About the new map format...

Masse · Post by **Masse** » 14 Feb 2006, 17:35

they looook niceee

now i need to see a metalmap

with damn bumpmapping !

AF · Post by AF » 14 Feb 2006, 20:36

Zaphod, how well does zooming scale with the new renderer? I'd try it out but thsi comp is crahs and doesnt scale well with anything.

My research into voronoi diagrams has lead me further into the field of computational geometry, http://www.cgal.org, a library gabba linked me to, it has examples of increasing/decreasing the detail of 3D models, and I'm sure ti could be sued for SupCom style terrain tesselation, allowing us to zoom out to insane distances, aswell as making highly detailed models less detailed as they are zoomed out, rather than having a normal or crappy generated version, or the proposed multiple models for different distances suggestion (ahk killing off one fo ym own suggestions to suit another).

If I ever get round to pathfinding CGAL would have to be integrated into spring anyway.

Post by **jcnossen** » 14 Feb 2006, 21:21

Zaphod, how well does zooming scale with the new renderer? I'd try it out but thsi comp is crahs and doesnt scale well with anything.

It scales pretty well, I'm using geomipmapping for LOD. (Although I should maybe implement the error calculation properly and not use my own guesstimation

) This is a very modern and fast way of doing terrain LOD for current hardware. Press F to see wireframe, so you can see what I mean.
You can be sure I evaluated most common terrain rendering algorithms avaiable, geomipmapping is one that has a really low CPU usage and low requirements on the AGP bus, because all geometry is located in video memory already.

On the really slow hardware, fragment processing speed and fillrate are the more important issues. I solved that by caching the terrain surface texture, and it runs really fast even on my old geforce 2 mx. However this is only enabled on cards with less than 4 texture units. When it is integrated in spring I will add a new configuration option for it.

For all people that experience crashing, could you point out exactly which hardware you're using or even better, locate it on the delphi3d hardware list: http://www.delphi3d.net/hardware/listreports.php
Thanks

FireCrack · Post by **FireCrack** » 15 Feb 2006, 23:12

Well, i've got a 9800 Pro
I only have 512mb of ram though
Running on an Athlon 2400+ (2.0 gHz)

mother · Post by **mother** » 15 Feb 2006, 23:33

Also running an ATI 9800...

My drivers are newer then anyting listed on that Delphi3D site [6.14.10.6458]. This is just a demo and I shouldn't freak out yet as it's a different environment, right?

Post by **jcnossen** » 15 Feb 2006, 23:42

I developed it on a 9600 Pro, which is IIRC just an 9800 chipset with less pixel pipelines and vertex pipelines.

Anyway, I will see if I can find a difference in the supported OpenGL functionality... if not I have to find another way. The crashreport library for example.

SeanHeron · Post by **SeanHeron** » 16 Feb 2006, 00:11

Looking very sweet :) . "Maps bigger than game area" is a very welcome feature as well. Good job !

mother · Post by **mother** » 16 Feb 2006, 00:17

Ok, update... Good news: It now works.

I updated to the latest Catalyst 6.2 drivers.

The 'bad' news is that I think that Delphi3D page is talking about the 'OpenGL Driver version' and not the 'version' [the 2D driver version] reported by windows... To make matters worse, I still cannot find the OpenGL (or 2d) versions on that list...

Grabbed my drivers from http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/... Resisted the temptation to softmod... Somehow...

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 16 Feb 2006, 03:06

It works fine with my 9800 pro... Maby a driver issue? How is terrain typemapping supported? Will this mapping format fix the problems with ugly seems and what not between different mapped terrain types?

FireCrack · Post by **FireCrack** » 16 Feb 2006, 05:56

Hm, driver update did it for me too.

Doomweaver · Post by **Doomweaver** » 16 Feb 2006, 06:47

Sorry, this might have been answered already, but are we going to revert to OTA style metal? Forget realism, visible metal patches are superior in every way.

Maelstrom · Post by **Maelstrom** » 16 Feb 2006, 07:03

I think you will still be able to decide between metal style. Both styles do have their advantages though.

mother · Post by **mother** » 16 Feb 2006, 07:04

Just because the pancake is getting a little tired...

I believe the metalmap is remaining essentially as is. [though Zaphod or someone feel free to correct me, I'm not involved with the coding]

Personally I roll my eyes every time a map maker goes with OTA patches- It's like screaming "Im stuck in 1997." Different strokes for different folks.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 16 Feb 2006, 08:50

mother wrote:Just because the pancake is getting a little tired...

I believe the metalmap is remaining essentially as is. [though Zaphod or someone feel free to correct me, I'm not involved with the coding]

Personally I roll my eyes every time a map maker goes with OTA patches- It's like screaming "Im stuck in 1997." Different strokes for different folks.

With the terrain mapping that acctually allows for bump mapping we might acctually be able to make those pancakes look like holes in the ground in which metal is abundant underneith.

Post by **jcnossen** » 16 Feb 2006, 14:46

However, right now there is no specular bumpmapping, only diffuse. If you think about Doom3 style bumpmapping with all the metal involved: That's all specular lighting.

I'll probably support specular lighting afterwards, but know that currently metalmaps won't be so good looking as people seem to expect.

Doomweaver · Post by **Doomweaver** » 16 Feb 2006, 21:31

I meant for a gameplay point of view... I mean, they don't have to look very cool at all, they just have to be extremely visible.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 16 Feb 2006, 21:47

zaphod, while I really really do love this new mapping format I have a few concerns. Namely, I often like to place textures on top of the main map texture (ota patches for example). Am I still going to be able to do this? While the metal map is really useful, it's very nice when you're in a hurry to be able to just lay a mex and go while having f4 off, besides, it looks nifty.

IMSabbel · Post by **IMSabbel** » 16 Feb 2006, 22:15

Wasnt conditional texturing one of the main points of the new map format?

Just look at the demo: the basic texture is tiled on the planes, and on the mountains it is either continued, or another one applied on top.

I guess the same way it would be no problems placing a metal spot texture onto a normal surface

Runecrafter · Post by **Runecrafter** » 17 Feb 2006, 12:05

when trying to run SpringTerrain.exe a window opens for about 1-2 sec then shuts down, (there is no error message) that is all I see. Is there somthing that I'm doing wrong? I am using a G-Force 4 6600 GT, 1gig or RAM, and a 2.8ghz HT processor.

genblood · Post by **genblood** » 20 Feb 2006, 19:03

I have a question to ask... When the new map format comes out
will the old maps still be playable or do all the maps need to
be redone again? Any time frame when the new Spring version
is going to be released? Any chance on getting the tools a few
days or a week before the release, so that some maps can get
remade before the release of the new Spring?

Spring RTS Engine

About the new map format...