Topic: Are Lod's still usefull with tech we have now?

[FoaS_XC]

Okay guys: You've both made good points but your "tone" is starting to get in the way of it.

Dizzy,

Did you see my post about technical facts?

[Starfox1701]

Look I can see both sides here

Dizzy you are taking a long veiw which includes making the environs more newb friendly so they can get into this game the way you all did. This is indeed an admirable thought process but you r approach may not be as practical as you think. Especially if it alienate the very people who make the modes that are the bedrock and foundation of this future you are looking to build. Perhaps it is time to consider other raods you can take that would lead to a simalar end. You may end up doing more work yourself  but then again you do feel its worth doing don't you?

Tus-XC you have an understanding of the hundreds or sometimes thousands of UNPAID manhours that can go into a new high quality model and texture set be for the first game is plaied. However you do care about thoughs 20 0ther guys that play with your stuff other wize it would never see the light of day. In that regaurd consider how the Readme can be improved especially where the novice is concerned. Training new moders and for that mater new modelers is how any comunity survives. I know modeling is a labor of love. No on endures the headachs that come with it. Don't you think your community desers some of the same consideration?

[marstone]

Okay guys: You've both made good points but your "tone" is starting to get in the way of it.

Dizzy,

Did you see my post about technical facts?

Part on this thread I find sad is that some XC members don't give 2 cents about the community members and how to help them out.  Isn't that the reason to join XC is to support the community.  Help it progress.  Oh-well, on to other things.

[GotAFarmYet?]

Okay guys: You've both made good points but your "tone" is starting to get in the way of it.

Dizzy,

Did you see my post about technical facts?

Part on this thread I find sad is that some XC members don't give 2 cents about the community members and how to help them out.  Isn't that the reason to join XC is to support the community.  Help it progress.  Oh-well, on to other things.

Marstone,
Relax they are two people from polar oppsite veiw points, they will each hold their arguement to heart while ignoring the point of the other except to attack it. A oppsite veiw is aways seen as wrong and therefore should be attacked, nothing wrong with it but it does tend to get out of hand. Think of a Tea party memeber and a Liberial having a political discussion, and trying to stop that fight.

Now lets get back to the orginal question that was answered on page one, go back and read it if you want.
Now lets move on to the argument, who is responisble for installing something on their PC, the USER is flat out. Now why are they responsible, they are making a change to a program that the manufacturer did not do, think of it as adding a turbo to your car or lowering it. Most poeple do not understand what a modification will do but they chose to do it, they could have looked it up or asked questions before doing it. As a old time gamer I always new it USER beware if you changed anything to a game you bought, community made or not you took the risk when you changed it. Same thing here if you replaced a defualt ship the game came with then it was your choice, you are the one responsible. You might have assumed that they would test it in every way you would use the game, but more than liki8ly they only tested it in the way they play the game. Large community mods are a bit different as they are usually intended for on-line play and less so for the single player mods, they are made by groups and tested across several platforms and internet connections. Firesoul made sure the ships he puts in a mod has low impact, because he designed it from the start to be a server mod for Dynaverse. Most individual ships are designed for a single player stand point as i doubt the artist system specs will be met by the average user.

So Dizzy well it might be nice for the modellers to make more friendly ships for on-line play unless they are part of a group making a large mod, that is usually outside of their purpose. USER beware should always be assumed as it is true with any piece of software you install, and that is basically a model. You as a server admin know that only a certain shiplist can be used, and if they have not replaced the defualt ships will use them when when playing on those servers. It is why we have the mod switcher and so forth the tools are there but unless someone looks or asks, they made the choice themselves.

So now in your Defense, can a new readme file be drafted to include a warning and what is or isn't in a new ship? Yes it can we can as a community ask the modellers to use a new form of readme file to help new users coming into this game by adding certain information. The readme file has always been a frame work to cover legal, and personal issues about a ship no reason a new one can't be made and distributed.

and now about the texture size and poly counts, Textures are the number one lagg causers for this game the FPS you get from reducing from 16 bit colour to 8 bit colour is hugh, and from a 1024x1024 size to a 512x512 is a 75% saving of meory from the first. You have to remember the game engine is from about 1994, it has serious limits in graphics.

could go on with more but I think this is enough for now

[marstone]

Gafy, yeah, I know those two will argue this until the earth ends.  I was just saying that an XC member you would figure would be behind trying to set standards for the community so everyone will get a better enjoyment out of it. 

