Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

3 Dimensional Chat / Hi Poly soldier - 'come and go' project

Author
Message
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 20th Nov 2007 22:38 Edited at: 25th Nov 2007 04:14
EDIT:

latest progress:



ORIGINAL:

Hey,

haven't posted anything in a long time an my website is dead so i thought what the heck I'll show some progress on something i like to work on again and again during bits of free time.

I wont get anywhere in the future if i cant make a decent high polygon model for my normal mapping process. I cant always rely on the nvidia filter for photoshop to do the hard surface work, or 'only do the easy stuff' like sculpting cloth, skin, muscle etc.

so here it is so far:



evident where it sucks badly and there is still a lot of work and cleaning up to do. (particularly around the wrists and refining the cloth) boots still need a bit of work, upper body in general needs more details on straps etc.

still thinking of ideas for a helmet, might stick without though.

here's that pistol also:



might show some more progress soon, although its a long way from being low-poly modeled + textured

jasonhtml
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: OC, California, USA
Posted: 20th Nov 2007 22:41
wow! very proffesional work (as always!) nicely done!

SimSmall
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 20th Nov 2007 22:44
Well, all looks great, I like the detail on the stubble, usually looks so fake. But does it animate? I know you said it was for for the normal mapping process, although surely it would be nice if it animated too.

Other than that, how many polies is high poly in this case?
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 20th Nov 2007 22:53
quick reply, thank you

im also going to experiment with *a lot* of alpha channeled hair for the high poly. (i seem to lack character models with their hair actually visible, lol

@ SimSmall

it's not intended to animate, there are way too many polygons and it has been built for a 'static purpose' (i.e. nothing to assist deformation, and everything is separated)
the animation/posing will be left for the low polygon model.

currently around 500,000 triangles modeled, but increasing, with a lot of the back armour unfinished and not very detailed (also thats a low poly head)

jasonhtml
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: OC, California, USA
Posted: 20th Nov 2007 22:56
so do you model high-poly first and then use a reducer? or do you just do the model over low-poly?

Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 20th Nov 2007 23:01 Edited at: 20th Nov 2007 23:30
in my first post i mention i don't often actually model high polygon meshes for my normal mapped models, rather sculpt the soft stuff and leave the small/hard surface details to the nvidia filter.

This is a learning curve for me to get better and more familiar with the *traditional* process of normal mapping, which is actually to make the high poly model first to achieve *precise* shape and form, then make a low poly cage to bake on.

some however like to make the low polygon model first then subdivide and sculpt it, which is what i do, yet trying to get out of the habit of doing.

never use a reducer for a game model from high poly model, EVAR.

KeithC
Senior Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 00:33
Curse you and your skills, Jon.

SpyDaniel
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 01:25
Reminds me a little of the SAS guys in CoD4, but a lot more advanced.

Also, never ever use a reducer, full stop! Do it by hand like me

Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 01:27
Insanity Complex
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Sep 2005
Location: Home
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 02:54
It's very pretty.

I think you should make a helmet for it though, because I think it would benefit the overall look of the solidier


TEH_CODERER
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Nov 2003
Location: Right behind you!
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 10:39
Lol! I looked at it and thought WOAH OMG SHINY LOL! Then I looked at who had posted it and it was like, ah OK, makes sense!

bond1
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 15:19 Edited at: 21st Nov 2007 15:24
Excellent! It's fun, isn't it? You really went all out for your first high poly sub-d model! All those soft bevels will look great on a normal map. Could you maybe post another pic with a lighter color besides black with a dark background, it's a little hard to see some of the details.

Are you going to re-topo from scratch, or use a lower poly pre-subdivided mesh? Just wondering.

