Hey guys, I got Wolfenstein for Christmas and I really enjoy it.

I would like to open up the editor but I get this after messing around with the editor target.

I read through the other threads but I can't seem to find the answer. If someone knows whether WolfEd works could you please tell me.

Thanks!

To put it as simply as possible I think everyone can forget about any wolf sdk.

I don't think there is going to be much support for it in the future.

Zombie13 wrote:

To put it as simply as possible I think everyone can forget about any wolf sdk.

I don't think there is going to be much support for it in the future.

Finally someone notices it
Congratulations men :twisted:

That's a real pity as the improvements made on the engine look fantastic. I might go for Prey then for my next mini project.

Douglas Quaid wrote:

That's a real pity as the improvements made on the engine look fantastic. I might go for Prey then for my next mini project.

Or you could have a play with the UDK! http://www.udk.com

simulation wrote:

Douglas Quaid wrote:

That's a real pity as the improvements made on the engine look fantastic. I might go for Prey then for my next mini project.

Or you could have a play with the UDK! http://www.udk.com

Get Out.

simulation wrote:

Douglas Quaid wrote:

That's a real pity as the improvements made on the engine look fantastic. I might go for Prey then for my next mini project.

Or you could have a play with the UDK! http://www.udk.com

YEAH FOR UE3 DEVELOPMENT!!!!!

Tron wrote:

simulation wrote:

Douglas Quaid wrote:

That's a real pity as the improvements made on the engine look fantastic. I might go for Prey then for my next mini project.

Or you could have a play with the UDK! http://www.udk.com

Get Out.

+1

simulation wrote:

Or you could have a play with the UDK! http://www.udk.com

A good while back I messed around with the editor but as far as I can see, 3dmax skills are a plus while mapping for UT3. Are you looking into the UDK kit yourself Sim?

Douglas Quaid wrote:

simulation wrote:

Or you could have a play with the UDK! http://www.udk.com

A good while back I messed around with the editor but as far as I can see, 3dmax skills are a plus while mapping for UT3. Are you looking into the UDK kit yourself Sim?

Great, since I am right now taking 3ds max lessons, does that mean ill be able to make :shock:

ut3 levels then?

If I remember right, alot of the terrain was clumps of external assets (max, maya etc). I may be wrong but the editor looks very polished and I'd say it takes a bit of getting used to after using DEdit and Preditor, maybe a week before a map gets going.

Yeah, UE3 works with static meshes as a huge percentage of level construction which means if you learn something like Max, you're on the right track for creating custom assets. Of course simply building a UT3 level you can use their static meshes as well. They still use brush for minor things like basic structure but static mesh is really the way things are built. The editor is not that hard to get into if you've done other game editing. If you bought the UT3 special edition you get a whole bunch of tutorial videos along with it from 3DBuzz that will teach a whole lot of stuff about the editor, building levels, making particle systems, materials, Kismet scripting.. etc. It's all very cool stuff.

Of course the UDK has a newer version of the editor and engine than UT3 but it's all still very much the same, even if some stuff might look different here and there, they work basically the same still.

Does the console work in any way in Wolfenstein? What if you tried to build the maps in something an open source editor like our Dark Radiant, then see if you can compile the map in Wolf with whatever the console can manage to do?

Might take some work to get Dark Radiant to make a compatible file that wolf could compile, but you never know.

New Horizon wrote:

Does the console work in any way in Wolfenstein? What if you tried to build the maps in something an open source editor like our Dark Radiant, then see if you can compile the map in Wolf with whatever the console can manage to do?

Might take some work to get Dark Radiant to make a compatible file that wolf could compile, but you never know.

you can't... The whole streaming system kills it. Tried the most hacks to do it, and only recieved errors.
Now, You can map for the multiplayer, but the multiplayer is sad

pretty much all games used external assets for maps now a days. Doom 3 was just the start.

Look @ any game out there & everything is 3d assets in a basic world setup with the editor & the assets placed in the editor. I used to not like it until I started modeling, now it's more control.

