Changes in UnrealEd 3.0 from UnrealEd 2.0?

[8IronBob]

Now that I'm getting into the third-generation of UnrealEd through UT3, I'm wondering now, is there anything different in UE 3.0 that I should know about that may be different from UE 2.0? Should I have to relearn the engine and the editor, or should some of the same mapping techniques from the last generation still apply here? Fill me in... Thanks.

[jimbob]

man, its vastly different. in the old version you carved levels out of solid mass, now you build in a void. wich has its ad- and disadvantages.

the mover system is heavly upgraded and much much more easy to work with as you now have a visual indicator and you can play the motions in the editor.

the builder brush is used slightly different, the old shaping ways dont seem to work anymore and you need to use different tools for it, it works but it takes some time getting used to.

some neat things i noticed,

*Scalable emitters. you dont need to change internal settings of the emitter if you want to have it smaller of bigger, you just set the scale to what you want.

*neat lights and effects.
*bot pathing is somewhat difficult as them seem to pendle between nodes for no aparent reason.
*a nice log.
*kismet
*crashes for no aparent reason while rendering
*locks for no aparent reason ( cant be heating issues as the last time it locked when i didnt even load a map yet! )
*crashes for no aparent reason
*maps need to be 'cooked' now before they show up in the game browserlist.
*no more skyboxes!
and much more

[8IronBob]

Ahh, so your saying that UT3's editor is turning out to be more like the rival to Valve's Source tech?
I mean, just like Valve went from the old Quake/HL1 tech to the new, graphically imrpoved Source version, it's night and day, much like the new UnrealEd tech from UT2004 to UT3/GOW. Got it.

Then again, I believe that Source/Quake, too, allows you to carve a skybox/global room while building the rest of the map as brushes (good way to cut down on leaks, as opposed to building the big room with six separate cube brushes), which is pretty good, but probably still different from how the UE would do things, obviously.

[Parkar]

Originally Posted by 8IronBob

Ahh, so your saying that UT3's editor is turning out to be more like the rival to Valve's Source tech?
I mean, just like Valve went from the old Quake/HL1 tech to the new, graphically imrpoved Source version, it's night and day, much like the new UnrealEd tech from UT2004 to UT3/GOW. Got it.

Then again, I believe that Source/Quake, too, allows you to carve a skybox/global room while building the rest of the map as brushes (good way to cut down on leaks, as opposed to building the big room with six separate cube brushes), which is pretty good, but probably still different from how the UE would do things, obviously.

It's not really more like the quake style editors you just start with a void instead of a solid mass. It's still CSG and the brushes still work exactly the same other then a few tweaks to the user interface. All the things I used to use in ue 3.0 for brush manipulation works more or less exactly the same.

building a hollow cube is done using 2 brushes in unreal engine, one additive to make the cube then one subtractive to cut the hole. There is never really a reason to build things like that using 6 cubes although teachnicaly that would work to.

I havn't touched the mapping tools for source so maybe they suport CSG as well now.

You shouldn't be relying on brushes for anything any more though. Static meshes is more or less always better from a performance point of view and support light mapping now so they can do anything brushes can now other then the obvious convenience of changing things easily in the editor.

[8IronBob]

Well, Valve uses Hammer for Source, which is WorldCraft, so you know that it's the Quake engine with new graphical enhancements, and some in-game changes, basically. However, yeah, I've been used to carving a hole into a solid cube (hollowing the cube) in Source/Quake as well for doing skyboxes and global rooms as I said (I find this a lot better than using the stupid 6 brushes = a room routine), and I'm quite sure that Unreal Tech does this also, as opposed to the six separate brushes to make a cube for a room. All right, so I guess the transition won't be that tough, I'll have to look through UT3's manuals for doing my own maps then, and see where the differences lie.

[jimbob]

you could also get the video tutorials from the UT3 special edition, they explain more than you need to know. quite handy too to have some fallback when you are stuck with some things and need a quick answer.

[peoplessi]

3D Buzz has a lot of UT3 videos on their site, so check that out too.

[8IronBob]

Yes, I also invested in this book from Amazon "Mastering Unreal Technology" I'm guessing that this can go hand-in-hand with those videos, most likely:

http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Unre...4883250&sr=8-1

Of course, I've had this around since UT2004 (so I've owned this book for more than a couple of years now), so it's probably a little dated. I can see that Amazon does have a newer book for UT3, so I'll look that over at Barnes and Noble or Borders first before deciding to pull the trigger on that via Amazon. At least looking through both books will give me some clues as to what to expect from one version of the UT engine to the next.

EDIT: Seems like the same guys behind those tutorial videos seem to be coming out with a book of their own, so I'll be waiting to see what this one'll be like:
http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Unre...4883250&sr=8-2

[peoplessi]

Well, the book you already have doesn't introduce any of the new and changed things UE3. If you are familiar with previous unreal editors, it doesn't differ at all - you can build the levels in a same fashion, but that way you miss out on the new features/changes.

