Me2/Me3: Increasing Tali Visor Opacity

[arianrhod]

Just as the title says. How might this be done?

[giftfish]

There's lots of discussion about Tali's visor on the old forum. Have a look over there.

[arianrhod]

giftfish , Now trying to do this for all Quarians using this advice:

To locate the MICs used by the stuntactor levels:

1. Load up the file in the sequence editor, and look for the SeqVar_Object that points to Liara's actor. From there, check its ObjValue property. It will point to a SFXStuntActor or SFXPawn class object. This is the top level actor.
2. Locate this SFXStuntActor or SFXPawn object in TREE VIEW (remember the reference is +1). Under it, find the node for the head mesh. Expand that to find the MIC for the Eye-related material. Now look to see if it has any Vector properties. Yes? Adjust them, these are the MICs you need. No? Proceed to step #3.
3. Go back to the SFXStuntActor/SFXPawn object. Click on its Metadata tab and look at the Archetype field. It will point to the 2nd tier stuntactor (+1).
4. Locate the 2nd tier SFXStuntActor or SFXPawn object in TREE VIEW and repeat step #2 (and #3, if necessary).
5. Locate the Base level SFXStuntActor or SFXPawn object in TREE VIEW and repeat step #2 (and #3, if necessary).
6. IF there are NO vector properties for any of the EYE_MIC objects, then the game SHOULD be using the vector properties associated with the parent MIC.

I have the sequence editor open, but the SeqVar_Objects I find say, under Object Value, "ME3Explorer.Unreal.ObjectProp" - which doesn't point me to a SFXPawn or SFXStuntActor... I don't even know if its pointing to anything. Granted, I can make the visors 100% opaque if I go through each and every MIC in each and every PCC... I really think the archetype method would save me a lot of time, if I can figure out how to do it correctly.

Thanks.

[giftfish]

You need to open that object in PackEd. That's where TreeView is located.

[arianrhod]

In the metadata tab I'm being re-directed to an archetype beginning with a -145 (-145 Hair SMC); the listed packages have no negative numbers before them - what does this mean? I also know for a fact that there IS a visor MIC in this package.

ALSO, I gather that the numbers individualizing each bit of data are the indexes


Save

[arianrhod]

Jun 1, 2017 13:31:02 GMT giftfish said:

You need to open that object in PackEd. That's where TreeView is located.

Lol, no worries. I know what tree view is in PackEd. I may be a dumb noob, but rest assured I am not THAT much of a dumb noob.
Save

[giftfish]

Jun 1, 2017 1:04:33 GMT arianrhod said:

giftfish , Now trying to do this for all Quarians using this advice:

The only way to fix all quarians is to alter every file with a quarian in the entire game.

Jun 1, 2017 18:52:03 GMT arianrhod said:

In the metadata tab I'm being re-directed to an archetype beginning with a -145 (-145 Hair SMC); the listed packages have no negative numbers before them - what does this mean? I also know for a fact that there IS a visor MIC in this package.

You don't mention which metadata tab of which object you are looking at, which makes it difficult to comment.

A bit of info:

1. I specifically mentioned StuntActors, to help you follow their flow. There will not be a HairSMC in the metadata tab of an export that's a stuntactor class.

2. If there are no visor opacity properties associated with the materials that belong to the stunt actor levels, then look at the parent material they specify. There *will* be a visor opacity there. This is what you're looking for.

3. Negative numbers are imports.

4. You're forgetting the +1 associated with imports and exports. If the reference says "-145", then it's pointing to import -144.

[arianrhod]

Well, thank you very much for your time. I shall now be combing through PCCs.

[giftfish]

Jun 2, 2017 1:27:39 GMT arianrhod said:

Well, thank you very much for your time. I shall now be combing through PCCs.

Lawl!

[arianrhod]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[giftfish]

Jun 2, 2017 1:57:35 GMT arianrhod said:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's doable, but fixing ALL the visors will take a little while

[arianrhod]

Lol, It probably sounds like a stupid mod to put that amount of time into, but I have that ending slide change I'm working on - putting a concept art head on the Quarian woman (who, if Tali is alive, I've painted her suit on). I find the Quarians to human; their final design is nothing compared to the concept art the team came up with. In fact, I can point to A LOT of instances where the ME concept art is way better than what ended up in the actual game. This is the new Quarian face.



