Chex Quest Fan Forums

Chex Quest => Chex Quest and Related Topics => Topic started by: Kato on October 08, 2008, 09:02:53 PM

Title: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Kato on October 08, 2008, 09:02:53 PM
In the CQ Half Life Mod thread, the Quake engine was discussed and dismissed.

But, to me, it seems like a logical extension of our DOOM engine-based game.

We have to consider the facts here. Neither GoldSource or Source are free. But the Quake engine, id Tech 2 (the Quake 2 engine), and id Tech 3 (the Quake 3 engine) are all open source, we can do (basically) whatever we want with them.

We also have to be realistic. It would be a heck of a lot easier to add content to a Quake engine game.

id developed the Quake engine for a reason--they'd evolved beyond the DOOM engine. Now, for some people, we have too...so why not keep the simplicity of DOOM, but do what they did, and add higher resolutions and 3D models?

I just wanted to add my part to the argument--to me creating a Quake engine game seems not only viable but very logical.
Title: Re: Reconsidering id Tech 1
Post by: Atariangamer on October 08, 2008, 09:07:28 PM
Im trying to think...Quake 2 would be better quality, and it was kinda story focused, right?
My main point is NPC and storyline. But a Quake mod for CQ would be pretty awesome...just a bit out of reach tho...

We only have about 3 model makers, and noone who has much BSP experience. It would be easier, but also with the same blocks as a HL mod...we no haz the people.

A GoldSource mod (as I am currently gathering tools and info) would be cool, but almost undoable. A quake mod would be cool, I could go with it.

...anyone got complaints to this? (or can we try to organize something this time?)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: TheMasterOfBattle on October 08, 2008, 09:12:35 PM
Depending and what programming language the engine uses, I could help a bit if it is C++.  I have not done anything on the scale of a game though.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Kato on October 08, 2008, 09:15:25 PM
We can tell a story in Quake 1. If worst comes to worst, we could use pre-rendered movies.

Quake 2 is when things start to look better. Quake 2 is a very far ancestor of GoldSource. I think Quake 2 might be a little out of our reach right now. GoldSource definitely is (and is also not free).

Just consider it :)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 08, 2008, 09:20:21 PM
I was...but due to the story abilities of GoldSource, I started researching and gettin a toolbox for it right after the other topic closed.

Quake would be a great NextStep, and would probably be the best thing to go for. Quake 2 (as you said) is when we get good at that. Quake 3 is gettin kinda up there...I doubt we could get to that anytime soon.

but I would totally like this, and in the other topic, I was kinda wanting the bitswapping to stop so I could ask for some help...I got Milkshape 3d (FULL, thanks to my old game programin book), and the Valve hammer editor (can it make Quake maps?).

and If you have experience in Quake editing/coding...what could we do in the way of NPCs (just something to stand there and give you info)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on October 08, 2008, 11:30:40 PM
This is my OPINION, but to say, if your going to advance CQ, do it through ID tec 3. Quakes engine looks worse then doom's animations. You'll get the same quality in GZdoom models. So If you don't want GZDoom, then go for ID tec 3.

Quote
...anyone got complaints to this? (or can we try to organize something this time?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion) I hope this help you learn what an opinion is. Your really starting to bug me. DON'T and I mean DON'T ask for some one opinion and yell at them when they do give you their opinion. Now I hope you understand that I was stating my opinion, not telling you that your ideas suck and mine is better. (Every one is entitle to their opinion.) Now i'm not going to talk about this again, so don't bother replying to this paragraph. And please don't lock this Manny, I just needed to get this out.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 09, 2008, 07:41:08 AM
@Replica: (please read this)
"DON'T ask for some one opinion and yell at them when they do give you their opinion."
Then I wont this time. I am going to say this tho: I cant use the GZDooM engine at all. If we did a project like this, I'd want to do something with it. But if the engine of choice is one I dont understand, how can I?

