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

[Centurus]

LODs aren't used in SFC3, nor are any different textures for the same purpose.  One model, one set of textures.

[GotAFarmYet?]

do the textue LODs run independent of the mesh LODds?

What most don't understand is a LOD is a complete model, It has to be made, mapped, HPed, DPed and textured just like any model. you would basically have to make 3 complete ships then once exported you would have to check each LOD. This would have to be tested in the viewer and the game engine for errors, including where the weapons fire from. It is alot of work and the two other LODs other than the primary one do not transfer to any other game and would have to be removed.

What is a LOD should be your question
A LOD is a Load On Distance model, basically a fully created model that the game will load at a predetermined distance. example below (not exact)
LOD1 = 0-15 Full Detailed Model 1000-7500 polies, Full detailed textures 16 or 8 bit color
LOD2 = 15-50 undetailed model 250-2000 polies, half sized texture reduced resolution 8 bit or 4 bit color
LOD3 = 050+ block model 100-500 polies, quater sized textures reduced resolution 4 bit or 2 bit color

So a modeller would ahve to make three complete ships for every release, a nice thing about the exporter is that if you do not have other models to assign to the export slots it will assign the orginal model for you to those slots. Now only the exporter made for Max let you do this, the other exporters for GMax, MS, etc did not have this ability and only export a 1 model.

So now back to your question:
I make a LOD1 model and assign textures to it, I can make a LOD2 model and assign the same textures or make reduced textures for it and assign them. Note if you rescale them, the textures by the way will need fixing after you do this. One way for making a LOD2 is to run the ship through a poly reducer, note this will cause mesh errors that have to be corrected. In both these cases the errors can be so severe that it will be easy to make a new one than correct the current mesh.

So a LOD is a complete model, with textures, damage points, hardpoints, and mapping. Depending on the camera distance from the target will determine which LOD is used. Only a export from 3DMax versions 2-5 will allow you to place multiple models into the exported MOD file.

Yeah I know clear as mud, but hope it helps ask away where you need it clearified.

[intermech]

GAFY, I think that is a very accurate, clear description. Your poly-counts seem high. Are you quoting stock model specs, or community averages?

[GotAFarmYet?]

GAFY, I think that is a very accurate, clear description. Your poly-counts seem high. Are you quoting stock model specs, or community averages?

Community averages is what I based it off of, the orginal game models were all sub 1200 polies for the full version

[Adonis]

GAFY, I think that is a very accurate, clear description. Your poly-counts seem high. Are you quoting stock model specs, or community averages?

I'd say those are community averages more than stock specs (even for SFC3), you're just used to building really low poly meshses my friend  .

In BC for instance you have the possibility of separate mesh and texture LOD's, so you can even use a LOD2 (called Med in BC) with LOD3 (called Low in BC) textures. Our personal BC limit was 10k for quite a while, and I personally don't even go over 15k (for like really big and/or detailed stuff like starbases or huge ships). Also, my personal rule of thumb is a single big map (2048's are my defaults) on 200 meter ships or below, and 2 or 3, maybe even 4 on bigger stuff, depending on the exact size (but 4 is really enough for anything to look good). One exception to this rule is the Galor/Keldon I did for Excalibur, The Gal is 8.2k with one 2048 map and a 512 one for the glowing parts (impulse, deflector, phaser pyramids), while the Keldon is around 10k with the exact same texture set as the Galor (they share their textures between themselves). I never would go down the road of having a boatload of small textures (like some SFC peeps do), it's pointless and you can achieve the exact same visual result with those max 4 big ones, than 20 which vary in size from 1024 to 4x4  or even 2x2, also, using a smaller number of maps helps with performance too (the analogy is that like you, a PC can handle a couple of big stuff easier than a load of varying size ones).

[Kreeargh]

GAFY, I think that is a very accurate, clear description. Your poly-counts seem high. Are you quoting stock model specs, or community averages?

I'd say those are community averages more than stock specs (even for SFC3), you're just used to building really low poly meshses my friend  .

