New improvement art! You don't need to replace civ5artdefines_landmarks.xml

Also, there seems to be some models appearing only when the game played with the DirectX 9 option. From what I have read and experienced, that is the case with the colony pod models converted from Civ4 to Civ5 for Spatzimaus' mod.
 
Also, there seems to be some models appearing only when the game played with the DirectX 9 option. From what I have read and experienced, that is the case with the colony pod models converted from Civ4 to Civ5 for Spatzimaus' mod.

Well that's interesting. I don't even know what you get for using the DX10/11 option. I always pick this by habit, even though I've had the leader screen animation turned off for a year now (even when playing vanilla). What else is different when you pick DX9?
 
Well that's interesting. I don't even know what you get for using the DX10/11 option. I always pick this by habit, even though I've had the leader screen animation turned off for a year now (even when playing vanilla). What else is different when you pick DX9?

I've never used DX9 either, but if you take a look at the "Age of Ascension" thread in Spatzimaus' subforum you will see that it is mentioned in the discussion that colony pod models do appear under DX9, but don't appear under DX10/11. Using DX10/11, the model indeed didn't appear for me ingame.
 
Right. None of the models I've converted from Civ4 show up in DX 10/11, but they all appear in DX9. That's about 15 or 16 models at present, so it's not just a problem with a single unit.
I've tried various compression schemes for the .DDS files, with no luck so far; it even fails on models whose DDS files are completely untouched from the original Civ4 unit. I've put new unit conversions on hold a bit to work out mechanics in my Mythology mod, but I'll be diving back into the unit model stuff fairly soon (probably March).

As for what the DX10/11 gives you? Almost nothing, from what I've seen. A few meaningless little animations like waves on the ocean or birds flying, better shadows, etc., but nothing significant that I've found; if you're the kind of person who turned off most of those little extras early on to make things go faster, you won't see any differences that I know of. I only ever use the DX9 executables any more; obviously I do this in part because I want to use my own mods without issues, but it also seems to load a bit faster.
 
As for what the DX10/11 gives you? Almost nothing, from what I've seen. A few meaningless little animations like waves on the ocean or birds flying, better shadows, etc., but nothing significant that I've found; if you're the kind of person who turned off most of those little extras early on to make things go faster, you won't see any differences that I know of. I only ever use the DX9 executables any more; obviously I do this in part because I want to use my own mods without issues, but it also seems to load a bit faster.

the atmospherics is certainly true but IIRC the difference between DX9 and DX10/11 is the multiple terrain art. In DX9 its the same on every continent (and randomly selected). On DX10/11 you'll see different colored grasslands and plains etc.

I'm curious if my windmill will show under DX9. Pazyryk can you check?
 
I'll try it this weekend, if I can. Is scale the only thing you changed in the last model? I should have just bumped this up when I tested it before (you can do this from ArtDefine_Landmarks and I know that works). I'll try the DX9 also.
 
I submitted a question for the "Ask Dennis Shrik about Gods and Kings" that asks if there will be any significant modding changes, specifically targetting the game's handling of new landmark, terrain and building assets.
 
I submitted a question for the "Ask Dennis Shrik about Gods and Kings" that asks if there will be any significant modding changes, specifically targetting the game's handling of new landmark, terrain and building assets.

Good idea, would be great if we got a satisfactory answer to that one.
Good luck with trying out the new model with DX9 Pazyryk, gonna keep my fingers crossed so that it works.
 
Hey could this be the reason for invisibility??????

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11300070&postcount=27

ok...first of all, GOOD JOB! :goodjob:

i took a look at the files and found a couple of issues.....



first, the fxsxml file had some roman legion stuff in it, that may have been causing part of the problem.

next, your blend to fbx export was not "exact".....the model name is cAp_SeNsItIvE, so writing WORLD_Center will cause the model not to move....took me a while to figure this one out....in this case, it is World_Center" :crazyeye:

the other thing I noticed was for some reason, your dds file was not showing. i loaded the model in asset viewer and got that white and red checkerboard pattern thing.....i noticed that your dds file was "off" on the usual kb size, so i just resaved it using the DXT1 RBG (or) the DXT3 ARBG and IT WORKED!!!!

i dont think the sref file has any thing to do with the file not working in game, but it is easy to make a proper sref, just take your normal color dds, chage the name to the sref, copy and paste as new layer, darken the new layer and erase the areas that are supposed to be "shiny"....

check out the pic on top that illustrates the steps i've mentioned

you will need to go back to your blend and do a proper/corrected fbx export

i have also included a 7z with the new dds, sref and fxsxml for reference...

GOOD LUCK and keep at it!!!
 
So I've bypassed the need to overwrite civ5artdefines_landmarktypes.xml. In the above example, I called the existing Great_Library.fxsxml and Hanging_Gardens.fxsxml, which then call the base game art assets. However, you should be able to supply your own .fxsxml files and downstream art. At least I think so. I haven't done any of this art stuff yet so either 1) I'm missing something basic that someone will shortly point out (making me feel kind of stupid...but it's 4am so what the hell) or 2) I've stumbled onto something useful that others have missed (which seems strange, given that changing a few lines in the db seems more obvious than replacing whole .xml files).

So what's stopping any good artist out there from adding windmills or whatever other improvement art they want? (And is there any reason to replace civ5artdefines_units.xml and so on? Is that really what modders are doing for new unit art?)


So I've learned that the landscape system (tile improvements, barbarian camps, etc) is the only graphics system that feeds off the database. The unit system populates the database, but still reads all data directly from the separate units xml files.

Has anyone checked off "Reload Landmark System" in their mod info? that should reload the required graphics from the DB
 
Ekmek, I'm glad you're still pursing this, and I hope maybe some others are too. Unfortunately, I'm putting all of my efforts into getting my mod out in April, so I have no time to work on this particular issue at all. I'll be using some wonder art as improvements, which look permanently unfinished, but it is an alpha after all so I'm not sweating good graphics yet.

I also wonder if the best approach here is to sit tight and see whether G&K brings better support for adding/modding art assets, making all of this a non-issue. I sure hope that is the case. If I had a developer's ear, that would be my top suggestion (tied with dll access).
 
I followed you example and got the Pentagon showing up; nice find :goodjob: Then I repeated the procedure to try get a reskinned trading post in (as a field hospital), but failed. It always shows up as the regular colored one, though with the scaling I set for it in ArtDefine_Landmarks. Anyway, it's probably for the best: to me it's not worth the risk of the mod crashing with the "reload landmarks system" option set. I hope a good solution will be available in the future!
 
has anyone progressed with this now that gods and kings has been released?
 
Top Bottom