If you get WinQuake or GLQuake, Quake looks great (with antialiasing, and model animation smoothing).
And my only problem with Tech3 is the fact that to get stuff out of it, we'd need a REAL team working on this for AWHILE. It would just be a bit too much for us to try to organize it, and also the fact that its hard to map for...Some had the same discussions about a Halo ChexQuest. Tech3 would require a BIG leap from anyone here...


And to all those who I *virtually*...ya could say "yelled" at, sorry...Kinda lost it there...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

INFO:
Editing refrence (tho old...): http://qref.planetquake.gamespy.com/
Source (mainly for TMOB, or whoever can code): ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/q1source.zip

I have Milkshape3d (but gotta relearn it)...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Dvader0086 on October 09, 2008, 11:41:03 AM
I think it would be nice too... But you need a team... Now IDK how to do models so ask me... I was just giving you my two cents...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Loremaster on October 10, 2008, 03:14:47 AM
I swear that if this devolves into another flame war, heads will roll on both sides of the argument. Atarian, Replica, Everyone Else: keep it civil.

Y'all been warned.

As for the subject at hand, I must agree with Replica. Go with iD tech 2 or 3. Quake 1 is hideous-looking nowadays.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 10, 2008, 07:49:00 AM
Has anyone used GLQuake? I'm not joking, it looks MUCH better. Yes, its not exactly 'hires', but it looks nice and sharp, at least.

The Quake 2 engine would definitely look better, but on the side of complexity, even basic mapping kinda shoots up a steep amount. Tech3, I havent seen or tried to map/mod for, so I'd be going in blind...me and whoever else would like to try.

Original Quake was like this on normal engine/computer:
(http://www.denken.com/dzone/screenshots/q1shot024.jpg)
Quake on GLQuake in a higher res:
(http://blogs.gamefilia.com/files/imce/u393921/quake_b.jpg)

GLQuake also uses DynamicLighting, texture and model smoothing, and other methods to smooth out the pixels and enhance the gameplay. (and it works, too)

Quake II, I havent seen many new ports of it...IDK, I havent researched that one enough, but I will and get back to here.

(I'm still pullin for a Quake one, but if Quake II doesn't take that much extra, shootin for that)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Loremaster on October 10, 2008, 05:09:50 PM
It looks a little nicer, but I still think that it looks bad. Go for Quake II.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 10, 2008, 05:53:04 PM
I'm trying to get a copy of Quake 2 ATM, and Quake 1 will take some disk recovery before I can get it readable. Quake 2 LOOKS better, but is slightly harder to modify, and will require a good bit more to do. I would like to try a simple quake mod (maybe edited shareware with a small set of models and maybe a map or two), then if we can do that, bump it up a notch. BTW, does anyone have a good model editor? I got Milkshape, but is kinda hard to work...and I wonder if there are any free ones?

I got BSP (editor) today, and need to wait till I get my Quake and Quake 2 files installed before I install it.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: The Green Avenger on October 10, 2008, 06:50:55 PM
Well, I stink at modeling, but I use Wings3D for when i want to mess around.  Another good one to try is Blender, but I think it's a bit complicated.  Maybe with the tutorials you can get somewhere.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 10, 2008, 07:16:03 PM
maybe...I never could get Wings3D up on my pc...i'll hafta try again. (and blender got me nowhere)

BSP is pretty easy (I used it with Paintball 2 awhile ago), and it'll work. Valve Hammer Editor doesn't support anything but Half Life and the like, so its out...I'll have to scope out some tutorials for it...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Kato on October 10, 2008, 11:32:00 PM
I'm an experienced Blender modeler (working on another fangame) and low-poly models for the Quake engine are well within my scope.

I could also learn BSP mapping, if someone could recommend me a good editor.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: The Slimeinator on October 10, 2008, 11:42:57 PM
www.doombuilder.com

That's all you need to know about map editing.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on October 11, 2008, 12:04:56 AM
Sliminator, you can't map Quake with doom builder. :P
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: The Slimeinator on October 11, 2008, 12:17:38 AM
Yes you can. You can use your mind. ;D
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on October 11, 2008, 12:20:48 AM
Ok, you can't mod Quake's engine with it.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 11, 2008, 12:42:33 AM
TRU! XD (but if that was a subliminal message back to Doom...)

