C
Cyberman
Guest
Well I prefer things be something close to right, it reminds me of a discussion someone had on Uncharted 3 about a section of the game where you crossed a ship in a storm. The original idea was too make the entire scene a repeated animation and fake the storm and that would be good. However the programmer said "why not make it a real wave simulation it's not like we don't have the power and more importantly it would not be predictable and thus more realistic".You may say that it's a professional quirk that I want things to be functionalThat being said, I think my modelling is improved by looking at actual references, so why not check out the real deal?
I concure actually, I prefer to do that because textures and faking it don't always work in all cases. I have been doing optical simulations using polycarbonate material index of refractions and it iritates the crap out of me that I can't vary the IOR based on the wavelength of light. Their are a number of interesting distortions one gets in materials that aren't obvious, for example IOR is non linear (and so plastic prismatic behavior is different than diamond glass or flourine based materials). I like things to look real not 'good enough' LOL. So if you actually create a flour that can be shaded in all circumstances it will save you time screwing around with other fiddling details such as stretching the uv map to look right in a fixed direction. I find it harder to twiddle textures than make shapes.Concerning the stones in the floor: using a displacement shader was a possibility that I examined in the first place. However, I couldn't find a proper displacement map which would remain faithful to the floor pattern of the original picture. If I were to draw the map myself with Paintshop, it would take pretty much the same time as making the actual mesh. Besides, making the mesh of the rock is less costly in terms of poly counts than subsufing the floor to the level required for a displacement shader, I think. So I eventually decided to go for making a mesh of the floor. In a sense, I feel like the time I am spending making this mesh will be compensated by the fact that texturing it will be much simpler that way.
I've a dumb question, I know blender supports python scripting etc. Isn't their surface brushes available to 'brush' on rock surfaces in fitted patterns? It seems like a common feature / need too me. I have seen a lot of games use surface normal textures or height fields to perform the same affect as individual rocks. It's very similiar to using terrain making software.By the way, for reference, here are the wires, though they show some levels of subsurf (3 levels of subsurf on stair pillars and studs, 2 levels of subsurf on the rocks). As far as the unsubsurfed mesh is concerned, the stair pillars and studs are based on 16 sided cylinders, and each rock is actually based on 12 faces.
Anyhow looks too me you are doing fine with what your working on and enjoying it. That's the important part, don't do stuff you can't enjoy.
Cyb


















