Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2006 8:01 pm Post subject:
Well it's the Team Leader that REALLY has to get things going. He hasn't posted in the Staff forum in months. I've added him on MSN and haven't seen him online a single time. I mean, seriously, what's going on here?!?
I'm seriously considering asking Reaperrr to come back and take his rightful place at the head of the table back, bc Rebel seems to be X_x _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 Location: In the Edge of /dev/null
Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject:
If you take a job, you have to finish it. Not to say to everyone "Please Trust in me" and, then, disappear in a puff of smoke. We are ALL awaiting for the next release, for bugfix, solo player missions and add-on. I hope that this mod won't be discontinued as the Red Alert Paradox Device, where, the chief modder continue to say that he has 16 hours of school at day, and the last update was on August. If you can't handle it, please free the mod source and let someone other to continue with the work. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:44 am Post subject:
Truth is I've been very busy with school, and shouldn't even be making those TFD fixes.
And I've never REALLY modded TS, and I don't know anything about TS mission making either -_-
I'm sorry.. I'd really want to do this, but I don't think I can. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Rebels gone away, I believe its time for a true leader to fill in, I request that I hostile take over Rebel's Command base of Return of The Dawn, and if successful, put Nyerguds in charge of coding, Dustin Mendus can be his cohort in coding as well?
And while I'm on the subject, Nyer, contact me on MSN, I may have some...ideas... for you. *Hint hint*
P.S. Dustin, I know you want to do some coding. _________________ ... QUICK_EDIT
Nyerguds would be the best person for the job imo, I would gladly help him becuase I love this mod and it would be a shame to see it stop completely. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Better terrain and civillian buildings and vehicles
(I would like to see some re-enditions of TD scenery IE: the spooky church and the vehicles from the period)
A new nuclear explosion (not borrowed from RA2)
Pity I've got a lot to do, otherwise I'd pitch in and help _________________
[quote="Lt A1br3cht"]Kill it with fire!!!!!!!!!!![/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 2:35 pm Post subject:
mice16 wrote:
What RoTD NEEDS is:
Better (Not made in paint) buildings
New infantry (not recycled TD shps)
Better terrain and civillian buildings and vehicles
(I would like to see some re-enditions of TD scenery IE: the spooky church and the vehicles from the period)
A new nuclear explosion (not borrowed from RA2)
[1]Jokeman's refinery looks better, imho...
[2-4]This is only possible with people able to do that, both from a skill and time perspective. In the TS modding community, everyone either meets (at best) one of these requirements or is already involved in other mods. So complaining about these things doesn't help anything, unless you can get someone actually doing something about it.
mice16 wrote:
Pity I've got a lot to do
Everyone has, you know...
Sorry, don't take it too personal, but I'm a bit pissed about people (you're not the first one) complaining about this graphic is bad and that graphic needs to be redone and talking about it as if a single person could do that in like 1 month...
So many people are are talking about what needs to be done in their opinion, but hardly anyone of them actually does something.
Mr. Pokey wrote:
*The search begins for an available leader...*
Don't you dare it, I've almost finished RotD 2.6
But looking at the wishlists, I'm not sure if I really should release it, probably won't meet majority's expectations anyway...
Who cares about bugfixes and balance tweaks, VISUALS AR TEH OWNAGE!!!!
Come on guys, if you want a TD total conversion with really good graphics, wait until someone makes a TD TC for C&C3:TW
sorry, but I'm in a somewhat cynical mood right now... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 Location: In the Edge of /dev/null
Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 12:16 am Post subject:
What RoTD NEEDS is: [list]
[*]Better (Not made in paint) buildings
This image is not very beautiful. You can do better
[*]New infantry (not recycled TD shps)
Why not? IMHO they are perfect. The AI is not so much improved, in RoTD.
[*]Better terrain and civillian buildings and vehicles
(I would like to see some re-enditions of TD scenery IE: the spooky church and the vehicles from the period)
It could be improved from Tiberian Sun Terrain Expansion (if exist one for that game).
[*]A new nuclear explosion (not borrowed from RA2)
Yes. It could be a re-edit of TD Nuclear Explosion no? The problem is the effect that the explosion product. Make the game work slower during the animation.
