10 réponses à ce sujet

[Wawmong]

one thing i've noticed is that very few multiplayer servers have the fog pushed back and use skyboxes for every area, i realize that fog can add to the ambience, but as a builder should one be careful using skyboxes? do skyboxes cause lag (latency lag)?
 

[Who said that I]

Not to my experience though. The thing is I think that fog can MAKE or BREAK an area in my opinion. It really depending on the kind of area you are using it in.

[Pstemarie]

one thing i've noticed is that very few multiplayer servers have the fog pushed back and use skyboxes for every area, i realize that fog can add to the ambience, but as a builder should one be careful using skyboxes? do skyboxes cause lag (latency lag)?
 

 

I use skyboxes for every area I build as they really add to immersion. There are two distinct possibilities playing into why you aren't seeing many skyboxes in the multiplayer servers you have visited.

 

1. The selection of skyboxes is somewhat limited, unless you use the Community Skybox Pack, AND unlike the skyboxes Morikhan did for Project Q, many skyboxes don't interact with the fog and area lighting settings.

 

2. The servers you have visited are older and just haven't upgraded their areas to use skyboxes. Servers typically have a LOT of areas and while it might seem trivial to add a skybox, it is time consuming for multiple areas. 

[Wawmong]

ok, i figured maybe builders weren't using them on account of a technical reason.

 

found a server that makes use of skyboxes in every area and it looks like they're using the hak you mentioned. just might add this myself at some point.

[Proleric]

Pushing the fog back increases the static area players can see, but has no effect on the distance at which creatures and dynamic placeables are rendered.

Careful area design can ensure that placeables are always visible, but creatures appear out of thin air as the player approaches them.

I can live with that, but I can see why some builders prefer the fog.

[Proleric]

The creature issue can be resolved by setting the PercepRngPlayer values in ranges.2da to a distance in metres greater than the largest area.

 

On today's hardware, there doesn't seem to be a performance issue in SP, even in a very busy area.

 

Arguably, it gives players an unreasonable advantage over monsters, but I prefer that to sudden materialisation.

[TheOneBlackRider]

Pushing the fog back increases the static area players can see, but has no effect on the distance at which creatures and dynamic placeables are rendered.

Careful area design can ensure that placeables are always visible, but creatures appear out of thin air as the player approaches them.

I can live with that, but I can see why some builders prefer the fog.

 

Just stumbled upon this. I missed, how one can asure. that placeables are always visible. I have an area, where I use the aquaduct of Borden. It starts to fade out with a certain distance where as the terrain is still visible.

[Proleric]

Just stumbled upon this. I missed, how one can asure. that placeables are always visible. I have an area, where I use the aquaduct of Borden. It starts to fade out with a certain distance where as the terrain is still visible.

 

Unfortunately, I can't find any way to fix this.

 

Dynamic placeables cease to be visible when the player is about 45m from the model origin. Period.

 

As far as I can see, values in ranges.2da have no impact.

 

Workarounds include

• Flagging the placeable as static
• Designing the area so that line of sight to the placeable is never more than 45m
• Edit the placeable model so that its origin is up to 45m from the visible geometry (with careful placement, this can increase visibility to about 90m)

[Pstemarie]

Another trick you can do for large placeables that need to be visible but also need to be useable so a PC can interact with it requires a little of model-fu in GMax or 3dsMax. What you need to do is split the placeable into smaller pieces - similar to what you do with slicing a tile. When you place your new "broken" placeable in the toolset, set the pieces that need to be visible (but not useable) to static, then set the piece that needs to be useable to "useable."

 

I saw this used to good effect in a module some years back that had a large placeable bridge the PC needed to destroy. The bridge was made in three pieces - the ends being set to "static" and the central part being set to "useable." The terrain was built in such a manner that the PC was channeled to the center of the bridge - which was visible from the point where the PC entered the area. Placeables were used to prevent the PC from moving to a vantage point where the center of the bridge would disappear. Because they were set to "static," the ends of the bridge remained visible irregardless of where the PC was located in the area. 

[TheOneBlackRider]

Thanks to both of you for the input.

The "move origin of a model" and the "breaking up the model" are intresting approaches! I'll keep that in mind. But both of it would mean to add new custom content = new downloads for players. I'd like to avoid that atm. But when a HAK update is to be done, I'll come back to this for sure!

[Blatob]

Perhaps the most simple approach, unless you do want to have PCs destroy parts of the placeable (and that bridge example sounds impressive), is to have placeable set to static, and add invisible object placeable at the part of it. If you want to have PCs, say, climb the placeable (to the ledge you made in the terrain above for instance), you can do that via dialogue or just giving it the teleportation script (I think there were those floating around long time ago and should be still on the vault here) in OnUse section.

 

There are also walkable placeables, but I think I saw just few of them around, and they would need quite precise placement in the area - one I was working with allows to be placed just on few very distinct spots in the area - though that might be dependent on the tileset.