hehe you have a good eye; there is a bumpmap there :D the screen is a render from max.
my sort of tentative plan was to reduce the level of the bumps on the terrain (you cant see it there, but i included the mexes in the bumpmap and they look pretty stupid) and then isolate and expand the green channel and add that to the bumpmap with some noise... im hoping i can make all of the grass spots look like they are sticking up!
anyways im actually excited about this one, the metal/heightmap was made by someone else, and has been through 12 testing versions... i might actually be working on something playable for once :D
(edit) and i do have a less-splattered texture, if the current one looks strange when i do the mapping for the grass, then i'll revert to the old one... this one im hoping will be okay, as most of the map is covered in water
* Massive Tree Feature Set *
Moderator: Moderators
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
most players don't use multi-threaded like youBeherith wrote:Also, 1k low poly trees still run at 90 fps. 50 for high poly ones.
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
Instead of making uninformed statements, you could ask which version I used for the test.
I have the common sense to use normal build for all benchmarks. Thus this benchmark was also made on official non mt build.
I have the common sense to use normal build for all benchmarks. Thus this benchmark was also made on official non mt build.
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
I'm working on converting this set for World Builder. You will be credited in the game's credits, if you'd like me to use your real name (for resume purposes, etc.) please let me know.
I've taken a couple of steps to make them work a bit better:
1. I'm converting the textures to DDS, and shrinking the sizes to 512/256. It doesn't really change how they look at most distances, and it will improve performance.
2. In UpSpring, use Edit-->Optimize-->All Objects to remove excess vertices on models that have been imported, to remove data that's no longer required. This makes the models substantially more efficient at the same polycount.
3. I'm re-welding them, to make sure that the vert-count is as low as possible. This can lower the final vert-count after optimization by as much as 5%.
4. I'm adding green / blue to the tex2's, so that the leaves and branches are very slightly reflective- this improves their realism considerably.
5. I'm constructing very simplistic normalmaps from the color data. This won't be awesome, but it will be OK.
As a typical case, after steps 2 and 3 have been performed, your high-poly trees went from 3000+ vertices to under 1500... a substantial reduction in data load per object.
Anyhow, I'll make another movie when I have enough of them converted to make a scene with. I think that, if they're used sparingly, they should be very nice, and I'm very glad you found the time to make them
I've taken a couple of steps to make them work a bit better:
1. I'm converting the textures to DDS, and shrinking the sizes to 512/256. It doesn't really change how they look at most distances, and it will improve performance.
2. In UpSpring, use Edit-->Optimize-->All Objects to remove excess vertices on models that have been imported, to remove data that's no longer required. This makes the models substantially more efficient at the same polycount.
3. I'm re-welding them, to make sure that the vert-count is as low as possible. This can lower the final vert-count after optimization by as much as 5%.
4. I'm adding green / blue to the tex2's, so that the leaves and branches are very slightly reflective- this improves their realism considerably.
5. I'm constructing very simplistic normalmaps from the color data. This won't be awesome, but it will be OK.
As a typical case, after steps 2 and 3 have been performed, your high-poly trees went from 3000+ vertices to under 1500... a substantial reduction in data load per object.
Anyhow, I'll make another movie when I have enough of them converted to make a scene with. I think that, if they're used sparingly, they should be very nice, and I'm very glad you found the time to make them
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
At jKs suggestion I did a test of pre shading the leaf textures a bit by darkening them in the places closer to the branches, and the results are quite nice, the tree looks much more realistic, ill post a shot when I get back on my regular PC. Its just a very simple burn with a large brush.
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
I dont think anyone really designs things for the past, but design them smart: small objects that you barely take attention at shouldnt have too much polygons...Beherith wrote:So, 180 low poly trees render at 150 fps, while 180 high poly ones render at 93. Thats still pretty damned good.
Im fucking sick and tired of designing everything for the past and not the future.
But hey, why doesnt spring support trees which detail comes higher when you zoom at them? would be damn epic, and Beherith could be pleased with his high poly trees as well. And doing this wouldnt be a problem, since you do the trees once... probably doesnt need to edit their models at the next 5 years once they are ready.
We should add these trees into the spring engine, so you dont have to include them in your maps separately, just use some variable like "usedefaulttrees=1" or something.
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
OK... good news... I have most of the trees and bushes converted for use with World Builder. It's turning into a hell of set- combined with the stuff that was already in, it's somewhere around 150 unique pieces of flora. And since they are randomized when created, it feels even more unique.
Bad news: I'm going to need to do a lot of manual editing, to make them look really good. IDK whether I'll have time to get this done before release or not.
Why? When viewed from above, most of the trees look less than perfect, due to lighting issues with the leaves. The flat planes come across very flat, vs. the style I've been using, where I was using real geometry to create volume, so that shading (and more importantly, in terms of cues, shadows) reflected a more "treelike" geometry when viewed from above. The main problem with the style I'm using is that it's all-manual modeling and a bit tricky, and certain types of branch arrangements aren't suitable... so it's all tradeoffs.
I don't have any miracle solutions to any of this yet, so I will have to mull this over a bit, and decide what can be done. Meanwhile, I'll put together a quick movie about building nice complex scenes with this stuff soonish.
Bad news: I'm going to need to do a lot of manual editing, to make them look really good. IDK whether I'll have time to get this done before release or not.
Why? When viewed from above, most of the trees look less than perfect, due to lighting issues with the leaves. The flat planes come across very flat, vs. the style I've been using, where I was using real geometry to create volume, so that shading (and more importantly, in terms of cues, shadows) reflected a more "treelike" geometry when viewed from above. The main problem with the style I'm using is that it's all-manual modeling and a bit tricky, and certain types of branch arrangements aren't suitable... so it's all tradeoffs.
I don't have any miracle solutions to any of this yet, so I will have to mull this over a bit, and decide what can be done. Meanwhile, I'll put together a quick movie about building nice complex scenes with this stuff soonish.
-
SirArtturi
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 18:29
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
Sounds interesting Argh. I'm very happy that you found the trees and you are improving them. As you all know, license allows this and Im actually encouraging you to do it. Just lemme know and I'll include them to the revision.
If you by any chance are going to use lua definitions (tdfs) for the trees, could you please hand them out to me, because I'm planning to revision next version of the trees with original .mtl files and hopefully with .lua defs included. (This will make the use and modification of the trees easier.) I don't have time to do that all manual conversion by hand...
It would be even more cool if it would be possible to revision the set with improvements you made on them. You will be credited as one of the authors then...
If you by any chance are going to use lua definitions (tdfs) for the trees, could you please hand them out to me, because I'm planning to revision next version of the trees with original .mtl files and hopefully with .lua defs included. (This will make the use and modification of the trees easier.) I don't have time to do that all manual conversion by hand...
It would be even more cool if it would be possible to revision the set with improvements you made on them. You will be credited as one of the authors then...
-
SirArtturi
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: 23 Jan 2008, 18:29
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
Made revision of these
http://www.springfiles.com/show_file.php?id=2504
* Changelog v.1.1 *
- Models and textures optimized by Beherith
- Featuredefs in lua
- Improved collisionvolumes
- Mass tag added
- Bushes made unblocking
- source models included
http://www.springfiles.com/show_file.php?id=2504
* Changelog v.1.1 *
- Models and textures optimized by Beherith
- Featuredefs in lua
- Improved collisionvolumes
- Mass tag added
- Bushes made unblocking
- source models included
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
Behe, are these the updated ones that you gave me a few weeks back or should I update the models in evo's featureplacer?
Re: * Massive Tree Feature Set *
I dont think you have the fixed ones. Just overwrite your old ones, these are tons more efficient.