Worldcraft vs Hammer Editor
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:07 pm
Worldcraft vs Hammer Editor
Which is better? I heard that they are pretty much the same, with Hammer Editor just having bug fixes. Will it make a difference which editor I use?
-
- Posts: 399
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 10:46 pm
- Location: its a secret
i wasnt trying to be a dick, was just stating that it was the same. - tired ... just got off work... wore down not thinkin 100%
edit: more or less stating that this thread is close to useless if this "Worldcraft vs Hammer Editor" is more or less the question... because its invalid if its the same ...
edit: more or less stating that this thread is close to useless if this "Worldcraft vs Hammer Editor" is more or less the question... because its invalid if its the same ...
Worldcraft goes back to Quake and was used for GoldScr Engine games, as well as Quake games (QUake 2 to my knowledge). Hammer is a later version, and the current version is made for the Source Engine.
As long as you are using Hammer/WC below 3.5, you can make maps for Half Life and GoldScr games, but you need Hammer/WC 3.3 or lower in order to use them for the Quake engine. Dont qoute me on any of this though.
You are probably better off asking the pro dudes as Func_Msgboard.
As long as you are using Hammer/WC below 3.5, you can make maps for Half Life and GoldScr games, but you need Hammer/WC 3.3 or lower in order to use them for the Quake engine. Dont qoute me on any of this though.
You are probably better off asking the pro dudes as Func_Msgboard.
....noodle...
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:07 pm
I know that they are the same, I have played Quake 1 AND Half-Life 1 since day 1. I noticed that they were very similar.ceriux wrote:worldcraft IS hammer.... hammer is just the new name for it for the newer versions, open the program you will see that they are the same.
I also know that. I simply posted up this topic because I remember back in the day when there was a site called collective.valve-erc.com, and someone from there said that since the engines are so similar, it wouldn't really make much of a difference.leileilol wrote:Hammer's for Half-Life, therefore automatically disqualifies.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:07 pm
It is unfortunate that Hammer can't be used for Quake maps according to the license agreement because Worldcraft 3.3 messes up texture alignment with the import of standard [non .map 220 format] Quake .map files where Hammer 3.4/3.5 imports them just fine without any problems.
Worldcraft 1.6 is nice but lacks OpenGL acceleration and cannot maintain texture alignment with rotation. Plus I think the standard download is just shareware, I can't remember the unwanted limitation imposed with the shareware version.
Worldcraft 3.3 and Hammer 3.4/3.5 do not have a way to brighten the 3d textured viewed which it seems is too dark on a lot of people's computers (this can be worked around using the setgamma.exe [ that can be downloaded at the DarkPlaces site among other places]utility to artificially brighten it ).
It seems that common consensus is that Radiant is hard to work with for many people because it can't do the 4 screen view many people are accustomed to working with.
The BSP editor that some people rave about is closed source, which like Worldcraft, is just another way of shooting yourself in the head ... if not today, then tomorrow.
A few people like Quark. I personally couldn't figure it out and it seemed hard to use but I also didn't give it a chance, but I heard it can have "issues".
This project IS open source, QuakeEd ( http://www.celephais.net/board/view_thr ... &start=142 ) and some people think it has a lot of potential. As I understand it, initial setup is confusing and lacks a nice screenshot to help someone set it up. It is my understanding that it lacks keeping textures aligned with rotation, but maybe that will eventually happen.
Worldcraft 1.6 is nice but lacks OpenGL acceleration and cannot maintain texture alignment with rotation. Plus I think the standard download is just shareware, I can't remember the unwanted limitation imposed with the shareware version.
Worldcraft 3.3 and Hammer 3.4/3.5 do not have a way to brighten the 3d textured viewed which it seems is too dark on a lot of people's computers (this can be worked around using the setgamma.exe [ that can be downloaded at the DarkPlaces site among other places]utility to artificially brighten it ).
It seems that common consensus is that Radiant is hard to work with for many people because it can't do the 4 screen view many people are accustomed to working with.
The BSP editor that some people rave about is closed source, which like Worldcraft, is just another way of shooting yourself in the head ... if not today, then tomorrow.
A few people like Quark. I personally couldn't figure it out and it seemed hard to use but I also didn't give it a chance, but I heard it can have "issues".
This project IS open source, QuakeEd ( http://www.celephais.net/board/view_thr ... &start=142 ) and some people think it has a lot of potential. As I understand it, initial setup is confusing and lacks a nice screenshot to help someone set it up. It is my understanding that it lacks keeping textures aligned with rotation, but maybe that will eventually happen.
Out of those 2 options, I choose:
GTKRadiant 1.4
TEEHEHE
GTKRadiant 1.4
TEEHEHE
Benjamin Darling
http://www.bendarling.net/
Reflex - In development competitive arena fps combining modern tech with the speed, precision and freedom of 90's shooters.
http://www.reflexfps.net/
http://www.bendarling.net/
Reflex - In development competitive arena fps combining modern tech with the speed, precision and freedom of 90's shooters.
http://www.reflexfps.net/