I've been making some models for GH's 20th century mod and I was wondering in particular what the poly count range that I should target to keep stuff placed in the game from negatively affecting performance (lagging). The highest ploy count I can currently make are models of 650 polygons or less. Is this ideal to keep the game running normally. I already know that one of the problems associated with lagging is caused by too many AI units being produced which somehow overwhelms the BZII engine resulting in the game slowing down so much that the game crashes eventually. Also is there a good model to use to get a scale reference for models and props I make? Tanks in advance...BNG.
I don't think polygon counts are quite such an issue these days, 650 polygons is certainly more than acceptable for units and buildings , infact most things really, I think that the number of objects in a map was far more of a problem than polygon counts and more likely to cause slowdown , if you are worried about the polygon count of a certain object you can always create low detail LOD models.
These LOD models can be used to replace the more detailed version of the model at longer distances when the object detail is set to medium in the graphics options, you can have many LOD models of slowly diminishing polygon counts if you want all set to cut in at whatever distance from the player you desire ( you can spoecify LOD distance in the object's ODF file) .
When the object detail settings are set to low in the graphics options the lower detail LOD1 model will replace the standard high detail model .
I don't think you can use animations on LOD's so you couldn't make LOD's for a walker for instance .
just as a general guide to polygon counts - the stock ships have approx 300 - 700 polygons each with the average count being around 500 polygons, polygon counts for the scion units are slightly lower on average .
I think that FE pushed the general detail level of units up a little bit more , as did Fleshstorm - my general rule of thumb was to keep polygon counts below 1000 for units and buildings and make LOD's wherever possible.
....... I coulda just said yes 650 polygons should be fine really :roll: .
Quote from: Lizard on June 08, 2007, 10:24:57 AM
I don't think you can use animations on LOD's so you couldn't make LOD's for a walker for instance .
Not true, actually. Look at a pilot from a distance through the sniperscope in game. Its severely degraded (very low poly LOD) from a far, but is still animated.
Well, at least on my machine it is... :roll:
well you can always use the "mrmFactor = 0" to cut down some poly's. Mainly used for pilots,walkers, and Scion Sphere....
Quote from: Steeveeo on June 08, 2007, 01:05:02 PM
Quote from: Lizard on June 08, 2007, 10:24:57 AM
I don't think you can use animations on LOD's so you couldn't make LOD's for a walker for instance .
Not true, actually. Look at a pilot from a distance through the sniperscope in game. Its severely degraded (very low poly LOD) from a far, but is still animated.
Well, at least on my machine it is... :roll:
check the stock ODF and XSI files only the non animated ISDF vehicles have LOD models and they are the only ones with LOD's specified in the ODF's, none of the scion vehicles have LOD models ( presumably because they have morph animations) , neither the ISDF or Scion turrets have LOD models either but the Scion buildings do.
I'm not sure how they did the LOD on pilots but they weren't using seperate models like they did with the ISDF tanks.
Its due to mrmfactor. If you set it to 0, it eliminates the detail degredation.
LOD models are static, and do not reflect the animated orientation of the model they're replacing.
That is, a GT LOD model turret won't rotate to match the actual model. It just sits there regardless of how many pieces it's made of or what they're named. I make pretty much all of my LOD models as a single piece because of this.
You don't need to go nuts with a LOD model, it's supposed to look like the original unit does from 3 or 4 hundred meters away... so drop your main unit in the engine and cruise some distance away to get an idea of what the LOD should look like. I also try to use the main unit's texture whenever possible, but sometimes for a very simple LOD it's better to just use a screen capture of the original unit from a distance.
The main model shown below has 228 verticies, 385 faces. The LOD1 model has 95 verts, 169 faces and uses the original texture. The LOD2 has 38/58 and uses a custom, 64x64 texture.
