Francis90Bats

[Francis90b 748]

2nd thing to say about scaling:

Upon looking for references about my current project, i realized that LOT sizes might really change from place to place, and there's no such thing as a "base parcel" from which all other parcel sizes are derived...that's true in NYC's Greenwich village, at least, i found lots being 19', 21,08', 24' 25,75' and so on large.

My conclusion would be that i give up the idea of a base sub-lot size determining all the others, and have more freedom with lot sizes.

This, however, doesn't mean that i might use a size like 7,14315 because i feel an odd attraction to that number - i think that some common denominator would be needed in order to keep things reasonable.

In real life, meters or foots are the measurement units.In SC4, and to my purposes, the unit of measurement could be the SC4 slab (that is, the square tiles composing the maxis default sidewalk texture, 1/10 of a SC4 tile, that is, 1,6 mtrs).

This, of course, makes things more complex than i first planned, but i also realize that things are, IRL, way more complex than my first system was.

  Edited August 5, 2012 by Francis90b  

[Francis90b 748]

I took some references as the basis for my rowhouses.Those will be BATed as closely as possible to their size, while keeping a size that could make them useable without too much trouble.

And, this is also what i'm going to do with all the models that are based upon some RL reference.

This model derives from one of the reference - and it's BATed very close to it's RL scale.

Now, you might paste this screenie into the game, and notice a couple of interesting things....i will look forward to your feedback.

End note:The model that i've shown in previous post is also going to be remodelled closer to reference building scale.

  Edited August 9, 2012 by Francis90b  

[Sgt Pepper 864]

You talk perfection!

The modeling looks really nice. If I was on my desktop right now, I'd probably paste that onto an ingame shot right away. It's zoom 5 right? Just assuming.

Because of its size, I'm guessing it'd grow in low density zones too right? I have a few row homes that do that, which is fits areas that I want to be urban but not with towering apartments just yet.

Can't wait to see more.

[Francis90b 748]

Yeah, it's zoom5.

5 of them would fill a 2x2 lot.

I was told that growing stage decides the type of zone where a BAT is going to grow.Personally, i've tried playing a bit with the "capacity satisfied" (the number of sims that could fit into a residential building, or the number of jobs of commercial ones), and i've found them growing in lower or higher density types.

I don't think, though, that model size is going to influence that.I can do an 1x1 cube, and then modd it so that it could hold 10000 sims...and the game will buy it.

It's a real pity the game does not have something like "lower mid density" and "higher mid density", that would make it easier to grow rowhouses and apartments at the same time...however, i would think it would be best to have them as mid density...i understand your point, but who would like to see a slice of Greenwich village growing in the middle of his-her suburbs and exurbs ?

[Sgt Pepper 864]

Haha I can see it now, within a grassy field with these little houses spaced out so far apart, there's a sudden Greenwich Village block.

I think if you modeled a cube and gave it that many jobs, but the cube was small enough it'd still grow in low density. I have a few buildings that do that in my game, where the BATer made the building a prop and had a tiny cube underneath it modded. I had like a over 10 story pencil tower growing in suburban commercial areas. Even so with this maybe 10 12 story apartment in low density areas, because of the little invisible cube... Sneaky cube.

[T Wrecks 10,210]

In fact, the Lot Editor has some internal rules according to which it assigns densities and stages (without telling you so). However, there is no hardwired connection whatsoever. You could easily mod a huge skyscraper to grow on low density in stage 1, or a tiny bungalow to grow on high density exclusively, and only after you've reached stage 8.

The default buildings are organised in a way that stages 1-2-3 grow on low density only, stages 4-5-6 mostly require medium-density lots, and stages 7 and 8 are mostly comprised of buildings that grow on high-density lots only.

Sgt Pepper, you're perfectly right with that "little cube" experience. The LE thinks "little cube = tiny building = low density, low stage", and there you go. You could do the same in reverse with a tiny building rendered inside an insanely huge LOD.

Growth stage cannot influence any decisions taken by the Lot Editor because it is assigned by the LE and doesn't enter the equation before.

In any case, I'd never trust an unintelligent tool that cannot consider complex conditions and contexts. <= yay for alliterations!

[Francis90b 748]

Hmm, is there any way to bypass lot editor?

Anyways, i would repeat my invitation to take my rowhouse, and put it in game screenies .

  Edited August 10, 2012 by Francis90b  

[nofunk 1,933]

Well, actually it's quite incorrect to say that most people model things to RL dimensions.IRL very few things in reality are 8, or 16, or 32 mtrs wide, and while some might get close to those dimensions, if you want to model them then you need to do them slightly bigger or smaller (e.g. the 7,62 to 8,0 mtrs situations - which, in a BAT, meant 0,15 mtrs more floor height - not much, but you can still feel it somehow).

