Jefferson's 3D Modeling Tips for Freelancer
-
Under the heading of FREELANCER; OUTSIDE THE ENGINE! (Or what you can do with a render farm in your closet)
-
Okay for fellow 3D geeks like me:
Single pass render to .tif @ rtime of 24min 58 secs
Global illumination with 4 levels of diffuse depth.
AA fixed as 16x16 min & max (sync)
Single area light with all excluded except ship model and figure. Raytraced shadows attenuated to 60% with cast of S 12% V 8% at cast of R 21 G 19 B 19.
Starsphere pulled from starsphere_bw04_stars.cmp along with associated stars_large01.tga and stars.tga
Nebula and sun volumetric effects (0 geometry).
Stars set to IBL through associated materials in luminance channel with 200% value.
No camera effects. -
Decided my old avatar was too cluttered and didn’t read very well. I’m working in a tutorial on UV mapping in pdf format with over 80 pics. Doing it like the tutorials in the 3D trades and putting the mapper software, model for mapping and textures all into the zip. (Except the image software, if they need that they can grab Gimp or something). The final image turned out so well I cropped it into the new avatar.
Here’ the original;
-
Okay among my irons in the fire I’m giving an entire base a redo. Planet Toledo, the Order base no less. I’ve got the new smoother geometry finished and have added landing pads and am going to render out near seamless textures for her. However I’m stuck at that pesky fx of the landing forcefield under the ship. The fx showroom thread’s last post was from Helloween a year ago, but I posted my appeal anyway and am crossing my fingers.
Now I’ve got some pretty potent terrain generators. (Vue, Bryce, even a few proprietary ones from past gigs). So the terrain mesh looks much better though the polygon counts aren’t that much higher. It’s going to need a total re-texturing to get rid of the tile effects, but that’s not that much trouble. I have the software that does that.
Heres the shots of the half completed Toledo Order base, a test ship of mine (the Asteroid) with a lame placeholder I made instead of the forcefield and a workfile shot of the terrain to show the new polygon mesh and that it’s not just a increasing them with a nurbs smoothing.
EDIT: given the ale, it’s 2 break out files and told until their finished with software their zip I can do with any of it. Still thanks.
-
I just broke the news about what .dds DXT5 implementation I was referring to in prior posts on the OpenGL thread. When I got trolled about it I shut down and figured these people must think DXT5 begins and ends with interpolated alpha. At one time or other I’ve worked professionally with every flavor of .dds and that was years before Freelancer shipped. Well now there’s one thing I and everyone else can use the NORMALS MAP implementation to do and that render NEW and REDONE textures in and resolution you want from vanilla 512 x 512 up to whatever though I’d suggest not going over 2048 x 2048. That’s textures rendered directly to .dds files or .tga files right from the 3D software.
A word of warning here. You REALLY have to know what you are doing or you’re going to crash Photoshop’s NVidia Normals map filter. There’s tricks to doing right. Trick I learned from the NIF Group, tricks I learned that you’ve seen me use in video games somewhere I flat guarantee you. That’s not a boast that’s just the facts.
So if you can take a single square plane and do the below with it using just the renderer welcome to the big leagues:
-
I’ve been trying to get hold of Crabtree to tell him I’m back and ask some technical questions and since he was good with his critiques on earliest models offer WTS World first crack at some ship models I’ve done. Website is dead. All the WTS sites posted in their latest mods are dead. Crabtree if you’re out there here’s a blast from the past that’s for the reason I sent it out when were out of contact because your server went FUBAR:
-
I’m going to repeat this one last time, very slowly, so you hopefully get it.
You’re wrong. You’re acting like file formats are fucking magic when they’re just that: file formats. DXT5_NM is a format used for storing normal maps. It’s a hacked together format (you want to use 3Dc/BC5 for best results) since it just reuses the green and alpha channels of an RGBA texture, but it works.
BUT THAT DOESN’T MAKE THE GAME MAGICALLY USE IT.
Schmack’s renderer can make use of the normal map. Freeworlds’ renderer can too. But that’s because we both explicitly implemented normal mapping support, by ourselves, without Freelancer magically doing it for us.
Freelancer, on its own, cannot use normal maps. It never will be able to. It doesn’t even support specular highlights for fuck’s sake. I don’t care what file format you shit out, none of them is going to do it. A file format just carries data, you can’t make it do something.
