Yeah, I don't know.
It just seems it would look more awesome if it were REALLY glowing bright, but having the 'slime' not actually being that bright.

I suppose, just keep tweaking it until you're satisfied :smile:

By the way, I thought of something else that might be a pretty cool effect: in shot 3 you have the slime pouring onto a platform that looks like a grate. If you can see under that area (I don't know if you can, obviously) it'd be pretty cool if you made some small 'slime' falls under the platform to make it look like the slime is dripping through. It's just a thought though.

But it's definitely looking better.

Thanks.

I've already got the light on the slime set to almost true-green (0 255 25). I suppose I could go all the way but I'm not sure how much difference it would make.

Badass, man.

The only thing I think should change is the lighting color of the "goo". I think it'd look a little better if the light eminating was a brighter (higher value) of green and bit more brightness (light level). I think it might be worth a try. But those retextures and architecture changes are great.

update
I've altered the pillars to appear more solid, and retextured the floor. I've also increased the direct light scale to 3 so direct lighting should be half-again brighter.

I sunk the floor here some. It's also another example of the difference changing the dscale has made.

I've darkened the color of the slime some so it matches the lighting.

I've articulated the floor around the goo-pool and added transparency to the grating.


Predicatably, r_speeds have increased some in the main area, but they are still always under 1200, and rarely reach 1100. However I'm noticing a pretty significant FPS hit and I'm not sure why as I've seen much higher r's rendered on my system without this performance hit. Any ideas?

Is there lag associated with Func_rotating ents or env_shooters?

I'd agree with most comments about the first and second screen Tracer, but I've got to say I'm impressed with the third and forth screens. I had to look twice, just to make sure they weren't from a UT2004 map or something, because thats the feel I got from them.

I like most of the texturing and brush work, though its a bit dark even for me :smile: . The radioactive waste also seems a bit too bright for the map, but then again the HL engine seems to like making water textures glow in the dark. If your trying to fix that I found making the textures darker generally works, as I did in pegasus to make the water dark.

Generally top stuff though, obviously needs some more work in parts, but looking very good so far.

image of my stupidity

Crono: Thank you. That sorted it out...

Under the MAP forum, click New Topic, the following screen will ask you for information as well as ask you to select a map that you have loaded into your profile through a dropdown.

scary_jeff said:
You have to add a map to your profile first, then you have the option of starting a thread about the map.

...and how does this option manifest itself? I haven't found a link or anything yet...

That slime looks a little too bright...

Out of curiousity, how many ks/megs is your map worth?

Thanks for the comments all :smile:

I'll see waht I can do about implementing some of these and get back to you with more screens

In terms of R's it's not as bad as it seems. Keep in mind that some of those screens were taken from places where the player can't actualy access. Particularly the cliff shots. When you are running around there the r's average around 600.

And, no worries Cass. I don't think Lep was refering to your Uber rock texture. Its staying in any case :biggrin: