dazzerfong

What game version are you running?

What version of the game are you running?

The i3 might be passable, but that 520 is going to be problematic with the game.

I got so excited with the Archiver I forgot to comment to you, didn't mean to be ignoring you like that. In any case, I'd love to load the archive into CK but I don't know how. From my research, the only reference that I found to doing such a thing was when Elianora commented on a reddit thread. The problem is that was on Skyrim, and the advice she gave (editing the CK ini) but the settings weren't in the new one. There was a different reddit post that I saw what I can put the textures folder into the data folder and the CK should detect it but not having much luck there. I'm getting tired though, I'll come back to it tomorrow. What Ethreon described was what I just posted, FYI.

It mostly bugs because they're running completely outdated copies (which usually signals something else.....). Had this issue with a few people whose guns were invisible: turns out they were all run unpatched versions. BA2 all the way. Using BA2's for textures streamlines the efficiency, while its effect on other stuff is not as significant. Furthermore, it prevents clutter when you delete files from your mod and update it. CK does it automatically: just click Create Archive. Remember to save the archives as (plugin name) - Main.ba2 and (plugin name) - Textures.ba2 for it to associate with your plugin.

OK, in that case, you can go even simpler. However, whatever you do, do not ever introduce the wrong information, only simplified information. For example: Textures: there are 3 textures used (then list what they all do, ie.) Albedo/diffuse: the plain colour of your part Normal map: used to control lighting interactions of mesh Specular: how shiny a part is Gloss: how 'oily' or matte a part is

Qu A few problems: Meshes are a surface representation of an object. Rather than jumping into Outfit Studio which has no context, explain the nuances of operating with a mesh, because the lead-up makes no sense to anyone who has never used OS. Textures are simply images used for the context of shaders. They are not 'layers' as you call it. Your texture definitions are wrong: Normal maps represent normal information, or the shading's directionality) Diffuse (more accurately, albedo map) show the non-reflected colour information Specular maps show the intensity of reflected colour. Gloss maps (the green channel of the '_S' map) are used to handle how rough or smooth the microsurface of the material is, thus affecting how well-defined the reflections are. Textures do not have to be square, just the dimensions have to be a power of 2. That 'square design' is called a UV map. That more or less projects the surface into a 2D representation (U,V). Besides that, it's not too bad, but I'm trying hard to understand the agenda of the article. Is it to teach the basics of 3D modelling and texturing, or how to mix-and-match body types? Because one half of your article does not address the other.

Sure you would be allowed to. People reverse engineer stuff all the time. It'd be a dick move to post a mod that does *exactly* the same thing. Especially if you learned about how to do that from another mod. Also some folks have the same idea, and simply don't realize another person has made such a mod. Just because a person got to a point first, doesn't give them any right to plant a flag and prevent others from re-creating their mod. Finally, I don't think Nexus ever wants to get in the position where a moderators have to deal with that garbage. I can already see the arguments about what upload dates to check. Like if the person used Beth.net or the site that shall not be named. Now if said person literally downloaded that persons mod and modified it, that's another ball of wax. Because at that point, without permission, stole his/her work. Not being a modder myself, I assume there's some way of telling if a mod was downloaded, repackaged and then re-uploaded as opposed to someone uploading a "unique version." In this context, an M4 made from one person would look the same as the other right? Or are there subtle differences that would be what determines if it's stolen or not? Due to the nature of porting, textures rarely go unchanged (or else it would look like lineart, lol). For most, some semblance of tweaking will be necessary to kinda force it to look alright. Not to mention, when porting meshes, if the sizes, positions or name of the parts are exactly the same, that's usually a dead giveaway. However, besides that, it's pretty hard to argue either way, because the ported doesn't own the mesh. Yes, they ported it, but they have no ownership of it.

So, let's assume they did steal it (they didn't): 1. Why does it look so different? 2. Why are the textures so different? http://i.imgur.com/5MoJsng.jpg http://i.imgur.com/1M4qZJK.jpg 3. One inspired the other. In this case, it's actually the opposite: Beth inspired Eli. Conclusion: get your eyes checked. No, really, it's for your safety: it Eli's version and Beth's version looks the same to you, for matter of public safety, get your eyes checked. Whether or not they took ideas is not is irrelevant here. Nobody cares: there's a reason ideas can't be copyrighted. Because everyone and their dog claims to have been the one who came up with the idea. It's the execution which matters.

Find your bottleneck first. To find it, see if either your CPU core(s) are maxed to 100% or your GPU is. If your CPU is, overclock your CPU. If your GPU is, overclock your GPU. If you enjoy pissing contests, overclock both. Otherwise, don't bother. As for damage to components, overclocking by definition will degrade your components faster. The question is how much​. Nobody knows, but sticking to conservative numbers (<80*C for most components) and acknowledging manufacturer's recommendations (i.e. < 1.45V for Skylake chips). Skyrim funnily never really stuttered for me: instead, it just had low frames on my old PC (E8500, 3.16 Ghz, 9800 GTX+ @ 738 Mhz). On a 6700k (4.7 Ghz) + 970 (1500 Mhz), practically never.

Animations don't work like that: you can't easily port animations unless the rig is identical (or at worst, extremely similar). ​Weapons, on the other hand: fairly trivial to do, but it'll look extremely bad in FO4. Not to mention, not exactly legal unless you're doing it for fun only and it's all private.

1. You can't: it's always the model that has to move. 2. That's because if you use the SMG animation set, the arms are further away. If you use anything else, it looks normal.

You can definitely get that lower. I'd say for that model, considering its lack of geometric complexity, 20-30k will do fine. Don't be afraid if errors show up: that's what edge groups and normal maps are for. Keep that as your high-poly model, and make a new model which is merely a silhouette of that.

1. Relatively simple to do: you can even make a batch file to do it too. 2. Much harder, but possible: run retopo tools through as many meshes that it could work on. 3. It's already doing that: uGridsToLoad governs exactly what you're describing (except for the directional thing, which still gets culled but is technically in-memory) 4. Nope. It's placed on the GPU for a reason: because GPU's are really good at doing many dumb things. A CPU is good at doing not too many smart things at once. I can tell you fairly safely it's not going to work well, even if you can accomplish all of the above.

You can go pretty wild these days. I've hit 80k for a fully-kitted out weapon with zero problems from the XB1/PS4 crew. Anyway, why you need normal maps: Normal map: http://i.imgur.com/Ze554xm.jpg No normal map: http://i.imgur.com/cRUiIYW.jpg Notice the weird lighting going on with the no normal-map model.