Update: new version out!

- added skybox models (for the use near the levelborder. blends nicely with the level models)
- added skybox models (for the use far away in the skybox. lower texture, lower polycount)
- additional level models, so mappers can use them more flexible.
- added new collisionmesh slightly above the ground, so a nice "through the cornfields" sound plays while walking through them.

some of the models are explained in the following picture. there are more in the update, but you better check them out yourself ;)




and here you can get them:
fields_v3.zip (http://pedroleum.dod-federation.com/models/fields_v3.zip)



i just released the fields i used in dod_farmers and dod_plateau because i got a lot of messages lately about them. i decided to make a new version because i was never satisfied with them.
if you need infos on the fields, go to my website (http://pedroleum.dod-federation.com)
i wrote everything down there.

that's what they look like:


and ingame (dod_farmers_b4):

Excellent stuff - will definately find use very soon!

Thanks, pedroleum :)

- Albatros

alright! Looks BA! great work!

Oh yeah ! A BIG thx to you Pedroleum !

O God I remember how much you slaved over getting those just right when making Plateau

there's a problem with the materials - they go in materials/models/props_fields, but the vmts are pointing to materials/models/pedroleum. i've changed the vmts to check in props_fields and they're working now.
other than that they look good, i saw them in dod_bocage in the playtest yesterday, and they didn't affect my fps too much either. i'm already using them in my next map, if it ever gets finished.

there's a problem with the materials - they go in materials/models/props_fields, but the vmts are pointing to materials/models/pedroleum. i've changed the vmts to check in props_fields and they're working now.


garrr.. thanks for pointing out... i knew it wasn't a good idea to rush them out on the first hour of monday morning ;)

updated the zip in the first post. please redownload or fix the vmt as written above.

Thanks Pedroleum... this is amazing.
I can se the polygons has gone way down

field_128 from 144 to 68
field_256 from 488 to 186
field_512 from 1800 to 542

plus we can spare a lot of polygons if we use the field_512 instead of 16 field_128 (1088 to 542)

Yeah ... that is the way to go :-D

I have an idea ... is it possible to combine a sound of "walking through a field", with a ground texturer... that would be so cool.

Looks great Pedroleum!!!
I can't wait to take a walk in the fields.
In the northern France, in our case (dod_bocage).
:)

I have an idea ... is it possible to combine a sound of "walking through a field", with a ground texturer... that would be so cool.

that would be sweet :)
i hope it's possible... someone knows more?

It seems that it is possible if we edit the "scripts/surfaceproperties.txt"

Here is an example of "dirt"
"dirt"
{
"density" "1600"
"elasticity" "0.01"
"friction" "0.8"

"stepleft" "Dirt.StepLeft"
"stepright" "Dirt.StepRight"
"impacthard" "Dirt.Impact"
"scraperough" "Dirt.Scrape"
"bulletimpact" "Dirt.BulletImpact"

"audioreflectivity" "0.03"
"audiohardnessfactor" "0.25"

"gamematerial" "D"
}

And here is the explanation in the top of the file.

// "surface group"
// {
// "property" "value"
// ...
// }
//
// thickness: If this value is present, the material is not volumetrically solid
// it means that the volume should be computed as the surface area times this
// thickness (for automatic mass). The inside space beneath the thickness value is air.
//
// physics parameters are:
// density: this is the material density in kg / m^3 (water is 1000)
// elasticity: This is the collision elasticity (0 - 1.0, 0.01 is soft, 1.0 is hard)
// friction: this is the physical friction (0 - 1.0, 0.01 is slick, 1.0 is totally rough)
// dampening: this is the physical drag on an object when in contact with this surface (0 - x, 0 none to x a lot)
//
// !!! Do not edit the physics properties (especially density) without the proper references !!!
//
// Sounds
//
// stepleft: footstep sound for left foot
// stepright: footstep sound for right foot
// impactsoft: Physical impact sound when hitting soft surfaces
// impacthard: Physical impact sound when hitting hard surfaces
// scrapesmooth: Looping physics friction sound (when scraping smooth surfaces)
// scraperough: Looping physics friction sound (when scraping rough surfaces)
// bulletimpact: bullet impact sound
// gamematerial: game material index (can be a single letter or a number)
//

// NOTE: The properties of "default" will get copied into EVERY material who does not
// override them!!!
//
// "base" means to use the parameters from that material as a base.
// "base" must appear as the first key in a material
//

cool model :)

but why the physicmodel? and can you also fast make this for the 3d skybox? thx

*edit

ahh and some lod maybe

cool model :)

but why the physicmodel? and can you also fast make this for the 3d skybox? thx

*edit

ahh and some lod maybe

there's a physicsmodel for those who use the fields as levelborder or something. just turn it off in hammer and you're fine.

skybox version! i knew i forgot something!

lods: i don't think it would be a good idea.. i'd have to make the fields less dense for that. people with model detail on low would have quite an advantage over those with model detail high...

yeah i agree, an LOD might be bad for this type of model, considering its use as a hiding place/cover

good reason !

i´ll be happy when u release the skybox models quickly,
there also good for my current hammerworx ;)

LoD is never a bad idea because performance is as important as looks. The biggest problem with the models that are released in MSA is they are generally too hi poly and too hi texture for serious consideration in the MP marketplace. It's understood some folks have rigs that can handle it and as designers we all want to make the best looking stuff we can...but w/o decent LoD you end up limiting their use to niche maps.