(http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s314/BZ-Avatar/LPadLOD.jpg)
The animation limitation is why they didn't use LOD models for pilots or walkers, using MRM instead. MRM is "Multi-Resolution-Mesh" technology from Intel and while it helped bankroll the game it can really mangle a pilot when you zoom in. It DOES look good from a distance, though, and since it's automatic and based on the actual mesh it saves you the memory the LOD models take up.
-Av-
Don't really know how relevent this is but I found that polygon reduction of a high poly model can be reduced significantly by creating a simple plane object and creating an object union with the high poly model. Afterwards, the plane can be deleted leaving the high poly object with a lower poly count. I used this technique on some BZII XSI terrain exports from the editor, convert the XSI to X in 3DEX 1.5, and then opened in GSL. The terrain object which had an extremely high ploy count with a ton of small triangles in the thousands was reduced to a few hundred poly's by applying an object union to a plane type object. Afterwards, I just deleted the plane object and was able to save the file as GSL only allows saving objects up to 650 faces. I find the XSI terrrain useful for creating premade building structure types for props easy. The reduced poly terrain objects can further be edited to add structure details in GSL...BNG. :-)
Another discovery I've made is to load COB files converted from XSI ones to edit them in GSL. Applying the method above to the individual high poly parts to reduce them down to savable size in GSL. The process is somewhat tedious, but allows me to edit/modify the geometry files to make variants of the different models for my own use. So far, I've added most of the IDF and Scion buildings to individual object libraries for future modification purposes. The object libraries are easy to manage and allow me to easily substitute out different parts of various model parts to make new variants of existing models. I like using it as GSL allows me to right click an object in the work space and edit the geometry of the object with it's editing tools...BNG (http://static1.filefront.com/images/personal/l/lppena/106799/cxrnrmkita.thumb500.jpg)
Another simple but tedious method of reducing poly count at least in GSL that I know of is to load the model into the editor, right click the model to bring up the editing control panel, select the vertice selection tool, highlite an individual vertice (lines that intersect 2 triangular faces and then select the delete vertice tool. This only works on faces that are flat, but many faces are just that and deleting the vertice on such faces can dramatically reduce a high poly model down quite significantly when applied carefully. Remember to work slowly and use the undo button if you accidentally delete something you didn't want deleted.
Using my odd building technique leaves me with very little scope when it comes to lod models.
So I try to design stuff as low as possible to start with and then just replace complex components with with simpler ones, The dalek eyestalk, 2 sphere's 1 cylinder 3 rings, just becomes 1 cylinder with an extruded end for example. (I do not notice the change at all in game) But usually attempting to reduce a models polys alters it so much that it no longer resembles the original and its texture no longer fits.
Many of my models do not have lods, because I cannot make them any lower.
Hopefully the increase in computer power since the game was first made will mean that this is not a big issue.
I always thought the scion scout looked weird and bent sometimes, it is, its LOD model is un-symmetrically triangulated and ugly.
Part of the problem with GSL is the 650 poly limit for saving model files. Then the problem is aggravated when saving them to the X format where triangulation is part of making it usable for BZ2ME and eventually for final conversion to XSI. Effectively (doubling the poly count) making it unusable for reediting in GSL again.
You can reload the X model just fine but saving it is not possible after editing it. I guess I'm trying to learn as much as I can about GSL so that I can eventually move on to Truespace 3.2, which has a very similar UI and no such poly save limitations. Either that or find another 3d modeler easy enough to master yet simple enough for the average person to make any sense of.
I have one of your Dalek units, but I don't remember where I got it from. It appears to be very complex in design and have a high poly count. Does it perform well in the game? It's the one that you show in your avatar thing MTS.
Anyways, from what I've gleaned so far about poly counts for models; don't use anymore then are necessary to create your models to achieve the look you want.
ALERT! ALERT! DATA LEAKAGE SUSPECTED! IDENTIFY SECURITY BREACH AND EXTERMINATE ALL SLAVE SPECIES! REPORT ANY SUSPECTED INTRUSIONS WITH PRIORITY 1.
