LAG

[Unnamed_ 0]

One thing that is probably true is, the more thats understand about addon making, the better the the addons are going to be. It's up to the individual addon maker to decied what they want, but at least they can make an informed choice.

Quote[/b] ]What else would we like to see in the tutorial?

After looking at too many aircraft over the past few months, I noticed a big difference in there design. Some surfaces do not work well with OFP's lighting (could just be my crap GFX card), some three sided polygons are shaded individualy rather than as an entire surface. Other addons are flawless in comparison, so I guess it's down to how they where built in O2?

[Charon-VW:BB- 0]

Hehe

Quote[/b] ]Did you mean to say a "hint"?

Because if you want a Hind, make your own!

yes hint thats what i meant to say. My english don't work all time. Sometimes it takes itself a break and then i have to do everything on my own.

But anyway, thanks for the hind

[offtime 0]

@Offtime

Hehe no thats not true i think you does not know what resolution lods are for example one weapon has a polycount from 2117 polys and a maximum texture resulotion from 2048x2048 so. My texture settings are 1024 because gf2 mx. If you are an officer in group of 12 man and you are in the middle of the group you will maximal see the left and the right soldier in the 2117 lod the other are to far away the engine will use the next lod with 380 faces and less texture resolution. But my experience shows mostly the left and the right solder uses the lower lods too that means the weapon my soldier have are the onlyone with the lod of the 2117 polycount. And i think the community will never get the 2048 texture version because peaple have fear but this is the decision of the mod leaders. But this is what i mean sure vbs1 dont have weapons with such high textures but soldier vehigles and many more. And you must know you all playing with weapons who have the same polycount but you doesnt know this   .

you just dydnt fully understand me.

if all addons you use would be "shity" (low poly, small 2 or three texture) you would see every soldier in best quality.

but i see you prefert to see only your weapon and one tank closest to you in best quality and rest can be shittyer.

i dont like this solution, i like balanced situations where i see not many differences betwen tanks one standing 2m from me and second 10m from me.

now imagine situation when you use realy detailed weapon

such detailed that you need to lower your settinds.

shure you will still see your weapon realy high quality but this tank ten meters from you will look like crap becouse game will rended distance lods. and models that werent made in such "high technology" like your weapon will have even second distance lod looks like crap. (BIS models)

so playng not on higher settings will always show you if addons you use in mission are res balanced or not.

now you catch me ?

there should be ballance betwen ALL used in mission addons, so one wouldnt make other looks shity when lowering settings.

[Romolus 0]

... This is about Finding a balance

in edeting. There are two balances. Small models and

many textures or Large models and few textures....

I think it's obvious that if you raise something like the poly count or the number or size of textures that it poses more work on the CPU and the GPU.

The balance you need to look at is the balance between every object that is rendered on the screen at a certain time.

If an object uses so many recources that it causes lag, then reducing the texture size while raising the poly count or the other way round doesn't help at all.

What you should do instead is to try to keep the system load for an object as low as possible.

This can be done by reducing the polys, reducing the size of textures or reducingt he number of textures.

Especially reducing the number of textures helps since swapping textures is one of the slower things, even on todays graphics cards.

Apart from such general advices it is really hard to give certain numbers that are safe since there are so many factors that need to be taken into account.

So try to stay as low as you can with your poly count, texture size and number and balance it against the other things that pose a load on the CPU or GPU.

PS

The abbreviation of "polygon" is "poly" and for the plural "polys" is generally used.

[offtime 0]

in this tut i wouldlike to see something about lightning settings on objects.

like when i was making tent...

eariel iv noticed that BIS made tent from two surfaces directed oposing sides (points werent connected, two separated surfaces, inside of tent and outside) and light settings set to normal

when iv made tent out of surfaces that had faces on both sides (same number of faces as BIS models but half of points count) my tents looked stupid with normal lightning setting.

after making few experiments iv noticed that it is not important for game engine if it is lightning surfaces directed to sun or in oposing direction as long they are using same points.

but setting lightning to half lighted save my day

hope someone will understand what i just wrore, its all i can do with my english

and also mentioning about half lighted setting on plants canopy would be cool

[Drill Sergeant 0]

@ Romolus Further in the o2 tutorial I will make an example of this.

I also suggest you try experamenting with it, maybe I'm not clear enough.

Gordy and Earls M4's are a perfect example of balance and imbalance.