Well it seems I'll be getting started with 3dmax or maya. I have really begun to enjoy creating levels and once I get Recall released I'll probobly try and make some maps for UT3 or Crysis. But idTech 4 is one hell of a nice engine and I really enjoyed the games made with it apart from Q4.

Doom 3 = The grand master, the ultimate FPS god and the best game ever made.
Quake 4 = Playable but boring and bad sound design.
Prey = Best Singleplayer since Doom 3 but lacked a decent multiplayer.
ET:QW = Alot of fun

Wolfenstein = A really enjoyable game but no level editor.

The Happy Friar wrote:

pretty much all games used external assets for maps now a days. Doom 3 was just the start.

Look @ any game out there & everything is 3d assets in a basic world setup with the editor & the assets placed in the editor. I used to not like it until I started modeling, now it's more control.

2 significant choices remain w/o heavy reliance on model assets for map making: CoDRadiant (with CoD 4, 5) and Source. Not to go negative on your point, but more control is a relevant term. In most studios that follow the "Unreal" method of the mapmaking pipeline, level designers do less and less map building and more blockout and scripting. Artists do most of the asset creation and final set dressing. If you want to do both (map building and gameplay), stick with the 2 engines I mentioned. id tech 4 is awesome but only one studio is confirmed still using it, albeit a highly modified version.

The Happy Friar wrote:

pretty much all games used external assets for maps now a days. Doom 3 was just the start.

Look @ any game out there & everything is 3d assets in a basic world setup with the editor & the assets placed in the editor. I used to not like it until I started modeling, now it's more control.

I dont understand, what do you mean by external assets? Assets packed in .pk4 files like in doom3? And in what way does that make map making or modelling different? And, opposed to what other type of asset packing? The unreal way of mapping and modelling? Sorry for my noobness.

External assets meaning meshes modelled in a 3d suite separate from a dedicated map editor like radiant, hammer, unreal editor etc. The brush based method of making maps is basically a relic from the past. I think source is the only current engine that still uses significant brushwork. Since around the time doom 3 was made the trend has been to move away from sculpting geometry in-editor and towards bulding meshes in max or maya. These days editors are mainly used for vis blocking, triggers and scripting, and blocking out.

whitewolf wrote:

...The brush based method of making maps is basically a relic from the past. I think source is the only current engine that still uses significant brushwork...

The CoD series still uses Radiant. I don't think anyone who played MW2 would say the environments look any poorer for being built in brushes. It's really shaders and smart engine tweaks that made the difference in keeping it looking current gen. Using a mesh-based system bloats a team into specialization, provides poor support for quick design iteration, and titles take forever to complete. I don't think it's an improvement or considered evolution.

Seems like a good texture to me (except for the fact that there are little shadows in the diffusemap).

Sturm, broken record much?

Was some pretty good textures used, you are just blinded by your hate for the title.

Chr1s wrote:

Was some pretty good textures used.

lol
Right, good textures for a 2003 game mod but not for a 2009 commercial title... And the fatty hands with the little pistol...
I love how they managed to lie the community with the hype :twisted:

Btw, where is the magical SDK that was promised back then?

This game is story, forget it man

P.S: Diffuse maps may only contain color info, not shadows or alike
Taken from modwiki.net

Diffuse maps in Doom 3 represent the diffuse reflection and color of a surface. In other words they define the color and intensity of light reflected back when it strikes a surface.

What hype? Activision didn't give a damn about this game before releasing. Had they actually paid for advertising I'm sure every gamer would have been brainwashed by all the propaganda and be talking about what an awesome game it was!!!!! even nowadays.
It worked with Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 and every Call of Duty title. :lol:

But weren't Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 actually good titles, after the advertisement dust settled?

aardwolf wrote:

But weren't Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 actually good titles, after the advertisement dust settled?

