Volkswagen Typ 87 Texture & Model Criticism

(IndyJones) #21

it’s much better than your last tank, although i’m missing inside cocpit etc… make glass transparent, so people can see what’s inside.

(Pande) #22

Downloading the model now to see how it looks in my map :slight_smile: Mind if I play with shaders to get an isolated glass reflection effect?

Also, could I do some minor reskinning on seperate models for variation? I probably wouldn’t change much other than color and a few marks and whatnot.

All model credit to you of course.

At some point I should find a more in depth tutorial on UV mapping and put by Blender/Gmax skills to some use. xD

(Pande) #23

Looking good!

Oh and other part of map. Will make WIP later. (just posting this here since I uploaded it by accident lol… not gonna waste it)

Note: all pictures are for some bizarre reason mirrored on the x axis…

(aaa3) #24

@tomtom, iirc zenith made one (R75) not long ago which was praised by everybody as beautiful albeit seemingly too highpoly in his topic. (was it smth like model pack 2?) OFF, VULGAR but i think it shouldnt be a problem, despite i have a preference and particular loving/nostalgia for lowpoly, im on the opinion on demanding stuff (big pk3s, high polys, etc) that they/we should suck it, even my old extremely annoying netburst (vomits) tinycache (pulls off hair) celeron (laughs) (with an quite ok gf6600) did have 40-ish fps, if they have even worse pc, they no matter how poor are (me too) should be able to buy a very powerful machine in a few months sparing. eg. nowadays the core2 based (1 of the biggest leaps imo) dual core celerons (e1xxx) are very cheap, and a sub-entry level vidcard like ati hd4350 or 4550(this i have now) (unified shader arch another big revolution i love, started with gf8800, only comparable was the very birth of 3d accel imo) also, while being many times stronger than old 6 or 7 series cards, which i wouldnt even had changed so satisfied was i but had to coz it was agp, not to speak about ridiculously low ram prices of today, and the cheapest asrock mobo also have warranty… every1 with a monthly income no matter how low it is could spare for this, in really bad case a half year, if with eating a bit less then with it(dont accuse me of speaking “from high”, i know what it is!), but i dont know how can they using piii-like pcs today and whine… well obvious, the most pro hacker could do wonders with a 386 too, but we earthly mortals after all who maps, play games, and lurks on the internet in many/some of his time, is expected to have some loving for technics stuff and computers… dont cry; go dig urself into the topic, make a good decision in parts, and buy it. this huge rant is not aimed to any1 personally but in general… i say **** those who dont waiting an 100mb pack if its called pretoria for example… **** them all, then they dont play it, and?! who cares their minutes long beep here*:mad:

(AlphaRed12) #25

Nice Beetle. But I’d rather a kubelwagen.

(Pande) #26

Beautiful Rant! (invert colors ftw)

(Pegazus) #27

@TomTom7777
About the windows, yep they are exactly like that. About those rear lights, it’s like that again :slight_smile:
There was alot of images with the Beetle and many of them had different rims.
Thanks, but i read that the Sd.Kfz. 234/2 saw service in Afrika, very late in the war. Mussolini made desperate attempts to get support from A.Hitler so he received some of these, but it was too late already. ( I dont know if this is true, i read it on some website, but i hardly believe it )
About those masked ones, i thought it was ment for sand protection :oh: shame on me

@Indyjones
I thought it is better, like the Opel blitz has. It is still ET, so i won’t go over with the interiour. If it would have been the open roof version, i would have made the interiour.

@Pande
Yes ofcourse, always read the readme :slight_smile: Everything is explained there.
There should be alot of tutorials out for uv-mapping :slight_smile:
Hmm, on the beetle image, there is some odd shadow on the side and on the wheels. Hmm, i can’t think what would be causing it. But the beetle fits in nicely to the town :cool:

@Alpha red
Thanks, well both are nice cars but beetle is my favorite :slight_smile:

(IndyJones) #28

well said aaa3. there is absolutly no reason to care about default com_hunkmegs today, and keeping models low-poly.

(TomTom7777) #29

Thanks aaa3 I should spend more time opening up what I download and not just depend on the filename (And C’s model viewer rocks!).

@Pegazus tried to find your Mussolini quote but no luck. Did find the following Book reference which I guess confirms my hunch;
“Altogether, some 2,300 vehicles of the 234 were built. Ironically by the time they entered service the North Africa campaign had been over for many months;”, German Armoured Cars and Reconnaissance Half-Tracks 1939-45, By Bryan Perrett, Bruce Culver, pg12.
Too bad as the 234 were better suited to the heat than the 232s that are in the afrikacorps photos.

(finally downloaded your model, back end looks right-on. )

(Pegazus) #30

Actualy there is a good reason to keep models low-poly.
Low poly starts from XXX verts - to around 28 000 verts. That is still consideribly low poly. (For me)
High poly - 28 000 verts - XXX XXX XXX
Trust me, nobody wants that in ET, give the game engine a rest. :tongue:

@TomTom7777
Maybe you are right, but i need to find that quote from Mussolini. North Africa campaign ended in April or May 1943?