REPORT: NO INFORMATION LEAKAGE HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED, ALL SECURITY SYSTEMS CHECKED AND PASSED.
CLAIM BY HUMAN TO HAVE POSSESSION OF DALEK TECHNOLOGY MUST BE VERIFIED. THE HUMAN MUST BE EXTERMINATED IF THE CLAIM IS CORRECT, THE TECHNOLOGY MUST BE RECOVERED OR DESTROYED!
None of my units have been released....maybe its one of Lizards daleks?
There is one in the FEDATA.pak
I think that is from before mrtwosheds started. Also, I PMed ya about something 2Shed (sounds like a rapper name).
Get a load of this...the X format that TS 3.2 saves in isn't the same format that GSL save in, and therefore is unreadable by BZ2ME. TS does save as COB and MAX ASC which are both readable by 3DEX 1.5 and convertable to X for BZ2ME use.
I've started creating stuff in TS and basically it's just a simpler form of the user friendly UI in GSL. Anyone comfortable with GSL can easily make the transition to TS with a little patients. TS, has no UV map unwrapper, but can map models for processing in either GSL which has a nice simple UV unwrapper or in Lithunwrap for more complex skins. The biggest benefit to using TS is that very complex high poly models can be created and saved w/o a problem. Both programs also use the very same sweep (extrusion) tool, and creating custom geometric objects is a piece of cake to make with either prog. FYI
Quote from: mrtwosheds on December 21, 2007, 05:48:22 PM
None of my units have been released....maybe its one of Lizards daleks?
yeah it's probably the dalek I included as an easter egg in FE, the high polygon count certainly fits the bill I think mine was nearly 2,000 polys.
I never did find it.
I find that when going over 3000 polies, BZ2 crashes, but does not give the "to many polies error". I think it gives that around 5000.
Quotehate rap music Tongue (as in erg)
? ? ? ?
3000 polys is far too much for a game like bz2. Getting near to 1000 is a bad idea.
Quote from: mrtwosheds on December 26, 2007, 02:59:22 PM
I never did find it.
It's hidden in the FeData.pak file somewhere, I don't have FE installed or anything at the moment or I'd take a look and tell you where I hid it.
I also hid a shadow battlecrab ( unskinned) from babylon 5 in there somewhere aswell.
Quotehate rap music Tongue (as in erg)
someone said something about 2shed soundign rapper like :S
and yeh there is a Dalek in there but i dont remember where it is :@...
are babylon 5 ships abailable? a lot of the links on bzscrap are broken or the zips dont work properly...
shame
The B5 ships never worked very well. I think they ended up being hack jobs!
Back then though, cutting edge BZ modding.
dont even know what they are =S never seen them... jsut wondered if some new XSI's were floating around heh
TS 3.2 appears to automatically triangulate all faces in the object in real time as they are created in the workspace, but in GSL 1.5 the faces are triangulated upon saving to the X format. So 650 faces could easily translate into more like 1300 faces after saving them as X. Then they'd did to be edited in TS anyways. So I guess the best method would be to use TS in the first place. However, and this is where GSL comes in handy as a UVW mapper and unwrap utility, but that's a whole nother topic and I won't get into detail in this tread.
I found another way to optimized a model by using a tool in GSL called, separate selected part of object; it doesn't delete the face rather it makes a copy of the face. It is accessed by right clicking the model, selecting the face to separate from the edit menu and then clicking the icon. The face is now detached from the main object. This can be used to separate lots of faces to create hollow objects that I would imagine could be welded together again to form optimized objects that don't need to be solid. It sort of reminds me of a shell like those seen in the cockpit objects. Don't know much about it, but I've noticed lots of BZII XSI models that make use of these things.
(http://static1.filefront.com/images/personal/l/lppena/106799/keeuzryexf.thumb500.jpg)
Lately, I found out that triangulating a model prior to saving it as an X file isn't really necessary prior to converting it to XSI via BZ2ME or 3DEX 1.5.5. Part of the problem with using a low poly modeler like GSL is the 650 face count limit imposed by the the free version of Gamespace. You won't notice this initially, but once you load the triangulated model again for reediting you'll notice the vast increase in the number of faces that make up a triangulated object.
