Increasing number of CS creators

[LuckyGirl]

Hi guys!

Within the last weeks the number of CS creators has increased quite a bit - or at least so it seems to me.

Personally I think this is fantastic, as more creators are able to provide more sets and styles :p This will also help to keep the community and individuals interested in RCT ;)

I wonder though, how come there is such a boost though? For a while I thought RCT was becoming less and less interesting to many and CS too difficult and time consuming.
Have the recent findings such as animation, etc. made the game interesting again (for many it always was interesting)?
How come so many peeps suddenly "dare" to attempt CS?

This all seems like great news for us ;) I am very amazed how quickly some of the peeps actually learn to do CS. More amazing though is the fact, that not many seem to give up anymore.

Thanks and welcome to all new creators! Please feel free to leave some feedback as to why you started CS ;)

Lucky

[Cancerbat]

I stated because I just wanted some pieces, I failed at that, but I will always keep trying.

[-Nuclear Fish-]

I started because I needed some lava particles for Frozen Meltdown which would run continuously without needing the MixMaster. Instead of just asking someone else if they would make them, I thought why not make them myself so that I get them exactly how I want them? Then I came up with the idea of just making a huge particles pack which everyone could use.

[StarRngr4.0]

Same as Nukie-Poo... I've a need for pieces that dont exist anywhere in the existing CS, and since I'd a bit of experiance in the past, both in 3d modeling, and specifically in creating some props and such for Ultimate Ride, I realised that if the pieces were to be, it would be up to me.

[LuckyGirl]

I love your attitude!
Also I think it's fine that people request/wish for scenery to be created and I flick through the thread once in a while to look for ideas, I think it is awful when people assume something will get made.
I should make myself clear here. I am not referring to normal requests, or even hugh requests. But I think it's rude when a person asks for something to be created (like complete movie themes, etc.) and gives off to creators if there is no reply within three days ;)

@TopGun - I thought there is no way I could learn it. Just keep trying ;)

[xss277x]

Well, I just want new pieces for my game that have not been made yet. The problem is, I still can't figure out how to do it. I mean, If I just wanted to do a simple wall and roof set, I could. But I can't figure out how to make anything more complex then that. Fortunately, I haven't given up. (Yet.) I'm still trying to figure out how to use Blender, and texture properly. My goal is to make a small set by the end of the year. Unfortunately for me, it doesn't seem like that is going to happen. :(

[zordork]

I was working on a park, and needed a pickett fence, but couldnt find one, and someone challenged me to make one, so I did, and this gave me the CSO Bug

[swimfreak430]

i have been playing around with sketchup for a while and created a couple of walls and other things of that nature
i havent had the time to get them in game plus im on vacation but when i get back i will play around with it

[Aceana]

Well, I'm not exactly new, but I'll post how I got started anyways.

I write novels, and I had been looking for a way to make models of my characters on my computer, thus I found Poser. Before that I had bought a copy of RCT to play in my spare time, and I quickly learned to use Shade3D (which I use to make clothes and stuff for poser) to make CS. :)

[-[A.S] Fanie-]

I'm not new but I attempted custom scenery a while back (like a year or more) and failed miserably. Marnetmar helped me with some things but it still didn't work out well. So I gave up and left these forums.

I'm still sneaking around here though :D

[madshell]

I've been a lurker for a long while. I've always thought I might try to make some, but I figured it would be so very hard to do.

Reading others posts, including yours, Luckygirl, :) I thought that I might try just putting myself through the tutorials and go for it; see what I could do.

The whole Xpcot set I'm working on is a big learning process for me, kinda in the spirit of EPCOT Center.

I have a few ideas of my own designs as well, which I may do in the times that I get stuck on Xpcot, but I've wanted to have these pieces for so long.

[reillysix]

I am making a cabin set, which I have been working on for quite a while.

[The_Cook]

I think that with the improvements Belgabor has been making to the importer, actually getting scenery ingame is getting easier. With direct import from Milkshape and automatic rotational fixups, some of the trickier steps such as conversion to .ase format using BitUrn and ensuring that the model is correctly positioned and rotated to correct for Milkshapes strange axis arrangement have pretty much vanished.