Don't you dare it, I've almost finished RotD 2.6
If you have made an update, share it with us. Red Rebel is completely missing from a long time. If we wait for him, the MOD could die. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 12:52 pm Post subject:
PUOJACKZ wrote:
If you have made an update, share it with us. Red Rebel is completely missing from a long time. If we wait for him, the MOD could die.
Quote:
Don't you dare it, I've almost finished RotD 2.6
Don't worry, when it's finished, I'll release it.
Carno wrote:
So what? I would like Reaperrr to revert to TD everything but I know he wont.
(or maybe he would.)
Never say never
The problem is, I currently just don't see the point in doing it. It would just be TD with some features added and some others missing compared to the original TD.
@mice16: There is no doubt that your render is more accurate to the dimensions of the refinery you see in the TD video, but the thing is, it looks more bulky (especially the foundation, which should be flat btw), the unloading port looks too small and is hidden behind the dome (which faces a strange direction in your isometric render), and the lighting is simply horrible.
Also, I don't see what's wrong with taking parts (only the animation, actually) from TD. And about that part taken from the cloning vat, it's just some detail added because that side of the ref would look a bit plain without it.
Our refinery looks more like the ingame one from TD, which is actually what we wanted. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Location: DAS BOOT IM DER OSTSEE
Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 4:56 pm Post subject:
I do. Nostalga, and you could incoporate voxel debris too. Atleast give it a shot, and please reaperrr... GIVE US PROPER FLAME/CHEM! _________________ PPM's Reichstrollfuherer, 236th Trollenparties brigade. QUICK_EDIT
@mice16: There is no doubt that your render is more accurate to the dimensions of the refinery you see in the TD video, but the thing is, it looks more bulky (especially the foundation, which should be flat btw), the unloading port looks too small and is hidden behind the dome (which faces a strange direction in your isometric render), and the lighting is simply horrible.
Also, I don't see what's wrong with taking parts (only the animation, actually) from TD. And about that part taken from the cloning vat, it's just some detail added because that side of the ref would look a bit plain without it.
Our refinery looks more like the ingame one from TD, which is actually what we wanted.
The loading shaft is accurate, IMO the other one is huge - The anti-aliasing was turned off because of me having to cut all the blurred bits off later and i took down the saturation in PS because I thought it would be a piece of scenery anyway, and should look old because it's TS - (I know the base should be flatter, and I can fix that) But please dont keep it like the ingame TD refinery, because, although we all love the game, it still was an MSDOS game, with 640x480, and 256 colours - hence they had to sacrifice more detail. _________________
[quote="Lt A1br3cht"]Kill it with fire!!!!!!!!!!![/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 3:57 pm Post subject:
mice16 wrote:
(...)But please dont keep it like the ingame TD refinery, because, although we all love the game, it still was an MSDOS game, with 640x480, and 256 colours - hence they had to sacrifice more detail.
Without manually setting higher resolutions, TS max resolution is 800x600, and the unit/building palettes are still 256 colors. The only thing about TS that is 16-bit ist the lighting effects, but still the graphics themselves are basically 256-colors only.
Besides that, the 640x480 version of TD was actually for windows, the DOS version was 320x240 only
@Carno, about the flame/chemthrowers: WTF are you talking about? have you given the 2.5 beta a shot already? It DOES have TD-like flame-/chemthrowers... ok, the sounds are missing due to a bug (which will be fixed in 2.6), but basically they are there. QUICK_EDIT
What exactly will be in the latest version? Will the Chem Warrior be in his rightful place in the Nod tech-tree? I would love to know all the changes _________________
Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Location: DAS BOOT IM DER OSTSEE
Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 9:08 pm Post subject:
Oh...Reapy, can we get more variety with starting tanks for us SS players? _________________ PPM's Reichstrollfuherer, 236th Trollenparties brigade. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject:
Mr. Pokey wrote:
Will the Chem Warrior be in his rightful place in the Nod tech-tree?
That was one of the first things I fixed
Mr. Pokey wrote:
What exactly will be in the latest version? I would love to know all the changes
2.6 will mainly be "what 2.5 was meant to be", with some little extras.
Currently, we have only 2.4 and 2.5 beta. 2.5 beta is a bit buggy, and 2.4 is outdated when it comes to balance (and lacks a few features from 2.5, too). So currently you have the choice between an outdated, and a buggy version. That's why I won't introduce too many new features in 2.6, because I want that situation fixed asap.