This setting can be disabled in the X export settings of GSL by selecting the settings option that pops up when you go to save an X file. Another panel pops up with an option to triangulate all faces which can be un-xed to keep the face count the same as the original models face count.
Another poly reduction technique is to use the object union tool to permanently attach non critical objects to other model assemblies. An example of this might be something like making a tank door hatch and attaching it to the main turret assembly and using the union tool rather then gluing it as a child or sibling.
Speeking of babylon 5 I have a new mod for freespace 2 which has a mass amount of Babylon 5 Ships in it. Everything you can think of.
Now, Take into account the assimulation mod, and what it has in there,
A load of ships from freespace to.
So it should be easy for me to convert all the babylon 5 ships to bz2 using the same I dear I made for my mod.
But..... It's been a while.......
unfortunately, blender 3D does not triangulate all faces in real time or saving to other formats. and im pretty sure BZII will not support over 3 vertex's per polygon...
perhaps i may be able to open it in truespace and save it to .x format using that? hmm. trouble is blender is TOO powerful for the likes of this game... i read it was used in the spiderman 2 film for soem of the CGI!!!
If blender is too powerful, what about 3dsmax?? :-P
Quoteand im pretty sure BZII will not support over 3 vertex's per polygon...
Most of the xsi models for bz2 are un-triangulated.
My problem is that I cannot convert to .xsi without triangulating them!
The worst part of triangulation is the flame meshes.
I thought that was the only problem.
BZ2 supports more than 3 verts per face just fine, as stated in the other thread. I know that for a fact.
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
QuoteThe worst part of triangulation is the flame meshes.
I sort of got round this by making the flames from triangles, 4 of them unattached to each other.
flame meshes just pure and simple confuse me... havent got onto them yet...
oh and BBB, i dont use 3ds max because of that little green paper thing! (or red,yellow, green and pink here in UK)
What paper thing?
Money I would guess. :P
And American money has pink and other rainbow'ish colors on it nowadays too...
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
correct =]
ooo nooo we have full on pink notes over here! (i THINK we do... is it bad to not know the colours of my currency?)
He.. Aussie money is all the colours of the rainbow.. except pink or purple :-P
MTS, you could try using GSL instead of Truespace as it is functionally the same as TS only of later release/design with some more advanced features like an actual UV map editor; TS has no utility for this. Additionally, it can save X files untriangulated in the Directx save options as well as the option to save in ASCII as needed for notepad editing, just remember to check the option prior to saving in X.
As far as I know, neither Threed or X2XSI triangulate by default when creating an XSI file from a GSL formatted X file. The problem with the TS X formatted files appears to be that X files are triangulated by default, and you need to check the ASCII option for every modeling session, i.e., every time you restart the program.
I use to triangulate all of my X models in GSL, but the poly count doubles with triangulation, and GSL has a 650 face limit per object, so after I discovered you don't really need to triangulate to get models into BZII; I disabled this option in the X save settings.
GSL, is also much easier to model with then TS3.2, and the UI in TS is almost identical to GSL, i.e., icon based. Most of the icons being adjustable via right click to access settings for the tools in both applications.
Also, editing objects in GSL can be done via right clicking an object in the work space, or opening the scene editor expanding the hierarchy tree, selecting an object, right clicking it's cube icon, and selecting edit from the options box. TS, does not support right click editing of objects...BNG.
(http://static3.filefront.com/images/personal/l/lppena/106799/gszwxhckbk.jpg)
What I wanna know is where can I get some 'Red Backs' (they are sitting in warehouses) for when the evil plot to tank the dollar is over.