One downside is that we are seeing an increase in sets which are 1piece wonders. Although there is a buzz to seeing you're piece ingame and an even larger buzz seeing other people using it, the one piece sets are a bit of an annoyance. I think a lot of them come about because it takes so much time to get that first piece ingame that they can't then be bothered to actually flesh out the rest of a set properly.

Occasionally I worry about the quality of some sets, we've seen a couple of people try to import pieces of scenery with upwards of 12,000 polygons because they've modelled it using lots of curved surfaces. Modeling for games is an art form and ensuring that a model contains the smallest possible number of polygons is very tricky.

Another thing that I worry about is the sheer number of sets being produced. Even though the actualy model data is only loaded when needed, the more sets that are installed, the longer the game will take to load and the more memory that will be consumed just keeping track of all that scenery.

The final thing that occured to me is mature sets and versioning. We've seen a couple of instances where later versions of sets have lost various pieces or had them renamed such that parks based on the earlier set need to be extensively rebuilt. I know I've been party to this, by accidentally leaving some test pieces in a set that I've released which people have then gone on to use and complained about when the piece has disappeared from the next release. Not on the forefront of most peoples minds when they are trying to design their first scenery piece, but decent planning and naming of pieces is very useful, because once people are using them it's difficult to change them.



I have a lot of time on my hands to worry about things, don't let it put people of creating custom scenery. I hope I've raised some points which can generate further sensible debate on this subject.

[AvA]

I was starting the Bridge set because the normal bridges in RCT were getting boring, and you could make more (and better) bridges with just one set.:cool:

[Belgabor]

I have to agree with what The_Cook says.

I think that with the improvements Belgabor has been making to the importer, actually getting scenery ingame is getting easier. With direct import from Milkshape and automatic rotational fixups, some of the trickier steps such as conversion to .ase format using BitUrn and ensuring that the model is correctly positioned and rotated to correct for Milkshapes strange axis arrangement have pretty much vanished.
I hope than this is the case, it was certainly one of the reasons I started to work on the importer. (btw I added code to the svn yesterday that automatically sets the fixup when you open a 3D model file that has a known orientation. So far that only applies to ms3d).

One downside is that we are seeing an increase in sets which are 1piece wonders. Although there is a buzz to seeing you're piece ingame and an even larger buzz seeing other people using it, the one piece sets are a bit of an annoyance. I think a lot of them come about because it takes so much time to get that first piece ingame that they can't then be bothered to actually flesh out the rest of a set properly.

Occasionally I worry about the quality of some sets, we've seen a couple of people try to import pieces of scenery with upwards of 12,000 polygons because they've modelled it using lots of curved surfaces. Modeling for games is an art form and ensuring that a model contains the smallest possible number of polygons is very tricky.

Another thing that I worry about is the sheer number of sets being produced. Even though the actualy model data is only loaded when needed, the more sets that are installed, the longer the game will take to load and the more memory that will be consumed just keeping track of all that scenery.

The final thing that occured to me is mature sets and versioning. We've seen a couple of instances where later versions of sets have lost various pieces or had them renamed such that parks based on the earlier set need to be extensively rebuilt. I know I've been party to this, by accidentally leaving some test pieces in a set that I've released which people have then gone on to use and complained about when the piece has disappeared from the next release. Not on the forefront of most peoples minds when they are trying to design their first scenery piece, but decent planning and naming of pieces is very useful, because once people are using them it's difficult to change them.

I'm worried about this as well. Mind I do not want to discourage anyone to make his own set, but those are certainly points to keep in mind.

A solution would be to create a managemant application. Olmecs thread about this was quickly trashed down, but essentially I think he had a point. Not only to help noobs (which I use without any negative smack in this place) install CS, but also to easily switch sets in and out. Some advanced features that might be added to it would be live previews of the contained pieces and warning about a high poly count (ie putting parts of the dumper in it) and maybe checking park dat files for which sets they need (no idea if that is possible).

A first step would be to agree on a few basic design guidelines, mainly regarding poly count and LODs in relation to the model's size in the game, based on Frontier's original pieces to allow new CS makers to see where they stand.