In BC for instance you have the possibility of separate mesh and texture LOD's, so you can even use a LOD2 (called Med in BC) with LOD3 (called Low in BC) textures. Our personal BC limit was 10k for quite a while, and I personally don't even go over 15k (for like really big and/or detailed stuff like starbases or huge ships). Also, my personal rule of thumb is a single big map (2048's are my defaults) on 200 meter ships or below, and 2 or 3, maybe even 4 on bigger stuff, depending on the exact size (but 4 is really enough for anything to look good). One exception to this rule is the Galor/Keldon I did for Excalibur, The Gal is 8.2k with one 2048 map and a 512 one for the glowing parts (impulse, deflector, phaser pyramids), while the Keldon is around 10k with the exact same texture set as the Galor (they share their textures between themselves). I never would go down the road of having a boatload of small textures (like some SFC peeps do), it's pointless and you can achieve the exact same visual result with those max 4 big ones, than 20 which vary in size from 1024 to 4x4  or even 2x2, also, using a smaller number of maps helps with performance too (the analogy is that like you, a PC can handle a couple of big stuff easier than a load of varying size ones).

I think more options rules SFC is one that gives many. Yea low tech to date but more than other games of same era!  Even BC is just a glory game.    Lods in sfc have some use not just the glory but to work the game engine so it dont die.  If its not true ? Why make it ?

[Adonis]

GAFY, I think that is a very accurate, clear description. Your poly-counts seem high. Are you quoting stock model specs, or community averages?

I'd say those are community averages more than stock specs (even for SFC3), you're just used to building really low poly meshses my friend  .

In BC for instance you have the possibility of separate mesh and texture LOD's, so you can even use a LOD2 (called Med in BC) with LOD3 (called Low in BC) textures. Our personal BC limit was 10k for quite a while, and I personally don't even go over 15k (for like really big and/or detailed stuff like starbases or huge ships). Also, my personal rule of thumb is a single big map (2048's are my defaults) on 200 meter ships or below, and 2 or 3, maybe even 4 on bigger stuff, depending on the exact size (but 4 is really enough for anything to look good). One exception to this rule is the Galor/Keldon I did for Excalibur, The Gal is 8.2k with one 2048 map and a 512 one for the glowing parts (impulse, deflector, phaser pyramids), while the Keldon is around 10k with the exact same texture set as the Galor (they share their textures between themselves). I never would go down the road of having a boatload of small textures (like some SFC peeps do), it's pointless and you can achieve the exact same visual result with those max 4 big ones, than 20 which vary in size from 1024 to 4x4  or even 2x2, also, using a smaller number of maps helps with performance too (the analogy is that like you, a PC can handle a couple of big stuff easier than a load of varying size ones).

I think more options rules SFC is one that gives many. Yea low tech to date but more than other games of same era!  Even BC is just a glory game.    Lods in sfc have some use not just the glory but to work the game engine so it dont die.

Quite the opposite, in BC you have far more room to free-combine stuff in therms of LOD, ST: Excal will be same and better in that regard. I didn't choose to mod BC by accident back in the day when I started and left SFC as an afterthought along the way. For ST:Excal, just look at it as a best-of-both-world approach on the matter, it'll have the flexibility of BC LOD system and the way SFC3 does illumination (colored map). The good things when you write your own engine in-team for the game your a part of making.

[Kreeargh]

My thoughts SFC1 , 2 and OP notscf3 or BC lod files.  I guess one needs law to define things of thought? Its not a debate at all its a question ? 

[marstone]

question to you guys then. If you could make a few minor tweaks to the graphic engine of SFC:EAW what would you do?  And what is the number one important thing you think should be done?  This is for debate and my own interest, not from the standpoint that it would or can be done.

[Kreeargh]

question to you guys then. If you could make a few minor tweaks to the graphic engine of SFC:EAW what would you do?  And what is the number one important thing you think should be done?  This is for debate and my own interest, not from the standpoint that it would or can be done.

My own wish would be use of gif files for use in all textures !
 MANY  ideas possable.

[marstone]

so  gif's so you can add animations would be your one wish if you got it.  that is one.

[Kreeargh]

so  gif's so you can add animations would be your one wish if you got it.  that is one.

Oh how about a Lod tool?  A program that sees polys or verts and coverts it to 3 models baised on the math  from 1 model  idea ?

[Tus-XC]

1. Animatable parts
2. Alpha Maps (I wants transparencies)
3. update to texture formats (PNGs, GIF, JPG,etc)

[Centurus]

What model format would be used, would be my question to the now recent conversation being discussed here.  Would the MOD format still be used, or would another be used instead?  Just curious.

[Panzergranate]

The thing everyone is forgetting is that when SFC 1, SFC 2 and SFC 3 came out PCs were still running single ALU processors which utilised a lot of extraneous clock cycles to process model graphics and texture.