Sometimes, also, you need to compare your stuff also with stuff that had been done before, maybe by someone who wasn't as faithful to model to RL dimensions, or at least try to, but you can't really do anything about it, 'cause it would require you to offer an alternative to dozens or hundreds of BATs.

So, the problem is about having to mediate between three different "realities" at once - it doesn't always turn out nice, does it? But i had some stuff already done, so one thing is realizing something's not right when you've just begun, and another is realizing it when you have passed that moment.

My overscaling problems were about the NYC commercial buildings i did.The ones i've shown in my thread usually looked overscaled if compared to AG BATs, slightly bigger if compared with some BSP BATs like the Knoll, and ok to slightly bigger if compared to some Smalltown BATs (i talk about the stuff i usually use, of course).

They were usually modelled according to the 25ft to 8mtrs rule, while proportions were retained.

Speaking about those specific models, i could model them to their exact dimensions, gaining a better visual comparison with other stuff, but losing 8 mtrs full widht, that made them usable in game and functional to my aims.

I would have two possibilities:

First, introduce other sizes, 7,6 or whatever needed, and model things to exact rl dimensions.But it would make my work more difficult cause it's harder to fill a SC4 lot with them, and therefore estabilishing a system from them - and estabilishing a system means to make them being useable aside from their specific lot and small universe, that's why i did elaborate a system in first place.

Also, there's a point about integration with SC4 environment - it's quite easy to see how an 8 mtrs building could fit into a game that was built on 16 mtrs - maybe someone split their parcel, or maybe SC4 tiles covers two 8 mtrs parcels, and the base parcel was of 8 mtrs even if Maxis didn't told us ? - you see, it's easy to invent a tale to make it fit into the system.

"Make sure what you do fits with what had been done before, for there is widsom and greatness" - mine is an exaggerated and negative way to look at this way of reasoning, yet i think in this case it might be the most valid path.

Second, model things according to their sizes, and then doing some modifications that could enlarge them so that they could fit the whole 8 mtrs widht (e.g. adding another row of windows to a building) - i would need to take each building, analyze it and then design a modification that could work - this is time and energy expensive, and also it's not certain at all it could be successful - if you modify a boulding, you need to be very careful about what you do, and it's quite easy to alter it beyond it's nature or what made it look particular or nice (e.g. what would it happen if you added another 80 floors to the empire state building, or chopped the cupola off the US capitol?) .So, that's a very tricky path as well.

Will i work again on them? I don't grant anything, the roads i've shown are very tricky.Other than this, i think it would be nice finishing what i've shown, plus other things on my HD that encountered similar issues.

I'd say there's a 75% possibility that what i've done won't be released - and if the other 25% happens to be the future, then redesigning efforts to 50-75% of the models might not be successful.

Francis, you make some very good points in this post, but I am a bit disappointed by the conclusion you draw.

I agree that modeling real life buildings for the game requires give-and-take, and sometimes requires us to modify buildings to fit the parameters of the game. However, I think that often there are creative solutions to these issues that can allow a modeler to meet the needs of the game, while at the same time honoring the integrity of the building they are modeling. I also think that one does not need to abandon reality, or ignore true dimensions when modeling a building.

When I decide to create a real life building, I collect reference photos, use Google Earth to identify the building's footprint, and use Photoshop and other tools to identify the true dimensions of windows, ornamentation, and other building elements. On true re-creations, I probably spend more time measuring dimensions than I do actually modeling the building. My measurements are often within 0.05m-0.1m of the true, real life dimensions (if not spot-on). So at least in my case, I DO model things to real life dimensions: if a window is 2m tall by 1.2 m wide in real life, then that is precisely how I will model it in 3ds max.

That said, you are correct that real life buildings often do not conform to 8m / 16m / 32m widths, i.e., game dimensions. In these cases, I think there are ways to make things conform while still honoring the original building. For example, on my current project, 826 N. Plankinton, I modeled the building to true dimensions, but the building is only 13m wide, which left a 3m gap. Instead of adding an extra bay of windows, or trying to stretch the building horizontally, I simply added an outdoor seating area. I also chopped off some of the back of the building, because the real life dimensions would exceed a 2-deep lot, but not sufficiently fill a 3-deep lot. While these are alterations of the original building, I don't think they detract in any substantial way from the building itself, yet allows it to work in the game.

In another case, with my Finch & Co. model, I did in fact alter the building facade by adding a single column of windows to the west side of the building. However, the rest of the building's dimensions are true to life, and IMO the extra bay does not take away from the original building. In the case of JG Haddock, as much as everyone (me included) would have loved it to be wall-to-wall, the dimensions just didn't work, so it isn't wall-to-wall.

