The way I see it, BSP brushes aren't really flexible enough for the amount of detail source can handle. BSP is locked to the grid, and brushes are necessarily simple shapes with planar sides. features like prefabs and the vertex tool can help you get around some of BSP's shortcomings, but for a lot of things models just make a lot more sense.

The original description of "abuse," clipping models into walls etc. is perfectly normal, valve maps are full of instances like that. The only problem as far as i know with it, is that if you can see part of a model the engine is rendering the whole thing (minus backface culling)

BSP is awesome for building walls and floors and the like, but I'd rather make a prop in something like XSI or Max than spend hours building detailed chairs, desks, etc. out of minute brushes. You can get a good result from both though.

Ahh yes the days of ejoop Prefabs.

Riven said:
Ah ok, I follow ya now. You were speaking in terms of solely mapping only and the "flexibility" that making brush figures on the fly versus over choosing the closest model for you design needs gives you. -Yea, in that regard I agree. But if one were to acquire modeling skills, then I would probably restate my opinion.

That's my point though, we are mappers, not modellers. I feel it's a shame that Half-Life 2 is so dependent on models to make it look nice, whereas on Half-Life 1 you would simply make something out of a bunch of brushes.

haymaker said:
Yeah notice the bogus shadowing on the right hand tree trunk. I knmow you can compile a map with the $staticproppoly string but it's never as good lightmapping as brushwork.

Conversely lighting support for dynamic brushes is very poor in Source.

Personally, I find maps with lots of models visible lag all to hell. That particular map might have a bunch of nodraw and areaportals in it, why not just make it brushes to begin with? The house and shed I mean

Models simply look better than brushes. I would make all my details from brushes, but that simply isn't accepted in H.L.2 maps. Back in H.L.1 pipes were made out of brushes as well as barrels, crates, tables, computer screens, you name it. I miss those days.

Yeah notice the bogus shadowing on the right hand tree trunk. I knmow you can compile a map with the $staticproppoly string but it's never as good lightmapping as brushwork.

Conversely lighting support for dynamic brushes is very poor in Source.

Personally, I find maps with lots of models visible lag all to hell. That particular map might have a bunch of nodraw and areaportals in it, why not just make it brushes to begin with? The house and shed I mean

cs_militia This map is almost made up entirely of Models. Very little brush work.

Ah ok, I follow ya now. You were speaking in terms of solely mapping only and the "flexibility" that making brush figures on the fly versus over choosing the closest model for you design needs gives you. -Yea, in that regard I agree. But if one were to acquire modeling skills, then I would probably restate my opinion.

What I mean is, with a model you need a specific model, but with brushes you can make damn near whatever you please.

Flynn said:
[brushes are] more flexible with what you can do with [them].

-I don't mean to get into specifics, but that can't be true. What do you mean by flexible? Last time I checked, you can't duplicate just edges or points with brushes like you can with models? -I'm a bit confused with what you mean by "flexible". I think you mean "simpler" eh? Because in that regard, yes brushes are simpler to handle, but you can't do as much with them, but you can get really creative in how you "mold" them. Could you explain a little?

I tend to prefer brush work to model detailing, it's more flexible with what you can do with it.

Hell yeah.. I abuse models.. I even make new ones just so I can abuse them. ComboDust as an example there are 5-6 new models I or the wife made just for that map, and then on top of that we have used many pre-made ones. So yeah I think Models are great.