if you smash CTRL-S, you select all textures of all BSP

But you can even improve the lighting on BSP, by changing the 'LightMap', under surface properties. When lowered, this will sharped the light falling upon the surface, making it look alot more realistic. I used this for ALL visible textures in DM-B-Ancient. But there's a downside.

I changed all textures from the normal 32 to 8. And the map size went from 18 mb to 22 mb. Now I've got them set up to 16, they still look cool and the map size isn't too big.

UE2.5 uses lightmaps? Ouch. . .

Why ouch? I dont get it

And I use the UE 3.0

Depends on the way lightmaps are implemented; as a multi-texture or a second world entity. I prefer the looks and functionality of realtime lighting calculation any day.

I see, yeah UT engine uses a pre-rendered lighting on the BSP and staticmeshes, but real time lighting on players, bots, pickups and other moving stuff. It does BSP better then staticmeshes.

You see what was so slow about this map is that the static meshes lighting is what was slow, it took a long time to render the lighting...

BSP lighting is NOT realtime but increases precache time map size and gives every edge of a brush has a seem which is BAD... Pound for Pound statics are much faster in ratio to BSP, as you can see my first try at a fully static mesh map didn't go so well but i learned how thing work and how to make it better, which leads me to my next comment...

Understand that the plan behind all the maps iv'e made was not to make a final professional map with no problems, The plan was to practice new stuff, this map didn't go so well because i tried some big thing that a had'nt tried yet and had no experience so it went bad...

Unlike DS2 where i was only trying things i allready have experience with and so it went well...

And as allways the problems you guys have help me by telliing me what is bad...

the map file size and building time aren't a too big problem.

All official maps out of the game are bsp'd too.
Why the editor have bsp, if its worse then staticmeshes?

Anyways, I cant see anything wrong with BSP lighting compared to static mesh lighting. From what I know, BSP lighting is much and much more pretty then any staticmesh
Unless your going to use textures for the shadowed parts. But that means a texture file for the whole map.

I did see a lighting bug with brushes however, it gives a stroke of sunlight at the edge of a surface, which sux.
But that's why you can fill the corners with staticmeshes, to add detail and to fix this bug, no?


Well, I dont think I can change your opinion on staticmeshes and BSP lighting... But could you tell me what is the big difference?

BSP is just an algorithm that has the info on a level geometry. It is entirely up to the rendering engine how lighting is handled, BSP or static meshes have nothing to do with it at all as far as I know.

Dont get me wrong BSP can be great if used carefully....only UTs engine is not good with BSP.. but you still need it for any map to work..

However statics are more relaible and faster in ratio.. plus look better.. only a bit more fiddle...

Maybe when you make your own you will understand a little more....

no, I understand. Staticmeshes are easier for the game to render, I always try using staticmeshes for details where BSP would lag everything out. But BSP is ALOT easier to optimize. Making a map with great balance between BSP and Statics is best. The hallways and rooms with BSP (just plain boxes) and then staticmeshes to detail the walls. (adding depth and stuff).

Though, if you'd ask me, BSP has better lighting.

Yes BSP may be eisier to work with but is limited.

However your maps are good example of how BSP can work well... youve managed

Only i have strayed from it.. because it is the way of the future if you would...

HL2s engine has better BSP than ut.. and use alot of statics... same with doom 3 and quake 4..

The Doom 3 engine doesn't use static meshes at all. You can call the geometry that if you wish, but UT's way of doing it is an isolated case.