The use of words is for beginers in this artical not advanced.

@ Offtime Working without LOD's on some of my guns I have noticed

the farther away I get the less rendering demand I have. Don't know

why. I will thouroughly tests this, give you all examples in great detail

along with FPS. Not today but in the future. I am quite busy with the

Seals and the o2 tut. Hope you all understand.

@Unnamed_

Heh, Maybe some one forgot to keep all the points shaded as normal

and hit f5 before they released. Anoying none the less. (Some one needs

o fix that.)

@Charon[VW:BB]

Exactly, I did the same on my uncles machine a while ago only I drove the setings

thrue the roof. No problem, we were cruzeing over Tonal smashing rebel T-55s.

Why? Balance, people scream about BAS's pollies on the black hawk. No ones

encountered any problems with it have they? Also CBT Balance, how many people

have problems with CBT?

Back ontopic, Just got up so step 5 isn't even on virtual paper yet.

[dm 9]

Lag can be anything from an annoying stutter to an all out lock up which forces you to restart. This is caused by the program trying to render poorly structured addons. Rendering poorly constructed addons causes the system resource demand to skyrocket, straining the system to the breaking point. User addons usually enhance the game. Some addons are poorly structured by a combination of texture and polygon Structuring. Addons with poorly structured textures or models will cause annoying lag.

Well... Where to start...

It is indeed poorly structured addons that cause lag, however, it is also expecting too much of your system that causes lag.

No matter what the specification of your system, it will have a limit. This limit is a physical one, it can be pushed a bit higher by overclocking, but the limit remains, and expecting your system to out-perform this limit will end up with your frame rate dropping below the desired "optimum."

Using OFP's autodetect option is a good way to find the optimum settings for your PC. You can expect to be able to push the autodetect-set settings up by about 10% and still retain a good performance. There are many other performace tweaks available, but this is not the topic of this thread.

Quote[/b] ]A poly count is the amount of triangles which are merged onto vertexes which represent objects on screen. Operation Flashpoint's official 3d editing tool (Oxygen 2 Light) doesn't count or label these units which mesh over the points or vertexes as polygons, but as "faces". The reason being Oxygen 2 renders both triangular and rectangular meshes.  Yet both a three point mesh or triangular face (Imagine playing dot to dot hence three vertexes or dots with a line drawn from point to point to create a triangle.) and a four point mesh (rectangular) are treated as a single

"face". To understand this further, a shape such as a circle or box is represented in 3d by a conglomeration of squares/rectangles/triangles combined together.

Whilst your basic definition of poly count (polygon, being the mathematical definition of an object created from 3 or more sides) is correct, your assumption as to the function of the game engine (specifically Real Virtuality) is not.

The Real Virtuality engine in fact, ONLY recognises square faces (i.e. faces made up of 4 verticies) Triangular faces in OFP are created in the model by storing a null vertex as part of the face. This is why Objectiv 2 Light reports a "face" count, and not a "poly" count. Since Real Virtuality does not use "traditional" 3d modeling "polys."

Quote[/b] ]A box in the shape of a cube has 6 sides, this is where the rendering system comes into play. If you decide to make a cube you place 8 points in the shape of a cube, then you have the frame or guide line onto which the mesh will be shaped. There are several types and  ways to render a mesh onto the square. The default way the mesh will be rendered is as 6 squares placed onto the frame in succession to give you the shape of a 3d cube. This causes the cube to have 8 points and 6 faces or sides. Next comes the more complex side of the process. Some computer programs only handle meshes as triangles, it takes two triangles to make a square and hence 12 triangular faces to make a square. So this causes the computer to have to render 6 extra faces which will take some extra power.

Whilst a rendering system does indeed come into play within Real Virtuality, it does not function as you have suggested.

Since RV only uses square faces, it only needs render 6 of them to create a cube. However, RV has a built in face culling system, that means any face that is outside of the current viewing envalope (described by "normals") is not rendered by the graphics engine. This means, that the graphics engine will only ever render 5 of the 6 faces of a cube (since this is the maximum number of faces that can be viewed at any one time)

Quote[/b] ]Once you learn to properly use o2 it will take less time and you will produce much higher quality models.

Whilst this may be true in your opinion, it is not actually "fact" per say. It would be more correct to say

"Once you learn to properly use o2 it will take less time and you will produce models much more suited to Operation Flashpoint."

