Max poligon count ?

[cholerix]

I've just finished making a GT3 car, and only noticed then that the poligon count has exceeded the 4000, if only slightly.

As my last cars (GroupCs) all had been between 2500 and 3000 poligons, 4000 did look like a lot to me. So I took up some investigations. The result did scare me even more than the 4000 poligons of my GT3 model:

- the Honda from HMC mod has 4500 poligons for each load model
- the WGTC cars have an average 3500 poligons for each load model
- on F1C almost every car that I had a look at had more than 4500 poligons

I once had a discussion with Punko, when he mentioned a max poligon count of 2000 for achieving good performance.

Now... for each car will be 4 tires loaded. Let's assume these are about 500 poligons each if tires are high detail. Makes another 2000 poligons.... If made right, this is only on "close distance" load model, to be sure. And might turn down to 1500 poligons for low6.mod, which will be displayed in Heat without tires. All this affects performance. As does glossiness btw (big effect on performance !)

What do you think should be the limit on total poligon count for car + tires for a Heat mod ?

[2fnlow]

Ok my models are as follows for the WGTS mod...(without tires)

360- 2460
Saleen- 1669
996- 2846
575- 2422
M3- 2668
Corvette- 3800
Viper- 2128
550- 2414
Lister- 2457

My tires and rims range from 368 to 598 between the 9 tire models.

I feel like anything around 3200 to 3800 poly's (Both the car model and tire models together.) is very good for performance and it should look very decent. But the different LOD's should be done in heat models..not just copy low1 four or five times to make the rest of the LOD's (like I did with the beta of WGTS, but I am working on different LOD's now)

[X-Ter]

I don't exactly know how fast the "average computer" of today is, but let's say that a good 30 or 40% still use 1Ghz CPU's and maybe 256Mb RAM. They might have got a fair Gfx card with 64 Mb on it, and that's it.
For those people, 3500 ply's per car, plus wheels is sadly to much I think. My old 500Mhz went on it's knee's with the original ETCC mod and I had to use the same wheels for all cars and run low detail.

My system can handle WGTC pretty ok, and I run 2Ghz, 512 RAM and a Gfx card with 128 Mb. Still, in some corners, on some tracks I actually drop under 20 Fps. Silverstone right before the FarmBend is one such place, and it aint pretty.
I'd say that the single car should strive to be around 2500 - 3000 poly's. And I would probably want a lower poly model for the low detail option. Say 2000 - 2500 tops.

About wheels then. The GroupC cars have some of the most beautiful rims I've ever seen. So I guess no more than 500 polys are needed in high detail. But, I would like a lower poly option for the low end machine, say 300. That would mean less good looking, but some would most probably like that, rather than to be unable to run it at all.

Bottom line:
High Detail, Max 3000 polys + wheels = 5000
Low Detail, Max 2500 polys + wheels = 3700

And for the record. Reading the posts around the forums here and therem I'd say that Heat migh be the final resort for some sim racers who can't afford to upgrade. So many (including myself) have a hard time to get rFactor to look good and run smooth at the same time. To them, a good mod for Heat with the right content and the right machine specs would be much welcomed

[cholerix]

xter said:

Reading the posts around the forums here and therem I'd say that Heat migh be the final resort for some sim racers who can't afford to upgrade. So many (including myself) have a hard time to get rFactor to look good and run smooth at the same time. To them, a good mod for Heat with the right content and the right machine specs would be much welcomed

Good argument.
But then on other forum discussion the topic was wether Heat mods can be competitive to F1C/rFactor/LFS in terms of graphics quality. Which can either hi res textures or high poly models.

Hi res graphics (and sfx) are what heats up the GPU, while poligons are "bad" for CPU. At least on the bigger part.

rFactor mods have both *very* hi res graphics and hi poly count models. And as pointed out above, WGTC mod for example uses the very same load model for high1-low6. So your computer will have to do the full math for each and every car on the track, no matter how far away.

It would be interesting to know how your performance with GroupC mod is, Magnus. As this one only has low1-low6 (like WGTS + ISCH2), but uses different load models. Maybe if the load models would be more "specific", this could be the way to save performance even on high poly count models

Myself I never had any performance trouble with GroupCs - unless San Marino track came out. And then after putting in shine. Big car fields now slightly turn down framerate sometimes even on average tracks. So here it was sfx that did much more affect performance than poligon count did.

[X-Ter]

I'll take the GroupC cars for a spin on SanMarino after I have given the kids breakfast. I'll let you know

[X-Ter]

In resolution 1280*1024 - High Detail Cars - 15 opponents.
I get FPS from about 15 up to 35 depending on where on the track I am.

In resolution 1024*768 - Low Detail Cars - 15 opponents.
I get FPS from about 22 up to 45 depending on where on the track I am.


Worst places are Start/Finish, Right before hairpin, the uphill after hairpin, and the right hand kink.

[cholerix]

Could you please check that for Honda mod as well ?