The facts actually prove it :twisted:

About the hype, it's pretty obvious that it had a lot (It has wolfenstein name on it), but not good advertisement. (except for hundreds of useless trailers)

aardwolf wrote:

But weren't Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 actually good titles, after the advertisement dust settled?

They're good games but not the new benchmark for video games! everyone keeps saying they are. Hype can have a lot of effect on people's minds even after it's over.
Wolfenstein is a good title too, and even if they didn't spend thirty hours per texture it's still one of the prettiest games made with the id Tech 4 engine, way better than Doom 3: Darkness Returns, Prey: Doom 3.1 or Quake 4: Doom 3 with lights.
Wolfenstein had no hype because the name means nothing in the current video games industry, the only people who were interested were the hardcore MP players RTCW had. You can say all you want about the developers promising "In-depth multiplayer" in maybe one or two videos but it doesn't change the fact that the game sold like shit on release and most people didn't even know it was coming out.

I'm still wondering why Wolfenstein flopped so much. Ok, the Single-player had flaws and the MP has been a step back from W:ET... but when I look at the server list it's really a disaster.

I think its because the single player had flaws and the mp was a step back... I dunno just a hunch :p

Lets face it, Raven are terrible these days. Quake 4 was seriously last gen in gameplay, and so was Wolf. The worst thing is the game could have been saved if the MP was AT LEAST as good as the old game and all they had to do was copy it... Yet they even screwed that up. Crappy maps, crappy classes, awful visuals and really poor gameplay meant that nobody would want to touch it online. The old RtCW (And on PC, ET) were mega hits online. Even the xbox version was played like crazy... To say people were left with a bad taste after the shambles we got is an understatment...

GUInterface wrote:

aardwolf wrote:

But weren't Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 actually good titles, after the advertisement dust settled?

They're good games but not the new benchmark for video games!

Play them both then try and play any of the other average pap they release these days. ME3 and U2 are two of thye best games to grace this generation of gaming. To say they are over hyped is totally insane. They may not be your cup of tea, but they set a VERY high standard for other devs to follow.

gavavva wrote:

GUInterface wrote:

aardwolf wrote:

But weren't Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 actually good titles, after the advertisement dust settled?

They're good games but not the new benchmark for video games!

Play them both then try and play any of the other average pap they release these days. ME3 and U2 are two of thye best games to grace this generation of gaming. To say they are over hyped is totally insane. They may not be your cup of tea, but they set a VERY high standard for other devs to follow.

And let me guess, so did Dragon Age Origins.

I had a look at Raven's next project Singularity (http://www.gametrailers.com/game/singularity/9206#Content) and I think it will fail just like Wolfenstein but the expectations are much lower. Not sure what happened but I liked Raven games very much like Star Trek Voyager Elite Force, Soldier of Fortune II or Jedi Academy (for this one I even made a map) but since then they released only crap. Solid SP but poor MP like Quake 4 and Wolfenstein. I think a successful Wolfenstein MP would have been something like Enemy Territory Quake Wars but just in WWII scenery... probably too much effort for Raven. :shock:

pazur wrote:

I had a look at Raven's next project Singularity (http://www.gametrailers.com/game/singularity/9206#Content) and I think it will fail just like Wolfenstein but the expectations are much lower. Not sure what happened but I liked Raven games very much like Star Trek Voyager Elite Force, Soldier of Fortune II or Jedi Academy (for this one I even made a map) but since then they released only crap. Solid SP but poor MP like Quake 4 and Wolfenstein. I think a successful Wolfenstein MP would have been something like Enemy Territory Quake Wars but just in WWII scenery... probably too much effort for Raven. :shock:

Not to rain on your parade or anything. But Raven didn't do the MP Endrant did and they are no longer around.

