355 réponses à ce sujet

[boodah83]

For what it's worth, I like the new body (and hand and feet) models and consider them to be a huge improvement over the Bioware ones. Just my opinion though.

[SHOVA]

The new PC parts are wonderful thank you for including them!

Sorry I haven't gotten back to you sooner on the water and wind mill placeable issue- I doubt you need a screenshot to explain what is- or rather isn't happening- simply put the placeable is too large to be used by a PC- they certainly try but end up blocked from being able to use- or open it, and just stand there attempting to get to it. Placeable 2da lines 4087, and 4088. I solved this issue by marking the mills static- and using a invisible object placeable set on the mill- close enough that a PC can get to it. 

 

Thank you for keeping Q alive and updating it with the quality content that makes NWN better. I certainly appreciate each new model added to (in my opinion) the best looking and most realistic hakset available. Thank you for making updates available almost daily- and making sure those updates don't crash NWN, or worse, corrupt modules. Thank you for being engaged with this community, listening to suggestions, both good and bad,   and for keeping the conversations positive when others are less concerned with politeness. Most of all thank you for your time! We at Black Dragons Q Ravenloft appreciate you! 

[Pstemarie]

The new PC parts are wonderful thank you for including them!

Sorry I haven't gotten back to you sooner on the water and wind mill placeable issue- I doubt you need a screenshot to explain what is- or rather isn't happening- simply put the placeable is too large to be used by a PC- they certainly try but end up blocked from being able to use- or open it, and just stand there attempting to get to it. Placeable 2da lines 4087, and 4088. I solved this issue by marking the mills static- and using a invisible object placeable set on the mill- close enough that a PC can get to it. 

 

Thank you for keeping Q alive and updating it with the quality content that makes NWN better. I certainly appreciate each new model added to (in my opinion) the best looking and most realistic hakset available. Thank you for making updates available almost daily- and making sure those updates don't crash NWN, or worse, corrupt modules. Thank you for being engaged with this community, listening to suggestions, both good and bad,   and for keeping the conversations positive when others are less concerned with politeness. Most of all thank you for your time! We at Black Dragons Q Ravenloft appreciate you! 

 

Ok, yeah I thought those were the models you were talking about. They are actually designed to be used with a lever placed nearby in the area. The new Q base module includes a script designed to be used with the lever to specifically activate those placeables. Here is the script for reference...

 

Spoiler

//::///////////////////////////////////////////////

//:: Placeable OnUsed

//:: q_mill_lever_act

//:: Copyright © 2003 Bioware Corp.

//:://////////////////////////////////////////////

/*

    This OnUsed event is designed to be used with a placeable lever

    and the new Project Q Millstone placeables (QP_MILLWHEEL_001 and

    QP_MILLWHEEL_002).

 

    1. Place the millstone placeable in the area.

 

    2. Place a lever and assign it the following variables

 

       - X2_L_PLC_ACTIVATED_STATE / int / 0

 

       - Q_ACT_TARGET / string / QP_MILLWHEEL_001 <or> QP_MILLWHEEL_002

 

    3. Open the lever's properties and set its initial state to "deactivated"

 

    4. Assign this script to the placeable lever's OnUsed event

 

    5. Place the "Mill Wheel" sound object near the millwheel, open its

       properties and uncheck the "active" button

 

    When the PC uses the lever, the mill wheel will begin to turn and the

    sound will play. When the lever is used again, the wheel and sound will

    stop

 

    Based upon an original BioWare script by Georg Zoeller

 

*/

//:://////////////////////////////////////////////

//:: Created By: Pstemarie

//:: Created On: September 23, 2013

//:://////////////////////////////////////////////

void main()

{

    string sTarget    = GetLocalString(OBJECT_SELF, "Q_ACT_TARGET");

    object oPlaceable = GetNearestObjectByTag(sTarget);

    object oSound     = GetNearestObjectByTag("MillWheel");

    int    nActive    = GetLocalInt (OBJECT_SELF,"X2_L_PLC_ACTIVATED_STATE");

 

    // * Play Appropriate Animation

    if (!nActive)

    {

        ActionPlayAnimation(ANIMATION_PLACEABLE_ACTIVATE);

        AssignCommand(oPlaceable, ActionPlayAnimation(ANIMATION_PLACEABLE_ACTIVATE));

        SoundObjectPlay(oSound);

    }

    else

    {

        ActionPlayAnimation(ANIMATION_PLACEABLE_DEACTIVATE);

        AssignCommand(oPlaceable, ActionPlayAnimation(ANIMATION_PLACEABLE_DEACTIVATE));

        SoundObjectStop(oSound);

    }

    // * Store New State

    SetLocalInt(OBJECT_SELF,"X2_L_PLC_ACTIVATED_STATE",!nActive);

}

[Jedijax]

I agree with Heka. I don't like the new anatomic choices, and improvement as they may be over the originals, I think there are much better alternatives than the ones included in the new Q. I also think his request isn't extreme, and is the basis of all modular works of the kind. His opinion mirrors mine in terms of description (the whole bags of potatoes/blocks remark), and even if I find it inappropriate due to the nature of the situation, it's a refreshingly honest and open one.