[cholerix]

xter said:

And I would probably want a lower poly model for the low detail option.

Unlikely to get.

Say you have both hi and low res models. That would be a 15 load models total. With at least 10-12 different models.

If you don't just delete certain faces from hi res models (which is what have done on GroupC car models), that won't be visible at far distance anyway, you 'd really have to put a significant amount of work to the different models as you'd have to replace faces and do a lot of remapping. For 10-12 models.....

I doubt anyone would want to do that. Any volunteers ?

Thus I'd suggest to check what has biggest impact on performance, but could easily dropped without losing quality.

I suspect that for example glossiness (and especially if applied to many faces) has massive impact on performance. Now if glossiness would only be applied to close distance models (hi/low1-3)... this may already make the difference. We should check such things as that could easily be put to any mod and would increase/safe performance

[themask]

Can anybody do this task:

Take a screenshot on a long road, such as backstraight of Le Mans, switch to chase view, and with some red dots mark at what distance changes every next LOD? Not sure if I explained well enough. For instance, if Heat switches to low-6 for farest models, how far is that from your own car in chase view? So I'd like to see dots, the "trigger" places where LODs change (1,2,3,4,5,6... etc). If possible

[X-Ter]

Well I tried it in the Honda's as well. Same test as above and the result:
First test , 14 - 25 FPS, average under 20
Seconds test, 17 - 25 FPS, average around 20

[cholerix]

themask said:

Can anybody do this task:

Take a screenshot on a long road, such as backstraight of Le Mans, switch to chase view, and with some red dots mark at what distance changes every next LOD? Not sure if I explained well enough. For instance, if Heat switches to low-6 for farest models, how far is that from your own car in chase view? So I'd like to see dots, the "trigger" places where LODs change (1,2,3,4,5,6... etc). If possible

Sure this is possible, but ..... the LOD changes are defined in lod.val and lod_hi.val that come shipped with each car. Though it will the same files for each car in a mod, it doesn't need to be the same files in each mod.

So it's not unlikely that LOD changes are mod specifc in some cases.

And, worse, because Heat uses different kind of view on F1-F4, the size of for example low3.mod you get displayed will be quite different from F1 view to F4 camera view.

I once had low1-low6 models mapped in different colors and run races with these to get a feeling when which LOD shows up. And what detail can be deleted as you cannot see it anyway.

On GroupC cars, that ends up with:

• low1/2 : full detail
  
• low3: no antenna/ no driver legs/ narrow faces deleted/ reduced cockpit interieur (rough steering wheel), headlight, exhaust pipes details
  
• low4 : added fake tires/ only rough headlights& exhaust pipes/ more narrow faces deleted/wheel wells more rough/ driver figure more rough/only half of steering wheel
  
• low5 : driver figure reduced to helmet/no steering wheel/ fake tire more rough/more narrow faces deleted/ no headlights & exhaust pipes
  
• low6 : no air intakes/ no rear view mirrors/ no driver figure/very rough fake tires
  

That way I saved an average 1000-1500 faces from low1-low6, without any visible difference on the track. I have to admit, I tried to stay on the safe side in this Maybe some details could be deleted sooner....

To save even more faces, you'd have to merge some, which means remapping. At least if it should not be notable in the game.

[themask]

Hey Karl,

thanks for response!

What surprised me most, is that LOD changes can be made mod specific. Yes you are right that it wouldn't be much sense to make that sort of a screenshot in this case, but I do believe few modders bothered with modifying the lod.val and lod_hi.val, so I believe it would be the same for all mods, and just because the sizes of cars vary in different Fx views, that's why I was mainly interested in the chase view. And good idea about mapping the LODs to different colors, that really is a simple and yet brilliant solution

You said:

To save even more faces, you'd have to merge some, which means remapping. At least if it should not be notable in the game

That's actually what I was always wondering about doing LODs. I thought this was very time consuming because you have to remap the models for each LOD and actually remodel some of the same stuff with less details, and that's why few people bothered with doing LODs. But. I guess I'm not understanding it completely

Ok, I understand that the most simple modification to a LOD is to remove a few polygons completely (that is, delete them). And that does not affect the mapping and also you don't have to remap anything.

I also understand that if you merge something then you'll have to remap those merged objects ... right?

But what I didn't quite understand is this:

[...]added fake tires/ only rough headlights& exhaust pipes[...]

first off I'm confused by the word "added". Then I'm confused by the word "fake". And last I'm confused by the word "rough" ... that applies almost anywhere where you used them (( ;D )) . By this "reducing" (?) did you mean that you deleted the faces to make them "rough" and "fake"? Cause if not, I guess you'd have to remap? What I'm trying to understand is - does only the deletion of polygons mean that I won't have to remap anything, or I can do something else which doesn't involve remapping? I'd guess that anything rather than deleting faces implies remapping.

Second.