I have a lot of time on my hands to worry about things, don't let it put people of creating custom scenery. I hope I've raised some points which can generate further sensible debate on this subject.
I hope I've added to this =)

[Novix]

Well, this is the reason why I will starting making custom scenery:

I always dreamed about making it, but I hadn't time to puzzle all the tutorials together. Last week I downloaded the tutorial from Battor77, and actually importing is quite simple, when you know how to do it. My first attempts crashed, and now I got my first object in game. This gives you such a 'kick'. It's like drugs ( i never used it :p ). You want to spend hours and hours on it, discover new things, functions... I agree with the_cook, that there are many '1 object packs'. I hope, one day when I will release a set, that there are many things you can use in 1 pack.
An exemple: I know Aceana Accents has been downloaded a lot, but I think the only object that people use is that 'wooden thing', that I like very much!

I'm not sure that i will release a set one day. In my opinion a set has to be perfect. If I'm not happy with the result, I wouldn't release it. Damn I'm going offtopic..

[Jag100]

Iv started ages ago almost a year now. i was apart of the great rctextended group but well as everyone knows thats gone. i now only make private CS for myself also i should be back at christmas to show you all my amazing north pole scenery :D

[NeoPuma]

I would like to start. I got a copy of blender, its just learning how to use it. The problem is, I don't have patients with things like that. I have looked at tutorials and stuff, but I just don't get it. Although, I can happily say, I have a friend visiting me soon who will teach me, so hopfully, I can get started then. But, this is a few months away yet (dammit!).

But, well done to everyone for actually taking on this 'challenge', because I find it very challenging. You guys have stuck at it and made some brilliant items making the game more realistic. Well done to you all.

[mikeyca]

In my case, I've been hoping to learn CS for a few months now, but up until last week didn't really find the time or reason to start. In the meantime, Belgabor and Jonwil increased the user-friendliness of the importer, and the number of tutorials, discoveries, question/answer threads, etc. has increased as well. Then, with my current park project, I realized that there are just some objects I need that aren't currently available and can't really be represented using existing scenery (at least not existing pieces of which I'm aware). With patience and lots of reading, CS became possible for me. Folks like Vodhin, The Cook and Belgabor have also been incredibly helpful and generous with their time in answering my questions (thanks again guys!), which made the learning process all the more bearable.

As a math teacher, it's been an extra bonus to see how mathematical the 3-D modeling really is. Knowing that 3D modeling is a direction that a significant number of my students will follow, it's another way to bring relevance to some of the material I teach (especially in Geometry).

[StayingDead]

Well i started a while back but gave up due to problems i had with the importer. But now after re-starting my park i realised how important it would be to make the peices i needed for the park. So far i've got into just making a couple of floortiles for my park but i will branch out abit sooner or later when i need to.

If it wasn't for alot of patient people for example Belgabor, Vodhin etc. who helped me alot to make this easy to understand. I doubt i would of been able to finnaly sort out my size/positioning problems i doubt many people wouldn't be able to actually start making CS.

So thankyou all Older/Newer Custom Scenery Makers who helped everyone along the way.

[Obi_Wan_Cannoli]

I started about two months ago, and just got it about a month ago...lol...

[Vodhin]

I think it's great to have all these new modelers trying things out- it is helpng in more ways that one might think: for one, as the importer gets better, there's more feedback about how intuitive the interface is as well as more suggestions about what can be done.

Folks who download custom scenery sets need to consider what sets they actually want to have, and need to know that each new set added to the game will slow down the load process.


Some of the new features available to modelers with the new importer versions include some important developments that all model makers should think hard about:

Texture OVLs: Very usefull for keeping the size of your files down. Texture OVLs are best used for textures that appear in more than one or two models: wall sets are a perfect example, but other things can also take advantage of this- plants, for example: you could use the same leafy texture , scaled larger for trees and smaller for bushes. However, it's still better to save any unique textures in its own model. And you can use both referenced textures and unique textures in the same scenery OVL.

Level Of Detail (LOD) levels are now available and it is extreemly easy to put into good use! I'm currently rebuilding my Vermont scenery and discovering things along the way- but in a nutshel, a single model can be used to create different LOD in one OVL. By planning your model using groups of meshes, you can simply have one LOD leave out certain meshes. I've been naming my meshes now based on their intended LOD and it works great.