BSP is probably the best map editor. Its simple, and it works. Is quite old, but I have seen a GREAT tutorial on it...
http://www.bspquakeeditor.com/
ah...heres the good tutorials:
http://www.bspquakeeditor.com/tutorials.php

now, I just got Quake installed, but its all hybrid with Win/GLQuake...I guess it'd still work (the dos version is still there...) as the data files arent moved.

Well...another question. Was Quake II models with frames? or models with skeletons? (and I have some ideas for enemy actions and looks, so I'll have to get with Themasterofbattle (my coder) and see if its possible)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on October 11, 2008, 01:15:00 AM
IDK, but you made me really want to play Quake, but I don't have it.  :( :'(
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: TheMasterOfBattle on October 11, 2008, 12:09:24 PM
Hehe, just know atarian that I haven't fully figured out the code for it yet nor had the time to do so, nor will I for a while, I just had an exam yesterday followed by a quiz, then I have another exam Monday, and Exam Thursday, and another quiz on Friday. ;)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 11, 2008, 04:11:15 PM
oh...XD

Well, replica, there are ways to play the first episode of Quake...its free. Quake 2 has no demo (AFAIK, if you can find one, then yay!).

Well, I got Quake here, as well as Quake 2. And from a playing standpoint, Quake 2's engine is a much better one for those comming from doom (it has the freelook and custom controls).

I'm thinking of how to do this both ways...
Quake 1:
HubMap (IFoC ship, like from CQ3 E3M1)
Episode 1: Bazoik (duh)
Episode 2: Ralston
Episode 3: Flemoid Prime (flemoid dimension)
Episode 4: IFoC ship (clear the ship out!)

Quake 2:
I dont have much info about Quake 2's levels/map system works...I think there are 4 episodes that consist of 9 Units which have around 3 to 5 objectives to complete in each before you can exit the unit. IDK, ish berry weird...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: The Green Avenger on October 11, 2008, 04:36:32 PM
Quake 2 has a demo, I've played it.  Don't know where, tho...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 11, 2008, 05:22:44 PM
oh...really?

Well, maybe the goal would be a working Quake 1 demo, then a full Quake 1 mod, then a Quake 2 demo, and then a full Quake 2 mod. (ReAlLy FaR iNtO tHe FuTuRe!)

Just got BSP Quake Editor setup and going, and tried some tutorials. Its kinda...odd, but the principles are basic, and shouldn't be that hard to figure out. The basic material is a "brush", which is a 6 sided prism in space. You can draw a big brush and convert it into a room, or you can draw 6 brushes that make an enclosed space. You set the brush to a texture, and some textures give off light automatically, others require you to set them to give off light. I havent gotten to doors or advanced stuff yet, just how to draw a room, how to clip brushes with a plane, and how to make a few entities (not sure what all of them do, atm). I'm trying to complete the tutorials to get into the bigger stuff (which will be necessary to make a good level), but I just slipped up, and killed the set of them :( But thankfully, they have the lesson maps for download, so I just gotta reget lesson 1 and 2...then finish 3 and go on to 4.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Josh on October 13, 2008, 10:47:33 AM
ehhh..... here is were you can find quake demo and quake2 demo
http://www.idsoftware.com/games/quake/quake/
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 13, 2008, 06:44:26 PM
Thnx! Thats a good thing to have, so everyone look at the demos and say which is better to get! XD

UPDATE: My mapping skills are progressing...I can make rooms, make lights, make windows to the sky, and simple doors, as well as monster entities. I'd post a picture, but its nothing special, a small room with lamp posts and a skylight with a door going into a bigger room with glow pannels...but its cool, and its awesome to look at. I do agree with loremaster...this should be the engine.

After I learn a few more things, I'm going to start on a Chex Quest level. I was sketching out a few ideas in class today, and got one that I'd like to run with.

