Skybox Scaling

[Floofies 2,470]

I don't see what you're trying to do scaling down the marker if not to make a smaller planet.

You've said you needed to make Threshold smaller, but then said you don't need a smaller planet.

Then you want better quality, but not a higher res bitmap.

What exactly is it you're trying to accomplish.

Scaling down the puffed up attachment point isn't making sense for me, I apologize I'm unable to understand what you're getting at. What's the end result, and I may be able to lend my knowledge in the situation.

Right now: A small resolution bitmap is being expanded by default, causing loss of quality while also being too big for my uses. Any sufficiently complicated bitmap is made blurry.

End result: The stock resolution bitmap for threshold stays same resolution, but it's presentation in the game is smaller (and thus not puffed up/higher quality). Minor details come into focus more easily.

From what I've read: A higher resolution bitmap will increase quality, but not shrink the size of the planet. Making the planet inside of the bitmap smaller will make the planet smaller, but decrease quality even further. Maybe I'm confused about the offered solutions?

[DeadHamster 954]

Do both? Increase the resolution to give you the ability to include more details, while shrinking the overall size of the planet on the bitmap making it smaller in-game. Thus, you end up with a bitmap getting stretched half as much as the stock, and the overall appearance of the planet is that it takes up less room in the sky.

Besides that, yes the only option is to edit the model of the sky's actual model, not the skybox which is different. As you seem against this the above is your next best alternative, however adjusting the size of the model is really the best option.

[Floofies 2,470]

Do both? Increase the resolution to give you the ability to include more details, while shrinking the overall size of the planet on the bitmap making it smaller in-game. Thus, you end up with a bitmap getting stretched half as much as the stock, and the overall appearance of the planet is that it takes up less room in the sky.

Besides that, yes the only option is to edit the model of the sky's actual model, not the skybox which is different. As you seem against this the above is your next best alternative, however adjusting the size of the model is really the best option.

Ohh I see. I didn't think of that! I'll try it and see how it looks.

How would I go about editing the sky model?

[DeadHamster 954]

If you can, export the levels\blah\sky mod2 through HMT and edit with modeler.

If you can't, you're stuck using CE tools.

[Floofies 2,470]

If you can, export the levels\blah\sky mod2 through HMT and edit with modeler.

If you can't, you're stuck using CE tools.

Thanks.

While we're here... Eschaton is giving me grief with injecting DDS files. Now, this isn't because I don't know how to use it (I think). I'm editing lightmaps and the very first one is 256x128px, format 5.6.5 DDS, no mipmaps, but eschaton keeps telling me the file dimensions are too large. I have no idea what it's talking about because I never changed the dimensions, and they're the same as the original.

[Sceny 3,138]

Injecting DDS files has never worked for me in Eschaton, and injecting image files reduces the quailty of the bitmap. Your best off using HMT.

[Floofies 2,470]

Injecting DDS files has never worked for me in Eschaton, and injecting image files reduces the quailty of the bitmap. Your best off using HMT.

Yeah Tucker says Eschaton has that problem. Using HMT then!

[WaeV 5,049]

Injecting DDS files has never worked for me in Eschaton, and injecting image files reduces the quailty of the bitmap. Your best off using HMT.

Can we update Eschaton purely to add this warning? So many people have run into this issue I assumed it was common knowledge by this point

[DeadHamster 954]

Somebody needs to write code for a batch bitmap injector. One that opens a bitmap, stores the number of sub-bitmaps and their position, and then allows importing of one image after another. Doing them one at a time is and has always been incredibly tedious, it's a program I've always wanted and a feature that should have been implemented at some point at some time for some program.