Just keep in mind that LOD versions affect what a player sees based on their own graphics settings as well as how far away the model is from their point of view. If their graphics settings are set low, then they will see the low version of your model up close.


Alphas Using the SIAlphaLow (and the other 'Low" alpha settings) a modeler can really cut down the number of polygons needed to acheive a certain look. A quick, down and dirty method of making the needed textures is to create the really high detail model, texture it, and then take a snapshot dead on from the appropriate viewing angle. My tables have 16 sides, and that meant 16 triangles for the top- a flat surface that cried out to be reduced. I simply took a shot of the table top and turned that into an alpha set of textures. I then deleted old table top and made a single, square 2 triangle face on the top and applied the texture.

To all model makers: take a close look at Frontier's models- look for the tricks they used to get such great detail using some neat tricks. And- if you didn't actually make the model from scratch, you should give credit to the original model maker.

[RCT-Spanky]

I have started with CS a while ago because I want not always request this or that for my parks. Fortunatly some of this high talented CS-designers here fulfilled a lot of my requests in the past (some of them know this, some don't know) and I can't thank any CS-creator here enough for their great stuff.

But I failed often with using a 3D-modeler program. Any program is different in handling. One prefered Blender, the other Milkshape and the next 3D Studio Max. I have tried different versions, have read hundred pages of tutorials. With currently no good results. Why should I build a table in blender, when I see that the first object of this table (a sphere) has more polygons as Shyguys whole mainstreet-Set together. Nobody tells you in this tuts how you can reduce the polygons later.

A think that really disturbed me as a noob in CS (and I mean this in my way with this negative smack) is that you must read in so many different threads for helpful hints or you ask for the 100st time the same questions. It's great that people like The Cook discovering how the Animation works or Vodhin discoverd how Alpha Textures work perfect. But for a noob like me, it's frustrating when you don't get a single object with correct dimensions and correct textures in the game.

What I really miss here, is a clear and structured tutorial with one of this programs from the early start with making a model in a 3d-program to the end with an ready object in the game. I know, that are several tutorials exit, but for example, that great tutorial from yesmydear with the lamp, that he modeled in blender starts needs some basic knowledge in use of blender (which is in fact not very easy to use in the beginning). But his tutorial ends with the modelling. How did i get this model in the game? Or this simple example from my own experiments ... I've started today again with milkshape. My goal was to create a simple Box with a different texture on any side. I made seperate groups of each side, textured them and on the front- and backside the texture was shown correct. The textures on the left and right side are mirrored and I don't know why. I have rotated the sides with 180° and the textures are correct (after reverse the vertex-order). But where can I find some help with problems like this here? As I know, iceacts has started a tutorial for milkshape and the importer a while ago. I wish he would continue with his work.

Belgabor has done a great job with the new importer, but what this program needs is also an updated instruction-manual. If you try to get your model in the game using the latest importer and read the instructions from jonwils version you really have some problems.

[CDN1212]

I read most of the blender tutorial and I just didn't understand it. I really want to get into cs making, but It is just so confusing! Like RCT-Spanky, I have yet to find a modular program that Is somewhat understandable to me. Sketchup is the easiest one for me to use so far, but i haven't heard any cs makers recomend it so I would rather use another more popular one. I have some ideas for sets that i would make already, I just have to learn how to make it. I hope to someday get the chance to announce the completion of my first set ever.

[Aceana]

^I really like Shade, but it will cost you roughly $100. Anim8or is a really good program for beginners, though.

[Belgabor]

Sketchup is pretty good to create the basis for a model, but imho you have too little control on vertex level. I used it the first time 'for real' to create the stone lantern and had to do a lot of cleaning up in Blender afterwards. I'm not 100% sure Sketchup alone is to blame for that, maybe the Blender import script just imports too much.
There is some hope that this will get better. I talked to the developer of the collada plugin for blender (collada is an alround 3D model interchange format. It is used inside Google Earth 4 files, but not 100% correct) to get it to read the collada files Google Sketchup writes (at least after a bit of fixing). This may spare beginners the pain of uv-mapping in Blender.