You're in a hanger, and there is a big hole in the ceiling, plus some fallen beams and the remains of your crashed ship. you walk over to the 'normal' door, but its been made inaccessable by a beam. You do a 180, and there is another door. you open it to the first enemy. behind that, another enemy, plus a rapid firing gun. there is a hole in the floor with a ladder. you climb down it and get in a sewer pipe. no enemies here. you come to a dead end and another ladder. climb it and you get into another pipe access, with a door to the 'IFoC' room. a few enemies here, plus some health, justincase. you go one way to a giant hanger with a small lab attatched to it. behind some bars is another section, with a switch to the doors. you go to the next area, a huge storage hanger, with the bridge across out. backup a few paces, and another pipe access. go down it and climb into the storage basement level via drain. good few enemies here. climb the levels and extend the bridge. go back to the broken place and cross the new bridge into the labs where the switches are. hit the main access and go back to the other lab where an open door leads to a teleporter test area. few enemies here. fight to the teleporter and hit the switch to send to the next level.


...not too ambitious, just in need of a FEW more techniques...okay, maybe ALOT more XD
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Nomekop on October 17, 2008, 06:28:14 PM
The Source engine is free.

At least the SDK is.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: The Green Avenger on October 17, 2008, 08:23:40 PM
The SDK is only free to people owning a Source engine game.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Anonymous (ChexGuy331) on October 17, 2008, 09:49:36 PM
Well, HL2DM is a Source engine game, and its free if you have an ATI or nVidia card. I think it said somewhere that the ATI offer is missing the Source SDK, though.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on October 18, 2008, 12:25:06 AM
I would like to use Source, but being as that is >< to map for (I tried, its kinda weird), I'm probably going with Quake2 for now...

I already have a pretty nice map going, but VERY complex, and will TOTALLY be noobish in its design...I have one design drawn out on paper, and most of it comming together on screen...i'd say i'm about 20% done...then I gotta figure out how to get y'all a video, cuz there's no way I can build a Quake2 data pack AND custom engine...I just cant do that. And also, it is in Quake textures till I get around to reviving my tools and looking at some texture wads
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: xrror on November 19, 2008, 10:13:39 AM
Before writing it off completely, might want to take a look at some Quake 1 source ports...
DarkPlaces is pretty nice:

http://icculus.org/twilight/darkplaces/

check out the screen shots, it's not just for Quake1 anymore  ;)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 19, 2008, 10:28:03 AM
Wait, this can run Quake 2?

Also, did ya see the FPS on that thing? 20 from First person, 13 from third, and 9 when viewing a large room!

also, that thing said 900mbs for the textures...what.

I'd like something just as good looking, but a bit smaller...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: xrror on November 20, 2008, 12:15:23 AM
DarkPlaces pretty much can be as "Heavy" or "Light" as you want it to be system wise. It's hard to explain. I really wish LordHavok had more info on his page about it.
Basically it's just a highly extended quake1 engine. For example, you can use Quake3 shaders in darkplaces maps. Or, you can just stick with the basics and make a normal quake1 map.

So while you can't run Quake2 per say, you can basically use features from quake2 maps in darkplaces. Does that makes any sense? Ironically, I think you can load quake3 maps verbatim, though obviously items and textures need to be included.

It's been a long time since I've done Quake 1 mapping, so my info is pretty shaky.

For performance, yes you can totally flog your framerate if you turn every graphic option on the menus (full dynamic lighting is pretty fun one, woe be your vid card). But if you really are starving for frames then you can reduce it down to GLQuake level.

Unfortunately I just realized that DarkPlaces inherently does not support software rendering - that is probably a deal breaker for a lot of people. Probably not going to run on Intel integrated graphics...

edit:
remembered you mentioned looking for Quake 2 source ports. I haven't tried these myself, but they were recommended (probably since they're some of the few still active).
http://www.quake2evolved.com/files.htm
http://quake2xp.quakedev.com/
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 20, 2008, 12:38:04 AM
At least I got another on a level close...

