-= Gametoast.com =-

No wireframe... but Hiddenline removal will do just as well:

Yes there are canyons in Siege of mos Eisley so I couldn't resist making this.

RC-1290'Dreadnought'

thats a pretty good model, gun is a little too big but almost looks just like the one from the rogue squadron games, on the cylinders though and this is something ive been meaning to say to all at GT, if its a flat cylinder just delete the center vertice on the ends and draw horizontal or vertical edges going across and it will REDUCE the tri count...

So..why did you post an X-wing? Why not do something different and make it a headhunter?

I think it was to show the endcaps of the cylinders.
---
Thanks for the advice .
---
About the gun, I used some blueprints and 2 other refference pictures. Acording to the blueprints the gun is that big. The T-16 luke has indeed seems to have a little bit smaller gun. However, I've seen a lot of variations in the T-16 Design, some without guns. I just made some kind of new version that combines features from multiple ships. Might scale the gun a bit down tough.

i just posted a pic to show an example of how to optimize a models cylinder caps, i dont have much of an interest in making anything for this game anymore, i might but i dont have anything planned and besides, that model has too much detail for this game, its a high resolution model for a full star wars flight sim game im making on an open source engine called free space 2.

Sounds cool

That's always sometihng which I've been wondering: Why it isn't logical for people that they should delete the end-caps (as you so nicely named it) to reduce the polycount. Even stuff such as rounding the corners with taking the pointy-vertices and all scale down towards the center is something most people can't see...

And interesting X-wing, Mini' How large will the texture be?

1024x1024 at the very most and itll probably be a compressed texture, its stupid to use anything larger, itll probably end up being 512x512, kids here actually think that a huge texture makes their model better when you cant even see that kind of detail in game, from a coders point of view its a waste of time since all your doing is hurting performance on something that you wont even see.

oh yeah i just read doofis post above and the part about rendering anything higher than a quad is untrue, games just wont take it but you can render whatever sided polygon you want. the only thing wrong with using anything higher than a quad is that it can bring a modeling programs performance down and there has to be ALOT of them, XSI has the fastest polygon rendering core, youd have to have a couple of million of them, ive watched the demonstration on this subject.

Its not the size of the texture, its the detail. Typically larger textures have more detail in a smaller area, and I don't think people don't understand that, they just either have trouble conveying that when they talk or assume that that is understood.

Interesting that if you make a texture large you can sharpen it a couple more times (then if you had left it default) and then resize back to default with no undesired 'noise' on it. Ultimately you end up with a prettier, sharper texture.

thats the busted way of doing it, you should just paint your textures at a really high res and then resize. but i try not to paint at anything higher than 1024x1024 because from the techniques i use its hard to get the right result when a single pixel is so incredibly fine.

I agree but I don't do much original texture work I tend to just use stuff I already have. I'm no texture artist myself.

minilogoguy18 wrote: oh yeah i just read doofis post above and the part about rendering anything higher than a quad is untrue, games just wont take it but you can render whatever sided polygon you want. the only thing wrong with using anything higher than a quad is that it can bring a modeling programs performance down and there has to be ALOT of them, XSI has the fastest polygon rendering core, youd have to have a couple of million of them, ive watched the demonstration on this subject.

Yea, but the renderer will always render tris. Otherwise he (it?! whatever) wouldn't know which vertex is in front of another. Its just impossible to render polygons actually. If at all, you'd get flickering or something.

And painting at true size is always gets the best results. Downsizing means a loss of quality and so does upscaling. When painting at true size, a pixel stays a pixel and it's pretty much the only way to get good pixel details. In the future, when every game will have >1024² pixel-textures that won't matter too much probably, but you'll certainly notice the difference when you paint at 1024 and then scale down to 512 or something.
[/smart-Diet Dr. Pepper-mode]


My newest creation
Too many tris for a game-model if you ask me, but anyways... "Next-Gen"

The stone texture is tilable and can therefore be used for several different things as well. I made it out of a photo from CGTextures.com. Great site. Every other texture is my own. All photosource.

...wow... I can make man-mad things... sometimes, but I'd love to learn making natural things like... wood, rocks etc. Very nice. Btw, if theres just going to be one or two, why NOT put in into a map... won't cause THAT much lag.

lol

you bet it will xD

Doofi, you forget even the 'next-Gen' has limits

impressively simple nonetheless. Gives it a really natural look.

Wow, Its been a LONG time since someone posted a model here.
If this is considered a Bump, I'm sorry, But it has content. thats the exception right? if it has content relavent to the topic its allowed right?
Well I better get to it then.

I just started working with XSI and I know absolutely nothing, but I made this:



And because EVERYONE always wants to see it in wireframe (no idea why)


It is of course a WIP, because I know nothing. But I hope to finish it and use it in my map.
I realize its no motzart job eather, Give me time and I'm sure I can improve it... or atleast finish it.

Edit: Incase you can't tell, its supposed to be a bed. lol.

well theres areas on there where theres a lot of polygons not doing anything that aren't needed. hit 'I' to ray cast select edges and right click on the round headboard and choose 'select edge loop (around corners) and select all the edge loops that run parallel to one another that are inside of the torus' boundaries and delete them and it'll cut back a lot of polygons. do the same for the end caps of the cylinders and also the edge loops that go around the middle of the cylinder. then delete the vertices's in the center of the cylinders end caps and draw edges connecting them either horizontally or vertically, doesn't matter, that too will cut back polygons. when your all done with that your model will look EXACTLY the same but have half as many polygons.

Ok, I'll try to translate that and do what it is you said.

T4-B Heavy Tank

Wow wow wow wow... <pauses for breath> wow. That is absolutely amazing Ace! Assuming (rather rudely) that you'll eventually release this to the GT folks, this'd come in real useful .

Did I mention wow?

@Caleb: LoL, nice . Much better than I did on my first try.

Thanks,
I redid it though:


BTW is that some tank from EaW?

If that is your first try then your gonna be good at it when your more experienced.