Please stop embarrassing yourself by repeating this ad nauseam.
-
Mia Culpa. Mia Maxima Culpa. Sixth time I’ve replied to find out the submit button’s vanished. The upshot is you’re right. There’s more opinions than a dog has fleas and from experience it’s always who gets there first that wins. So I promise from hereon out to never mention any .dds schema inside Freelancer’s engine. Let the best coder win. Now Schmack was taking resizing and othet questions that there is only one sure answer to. There’s a saying around these parts that you can’t polish a turd. And Freelancer’s old textures are firmly in that category. The answer to resize is NOT in the 2D graphics it’s in the 3D software renderer. Otherwise on an upscale your dragging the trash and aliasing with you. Now that means redoing the textures. I’ve explained that to him and will show him with the right techniques that’s not that hard or time consuming and I really want to see what he can do with the tools besides GIMP and Blender because he’s got talent. I’d like to see what he can do not trying to paint the Mona Lisa with a paint roller.
-
Oh an while I’m being contrite FF you are so right about the green and alpha channel. No make that Especially that alpha channel. That is if to let most filters in the creation of them handle it. Don’t they screw it up in a flat heartbeat. That’s why I create the correct data and add it to the alpha channel myself. Darn thing ONLY responds correctly to a the right set of values. As for the green channel that’s again a matter of garbage in - garbage out and again works only with the right set of values. Though when you know… Well the results speak for themselves. Plus packages like C4D do a superb job with them it (at least on my builds) doesn’t use .dds files. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t accept photoshop format with the same NM data. Worked real well.
-
Out of Engine:
New Toledo Order Base in volumetric rederer:
-
… and that one looks better than the original?
Dont get me wrong here.
You might have experience with modeling and textures dating back even before FL was a thing (at least thats what Ive read multiple times today), but you also should keep in mind that we are no dumbasses either.
Some of us have been active FL modders from day one. Thats ~15 years of experience in which we have tried to improve the game as much as possible (and I guess that we did a very good job so far).
Your enthusiasm definitely is refreshing but at times you sound like the guy that wants to teach us how to finally do it right.
You are very focused on the DTX5 NM stuff, probably because you see a benefit in it. Great.
We (or better I -> because I can not speak for the others) see the situation a bit different.
1. the normal map stuff is currently not supported by FL
2. even with the wrappers I do not know how they will deal with the data… maybe the input of the NM data is done in a completely different way -> since the wrapper has not been release yet I dont have such specific information
3. DTX5 (with NM or without) is not always the best way to use textures in FL. By my 15 years of experience with FL I am very sure that DTX1 or DTX3 have some advantages over DTX5. Sometimes I would even go with uncompressed TGA. In my eyes there is no ultimate DTX5 solution.
4. File sizes matter (especially on mod which already have multiple GB of data).
5. compression artifacts or not… in most cases the average user wouldnt even notice that. This whole upscaling stuff in my eyes wont significantly improve the quality (at least not in a way the players would notice).
6. there are other ways to improve the look of textures in FL way beyond what upscaling could do. (if these ways even work on the upcoming wrapper is unknown to me).What I am trying to tell you is that we also have alot of experience, expecially with FL and that there is no “best” solution.
Modding FL requires to make decisions which solution works best in specific situations.I say that because I am not just a modeler or a guy that knows how to work with textures… I am an allrounder who has done pretty much everything from creating tools over modeling, texturing and scripting.
FL modding is alot more complex than you might think. The impact of texture on the game also is more diverse than you currently seem to have in mind.At this point I would simply claim that your DTX5NM has no positive impact on vanilla FL and 99% of its mods simply for the fact that the NM data isnt even used by FL.
Yes, you can add that data if you want. You can also put in a jpg or a gif into the utf containers. That however does not mean FL can read that data.
This might change with the new wrapper… or it might not change.
So far I havent read anything about how NM data will be read by the wrapper. Maybe you have information we others dont have… dunno.
I also have no information if that wrapper has any side effects.
When Freeworlds was released it certainly looked good for that Star Wars environment but it also changed how FL specific graphics worked… up to the point where some FL related settings were no longer possible.
The new wrapper might be different… but i dont really know about that yet.
There are way too many questionmarks for me to predict how stuff will work. -
Again. 5th attempt to reply. This site does NOT like Android. Submit vanishes.
