Making 16x maps

Discussion in 'Mapping' started by thaile, Dec 5, 2006.

  1. Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music)

    Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music) Member

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It worked fine on Half-Life (Goldsource!!11three) engine,
    will work better on Source. ;)
     
  2. Solokiller

    Solokiller Member

    Messages:
    4,861
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    16X maps are like skyboxes, and we've all been in a skybox before.
     
  3. katana9000

    katana9000 Member

    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well I guess my only option is to wait and watch for someone to try to do it. I do hope it will work. (Noone can say it will untill it has been done.) Is it 1.08 that will support it? or does 1.07 already support them?
     
  4. Solokiller

    Solokiller Member

    Messages:
    4,861
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    1.1/2.0 will support 16X maps, when aircraft are implemented.
     
  5. Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music)

    Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music) Member

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Btw. (I know I could read it up somewhere :p) how many times bigger will the maps be?

    4x in every dimension? 16 square, 64 cubic?

    Or actually 16x, 256 square, 4096 cubic?

    Well, it all comes back now, must be 16x, Krenzo said those would be aircraft only
    (since collision doesnt work prpperly below 1 unit [1 unit is critical already]).
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2007
  6. Solokiller

    Solokiller Member

    Messages:
    4,861
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They will be like skyboxes, except the players are smaller as well.
     
  7. Krenzo

    Krenzo Administrator

    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    R_Yell made a 16x map with aircraft that we've tested.
     
  8. R_yell

    R_yell Member

    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are also some examples in current maps, look at the 3dskybox part of MValley or Duststorm. That's 16x and both 3dskyboxes are made with the same level of detail than the main terrain. It wouldn't be possible to make a entire scaled map at that level of detail, but that's not needed anyway. A x16 map should use different scales of detail.
     
  9. katana9000

    katana9000 Member

    Messages:
    447
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thats great to hear. Though I do wish it were possible to do a full 16x map with all units. And not just aircraft. Were there any major problems you encountered while testing it?
     
  10. Solokiller

    Solokiller Member

    Messages:
    4,861
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you make the terrain models you could use LOD's to improve performance.
     
  11. R_yell

    R_yell Member

    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Models aren't meant to be used like terrain if you mean a surface where units can move across. They could be used in mountains but the lack of proper shadows would add some new problems.
     
  12. Beerdude26

    Beerdude26 OnThink(){ IsDownYet(); }

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wait... Then what do mipmaps for textures do?
     
  13. Krenzo

    Krenzo Administrator

    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mip maps are for textures. He's talking about making the terrain up of less triangles as you get farther away.
     
  14. Beerdude26

    Beerdude26 OnThink(){ IsDownYet(); }

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ah. So what's the polygonal strain on a default computer (512MB, +2Ghz, decent mid-range graphics card like a Radeon 9800, etc.)? Actually, let me phrase it like this: How much more strain does a 16x map give (FPS-wise, server-wise) than the current ones, unoptimized?
     
  15. Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music)

    Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music) Member

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What I would expect:
    Server - little to no difference
    Client - little to no difference

    It's all the same units, smaller models won't affect performance,
    especially since the map would be designed with the 16th part of the viewing distance of a 1:1 map.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2007
  16. arklansman

    arklansman Member

    Messages:
    5,365
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    More detailed displacements and textures is what might affect performance.
     
  17. Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music)

    Pimp Recruit (formerly Don Music) Member

    Messages:
    319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's all depending on the mapper.

    If the mapper isn't a fool then the map will run better or the same.

    And btw. .. the probability for LESS detail is higher, since the grid units are "longer" and such big maps will "want" farther viewing distance, forcing lower detail.

    People can build 1:1 Maps that run like shit and they can make 1:16 maps that run like shit, nothing new, nothing to care about.
    The mapper is responsible for map performance, 1:16 scale isn't.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2007
  18. Solokiller

    Solokiller Member

    Messages:
    4,861
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually, if a standard map we have now is changed into a 16X map, it would be better. Why? Because the standard 1024 unit cuts will not be the same at the scale of 16, meaning a map the size of escort would be 16 times better, if optimized as well, i could estimate up to 30 times better.
     
  19. R_yell

    R_yell Member

    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    16x maps should need much more work to look like 1:1, if mapper wants to make effective use of the whole area. That means bigger maps (bsp size), higher load times, higher memory requirements. If a map is going to have more displacements, brushes, models, etc, it also will need more optimization. Performance won't be good or bad because the scale, but a 16x map will tend to perform worse than a 1:1 map or it'll look completely bland.

    Also take in mind that some actual 1:1 maps aren't examples of optimization.
     
  20. dumpster_fox

    dumpster_fox Member

    Messages:
    1,716
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Idea: good use of large-scale decals on the terrain could help with some of the blandness while remaining relatively inexpensive. In other words, use a small handful of textures with minimal distinguishable parts (to reduce the appearance of tiling) scaled down 16 times as to match the scale of the player, then get some partially-transparent decals scaled way up and smattered across the terrain. It'll retain a high-res look from the ground, not look awful from way up in the sky, and not have draconian memory requirements.

    R_Yell, you're a skilled mapper, do you think that this idea would work?
     

Share This Page