Because of the nature of the tool (designed and "optimised" to create content for the RV engine)

Quote[/b] ]A properly created object should only render the outside mesh. (Out side

meaning any side or part of the object which will be seen during it's use.)

As discussed before, the "outside" will be the only "side" rendered by the graphics engine. And even then, not all of the "outside" will be rendered.

Quote[/b] ]Objects such as circles and very complex boxes will require a large amount of polygons.

A circle is a circle, a box is a box and a sphere is a sphere, no matter how "complex" they are. I believe what you are trying to say is, that more complex shapes will require a higher number of faces in order to create a likeness true to the original.

Quote[/b] ]As a guide line in oxygen for a medium detail object you would use 16-20 point circles. For High detail you would use 32-40 point circles, once you have reached a certain level on most medium sized objects (height/width) 32-40 works perfectly. For extremely large objects such as municipal water towers or oil storage tanks I suggest a minimum of 40 point circles.

As I have just said, a shape is a shape, no matter how large it is. A sphere of say 20 faces and 0.5m diameter, will look just as "square" and "ugly" as a sphere of 20 faces and 20m diameter. It is the angle between the faces that makes an object appear round or smooth, and the angle remains constant no matter what the size.

Rather than considering how large the object is to be when ploughing extra faces into it, consider how often it is the be viewed, and from how close.

Using the water tower as an example. A spherical water tower 15m off the ground, with no access to the storage tank level (no ladder to get up there) would not need a huge amount of faces to create a believable and aesthetically pleasing object. However, the artificail horizon in a helicopter cockpit would require a higher number of faces to create, since it is likely to be viewed from very close proximity.

Quote[/b] ]As a rule of thumb when working with 3d models and internal or extra faces, "If you can't see it, you don't need it." To summarize, Extra unused, internal unused faces will up the amount of power usage.

Whilst this is good practise for modeling - use as few faces as possible, and eliminate any excess faces, because of the graphics engine of RV, "unused, internal faces" will not eat up power, since they are never rendered.

Quote[/b] ]Rendering a shaded, detailed 3d model without any textures on it takes minimal computer power.

Very true, and applying a single texture to ALL of these faces will use very little power too.

The useage of textures should be to have as few textures as physically possible, since loading textures into and out of the graphics memory is what takes up the most time. Simply rendering the texture to a face is on of the simplest operations the graphics card can do. Once the texture is loaded into the graphics memory, mapping it onto even a million faces is a very simple and gpu "cheap" process.

With your hind example, a hind with 25,000 faces and 5 2048x2048 textures will provide less visual lag than a hind with 30,000 faces and 30 512x512 textures.

However, there is a limit here also. As the texture resolution increases, so does its physical size. This is where the amount of RAM on your graphics card comes into play. With a 256Mb graphics card, you will be able to accomodate many many large textures before the memory becomes full. This means that these large textures may be loaded and stored for when they are next used, meaning that they are ready for use, and lag will be minimul. A card with only 64Mb of RAM will obviously fill up a lot quicker, and no matter how fast it is, you will incur lag as it attempts to load textures into and out of its memory.

Quote[/b] ]Textures can not make up for lack of model

Yes, they can. Good textures can make up for a "lack" of model very easily, just take earls M4's for example. Earl did not need to model every single pin, bolt, crease and marking on his M4's, because the textures did that for him. He could use 8 face cylinders because the lighting on his textures make the barrels appear rounder than they actually are.

Quote[/b] ]Paint is not 3d and it has it's limitations when shown on a plane sloping away from the point of view. 3d does not have paint, looks rather bland or un-shaded and is limited by game engine limits. A good 3d model with a good single or plural texture, is just as good as a poor 3d model and many textures.

Not exactly sure where you came up with this assumption, but it is patently not true. A good 3d model with one or two good textures is much better than a poor 3d model with 100's of textures, simply by design. Whilst a good texture will enhance smaller visual details, it will not make up for a total lack of model. For example, there is no way a texture can make a cube look like a cylinder, or vice versa.

Quote[/b] ]Content should be developed for the future and not for the present. We are working in the dynamic and rapidly advancing world of computers. Technology will not be the same in 2 months or a year when we hope to finish our many projects. If we build for the future, computer technology will be there to support us when we finish.

This is a sticky point in development, since not everyone will be able to keep up with the cutting edge of computing technology.

