DogtoothCG

Edit: I have no interest in re-iterating myself multiple times on the subject. Just contact support for questions.

And that is all I need to hear to know just how little you understand the Creation Engine or the Creation kit but, Sure lets get back to topic. Where is the proof that the Creation Club will ruin the community or even have any effect on it other then a few mods falling behind a Pay Wall? I suspect it will have little impact on the PC players at all but, for console players it's could be a game changer. (But I know from other topics how you feel about anyone who chooses to play on a console so you don't even need to bother telling me you don't care about them!) Where is your proof that the CC won't destroy the community? Guess we'll see. We're all just making assumptions here. The response has been pretty negative so far. Those that support this are obviously in the minority. I think this is a crap move by Bethesda. And with their track record of treating smaller developers, I have little faith they won't take this as an opportunity to screw over the modding community as a whole. So a handful of modders get a little money? Whoopdeefreakingdoo. There are literally thousands of modders who won't. And some of those may end up receiving C&D letters because their mods may look or act similar to what will be on the CC. If money is involved, you can bet they'll pursue some sort of action. Even if it's just threatening letters. Hell, I've done that with video work I've done with people who stole my material. It's very simple. Bethesda will have no issue doing it. So...no. In my opinion, it's just not worth it. It's going to cause a rift in the community. Worse than the last time they tried this. You want to make money modding games? Pick another game. There are plenty out there. Once again, neither Bethesda, nor any affiliated parties has any intentions of sending any C&D's based on competing products.

Which is literally standard procedure for almost every contact job in games, this one included.

Apologies if I wasn't clear; though it is possible that your referencing mods in general, and not directly competing content; However, it is Bethesda's position that they will not be taking any action against two directly competing products. That gives me an abundance of evidence to point towards them having zero interest in even sending a C&D to Joe and Sally MA for a completely unrelated mod.

The idea that Bethesda or Zenimax will be sending they're lawyers after anyone is a bit of a grasp at the thought of the "evil" of this new campaign isn't it? I am aware that the Creation Club trailer has shown a version of the Chinese Stealth Suit, and the FAQ page shows images of the Hellfire Power Armor; the version of the Chinese Stealth Suit already available on Nexus and Bethnet is in no danger of being taken down, and our version of the Hellfire Power Armor has been given the go ahead, despite releasing alongside its payed counterpart. It is wholly unlikely that they will act in a litigious manner in response to any competing products, lest it becomes a trend for people to recreate free versions of payed content in a serial manner.

He stated on his forum it wasn't his, so they're making "new" mods from old ones as well. Now that you mention it... the visor is a different color... and there may be some other tiny differences in the model if you look at it long enough. This still presents the obvious problem of free and paid mods that deliver the exact same damned thing. That is correct; neither the Chinese Stealth Suit, nor the Hellfire featured in the Creators Club are my works.

I actually finally figured it out a few weeks ago. It was (likely) being caused by me fiddling with the wet settings in the nif and duplicating them in the bgsm thinking they were default. I've since fixed the problem, it will be included in the next update.

I'm about to sign off here, so this is likely extra-ordinarily non useful (I also don't do much esp work); but the biggest problem your likely going to run into is getting the lights to be in the "on" state. Applying workable lights to skinned models is fairly straight forward, but I would have to ask unoctium about potential keywords you might need.

Really looking forward to seeing what you put out, I'm sure you'll have a great time!

Pretty sure I know your work from Polycount, glad to see the game has piqued your interest!

Do you have any mods that affect headlamps, or add new ones?

Did you remember to unhook the bgsm in the material path? Check for Material swaps in xedit?

Hey man, as it stands, this wouldn't be an easy task for even the most adept modder. Without creating a brand new head model, you'd need to own Facegen Customizer to reimport the F:4 model and morphs, which takes easily 8+ hours for Facegen to configure it. Beyond that, the process is the same as you experienced in FG modeler, save for the possibility that the origin point of the model ingame may change during the process, in which case you would have to go in and do a whole hell of a lot of work to get it functioning.