[xss277x]

Well, I really like Sketchup, but I can't afford it. I tried to use Blender to UV-map an object I made in Google Sketchup, and I had no idea what I was doing, even with the tutorial right in front of me.

I also like Milkshape, but my free trial ran out, and I have a feeling it is really expensive. Also, the small windows make me feel claustrophoic. :p . And also, I don't know what size to make my objects, in any of the programs.

But the hardest thing for me...is texturing. I finally got an object in game, with a texture, but I had the hardest time doing it. I know that you can't use the textures in Sketchup, and I don't know if you can in Milkshape. (I used up my entire free trial just practing modeling) And trying to texture in Blender, as I said before was just to difficult!

[madshell]

I totally agree with what you're saying though I think I'm a bit more confident on UV mapping in Blender.

It is difficult, but if you realize that you do have the ability to go in and edit points on your map, the process starts to get a little easier. Also, using the Archimap UV Projection unwrapper has made some great maps for me. It's part of the Python scripts located in the UVs menu.


Level Of Detail (LOD) levels are now available and it is extreemly easy to put into good use! I'm currently rebuilding my Vermont scenery and discovering things along the way- but in a nutshel, a single model can be used to create different LOD in one OVL. By planning your model using groups of meshes, you can simply have one LOD leave out certain meshes. I've been naming my meshes now based on their intended LOD and it works great.

Just keep in mind that LOD versions affect what a player sees based on their own graphics settings as well as how far away the model is from their point of view. If their graphics settings are set low, then they will see the low version of your model up close.



LODs are still eluding me at the moment. Would it be too much to beg for one of your excellent tutorials on the subject, Vodhin?

[Vodhin]

LODs are still eluding me at the moment. Would it be too much to beg for one of your excellent tutorials on the subject, Vodhin?

Beg all you want- I've already written one! ;) Click Here: http://www.vodhin.net/RCT3Community/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.6

Let me know if it helps :D

[coinich]

I'm personally not bothered by the whole host of CS peeps popping up around here. It just means I have more of a selection of CS to pick and choose from! :D

[CDN1212]

I'm personally not bothered by the whole host of CS peeps popping up around here. It just means I have more of a selection of CS to pick and choose from! :D

I agree. How could it be a bad thing. The more the better.

I'm trying to get the hang of anim8or and I've been reading tutorials for it. I decided to go with Anim8or because it seems pretty simple. Once i get good at it and learn how to import, I will try a couple of my ideas for CS sets. Won't be for a while though, I just got anim8or yesterday.

[The_Cook]

I agree. How could it be a bad thing. The more the better.


With my devils advocate hat firmly on my head...

Quality vs Quantity?

As mentioned previously, the more scenery added to the game, the slower the game will run. Therefore more scenery is not necessarily a good thing. Are a dozen different sets containing a couple of mediore midway games pieces better than one set where the texture mapping is spot on, all the pieces are properly aligned and effects points have been addeed so that peeps look like they are properly interacting with the games?

Usability of pieces?

Some pieces are very tied into a recreation of a specific ride or real world park. All well and good if you're recreating that ride or park, but often not much outside of that setting. As an example take Gadgets current Space Mountain recreation, outside of a Space Mountain recreation only a small handful of the pieces are going to be of much use elsewhere. Contrast that with ShyGuy's Alpine Village packs, lots of little pieces that can be combined in a multitude of different ways and have been used to create much, much more than the original timbering usage that they were conceived for.

Which is better is a personal question. I have patience, I enjoy building things up from little pieces, therefore I prefer the sets with lots of little bits. If you don't have much patience then you'll probably prefer the sets with only a couple of big pieces, place those and you've got an instant recreation in perfect detail, but you're park will look like the next person that does the same recreation using the same few bits of scenery.

[madshell]

You would think that recreation of scenery would be a strictly exclusive part but I have found that my Spaceship Earth set can be used as a geodesic dome if it is placed below ground.

Many of the pieces I am making for the Xpcot: Spaceship Earth set could be used for unique scenery, such as the Leave a Legacy stones. (I will make them in recolour.)

In any case, it's quite easy to remove the custom scenery if there is too much lag, so I don't think we're doing a disservice at all making more than before.