Fixmore 3 pod

HCT_Rock · Post by **HCT_Rock** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:57 pm

Phineus wrote:Two. The samples that have been shown are hosted on a nfs site. Now, please don't take this the wrong way, but it is my opinion, and the opinion of many others, that nfs is an inferior game to mtm2. Furthermore, the nfs community leaves a lot to be desired. What this translates into is that I'm extremely reluctant to import anything from there into mtm2. The quality is dubious, and the benefits are questionable. At the same time, it's only a water texture so I don't think I'd offer too much opposition if the set were an improvement. So, if you can come up with a working set, I'll do up pictures and start a poll so everybody can have their say. Then we could go from there.

i could host it on geocities or tripod if it offends you that much, lol.

nfs and mtm2 are two different games. the communitys are different [ie nfs community has a lot n00bs]. infact i bought mtm2 well before i had any nfs version. the water textures arent from nfs3 anyway

you must relise that im just trying to make mtm2 look better because the one in the fixall pod are not the originals anyway

Post by **Phineus** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:24 pm

> you must realise that im just trying to make mtm2 look better

Yes, I do. We're cool :-)

> because the one in the fixall pod are not the originals anyway

That's correct. It was recognized long ago that the stock water was less than ideal. The fixmore version is the best we've come up with so far.

Oh, and hey, I just noticed your front page. Would you please be kind and update the link to this url.

http://cownap.com/~mtmg/about.shtml

Greatly appreciated, thanks.

And the screenshots of your new track are looking fine too. Good work.

HCT_Rock · Post by **HCT_Rock** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 8:49 pm

>Oh, and hey, I just noticed your front page. Would you please be >kind and update the link to this url.

>http://cownap.com/~mtmg/about.shtml

Done that

>And the screenshots of your new track are looking fine too. Good >work.

thanks its my first track

ill do those water textures tonight

Wint · Post by **Wint** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 9:44 pm

>> ill do those water textures tonight

I hope you're aware that the textures are 60x60 at their core, that the two pixel borders are actually a two pixel strip from the edges of the 60x60 core of adjacent textures, or in the case of the single water texture - a two pixel strip from the opposite edge of the 60x60 core. In other words, be sure to make your tiling image 60x60, animate it as 60x60, then once you are finished the edges can be swapped around to create the necessary 64x64 finished textures. If you don't do this then seams will be evident where the water texture butts up against itself as it tiles. The thing is that in order to be perfectly seamless in game all custom MTM2 terrain textures need to be built in multiples of 60x60 and have the extra two pixel border edges generated by a program like Slice60, or done manually in a paint program.

Slice60 and texture info: http://cownap.com/~mtmg/slice60/

Speaking of water:

<center>
Stock water::
<img src=http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/ripplestock.gif>

Yeastmans's replacement:
<img src=http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/rippleyeast.gif>

OOPS's replacement: (in the current fixmore)
<img src=http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/rippleoops.gif>
</center>

Palettes: I've noted that the stock water is a mostly greyscale palette and uses 121 unique colors from the palette, while Yeast's and OOPS' textures use 20 unique colors each. A greyscale palette is likely to merge well with any track palette of course, and the 20 color palettes stand a good chance of surviving the application of a track palette with enough blue in it (bearing in mind the water color will always merge itself will the track palette - matching colors in that palette as closely as possible).

HCT_Rock · Post by **HCT_Rock** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 10:08 pm

thanks, i did not know that, ill consider that when i do them

ZOtm_BigDOGGe · Post by **ZOtm_BigDOGGe** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 10:37 pm

In my opinion, MTM2 is a superior product, for the sole reason that MTM2 uses a true 3-dimensional world, while NFS uses a "linear" world...In NFS, you can only go from one end of the course to the other...you can never leave the track. Same with the "test drive" series...

real 3D worlds leave so many possibilities for new ways to play the game, such as "cops & robbers" and rock-climbing or simply exploring...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 10:56 pm

i couldnt agree more. i hate it when you ram into an invisible wall. thats why gta3 is cool as well. i think its a dern ea thing

Post by **Phineus** » Thu Feb 12, 2004 12:41 am

That may be but it's not the topic at hand. mtm can stand on its own feet without worrying about game making philosophies. I am not a fan of other driving games but don't feel it necessary to bash them. I hope you understand.

ch_2005 · Post by **ch_2005** » Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:38 am

yea no bashing of other games!
"nfs is an inferior game to mtm2. Furthermore, the nfs community leaves a lot to be desired."
^^^thats more nettling than bashing.