We usually do one TEX for each paintjob (read this again). And what happens if some later LODs have not only deleted faces, but also merged faces, or even remodeled with less detail (this is an option too right?). Will I have to map this one-and-only template to all LODs? (so that this only TEX file would appear on all LODs). And is this base template made from full detail 3D model?

I know this is a lot of questions, but I just want to have this one cleared up as long as we're on subject, and secondly, this might come in handy in future for me

Thanks,
Oleg

P.S. I guess this thead should have been in "Heat Editing" section ;D

[cholerix]

themask said:

I also understand that if you merge something then you'll have to remap those merged objects ... right?

Yes and no
Yes, if it is parts with "specific" textures. No, if is parts simply mapped to "single color" patterns. Car bottom for example (black)

themask said:

first off I'm confused by the word "added". Then I'm confused by the word "fake". And last I'm confused by the word "rough"

Heat doesn't display tires for low4-low6. That results in "hovering cars" from a distant view. Check Honda or WGTC mod for this effect. Some modders (me at least ;D) thus add rough fake (static) tire models to the car body in low4-6.

That slightly increases poligon count (+about max 100 poligons), but since you can easily delete at least as many faces, low4 will have less faces than low3 anyway.

Making objects rough... ;D .... this can be done by carefully deleting some faces and carefully welding the remaining (now "open") vertices - on objects that have been "single color" mapped only ! Like for example rear view mirrors, wheel wells, etc. As for the steering wheel, I had simply put in another with less poligons. Made one time, mapped one time and then put to all low2-6 for all cars. About as little effort as deleting some faces as its the same wheel on all those LODs on all cars.

Round objects like exhaust pipes and headlights can be easily poligon-reduced as well. On a 12-step circle you can delete every 3rd and merge 2nd and 4th, 5th+7th, .... As the mapping was symmetric, you won't see any difference from a little more distance.

themask said:

And what happens if some later LODs have not only deleted faces, but also merged faces, or even remodeled with less detail (this is an option too right?). Will I have to map this one-and-only template to all LODs? (so that this only TEX file would appear on all LODs). And is this base template made from full detail 3D model?

[/b] [/quote]
Yup. Simple as that
But since I have found some nice way(*) to do remapping precisely (which would be important IMO), I guess I may do the remapping on my next project.

Important step is to do the optimizing & remapping as the very last step. Unless you really enjoy doing it ;D

(*) quite easy: substitute the template by a white TGA that has many horizontal and vertical black lines, all with random gaps between. Edges of mappings have to fit precisely to each other. That way all mappings will have same scale and can easily be remapped if needed Even partially

[themask]

oh oh, this is too much for me right now, Monday morning and beer with snooker yesterday and all you know .... ;D But thanks much, I'll save this in my notes

[cholerix]

themask said:

What surprised me most, is that LOD changes can be made mod specific.

Actually even car specific

themask said:

but I do believe few modders bothered with modifying the lod.val and lod_hi.val, so I believe it would be the same for all mods, ...

Yes and no. You made me take up interest in that matter again and I've made some investigations. For example the lod.val and lod_hi.val (same content as it looks like) used in ISCH2 mod is like that (the interesting part at least):

table high
lod0 0x
lod1 152
lod2 203
lod3 304
lod4 45x
model high
end

table low
lod0 0x
lod1 152
lod2 203
lod3 304
lod4 45x
model low
end

while same part in lod.val that comes with original HEat stock.car and most mods is like that:

table high
lod0 00
lod1 60
lod2 90
lod3 121
lod4 152
lod5 303
lod6 604
lod7 1205
lod8 180x
lod9 240x
model high
end

table low
lod0 00
lod1 102
lod2 153
lod3 203
lod4 405
lod5 80x
lod6 120x
model low
end

The ISCH2 cars only have low1-low6 LODs (no high1-9) , but according to lod.val actually even only use low1-low4 . Maybe if that statement "model high" would be changed to "low", Heat wouldn't even crash on ISCH2 mod with "high detail" option set

I've tried to alter the distance values, but that made Heat crash . Seems to need some certain algorithm for that. I suspect (yet unchecked) that the last digit always determines what tire is put in, as it is never higher than 5 and always increasing. x would mean "no tire displayed".

I'll check that

Maybe in the end we'll be able come up with edited lod.val instead of always putting in the same model for high1-9 and low1-6

themask said:

P.S. I guess this thead should have been in "Heat Editing" section ;D

Yup. Could or maybe even should be moved by admin

[cholerix]

this is weird....


I have decompiled and recompiled the lod.val. Without changes. When I now run Heat, it crashes and says "invalid LOD, bad value 152"

If I now take the very same table and change it to

table low
lod0 0x
lod1 15x
lod2 20x
lod3 30x
lod4 45x
model low
end

= deleting tires, Heat will run fine and I get - as expected - hovering cars. No tires will be loaded.

But no matter what number I put in for the x , Heat will crash. Unless I take the undecompiled file from the car (which has exactly those values that Heat claims are bad )

What's wrong here ?
I can make custom lod.val files only if I don't put in what tires to load