Now we run processors with multiple ALUs, dedecated to branch calls, interrupts, IO handling and the original core ALU that all PC processors have always had. These were features, years ago, that only super computers had.

It is not, as one IT tech once tried to convince a bunch of electronics engineers, 4 x CPUs in one chip.... we laughed so much over that one!! God it was like listening to a medic trying to explain brain surgery to a neurologist....

Therefore LODs aren't really neccessary as their original purpose was to overcome the processor data handling limitations of the old Pentium 2 and Pentium 3 processors.

However I still use LODs in some of my models mainly because:

(A) Some of the PCs we network here for LAN games aren't Dual or Quad Core equiped.

(B) They can prove useful in LAN scenarios for Romulan deceptions such making a warship appear as a freighter or a mine appear as a vessel to attract a victim.

With the latter we allow Romulan corvettes to have the ability to appear to be freighters from a distance and need to use LOD 2 and LOD 3 to maintain that illusion. With their designation, in the shiplist, also under freighter, opposing players aren't always too sure what they are attempting to attack. We also use the Romulan Cloaked Decoy shuttle, from SFB, by a similar system.

We also use the same LOD system for the Klingon K2 scout, except it only appears as a Federation freighter at LOD 3, in keeping with the Star Fleet Museum transcript of its operational failings. The version of the K2, for use against the Kzinti and Hydrans in scenarios, deceives at LOD 2 and LOD 3.

As we use FMSE to script all of our scenarios and use a 500 ship model library, we have some interesting LAN games.

You can have some fun with LODs with some imagination.

[knightstorm]

(B) They can prove useful in LAN scenarios for Romulan deceptions such making a warship appear as a freighter or a mine appear as a vessel to attract a victim.

With the latter we allow Romulan corvettes to have the ability to appear to be freighters from a distance and need to use LOD 2 and LOD 3 to maintain that illusion. With their designation, in the shiplist, also under freighter, opposing players aren't always too sure what they are attempting to attack. We also use the Romulan Cloaked Decoy shuttle, from SFB, by a similar system.

We also use the same LOD system for the Klingon K2 scout, except it only appears as a Federation freighter at LOD 3, in keeping with the Star Fleet Museum transcript of its operational failings. The version of the K2, for use against the Kzinti and Hydrans in scenarios, deceives at LOD 2 and LOD 3.

As we use FMSE to script all of our scenarios and use a 500 ship model library, we have some interesting LAN games.

You can have some fun with LODs with some imagination.

That sounds really cool.   I'm assuming you have some sort of restriction on probes.

[Panzergranate]

Some ships don't have probes.... Orions for instance....

Some players still occasionally forget to fire a probe.

 The other option is to send a Red Shirt out in a budget shuttlecraft to take a closer look. If it turns out to be a monster or a hostile warship then its only a Red Shirt and engineering can always knock up another shuttlecraft. If there was a Red Shirt in a space suit option, that would be better.

Red Shirts.... they're there to die in horrific and stupid ways so you don't have to....

[marstone]

so  gif's so you can add animations would be your one wish if you got it.  that is one.

Oh how about a Lod tool?  A program that sees polys or verts and coverts it to 3 models baised on the math  from 1 model  idea ?

That would be awesome, but if a professional level 3d graphics program can't cut polys without messing up the model, I don't hold a lot of hope for a small utility.  But will put on my little list of things to think about.

[marstone]

What model format would be used, would be my question to the now recent conversation being discussed here.  Would the MOD format still be used, or would another be used instead?  Just curious.

MOD is still the format for use.  From personal thought, maybe adding a MD2 (mod2) format down the road might be good, thus keeping the old one for comparability and add a new one for new things.  But this is only my musing and hopes.

[intermech]

question to you guys then. If you could make a few minor tweaks to the graphic engine of SFC:EAW what would you do?  And what is the number one important thing you think should be done?  This is for debate and my own interest, not from the standpoint that it would or can be done.

Since you asked . . .

1. Ability to Edit the Q3 file. I have been following your progress! Thanks for your work here.
2. Support for wide screen and higher resolution monitors.
3. Transparent texture support for *.tga, *.gif, and *.png formats in SFC1, SFC2, SFCOP (SFC3 already has it)
4. Animated *.gif support.
5. SFC3 allows selection of different spectacularity on individual models in the *.gf file. It would be nice to be able to have different spectacular on  different model groups.
6. Spectacularity and/or bump maps enabled.