Points made in 4 attepts:
( Edits made post submit as I had to hurry. Screen on smart phone tiny. I’m so blind can’t drive anymore, etc)Love DDS format.
DDS supplies direct access to DX.
Don’t like games reinventing wheel to get same functionality as DDS system.Maybe enlightening to show how other games using DDS handle the format. One developed own filter for normal + height generation. (Never work on FL, but interesting).
Could show with examples evolution of DDS from beginning to now if I hunted up examples from backups.Polygon budget are paramount in any 3D game NOW.
expect that to change in a few years. Not in FL but in future you give the engine an example of what you want and it will generate the 3D itself at no fixed poly count. (Eg: huge for close passes tiny for far or perfect LOD). Texture examples fed to it will be 4096 min dimension I didn’t hear their maximum ( probably 65,535 or FFFF).Some modern game already using shemas like this, this is only the one I know those involved.
Others are working on a program to take any old game, run it in and output it totally upgraded to modern WIN 10 use and that’s sound and graphics aside, that has to redone to modern standards, its the “wrapper” engine, renderer, etc that gets upgraded. This is to pull old DOS games from the dustbin, polish them, pat them on the head and tell them “now go back into the arena and make us more money”.
There are more teams working more ideas out there than are dreamt of in your philosophy Haratio.
They are planning on not only digging up Yoric’s skull, they are planning on raising the jester in the entire.So there is infinite jest here. Change is on the horizon. The question is; What change and whose change and who has the say about it.
Not me I’m afraid. Mans days upon this earth are numbered to three score and ten as the Christian bible says. I’m slated to fall a tad short of the mark.
Though as far as the future is concerned, lists are being made. I’m sure (Dead sure) Freelancer is on those lists. It will all come down to one question from that point, “Whose the best and brightest at X part of what comes next?”. Resumes not accepted, they’ll make the calls.
No I don’t know any of this as solid as to the competitors simply because there is a horserace with a bunch of developers to get this out. No make that a good old knock down drag out fistfight! First to develop and pitch is the winner. That’s just the way it works. Good old Darwinistic Capitalism.
I knew only some of the people on one team. I was begged to join. If I had I wouldn’t me back in the Freelancer community. 'Fraid their insurance woudn’t let me near them.
Nope, ol Jeff is going back to what he had the most fun at doin a while back. Other than making a rightous sword or piece of great looking armor or a really fantastic looking gun or a great looking effect when that gun reduced the shootee into ash, that was the thrill I got flying my own designs around Sirius. Few games give you that opportunity folks. Charish the game for this.
As for polygon budgets. Don’t teach gradpa how to suck eggs. The tecnique is called “Dog Robbing”.
Freelancer’s terrain is “Fixed Grid”. X by Y you have the grid plane. Terribe for terrain budgets. Why? The answer is a simple logic it’s easy to get across. Say you have a flat piece of the terrain like under the landing pads in the Toledo base I’m doing to leave as an example. That’s a bunch of polys that with no problems at all can be merged into one polygon freeing you to use those polys you just saved to be used where needed. And the need here is terrain folds. Eg: Where cliffs drop off as one example.
Now it’s outside of the engine and taking Toledo and exporting to .obj and importing into two tools I’ve been using for years. Vue and Bryce. Oh shut up, yes there might be better in you opinion. But opions are like anal cavities, everybody has one and I know how to to do thing with my tools no casulal user has any business trying. Now from there grabbing a height map (kind of like those used in other applications but with the full range of tones uesed) and then regenerating the terrain (bunch of times as this entails exporting them back to objactions and then CMP and into Freelancer for a look see)Now those new pads ARE NOT the stock models by any means any more. They had just too many polys doing absolotely nothing so I merged and played and cut their budgets so I could clone more and not raise the overall budget that much. Want to know what the HUGE polygon waste was and I MEAN HUGE? The walkways and if you don’t believe me break then out of the CMP youself and see. Now if you do, what is going to pop into your head after you stop laughing or crying will be, “What we’re they thinkinlg”. And from experiance I think I know. Toledo gets used in these live action cut scenes and they kept the buget high so that department would be happy with the results.
Now take those walkways and instead of baking the texture as solid we can not be lazy and keep all the cutouts with alphas and get exactly the same effect of the walkway guard rails as the did with landing pad grating.