You'll find that 99.9% of developers create thier content for the present, or the very near future.

However, when talking about Operation Flashpoint content creation, there is another physical limit. That is the overall number of faces and the maximum size/resolution of textures that the graphics engine can handle. Because of this, no matter how fast or powerful computers become, the RV Graphics engine will still only be able to cope with a maximum of x faces and y sized textures.

Just a few "clarifications"

Edit: Damn spelling...

[kegetys 2]

Since RV only uses square faces, it only needs render 6 of them to create a cube. However, RV has a built in face culling system, that means any face that is outside of the current viewing envalope (described by "normals") is not rendered by the graphics engine. This means, that the graphics engine will only ever render 5 of the 6 faces of a cube (since this is the maximum number of faces that can be viewed at any one time)

Actually the OFP engine supports quads ("square faces") because of the Glide background (3Dfx cards could render quads in hardware), but only when using Glide. The 3D card does the rendering, not OFP, and in non-3dfx video cards a cube requires 12 triangles to be rendered... I'm not sure at which point OFP splits the quads into triangles (or if its done by Direct3D or the video card driver), but when the models are rendered its all done in triagles, and triangle count is the one you should observe performance-vise.

The face culling is also handled by the video card (or direct3D), which means that OFP still needs to process even the backfacing faces and they do still make a performance difference since they need to be moved around in the vertex buffers to be then processed & possibly dropped out before rendering.

[offtime 0]

i see with my future-vision skill that this topic will bring us realy damn good piece of usefull paper  

[Romolus 0]

@ Romolus Further in the o2 tutorial I will make an example of this.

I also suggest you try experamenting with it, maybe I'm not clear enough.

Gordy and Earls M4's are a perfect example of balance and imbalance.

The use of words is for beginers in this artical not advanced.

Well you're definately not clear enough when you just state rough numbers without any relation to other things that influenced those numbers.

Without these relations, such numbers are not much help for beginners, since they are only valid within their relation to the rest of what poses load on the complete system. Without knowing those relations you are better off with general advices.

On an island with many objects, an addon might still be lagging when created after your numbers for example. Also the specs of the PC play a big role. You don't mention those anywhere, which makes your numbers allmost useless.

Doing all the tests to get some valid average numbers is quite some work and I doubt that any addon maker ever did that.

So all you are left with when creating an addon, is to try to estimate in what kind of environment your addon will be used in. Then look how other addons behave in that environment and check how they are done (face count, number and size of textures, scripts,...) to get a feeling of how much load your addon can pose on the system to work without creating lag.

This is something you need to learn and get a feeling for it (if you don't want to do all those scientific tests I was mentioning).

Modeling by numbers doesn't help much with it since you only know the numbers then and not how they were found.

It's the knowledge how things work together in OFP that enables you to create better and lagless addons.

[Gordy 0]

I would like to remind you this crazzy addon maker is also

doing a 02 tutorial. Also this line that Totmacher is talking

about is just about the one I'm standing on. This is not about

your system specs. This is about how addons can be made.

People need to learn how to balance the load of the addon.

How to improve layouts and how to creat addons that look

good and don't tax the system.

If this requires an example I will give one.

Gordys M4 has roughly the same amount of pollies as

earls best. Gordys lags on mine and Earls doesn't.

Why?

Earls M4 uses at maximum 5 texture layouts.

Both rather large. Gordy's M4's use 29+ texture layouts.

If gordy put all his textures on one laout as Earl did,

gordy could up the pollie count and make it look beter

without a system hit. Not that gordy has to add allot of

pollies, but there is room for improvement...

I had hoped to get out of this without skining anyone

for an example but I was forced to.  

Once again it's about balance. The o2 tutorial will cover

textures or atleast there layouts.

The tutorial will make things PAIN FULLY clear on how to

ballance, hower you balance, model or texture is up to you.

Thank you Drill for using me as a test rabbit.

If I knew, How to make addons correctly I wouldn't have made it the way I did. I put them up to public for suggestions as I wanted to learn as much as possible from people who do them much longer than I do.

No-one has ever told me, hold! I asked, searched, looked for tutorials or knowledge base and found nothing. Putting an article about my incompetence is a like a smack in the face. Sorry Drill, this is how I felt when I saw this.

On the other hand, finally someone has put sth that should be the very base of addon-making. It is for people like me that don't know what a vertex is when the start. I only regret that Drill didn't ask me before he put it here.

