Author Topic: Work on my engine so far. (Read 17670 times)

Voltage · « **Reply #20 on:** April 27, 2007 »

Great work stonemonkey! I am in awe of you transparent chess pieces. They are truly amazing. It runs quite fast here. Athlon 3800 dual core.

The latest proggy... project3.exe runs at approx 10-15 FPS here. No glitches, looks sexy.

Keep the posts rolling in on this project please mate.

Are you doing frustrum culling or octrees or anything funky like that?

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #21 on:** April 27, 2007 »

Thanks, nothing too funky voltage but it does some occlusion using the z buffer and bounding boxes which should be a bit more effective with more detailed objects than cubes.

Shockwave · « **Reply #22 on:** April 27, 2007 »

Cripes! There's a lot of stuff being drawn in that preview. The delta timing is working really well though and although it's noticeable slightly that the framerate has dropped when there's a lot on the screen, it still works very well indeed.

The building models look really great by the way! Nice to see ledges etc. It would look even better with real textures but that will be for the future I'm sure

Rbz · « **Reply #23 on:** April 28, 2007 »

Nice engine, are you trying to remake debris by farbrausch ?

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #24 on:** April 28, 2007 »

sw rendered remake of debris........ hmmm not quite what I have in mind.

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #25 on:** August 18, 2007 »

Just been trying out some sort of filtering, basically reading 4 texels with some weighted average and it makes quite a difference:

Shockwave · « **Reply #26 on:** August 18, 2007 »

Yes, you can see it most clearly on the road markings.

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #27 on:** August 18, 2007 »

Yep, I have a few problems with mipmapping things like roads that are quite an angle to the camera. Here's an exe of it, that filtering doesn't cost too much but I've done a few other things too to try and improve the quality so it's pretty slow atm.

Takes a little while (white window) to start, mouse buttons to turn/both together move forward.

Shockwave · « **Reply #28 on:** August 18, 2007 »

It looks much better in motion in fact.
People who download this, press lmb for left, Rmb for right, hold both buttons to move.

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #29 on:** August 18, 2007 »

This is cool, at least to me. While sorting out the texture alignment a bit (if you look at the yellow lines on the road, they don't quite line up with the lines on the crossroads) I fixed that but now I now have the same problem I've experienced with hw rendering with the edges of textures being wrapped around slightly and is fixed by clamping the textures so I understand why that happens now although I'm not quite sure how to deal with it in this.

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #30 on:** August 18, 2007 »

Heh, only run this if you have a monster of a pc. I've managed to fix the problem a little but there's still a slight visible line on the roads, just before the junctions.
This needs the textures from the zip a couple of posts up.

It's rendered at 1280*960 with each pixel reading and blending 4 texels then the final image shrunk down to 640*480, as well as the buildings there's 100,000 cubes and a dynamically cubemapped sphere. I get around 1fps.

Jim · « **Reply #31 on:** August 19, 2007 »

Unfortunately that crashes immediately

The filtering's making an enormous difference. Are you doing this by rendering a much larger screen and downsampling, or are you dealing with it in the triangle drawing?

N64 had this algorithm - every byte in screen memory had 9 bits. The 9th bit would be set (or maybe xored) if the pixel drawn there was on the edge of a triangle. The hardware doing the DAC would look at these bits for neighbouring pixels and smooth those pixels that changed from a 1 to a 0 or a 0 to a 1. That gave edge antialiasing really cheaply.

Jim

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #32 on:** August 19, 2007 »

Did you get the textures from the attatchment 2 or 3 posts back?

It's rendering to a larger buffer (2*2) at first then shrinking it down. It also looks up 4 texels for each pixel and does some weighted blending so it's really doing 16 texture lookups, 4 shading calcs and a whole lot of blending for each pixel of the final image. I think I can get it down to 1 shading calc and improve my blending method a bit.

Jim · « **Reply #33 on:** August 19, 2007 »

My bad, I didn't have the textures

It looks great - the antialiasing looks seriously smooth!

So basically you're doing a bilinear filter on the source texture and then 2xAA on the output? In software and it runs at that speed is really impressive.

Jim

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #34 on:** August 19, 2007 »

"So basically you're doing a bilinear filter on the source texture and then 2xAA on the output?"

Yep, pretty much. Not sure how useful it's all going to be as I do want to keep the speed up but I'll see what I can do. The filtering makes a big difference to the textures and isn't particularly expensive but the AA only really makes a difference along the edges and is expensive.

taj · « **Reply #35 on:** August 19, 2007 »

I am amazed it runs that quickly. Stunned...100,000 cues, cubemapped at that resolution? Wow.

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #36 on:** August 19, 2007 »

Maybe come up with a solution to the AA being so costly,

1.5*AA instead. It works and still looks pretty smooth along the edges. So instead of rendering at 1280*960 it's only rendering at 960*720 and blending each block of 3*3 pixels down to 2*2.

It's not just as good as 2* but doesn't cost nearly as much and is definitely much better than nothing.

.exe with the textures.

Clyde · « **Reply #37 on:** August 20, 2007 »

Great Job

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #38 on:** August 20, 2007 »

Cheers clyde.

Going to give ripmapping, or at least how i think that works a go. As well as reducing the height and width of each mipmap other maps are made that only reduce either the height or the width. Done some tests with just stretching the textures atm and it looks like it'll help with the smearing and aliasing of road textures and other surfaces at angles to the camera in the distance.

Stonemonkey · « **Reply #39 on:** August 28, 2007 »

Got that working fairly well, it does quite a good job of getting rid of the smearing of the road textures in the distance. Now got a little bug in the alignment of some of the textures to sort out but it's not too bad.