PDA

View Full Version : WIP rundown city environment


Whammybar
10-21-2010, 09:37 PM
Here is a game environment I am working on so I can have more portfolio pieces. Im basing my environment off of a concept that I found on someone else's portfolio. Here's the concept image and what I have so far. The red box is the size of a person in UDK.

Also, is it me or is the concept's perspective wrong in many places. It seems like things in the distance get small too fast and a lot of the perspective lines dont correctly lead to the vanishing point.

http://i51.tinypic.com/v30nyr.jpg

http://i56.tinypic.com/sdi438.jpg

http://i51.tinypic.com/qys4z7.jpg

aeres
10-22-2010, 02:17 AM
Here is a game environment I am working on so I can have more portfolio pieces. Im basing my environment off of a concept that I found on someone else's portfolio. Here's the concept image and what I have so far. The red box is the size of a person in UDK.

Also, is it me or is the concept's perspective wrong in many places. It seems like things in the distance get small too fast and a lot of the perspective lines dont correctly lead to the vanishing point.


Technically IMO there is nothing wrong with the drawing. As for the "things in the distance get small too fast" part, you can try to to reduce your camera's focal length to achieve the same effect.

Whammybar
10-22-2010, 02:23 AM
Technically IMO there is nothing wrong with the drawing. As for the "things in the distance get small too fast" part, you can try to to reduce your camera's focal length to achieve the same effect.

yea, i guess ill just have to use windows to get the right size of buildings in the distance.

i guess its pretty solid, its just that i went into photoshop and checked where the perspective lines went and it just seemed like a lot of them didnt really go to a solid vanishing point, but its enough to go by

the weirdest thing in the drawing is the bridge above the road. it looks like its going diagonally but that wouldn't make any sense since its spanning across two buildings that should be directly opposite each other judging by where they are on the block

Whammybar
10-22-2010, 09:22 AM
Am I doing okay as far as the way im laying out my mesh? Im basically just trying to make sure there are no polys that are larger than 4 sides and im using triangles where i can to keep the poly count down instead of doing edge loops everywhere.

http://i52.tinypic.com/6gv249.jpg

http://i52.tinypic.com/2r2u4xh.jpg

GradiusCancer
10-22-2010, 10:04 PM
You are keeping your tri counts too low. Those long edge strips will cause lighting errors. You actually SHOULD keep things in quads as much as possible for modern game production for a multitude of reasons. The rendering errors for one. Large env pieces need to be broken up with clean edge loops for better use of tech, just like characters.

We also have access to LODs and Culling. As long as it's an efficently modeled piece, there really isn't a polygon limitation. If detail can't be seen, remove it. Once you're too far from a model to see it's detail, switch it with a lower poly version. By keeping things in quads, it's very easy to turn them into Level of detail steps. And culling, well that hides everything you can't see.

I'm very aggressive with these features so that I can push as much detail as I want, which is over 2 million on screen of current consoles. But my culling is pretty good, so my best zones end up hovering around 800k tris on screen.


And at the end of the day, man, this is for your portfolio. PUSH the hell out of the detail and make soemthing that looks amazing first. Then optimize with the knowledge you gained from putting it in UDK. Remember, you can always scale back detail, but you have to completely rebuild a piece to add more detail.

Whammybar
10-23-2010, 04:47 AM
Whats it mean that im keeping my tri counts too low? The mesh isnt high enough detail?

It's true its just for portfolio, just trying to make sure that when I show my wireframe, its considered correct modeling for game standards. I want companies to know I understand correct procedure.

I was basing my topology on stuff like this i found on the web:
http://www.escapistimagery.com/image/3Denvironments/Socom_ArchwayBldg_camCloserWireFrame400.jpg

So I should be doing something more like this then:

edit: or actually a better way might be to have the edge loops from the arches of the windows to connect with each other horizontally instead of having tons of edge loops shoot up like that

http://i55.tinypic.com/2rg2b2a.jpg

GradiusCancer
10-23-2010, 11:22 PM
Model in WAY more detail. Again, modern console games are pushing over 2 million triangles on screen without breaking a sweat. If a particular asset is too high can be LODed down. If it's WAY too high you bake a normal with it. The only limitations are the ones you're putting on yourself. BUT remember, modeling ineffeciently is also a limitation.

If you want companies to know you understand correct procedure, then don't just copy someone's wireframe because this is the definition of not understanding. The only way you will learn is by time and trial.

If an edge does not add to silhouette or aid in a technical matter (lighting, rendering, advananced material setups, etc), then it shouldn't be there. This is how a employer will know you understand what you are doing.

If there's anything you should do more than anything, it's start getting your art in UDK and treating it as game art instead of a model in a modeling package. The diffences shouldn't come as a surprise as the end, and you find you have to rebuild everything because you're doing it so wrong from the start.

Whammybar
10-24-2010, 01:16 AM
Ah yea, i was definitely planning to add a ton more detail, was just seeing if I was on the right track as far as topology goes. I just feel like if I model in straight edge loops, especially with this model, then theres gonna be a lot of places where edge loops cross each other and create unused polygons. is there any documentation out there on how topology can aid in lighting?

Whammybar
10-25-2010, 11:36 AM
alright, well heres an update. still have a lot more to model, especially buildings in the second image, but its coming along.

http://i53.tinypic.com/2557zmu.jpg

http://i54.tinypic.com/2yopf9i.jpg

rip3rs
10-29-2010, 03:03 AM
Keep up the good work :)
Could we see a overall wireframe and sectionized wireframes please? :)

ovinet
11-02-2010, 06:52 PM
Wow, I love the last update.

Also, this thread is very useful, thanks to GradiusCancer and his shared knowledge. Thank you ! :thumbsup:

ovinet
11-12-2010, 09:34 AM
Remember, you can always scale back detail, but you have to completely rebuild a piece to add more detail.
You're my genius in 3d models quality :beer:
"you can always scale back detail, but you have to completely rebuild a piece to add more detail." This is something that should do it for a product quality theory: you can scale back quality, the difficulty is to move in the opposite direction.
Thank you!

CGTalk Moderation
11-12-2010, 09:34 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.