Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Tim Rennie

Members
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tim Rennie

  • Rank
    Warming Up
  1. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    I'm only interested in the bump mapping technique used, and like I said, I'm reserving judgement.
  2. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    Hrm, I'll reserve judgement on the whole Doom3 vs. Hl2 thing until there's more details then :]
  3. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    Well, yes, but _how_ does it use both a normal map and a height map? No bump mapping method that I know of works like that. Re 'bump mapping' vs. 'normal mapping': The term 'bump mapping' has been muddled lately, but originally it meant 'perturb the normal based on a heightmap' - these days it tends to cover anything that perturbs the normal. 'Normal mapping' is the same as original bump mapping, but using a normal map instead of a heightmap. There's no fundamental difference, they're both just ways of twiddling the normal. Afaik, normal mapping is used by Doom3, Hl2 and pretty much all modern games that feature any kind of bump mapping.
  4. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    Both? That's... odd. How are they used at runtime? I can't see anything other than standard bumpmapping in the screenshots.
  5. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    The whole "take a high-poly model and generate a low-poly model plus normal map that makes it look roughly the same" thing. I don't know if there's an accepted term for it, APS is just what the first paper I saw called it.
  6. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    Do you mean bump-mapping or the appearance preserving simplification stuff?
  7. Tim Rennie

    What does it mean that textures are models?

    Er... care to elaborate again? I can't see any explanation in this thread.
  8. Tim Rennie

    Development environment

    The Quake3 game side stuff was definitely C. Afaik, the engine was C too, but I obviously can't confirm this :]
  9. Tim Rennie

    Development environment

    According to this interview, yes. I vaguely remember some statements about the renderer still being C, but I can't seem to find a source. EDIT: Er... by 'yes' I mean 'C++'. me st00pid.
  10. Tim Rennie

    3D Illusions in D3

    Well, I'd like to, but I don't know enough about modern hardware and point rendering to guess. Plus there's an awful lot of unknowns there - number of points, overdraw, filtering used, etc.. What I would guess is that however fast it would be, plain ol' triangles would still beat it, simply because that's what current hardware is designed for. Have you seen the Total War series at all? I think that's near state of the art in metric-assload-of-models technology :]. Not sure exactly what they're using, probably just low poly models up close and imposters or pre-rendered sprites for everything else.
  11. Tim Rennie

    3D Illusions in D3

    Some random comments about point/imposter rendering: Carmack/Abrash actually implemented imposters for Quake1. See here, under "An idea that didn't work". They have been used in some other games (StarTopia for one), although never in a FPS afaik. Point rendering (or at least rasterization of points, which is what people generally mean) is actually quite common, although not for games. It's typically used for volumetric rendering, range scans, that kinda thing. Google 'qsplat' for an actual implementation, and 'splatting' for more general papers and stuff. I think Ico used particles for rendering its monsters, and I vaguely remember a Cranberry Source game that was going to use point clouds for enemies, although I'm not sure if it was eve released. Oh, and of course there's Ken 'Build Engine' Silverman's voxel engine. The_Tonx, I'm not sure that demo is a good test, it's using far more fillrate than most normal sprite rendering would. I've had ~60,000 particles running at 30fps on an XBox without any real optimization, so better code on a modern PC should do many more than that. Quake was doing hundreds of particles in software 5 years ago, so thousands shouldn't be much trouble these days :] The big problem I can see with point rendering is how to get a shadow volumes out of it. Wouldn't be Doom3 without stencil shadows :]
×