ProjectsWhat's NewDownloadsCommunitySupportCompany
Forum Index » S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl Forum » Engine
Xray or Source

1 2 3 4 5 | Next 10 events »| All Messages
Posted by/on
Question/AnswerMake Newest Up Sort by Descending
  20:56:14  12 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Mike Mayea
(Novice)
 
On forum: 03/12/2005
Messages: 14
Xray or Source

Please, I know many of you here have mixed opinions on my topic, but let me explain.

I run a HL2 mod called Desolate, over the last few months I have noticed that the source engine is in fact very weak, it simply can not do anything I want. I want open spaces, I want close spaces, I want your weather system, XRAY has it all.

I'm faced with a problem, my Co-leader is a very good friend of mine, he insist we stay on the source engine, I respect his decision but ultimately I feel Xray is the way to go.

I have a few questions regarding your engine.

Will it come shipped with an SDK for Mapping, model converting, texture converting, everything I need basically? Will I have any problems using an online method to my mod with 32 players? Are facial expression possible like in HL2 buy simply using bones? I will be making a large urban area, can optimizations to areas be made? (area portals, thing such as hint brushes) Can many of the weather and lighting effects be put to client side for online play?

I have a ton of questions, but I'd really like to hear what you all have to say. Please post convincing facts as to why my friend Ben should change his mind.

More details on my mod will be giving tomorrow as well as our final choice. I'd also like to know if you would be interested in helping in the production, simply state yes or no, nothing complicated is needed as of now.
  05:22:00  13 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Don Reba
Bishop and Councilor of War
(Moderator)

 

 
On forum: 12/04/2002
Messages: 11553
There will be a modSDK. It will most likely come with the game or soon after.
Hang on. I'll try to get you an answer after the weekends are over.
  23:20:29  13 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
SNIPER-X
Know's the X-Ray Engine
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 10/28/2004
Messages: 230
Most of the SDK has been getting finished, expecially the import and export file plug-ins.
Chances are the "X-Ray Level Editor" and the Robust SDK are going to be released with the game, but the SDK i should have put aside, will or might be released just a week to a month after the games release.

But yes, X-Ray is more powerful than source, it's just a problem for most to understand cuz they have that half life fan crave in them, which makes them soo dillusional to not like any other engine. Expecially when it comes to it's rival STALKER.

Which out of all reasons, is why i am hard working on my mod project for STALKER already.
  23:30:52  13 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Mike Mayea
(Novice)
 
On forum: 03/12/2005
Messages: 14
Thanks for the reply.

Well I'm going to go ahead and leave what I have behind, my team insist on staying with source but they're simply ignorant fan boys, I'm the only one who has actually had to dealt with all the optimization problems in source when making a small outdoor area.

I'm moving to Xray, I will be making XDesolate and my other team will continue on Source.

As of now, I have a wonderful website being made, www.Desolatemod.com will soon be awake.

I would still like to know if anyone is interested in making a mod or even a S.T.A.L.K.E.R community, if you are please post and tell me!

I will have more details latter on after my website is finished.
  15:50:34  17 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Gm0nx
(Novice)
 
On forum: 03/12/2005
 

Message edited by:
Gm0nx
03/17/2005 15:51:21
Messages: 27
I would..

I would like to help out, i could write codings for alot of stuff, i write Python programs and have a bit of Delphi, Perl, C(plus-plus) knowledge.
I also like level-mapping, although i haven't used anything else but Quake Army Knife (QuArK) and Hammer.
I'm from the Netherlands, am 18 years old, have no problems with English communication.
And like most others, will dive into stalker ASAP!
Contact me @ kaashomp@gmail.com or just post a reply..

