Best Map Compile Utilities

Discuss the construction of maps and the tools to create maps for 3D games.
Post Reply
Team Xlink
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:45 am
Location: Michigan

Best Map Compile Utilities

Post by Team Xlink »

What are the best map compile utilities?

My goal is to find out what utilities I should use if I am trying to get as high an FPS as possible.
Last edited by Team Xlink on Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
r00k
Posts: 1111
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:39 pm

Post by r00k »

Enhanced TreeQBSP
=================

Main features are :

* Very low memory requirements, typically 10-20% of most other compilers.
* Fast processing, partly due to the low memory requirements.
* Large map capacity; most limits are beyond the Quake engine capacity.
* High precision in floating point calculations.
* MultiWAD (WorldCraft-style) and wildcard support.
* Support for default wad file if no other wads found.
* Support for Valve WAD3 format.
* Support for Hipnotic/Ritual entity rotation.
* Support for enhanced texture positioning in QuArK.
* Support for Valve 220 map format, e.g. from Hammer.
* Support for Q2/Q3 map format, e.g. from GtkRadiant.
* Support for floating point coordinates in map files (e.g. from QuArK).
* Enhanced warning/error messages.
* Enhanced leak handling.
* Progress feedback that works in any console and does not cause performance loss.
* Transparent water support.
* Cleanup of texture names.
* No hull files.
* Log file.
* INI file.


vs



Enhanced TxQBSP
===============

Main features are :

* Very low memory requirements, typically 10-20% of most other compilers.
* Fast processing, partly due to the low memory requirements.
* Large map capacity; most limits are beyond the Quake engine capacity.
* High precision in floating point calculations.
* MultiWAD (WorldCraft-style) and wildcard support.
* Support for default wad file if no other wads found.
* Support for Valve WAD3 format.
* Support for Hipnotic/Ritual entity rotation.
* Support for enhanced texture positioning in QuArK.
* Support for Valve 220 map format, e.g. from Hammer.
* Support for Q2/Q3 map format, e.g. from GtkRadiant.
* Support for floating point coordinates in map files (e.g. from QuArK).
* Enhanced warning/error messages.
* Enhanced leak handling.
* Progress feedback that works in any console and does not cause performance loss.
* Transparent water support.
* Cleanup of texture names.
* No hull files.
* Log file.

hmm, maybe its just a namechange??
xaGe
Posts: 465
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:29 am
Location: Upstate, New York
Contact:

Post by xaGe »

..Well once upon a time I thought TxQBSP was the one to support Quark's enhanced texture positioning where as TreeQBSP did not. Not sure any more though.
Team Xlink
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:45 am
Location: Michigan

Post by Team Xlink »

I edited my first post in this topic to avoid starting a new topic that was so similar.

So what are the best map compile utilities if your goal is to achieve as high an fps as possible.
Spirit
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 9:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Spirit »

The compiler does not matter as much as your map(ping style). I think it does not matter at all.
Improve Quaddicted, send me a pull request: https://github.com/SpiritQuaddicted/Quaddicted-reviews
Downsider
Posts: 621
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:35 am

Post by Downsider »

The compiler really can't magically speed up your maps..
Spike
Posts: 2914
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 3:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Spike »

LordHavoc's hmap compiler supports a bigger lightmaps extension thingie. only works with engines that support that, but it means less surface fragments and thus a bit higher framerates.
so mneh.
goldenboy
Posts: 924
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Kiel
Contact:

Post by goldenboy »

In tests, Bengt's vis tool seemed to do the best culling. I would advise to use that.

You can see how much of a map is actually rendered with an engine that lets you lock the PVS, like Tyrquake. It was pretty interesting to do this and compare the rendering of the same map compiled using different vis tools.

That will influence FPS for sure.

I think some engines also promise improved culling, but that's beyond the mapper's control (well, without applying unreasonable methods).
Downsider
Posts: 621
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:35 am

Post by Downsider »

goldenboy wrote:In tests, Bengt's vis tool seemed to do the best culling. I would advise to use that..
Good to know.
Team Xlink
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:45 am
Location: Michigan

Post by Team Xlink »

goldenboy wrote:In tests, Bengt's vis tool seemed to do the best culling. I would advise to use that.

You can see how much of a map is actually rendered with an engine that lets you lock the PVS, like Tyrquake. It was pretty interesting to do this and compare the rendering of the same map compiled using different vis tools.

That will influence FPS for sure.

I think some engines also promise improved culling, but that's beyond the mapper's control (well, without applying unreasonable methods).
Having improved culling in the engine seems like a very useful thing, do you know of any that have it?
goldenboy
Posts: 924
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:04 pm
Location: Kiel
Contact:

Post by goldenboy »

Hmm, I might have confused something, I just seemed to remember reading something like that in some engine readme. Sorry. It might have been bjp's engine, but I'm not sure at all. I'm a little out of the normal Quake scene. Don't remember too much of these things.

I should have worded that better. An ISTR would have been appropriate :)

I do definitely remember doing that vis test on one of my maps, though.
Post Reply