Tweet
anybody agree?
-
It made DarkPlaces easier, every fn bell and whistle people made became "plug and play"...Originally posted by syluxman2803 View Post
The question remains,what would you use it for if it had pk3 support?
Want to get into playing Quake again? Click here for the Multiplayer-Startup kit! laissez bon temps rouler!
-
pk3 support in itself is not significantly different from pak support, which proquake already supports (as does every other quake engine).Comment
-
Where'e the problem? Extract the pk3, add the content to a zip file and rename it to pak. There you go. The only "problem" is that the paks must be named correctly, pak.2.pak, pak3.pak and so on...Comment
-
pak file aren't zip files?
Have you ever tried opening a pak file with WinZip/WinRAR/any Archival utility?
WinRAR just blowed up (told me to fuck off) while trying to open a pak file...
renamed pak6.pak to pak6.zip,same result.
You can make a basic Zip file,and rename to PK3 maybe I think I recall someone telling me, you can rename PK3 to ZIP and access it, but you CANT rename ZIP to PK3 and get the desired result,as they are similar but not exact.
ewwwww. Pak vs Pk3 ; pk3 clear winner,based on ease of access. PakXplorer FTW.Want to get into playing Quake again? Click here for the Multiplayer-Startup kit! laissez bon temps rouler!
Comment
-
i would just update textures,weapons, enemies,sounds,etcComment
-
pk3s are just zip files.
u can also just dump the contents right into /id1
creating an /id1/textures (/progs /sounds etc...) folder and omit the whole pak scheme.Comment
-
I thought this made it load slower or something. I know I read something somewhere that claimed pak > standard directory. I can't remember why.u can also just dump the contents right into /id1
creating an /id1/textures (/progs /sounds etc...) folder and omit the whole pak scheme.Comment
Comment