Quark - Is there something better?

#1 You could try DelEd if you wanted. But then again that is a differnet set up all together.

#2 Quark, I have found, is really fickle, but can give good results. The most important thing is to make sure you build the interior to its rather anal standards. I started out hating it, but now I am fairly pleased with it. Which isn't to say I am not going to pick up Constructor as soon as it shows its face...

#3 I like QuArK now. Yes it is very anal, but don't rotate anything - ever! and you're right.

Also never save your original scene and quit without saving a QKM file of it otherwise you lose your scene structure.

It does make good looking structures, and the workflow is good once you "tame" it. Plus it's free. It just a pain to start with.

Also, make sure your structure is water tight and you wont have any lighting problems.

#4 I am using Quark. It creates great inside and outside wall collision. My question is this, how the hell do you get textures to show up in the engine, and can i use custom textures instead of quakes?

I'm in a deadline and I need help fast. Yes I want Constructor too but who the hell know when that will be available?

Any tips are greatly appreciated!

#5 GTK Radiant is another one that in my opinion is really powerful, and does a hell of a job a creating good .MAP files...the there is Getic which has a free version that is good for commercial and indie projects alike. I am in the process of talks with Valve about using World-craft, which they adopted recently and re-named Hammer. I have asked for the right to use the older one that was not updated by then, and created for quake originally and had always been free to use.

#6 I'm wondering about your definition of "recently" since they purchased Worldcraft in 1997. That's a good ten years ago. Well, nine and change since they bought it in May.

#7 @Dave - it will be great to hear what Valve say. As far I know you can't use Hammer, GTK or Worldcraft for commercial Torque projects at this moment in time.

#8 If you compile the GPL version of Radiant, you can use it. You cannot, however, use the pre-compiled binaries with the gametype data and such as per the included licenses.

#9 I happen to like QuArK a lot, but then I've worked with it long enough to understand many of its QuIrKs.

With the latest version having fixed the openGL problems, it runs pretty fantastic. My major problems actually come from map2DIF and map2DIF_Plus, each of which have its own buggy quirks.

I'm still looking forward to Constructor, which will have new features and allow for easier/more realistic lighting of levels as well as other things. I just hope they make a comparable learning path (similar GUI) for QuArK users like myself.

#10 I'd suggest you try out the Blender DIF exporter. It doesn't always work - but if you can get familiar with Blender then you'll be cranking out shapes in no time.

Mind you - it's not a perfect solution - you'll experience some frustrations but I think they're worth it compared to the things you experience in QuArK when trying to build structures. Maybe I'll make a video tutorial for people to use Blender for DIF.