Macser_old

If Sanc doesn't mind I'll butt in on that point. :) Creating a model from scratch is possible in blender. You can build it,unwrap and map it.You can also create Res/View lods without completely destroying mapping.You can put in your point based lods and even do good skin weighting. You need O2 to apply mass,re-path textures to accomodate Pac/Paa,and rename lods.And of course named properties. But creatively speaking,Vektor's scripts allow you to stay in the Blender environment until you're ready to finalize for OFP.

Yep.Those hedgerows are a bit of a pain. ;) I love that last pic.I imagine with some extra "clutter" thrown in,like the haystacks,that scene would make for some good close-quarters action. :)

Hello, You might find a copy of the resistance expansion somewhere out there. Although it might require some digging.And I've seen some silly prices being quoted for new(unopened?)copies. Must be quite sought after. A new copy of the GOTY editon shouldn't cost a hell of a lot though. Wherever you're from. :)

G44, No offence intended,but if you have a genuine point to make,then it might be better to contact a moderator. Rather than making what appear to be smart comments.

Beautiful work Dara.Even without a population the villages/towns look believable.The locations have a lot of "character",for want of a better word. :)

Hello,John,STGN. John, If you think too many addons are causing problems then I suggest you start using mod folders. Maybe you could organize your addons into smaller sets,and then split them up into their own mod folders. In any case,stuffing content into the RES addons folder and the OFP addons folder,may cause problems of it's own.You should keep just the default data in those locations. :)

Either will work. There's a page from the wiki referring to OFP.Probably the same effect, but there's a list of what types are used on what objects. DestrType=5; That's about as close as you can get,to what you want.As in Sanctuary's WW4. Although there's no explosion or smoke effect.So you'd need to take care of that yourself.

Hello f00bar. Creating faces isn't much of a problem.But it would be time consuming. Which is probably why you haven't had many offers of assistance,in that regard. You mention textures used on both the BIS mapped head,as well as custom mapped heads. What type did you intend to apply your newly created/edited faces to?

Of course you can do it. :) Not too long ago someone else did it.The only difference being that they wanted the WW4 weapons to replace the defaults. Vultar's WW4 default weapon replacement. And there's a discussion on the subject that took place in this very thread.It started here. If you just want a quick mess around,you can simply change the soldiers default loadouts. Or as Sanctuary suggested,if you just wanted to change the look of the weapon, then all you need to do is edit the lines he quoted. Replacing the default models with the ones you'd like to see. If you want a more broad ranging change,then you'll need to do what Vultar has done. Namely change the base magazines for the weapons,as well as the models. If we're not spelling it out for you step by step,it's because it's been done many times before. The info you want is definitely available on these forums. So do some research on the subject before you start.And good luck.

Lovely work.Very scenic environment. A pity it's going to be bombed,burned and shot to pieces. :biggrin:

You could be right.But like Rellikki's suggestion,it probably involves some looped scripting.Not that that's a bad thing for everybody.There's occasions when you just can't tackle a problem any other way. Still.I'm biased towards not using them.

Hello,Aldo. You can change the reload animation.But once you do,it is used for every weapon of that type.Because you are animating the character.And the animations are shared for all character models.Much like 3rd person view in counterstrike. What you have in the image is first person view.As far as I know,those animations are packaged with the model for the weapon and hands.Which is why they can be different. :)

Ok for me.Must be connection issues,or other influences as the Prof suggests.

I apologise in advance if I'm missing something. :) Aside from removing the flash itself,and the lack of a "cone",on some light sources,there doesn't seem to be anything fundamentally different with the lighting. Or do you mean lighting effects?Because lighting system implies something more technical.Like the way objects and the environment receive light.I don't really see anything different in that regard. Do you mean the moving clouds?Or the skydome? Doing the clouds any other way would be tricky.If you try making them a solid mesh it'd take a lot of geometry to make them look like clouds.And I don't think it'd look too convincing anyway.

Not strictly true. Anyway.Unity does seem like an impressive engine.Although as you said Johncage,it'd be fairly limited within the confines of a web based title.I'd like to see a full 3d attempt at a military themed game.

I know Blender 2.49b can import stl files.But I've never tried it myself. Meshlab can import from stl too,as far as I'm aware. From either of those you should be able to export to a variety of formats.