As a final note, while I tend to choose buildings to model based on what I like, I am always cognizant of the game's parameters when selecting a building to model. There are buildings I would love to BAT but probably won't because their dimensions just don't work in the game. Conversely, I have modeled buildings that I wasn't passionate about because I determined they would work well with the game's grid, and were at least somewhat interesting. There's always a give and take.

Ultimately, I guess all of this is my way of saying that you are totally right that it can be a struggle to model real life buildings for the game, and that as modelers, we are always making compromises with our BATs. But I think it is a shame to make such wonderful models and then not to release them because they don't meet some particular idea of perfection. And trust me, I am a perfectionist too and understand how frustrating it can be to compromise on quality or accuracy, but as they say, nothing's perfect. Everything I have seen you produce has been top-notch -- indeed some of the best modeling on this site! -- and my only hope is that you allow us all to enjoy it in the game!

Incidentally, I put together a little collection of mine and Jasoncw's buildings, and photoshopped your models in with them, and they look fantastic! The floor heights and other dimensions line up perfectly!

[Francis90b 748]

Thanks for your post, Nolan.

Your considerations are spot on, and i don't actually want giving up on those BATs - however i would like to follow my idea of perfection, even if i'm perfectly aware that without results, any idea remains just a fanciful delusion.

The photo you posted, with a mock up of the rescaled-remodelled buildings:

So, changes for each building, started with the left-most one, going towards the red one:

1) 20 John street: BATed widht 8,0mtrs, RL widht 24,92', proposed new widht 7,6 mtrs.

2) 34 W 38th street: BATed widht 8,0 mtrs, RL widht 23' proposed new widht 7 mtrs.

3) 36 W 38th street: BATed widht 8,0 mtrs, RL widht 21', proposed new widht 6,4 mtrs.

4) 41 W 34th street: BATed widht 6,0 mtrs, RL widht 24', proposed new widht 7,2 mtrs.

5) 13 W 38th street: BATed widht 6,0 mtrs, RL widht 18,75', proposed new widht 5,6 mtrs.

6) 26 W 38th street: BATed widht 8,0 mtrs, RL widht 25', proposed new widht 7,6 mtrs.

7) red one, based on 17 John street: unchanged scale and widht.

As you could see, even a difference as small as 0,4 mtrs might be noticeable...when i rescaled the model to their new widhts, most of the time i had to rescale them to 90-95% of their size...still, do you see the difference?

Now, you might tell me they look too small.However, if the buildings next to them are modelled to correct dimensions, that's how they would actually look like - if you find that odd, it's matter of habit and expectation, more than true fact.

I could understand that this should spring a lot of objections, one of them, prolly the most important, that it wouldn't fit as expected with other custom content...however, i'd like to ask you a question: where ever we would be if we based our BATing solely on how we would expect things to look like? How would modelling look like? How would material tweaking look like? We would prolly miss a lot...

  Edited August 18, 2012 by Francis90b  

[Francis90b 748]

Ok, so, i have some plans for the future - concerning finishing and expanding the selection of commercial buildings i attempted to do - but before them, i'd like cleaning up my plate a bit.

One thing i think i should finish, or at least move forward with, is my tunnel project.So, here are some questions:

1) I would like to know the exact dimensions of SC4's subway tubes.The reason is that part of the model would be visible in underground view, and i'd like things to fit as seamless as possible.

From eyeballing, i got the impression that a subway tube is as wide as the standard widht of SC4 roads traffic lanes standard widht, that would be a total 9,6 mtrs (a).I also got the impression that the subway tubes are at -15.5 mtrs or somewhat like that (b).

If you have more accurate informations, please share.

(a) Some math:a standard SC4 road takes one tile (16 mtrs) and is composed by two lanes, and two sidewalks, each being composed by two 1,6 mtrs tiles - therefore, the widhtt of the road lanes could be obtained by doing 16-(1,6x4)=9,6 mtrs - that's how i got that number.

(b) From eyeballing i had to guess they followed the same standard as in El rail (+15,5), just below ground rather than above it.

2) Someone once tried doing sub-surface railroads eye-candy pieces - i might try doing something similar for ramps and approaches, therefore i might look into that.If someone remembers about that project, could he-she please give me the "juice" of what it took - what was necessary to do, and how could it work?

3)Also, it is possible to connect two puzzle pieces or TEd Lots one after another, with no gap between them?

[T Wrecks 10,210]

Phew, I'm afraid I won't be able to answer most of your questions.

As for 3), two transit-enabled lots cannot be placed one after another. Puzzle pieces can be joined seamlessly, that's how GLR used to work before it was draggable.

[Francis90b 748]

Thanks, TWrecks!

I took a look at puzzle pieces modding.IDK what to say about it, the process seems fairly clear to me, however what i'd like to do would require the modding of several puzzle pieces, so i'm not too confident about trying it.