Now start adding that savings to the list and and start spending the savings where needed. Thats on the “Hero” parts that get more that a too quick view on the flyover. (I won’t go into how to preserve the things like imbedded path splines and prop hardpoints. Take it as read nothing I’m doing will change those) Or they’d better not or it’s back to troubleshooting until they do work. The best thing to “do with the new” here is import into the existing CMP with UTF editor.
(Great tool for models too. Oft overlooked that I love to do things like change the canopy glass color with. Red glass looks cool on some moldels.)
Android acting flaky again. Shocked lasted this long
Sign off before lose submit.Edited by Jfferson001 with a rig I set up to magnify this LG smartphone’s screen. Tried blue tooth keyboards unstead of virtual. On keystroke per second sucked. Sorry but must reedit. Today eyes really bad. Most times submit gone.
-
As for looking better than the original? Thank you that in this case is a HUGE compliment. It’s the VAST changes made that you’re not suppose to see that are the key.
That goes back to dog robbing. I took from Peter to pay Paul as they say. There’s no arguing with success and I see I’d better show an example here so I’m whipping one up.
Those catwalks and why you couldn’t see any difference but the difference is HUGE.
In fact there’s not much of the original CMP in the geometry I haven’t dropped the the polygon counts drastically on.
Better show how or people’s not going to believe me. That’s simple enough and is a good lesson on how to dog rob some other badly executed models scattered throughout the game.
So let me get busy backtracking on that catwalk problem.
-
And why do you think dropping the poly count of a 15 year old game makes any sense?
Its not that there are any players around with hardware that couldnt handle the original.
Players in first place are interested in how stuff looks. Not in stuff they cant see and at the same time has absolutely no impact on their game experience. -
Well first first off why raise the poly count any more than you have too? On the other hand the smarter move might be follow Occum’s Razor. Most scew up old Occum and totally drop the premise and make the statement false. The premise is: “All things being equal.” Then goes on with “The simplest solution is the best.” Given that the if you can simplify the geometry keeping the same result in the analysis, why not? Again Swat you’ve made my point for me. Thank you. Keep up the good work.
Now in sterling example of a difference that makes no difference makes no difference. To the naked eye what I’m going to show is what a difference it makes to the budget I need to revamp the terrain. And why you didn’t see any difference because had you then I would have been disappointed.
-
Got my ducks in a row so here I go:
-
In a row continued:
-
Ive never said that I would raise the poly count. Dunno why you see my question as a confirmation of your point. There are good reasons why raising the poly count might be a good idea… but to be honest I dont really want to discuss this any further.
My point here is that you could put your new changed geometry, put it into the game and then ask players “what has changed?”. I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of players wouldnt be able to give you an answer.
When I do modding then I create stuff that players notice and can enjoy. The players experience has priority over everything else. Unnoticable cleanups do not belong to my priorities (unless of course they help me during the modding process).
My time is to precious to waste it with unimportant details that players wouldnt even recognize.If you add a tower and a sign stating “Welcome to Toledo - Nomads stay out”… that would catch the players attention.
Or if you take an existing station model and add further details to it… that would make a difference (and thats btw. a good reason to increase the polygon number).However, that is just my opinion and you are free to have your own.
When you have created your mod we will see how players will react to it.And btw. it is nice that you put up rendered images but in the end the only thing that matters is how it does look like in the FL game engine.
-
Okay I get your point load and clear! I AM MOST Certainly doing this to add something Spectacular to this when I’m finished. Besides sorting that blocky terrain. Oh that sign idea? Killer! Consider it done!
Imagine flying into the base and over on that big pad is the ship seller under a huge lit sign “Jeff’s Used Starships”. Redoing that pad material to same sized small pad decals and tiling them to put the ships on.
Next on the list is making a larger control center sticking out of that cliff face. They chopped up the terrain mesh around it and didn’t need to. The terrain mat will be seamless with more detail but that’s just taking the huge material my terrain generator will kick out and chopping it into Freelancer sized pieces. Most you reuse, like the snow pack. That old tiled cliff face is so gone! Distracts.
The terrain map and material has been rendering on it’s own machine for a day and a half now.
-
The bigger picture is that you’re freaking out over a 1.5k poly bridge when the typical scene budget for a game these days is over 1M polygons. An entire FL scene is less than a modern character.
It’s basically utterly irrelevant to do any optimization on these.
Oh, and it wouldn’t surprise me if FL used per-vertex lighting for some things, in which case having denser geometry actually increases lighting quality. The more you know, eh?