Here's the main bit. Q1 is more Doom-ish with its levels and episode progression. I like this as there really is not a true story (even though my original idea was a story based Quake mod), and the levels can flow easier. Quake 2's mission system isn't exactly what I'm looking for, but it has better compatibility. HOWEVER, if these Quake 2 ports can run the data files W/O using a CD, you may just have helped me a good bit. (Datra, the resident modeler, is trying to help some, but the current process of me transfering the data to him and running it is involved and complex...this could REALLY help)

I'd like to use Q1 IF it had a few more features...but if that DarkPlaces cant even do SOFTWARE OpenGL, *I"M* dead, as I have intel integrated (SUX).

If we have any free engines that are relatively easy to use and mod, and can have some sort of a story line (a la Half-Life), let me know as well...I'm a good story writer and thinker, not much of an artist or mapper ><

(BTW, thanks for some of this)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on November 20, 2008, 01:16:40 AM
Hello Xrror! Welcome to the forum! Can I suggest intoducing yourself in the introduction section?
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 20, 2008, 02:11:09 AM
lol, I totally forgot to say hi XD

Also, those ports look awesome, but DANG! The simplest one (Q2XP) almost crashed my PC, and thats no good...and its not because its a virus, just that i got horrible computer specs ><

I got a coder that might could help...IDK, hes gotta finish midterms before he can concentrate on it...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: TheMasterOfBattle on November 20, 2008, 02:19:55 AM
hehe, that would still be me.  And yes I have midterms before I can try to immerse myself in the code if need be, but I can't do much else except try to help with the code. :-\
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: xrror on November 20, 2008, 02:49:37 AM
Quote from: Atariangamer on November 20, 2008, 12:38:04 AM
...but if that DarkPlaces cant even do SOFTWARE OpenGL
I'm sure DarkPlaces would happily send it's OpenGL output to a software based OpenGL renderer... now if only that S3 ViRGE OGL wrapper was finished  :P (I kid)

Quote from: Atariangamer on November 20, 2008, 02:11:09 AM
Also, those ports look awesome, but DANG!
Yea I just went looking at those after I posted them... I think I heard an Intel GMA explode somewhere...  :D

I keep digging around, and finding some interesting stuff - I'm actually surprised to find people still actively tinkering with Quake 1 engine stuff in 2008. I'll know the end times are here when I suddenly stumble onto a lively Hexen II source port.

For instance - hope this person keeps going onward with his "experiments" with running Half Life maps in Quake 1 engines:
http://www.quakeone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3997

What got my attention was that he was using Half Life editing tools to make "Quake" maps this way. He also mentioned having already having whipped up a "converter" to use WorldCraft 3.3 for Quake 1 maps directly... who's your daddy now GoldSRC? (literally!)

But again these ports are not seeming software renderer friendly. That squealing noise you hearing right now is coming from your motherboard ;D

I'm going to stop spamming out stuff on here, cause it seems that I need to start researching what's out there nowadays and get caught up some! Seems to be quite a bit of nifty development going on, kinda exciting again isn't it?
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 20, 2008, 10:13:45 AM
LOL @ Xploding Intel

That HL maps in Quake looks awesome...hmm...I'll have to pull out my Q1 paks and try these engines before I turn em down.

And you're not really spamming...as long as you dont bump, double post, or do something bad, its ok!

Also, I'm kinda at a loss ATM...no matter what I do to this map I made (Q2), the lights are dead, even though I touched nothing, just rerendered it in final quality...>< now none of the renders work.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: ChexCommander on November 21, 2008, 09:32:06 PM
I dunno how we'd get CQ on Quake, but if we could, it'd PWN pretty bad, lol...just make the system requirements are very light, not everyone can handle all the stuff, though I do have dedicated graphics now, luckily...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 22, 2008, 02:37:13 AM
>< doggone integrated sux...almost bluescreened on Q2XP...><