 

Having said that, Project Q is tended by Pstemarie, and he has final say on what is done with it. Making a request in no way means he is obligated to comply. I understand that and respect his judgement. I usually don't voice out my opinion when I feel like it would offend the custom content contributor, regardless of how well-worded or valid it may be. However, I bet there are others who do this, and it may be useful to consider it.

Close

[Pstemarie]

 

I agree with Heka. I don't like the new anatomic choices, and improvement as they may be over the originals, I think there are much better alternatives than the ones included in the new Q. I also think his request isn't extreme, and is the basis of all modular works of the kind. His opinion mirrors mine in terms of description (the whole bags of potatoes/blocks remark), and even if I find it inappropriate due to the nature of the situation, it's a refreshingly honest and open one.

 

Having said that, Project Q is tended by Pstemarie, and he has final say on what is done with it. Making a request in no way means he is obligated to comply. I understand that and respect his judgement. I usually don't voice out my opinion when I feel like it would offend the custom content contributor, regardless of how well-worded or valid it may be. However, I bet there are others who do this, and it may be useful to consider it.

Close

 

 

I hear what you guys are saying. The problem I have with separating it out into a separate hak hits upon these points...

 

1. Its one batch of content, that if separated into a "q_!override.HAK" would just duplicate another HAK that already exists (e.g. the original package the content came from).

 

2. If I separate one override into a HAK - q_!override.HAK - then next thing you know people will want more overriding content moved to that HAK. The HAK then winds up becoming a repository for every override in Q.

 

3. Next thing you know, people start wanting other things pulled from this new override HAK and moved into separate override HAKs because they like content A but not content B.

 

Project Q has always included overrides as essential elements of its content. Not every Builder likes everything that has been included. However, Builders always have the freedom to either repackage Q or to create a tophak that overrides Q content. Given this simple fact, expecting CC authors to completely reorganize the structure of a package because you don't like something in it makes little sense. 

 

All this being said, instead of quibbling back and forth over a point I consider settled, why not put our three heads together and figure out how we can give the models back the higher definition of the originals? The answer lies with the textures, I'm sure, and its not like we're looking at a lot of textures here. I'm not a texture artist and have never made claims to be one - save for a handful, the textures I use are all modifications of ones other people create. Maybe a texture artist will step up, having seen this, and offer to help out.

[Pstemarie]

OK, I've, as PHoD would say, "hit the..." first PLT texture "...with a brick" and come up with the following. On the right is the original, left is the modified (sharpen mask +40, contrast mask +15). Thoughts, comments...

 

 

I also seem to recall someone was going to take a look at Gunner's models - OTR I think it was. I'll have to look into that.

[SHOVA]

Maybe I am too old- but I can not tell a difference. By the way, his nipples are showing! 

 

Thanks for the reply about the mill- it makes a lot more sense now. I'll have to see if I can incorporate the lever into the CNR system.

[Surek]

I would have to agree with Shova I see no difference at all. I'm happy with everything that gets put into Q.

[boodah83]

There is a difference; left one's skin is a little lighter and the contours a little darker. I think it's an improvement.

[Pstemarie]

Its subtle and I'd really like to the avoid the over-the-top "definition" used by BioWare on their original textures. To me the Bioware textures look like a blob of dark lines feebly attempting to force a three dimensional appearance to whatever they are painted over. I spent a good portion of today looking at images of male upper torsos - real and artistic - and none of what I saw even comes close to BioWares forced definition. Indeed, the textures Gunner used are much closer in definition and shadowing to the images I looked through.

[Hekatoncheires]

Hrm. I'll give some thoughts; Im not sure Im capable of pulling punches with a critique, so, please bear with me, my intent is not to insult.

Im not going to quibble about about the models; I sort of like the feet but I have a poor assessment of the rest of them. So, I will focus on texture.