Get the Unreal 3 Collectors Edition Level Design DVD and check the Unreal 3 videos here as suggested by my and jimbob: http://www.3dbuzz.com/vbforum/sv_home.php

[8IronBob]

Sweet, so I guess that the book is actually written by the same people that did the Buzz3D videos as well, so seems like they should follow hand-in-hand in the same order of lessons between them... Unfortunately, it seems like Vista x64 may be the issue, but the DivX lessons only seem to play audio, I don't see any video at all. I'm even wondering if the DivX player that Epic/Atari included would even be 100% compatible w/ Vista at all here. Hmm...

EDIT: N/m, just had to d/l v6.8 off of DivX's website, now I see video along with the audio. Thanks. I'll be sure to look through everything. So far, I'm quite sure that if I've used Hammer/Source, UnrealEd probably might not be too overwhelming, just so long as I know that it's carving out of solid mass (UT2004), as opposed to carving in a void (UT3 and Source, too, probably), I'll be okay.

[8IronBob]

All righty, looking through some of the tutorials, I decided to come up with a three-floor arena of sorts (main room so far), and seems like I may be getting more of a hang of this than I thought. Now, seeing as tho this is a UT2004 map that I'm doing, I'm wondering how this can be done for UT3. Would something like this be done a bit differently there at all? I mean, to me, subtractive mapping with static meshes does seem more superior, imo. Just as a matter of saying.

[jimbob]

wel, in UT3 you can still map substractive if you want but you cant create skyboxes anymore, so if you want to have an 'outside' area with some sort of sunlight you need to build addative and create a big box and then substract the rooms out of that.

as for one being supperior, they both have some advantages and disadvantages.

[8IronBob]

Sweet, yeah, once I learn skyboxes, I may even try to recreate a version of Dust from CS:S and bring that as a DM map for UT2004, unless the original creators of Dust did this already, then just point me out.
Well, either Dust, or a souped-up version of Doom E1M1, one or the other.

[jimbob]

skyboxes are just that, boxes somewhere out of the way from the map that are filled with scenery to create a background. just carve a square out with a convenient size and place in a skybox actor ( not sure whats its called, skyboxinfo or something ) and if you tag certain walls that should show sky than that box wil appear. with whatever you stuck in there.

[8IronBob]

Sweet, there is an area that will turn that arena room into a "Roman Courtyard" so to speak, where I'd have a good skylight up above, guess I'll do that now. Thanks.

[8IronBob]

Now that I'm experimenting with UnrealEd for the UT series, I took a look at PostEd for Postal 2, and boy, is that version of UED ever, I dunno, it just doesn't seem to have the same features that UT2004's does at all. No water/lava/slime volumes, no real options for any arena-style mapping that I can see... I'm gonna have to reinstall SWAT 4 eventually and see what that'll do. GoW, BioShock, and UT3 may all come in due time, but first things first, gotta learn the old before learning the new.

[peoplessi]

I can't see why, there is no reason not to learn UT3 properly, I am not totally sure what your point in all this is. The stuff you've shown are bit ordinary quick mockups.

[8IronBob]

Hmm... Well, that was until now, this one is starting to look like that Resident Evil-style arena map that I've been looking for, arches all around with spooky halls around a pool, etc... Yeah, here we go.

[peoplessi]

If that's just a mockup lighting.. but it seems you don't pay attention on lighting at all. Texturing could use some work too, and the highly repetitive geometry, I can't see how that map would play well.

[8IronBob]

I was really going for a Roman-style courtyard arena, which is pretty traditional, imo. However, I was about to add some twists to it, and I may probably look to inspiration from my old days in Quake mapping to get me through this.
After all, arched hallways and balconies around a wading pool was one of the biggest architectures from Roman times, and is a good start, from how I see it.

[8IronBob]

Well, so that I focus on realism and detail of maps, instead of mapping in UT2004, I decided to map for SWAT 4, since that puts you and your squad in the middle of real-life city crime scenes, which, imo, will allow me to write far better maps, as opposed to those beater arenas that I've been doing. Wamp was right about the whole thing. UT2004 is a great place to get some experience built up, but coming from mapping in CS brand using the Quake/Source tech, and moving to UnrealEd tech, SWAT 4's environments seem to follow coop-based situations, which are far better than DeathMatch, and may be a better place to use mapping skills.

[8IronBob]

Originally Posted by peoplessi

3D Buzz has a lot of UT3 videos on their site, so check that out too.

Ahh, okay... Will do. I have the VTMs included with the Atari DVD version of UT2004 (remember that Midway's DVD versions don't have these), but I only have the basic $20 version of UT3, so this may help out many bunches. I hear that there are tools that will convert maps you may have built in UT2004, and change it to a UT3 map, someone had a link to those conversion tools at the Beyond Unreal forums, can't remember where now.

Incidentally, I'm not too sure if it's path nodes, or if it's skybox interference, but all the weapons and item pickups that I placed in my map don't show up in my map when I'm playing it. It seems like it gives me all the weapons and ammo in the game out of the box, which shouldn't happen, it should be the four player starts, the pickups all over that I've placed, and the all the other good stuff. Wonder where I can correct all this. Should there have been a special, certain order in which to build a map? I was trying the old traditional place players first, then build paths, and then weapons and health, etc... Not too sure if that was the smartest order of placement.