I don't think it can "die",as such.It may have less activity in it's online interest.Whether that be Multiplay or modding.But I think it's unique enough to still hold interest for a good number of people.Not to mention that it's easier on your hardware than newer titles.(Although it might not use newer hardware very well.) Neither do I think it needs to have legions of followers to be considered a valid form of entertainment.A good game is simply a good game.Speaking personally,I don't judge a games worth on the amount of people yapping about it.I'd consider it a going concern as long as there's some people discussing and especially contributing to it.And there's still a few people doing exactly that. I've noticed a few more new members recently too. Inevitably interest will wane.But it's still attracting some attention,even this far down the line.So it should probably be around a little while longer. I think a more apt description,at this point,would be that it's not as trendy as it used to be. :)

I won't say they don't exist,but I'm not aware of anything as specific as character creation tutorials for O2. Because of the need to adhere to the default unit's joint positions,even the best modellers are forced to re-edit,add and subtract to default content. If you don't,you get unpredictable results with the animations. Which is why most characters look similar at a base level.Not because of a lack of skill or originality on the part of modellers.But because of the need to conform to the anims.You could probably get something that looks a bit better proportioned,with a shedload of work.But it can be very hit and miss. The base pose of the model doesn't help much either.I've found it to be incredibly frustrating to work with. Post Resistance,people adopted the BIS civilian sample model as a basis for new characters.I assume it was because of the lack of "clutter" and general proportions.Making it a little easier to work with.But the same constraints apply,with regard to animations.Still it might be a good choice to start with. At first just do some editing of the mesh.Add a pouch or two.Maybe a helmet. Just to get it in game and see how things work.Pay very close attention to selections. Anyway,good luck.And have a thorough look around this very forum if you get stuck.90% of the things that'll crop up will have been tackled already.Some have solutions,some are impassable due to limitations. :)

The texture paint mode in Blender isn't perfect.But it's just good enough for seams. Otherwise there's a lot of guesswork and going from image editor to 3d app.Lots of trial and error. Tattoo has a non commercial license. It's basically a mesh painting app.A simpler version of high end tools,like deeppaint or bodypaint.Although it adds another stage to your workflow. The only plugins I'm aware of for Max,that allows painting onto the mesh,is the polyboost set. But it costs around 150 US dollars. I know all that seems like a lot of effort for OFP.But I also know it's not the only engine you make content for. :)

Hello guys, I think it might be something to do with hardware.Or at least it could be a factor. OFP was written for very different gear than we have available today. Perhaps the engine just isn't capable of using newer video cards and CPUs to their fullest.Actually I think the CPU takes the biggest load,so the video card may not get much of a workout at all. I only say that,as I've had a similar experience.Other people have reported the same thing also.Even after an upgrade there's no discernible improvement in framerates.Or in some cases the game may not work at all. I think you'll just have to take STGN's advice,and dial the detail back a little. In any case welcome to the forums Wally. :)

I can only speak for myself when I say character models are the trickiest part of modelling for OFP.Particularly if you want to do something a bit different than the default units.Any serious deviation from the proportions and locations of the joints will have some rather ugly results. Unless of course you're willing to do your own set of animations,designed for your model.But that's a whole other topic on it's own.And not something you'd be doing over a weekend. I don't know of any way to get skeletal data into O2.Regardless of format. I've always found O2 to be a bit,cumbersome,to use.You do need it to set up selections and lods,but the modelling can be done elsewhere.Exporting to 3ds for import to O2.O2 can't import FBX. The only real advice I could give,would be to watch the joints,and how they compare to a default BIS unit.If you keep your model's matched up to theirs,there shouldn't be any problems with animations. Unfortunately you're still left with a very awkward base pose. Anyway.Just jump in and try it.Study the setup of the BIS stuff first. Then have a peek at some of the vast array of works by the members of this community.And make good use of the search function. And welcome to the forums. :)

Nice barrow there. :) Looks quite convincing.Maybe you could darken it up where the bags meet.It might give them some more definition. I'm assuming they're seams running down the sides?If so,I know how much of a headache it is to match up the opposing sides of a seam. Especially with something flexible or organic. I do as much as possible with a texture beforehand,then bring it in to Blender to tidy up the seams.As it allows the modeller to paint directly onto the mesh.

angle convertor There's a handy site to convert angles. Ofp uses Radians.So if you know roughly what your required angle is in degrees, you can quickly convert to radian values. :)

What can I say? Really nice work Prof.It's great to see another project that's off the beaten path.And done with a bit of passion too. :)

Yeah.Gimp is well worth checking out.Like Blender it's continuing to evolve.They aren't perfect solutions,but then again,neither are some of the commercial apps.And of course they're very cost effective. :)