Question; Any general ideas of what kind of mod. it will become?
  09:56:53  21 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
Sil3nt-War
(Novice)
 
On forum: 07/18/2004
Messages: 25
i doubt xray will have the facial expressions support like source.
  17:36:29  21 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
SNIPER-X
Know's the X-Ray Engine
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 10/28/2004
Messages: 230
X-Ray has facial expressions, just not in depth.. it's just they don't want to make stalker based of "Facial" like valve based half life 2 off of.
  20:35:25  25 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
1337counterstrike
(Senior)
 
On forum: 03/25/2005
Messages: 99
source is feeble and insignifigant to x-ray or even the doom3 engine. it was id who developed gravity array technoligy (like the hl2 grav gun) first. used in doom3 maps to move bodies and other scary things. just wasnt formated into a gun. but was used in the engine quite often, was an easy solution to things floating or being thrown by a script. source engine wasnt bad, impressive in a few areas like physics, but most of the time the physics are overdone and drawn out. doom3 had little physics in the actual game but the engine they used is quite capable of physics in real time. this is just what iv gathered from playing both, to freakin much .
  01:33:03  26 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
serp
whats this?
(Resident)

 

 
On forum: 02/27/2003
 

Message edited by:
serp
03/26/2005 1:34:27
Messages: 621

---QUOTATION---
source is feeble and insignifigant to x-ray or even the doom3 engine. it was id who developed gravity array technoligy (like the hl2 grav gun) first. used in doom3 maps to move bodies and other scary things. just wasnt formated into a gun. but was used in the engine quite often, was an easy solution to things floating or being thrown by a script. source engine wasnt bad, impressive in a few areas like physics, but most of the time the physics are overdone and drawn out. doom3 had little physics in the actual game but the engine they used is quite capable of physics in real time. this is just what iv gathered from playing both, to freakin much .
---END QUOTATION---


yes, because "gravity array technology" is extremely complicated...
The physics seem the same for both games, and lights are obviously a lot more complex in doom3, but I can't exactly run doom3 at the same settings that i run half life 2 at, that's where source wins for me.

If i were to chose which engine i wanted x-ray to be "closer" to i'd chose source without even thinking twice.
  04:11:47  26 March 2005
profilee-mailreply Message URLTo the Top
1337counterstrike
(Senior)
 
On forum: 03/25/2005
Messages: 99
yes, because "gravity array technology" is extremely complicated...
The physics seem the same for both games, and lights are obviously a lot more complex in doom3, but I can't exactly run doom3 at the same settings that i run half life 2 at, that's where source wins for me.

If i were to chose which engine i wanted x-ray to be "closer" to i'd chose source without even thinking twice.
---END QUOTATION---


thats why im glad there is a new engine (x ray ofcourse) there would be much controversy if one was chosen over the other. source just wasnt as powerful as the doom3 engine. the d3 engine diddnt run as good because id diddnt optimize it and its openGL, not dx9 like source. dx9 has a reputation for fast rendering, as openGL looks better. explains perfectly why d3 looked better, and source played better. this is all asuming both are being run on a mid range computer. lets make up a fake computer up shall we:

intel P4 2.6
ATI 9000 256
512 ram pc2700
233 fsb mobo
400 watt psu

now lets say on doom3 we get around 30 fps at 800x600 medium, on source we would get probally 60 with medium settings and 1024x768.
3 reasons we get better fps in source. textures in source arent as detailed, dx9 renders better than openGL, ATI cards were 6-7 fps faster in source (although in other dx9 games nvidia did better or as good) if we turned antanalising on with doom3 our computer would artafact or we would die really fast from not being able to aim, source woulda taked 2aa with that system and np. the ONLY think i liked about source was its rendering capibilities and its color pattlete. doom3 was bleak at times, but the reality was we were on mars. lets look at those trees and water on mars, o wait, there arent any. the doom3 engine is capable of allot, if optimized and givin a better setting for a game, and not a barrenred planet.
 
Each word should be at least 3 characters long.
Search:    
Search conditions:    - spaces as AND    - spaces as OR   
 
Forum Index » S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl Forum » Engine
 

All short dates are in Month-Day-Year format.


 

Copyright © 1995-2017 GSC Game World. All rights reserved.
This site is best viewed in Internet Explorer 4.xx and up and Javascript enabled. Webmaster.
Opera Software products are not supported.
If any problem concerning the site functioning under Opera Software appears apply
to Opera Software technical support service.