Jump to content

Xycaleth

Members
  • Posts

    1,458
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Xycaleth

  1. I can't say for sure why it's looking flat, but my guess would be because there's not many "real" lights in JKA so you don't get the lights shining across the surface. Try turning your saber on and see if that makes any difference.

     

    Also what does your normal map look like? You said you're using a bump map when I hope you mean a normal map :P

  2. @@Xycaleth -- maybe you guys should consider bumping the limit to 15k (or higher) to account for Ghoul2 weapons?

    It's not that simple. Anything that is attached will contribute to the problem. That includes jetpacks, that includes (in JKG's case) armour, etc. If anything the code needs to be redesigned to avoid the problem altogether. But this still doesn't solve anything for models in JASP :P
    Archangel35757 and eezstreet like this
  3. I'd never considered the same normal map would be used for multiple models :P I'll look into it. It don't think it would be too much work to do.

     

    I imagine it would just be a keyword in the shader to say this is an object space map instead of tangent space.

    Archangel35757 likes this
  4. Okay, think I've found the problem (again?)! Any Ghoul2 model attached to the model also counts towards the limit. For example, if your model is holding a saber, you would add another numSurfaces*4 + numVertes*20 for that extra model. Does that bring the numbers over the limit?

  5. That's strange :/ I can't see anything in the code that would cause this to happen. Do you ever get the transform space error when you only have one player on screen? My only explanation is that the collision detection isn't happening unless there's more than one player.

     

    I don't believe this is a problem caused by rendering models. Instead, it's when collision detection needs to be done.

  6. Great, thanks for the input everyone :) I think I'm going to go for metallic workflow since @@AshuraDX says the artifacts on material transitions can be avoided. I think rend2 already has code for metallic workflow - I just need to enable it and make sure it's working properly.

    SomaZ likes this
  7. Okay, just looked at the code. In OpenJK, SP and MP both have the same amount of 'transform space', which is 262144 bytes. JASP seems to have roughly half the amount of transform space compared to JAMP; JASP has 132096 bytes of transform space, JAMP has 262144 bytes.

     

    The equation you're trying to satisfy is:

     

    number of surfaces * 4 + total number of vertices in an LOD * 20 <= transform space
    In other words, both the number of surfaces and the total number of vertices can trigger the error, but total number of vertices more-so. I don't know which LOD gets used, but assuming you're hitting the error, I'm guessing it's using LOD0.

     

    For JASP, you can have around 6600 verts maximum before you hit the error.

    In JAMP and OpenJK, you can have around 13100 verts before hitting the error.

     

    Both cases assuming you have 32 surfaces.

     

    EDIT: The 'transform space', in case anyone is curious, is used for transforming the model vertices for collision detection.

    Archangel35757 and eezstreet like this
  8. The meaning of the albedo/specular maps in a specular workflow isn't the same as the albedo/specular maps in the traditional workflow though. You can't use one set in the other, so I don't think that's really a good reason for using specular workflow in this case. With regard to metallic workflow, the edge artifacts along material transitions is kind of a deal breaker for me though :(

    Archangel35757 likes this
  9. Been doing some research on PBR workflows. As far as I can tell there is a metallic and a specular workflow. Those of you who have experience with both, which do you prefer or think is better? From my point of view, the metallic seems to be better since it's more difficult to get wrong and uses less texture memory. Thoughts anyone?

    • By making your User-Generated Content, it has to be of stuff that you actually own (with a very large exception). Also it says that you can't charge other people for User-Generated Content or for people to help you make User-Generated Content.

    This isn't quite correct. From the license:

     

     

    You represent and warrant that your User Generated Content conforms to these terms and that you own or have the necessary rights and permissions, without the need for payment to any other person or entity, to use and exploit, and to authorize us to use and exploit, your User Generated Content in all manners contemplated by these terms.

    Firstly, the ownership refers to the distribution rights, and not the ownership of the content. Secondly, the payment is referring to the usage and/or exploitation of the content. You can pay someone to create the content, but you cannot charge people to use the content, i.e. it must be freely available. At least, that's my understanding.

    Cerez and Darth Sion like this
×
×
  • Create New...