BTW...I must say they look great.

Now that i think about it, your LOD models could almost be just cubes with the texture on the side. Something solid, onyl for use really far away. I dunno. Actually, after reading the Valve Wiki on it (link (http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/LOD_Models)), i'm not so sure:
LOD model useless?
In some cases, a LOD model will not provide a noticeable performance increase. This might be the case if:

-your model already has a small polycount or is low detail
-you don't think you can reduce the polycount by at least 30% (the model has no round/organic structures)
-it's a static model that is only going to be used in areas with a good performance

Now that i think about it, your LOD models could almost be just cubes with the texture on the side.

there is the problem i talked about. if i do a lod1 besides a lod0, that lod1 on the 256 version should be around 120 faces or so. if i do that, the field will be much less dense. if i go even lower, you will be able to see through almost completely. now, the problem: lod1 is also used (as the default lod) when the player sets the model detail on normal (not even low) which will give him quite an advantage over the other players.

considering this and the amount of faces we talk about, i'd rather go with no lod at all.

even the 512-version has less faces than the default hedge! (has no lods btw.) and we talk about quite a large model (considering the size of that field).

btw. i did some extensive testing on plateau with custom hedges (lots of them in there!) and lods. i took the hedge with 500something faces and stripped it down on lod1 to about 100 faces. what came out was, that i couldn't even measure a difference! it seems like the engine can handle those small models quite well.

good models

Hey Pedroleum,

those field models really are an incredible boost to my mapping motivation. Sweet stuff indeed!

There's only one wish I'd have... and I hope it won't be too time consuming to do... do you think you could probably make a field model scaled in 1 : 16 for skybox usage?

That would help increase the performance... and it should look amazing, giving a whole new feeling of distance :).

Anyway, my favourite mapmodels!

Cheers,

Albatros

Albatros;1043831']
There's only one wish I'd have... and I hope it won't be too time consuming to do... do you think you could probably make a field model scaled in 1 : 16 for skybox usage?


i'll try to do them as soon as possible!

Perfect, can't wait to implement them :)

Thanks!!!

i'll try to do them as soon as possible!

hmm ok i have some done, not teh highquality like your mapmodel
but for 3dsky its ok i think. but make yours too if u want
pic (http://people.freenet.de/derErnst/files/e_field_skybox.jpg)
i used the same textures and folder, only the model is included

(ok better no download)

oh great.. and i just know why you didn't ask for permission... because i wouldn't have granted it! take the link down please!

EDIT:
ok, i just woke up when i wrote that... at least you used your own file name. i know i didn't include any release notes because it thought they're not necessary. it's only polite to ask.

i also know you told me you need them very soon, but models take testing time. especially skybox ones which can be very far away or very close as the extension of the normal model near level border. to get that right, it takes time, just as it took to make the texture the way it is now.

it's not that i'm not working on them, i'm just not satisfied, because of several things. (polycount, mipmapping,....)

i.e. if you just used the same texture, the fields models will look very crispy and constantly moving when far away in the skybox, because i compiled the texture with "no mipmaps". that's what i didn't want them to look.

you can leave that download link there. i don't mind.

especially skybox ones which can be ....very close as the extension of the normal model near level border.

i have not thinking about this .. sorry. i maked it for my map,
where such does not occur.

and to ask u for permission was not in my head, i only maked an
own extra model for your pack and hoped all is fine.
big sorry for that, i know that the textures are bad for this model.

thx and sorry again ! :)

update!

read the first post... (http://www.dayofdefeat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71842)

Thanks!!!

Awesome model! I know how much tedious tweaking foliage models need and yours are perfect.

Frankly, I admire the style of your work, models and maps. Kudos to you.

Great stuff - thanks pedroleum, you're my hero :D

Guys where do you unzip the cornfield texture again?
I think they are awesome btw, great job. :)

if you unzip the file, you end up with a folder "dod" that one goes into c:/program files/steam/steamapps/[your mail]/day of defeat source

if you unzip the file, you end up with a folder "dod" that one goes into c:/program files/steam/steamapps/[your mail]/day of defeat source

Pedroleum the only thing is wouldn't you have to overwrite the old dod folder? Or do you open the folder and copy and paste what is inside? Sorry still new at this.
Thanks.

i don't think it will overwrite the folder.. it just adds the stuff thats in it. but if you don't trust computers (never do!!!) just copy the stuff inside into your dod folder.

Thanks again. :)

NOTE UPDATE: I got them to work, they are great. :D

Uh, how do you install? in dod folder or day of defeat source folder?

Uh, how do you install? in dod folder or day of defeat source folder?

if you unzip the file, you end up with a folder "dod" that one goes into c:/program files/steam/steamapps/[your mail]/day of defeat source

so you end up with:
c:/program files/steam/steamapps/[your mail]/day of defeat source/dod/materials/models/props_fields/[files .vmt .vtf]

and

c:/program files/steam/steamapps/[your mail]/day of defeat source/dod/models/props_fields/[files .mdl .vtx .phy ....]