----------------------------------------
"Your mom goes to college."
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 17:53 Edited at: 21st Nov 2007 17:57
re-topo from scratch.

it will also make sure i can save polygons by not cutting in anywhere where gaps are too small to notice.

yeah sorry about the colours, this happens with a lot of my models, i try to get that 'final look' even throughout the modeling, by setting out colours to wonder what it will look like.

as for this model I've been keeping the armour dark, gives it that 'L337' look

but here it is with the model lightened up:



yeah it certainly is very fun, though time consuming, especially the little bits. XD

(those orange stripes were a bit of fun in photoshop, i saw some amazing soldier concept art a while back somewhere which made really awesome use of simple lines.)

Quote: "I think you should make a helmet for it though"


i will, but for now i need evidence in my portfolio that im not scared of modeling hair

I'll show some progress on the high poly helmet when i get time.

Styloo
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Feb 2006
Location: France
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 18:48
Wooo ! Look very very ver goood !


ps: I prefer the first texture (all black)


Just click to show the ShowCase
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 19:33
its not textured, its just the material colour, it just helps me model.

Styloo
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Feb 2006
Location: France
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 19:46
oh, sorry


Just click to show the ShowCase
Fuzz
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Nov 2006
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posted: 21st Nov 2007 23:29
omg...........that is sooooooooooo sweet

if it was animated it would be like the best thing ever

(\__/)
(O.o )
(> < )Please join groves inc.....World domination
hessiess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2007
Location: pc!
Posted: 22nd Nov 2007 00:43
background is to dark, cannot see it well

learn blender, you will never regret it.
Agent Dink
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2004
Location:
Posted: 22nd Nov 2007 01:04
Beautiful, Fletcher. Awesome work!

Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 22nd Nov 2007 01:10 Edited at: 22nd Nov 2007 01:13
@ hessiess

sure its not your monitor? i can see it perfectly fine.

I've lightened up the material colours in a pic above, that should be better.

@ Dink

thank you

tyrano man
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Oct 2006
Location: Battle City - Kalspher :)
Posted: 22nd Nov 2007 13:32
as good as ever. Is the fantasy pack still alive by any chance?

Can't wait to see the final version
Tyrano

TATBS is now V4 for anyone who thought i might be dead
discostu
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th May 2004
Location:
Posted: 22nd Nov 2007 14:26
Thats a really nice model as simsmall said the stubble on the face is really impressive,but the boots on the second picture look quite thick towards the top probably meant to be like that just looks weird. i have one question about the gun how do you make the holes in the trigger and on the side of the gun are two indents rectangles did you just select the faces and extrude inwards

again nice model

Discostu

cletus that aint no racoon now get me some proper roadkill
Fuzz
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Nov 2006
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posted: 23rd Nov 2007 13:11
the guns are also cool as

any news on the fantasy pack




Fuzz

(\__/)
(O.o )
(> < )Please join groves inc.....World domination
Keo C
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Aug 2007
Location: Somewhere between here and there.
Posted: 23rd Nov 2007 17:47
Quote: "its not textured, its just the material colour"

That explains why the man's neck looks like it's the end of a mask.


Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 25th Nov 2007 02:24 Edited at: 25th Nov 2007 02:29
had some time this evening, tweaked areas and completed the back of the model+bags, also modeled more to the chest to differ from the normal vest look. Also fiddled with the head some more, previous looked too old/battle worn, tweaked to something i like:



ignore the weirdness in the corner, just trying out logos/emblems for uniform etc. just helps with the concept.

in case you're wondering, that says "M.BAKES" on the back, don't ask.

might still completely re-do the wrist thing, aside from that its pretty much done, just gotta create the low-poly and texture it

no progress on a helmet though, if anybody wants to help me out they could link me to some cool helmet concepts (nothing like a normal Kevlar though)

EDIT:

sorry i forgot to answer your questions!

@ Tyrano Man

yeah still active, my conscience keeps me from working on it though, got stuff that still needs to be finished.

@ discostu

yes just extrude inwards, if im lazy, Boolean operations can be used.