Part of what makes the original bioware parts work is that the definitions of muscle sort of over the top, like theater makeup; it makes it read more clearly from a distance. The NWN lighting system is also not terribly advanced, so you're not gonna get great turning-of-the-form from simple light on the model; it needs to be done with the texture itself.

How to accomplish this? Example, toes. Darken the edges to imply a turning of form, or darken the toes outright to imply the bloodflow to that region of the body. Gunnar's shading is minimal and it reads terribly in the engine; a more extreme contrast shift is needed.

Also, note that in the originals, there is a lot of muscular definition; it FEELS like there is muscle over bone. The texture exaggerates the musculature, the extensors and flexors in the forearm for example.

[Pstemarie]

Hrm. I'll give some thoughts; Im not sure Im capable of pulling punches with a critique, so, please bear with me, my intent is not to insult.

Im not going to quibble about about the models; I sort of like the feet but I have a poor assessment of the rest of them. So, I will focus on texture.

Part of what makes the original bioware parts work is that the definitions of muscle sort of over the top, like theater makeup; it makes it read more clearly from a distance. The NWN lighting system is also not terribly advanced, so you're not gonna get great turning-of-the-form from simple light on the model; it needs to be done with the texture itself.

How to accomplish this? Example, toes. Darken the edges to imply a turning of form, or darken the toes outright to imply the bloodflow to that region of the body. Gunnar's shading is minimal and it reads terribly in the engine; a more extreme contrast shift is needed.

Also, note that in the originals, there is a lot of muscular definition; it FEELS like there is muscle over bone. The texture exaggerates the musculature, the extensors and flexors in the forearm for example.

 

Texture work, like I said. Keep in mind though that I'm no texture artist. The majority of the texture work I do centers around modifying existing work. You seem to have a good handle on what you're looking for - might be worthwhile for you to give it a whack.

 

Models - sounds like you feel they're too rounded. I wonder what they'd look like with the poly-count reduced a bit. Something to consider in the future, but I've got other things to make/fix.

[Jedijax]

 

 

I do see the difference, and I think it is for the best, however, as far as modifications and good intentions may go, I believe a completely new one would be needed in order to make a real change. Now, we also have to take style and taste into consideration. The texture is definitely simple, but the models aren't objectively "good" or "bad". I think they just portray a more natural, regular look, in contrast to the more "ripped-cut" style some other works go for. If you can do it, Paul, and you're satisfied with it, I am all for it. You're not the content creator, and it's not your responsibility to upgrade this particular addition. I think what Heka was not so happy about was their inclusion in Project Q. In all honesty, my selection is a mix and match of different hak projects which include at least the previous feet and shins from Q, which were defined, correctly UVMapped, and smaller than other options. I don't remember if the torso was the one created by Ragnarok for his ACP suite, but that's the one I use, the modified version without shoulders. As for limbs, I use... uh... I think his name was Xaltar? This guy who made a rework of anatomies and some heads that are very high quality in my opinion. Finally, I prefer Kuraryu's hands.

 

See, I wish I could help more, but I am no content creator. I can do basic model and texture modifications, same as most of you guys, which is why I say I don't think a simple texture modification can help definition in the new models. All I can do is share what I've found to work best for me. Oh! Also, If OldTimeRadio is around, he had some neat ideas on fully-skinmeshed anatomies.

Close

[RansomR]

@Pstemarie - I see you're working on the TNO Castle Exterior, Rural titleset and I don't know if you noticed but some of the road tiles are missing the correct imagines for the minimap.

[Pstemarie]

@Pstemarie - I see you're working on the TNO Castle Exterior, Rural titleset and I don't know if you noticed but some of the road tiles are missing the correct imagines for the minimap.

 

Minimaps are on the list - albeit, near the bottom. I prefer to make them in large batches, rather than piecemeal them out in small groups. If its specific tiles you're looking for right now, shoot me a PM with the tile names and I'll rip some maps for you.

[RansomR]

Well, the tiles are the road ones and them ending abruptly on the mini-map isn't pretty. Anyways, I've sent you a PM with the tiles. Thank you in advance!

[Pstemarie]

Well, the tiles are the road ones and them ending abruptly on the mini-map isn't pretty. Anyways, I've sent you a PM with the tiles. Thank you in advance!

 

Should be all fixed now. I still have other minimaps to make - so if you or ANYONE else see any more that need fixing let me know. 

[Drewskie]

Q creature models, both beasts and npcs, are all quite excellent and light years away from vanilla nwn.  However, there is one left that still bothers me... the Vrock.  And it appears frequently in game too as the object of greater planar binding and as a blackguard summons.  Don't know if you are looking at beasties anymore, but the Vrock needs alot of help.

