Spring RTS Engine

What I find is how important the Normal map is for the sexy visual in those renders.

With your factory render, compared to what it looks like ingame in the spring engine is a night/day difference.

It just looks gorgeous in the render, but ingame it just looks plain and a bit washed out without the normal map for extra shaders and lighting.

Makes me wonder how good spring would look with normal map support.

MR.D wrote: Makes me wonder how good spring would look with normal map support.

I dont think you can underestimate the better lighting conditions either, i bet if you compared the untextured model in that scene to the untextured model in spring, there would be a huge difference.

Didn't argh have normal mapping working in Spring?

It's unfortunately too late to really be of use in IW (the workload to retro-make normal maps on all units would be immense), but you can clearly see the vibrance it can do to a model, and that's in a single static shot, it'd look even better in 3D when you're moving around and the light can dance on the surfaces

Well yes, but I don't deserve much credit. Kloot wrote it, I just debugged it a bit for ATi. The source has been available here for months.

I am still too busy working on content and other stuff to get back to Unit shaders, now that I have the final one for P.U.R.E. 1.3 built.

But it is safe to say that, other than the shadow volumes, which are a Spring problem, it's a significant improvement over the ARB shaders, and can even be applied to models without a custom normalmap to improve beauty (and hopefully the final will improve speed as well). More than that would not be appropriate to talk about atm, as it may change a bit before release.

Cremuss, I love what you are doing.

I know this request is a bit off-topic, but would you mind making something for mappers too? We are in desperate need of good looking trees for example, especilly ones with snow on them. As also, some new rocks, bushes/weed would come in need. :)

. . . .
look in grts... load it with the commander set to sandbox.. you will find all of the spring features in there... including the s44 stuff and the agorm stuff. You need only pluck the desired features out of gundam.

smoth wrote:. . . .
look in grts... load it with the commander set to sandbox.. you will find all of the spring features in there... including the s44 stuff and the agorm stuff. You need only pluck the desired features out of gundam.

wow thats so cool. ur a cool dude smoth

d_b wrote:

smoth wrote:. . . .
look in grts... load it with the commander set to sandbox.. you will find all of the spring features in there... including the s44 stuff and the agorm stuff. You need only pluck the desired features out of gundam.

wow thats so cool. ur a cool dude smoth

You post, but I don't know why.

to express how cool that is. why else? Re read the post for clarity.

Oh you tried it? cool.

ya im using it for my map this is great stuff!

interesting. If you need help with teh feature placer stuff bug me in pm or make a post in the mapping forum(better because others can see what you are doing).

im fine thanks but thank u. im trying to make growing trees... but of course it looks retarded because we dont really have different models of trees in different stages.

Cremus interested? :D

d_b wrote:make growing trees

He said it, not me...

aGorm wrote:

d_b wrote:make growing trees

He said it, not me...

I know..

funny thing is I know how he could do them and am not saying... I STILL STAND FOR NO REGROWING TREES!

smoth wrote:. . . .
look in grts... load it with the commander set to sandbox.. you will find all of the spring features in there... including the s44 stuff and the agorm stuff. You need only pluck the desired features out of gundam.

Im not sure if you pointed out this for me, but you should be very well aware, that im aware of the existing map features available so far. And to be honest, they are merely decent, thats why I said "we need good looking trees.

Growing trees are a bit silly idea presented too early, because the trees are not even "alive" yet. They just stand up there freezed, not reacting to the environmnet for example: wind blowing through the leaves.

SirArtturi wrote:Im not sure if you pointed out this for me, but you should be very well aware, that im aware of the existing map features available so far. And to be honest, they are merely decent, thats why I said "we need good looking trees.

What do you think is good looking? we have to strike a balance between low poly and decent detail.

no you are not getting crysis level of detail in your trees.

you cited a lack of shrubs etc.. I think you are just not looking.

thats not a screenshot from spring its from crysis.

Hi :)

Saktoth > cool pic, however I'm not sure I like the top opening doors but that's not a problem if you prefer it this way ;d

http://cremuss.free.fr/files/horse.zip

Also, yes I've some trees but it's too high-poly to be in a RTS and I use them for my own projects. Just try to do some, it's pretty easy. The hardest part is to find the leaves/branchs textures or to make them yourself, the rest is easy as hell. Just some planes with alpha on a basic branchs model ^^

See you later :)

smoth wrote: What do you think is good looking? we have to strike a balance between low poly and decent detail.

no you are not getting crysis level of detail in your trees.

Yes, palm trees and agorm's features are really great, however, you cant use palms in every map. I have no knowledge about how much engine can take high poly features, and therefore know, that somekinda compromise needs to be done... But seriously... Isn't there any room for better?

I emphasize, we have decent looking trees, but they could be way better looking right?


Spring default tree.


Nice textures, but thats all...


Not very impressive...


Pretty nice actually, could be better though...