@ Keo C

not sure what you you mean probably just the dramatic difference between the colour of the skin and the scarf makes it look like a mask, lol.

mastercheif 193
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2007
Location: Outer Heaven
Posted: 25th Nov 2007 02:58
Very nice Jon. I like the pistol, for some reason it reminds me of the pistol on doom 3 a little bit. The bags give him a more bulkier look and it looks awsome.
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 25th Nov 2007 04:22
thanks

my actual inspiration was the Quake 4 pistol although in general i just wanted to make one of those pistols where it looks heavy at the front

Venge
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2006
Location: Iowa
Posted: 25th Nov 2007 04:50
Very nice work. Wish I could model people..
mastercheif 193
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2007
Location: Outer Heaven
Posted: 25th Nov 2007 05:59
Quote: "my actual inspiration was the Quake 4 pistol "


Oh, I knew it looked like either doom 3 or Quake 4 couldn't remember.

Quote: "although in general i just wanted to make one of those pistols where it looks heavy at the front "


Those kind of pistols are awsome.
dfujis the rocker
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Feb 2007
Location:
Posted: 25th Nov 2007 06:14
you did a great job, do you concept art or just wing it when you make these?

famous last words: check this out
fallen one
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2006
Location: My imagination!
Posted: 26th Nov 2007 00:57
I love that near future look, looks a lot better than all that oversized impractical stuff that we see in all the video games, one can belive that a soldier might actually look like this, I hope it gets rigged and released, would be great for fpsc dx10.

fpsc game KillTV update 22Oct.http://www.avantivita.com/killtv.html
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 26th Nov 2007 13:22
thanks guys,

Quote: "do you concept art or just wing it when you make these?"


i did draw something yes, might try and scan it in and work on it some more, but mostly i looked at other examples of gear on the net.

Quote: "I love that near future look, looks a lot better than all that oversized impractical stuff that we see in all the video games"


i really enjoy the art style of those type of characters but your right it is impractical, i know i wouldn't want to lug around full body plated armour like the stuff in ut3 gotta love the style though

Alucard94
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Jul 2007
Location: Stockholm, Sweden.
Posted: 26th Nov 2007 15:24
Master in work here, Jon you are the king!!!!!! Lol

So anyways can we see the wireframe?

Let's see how many peoples at BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH.... scared you there eh?
Quote: ""One day I realised that people on the whole are idiots""
- Raven
Keo C
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Aug 2007
Location: Somewhere between here and there.
Posted: 27th Nov 2007 01:19
Quote: "not sure what you you mean probably just the dramatic difference between the colour of the skin and the scarf makes it look like a mask, lol."

Bingo! I'm always at loss for words.


Havok
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Jul 2005
Location: In a box
Posted: 27th Nov 2007 03:58
Awesome work, Jon. I have been trying some high poly stuff in max aswell. I haven't executed it as well as you have, but I hope to get there soon. I have a question though. What do you use for proportion reference if any at all? I cant seem to find any good reference and I am not sure if I want to subscribe to 3d.sk. Thanks in advance and can't wait to see more progress on this.


I know Karate, Kung Fu, and 47 other dangerous words...
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 27th Nov 2007 12:52
if you find reference hard to come by, you can always resort to using yourself. Not for hugely accurate proportions, just remember places where certain joints and limbs meet with other sections of the body, like the hand to thigh thing etc.

mine arent too brilliant for this model, though if you stare upon what your making for long enough you'll notice and make occasional tweaks to help it.

when i get back on my laptop i'll upload an amazing reference image for male and female proportions, which i got from the polycount boards, even set out for modeling i think.

Quote: "So anyways can we see the wireframe?"


sure i'll upload that later on too. Alot of area will simply be blacked out due to the amount of polygons in one area but ok.

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 27th Nov 2007 14:46
Quote: "mine arent too brilliant for this model, though if you stare upon what your making for long enough you'll notice and make occasional tweaks to help it."


quite true, not that many would notice so much tbh
just look through the comments back and you'll see they haven't.