(Pande) #31

The shadow is from my -dirty mapping, I will will try and fix that spot if I can. (may need some really small light ent’s)

(aaa3) #32

the 28k verts=9k tris are ridiculously high poly imo to call it low. u may be right about the “proper” industry meanings about these terms, where - i guess - everything is highpoly only if you dont actually see the polygons, ie tens of thousdsands or millions of tris, with extreme detail, and the model derived from this with automatically simplifying and then “bumpmapping” is called low poly, no matter if it was made for q1 with 150 or for rage with 15000 triangles.
BUT.
i think the limits u describing are very much not fitting to this game. instead of correct term usage most of us i believe liking (me definitely:) using common sensical meanings for low and high polyness and make up a relative scale for ourselves. u might have a preference for higher poly models, and be right that these are in the first meaning really still low polys, but if we are taking the second meaning (lets take it:P), then these (9k tri) are, for this game, definitely not lowpolys. i simply cant accept that such a model called lowpoly in the ET world. just look to the kübel somebody linked from katsbits a few posts above. it was made for rtcw and is a perfect representation of what is lowpoly in the rtcw and et world (according to my limits:P). u might have your personal limits gameindependently that high, but trying to keep to those in et is not working imo.

so to sum it up when its about classifying i have the limit of highpoly much lower (and i nostalgically love lowpoly things), but to have the limit of whats acceptable in the game we might be areound the same high (*)(bcoz i also love highpoly/other highdef things too in et:P (my prev. rant was about we should use these if we want and to the hell with those players who do not want xD)). the difference that u would call it lowpoly while i would call it high. but what i wanted to say that i cant really think its 100% ok that to call them lowpolys in et. and… that i wasnt sure that u called it low because u sticking to correct term usage, or coz u also judging by “incorrect” second sense meaning (which both includes personal prefs, and which is(/should) changing by game) just having different limits

*:bcoz: i, indy, pande saying lets use highpoly if we want, but 28k is high for me, u say lets use low but u call 28k low, then we are at the same :slight_smile:

(Pegazus) #33

Yes, if we talk about ET 9k tris is extremely high poly. For a model ET has a limit of around 8k (can’t remember exactly) and per object 1024 verts.
This volkswagen is low poly even for ET :slight_smile: only 1165 verts.
Compared to the SD opel blitz, wich has 1846 verts they are quite equal and both are good looking imo. Only exception SD has made a professional work with it.

To me, I love low poly vehicles and honestly I “hate” [This is not a rant against any company, i like all good game companies, just incase someone thinks so :tongue:] game companies going over with there models, but i guess that’s how the game industrie goes.
But let’s remember the famous saying…
“Better graphics and layout wont make a better game”

In my earlier comment, i wrote what I thought Indy ment. Nowadays we can use more high poly models and ignore the default com_hunkmegs. I thought he ment models that are todays standards of high poly. :o
My bad.
:slight_smile:

(AlphaRed12) #34

Um, I think you guys are mistaken.
Low poly and high poly are 2 different terms relation to each other (basically 2 ends of a spectrum). A ‘poly’ is defined as a shape with more than 3 and usually no more than 4 (above 4 is considered an N-gon) sides. So a poly must have anywhere from 3-4 verts. High poly and low poly are not defined by vert #, they are determined by polycount (face #). I coudl care less about verts but polys are very important.

(aaa3) #35

i [very late edit, thx to kat: previously] thought verts and polys are the same for any practicval purposes, (that is, you just divide verts by 3 to get the polys and vice versa, ofc with the knowing of that this is a dirty example because tris can share verts and that there are nontriangle faces (i also used tri and poly interchangeably in my above posts) (but these will be broken into tris anyway so… ) … anyway for a rough equivalence this is ok imo, who knows the 2 errors might kill each other xD)

(Pande) #36

Verts are important here because of the limits in the engine, but really its the amount of single planes that need to be mapped in game that make the biggest hit.

(Pegazus) #37

Thanks alpha red for the proper explanation :slight_smile:

(kat) #38

[QUOTE=aaa3;192445]i thought verts and polys are the same for any practicval purposes, (that is, you just divide verts by 3 to get the polys and vice versa, ofc with the knowing of that this is a dirty example because tris can share verts and that there are nontriangle faces (i also used tri and poly interchangeably in my above posts) (but these will be broken into tris anyway so… ) … anyway for a rough equivalence this is ok imo, who knows the 2 errors might kill each other xD)[/QUOTE]Face-count is usually the most consistant measurement of ‘size’ rather than using vertex count, the reason being that vertexes get split when implimenting smooth groups which then means your # count and # used to represent polygons get squewed.

So, in the context of games you need to make the distinction between them becasue the engine tends to process and handle each ‘type’ differently in terms of drawing them to screen and what it can do to them (‘effects’). So no, it’s not really accurate to regard them as being the same, even from a “practical” point of view.

@ original poster. Nice model. I learn’t something new today as I’d always though the ‘Beetle’ developed from the Kubalwagon instead of the other way around.

(aaa3) #39

thanks for clearing this up, now i see :slight_smile:
(+really dont wanting to mess with this coz i like your model much but its Kübelwagen, or when ü is not desired, preferably Kubelwagen, less nicely but more informatively Kuebelwagen)

(Pegazus) #40

Thanks Kem, glad you like it.
Yes, A.Hitler designed the first prototype back in 1932, while Kübelwagen was first discussed in 1938 and the Beetle was a good start off for it.

Here is the A.Hitler prototype, if anyone is interested.