I just had a thought...

Its been hinted at that some of the weapons will get a "second attack" function like the buttsmack, etc.

This being the case, obviously there will need to be new animations for the player models and as DoD already uses more than the 256 limit imposed by the default studiomdl.exe, does this mean we're going to have to re-compile our custom models again for 1.2?

And will we have to wait the same ammount of time for the new version of studiomdl.exe?

And will $cliptotextures work in the next version?

And, and...

- Jed

It's really good you brought it up, and in time.
Im intrested aswell.

Unless they use the same animations as the buttsmack

/me knows nothing about animations.

sry for asking a n00b Q. im quite new to all this editing and scripting, except mapping :)
but what is buttsmack ???

ps. how long have u guys been doing all this editing stuff ....:confused:

Originally posted by mXed.dk
but what is buttsmack ???


LOL.. I could be rude here, but I won't be ;)

"Buttsmack" is the secondary fire function on some of the weapons where the "butt end" of the gun is swung around to "smack" an offending player ... Makes for some fun kills....


Studiomdl2 ... Maybe it'll be a GUI rather than commandline ... one can dream...


...

Originally posted by mXed.dk

but what is buttsmack ???


When using the Garand you alt-fire and the model swings around and (if you're close enough) smacks an enemy player. AKA smacking another person with the butt of the gun, or in short
Buttsmack

TLDR version: Swinging the gun like a baseball bat at another person.

I would figure the alt fire would be a buttsmack using one of the rifles. (K43 and M1 Carbine?) What other possible secondary functions could there be? Fire mode selection?

EDIT: Darn Effexx, posted before me

ok thx, i thought it was something scripting stuff
but i get the point lol .....

it could be cool if all the gun had this
like in CoD

Originally posted by Effexx
Studiomdl2 ... Maybe it'll be a GUI rather than commandline ... one can dream...

That would be great but me thinks not lol I jus hope they get it released somewhere around when 1.2 comes out, the delay for the 1.1 studiomdl was a joke.

- Ska

Perhaps this thread should be brought to the attention of someone who could get an answer from the team.

Or you could pm PIU

I don't think Valve care to much for the custom community anymore, i mean if it was not for peeps like Jed and Nem, we really would be done for. As Valve has made no attempt as yet to release a GFC extractor, and they where in no hurry to release a compiler last time they updated. And i get the feeling it was through the dev team keep mentioning it to Valve that is was finally released, lets hope this time, if we need a new compiler they release it the same time as the next update. Because last time they took so long, alot of the community left, and in all honesty it felt like Valve was trying to destroy the MSA forum, which has never been the same since dod went retail.

Aye, come on valve, restore MSAs faith in you and get the compiler out the same time as the update eh?

- Ska

Well in defence of the DoD team I have been tipped off that some of animations will be reused but I'm guessing if they change the number of animations in the MDL then we might need a new compiler.

GCF extractor - well when I spoke to Chris at Valve about this he said it was on a list of things to do and that they were happy to support anyone who was "wanting to do it for them". However, we didn't get any help from Valve and had no response when we submitted news of GCFScape to Valve-ERC.

Its more than possible that many of the actually developers at Valve are pro-modding but internal politics at Valve is against certain aspects. Maybe higher ups see GCFScape as a "hacker" tool and hence don't want to give any info away. Its not uncommon sometimes.

As for a GUI version of Studiomdl... now thats got me thinking...

- Jed

Originally posted by Trp. Jed
Maybe higher ups see GCFScape as a "hacker" tool and hence don't want to give any info away. Its not uncommon sometimes.


First you steal the HL2 code and then you hack their GCF ? naughty boy ^_^

Joking of course :D

Well from what i know (and it's not much) but from what i know if the dev will add another animation and you will just add a link to the qc file, what problems would arise? and why?
I think it will work :o

BTW, some of the animators here can try doing something like that ( Atleast, I think... ).

I think its because DoDs animations are blended and there are 345 and the default StudioMDL only supports 256 animations. Every time they alter the number of anims or the blending in the model format for DoD it seems we need a new tweaked version of StudioMDL.

- Jed

Originally posted by Trp. Jed
As for a GUI version of Studiomdl... now thats got me thinking...

ooo me likes the sound of that.

- Ska

Yeah but I'm a ****ty C++ programmer.

Maybe if I can figure out how to use MxToolkit with HLMV uses I can avoid using MFC.

Err, that made no sense to anyone except me. Sorry.

- Jed

LOL. Well its a start I suppose...

- Jed

haha nice

I have Windows set up so when I wanna compile a model I just right click on a QC file and I have the 'Compile' option right there in the pop-up menu. :D

Originally posted by Trp. Jed
Maybe if I can figure out how to use MxToolkit with HLMV uses I can avoid using MFC.
Could it be integrated as an option into HLMV then Jed or would that be too messy code wise? great work with that BTW.

Musso

Originally posted by Cheeto
I have Windows set up so when I wanna compile a model I just right click on a QC file and I have the 'Compile' option right there in the pop-up menu. :D


me too, but who doesn't love a nice GUI ??

Nice start Jed... Studiomdl pr0n.... I actually got moist... :eek:


...

Well I got it to work from a GUI/Win32 app - I managed to compile a MDL file from a QC.

Only problem is that the source for compiling from the SDK is written in C and the GUI code is in C++. I can't call the C++ class function from the C so at the moment I haven't worked out how to get the compiling code to report status messages to the console - so basically it compiles blind. :(

- Jed