From a quite look, things that jump out at me;
• Neck would be the right length if he was wearing a shirt, but is too long for bulky clothing like this

• Shoulders appear to be disjointed, causing too steep a sloap with practically no actual shoulder. This is often only found on larger men with more bulk which yours isn't

• Forearms are a little on the short side, by approx. 6-10"

• Feet are tapering too much and are a tad on the long side, in-fact the actual ball section seems to be a little disjointed

• The combat clothes while you might not think so, are actually throwing some proportions out (for example the legs)



As you can see, although not a clear picture (but meh 2seconds looking ).. fully laden combat soliders generally have much less on them, usually the extra packs are for ammo for both firearms they carry.

Although sure you can expand this with extra armour (for near future war troops), think about the guy carrying this stuff himself. In Gears of War and Unreal Tournament they can wear pretty much walking tanks as armour as it's assisted movement through motor controls. If some solider is doing this off his own back it's good to think about how much it'd weigh him down especially when it comes to animation.

The reason troops only carry basic Kevlar in to combat is to really cut down on the weight so they can move quickly while being relatively protected.

KeithC
Senior Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 27th Nov 2007 16:09
Quote: "fully laden combat soliders generally have much less on them"

It really depends on the situation. When entering a theatre, a combat soldier can easily be burdened with his own body weight in equipment. I used to jump out of airplanes (while in flight) in the 82nd; I remember seeing many of the 11B types carrying multiple pieces of equipment, in addition to their personal combat loads (such as pieces of an M2 machine gun, an AT4 rocket, radio equipment, etc.).

Once in position however (as Raven stated), the soldier would prefer to have only what he needs to fight/survive...as the extra weight could mean death. Kevlar on a troop is only found in the helmet now; the body armor is comprised of a number of ceramic plates (the Dragon Armor still hasn't been authorized, due to degradation in high heat situations).

Normally, a combat troop will only have a version of the M4, M249, or other such primary weapon...they will not carry a sidearm (although I do see an M9 on the right thigh of the soldier on the left), unless they are an officer or a more senior NCO. Of course soldiers do at times "improvise". That debate still rages on (on whether or not to authorize ALL soldiers a primary and secondary weapon as a standard issue); though I feel it is a "no-brainer". The government doesn't want to field that additional expense however....

Quote: " Forearms are a little on the short side, by approx. 6-10""

I don't think so; the look is a little off due to the amount of armor making the arms stick out a bit, but I can't see increasing the length of the forearms that much (my forearm's only just over 12 inches...6-10 additional inches would make me look very odd).

The slumpy look in the shoulders looks more to do with the armor than the actual physique of the soldier, but that may just be my eye.

Altogether, he looks well insulated from the potential drop in temperature on spacecraft. I'm interested in the texture choice for the armor and how the hard (metal I'm assuming) shell/casing will contrast with the cloth underneath.

-Keith

Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 03:35 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 03:36
@ Raven,

thanks for the crit

i wasn't going for something dead accurate, nor a specifically designated soldier for (excuse my stupidity if wrong) 'assault' (quick moving, raiding buildings etc.)

i think the shoulder thing is just an illusion due to the shape of the armour. but I'll look into making it more convincing.

if/when i go to want something more agility based when i create variations I'll remove unnecessary gear (such as the roll and most bags, that aren't really necessary in 'full' combat (again, excuse my stupidity )

I don't think thats too much gear though, i have seen far worse examples and just from looking at the things that are being carried they don't pose much of a burden in there current position/scale, its basically an all round soldier, with basic survival needs and resources yet not too much for assault, raiding, recon missions etc.

im sure it will make more sense to show the kind of soldier im going for when I've made the helmet, the easiest way i want to put it is just to not think of it as alone a 'cheap by the dozen' soldier.

also this was a chance to be creative making my first Sub-D model, how much of a lesson would i learn if i found myself modeling a simple vest and then sculpting the rest of the cloth.

thanks for the crit though, gave me a few things to think about.

@ Keith

combat troops don't normally carry a sidearm? thats one new thing I've learnt today! seems strange why not, what about close range or if you've run out of ammunition on your main firearm?