So this is what you'll definitely get:
-IE bug from 2.5 beta fixed
-Nod Chem Warrior tech tree fix (will need Temple of Nod again)
-sounds for flame- and chemthrowing will now be working
-lag caused by nuke reduced
-some balance adjustments
Besides, I've reorganized the mix files and deleted all obsolete files. RotD 2.6 will come with only 3 mix files, so when it's released you'll have to uninstall older versions first, since rotdxp05 and 06 aren't used anymore.
That won't do anything for you, but it is a better foundation for future versions. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Location: DAS BOOT IM DER OSTSEE
Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 8:58 pm Post subject:
SSM ever going to get a turret like it should? I mean, Reap, you're against it, but its kinda akward without it...it HAD a turret in TD, you're depriving it of something I cant exactly pinpoint now. _________________ PPM's Reichstrollfuherer, 236th Trollenparties brigade. QUICK_EDIT
[...]
@mice16: There is no doubt that your render is more accurate to the dimensions of the refinery you see in the TD video, but the thing is, it looks more bulky (especially the foundation, which should be flat btw), the unloading port looks too small and is hidden behind the dome (which faces a strange direction in your isometric render), and the lighting is simply horrible.
Also, I don't see what's wrong with taking parts (only the animation, actually) from TD. And about that part taken from the cloning vat, it's just some detail added because that side of the ref would look a bit plain without it.
Our refinery looks more like the ingame one from TD, which is actually what we wanted.
exactly...
the goal was, to get the feeling of playing TD when you play RoTD... so we wanted the dimensions of the ingame buildings and added some detail to take advantage of the higher resolution...
mostly, the details came from TD videos or pictures from manuals... like the doors, you see at the comm center
the refinery is one example of different dimensions ingame and in video... the airfield is another... it's much longer in the video, but we wanted it familiar to the ingame version
i'm sure, that good 3D models are much better than my photoshop (not paint!! ) versions... DJFreestyler did a great job with the construction yard _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 4:04 pm Post subject:
Couldn't agree more, Jokeman
DoMoNiC_HuNtEr wrote:
Sweet. Any more missions?
Sorry, not in 2.6.
Making (good) missions takes time, and as I already said, I want 2.6 out asap. But there's a good chance (I'm not guaranteeing it, but still) that 2.6 won't be the last version.
@Carno: Ok, I'll see what I can do, although it probably won't look that good, since turret voxels tend to overlap the main voxel (in this case, even the lowest layer of the turret voxel will overlap a small part of the 'cockpit' of the SSM in some perspectives). QUICK_EDIT
exactly...
the goal was, to get the feeling of playing TD when you play RoTD... so we wanted the dimensions of the ingame buildings and added some detail to take advantage of the higher resolution...
mostly, the details came from TD videos or pictures from manuals... like the doors, you see at the comm center
the refinery is one example of different dimensions ingame and in video... the airfield is another... it's much longer in the video, but we wanted it familiar to the ingame version
i'm sure, that good 3D models are much better than my photoshop (not paint!! ) versions... DJFreestyler did a great job with the construction yard
Actually, my render is more the right size for TS... I put it up to a screenshot, and it fits perfectly, and, as I said before, the lighting was done that way to make it look old, because, originally, it was just supposed to be scenery - for my private mod - And I didn't add anything to the design, that cloning chamber doesn't fit, why have a human in suspended animation, in a vat, near a refinery (maybe for Nod ) _________________
[quote="Lt A1br3cht"]Kill it with fire!!!!!!!!!!![/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject:
mice16 wrote:
(...) that cloning chamber doesn't fit, why have a human in suspended animation, in a vat, near a refinery (maybe for Nod )
Well, I agree on that one, but this can be fixed
About the refs size, I think Jokeman was more referring to the relation between height, width & length, not the actual size.
The way your refinery looks like on the screenshot you posted, it wouldn't make it's way into RotD. If you'd like it to be used in RotD, you'll need to improve it considerably (especially the lighting and textures) and make animations for it.
If you can't or don't want to do that, then there's really no point in showing it here.
I mean, what did you expect to happen when showing it here? Everyone here screaming "OMGOMG WTF TEH PWNAGE!!!!11!!! We'll pay you anything to get your godlike refinery in this mod!!!!!!!!111!!????!!!!"?