QuoteMTS, you could try using GSL instead of Truespace
I am not using either of these, I am still using something that does not even pretend to be a modeling program, lithunwrap 1.3. :lol:
The triangulation comes from convertion to .3ds format. This is the only format that I can get lithunwrap to export to that can then be converted to .x by 3dex.
I quite like lithunwrap's minimalist approach to geometric construction, it is also a good UV mapper, and UV mapping is the most important part of creating good looking models.
Can it Un-triangulate models?
Quote from: mrtwosheds on July 14, 2008, 07:14:50 PM
Can it Un-triangulate models?
I think that would be like trying to turn an apple cut in half back into an apple.
You can, but there is no point to do so. BZ2, when it reads the xsi or whatever, triangulates things anyway.
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
There's a flame mesh tutorial floating around on how to manually unwrap them correctly. The exporter for Max just winds them wrong, mangling the flame. I do much the same as mrtwosheds, and use triangular flames whenever possible.
-Av-
QuoteYou can, but there is no point to do so. BZ2, when it reads the xsi or whatever, triangulates things anyway.
There is one reason, A triangulated xsi-mesh will show the triangulations on the build effect, an untriangulated xsi-mesh does not.
Yes, for BZ2 models you want to 'optimize/auto edge' when finished, to eliminate that. The MSH maker may triangulate everything but somewhere it's keeping track of a 'hard' edge vs a soft one. It may simply be a matter of winding order, as flames demonstrate...
-Av-
That is probably due to unified normals between them, or due to detected flat adjacent edges, do not really know, have not seen into the renderer...
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
so basically flame meshes are hard to do... tsssk.
someone needs to fix the ISDF puma flame mesh. its a bit.. um. broke.
Speaking of engine flame, i've posted the old flame repair tutorial on bzcommand.com (http://www.bzcommand.com)
Model :: Engine flame repair tutorial (3ds Max) (http://www.bzcommand.com/forum/index.php?page=32)
There is a 2nd one I don't like as much too. It shows making the flame a few times and testing in game to see which one exports right, then removing the others.
Quote from: OvermindDL1 on July 16, 2008, 02:23:48 AM
That is probably due to unified normals between them, or due to detected flat adjacent edges, do not really know, have not seen into the renderer...
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
In Max it's shown as a solid line for 'hard' edges, and dotted for 'soft' ones. A 'hard' edge will show in BZ2 no matter how planar the face, where a 'soft' one won't. It's a simple matter to hit OPTIMIZE, select Auto Edge, and dial down the threshing to the point where all it does is soften any edge possible.
-Av-
Here's a simple way to add a lot of detail to a single sided object without a ton of polygons. I wanted to make a nice wheel and rim to one of my models, but didn't want the 192 faces that make up the 3d object shown on the right in this pic. So I face painted it with the material editor and from the top view did a screen grab and opened it in my paint program. After I cropped off what I didn't want to keep I saved it as a BMP file. Then I created a 2 faced wheel object and placed my BMP on to it using the material editor and UV map editor. The biggest problem was adjusting the UV lines to fit with the texture file, and boom a nicley textured object with only 2 faces verses the original 192 faces. PS: I save all 3d objects in my GSL library folders for future use and the collection of objects in the library has grown to hundreds of such little objects.
(http://static1.filefront.com/images/personal/l/lppena/106799/yzqfqqccon.thumb500.jpg)
Can someone please tell me how this mrmfactor works and what the settings are?
Dia
You know what really seems to work very effectively is starting models using the nurbs creation tool in GSL. Then converting it into an editable mesh patch, mirroring it, and then welding the 2 halves as a single object.
Afterwards, I can add detail via adding new edges and drawing additional polygons on the resulting geometry. This way my models are somewhat optimized as I construct them. Now if I can only figure out how to paint better texture files look out world!
I've been creating a ton of plant based props like leaves, bushes, and trees using the nurb creation tool, mirroring tool and my imagination. Eventually, I'll upload them for others to download too...BNG.
Oh BTW, the draw polygon tool works great at creating human facial details like eyes, lips, ears, etc. A bit much for pilot figures but really neat for creating detailed texture map screen grabs.