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 07:00
Quote: "also this was a chance to be creative making my first Sub-D model, how much of a lesson would i learn if i found myself modeling a simple vest and then sculpting the rest of the cloth."


aye, it's why i've not really said anything.
not used Max since r7 but they had added physics (havok-based), they might've finally added cloth now discreet have Maya as well.

always found it easiest in Maya to create clothes out of b-splines surfaces, sew them together and let the physics figure out how they should lay. then output the static model.

nowadays working closely with Havok (at work with HydraCore), all I have to do is output the cloth at a lower resolution .. often 8-12 sections round divided, then add physics to it for the real-time.

Been working on a shader for a few weeks now, that takes the normal position of the vertices for the major folds and then calculate using a nice sinwave the smaller/subtle ones.

I mean the beauty of doing it this way with the physics system is you can really have some fun getting things to move as people would expect.

Certainly stops having to output a static normal map for it too, so saves on overall space; plus the models can be adapted for weather conditions (wet/dry/burnt)... not sure if this'll end up in FPSCX10 but you might want to suggest something similar there.

Why have PhysX just for ragdolls? always has baffled me that they have a powerful physics engine yet don't really use it, in-fact what they use it for could very easily be hard-coded newtonian physics with a decent collision system far quicker.
(but then who am I to argue with their decisions, eh?)

if you get a chance, check-out -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/future_force_warrior

a small glimps into what the US Marines are starting to use on the front-lines in their new "information linked" warriors. I've heard that it isn't as uncomfortable or heavy as it looks, but heh my days running around a battlezone with this kit'n'kaboodle on me are long gone; and the UK government is too bloody cheap to ever really provide that stuff to the peons

Quote: "combat troops don't normally carry a sidearm? thats one new thing I've learnt today! seems strange why not, what about close range or if you've run out of ammunition on your main firearm?"


Quite rare nowadays to really carry side-arms as they have very little range (about 750yards) and you certainly won't have scopes as they don't fit in holsters, making it even shorter range.

Not to mention their stopping power is low.
For the weight you loose from a sidearm you can hold atleast 2x clips with a good 20-30 rounds each.. what would you rather have, a last resort that *may* stop someone advancing at you; or more rounds to guarentee stopping someone?

Also not often you'll end up in close-quarter combat, or even on your own. Someone always has your back, otherwise well not really worth thinking about

Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 11:09 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 11:10
Quote: "otherwise well not really worth thinking about"


kneeing them in the groin?

suppose its just in games and movies for show and the whole last resort 'taking on 200 terrorists with an M9' thing.

Quote: "Why have PhysX just for ragdolls?"


it doesnt use Physx, but rather a newer version of ODE (is it? struggling to remember what the normal FPSC uses.


might try the look of this helmet, maybe with more seethrough visors/more 'believable'

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 11:41 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 11:42
Quote: "it doesnt use Physx, but rather a newer version of ODE (is it? struggling to remember what the normal FPSC uses."


If they're using ODE over PhysX then christ they've gone totally crazy!

Anyway as for the helmet, perhaps something like this:


Attachments

Login to view attachments
Cash Curtis II
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Apr 2005
Location: Corpus Christi Texas
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 12:25 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 12:29
@KeithC -
Quote: "I used to jump out of airplanes (while in flight) in the 82nd"

I used to be in the 82nd, 82nd Sig Bn ACP. That was a pretty cool job, we'd have to jump with a TON of equipment - combat load, radio, three day supply of batteries, and parts of a OE254 antenna (everybody got a piece so that we could put it up once we hit the DZ). The privates always got stuck withthe HF radios Sometimes we'd have to ruck 20 miles with all of that stuff, sometimes 100 lbs.

@Everyone -
Only officers carry sidearms. I don't think that the model's armor needs to match any current standards, in the future I'm sure that body armor will be very light.

Quote: "If they're using ODE over PhysX then christ they've gone totally crazy!"

