PDA

View Full Version : TRI vs QUAD - Rendering


sadicus
09-02-2009, 01:48 PM
I have a few questions for any of you Gamers / 3D modlers.

Q: After Creating the character, what realtime game testing engine would you recomend to:
animate it in an environment, even if it's a simple walk cycle?

So it use to be, "Everything must be quads, or you are a useless designer, you'll never be good for the CG industry, and your mom dresses you funny."

I understand the importance of good topology and edgeflow for animation, but not clear as to why sometimes everything HAS to be quads, but game models are tri's and animatible.

Q: Why are tri's such a bich to render using a $6+.00 like Maya, but it seems every gaming engine renders tris REALTIME?

I guess what I'm trying to understand is the workflow from Model creation (all quads?) to final rigged character (converted to tri's?) for realtime animation.

thanks!

Piflik
09-02-2009, 04:31 PM
First thing to note: There are no quads when it comes to rendering. Quads and NGons are purely for modeling and animating. When it comes to rendering (that includes the realtime viewport shading) every Polygon is triangulated. I never had any performance issues with a triangulated mesh in comparison to an all Quads mesh...

The reason for game models being triangulated is that the modeler wants full control over the look of the mesh. If he used Quads or NGons, the automatic triangulation might create unwanted results. It's not so much an issue with high poly meshes.

As for 'everything must be quads', that's a good rule for beginners to follow, but in certain circumstances a Tri or NGon can be the solution to a pinching issue when SubD-ing (not in an area that will be animated, mostly ;)).

sadicus
09-03-2009, 01:16 AM
Thank you for the explination.

CGTalk Moderation
09-03-2009, 01:16 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.