[Pstemarie]

He's been upgraded a bit, but short of a complete rework there isn't much that can help him I'm afraid.

[Pstemarie]

The Project Q Minimap Project is underway. Once everything is all said and done, ALL minimaps will use the texture set currently used on the tileset - in other words, you won't have map images in which one block stands out from the rest because it was created with an older rendering. Currently, you see this with Gaoeng's interior tiles which were added to Castle Interior 2 and City Interior 2 - the minimaps do not match up with the other minimaps, easily standing out when the PC views the map in game. The new minimaps will fix this.

 

Also, BUILDERS - NWN Tool is an excellent little utility for looking at all the area minimaps in your module and seeing which ones have minimap issues. It's what I've been using to quickly discover which tiles need their minimaps redone.

[Pstemarie]

Sorry for the random activity and bouncing around, but I'm fixing stuff on the fly as I find it...

 

This morning I reskinned the "Fort" terrain for the TNO tileset again, replacing the Wildwoods stone texture used for the walls with one of the new TNO stone textures - the textures are almost identical so no point posting a screenshot.

 

I also fixed the walkmesh on the tiles so that the walls are now use the "obscurring" walkmesh surface material rather than "nonwalkable" surface material. The walkmesh geometry along the roof-line was also lowered so that models on the roof can still attack models on the ground with ranged attacks and spells.

[Pstemarie]

I've found several placeables buried in the XP1 and XP2 .BIF files that appear to be final versions of placeables, but with the wrong name. Furthermore, unlike the versions which are listed in placeables.2da (and accessible in the toolset) which are NOT animated (or incorrectly animated), these models appear to have all of the necessary animations and associated emitters.

 

For example, listed in placeables.2da is a model of a cookpot (plc_x0_pot) - the model lacks a damage node and the chunky emitters. In XP2.BIF, there is another model - plc_x0pot - which has the damage node and the chunky emitters. Apparently, the models currently included in placeables.2da are incomplete versions.

 

I will go through these models one-by-one and upload them as overrides in q_placeables.HAK as necessary. 

[Pstemarie]

Need a stuffed bear standing on its hind legs...

 

[Pstemarie]

I've found several placeables buried in the XP1 and XP2 .BIF files that appear to be final versions of placeables, but with the wrong name. Furthermore, unlike the versions which are listed in placeables.2da (and accessible in the toolset) which are NOT animated (or incorrectly animated), these models appear to have all of the necessary animations and associated emitters.

 

For example, listed in placeables.2da is a model of a cookpot (plc_x0_pot) - the model lacks a damage node and the chunky emitters. In XP2.BIF, there is another model - plc_x0pot - which has the damage node and the chunky emitters. Apparently, the models currently included in placeables.2da are incomplete versions.

 

I will go through these models one-by-one and upload them as overrides in q_placeables.HAK as necessary. 

 

UPDATE - The situation is not as bad as I thought. There are only a handful of models that need fixing. From what I can tell after examining both sets of models, it appears that someone at BioWare (in typical fashion back then) made some adjustments, changed the name of the models, but never cleaned up the older version. However, you can't tell which is the older version. Therefore, I'm going to use the model listed in placeables.2da as the base, add the missing dummy nodes and emitters, and finally insert the missing animations as needed. I will NOT adjust the walkmesh - even though it looks undersized on some models.

[meaglyn]

First off, thanks for all your work on Q!

 

I'm just testing with the latest before doing any real merge. Originally I was on you side about Gunner's body updates but now that I've got to try it out. I find that I have to agree with the earlier posters about the new body parts. I think this needs to be a module builder optional override hak.  Body parts are different than say placeable or appearance overrides since they have to really mesh with the other body parts.  I like the new body parts a lot but ... I have a bunch of nude chest and pelvis models and textures which are now broken. The colors are totally off. The models actually fit moderately well, but I am not in any position (skillwise, toolwise or timewise) to do the required texture work to make all of these work with the new thighs and arms. 

 

Having this in Q means I either have to remove Q or do the work myself to un-override all the new pieces by digging out the original bioware pieces.   That means carrying around original bioware content in my haks to have the game use the original stuff which the players already have on their hardrives.  Or somehow tell players to only use Q2.0 which I don't think is feasible since the haks all have the same names (and miss all the other updates which I do want).

 

Stuff like this needs to be seamless or optional I think, since it breaks other things builders may be relying on.  This would be like changing a bunch of tiles so that existing built areas don't work any more.  Please re-consider making this optional.