PS: I too would like more info on the mrmfactor thingy myself.
One useful option to working around the 650 poly face limited in Gamespace Lite is to download Truespace 7.6 free from Caligari.com and use the TS6 file icon to load and save older GSL model files into the TS 7.6 work space. There's no poly face limit to file saves, and unlike GSL 7.6 supports Meta and Plastiform objects. It's not really a licence too make models with like a gazillion polygons, but opens up the possibility of more detailed models and props for the game.
(http://static1.filefront.com/images/personal/l/lppena/106799/axpvkkdods.thumb500.jpg)
QuoteSpeaking of engine flame, i've posted the old flame repair tutorial on bzcommand.com
Model :: Engine flame repair tutorial (3ds Max)
I was just going to use this, except bzcommand.com seems to have vanished.
Has anyone else got a copy of the flames tutorial?
BZcommand.com works for me.
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
Its back now.
Doesn't seem to be much help to me, I noticed some time ago that the conversion process I use is a bit odd.
An 8 sided polygon converted from .3ds, to .x to .xsi has 18 vertex instead of just 8, I cannot understand why, it works fine as an xsi and in game.
edit:
Don't you just hate it when 3 years after starting and near the end of a mod you suddenly discover a better way of doing things.... :oops:
Because it has to be split up into 3-triangle parts. Even if you do not do that in the xsi itself, BZ2 will still do it on the split to .msh, and it can split it different then you wanted at times, you should always have it pre-split.
(http://www.overminddl1.com/image_scripts/image_sig.php?type=ODL1signitures&image/sig.gif)
Generated by OvermindDL1's Signature Auto-Add Script (http://overminddl1.com) via GreaseMonkey (http://greasemonkey.mozdev.org/)
Yes, I had short nap and figured out that is what it was.
Still its useful now I have figured out two ways to make xsi triangulated and un-triangulated
Quote from: Dianoga4 on August 11, 2008, 06:19:17 AM
Can someone please tell me how this mrmfactor works and what the settings are?
Dia
MRM is 'Multi-Resolution-Mesh', a technology that Intel came up with to automatically make LOD (level of detail) objects for games.
It allows the designer to NOT have to make simpler models for viewing from far away, which is what LOD's are for. They cut engine strain by simplifying distant objects, ones that you can't see all of the details on anyway. Instead, the engine drops parts of the mesh automatically based on distance.
The designer can still mark verticies (model lines) to indicate the ones that are more important if MRM mangles a model too badly.
It sortof works, but zooming in on a distant pilot model will show you the issues it has. Of course, zoom could probably be linked into MRM such that MRM cuts back as you zoom in, but it's not in BZ2.
And, as far as I know, there are no settings. It's either on or off... experiment with MRMFACTOR = and then come back and tell us. :)
-Av-
Adding detail where needed is a good way to keep poly counts to a manageable size. Most 3d modelers support adding edges and drawing new polygons on existing geometric objects. In Truespace, right clicking an object enters in to edit mode where you can add vertices's, edges, and my favorite draw new polygons on existing ones to add just the right level of detail highlighting only certain areas of the model. I use it on area's like cockpit windows. You can also draw out numbers and other cool symbols to add realistic unit markings. I even used another cool tool to put my initials on one of my units using the text drawing tool to sign it using the subtract boolean tool to imprint my initials; probably a good way to digitally sign the unit to protect against others claiming my work as their own if an issue arises down the road. I tried removing it afterwords, but the effort requires quite a bit of editing to undo it, and most peeps would probably give up in the effort anyways.
Another method for reducing the poly count on a BZII model or prop is to delete unneeded hidden faces on the models geometry. Examples of these are places where two separate but attached objects mate with another model part. Essentially, they're not needed and can safely be removed. A side benefit also appears to be useful when UV mapping a model or prop; less faces to map helps to simplify the UV map created for a bit easier skinning end result.