I guess i might consider using transit-enabled lots to get the result, this would require having TE'd lots with overhanging models to cover the "gaps" in the places where connecting road network tiles would be located.

Now, is a one tile gap between two different transit-enable lots enough for them to be connected and work properly?

And, should i take any care about using non-original network types, like NWM? - I plan to build the whole so that 3 lane NWM OWRs could (should, actually) be used as it's connecting road network type.

  Edited October 7, 2012 by Francis90b  

[T Wrecks 10,210]

Yes, a gap of 1 tile will suffice. What you should always remember in case of TE'd lots, though, is that they influence the traffic simulator. Any "road" tiles on a TE'd lot are not treated by the game in the same manner as tiles of actual road. As soon as traffic reaches a TE'd lot, it is basically teleported to the edge where it can (a) leave the lot, and (b) take the shortest route to its destination.

I don't know what you're going for, but if it will only be compatible with the NWM, then it will of course be rather highly specific.

[Francis90b 748]

What i'm going for:

I'm not going to include just the tunnel portal, but all the possible road access to it (e.g. a couple of ramps, an access plaza, and toll booths), and other things that would be needed, IRL, for it to work (e.g. service vehicle parking, ventilation towers, an administration building).

Everything will be made in pieces.

All the road sections could be either TE'd lots, or puzzle pieces.The tunnel portal will work as a road to subway transition.Everything else will be ploppable landmarks with jobs.

Perhaps a MML would be nice to keep all things together, and avoid unnecessarily clogging game menus.

NWM:

Yep, if i modd the pieces as TE'd lots NWM OWRs would be necessary to join them together - and this would make it quite specific.

What if i modd the pieces as puzzle pieces?

[Francis90b 748]

Tunnel:Scaling it back, and starting it.

Since the tunnel project would require me to experiment in some things i never did before (e.g. creating from scratch good-looking road textures, and not extracting them out of a .dat file), and getting my hands on puzzle pieces - therefore it would be better to scale down my plans - from a sprawling set of modular pieces to just two or three, to get an idea about the things i should do.

I found a small tunnel that could be a good reference for what i'd like to do - the Bankhead tunnel in Mobile, AL.

It starts in the middle of an avenue in downtown Mobile (i would need to make a custom road texture needed there, the only thing transit piece could think about is the tram to subway in avenue transition piece in NAM), then goes underwater, and comes out to the other side with something that, for SC4 purposes, could be compared to the standard tunnel or underpass pieces.

So, the pieces of the project would be the following:

1) A puzzle piece, avenue to subway - six lanes in total, two for each direction, and two for the tunnel.

2) A ventilation building, likely to be a close copy of the Bankhead's one.

3) A road to subway piece.

Speaking about the architectural style, i won't recreate the architecture of the Bankhead tunnel - i would rather experiment with some desing and style solutions i'd like to use in later tunnel projects.

Right now, i've started to create the avenue + tunnel approach piece.

I've been using splines to draw sidewalks and road lines - then they will be rendered, the render put in Photoshop, and tweaked to become the road texture.

[Francis90b 748]

I need to model a corbel for a BAT, however i'm having a bit of trouble with that.

The corbel should have a curved section on it's side, and a front section having flutings on it, more or less like the corbels shown supporting the cornice on this building:

If the corbel had no ornament on it's front side, i'd have modelled it as a spline, and then extruded it as needed.

Flutings forced me to take a different approach, that is, to model a series of splines that would depict the profile of the corbel at different points (e.g. at the corbel's edge, where fluting begins, when it reaches maximum depth, and so on) - then attach them together and apply a cross section modifier to it - then apply a surface modifier on the top of it, and then convert the result into an editable poly.

I got rid of the existing smoothing groups, and applied a turbosmooth modifier to the poly - problem is, shading on it is quite odd, especially at the bottom:

Aaron suggested me to check for smoothing groups, but resetting them and then applying them again did not go as expected.

The model shown there is a tiny detail, 0,2x0,5 mtrs...however, it shows me a problem i could encounter in any case, should i model a tiny corbel or an aircraft carreer....therefore, i'd be interested in looking for some way to fix it.

Despite knowing in theory about loft or sweep, i never managed to get the expected results from them...it could be said they were fun to look at, but not fit for what i was aiming for .

So, i'd like asking you for some other quick, effective and reliable way to model things like this.

EDIT:

Other than this, i'd also like to know how people BATing modular models, like airport terminals, sea walls and similar, can make their models bleand seamlessly.

If i recall correctly, the trick should be to make a model that's slightly bigger than the area it is expected to fit, crop the LODS so that they include just that area, and then there shouldn't be any seam between models once they're put one next to each other - am i correct about this?

[Aaron Graham 4,417]

How does the corbel look in the render up close?