You should get some facts before shooting down companies =)

pazur wrote:

I had a look at Raven's next project Singularity (http://www.gametrailers.com/game/singularity/9206#Content) and I think it will fail just like Wolfenstein but the expectations are much lower. Not sure what happened but I liked Raven games very much like Star Trek Voyager Elite Force, Soldier of Fortune II or Jedi Academy (for this one I even made a map) but since then they released only crap. Solid SP but poor MP like Quake 4 and Wolfenstein. I think a successful Wolfenstein MP would have been something like Enemy Territory Quake Wars but just in WWII scenery... probably too much effort for Raven. :shock:

Hmm, the SP portions of their games aren't that solid either, they are very simple predictable stories and bland characters only there to serve as cool models for the MP.

Yes I know it was Endrant but Raven had the project lead I thought or was that Activision? Doesn't matter in the end. Whoever was in charge for the conceptual work messed up the SP and the MP too.

GUInterface wrote:

aardwolf wrote:

But weren't Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 actually good titles, after the advertisement dust settled?

They're good games but not the new benchmark for video games! everyone keeps saying they are. Hype can have a lot of effect on people's minds even after it's over.
Wolfenstein is a good title too, and even if they didn't spend thirty hours per texture it's still one of the prettiest games made with the id Tech 4 engine, way better than Doom 3: Darkness Returns, Prey: Doom 3.1 or Quake 4: Doom 3 with lights.
Wolfenstein had no hype because the name means nothing in the current video games industry, the only people who were interested were the hardcore MP players RTCW had. You can say all you want about the developers promising "In-depth multiplayer" in maybe one or two videos but it doesn't change the fact that the game sold like shit on release and most people didn't even know it was coming out.

Mass Effect 2 is easily the best game I've played since 2003. It's in a whole other league than (in my opinion) crap like Quake4 or Wolfailstein.
I also disagree about wolfailstein being one of the prettiest games made with idtech4 (or even that it's a good title). The game looked downright horrible. The textures were excrutiatingly bad and pimply and the generel design of the game was grey in grey. Wolfailstein had hype, but nobody cared because the released media was really really bad. Everybody could see it right from the "start". Everybody knew this was going to flop big time. The game sold like shit because the game is shit. Comparing it to Mass Effect 2 is almost insulting

That game may have a large commercial engine feeding it, but the quality of the game speaks for itself. I played the first game and wasn't all that impressed. The sequel won me over like not many games have before it.

Quake4 and Wolfailstein both suffer from being nobody's baby. Noone throughout development really cared for these games and it shows. They're generic, bland and hurt id software and their franchises more than they gain. It's not so weird id has decided to make all their AAA games in-house now. Raven failed miserably.

I dont know if im right, but Carmack mentioned like 2 years ago that there was probably going to be a next Quake game, which would be a sequel to q3, and that it was going to be developed in-house. Anyone who knows more please correct me if im wrong. Now that they are part of Zenimax, they maybe can make all their many game sequels in-house, and pump out game after game like Bioware did. Geeze, they have release like what, 4 games in a 6 month period by now?

Maybe it was Quake Live what he meant... and I think the guys at id are right now busy with Rage.

No, I think I read something about a new quake, not quake live. Maybe they meant the console version of q3 being done by Pi Studios. When's that thing being released, it's been in development for years now.

Seems like a good texture to me (except for the fact that there are little shadows in the diffusemap).

Sturm, broken record much?

Was some pretty good textures used, you are just blinded by your hate for the title.

Chr1s wrote:

Was some pretty good textures used.

lol
Right, good textures for a 2003 game mod but not for a 2009 commercial title... And the fatty hands with the little pistol...
I love how they managed to lie the community with the hype :twisted:

Btw, where is the magical SDK that was promised back then?

This game is story, forget it man

P.S: Diffuse maps may only contain color info, not shadows or alike
Taken from modwiki.net

Diffuse maps in Doom 3 represent the diffuse reflection and color of a surface. In other words they define the color and intensity of light reflected back when it strikes a surface.

What hype? Activision didn't give a damn about this game before releasing. Had they actually paid for advertising I'm sure every gamer would have been brainwashed by all the propaganda and be talking about what an awesome game it was!!!!! even nowadays.
It worked with Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 and every Call of Duty title. :lol: