|
|
| Re: Poly test [message #185961 is a reply to message #185957] |
Mon, 16 January 2006 16:43   |
|
|
That wasn't necessary, it was already tested before, someone put a bunch of high detail tanks and got the polygon count into the millions and had it in game with little FPS loss. The game handles larger numbers of polygons well, but doesn't handle larger textures as good.
So yes, "what about the older computers, they wont handle that much" is false.
But the first quote has nothing to do with that, 1930 is WAY too much for a model that small, that beacon can be done in less then half of that with the same amount of detail if done right.
.:Red Alert: A Path Beyond Modeler:.
E-mail: sirphoenixx@gmail.com
AIM: Sir Phoenixx
ICQ: 339325768
MSN: sirphoenixx@hotmail.com
Yahoo: sirphoenix86
If anyone needs any help with using 3dsmax, or gmax feel free to contact me.
My Gallery: sir-phoenixx.deviantart.com/gallery
[Updated on: Mon, 16 January 2006 16:44] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Poly test [message #185962 is a reply to message #185957] |
Mon, 16 January 2006 16:47 |
 |
PaRaDoX
Messages: 288
Registered: October 2005
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
yea i could be but it does not have to be 800 polys
and i dont think they are going to cut the faces out of the parts you cant see... if they did that it would be around 1100
| Moee wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 00:10 |
U 2 bumb as a pot
|
[Updated on: Mon, 16 January 2006 16:49] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Poly test [message #186000 is a reply to message #185962] |
Mon, 16 January 2006 21:13 |
Chronojam
Messages: 688
Registered: March 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| PaRaDoX wrote on Mon, 16 January 2006 18:47 |
yea i could be but it does not have to be 800 polys
and i dont think they are going to cut the faces out of the parts you cant see... if they did that it would be around 1100
|
It doesn't have to be over 1000 polygons. It SHOULD be way less than it is. It's unprofessional to invest additional polygons when you gain absolutely no detail, and a waste.
Renegade handles polygons wonderfully but it's not so good about wrapping large textures over them. Some engines are good at polys, some are good at textures; Renegade is great with polygons in the order of millions of visible ones on-screen, but as soon as you stick 1024x1024 textures on them...
|
|
|
|
| Re: Poly test [message #186001 is a reply to message #185990] |
Mon, 16 January 2006 21:39 |
|
PaRaDoX
Messages: 288
Registered: October 2005
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| KaiserPanda wrote on Mon, 16 January 2006 22:31 |
How often do you see untextured objects in game? Now try it with game-scale textures.
|
how may game models are biger then 4000 polys?
and yes cj they did waste a bunch on it, those details could have been added with a good bump map too 
| Moee wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 00:10 |
U 2 bumb as a pot
|
[Updated on: Mon, 16 January 2006 21:44] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Poly test [message #186006 is a reply to message #185957] |
Mon, 16 January 2006 22:45 |
Chronojam
Messages: 688
Registered: March 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
|
I'm sure they'll reduce it and have it still look as great as it does, but you shouldn't try to defend the overuse of polygons especially using this old truth about Renegade (that it handles polygons great). By the way, what's with you talking about bumpmaps all the time suddenly? o_O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