You'll want to place the shader in documents/substancepainter/allegorithmic/shelf/shaders for it to show up. Your spec is going to be predominantly grey, unless your material legitimately has a colored specular, IE, gold is brown in diffuse, yellow in spec. However, Fallout: 4 does not support colored specular, but the specular color can be set per element in nifskope. So if you want to make something with lots of complex materials, remember to separate the model pieces. Also, keep in mind that PBR references luminance values, spec/gloss can get very similar results to metal/rough with work. Look up material examples from scans if you get lost.

You can just invert the extracted normal maps, if they're coming out green. The normal maps themselves are pretty standard, with no info in the blue channel, and a swizzled green channel. As far as _s setup goes, its specular in the green, and gloss in the red. Using the spec/gloss shader found here https://share.allegorithmic.com/libraries/15 you can get a very good approximation of how it will look ingame. You can, rather easily, convert from m/r to s/g, but if you have the source files still, it would be easiest to just redo it correctly.

Hey dude, 1. Your normals are inverted, substance needs them swizzled to the correct orientation for display and modification purposes. 2. Copying and normalizing the normal map to generate the blue channel, and merging that with some work with SP's curvature map, you can make a rather ghetto, but functional AO for input in SP. 3. You'll want to use the PBR Spec/gloss shader available on Substance Share, F4 is PBR, but not rough/metal workflow. Thats the root of your problem right there. Rough and gloss are very similar, but the values are inverted, thats why your semi-matte black portion is super shiny, and the metal on the mouth is matte. You can convert Metal to Spec, but I'd recommend creating new input maps, inverting your normals, and starting over with the correct shader.

Import your model, ensure that import skeleton is checked, and leading to the correct filepath. On Import, duplicate your model remove any modifiers present Ensure that your copy is centered (both geometry and origin align with the original). Enter edit element mode (press 5 on the keyboard), select and delete the elements you do not wish to be present in your new model. Select "skin wrap" from the modifier drop down, ensure "weight all verts" is enabled, and select the original model as your reference model. Add a "Bsubindexmodifier", and create your subindex array in accordance with that of the original model. Delete the original model, and only the original model. Export as .nif with default settings (not export selected).Let me know if you have any more problems!

Tools>New Scene Explorer.

The suffix GO is IIRC "Ground Only", its used for the world model of the item, as well as the inventory view. The texture path your looking for is armor/macready/mac_(d,n,s).dds, the hat model your looking for is armor/macready/machat(m,f).nif

Are you guys sure about that? I've been doing that for a bit now using the new 3ds export tool, opening two instances of nifskope, and copying the subindex and skin data directly over to a reference file just as I did in the past, and it works just fine.

Pretty much, without express written permission from Zenimax Media, you may in no way use any resource from another title, in any other title, regardless of who owns it. Not only does this forbid things like Doom, Wolfenstien, or Dishonored being used in Fallout or the Elder Scrolls, but any other title. For certain studios, ala CDPR or IIRC GSC GameWorld, have limited useage licenses that allow for freely distributed non commercial useage of assets (mods, machinima, etc). If you are interested in using a games asset in a mod, you would need to contact the studio, and get that permission on record, which is extraordinarily rare.

Hey man, go ahead and throw me a PM, I'll try to walk you through it.

Glad to be of service, let me know if there's anything else I can help with!

I believe the rendering pipeline is physically based, though not using the metalness workflow. With that stated however, PBR as far as FO4 goes, should be treated as a basis, luminance values are important, but its the final product that matters, so don't be afraid to be creative with your materials.

Hey Seffyr, welcome! The _s texture can be quite confusing at first glance. Simply put, R is your spec, G is your gloss, and B should be black (not sure yet if B channel has a purpose). Saving that as .dds using the Intel texture works plugin should work just fine. You may need to do a little bit of modification to get the look you have in marmo or other rendering engine, but i've had no problems thus far. Also, author your textures in linear format, rather than sRGB.