Is it me or is QuArk flakey as a fish?
by FruitBatInShades · in Artist Corner · 06/15/2004 (7:35 am) · 7 replies
I'm trying to learn QuArk but it seems really unreliable to me. Whenever I snap to grid, all my walls break apart! Surely it's meant to so the opposite.
I am trying to create holes/doorways etc. I draw a cube, place it in the right place (after serious fiddling) and subtract the shape. But nothing ever ties up properly, I keep having to fiddle with the polys and they never seems to line up properly.
Tell me I'm wrong and I'm missing something but I seem to keep trying to do simple things and my map does something wierd elsewhere! Are there any good tutorials I've only found the garagegames one (bit advanced at the mo) and the one on the Quark site. Are there any tut's that explain these issues, how to resolve them or one that takes me through building a level?
I am trying to create holes/doorways etc. I draw a cube, place it in the right place (after serious fiddling) and subtract the shape. But nothing ever ties up properly, I keep having to fiddle with the polys and they never seems to line up properly.
Tell me I'm wrong and I'm missing something but I seem to keep trying to do simple things and my map does something wierd elsewhere! Are there any good tutorials I've only found the garagegames one (bit advanced at the mo) and the one on the Quark site. Are there any tut's that explain these issues, how to resolve them or one that takes me through building a level?
#2
06/15/2004 (11:40 am)
I just tried hammer, that seems like a much more solid product :) Everything snaps together and is a lot more userfriendly.
#3
Quark is much more competent and complex IMHO, but then again that might be subjective.
Keep in mind that there is still some issues regarding the licensing of Hammer, AFAIK basically you are not allowed to release anything publically that is made with Hammer unless it is for Half-Life.
Be warned :-)
06/15/2004 (11:51 am)
Mmm, that was my initial tought as well but after reviewing some threads that discussed the license of Hammer I decided to try out Quark and I don't regret that descision.Quark is much more competent and complex IMHO, but then again that might be subjective.
Keep in mind that there is still some issues regarding the licensing of Hammer, AFAIK basically you are not allowed to release anything publically that is made with Hammer unless it is for Half-Life.
Be warned :-)
#4
Addendum: oh, and sometimes, it seems after duplicating a brush, it's hard to get the slice tool to cut it. Save often.
06/15/2004 (6:59 pm)
I find QuArk to work well, and it reminded me a lot of Hammer/WC in some ways, but, to me; I like it better, and appreciate the split-pane setup(love a cascading tree...:), which allows me to throw stuf around and use it more like a Winprog...drag/drop, marvelous...:):), and the only flakiness I've encountered is with some texture rendering in the Perspective view...textures on some brushes snap to a greenish highlight and a unselect usually clears it. It takes a tiny bit more to organize and setup, but is worth delving into, imho. Cheers.Addendum: oh, and sometimes, it seems after duplicating a brush, it's hard to get the slice tool to cut it. Save often.
#5
06/22/2004 (6:51 am)
GRRRRRR...ARAGGGGHHHHHH. I HATE quark :'( I keep breaking things apart. Why doesn't it snap objects together properly. Lwaks, leaks, leaks...Wahhhh!Quote:Rex:Save often.Says it all Rex!
#6
The key here is to try not to use the snap function. Set your grid to a nice power of two and work around that (always resetting your grid to smaller numbers when smaller pieces are needed). But, sometimes snapping is a must, so I'd recommend trying the "glue" function instead. Like a lot of QuArK, you'll need to play around with it. But, it usually involves picking a poly side you're happy with, "tagging" it, and click either on the other poly's side or its vertex and hitting "glue to tagged".
Also, I understand 6.4 may have some floating point bugs. So, you might stick with 6.3.x.
-Eric F
06/22/2004 (1:37 pm)
I love QuArK. Which, btw, has an "autosave" feature. ;)The key here is to try not to use the snap function. Set your grid to a nice power of two and work around that (always resetting your grid to smaller numbers when smaller pieces are needed). But, sometimes snapping is a must, so I'd recommend trying the "glue" function instead. Like a lot of QuArK, you'll need to play around with it. But, it usually involves picking a poly side you're happy with, "tagging" it, and click either on the other poly's side or its vertex and hitting "glue to tagged".
Also, I understand 6.4 may have some floating point bugs. So, you might stick with 6.3.x.
-Eric F
#7
06/23/2004 (9:38 am)
I like Hammer very much myself. Also make sure you get the updated exe from collective.valve-erc.com/ Its a beta but it has many bugfixes and is more stable. 
Torque Owner Jorgen Ewelonn
Avoid CTRL dragging objects at all costs.
The grouped objects should still snap to grid unless you have changed grid-size during creation of the group.
Instead of Subtracting a brush from another, use diggers or negative brushes instead. These don't break geometry until export thus giving you better control over alignement of your windows and doors.
I don't know of any tutorials tough ... someone else ??