What I would like to do is just a simple rehash of Chex Quest E1M1 with some of the cool Quake features in DarkPlaces. If we could do that, it would pwn, mostly because of the awesome light rendering (Saw some of the HL BSPs run through it...SO MUCH MORE REAL). So, in general, just slightly enhancing it. If we get good at that, then we can start redoing other levels, and even make new ones...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: ChexCommander on November 22, 2008, 04:35:23 PM
Yes, that'd be nice, but I wish we could do that with DooM, so we can finish up TUCQ Phase 2...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 22, 2008, 04:56:39 PM
This is not going to be TUCQ, exactly...no, it wont be TUCQ at all. Boingo's is just a bit more detailed than I could get mine...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: ChexCommander on November 22, 2008, 05:03:35 PM
I realize that.  A Quake CQ would be nice too, but we'd need an engine, right?
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 22, 2008, 05:28:57 PM
Darkplaces is a very nice, modern engine. I just tried it, and it looks better than the original engine. It also can be used with realtime lighting, though it takes a hit to the framerate according to your graphics. There are others, and I need to look at them to decide.

HOWEVER, with my bit of time this weekend, I'd like to make a map. However, I need a few things...

I need the CQ textures...Anyone have them? THEY ARE NECESSARY!

Also, if anyone can find some stuff on rendering Quake/Quake2 maps (qBSP and such), plz, tell.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: ChexCommander on November 23, 2008, 12:39:34 AM
Heh. Don't look at me. I'm a neophyte.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Manny Cav on November 23, 2008, 12:16:48 PM
Quote from: Atariangamer on November 22, 2008, 05:28:57 PM
I need the CQ textures...Anyone have them? THEY ARE NECESSARY!
Let me give you a bail out. (http://chexquestgallery.webng.com/downloads/) ;)
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on November 23, 2008, 03:46:58 PM
Or open Doomu/Chex.wad. :P
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: ChexCommander on November 23, 2008, 07:25:50 PM
Quote from: Replica on November 23, 2008, 03:46:58 PM
Or open Doomu/Chex.wad. :P
I think that would be more work than just downloading from CQG, though.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 23, 2008, 11:09:44 PM
Lemme reiterate. The "WAD Textures" aren't the real textures, they are the patches. Quake uses each file as a texture. No patches, no TEXTURE1 lump. I was wanting full rips of textures. This would do normaly, but heres an example of how not: the red key door is made of a plain door and a red sign. they are 2 separate patches, and I would need to manually place them back together. This is harder said than done on things like the computer textures and the like.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on November 24, 2008, 04:07:39 AM
Well, you cant. So you'll have to do it manualy.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 24, 2008, 10:06:10 AM
I've tried...XWE keeps crashing on me, and every time it does work, the save function under the Texture menu doesn't work anymore.

plus, I thought there was a pack of them...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on November 24, 2008, 04:41:16 PM
No, you have to do it manually. Try Slumped.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 24, 2008, 05:17:57 PM
That does nothing...I can open/edit the wad, but what from there? ><
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Replica on November 24, 2008, 06:06:17 PM
Export the patches...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 24, 2008, 08:02:15 PM
...lemme reiterate for the third time:

-Manny has a package of the 'patches'.
-I would have to hand remake the actual textures, which is hard being as some of the textures take up 10 patches or more
-XWE has a Texture>Save thing, but its not working for me
-SLumpEd has no such option, working or not.

Ok, the blue wall. Its a patch, but also a texture. things like the boxes are NOT a patch. they are 2 end pieces PLUS a repeated center patch. Thats just a bit too much cut and paste. There HAS to be an easier way to extract the textures from the TEXTURE1 and TEXTURE2 lumps...
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Manny Cav on November 24, 2008, 09:46:56 PM
You do not ask an easy thing, but it is possible. When you open up TEXTURE1 or 2, you can scroll through the possible textures. You just have to manually print screen them, position them in Paint or whatever, crop them, and save them.
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Atariangamer on November 25, 2008, 01:06:11 AM
Oh! That works...><

I guess I can mess with that some, but I SWEAR I had a pack of the real textures at one point... :confused:
Title: Re: Reconsidering the Quake engine
Post by: Manny Cav on November 26, 2008, 08:21:05 PM
Also beware of the dreaded duplicate texture. Since you're not doing a Doom WAD, but a new system, there is really no value in having them to fill in all of the textures.