ZOtm_BigDOGGe · Post by **ZOtm_BigDOGGe** » Thu Feb 12, 2004 1:41 pm

No bashing spoken nor intended here. I merely stated which game is superior to me. I play and enjoy all the sim games I mentioned.

Anyway, I'm curious as to how the color of the new water textures will do on tracks like the EVO track conversions. I noticed many truck-color errors on them due to their unique color palettes, more so than usual on most custom tracks.

HCT_Rock · Post by **HCT_Rock** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 8:27 pm

finally got the water textures done. not to sure if they look better or worse. have a look for yourself

The Pod File

Post by **Phineus** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:41 pm

Okay, first, since you've had the staying power to see this through to completion, then the first thing we have to do is make this available as an alternative all the time here: <a href="http://mtm2.com/~mtmg/downloads/mtm2/game/water_by_HCT_Rock.zip">water_by_HCT_Rock.zip</a>

Then, a side by side comparison:

<table align=center><tr align=center><td>stock</td><td>yeast</td><td>oops</td><td>rock</td></tr><tr align=center><td><img src="http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/ripplestock.gif"></td><td><img src="http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/rippleyeast.gif"></td><td><img src="http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/rippleoops.gif"></td><td><img src="http://mtm2.com/~forum/images/ripplerock.gif"></td></tr></table>

There are a couple visible seams on yours, but nothing drastic.

So, now we have to hear what others think. Which do you like best for fixmore3?

ch_2005 · Post by **ch_2005** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:16 am

i've always like'd yeast's cause MTM2 is supposed to be fun and his is a nice bright color just like most of the stock rucks and the mtm2 box

SLO_COPE · Post by **SLO_COPE** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:31 am

OOPs for me.

Drive2Survive · Post by **Drive2Survive** » Tue Mar 02, 2004 7:35 pm

A spare half-hour coupled with an itchy screen capture finger and generally thinking about things too much transpired to produce the following <a href="http://mtm2.com/~d2s/temp/mtm2_water_comparison.jpg">comparison shots</a> across five different tracks, for anyone who wants a side-by-side look at the current alongside Rock's proposed water textures, in-game and as affected by various track palettes.

IMO, Oops' water is the one to keep, as it's the only one that consistently make the water appear bluish across a range of tracks. Rock's textures look smoother, which I think kind of suits the game's "pane of glass" way of rendering water, but unfortunately the colour palette doesn't work very well and tends to turn grey, or if it does appear blue, looks flat and unconvincing. I also felt the animation of the water looked a bit weird - from certain angles it looked like the textures were moving back and forth on a conveyer belt, not very natural at all! Although, I was surprised when it went <i>green</i> on Ragin' Cajun (not the first time I've been <a href="http://mtm2.com/~d2s/temp/ragin_xrod.jpg">surprised</a> by it), which I think, given the visual theme of that particular track, looks better than blue water ever could... but for the majority, we do want blue water.

Maybe if we merged the Oops palette with the Rock textures, we'd have something that would look better, but for now I'm supporting we keep the status quo. (Hope you didn't mind me taking it apart like that, buddy.)

Wint · Post by **Wint** » Wed Mar 03, 2004 12:57 am

It's good to have you aboard Rock, and nice to see you doing well what few have tried. Your water is very nice, though I'd say the directional flow doesn't seem to fit every situation.

I must agree that Rock's water looks appropriately swampy in that Ragin' Cajun shot. Nice pic!

Overall, I think OOPS's are best for fixmore, though I've never considered subjective cosmetic changes such as these to be 'fixes'. ;)

HCT_Rock · Post by **HCT_Rock** » Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:25 pm

@Drive2Survive: Thanks for the compare i am still learning about the way mtm2 renders things at the moment. I sort of have to agree that oops one seems to work on more tracks better though.

Drive2Survive wrote: Maybe if we merged the Oops palette with the Rock textures, we'd have something that would look better

hmmmmm maybe.

In the mean time i think that i will focus on getting a track out the way

scrooch · Post by **scrooch** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 1:57 pm

I guess this pod is stable enough to get it on the upcoming APL release?

Post by **Phineus** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 2:22 pm

Since HCT_Rock is leaning toward oops' himself, then I'd say yes we can call this done. I'll do up the readme notes and have a final zip ready shortly. Meantime, the pod won't change.. so if you already have it, you're good to go.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 2:40 pm

Alright, thanks for your quick reply!