Battlezone Forums

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d4Cq5fM ... re=related

I was browsing youtube, and saw the image in this vid.

Is it just me, or does that look an awful lot like...

Well, yeah, but it wasn't the most original of designs to begin with.

I like Jayden's Mark 2 Star Carrier the most.
http://www.bzcomplex.com/user_hubs/jayd ... 20copy.png

Where IS jayden anyway?

I see so much incredible and prolific modeling over at the Sketchup forums, it's hard to get excited about ships that still rely on textures for 3D detail.

Psychedelic Rhino wrote:I see so much incredible and prolific modeling over at the Sketchup forums, it's hard to get excited about ships that still rely on textures for 3D detail.

Except for the fact that modeling for rendering and modeling for games are entirely different. If anything, I would say that models that use textures are far more impressive than those that use pure mesh and simple materials because they able to simulate geebles without actually having them.

Nielk1 wrote: I would say that models that use textures are far more impressive than those that use pure mesh and simple materials because they able to simulate geebles without actually having them.

Mmmm, sort of like having a soybean burger and telling yourself it's tastes like Angus (no pun intended)

No texture will ever compete against pivoting around intricate 3D detail.

BTW High Roller is nice.

Please tell me this guy above is a thinly veiled troll.

Textures will compete as long as they are necessary for good performance. On most computers you could not play a game full of models like that one.

Clavin12 wrote:Textures will compete as long as they are necessary for good performance. On most computers you could not play a game full of models like that one.

Absolutely. But every year we are getting closer to having that kind if intricate detail in our games. Rejoice!

Shadow Knight wrote:Please tell me this guy above is a thinly veiled troll.

Where is that coming from?

Psychedelic Rhino wrote:

Clavin12 wrote:Textures will compete as long as they are necessary for good performance. On most computers you could not play a game full of models like that one.

Absolutely. But every year we are getting closer to having that kind if intricate detail in our games. Rejoice!

Eh...sort of. These days, detail is simulated from fancy things like normal maps, bump maps, and sometimes displacement maps (but that's rarer). I've seen more effort in prettying up the current polygon count through shaders rather than increasing the through-put.

However, NVidia's tessellation tech from I think around 2008 or 2009 is really neat, and might be the best bet for intricate models with lots of detail like the above.

Psychedelic Rhino wrote:

Shadow Knight wrote:Please tell me this guy above is a thinly veiled troll.

Where is that coming from?

Someone currently working with a 3D rendering framework and having to deal with handling meshes, texturing, winding, shaders and collision. Do not even think about getting me started on why high poly models will never work on computers, especially since we're hitting the roof of what is possible with current tech at the moment.

Do not worry my friend, the power you need is right around the corner.

I'm not sure what that was meant to be contributing to the discussion, but this is rather offtopic and not worth the effort it would take to explain my position, especially as you haven't defended yours.

Which is best considering the negativity.