Tomcatz ShipYard
-
Mmhhhh i Would prefer from LOD as ramp is not
Linear .Any idea ?
Then āLinearizeā it :mrgreen:
-
Nice stuff, Tom.
ā¦ and no, Iāll not ask about the poly count.
Cheers,
LSpfff that? just 500 are more than enoughā¦ :rofl:
-
500 as 500.000
-
Hi-Thank you all.
Polygons: arround 52k - Normaly a carrier is the only big object in the hole wide sea so : no frame problems or so. It works perfect.
Cheers
Tom -
Question is if you will create lower LODsā¦ the fact that its working doesnāt mean that its working right. Unlike other sims/games, Falcon dynamic campaign can be overloading, even on strong machines, not creating lower LODs for a new created model means that the old lower LODs will be used, and of course this LODs have different textures assigned to them, so when LOD is transitioned, the meaning is that the GFX engine must load new/more texturesā¦ having all LODs using same texture sets is the way to go, of course also creating 1 or maximum 2 large texture sheets for a model is better than having many smaller textures. You would be surprised how loading textures might be critical on game performanceā¦
You are very good at creating high quality models but itās too bad you arenāt working per requirements for standard models and even if releasing a community independent patch, you arenāt creating lower LODs for your modelsā¦ how much it takes to create lower LODs? Iām sure way less than the original model right?
-
Question is if you will create lower LODsā¦ the fact that its working doesnāt mean that its working right. Unlike other sims/games, Falcon dynamic campaign can be overloading, even on strong machines, not creating lower LODs for a new created model means that the old lower LODs will be used, and of course this LODs have different textures assigned to them, so when LOD is transitioned, the meaning is that the GFX engine must load new/more texturesā¦ having all LODs using same texture sets is the way to go, of course also creating 1 or maximum 2 large texture sheets for a model is better than having many smaller textures. You would be surprised how loading textures might be critical on game performanceā¦
You are very good at creating high quality models but itās too bad you arenāt working per requirements for standard models and even if releasing a community independent patch, you arenāt creating lower LODs for your modelsā¦ how much it takes to create lower LODs? Iām sure way less than the original model right?
Why not erase the old lods - textures? and use only new - current?
@Tom Catz wow only 52k polyās wow manā¦ u are a masterā¦
Could u please give some insight on the reflective surfaces that glow in the night if u have it done (as I believe)?
Iām trying to make my buildings light up in the night and still I canāt finish so to have a complete overview on the subject, so to decide which is best and go aheadā¦ -
Hi WoW!
Now that deserves a āFRAMINGāā¦ā¦ ^^^^^^ā¦LoL
Thats what Iām talking about lets get it onā¦Fantastic cant waitā¦
I also would like to say I dont agree with āFPS/Polycount this and that Argumentā holding back F4 from ever becoming what it should be in todays ā¦ā¦2013 ā¦ Flight Simulator Standards.
Its time to make F4 more modern āRise-the-Barā higher and higherā¦ as per say!
I say go for it Tomcatzās look how many āThanksā your getting everyone wants a high quality modern F4 Sim, not old Falcon 3.0 look, Cāmon guys!
Keep going Tomcatzās your stuff looks awesome and the detail is amazing!
Also like you said here ā¦ https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11046-Tomcatz-ShipYard&p=177224&viewfull=1#post177224 if you say no problem then people need to just upgrade their systems simple really and expected if you love gaming yet alone Flight Simulators.
You have the wider community support! :headb: ā¦ā¦ Your making F4 better all the time!:woohoo:
Itās obvious more Core Code Optimization for Quad Core CPUās, Memory Usage Bandwidth and a New Terrain Engine, Terrain Mesh, GFX engine tweaked for better photo realistic modeling etc etc work is desperately needed as well, eliminating all the limitations the core code has is truly the way forward and free up the sim to look more like a high end commercial product.
Just surprised this isnāt the case but continually debated in Forum by others who know about this stuff.
I mean the wider community is asking for ARMAII Terrain as an example and rightly so its 2013, gents, Cāmon, keeping up with Flight Sim standards is where BMS needs to be looking at the Future of F4, right, lets be honest and discuss this respectfully.
More like this Pleaseā¦
Good quality models high Definition etc etc is needed.
Point is peoples individual PC Systems should not slow or under develop F4 Sim moving forward and beyond 2013ā¦Final!
Devs can utilize the BMS Config Editor so users can turn ON or OFF certain functions for better performance like I.e 3D Cities, HDR, Blur, other effect add-ons and GFX settings etc etc etc like in FSX, Oh Cāmon gents, seriously now.
I mean simply going by what I read in Forum it will have to happen anyway old code and limitations and what not etc etc etcā¦
We all want a better and modern Falcon, so keep going Tom Catzāsā¦my 2 Cents anyway!
Thanks for all the work!
Regards,
SkyKnight
-
Why not erase the old lods - textures? and use only new - current?
Because you still NEED them?? looking at the carrier from 5K feet shouldnāt be a 52K poly model but more like 5Kā¦
-
Hi,
the look is very nice, the frames are stabil and good and dthe overall look is much better if you want to land on the carrier.
Polycount is not important- The workload for the grafic card is much more important.