FPSCx10 does use ODE. This is because of licensing restrictions with Ageia PhysX - if you make a commercial product with their SDK you have to register it through them. It's free, but required for each piece of software, and that requirement would be impossible to manage with a product like this. ODE is ideal because it is fast and has no licensing restriction. Paul Johnston made ragdolls work perfectly with ODE as well, it looks absolutely fantastic.

Some might think that using ODE isn't smart with its current problems with complex objects. I have quite a bit of experience with physics engines and almost every dynamic rigid body can be represented with primitive shapes very effectively. ODE gets the job done.


Come see the WIP!
Jon Fletcher
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th May 2005
Location: Taunton, UK
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 12:28 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 12:34
@ Raven

maybe theres a different license with using and distributing something with Physx than there is with ODE. (i'm not overly sure why but they probably have a good enough reason)

------

edit:

^^ Cash just edited to confirm about the license, so yeah i guess thats the reason.

------

thanks for that sketch, i'll definately add some sort of technological enhancement on it, like night vision and/or camera feed.

Quote: "I don't think that the model's armor needs to match any current standards, in the future I'm sure that body armor will be very light.
"


that was going to be a kind of cheap 'last excuse' if i did go a tiny bit overboard with the look of weight, but im still gonna try and keep it looking logical

KeithC
Senior Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 13:00 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 13:03
Quote: "seems strange why not, what about close range or if you've run out of ammunition on your main firearm?"

Now you see the reason for the controversy/argument being made by the troops on the ground.

Quote: "For the weight you loose from a sidearm you can hold atleast 2x clips with a good 20-30 rounds each.. what would you rather have, a last resort that *may* stop someone advancing at you; or more rounds to guarentee stopping someone?"

One of the reasons for having a second weapon, is in case your primary goes down due to malfunction (which happens often...especially in the dusty environment of the desert; I was constantly cleaning my M249).

Quote: "Also not often you'll end up in close-quarter combat, or even on your own. Someone always has your back, otherwise well not really worth thinking about "

What are you talking about? What do you think we do on a daily basis? Counting on someone always having your back is rather foolish, as they may be thinking the same of you.

The bottom line is; the only reason every soldier doesn't currently have a sidearm, is because the government doesn't want to shell out the money to pay for it. As far as stopping power goes, I agree...they need to bring back the M1911 and get rid of the 9mm piece of garbage.

-Keith

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 13:04 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 13:19
Quote: "Only officers carry sidearms."


American officers, in the RAF we used to have to buy our own.
In-fact most troops unless part of the infantry were only issued weapons as and when required. Not sure if it's the same for the Army mind, I know the Navy is the same though.

Quote: "FPSCx10 does use ODE. This is because of licensing restrictions with Ageia PhysX - if you make a commercial product with their SDK you have to register it through them. It's free, but required for each piece of software, and that requirement would be impossible to manage with a product like this. ODE is ideal because it is fast and has no licensing restriction. Paul Johnston made ragdolls work perfectly with ODE as well, it looks absolutely fantastic."


Although you have a point, the license actually only covers products physically using their product. This is why DarkPhysics has a different license; although even if you did have to register that you were going to retail, it is free so.. yeah wtf man.

ODE is capable, but tbh there are much better systems out there.
Newton for example is much quicker and easier to impliment with features on-par with PhysX or Havok, free license, free to use, and most importantly QUICK.

This is something that ODE really falls down on, is performance and lack of threading. Although no doubt they've heavily modified the source to allow that now, and hopefully fixed some other issues (like memory leaking and IEEE precision to stop the "infinite jitter" issue) but still just still seems silly.

The only real reason I can see them maintaining ODE (again baffled by this) is so that the source can still remain open, and that people aren't forced to purchase DarkPhysics just to modify the engine.

Still if that is the reason it's pretty weak given very few actually touched the original source thanks to Lee's intuative way of compressing the code into a single source file with absolutely no remarks and one of the most convoluted uses of the UDTs i've seen in a long long time (I mean Lee made the language surely he knows how slow doing it the way he did it all was, right!?)... plus apart from the initial release, they've not updated the source since.