As I said, on to other things.  I actually got an urge to work on some code again so back to diving into it.

[FRA.E.Kehakoul_XC]

Okay guys: You've both made good points but your "tone" is starting to get in the way of it.

Dizzy,

Did you see my post about technical facts?

Part on this thread I find sad is that some XC members don't give 2 cents about the community members and how to help them out.  Isn't that the reason to join XC is to support the community.  Help it progress.  Oh-well, on to other things.

Actually Xeno Corp is a fleet /guild with many fields of operations,other gameing platforms etc,, which means we got members  who don't necessarily have their prime focus on Sfc and helping this  Community.

The staff of D.net however is a whole different affair, all working here are dedicated to help this community ,that should be obvious by now.
That said, This is Tus`s opinion about this special topic, and not the  general Stance of XC as a whole in regard to Lods.

[marstone]

okay, will buy that.  I have seen the XC website also.  Just figured it was kind of one of the same. (XC/d.net).  Back to code (never ending stuff it is).

[FA Frey XC]

Ok.

1.) Dizzy - it's absolutely the end users responsibility for ANYTHING they install on their machine. Period. Ultimately it's the end user that has to deal with it, and it may absolutely be:

a.) The model drops the player out of the game
b.) The Model lags the game so badly that one player seems to be rubber-banding as they approach.
c.) Fighters / PF's turn on their launching ship, then fly off for some Starbucks.

and it's all on them. Now, communities form around such things... and how to better play / enjoy said applications. Kinda what happened here, but I'd dare say your "FU" attitude and refusal to even speak in a polite and well-mannered tone has done more damage to the game than anything else. You don't give a rats ass about the community, as usual  you just want to win your argument.

2.) Tus - It's absolutely the software designers (in this case the model designer) responsibility to include relevant documentation so the END USER CAN read it to know about any possible issues. By refusing to, not only is it blatantly un-professional, it's rude and condescending. How many end users would even understand it ? Doesn't matter. You put the info in the readme so it's there, so you've done your part.

FOR MODELERS TO SAY ITS TOO MUCH TROUBLE TO PUT IN A READ ME SOMETHING LIKE

"WARnING!!! This model has been ported from Bridgecommander to Starfleet Command and as such may not run well on the original versions of the game due to it's engine's restrictions."

IS COMPLETELY LAZY. You should be ashamed of yourself... and this proves it :

sorry for beeing such an as***** but do you know what LOD's meen, more work and most of the modellers make models because they have fun to make models and won't even consider to make LOD's, cause it's to much work.
if you want to use highpoly models, than go with time and the thinking of modern gaming industry, and change to a newer game that could handle the higher polycounts or invest into better servers or change to a newer OS.
i to won't ever make LOD's for any gamemodels i make, but i even don't want or will ever use online play that much.
i even don't like the way the gaming industry goes with this, to only support online play and throwing the singleplayer part completely out.

So basically it comes down to this : your BOTH RIGHT, and yet WRONG.

The modeler NEEDS to put relevant information into the readme, so it's THERE. By doing THAT ACT, you've basically put it ON the END USER. Tried and true method, mates, been done since beginning of time - give em a manual and then tell em "give it hell!". If you want to be lazy, fine... make your entry that it may not run well because you certainly didn't DESIGN IT FOR SFC.

If it was designed for SFC, then it SHOULD have the LOD for the game version your playing. SFC3 doesn't require LOD's on models, hence it would be applicable.  The ENTIRE PURPOSE of LODS, does anyone understand it ?

Then WE the COMMUNITY take care, as we always have, of educating the rest of the community on those specific issues. Make a thread containing MODEL packs and those w/ LODS and without, or ensuring specific dynaverse servers have LOD models that require them.