I use a 2048x2048 texture for the hole carrier. After a long time I was able to manage the export problems with textures which uses alpha sources. Some day I realized that I still have to use only one texture but I could use these texture with different materials and material settings. So I have one texture but a lot of effects. And now I have reelings, antennas, cables and big painted areasā¦
Cheers,
Tom -
Hi Tom,
@Tom:
Hi,
the look is very nice, the frames are stabil and good and dthe overall look is much better if you want to land on the carrier.
maybe this is true for you, but our goal is to get the sim running smooth for people with some older HW alsoā¦
So youāre building nice models, but unfortunately no way for them (with such high poly count) to go into BMS db.Cheers
Biker -
Polycount is not important- The workload for the grafic card is much more important.
You say this. I tried your SAM stuff and FPS was halved on my rig. So as long as possible pls. spare with polys and create lower LODs or your work is pointless. Most of useres never will enjoy your HQ models because cannot be integratedā¦ Or even anyone try to put into 3rd party DB many players HW are not able deal with too many polys.
-
Hi JP,
Mmhhhh i Would prefer from LOD as ramp is not
Linear .Any idea ?
in RV I did hijack the slot data (they have x, y, z coordinates) to generate deag positions on carriers.
Maybe we can use a similar approach (new type) then also we can get rid of bounding box usage.Cheers
Biker -
Hi JP,
in RV I did hijack the slot data (they have x, y, z coordinates) to generate deag positions on carriers.
Maybe we can use a similar approach (new type) then also we can get rid of bounding box usage.Cheers
BikerI hacked data as well for catapult and arrester positions. However I need real z posit on the LOD because ramp is not linear at all
-
@Tom:
Polycount is not important- The workload for the grafic card is much more important.
The work load comes form many things, poly count and also the vertex count. There are many things which cause the graphics card to have more work e.g. shading breaks, DOF, switches etc.
One the to also remember is that if we let everyone make models like this then it will start to be a problem. Try not to be greedy with your poly counts as there are many other that want to use or create high poly models. Think about the user that has installed all of these new high poly unoptimised models.
Regards
Dave -
ā¦
ā¦
ā¦
ā¦ I ā¦ dont know what kind of problem there is. Better models (more accurate models) needs more polygones. If you wont accept that fact I should stop my efforts now and you can still land on that painted box what is called "Carrier. I really do not understand it- I wont!
Cheers -
You simply do not want to accpect the requirements of a game. Not BMS Team, nobody will accept a stuff which have only most detailed LOD. Only supercomputers will accept this polycount. So as long as your aspect wonāt change your work should be treated as an art, but not pratical application. I have seen people who made 2M poly models just for fun as an art, they never wished to intagrate any game. But if you wishā¦
In short +1000 thanks from users for a big nothing and some nice screenshot. Sad.
-
Better models need more polygons but it doesnāt mean they have to have EXPLODING poly count! Look at Hayeb modelsā¦ 4K tris (not polys!) for great quality ground units or 15-20K tris for a nice AC model. Look at the AN-24, how nice it is with sane tris count, lower LODs, matching textures etc, so it can be standard in BMS DB and stay there forever for EVERYONE to use without the need to manually install models/textures, worry about unoptimized models and lower LODs etcā¦
You have decided to work that way and I respect your choice but I donāt see the logic in it. I guess you do like the sim and you do care about people using your models so think this way:
1. You make models like now - Your models stay always some 3rd party work, after long time (when maybe you will not be around anymore or stop making models, or stop caring, it does happenā¦) your 3rd party work stays hovering around forever, like tons of old times models and skins that no one ever use anymore because its forgotten, disappeared with the years and mostly the DB changes that people have to do manuallyā¦ its forgotten.
2. You make correct models with sane tris count, lower LODs etc and your models go into BMS DB and they sale with the DB foreverā¦ for years, not one will forget them because they will always be in there, for all theaters, all DB changes etcā¦ and even if in the future the GFX engine will change to allow more poly count to be rendered easily, they will be replaced only when better models are introduced. You can always send your high poly work for BMS to keep for maybe someday when GFX engine and HW will be good enough to handle it in Falcon.
I know its sounds dramatic but this is reality of what happen through the yearsā¦ your choice.
Cheers!
-
Give up guys and let Tom build the models he wantsā¦ Tom do not want to (or canāt ?) understand āwhyā all those recommendations from Dev team. Let him do his HP models and let the people enjoy the time they can ā¦ finally, let models be unusable in one years or more. (:()
Tom is building beautiful hight ploy models, but that is not the most difficultā¦ I do prefer focus on what can brings us a durable evolutionā¦ Hayabās models.
-
I dont know why I have to run against walls here.
I thought I can do something for the BMS community but I wont discuss the same points ever and ever again. I
ll stop my efforts and molnibalage can be happy. Some people are very fast to criticize other peoples work while doing simply nothing for the community. I
m so bored about these poeple. However: I have position and I wont go in any direction - So this is what Iam.
So thanks for the support- be happy- and out -
I dont know why I have to run against walls here.
You donāt have to Tom ā¦ Do what you wantā¦ or what make youn happy!
It is YOUR work, YOUR time, YOUR choice.
Nobody is judging you. They are just sad to see all this work wasted in a long term.