Which seems quite lack-luster to the point they honestly shouldn't have bothered if they weren't going to make an effort. Atleast in my point of view.

Quote: "thanks for that sketch, i'll definately add some sort of technological enhancement on it, like night vision and/or camera feed."


np, it was a 5min thing while the boss wasn't looking.
think i need to get some more graphite on the way home though, my poor pencils are running low; and i'm still not seeing quite eye-to-eye with that wacom tablet in here.

Quote: "One of the reasons for having a second weapon, is in case your primary goes down due to malfunction (which happens often...especially in the dusty environment of the desert; I was constantly cleaning my M249)."


heh, god bless the SA80-B
the first one we had pretty much sneeze on it and it jammed, but they replaced them and they became extremely reliable peices of kit; even better was they changed the slide so there is a runner that'll block back anything that obstructs the chamber.

quite a nice feature unless you get a round physically jammed, then you've gotta unhinge the slide and hope the damn thing isn't hot.

Quote: "What are you talking about? What do you think we do on a daily basis? Counting on someone always having your back is rather foolish, as they may be thinking the same of you."


Could be a difference between our armed forces, as yeah that is pretty much what is expected. We were always taught that communication is paramount between you and you buddy, caution is better.

That said, I've not been in Iraq; only Bosnia. Can't see it being much different mind, usually when we got close enough for close-quarter fighting (within buildings this mostly happened); you'd be doubled up and more worried about civvies.

Quote: "The bottom line is; the only reason every soldier doesn't currently have a sidearm, is because the government doesn't want to shell out the money to pay for it. As far as stopping power goes, I agree...they need to bring back the M1911 and get rid of the 9mm piece of garbage."


lol, dude you guys get paid ridiculous amounts; plus theres ridiculous numbers of you. the government just isn't that rich... atleast not now.

was looking at your pay rates though, even at ensign level you get almost 30% more than our guys do. (that's taking into account exchange rates)

KeithC
Senior Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 13:12
Quote: "I used to be in the 82nd, 82nd Sig Bn ACP."

Hey, a brother Airborne! I was on the other side of Replacement from you on Ardennes, in the 82nd Aviation (the Cobra attack helicopter in front of Brigade).

@Raven; that's a nice concept for the helmet. Might I add a light either opposite the Camera, or alongside the camera.

-Keith

Cash Curtis II
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Apr 2005
Location: Corpus Christi Texas
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 13:30 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 13:34
@Raven -
Quote: "Newton for example is much quicker and easier to impliment"

Newton has a similar licensing arrangement as PhysX, which is why they couldn't use it. I agree with their decision to use ODE - they needed a no frills physics solution and ODE does everything that they need in FPSC. Rigid bodies, collision, ragdolls - in a game engine where speed is a major concern there's not much more you need from a physics engine. Indeed, that is how I've implemented Dark Physics in Geisha House.

I also don't believe that the coding of the FPSC deserves any criticism. Lee has his own style of coding, and with it he produced a commercial quality, stable, scalable FPS game engine. You can't expect much more than that. I don't personally use UDTs the way that he does, but I'd be out of line if I even thought to criticise it when it works well.

Quote: "that's taking into account exchange rates"

Good Lord, that's a lot considering how bad the $ is right now. I don't know what the British benefits are like, the governemnt is paying my school 100% + subsistance allowance for me and my family. I'm making pretty good money right now.

@KeithC -
Quote: "Hey, a brother Airborne! I was on the other side of Replacement from you on Ardennes, in the 82nd Aviation (the Cobra attack helicopter in front of Brigade)."

It's a small world, I use to run by there almost every day Hell, we were probably on the flight line at the same time too. I sure do miss those days - single, living in the barracks, nothing to worry about except for an early morning alert.