If we had simply used the original shps from TD without improving them, then that eventually would have happened, and if your refinery was of similar quality to DJFreestylers ConYard (can't stress this enough), then too, but that just isn't the case.
I think it doesn't make sense for us to discuss this any further, as we obviously have different opinions on what RotD buildings should look like... QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Location: DAS BOOT IM DER OSTSEE
Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 5:10 pm Post subject:
Reaperrr...just my input/Off topic thought...
In the future, somewhere far and distant, could you do an ALTERNATE RoTD? With TD shps for everything but terrain?) _________________ PPM's Reichstrollfuherer, 236th Trollenparties brigade. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 10:35 am Post subject:
Too flat
Still too flat
WHO CARES? It LOOKS better.
Have you even seen WW's 3D model of the refinery? No? Dig through your TD (if you got it) and find "refinery.vqa", on the Covert Ops disk. It has the exact metric measurements of the refinery.
Reaperrr wrote:
@mice16: There is no doubt that your render is more accurate to the dimensions of the refinery you see in the TD video
Ity isn't. I checked. The main unloading tower is way too small, and the processing core on the back is too big.
mice16 wrote:
But please dont keep it like the ingame TD refinery, because, although we all love the game, it still was an MSDOS game, with 640x480, and 256 colours - hence they had to sacrifice more detail.
Ehhhh get your facts right. That's 320x200, and the colour palette did NOTHING to reduce the image quality at all. TS still has the same amount of remap colours.
And IF you based yourself on that video I hope you didn't base yourself on the actual images from that vid, because they have to be resized from 320x200 to 320x240 to get the right aspect ratio for modern resolutions. In DOS C&C, 320x200 is full screen.
[yes, I'm slightly annoyed -_-]
Reaperrr wrote:
Besides that, the 640x480 version of TD was actually for windows, the DOS version was 320x240 only
BAD Reaperrr. BAD. 320x200. Carve it in your brain _________________ QUICK_EDIT
And IF you based yourself on that video I hope you didn't base yourself on the actual images from that vid, because they have to be resized from 320x200 to 320x240 to get the right aspect ratio for modern resolutions. In DOS C&C, 320x200 is full screen.
Ah... THAT's the problem
I also have a detailed model of the TD harvester - But I can't get 3ds2vxl to work properly (VXLSE wont read the produced voxels) _________________
[quote="Lt A1br3cht"]Kill it with fire!!!!!!!!!!![/quote] Last edited by mice16 on Sat May 06, 2006 8:30 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 3:04 pm Post subject:
Nyerguds wrote:
Reaperrr wrote:
Besides that, the 640x480 version of TD was actually for windows, the DOS version was 320x240 only
BAD Reaperrr. BAD. 320x200. Carve it in your brain
oops!
Shame on me
I only played C&C95, you know
BUT: I remember my monitor saying 640x350 in C&C95 (unless I set the res to 640x480), and somewhere saw the videos actually were 320x156? or was that RA1 DOS?
Ahh, too long ago...
@mice16: Neither will I replace my harvester voxel, because a) I don't see what's wrong with it, and b) I just tweaked the normals, so in 2.6 it will look even slightly better than in 2.5. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Aug 2004 Location: DAS BOOT IM DER OSTSEE
Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 3:59 pm Post subject:
Reaperrr, throw me the Old Renegade harvester voxel if you still have it, I wanna mod it.
And if there is a best mod ever it sure as hell anit Sevely's Empire. _________________ PPM's Reichstrollfuherer, 236th Trollenparties brigade. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 24 May 2004 Location: Flanders (Be) Posts:300000001
Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 4:53 pm Post subject:
Reaperrr wrote:
oops!
Shame on me
I only played C&C95, you know
BUT: I remember my monitor saying 640x350 in C&C95 (unless I set the res to 640x480), and somewhere saw the videos actually were 320x156? or was that RA1 DOS?
Ahh, too long ago...
Normal C&C95 res is 640x400, but you can add black borders to make it 640x480 for video card compatibility.
The videos are indeed 320x156, but they're centered in a 320x200 frame, to give a widescreen-movie effect. So in C&C95, that's done x2, so it becomes 640x312 centered in a 640x400 frame, and perhaps that whole thing is also centered in 640x480 if you put the C&C95 settings that way.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum