .net core is and will be receiving most of the attention going forward. Contrary to popular belief, C# (with .net core) is cross platform and open source today. C# was born out of a strict OOP mindset, but in the later years it has adopted many features and ideas from functional languages. Another somewhat recent trend with .net core is a focus on overall performance and low-level features like simd and Intel recently added support for hardware intrinsics to the framework. Another general note is that Unity engine is transitioning their most tight loops and performant code from C++ to C#. It's their own version of the language and not stock C#/.net core, but the general direction is the same. What I really like about the language is that you can go pretty far in both vertical directions. It has some excellent high level features, but also sports more and more low level options. I'm currently looking into learning a bit of Vulkan with some nice C# bindings. It's great fun.
  11. Shaviro

    Stream soon.

    @DooM_RO There are plenty of ways you could go other than cramming as much nostalgia in there as possible. You know. Marbfaces and what not ;) Ah I get it. It's just more "subversive" garbage then. I guess it's okay when it's Doom :D But seriously, they're riding this wave of power fantasy gaming so hard and it's also really diluting their other titles with Wolfenstein and Rage 2. I can't blame them, it's a business after all and I'm way too old to be fangirly about it. Not every game or movie has to cater to one's exact tastes....but this is just as much a wave and a trend as what "everyone else is doing".
  12. Shaviro

    Stream soon.

    But the current audience is the power fantasy. Every other action game or movie today is all about being powerful, going over the top. Doom 2016 "kinda" broke the mold with shooters by not going call of doom, but today it's a pretty different market and Doom Eternal seems to be really fanservicey to me. That doesn't mean it's going to be a bad game, by no means, but it does feel pretty toothless and risk adverse compared to former id games.
  13. Shaviro

    Stream soon.

    If you want to get a point across, not writing an inflammatory one-liner post is probably a better strategy :)
  14. Shaviro

    Stream soon.

    Yeah that part really rubbed me the wrong way. Almost to an extent that made me uncomfortable, but probably for different reasons. First of all I have to point out how low a blow that was, desperately trying to cash in on a 1½ year old discussion. Thankfully only one guy in the audience responded to that and apart from him it was so awkwardly silent. Somewhat of a dick move and I definitely lost some respect for the guy right there. I mean, you wouldn't expect JJ Abrams to rag on Doom 2016 while promoting his next movie. Anyway. I think he's got it backwards. It dawned on me right then and there why Doom Eternal is the iteration of Doom that interests me the least and why I am more fond of "New Star Wars" than I am of "New Doom". It seems to me id software of 2019 is more afraid of the fans than anything. He even said it himself; He wouldn't want to "ruin someone's childhood" by having a different take on something and it shows. Just take a look at what happened going from Doom 2016 to Doom Eternal. Lots of design decisions revoked with the sole purpose of "pleasing the fans". Reverting the Mancubus, the Plasma Rifle, the Cyberdemon. It's not that I *don't* think these Doom2 versions of the designs are better, I do, but it's also kinda disingenuous and fan-servicey. One of the amazing things to do back in 2000-2004 was to see how they reimagined this monster or that weapon in Doom3. I don't really care about that for Doom Eternal because it's all pretty damn predictable. Go with the power fantasy head canon and scour forums to figure out what "fans want". That's exactly what they didn't do with TLJ. They went with a completely different type of director and gave him 100% trust. I still haven't decided whether I really liked the movie, but it was someone's vision, someone's baby, someone's take and thus controversial. ...And even then I think they ended up understanding the source material better than they do with Doom Eternal. All that said, I still do look foward to Doom Eternal. It's a day one purchase for me and I'll probably build a new computer for the purpose...well, at least partially for that purpose....but I'm not *all* that excited for it because it does feel a lot less like a dedicated group of artists working on a common vision and more of a corporate cash grab this time around.
  15. Shaviro

    Anyone know how to edit levels for doom 3?

    I've stuck to Doom3Radiant, the editor that came with Doom3 for the entirety of the Phobos project. I did shortly try out DarkRadiant and others, but D3R just won out in the "What You See Is What You Get" department with the actual renderer being built in. I have no doubt that the other editors have more features and less bugs though. Over time I've come to really appreciate Doom3Radiant for what it is.
×