Talk:Lightmapped 4WayBlend: Difference between revisions
JorisCeoen (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Is there absolutely no way to use this in older engines like the 2013 Single/Multiplayer engines? This is perhaps the best shader I have seen since years... It makes things so mu...") |
|||
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Is there absolutely no way to use this in older engines like the 2013 Single/Multiplayer engines? This is perhaps the best shader I have seen since years... It makes things so much easier. Why wasn't this included years ago :( --[[User:JorisCeoen|JorisCeoen]] 14:38, 24 February 2014 (PST) | Is there absolutely no way to use this in older engines like the 2013 Single/Multiplayer engines? This is perhaps the best shader I have seen since years... It makes things so much easier. Why wasn't this included years ago :( --[[User:JorisCeoen|JorisCeoen]] 14:38, 24 February 2014 (PST) | ||
== What are some example vmts? == | |||
How are they filtered in CSGO? | |||
Are there any available? | |||
SDK Aztec doesn't have any, after a brief inspection. | |||
== Revising and condensing the Supported Effects == | |||
This section should be done in a similar way to [[$envmap#Additional Parameters|the "Additional Parameters" section in the page for $envmap]]. Rather than having an individual stub page for each parameter, just describe it briefly below the parameter listed. Most if not all of these parameters are exclusive to Lightmapped_4WayBlend, so why bother having a page for each one? --[[User:Stract|Stract]] ([[User talk:Stract|talk]]) 18:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC) | |||
:Agreed, this is kinda bad. Whoever does this should also make the to-be-old pages redirect to this page. [[User:Pinsplash|Pinsplash]] ([[User talk:Pinsplash|talk]]) 18:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC) | |||
I've since updated the section to be formatted this way. Check how I indicated the parameter alternatives; is this a decent system? Is there some better or more clear alternative? I considered doing something like this: | |||
; <code>$basetexture</code> to <code>$basetexture4 <[[texture]]></code> | |||
: See <code>[[$basetexture]]</code>. Defines the [[albedo]] texture for a given layer. | |||
But I feel that looks a little strange and might be a little too verbose compared to what exists now. Thoughts? --[[User:Stract|Stract]] ([[User talk:Stract|talk]]) 16:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC) | |||
:i think the $basetexture[null/2/3/4] works fine. Use of each of the 4 is demonstrated in the example vmt too, so people should be able to get it. [[User:Pinsplash|Pinsplash]] ([[User talk:Pinsplash|talk]]) 16:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 09:27, 12 July 2018
Is there absolutely no way to use this in older engines like the 2013 Single/Multiplayer engines? This is perhaps the best shader I have seen since years... It makes things so much easier. Why wasn't this included years ago :( --JorisCeoen 14:38, 24 February 2014 (PST)
What are some example vmts?
How are they filtered in CSGO?
Are there any available?
SDK Aztec doesn't have any, after a brief inspection.
Revising and condensing the Supported Effects
This section should be done in a similar way to the "Additional Parameters" section in the page for $envmap. Rather than having an individual stub page for each parameter, just describe it briefly below the parameter listed. Most if not all of these parameters are exclusive to Lightmapped_4WayBlend, so why bother having a page for each one? --Stract (talk) 18:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed, this is kinda bad. Whoever does this should also make the to-be-old pages redirect to this page. Pinsplash (talk) 18:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I've since updated the section to be formatted this way. Check how I indicated the parameter alternatives; is this a decent system? Is there some better or more clear alternative? I considered doing something like this:
$basetexture
to$basetexture4 <texture>
- See
$basetexture
. Defines the albedo texture for a given layer.
But I feel that looks a little strange and might be a little too verbose compared to what exists now. Thoughts? --Stract (talk) 16:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)