What will the future hold? Who knows ? This community has a history of it's members suddenly getting really selfish and arrogant and the community suffering for it. Perhaps until we, as a community, can again get past

Now for my soap box, I honestly don't give two sh*ts about most players anymore.  there are what, 20 or so active players?  Maybe if there were a few hundred that still played.  But really, whats the point of tailoring my work to 20 people when odds are only 2 people are going to use it.  It ain't worth my damn time and my time is expensive.

arrogance and selfishness, we'd be a lot better.

Regards,

[Tus-XC]

I should make it clear that my stances are my own opinions and do not reflect the views of XC or its members.  I have been crass (and i'm sorry if rubbed some of ya'll the wrong way, tends to happen when i'm annoyed) but there has been a reason.  Through my arguements I took the hard stance that I would not do this or that but did anyone bother to fact check me on this?  If you check my site you will find Poly counts clearly labeled for my newer models (I haven't added them for all of them).  Further, had the readme been checked you would have found this:

Ship name:  Daedalus, NCC - 150
Race: Federation
Model/mesh credits: Tus
Texture credits:  Tus
Design Credits:  Aethernaut
Kitbash credits: n/a


Are these following files/modifications included?

Model brks = (exploding model): - yes
Textured: -yes
Hardpoints/damage points:-yes.
Ship (mod) file : -yes
SFC II illumination maps: -yes
SFC III files: -no
Game specs: Replaces FCL
Background: no

Now granted, i don't have LODs listed, I haven't made them or used them in but 1 or two instances (and don't even intend to, sorry).  But that right there is a pretty detailed readme (even comes with a warning which is both a reminder that it might not work for you but also a bit of protection for me as its my general disclaimer).  But heres the thing, we already police ourselves and do stuff to make it easy for the end user to use our models.  Remember that install file i talked about?  I did that for a while to make it easier for the players to get models, and install them.  I even included a set of specs for it that could be copied into your shiplist (granted they were probably not balanced).  Modellers have been doing things for for a while to help yall and as demonstrated in this thread it, for the most part, goes unnoticed.  Further there is only so much we can do to make it work for everyone.  A detailed readme, stats and specs, info posted plain as day on the dled site.  Beyond that there isn't much we can do as all that now lies in the hands of the user.  This leads me what this really is about and its people demanding we do things their way and then harrasing people when they don't.  I've seen people posting in model threads and not even comment on the model but simply demand 'whats the poly count'.  No coments on the model (good or bad) but a demand. Or as is exampled in this thread belittling others just because they don't share your opinion on how models should be done.  That type of attitude just don't fly with me, and I'm certain that it don't fly with just about everyone else.  Doing just that will deter me from making those changes just to spite them its just that simple. 

Not sure how to end this now, I'm guessing that is long and rambling but I think it sums up my position.

[Kreeargh]

STOP THE --- ---  THIS THREAD was not MODELERS issues. My thoughs were "ITS ABOUT THE TECH" WHAT IS NEEDED !!!!!!!!   
 You know its hard to read all these posts to understand any thing but -- thoughts.
Peace out! I hope sfc lasts forever.

[GotAFarmYet?]

STOP THE --- ---  THIS THREAD was not MODELERS issues. My thoughs were "ITS ABOUT THE TECH" WHAT IS NEEDED !!!!!!!!   
 You know its hard to read all these posts to understand any thing but -- thoughts.
Peace out! I hope sfc lasts forever.

Then go back and read this First post from me and ignore the rest of this thread

for SFC 2 and 1, YES
SFC 3 and future versions NO

The SFC 3 engine used a different system so lods were not really necessary that system handled the graphics better too compaired to the orginal engine.

The LOD was useful because only if the ship was veiwed very closely was the full bit map at a higher resolution used. at a distance of 10 or more the second LOD was used, with a texture setting that was 1/2 to 1/4 the resolution of the up close one. It means the processor used 50 - 25% less of the processing of the LOD 1 version. If LOD was used at ranges above 50 I think it was the model was 1/4 to 1/8 of the LOD 2 25- 12 % of the processing of LOD 2 and a whopping 4% or so of LOD 1.