[scousejedi 0]

Do you people realise how long its going to take me to mergetexture 30+ 256x128 textures into 1024 x 1024's?

All my WIP for I44:Phase 2 are going to need a little texture work

As for poly's I get nervous at ~4000 for tanks. I've always used the BIS demo models as a guide with some allowance for better technology as the years pass.

[sputnik monroe 102]

*offtopic* Hey uh... offtime, have you noticed theres a close up of some dudes johnson in your sig?

Just stare at the picture for like 30 seconds and then it flashes by all the sudden. Any one else notice this?

[Totmacher 0]

Polycounts

Helos:

bis uh60 1530 faces

bas mh60k 6933 faces that is the count of 4 bis uh60

bas mh60l 5899 faces

Weapons:

bas m4acog in 0.350 lod : 1498 faces

                   0.700 lod : 1257 faces

                   1.500 lod :  687 faces

bas m24sws 1348

bas m240B 1488

bas m249 in 0.350 lod : 2113 faces

                 pilot lod : 2110 faces

why has the pilot view less faces everybody know the pilot view is the lod with the highest faces

bas m249spw 2292 faces

bas m249spws 1920 faces

These weapons has a to high polycount for such bad quality. The weapons uses faces who no one will ever see, these can be removed. Everybody say the texture make a visual quality. Why has these weapons to high polys and to bad textures ?

Where is the balance must anyone drop down the quality of other addons to use these bas addons ?

Yes my weapon has polycount of 2117 faces in first lod but in the second 380 and than 223 and so on. You cant see a different of the distance by these lods in any aspect of the quality. And as i sad i think the weapons in 2048 or 1024 texture resolution will never be available. But this is the decision of the leaders. I made this weapons in this resolution and it is the easyest point to reduce the image resolution.

About the polycount, it is nothing special you all play with addons in these counts but you dont know this or sometimes you all have addons with higher polys.

And again i have 930 mhz gf2 mx 768 mb sd ram i have no big problems and no other addon loses any type of quality.

@Offtime,.. nothing against you please understand me. But did you realy think i does not know what im talking about or that i dont know what im doing Did you realy think i make addons that i cant use or play with them because of to high lags. I downloaded addons i cant use the reason are bad processing to high polys or else or CTDs.

And a little question at the end way has the basic bas helo and the vbs1 helo the same model i mean faces and so on are identically. And the black textures the same too

greets Tot

[sanctuary 19]

Quote[/b] ]Textures can not make up for lack of model

Yes, they can. Good textures can make up for a "lack" of model very easily, just take earls M4's for example. Earl did not need to model every single pin, bolt, crease and marking on his M4's, because the textures did that for him. He could use 8 face cylinders because the lighting on his textures make the barrels appear rounder than they actually are.

That is very true.

I remember in Swat 3 and in Ghost Recon some mods used good quality textures on low poly guns and it looked very very nice while not being heavy at all for both of those old engines.

Earl made a "weapon upgrade" mod for Ghost Recon with this in mind, the result was really awesome.

Polygons are not everything, a good usage of textures can make great a simple low poly objects.

[Romolus 0]

...

greets Tot

I somehow fail to see your point Totmacher.

You are also mentioning poly count numbers without telling much about the rest of your test environment.

On what island did you do those tests?

What other addons did you have in the testmission?

The meaning of the results of your tests are verry different when you test on desert island without any other addons or if you test on Nogova with 2 tank groups trying to navigat through some villages.

Just the poly count doesn't really say much.

And what does the poly count of some old BAS weapons have to do with the arguments mentioned in this thread?

And a little question at the end way has the basic bas helo and the vbs1 helo the same model i mean faces and so on are identically. And the black textures the same too

It's well known that SelectThis made the BAS Blackhawk models and that he took them with him to BIA. That's why they look so similar.

Somehow I don't get rid of the feeling that a BAS signature is a red rag to you

[dm 9]

These weapons has a to high polycount for such bad quality. The weapons uses faces who no one will ever see, these can be removed. Everybody say the texture make a visual quality. Why has these weapons to high polys and to bad textures ?

Where is the balance must anyone drop down the quality of other addons to use these bas addons ?

Whilst I'd like to keep this as on topic as possible, I'll still go into detail on this, as I feel that it is ontopic.

