Mike, always the gentlemen =) I did enjoy my breakfast, Cheers!
I had too look up the term "Illegitimi Non Carborundum" and I'm glad I did. It's a good one, and its not gonna happen.
Glad you enjoy the map!
Interesting and usefull post.
Guess what ?
I agree with Nestor Makhno. Never thought this would happen.
Highlight capture areas for gameplay reasons with orange light and at the
same post telling people ain't used to how certain things should look.
Is a little bit weird.
I have no idea what your point is there. You mean its contradicting that i made a decision to, in my oppinion, enhance gameplay using lighting but at the same time im telling people that I think objectives should be highlighted? or... what?

Elaborate on that please, cuz i really dont understand
Interesting and usefull post.
As you post about the lightning used in the winterversion
of Zhitomir was boring, but that's my believe how a snowy
clouded winterday looks. Their is nothing fancy lighted in a snowy clouded
winterday. No dramatic light just shades of grey.
As an example i link some pictures i took in the snowy Ardennes
spring 2005. La Gleize and Stavelot area
Picture 2
Picture 2
Picture 3
Theres alot more going on in those pictures than it is in the sshots available in "the winter revenge" thread.
First off, there are quite many more things in view in the real-life pictures than there is in the map because the pictures are of wide open areas. fields that goes on forever and that in itself creates drama. Also, in the winter revenge thread the enviorment doesnt strike me as very foggy/clouded.
If you set out to create a foggy/clouded enviorment take it all the way and make it work for the map - not just implement it and leave it feeling empty and flat.
Taking something from real life and directly translating it into a game rarly works when it comes to keeping it interesting. You, as an artist, must interpet what elements in that enviorment works and what elements doesnt works towards to end-goal of adding to a compelling enviorment.
Architecture, texturing and lighting must work for eachother but if you're deadset on creating an exact replica of a certain time of day and mimic real life "to the number" you gotta compensate by making sure the texturing and architecture is all the more interesting.
Hands on example: The houses in The winter revenge thread are mostly plan, fairly featureless boxes with pillars (nicly done broken walls tho and sufficent texturing too).
To break it up there could be larger pillars that casts more shadows on the walls or more angles on the structures. See screenshots for an really simple example.
To make the example extreme i didnt add any features to the "house" at all. This is pure and plain box thats utterly uninteresting. In the sshots in the winter revenge thread there are plenty of smaller features like pillars, windows and the bigger features such as holes and what not and those are good but they're not enough. The bombed out holes are all good but where there arnt any holes it looks all out flat and boring.
The features on these sections of the wall add detail but no drama and doesnt do much to the tension of the scene. In the end, its still a plain wall - just that its a plain wall with detail.
With such a simple thing as this little additional cubic brush the scene got a whole lot more interesting.
Point here is that, again, texturing, architecture and lighting works together to create interesting scenery. They have to compleate eachother and I was unfair to simply say "boring lighting" in the thread because its not soley the lighting that makes it look bland.
Interesting and usefull post.
Off course this changed when the scenery changed to
a evening or night map with unnatural light sources.
I really understand how you feel with the fact all the
people telling you Zavod is an UT map or Zavod is SCI FI.
But it's not only the lighting which make them say that.
It's the mix of architecture and lightning which make
people say that. I don't know your intention but in Zavod
their is hardly any position which make me feel like i'm in
a bombed out east european industrial area.
Thats what i've been saying all along

I havnt claimed its
just the lighting. Dunno how many times i've said that architecture, lighting and texturing works together in this thread now
My intention with Zavod was to create an interesting and atmospheric map that could have been in europe during the war, could beeing the rule of thumb. Obviosly I failed on one of those two. It's not suprising to me at all that you dont feel like you're not in a european industrial area. All i was going for was a cool "might've-been" setting.
How I feel about Zavod? I'm proud of Zavod, wouldnt have done it any differently had I the chance to redo it.

The thing that confuses me is the RO-Community
Interesting and usefull post.
I really love certain parts of the lighting in Zavod and the
map looks great to, but their are other parts where i really
wondered the reason of this light.
Again the post is very usefull and i will see if i can use some
of this stuff for inside areas.
Greetz Drecks
Lighting in Zavod was created on two basis: Looks and gameplay. If you find a light that is placed somewhere that you feel is "over the top" its simply because I found it plausable and i found it looked good. Simple as that.
Thanks for the input