How I could not make her look like this? It's so cute! But see how big the eyes are? The eyes you see through their visors are obviously not that big. They also have no pupils. Besides, with eyes that big, I imagine they are quite sensitive to light and would need a light-dimming visor to protect their vision (Rannoch does orbit a dimmer class of star after all...). I plan to add in a codex entry (after I shut up that annoying narrator in soundplorer) with this info. Now no more questions about why they need nearly opaque visors.

(P.S., I will need to ask you if I can add a separate slide, showing a nameless Quarian woman with this face if Tali is dead, but Tali in this slide if alive)

[avpen]

Jun 2, 2017 2:21:52 GMT arianrhod said:

Lol, It probably sounds like a stupid mod to put that amount of time into, but I have that ending slide change I'm working on - putting a concept art head on the Quarian woman (who, if Tali is alive, I've painted her suit on). I find the Quarians to human; their final design is nothing compared to the concept art the team came up with. In fact, I can point to A LOT of instances where the ME concept art is way better than what ended up in the actual game. This is the new Quarian face.

Going to play Devil's Advocate here (since I've spent a f'ing long-ass time into the quarians in the ME series):

1.  That concept image you posted is not the concept image of the quarian face - the artists in ME had created numerous versions of what a quarian's face could look like under the visor (ultimately, they were all correct and false at the time they were drawn, since no one could see an actual quarian face in ME1). In the end, however, BW had to commit to a design for the 3D model inside the quarian's helmet, which is what they modeled for Tali's face behind the visor in ME1.

2. If you increase the visor opacity too much to the point you are trying to obscure the physiology of the face model, most likely you will also obscure the eyes and facial-area surrounding the eyes to the point that the player can't see them. This, quite honestly, would be a BIG mistake in my view - Tali's eyes were, and have always been, one of the most expressive elements to her character (given that it's all the player can really see of her "face"), and quarians in general, and obscuring those elements of her face from the player would be a disservice to her character.

As a sidenote, quarians having human-like faces never bothered me too much (given that you could already see that they had human-like facial physiology all the way back in ME1 and that the asari and drell are the only other aliens who also have human-like faces, while there are plenty of other non-human type aliens around in ME).

[arianrhod]

1. That concept image you posted is not the concept image of the quarian face - the artists in ME had created numerous versions of what a quarian's face could look like under the visor (ultimately, they were all correct and false at the time they were drawn, since no one could see an actual quarian face in ME1). In the end, however, BW had to commit to a design for the 3D model inside the quarian's helmet, which is what they modeled for Tali's face behind the visor in ME1.

...Yes, I know. I must have chosen the wrong words; her concept art(s) were better than what ended up in the final game, in my opinion. I chose the above because it was my personal favorite.

2. If you increase the visor opacity too much to the point you are trying to obscure the physiology of the face model, most likely you will also obscure the eyes and facial-area surrounding the eyes to the point that the player can't see them. This, quite honestly, would be a BIG mistake in my view - Tali's eyes were, and have always been, one of the most expressive elements to her character (given that it's all the player can really see of her "face"), and quarians in general, and obscuring those elements of her face from the player would be a disservice to her character.

I see. I will try to paint the glowing part of her eye onto her new face; perhaps that glowing outline under her mask was not who WHOLE eye, but the outline of her Iris?

[avpen]

Jun 2, 2017 18:30:29 GMT arianrhod said:

2. If you increase the visor opacity too much to the point you are trying to obscure the physiology of the face model, most likely you will also obscure the eyes and facial-area surrounding the eyes to the point that the player can't see them. This, quite honestly, would be a BIG mistake in my view - Tali's eyes were, and have always been, one of the most expressive elements to her character (given that it's all the player can really see of her "face"), and quarians in general, and obscuring those elements of her face from the player would be a disservice to her character.

I see. I will try to paint the glowing part of her eye onto her new face; perhaps that glowing outline under her mask was not who WHOLE eye, but the outline of her Iris?

The "glowing shine" of the eyes from behind the visor are indeed the irises of the quarian's eyes, not the full eye itself (it's pretty easy to tell this based on the shape and proportion of the shining orbs in relation to the eye and face, even with the visor's glass obscuring the main features of the face).