Come see the WIP!
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 14:48
Quote: "Good Lord, that's a lot considering how bad the $ is right now. I don't know what the British benefits are like, the governemnt is paying my school 100% + subsistance allowance for me and my family. I'm making pretty good money right now."


I think it's similar perks, as family are fully provided for as well as education and such.

About the only thing we have to pay for out of our own pocket is equippment, or rather replacement when it gets bad.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/careers/jobs/rafregimentgunner.cfm

have been thinking of re-enlisting again, nothing like it.

Quote: "I also don't believe that the coding of the FPSC deserves any criticism. Lee has his own style of coding, and with it he produced a commercial quality, stable, scalable FPS game engine. You can't expect much more than that. I don't personally use UDTs the way that he does, but I'd be out of line if I even thought to criticise it when it works well."


Yeah, Commercial Quality, Stable and Scalable are not the words I would've used to describe it; nor did many of the tech support mails.

It has a loyal fanbase, but even next to TimeSplitters; it is hardly what you'd call great. Lacks some fundimental things that most FPS consider standard, and the X10 version only really looks as good as it does because of the artwork.

Even then I don't think that the engine really matches the quality of the work. It's not bad per'say but well just browse for comments about it outside of TGC and you get a fairly unanimous verdict on what many think and feel about it.

Maybe X10 will change that, but so far I've seen some pretty effects, a couple of new additions that could've easily been put in X9. On the whole, have seen a couple of better things from the community themselves. Lee's style of coding works for him, but for editing means it's not great for others.

Part of what put many off of using the Doom 3 engine was Carmack + Object-Orientation = Unreadable. Not to say that isn't a good engine too, just some decisions made in development made it a pain to work with.

FPSCreator could be a great product, just think rather than app developers making the decisions on it's development direction they should probably get atleast one person in who knows game development better than they do.

I think that's the last I'll say about it here though, cause kinda hijacked the thread. Not really fair on Jon.

KeithC
Senior Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 28th Nov 2007 16:01 Edited at: 28th Nov 2007 16:04
Quote: "lol, dude you guys get paid ridiculous amounts; plus theres ridiculous numbers of you. the government just isn't that rich... atleast not now."

As far as pay goes, I don't find it a ridiculous amount at all(factoring in cost of living) for the work being performed...and the repeated deployments to Warzones. As far as numbers goes...you couldn't be more wrong; our forces are stretched to the breaking point. The government has more than enough to properly equip our soldiers (I had a flak jacket when I went over there). Since the Brits are leaving Iraq with what forces they had left over, we may have to pick up the slack there as well (depending on how thing go in Southern Iraq).

Quote: "even at ensign level you get almost 30% more than our guys do"

Try comparing enlisted rates, instead of officer rates.

Although we get a clothing allowance, any enlisted man knows that it never comes anywhere close to being enough to cover replacement costs...therefore we too have to pay out of pocket for much of our issue.

I will say though, that the British have much better MREs than we do. Back in (or around) '96 we had a major joint excercise with the British at Bragg, in which your Airborne and our Airborne did a MASSIVE airborne assault using all of our drop zones (I believe it was the largest airdrop since WWII). We had the opportunity to exchange conversations, rations (although once the Brits tasted our MREs...they wanted nothing more to do with them ) and uniform items. Great bunch of people.

I've also trained with the German Army, who are also a pleasure to work with (not sure what's in their field rations though...).

Quote: "It's a small world, I use to run by there almost every day Hell, we were probably on the flight line at the same time too. I sure do miss those days - single, living in the barracks, nothing to worry about except for an early morning alert."

I was there between '95 and '99. As far as single and in the barracks....I still think about it occassionally; though I wouldn't trade my family for it.

As far as FPSC goes; I think we can all agree that there are a number of things that could have gone better, but for $50...I think it's quite a tool. Just wish they'd fix the frame-rate issue.

....and now for something on Jon's thread:

Is this something you're working on for your Portfolio, or will it see it's way into a Pack for X10?

-Keith

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-26 00:29:54
Your offset time is: 2024-11-26 00:29:54