Bear in mind that the weapons in the BAS pack are nearly 2 years old. O2 was just released, addon making was in its infancy, and general addon making skills were just starting to develop.

That is why I think something like this thread is actually quite important, since it can define certain values (in the form of percentages) to provide other addon makers with a basis to work on that the "pioneers" did not have, or necessarily understand.

When we created the weapons pack we, like Earl, removed faces from our pilot view LOD. This reduced the overall model size, and reduced the number of faces that needed to be rendered, thus increasing (to a certain extent) the performance of the models.

I'll admit that the quality of our weapons isnt the greatest, but that is the whole point of this thread. To lay down some guidelines as to the "ideal" polycount/texture size for addons.

[Totmacher 0]

Haa i was right with the bas and vbs1 helo   .

Sry the point is that some people say my polycount is to high (unplayable) but on the other hand they actually play with such poly addons without problems. I relised that people only have problems with too high poly addons if they know the count. If they dont know the count they dont have problems. Its a mysterios stupid phänomen.

I mean is it forbitten for me RHS member to use a polycount that other Mod teams use ?

My test environment is the same who all others can use bas weapons. Because the polycount is the same only texture resolution is a lil bit higher .

But my test environment are all the standart ofp or opf islands with converted normal missions with my weapons ( at the same time i use soldier with 2048x2048 and 4096 x 4096 textures wich my gf2mx render down to 2048x2048). Or sefmade missions with a lot of bas addons (helos, units, weapons, and all other bas stuff), laser addons and a lot of other high poly addons. With a view distance 1250m i use a texture resolution from 1024x1024 that means all addons with higher textures are rendered down in realtime my weapons and soldiers are included. Screen resolution 1024x768.

I know that are not all aspects of the adjustments you can make of ofp game engine.

About bas weapons:

This treath was for tutorials and the balancing of addons. Polycount and textures i use the bas weapons for example because they are often in use. The bas weapons are old thats right they was the first weapons with such good quality but now the weapons are old and i say bad because the weapons have room to optimize. Unused faces can be removed. And why has the pilot view of one or more weapons a lower count as the first resolution lod ? But the weapons are selfmade and not stealed imports from other games. And that is an achievement other must copy first times (this sentence is translated hope is understandable).

But is it a secret or is it forbitten to show the polycount of bas addons ? With a personally opinion ?

Sry nobody must justify in this thread and i dont mean it negative. I only would like to show people that they play with such high polycount i use. And again with the quality of bas weapons it is ony my opinion.

My big mistake was that i told the polycount of my weapons if i never did that no one would ever get problems.

I thought this thread is for beginners and other addon maker who can talk about balancing poly and textures but that is not true.

I only see 2 solution 1. you dont tell the polycount and all are happy or 2. you lie with the polycount and all are happy.

I see many people set the texture resolution to 4096x4096 why did they do this if they dont like addons with such resolution ?

[Romolus 0]

I mean is it forbitten for me RHS member to use a polycount that other Mod teams use ?

...

But is it a secret or is it forbitten to show the polycount of bas addons ? With a personally opinion ?

No it's not, I just didn't see the point your post provided for the topic of the thread. Thanx for clearing it up

Can't we all just leave the rivalries between mod makers out of this thread and stick to factual arguments?

[Gordy 0]

This was supposed to be a tut thread and it turns out to be a bitching contest.

I learned one thing so far. To rearrange textures. That's it. I have so much respect for BAS guys, but you say that when you started all started. You never passed on the knowledge. The same with most of other advanced mods. The rule so far is: you must know sth to learn more. How the f... am I suppose to learn the basics. I would like it to be fun, but most often is only frustration. It seems like I have to re-invent the wheel again everytime I try to do sth.

And where is Drill? He started it and disappeared having most fun in some dark room.

[Totmacher 0]

Quote[/b] ]I don't get rid of the feeling that a BAS signature is a red rag to you

yea but that has something todo that you are or was a west based mod team and im in a east mod team. It is the normal east vs west conflict nothing else or personally .

Quote[/b] ]This was supposed to be a tut thread and it turns out to be a bitching contest.

hehe sry i dont wont it. The problem is the topic title lag and lag has something to do with polys and textures (and some other things). You have problems in addon making tell us your problems and who can will help me too. I learnt all by myself. There was only one who learnt me the first steps in o2 was KK or Kambodsch.kampfsau the leader of the swissmod.

here is a lil textur drawing tut for photoshop but this thread was for o2 or ? http://st.gaming-interactive.com/ ah why must all be so complicated.