It meant that you only impaced your system if you closed to a range of under 10 to allot of ships which did not happen all that much

Basically if a new game is developed you will not need the LOD, and will probably have the light maps built into the texture *.TGA file and bump maps and other things added as well. If the next version is built on the current SFC I-OP then they will be needed for the on-line players. Current game engines are far better at graphics than the older engines, remember this one is from about 1994 or older for the orginal games. SFC 3 used a different engine and could handle the higher poly and textures as does the BC, Legacy and other games.

[marstone]

version being worked on is EAW based (only source access is that one).  So limits will be the same to start.  As it is learned (reconstructing the API stuff), I have hopes that a new graphics engine will be added, but that would be farther down the road.  I have hopes of it being done.  If nothing else some tweaks to the engine might be done, like adding some of the newer tech to the older engine.

[intermech]

You cannot put artists into a box. Everything released around here is free. Use of LODs costs money because programs that can generate them are expensive.

I keep my polies low out of habit because I had been using the same low grade computer for over a decade. I rarely now release full ship additions because it seems no one can appreciate a balance between model "quality" and poly-count. It is nice to know that there is a contingent out there that appreciates finesse models that are conservative on the  resource demand.

Without LODs, you get the following catch-22:

If you become a poly-count miser, you get poor reviews on the filefront site because spoiled fifth-graders with corporate-grade computers are upset because your model doesn't look like professional film quality, even though they are tens of times better than the stock models. If you increase poly count to appease the art critics, then you alienate the people who are playing the game for the tactics.

I have never, ever been successful in logging  in anywhere to play multi-player on any SFC game. So writing out detailed information on what a particular model might do to a system for people who do not care to distribute the same level of detail about how to be involved in these games is lopsided at best.

Here is a solid TIP: the better this ship looks, the more it will lag your system. PERIOD.

[GotAFarmYet?]

You cannot put artists into a box. Everything released around here is free. Use of LODs costs money because programs that can generate them are expensive.

I keep my polies low out of habit because I had been using the same low grade computer for over a decade. I rarely now release full ship additions because it seems no one can appreciate a balance between model "quality" and poly-count. It is nice to know that there is a contingent out there that appreciates finesse models that are conservative on the  resource demand.

Without LODs, you get the following catch-22:

If you become a poly-count miser, you get poor reviews on the filefront site because spoiled fifth-graders with corporate-grade computers are upset because your model doesn't look like professional film quality, even though they are tens of times better than the stock models. If you increase poly count to appease the art critics, then you alienate the people who are playing the game for the tactics.

I have never, ever been successful in logging  in anywhere to play multi-player on any SFC game. So writing out detailed information on what a particular model might do to a system for people who do not care to distribute the same level of detail about how to be involved in these games is lopsided at best.

Here is a solid TIP: the better this ship looks, the more it will lag your system. PERIOD.

Go IM!!!
The last line cracked me up and is completely true.

You are correct on the cost side, you need 3DMax 3-5 to export the model with LODs no other program does it. Also on a side note the making of textures has also gone up thanks to corel. The bought the makers of PSP and because it conflicked with there flag ship graphic program Corel Draw they down graded PSP to the point were it is mostly a photo editor now.

Max is still above 1000 I beleive
PS above 700 for the full suite

PSP was about 80 but is now not useful

[Kreeargh]

STOP THE --- ---  THIS THREAD was not MODELERS issues. My thoughs were "ITS ABOUT THE TECH" WHAT IS NEEDED !!!!!!!!   
 You know its hard to read all these posts to understand any thing but -- thoughts.
Peace out! I hope sfc lasts forever.

Then go back and read this First post from me and ignore the rest of this thread

for SFC 2 and 1, YES
SFC 3 and future versions NO

The SFC 3 engine used a different system so lods were not really necessary that system handled the graphics better too compaired to the orginal engine.