I waiting for a mod who move this thread in the o2 section .

[Drill Sergeant 0]

Oh I'm off writing and working since the new Seal textures

came in. Also happened to re-seal the drive way.

Oh well back on topic which was what ever it was.

A Cube has six sides. That is in reference to a cube having

six textured sides. As in a cargo container.

So since we have lost focus here.

I will re-summarize, From the Top.

Hello, this thread is for the discussion of balance in addons.

This thread has nothing to do with my addons, my pollie counts,

my textures. This is not a thread about VBS1 or anything other

then OFP and how it handles different aspects of addons.

This is not a thread to discuss addons that are within the community but,

how to create addons using a chosen technique. This article was written

to help addon makers and the general public understand some of the causes

of lag in addons.

Yet it is also about how to structure addons in different ways.

I am not going to be able to give any examples from the tutorial until it

is entirely finished as the answer to your questions or complaints is most

likely in the next step.

Seems to me every time I post something in reference to the construction of

and addon people think it's a defense for my modeling. Take it as you like.

Every thread I have ever posted has turned into a hate mail flame fest, stemming

from the existence of high pollie models in the community for which I am held

accountable on all occasions. I would like everyone to take a minute and look

at all the addons I have released and tell me if they are unplayable.

The majority of the projects I have wished to start have ended up on the scrap

heap do to community resistance. If the community wishes to reject my o2 tutorial

I will be forced to also place it on the scrap heap and move on.

This is the last time I will try and clarify this, this has nothing to do with my

models or addons. I was trying to inform the community of how to create addons.

If some one wishes to add to this constructively go ahead.

P.S. Gordy and Earl were two examples of released addons that could be

compared in any way. Gordy's M4's ran perfectly on my Uncles more powerful

machine but not on mine. For the record my computer has a Intel Celron 746MHZ processor, 40GB hard drive, 256 ram, 8-16 meg video integrated controller and 12x

CDRW drive.

[philcommando 0]

What is balance?

Science is a fact of expression that no matter how many times u perform an act, u will be able to get the same repetitive results.

Art is an abstract form of expression that no matter how many times u expressed it, it comes out different - an unique perspective each time unlike science.

An artist can never be a scientist and a scientist can never be an artist.

In the world of computers, many seek to find the balance between science and art, and 3d is the best proponent that science and art can co-exist. Therefore, the balance is to mathematically re-create art within the limitations of computer science and current technology.

An true blue artist will never compromise his artform and using what limited knowledge he has of comp tech, he will recreate every pixel of his art.

A true blue scientist will never compromise his scientific expression and using whatever limited knowledge of his artistic streak, he will recreate every mathematically correct artform into his computer with disregard to asthetics and only that it should work and be playerable.

What drill sergent is trying to do is to bridge the gap between science and art. It is highly commendable but i am saddened by others who chose to defend their artform when used just as an example. I have not detected even a single alphabet of personal attack by drill sergent and yet, perhaps what others term as defensive come across quite arrogant and offensive.

Lets take stock, hold back our criticism and encourage the efforts of Drill sergent, who belongs to the legendary class of people like snyper and brsseb, for without them, i doubt if ofp can be what it is today. What he does today will bode well for the future of ofp. No one is perfect and along the way, should we discovered better ways, lets share the ideas instead of deriding others. All the best,Sergent and the rest are looking forward to your efforts done for us freely in your own time.

[offtime 0]

schisch....

i was hoping for a little war betwen two most popular and still most arogant mod teams and there you go.. comes philcommando, writes his stuff and spoils my fun.

thanks philcommando  

on topic

i think that this whole topic will be for shure helpfull to DS while writing final version.

hope some BIS guys will write they few cents, they are only ones that knows everything about this game

[Drill Sergeant 0]

Thank you so much philcommando for breaking it down and understanding.

It's hard to express in words how it feels to get closure on this, even after

all this time. Your comment has made every bump in the road to today in

the OFP community worth it. Well I have a o2 tut to make, among other things,

so back to work. I'm short of words at the moment, (thats rare for me.)

All I can say is thanks to those who understand and support me. Without

people like you I would have quit a long time ago. You guys truly help make

OFP what it is today.