The LOD was useful because only if the ship was veiwed very closely was the full bit map at a higher resolution used. at a distance of 10 or more the second LOD was used, with a texture setting that was 1/2 to 1/4 the resolution of the up close one. It means the processor used 50 - 25% less of the processing of the LOD 1 version. If LOD was used at ranges above 50 I think it was the model was 1/4 to 1/8 of the LOD 2 25- 12 % of the processing of LOD 2 and a whopping 4% or so of LOD 1.

It meant that you only impaced your system if you closed to a range of under 10 to allot of ships which did not happen all that much

Basically if a new game is developed you will not need the LOD, and will probably have the light maps built into the texture *.TGA file and bump maps and other things added as well. If the next version is built on the current SFC I-OP then they will be needed for the on-line players. Current game engines are far better at graphics than the older engines, remember this one is from about 1994 or older for the orginal games. SFC 3 used a different engine and could handle the higher poly and textures as does the BC, Legacy and other games.

I AGREE with you I did read that i do not think others did. Let it play out . 

[Adonis]

Oh, man, what a mess...

OK, let's see:

Point 1: Some of you modelers have stated that we do this for free. Yes, we do, and so how we do stuff and most importantly for what we do it for is our own discretion entirely.

Point 2: This is something which by what i red here no one seemed to bother to mention just for the sake of the argument: You cannot just simply cross-port a mesh between ST games, each has it's own way of dealing with things, and porting in reality isn't something you can do easily and with a limited set of knowledge of modelling.

Point 3 (the one Dizzy willfully misses all the time): As GAFY? said upstairs, textures do the lagging 95%, only the remaining 5% is the mesh itself. Add to it that for example you have a mesh that wasn't even done with said particular game in mind, it gets worse if it isn't ported correctly. I've been messing around with Excals engine these past 2 years or so, and that isn't something you can do with limited knowledge of how stuff works in games that Dizzy has. It shows the correlation between poly count and textures nicely, and also which of the two is the resource hog. All moaning aside, as Frey said, your only goal is to be right, which you are not, out of the simple reason that you lack the understanding needed to be able to judge the relations of this whole's sum of parts correctly.

Point 4: Now we get to something which Dizzy will not be able to understand to be blunt, but realistic. It is one thing to build a model which looks good, and a completely different can of worms to make it look good and be done with good skill. The two aren't connected. I was able to transfer this understanding to some to certain degrees of non-absolute excellence, but most fall on deaf ears on the matter. Modeling is something you perfect all the time. Add to this, of course, my second point, which is an integral part of it.

[Strat]

I just want to say 'thank you' for the models people make that add to the fun factor of the game... Its really nice seeing the threads where people discuss them, to see the deep thought and effort put into era design and making them.

Kudos to the effort. Sorry for the times it gets really hard.

[intermech]

Good points Adonis.

I do remember someone took a sample of models which which ranged from very high poly with textures that were practically 4x4 pixel and very low poly with ginormous wallpaper sized textures, played them in the SFC engine, and noted the demand on resources. I wish I could credit who it was, but I remember the conclusion being that the high poly, small textures were much more palatable for the game. The flip side of that is that in SFC3, for example, you can reach a polygon limit. Fallen Warrior had done incremental tests and found this number. But I forget what it was. So, you have to find a balance.

If  you really wanted to classify resource load, I think a way to do it would be to show a factor over the stock models. SFC1 had an average model poly count of about 250 and textures at 256 x 256. So one of my standard ~2500-poly models with 512 x 512 textures would have a poly factor of 10 and a texture factor of 2. . . or may be 4 . . . how ever it is best understood.

[Starfox1701]

do the textue LODs run independent of the mesh LODds?

[Tus-XC]

LoDs are different models that the game engine recognizes as varing camera distances.  As such the textures can be whatever the creater wants them to be.  Sinces the goal of a LoD is to reduce load, the textures associated with that LoD can be reduced in size  accordingly.  They do not act independent of the model as the textures and the model are assigned during creation.  This is only the case of SFC1,2, and OP.  SFC3 as far as i know does not utilize smaller textures for varing LoDs