How do developers know how intensive the addition of extra polygons on the mesh? The number of polygons on the mesh is important for performance, while balancing that performance with image-quality. Objects not as visible, such as objects in the distance have generally less polygons than more visible objects. How do developers know when 5,000 polygons will work versus 500, especially when creating things like dynamic meshes?
rahulk29
Game engines sometimes implement level of detail groups, where an object has a few meshes with varying levels of detail / number of polygons. As objects come closer to the camera, the engine switches from lower polygon meshes to the higher polygon meshes.
KevinXu02
Actually developers do not always know how many ploygons will work,and put too many ploygons in the scene which causes performance issues. For instance, rencent games like Palu world and Wo long uses massive ploygons on stones which greatly reduces gaming experience. Unreal Engine 5 introduces Nanite to automatically handle level of details. You can check https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.0/en-US/nanite-virtualized-geometry-in-unreal-engine/ if you are interested in.
jacky-p
As machines get more powerful over time it is interesting how the graphics of various things (3D animation/video games) also change with it. With quadratic error mesh simplification I am beginning to really understand the significant complexities of 3D graphics in video games/movies I play/watch frequently. This technique optimizes the meshes in a way that they are more efficient with resources, thus improving rendering, memory usage, and simulation, among other things, while also preserving its overall visual shape. I wonder as machines continue to improve if more complicated meshes will become more common in popular video games?
s3kim2018
I was curious if this is the way video games "reduce graphic load" settings work. Even if there are less triangles, we would still need to sample all of the potential points. In popular video games like GTA or Call of Duty, I noticed that if I turn down the graphics setting to low, the shapes don't usually get deformed or look boxier, but the texture gets pixilated (as if they are using a smaller mipmap file). I think sampling needed for ray tracing is far more expensive than having less triangles to represent a scene.
How do developers know how intensive the addition of extra polygons on the mesh? The number of polygons on the mesh is important for performance, while balancing that performance with image-quality. Objects not as visible, such as objects in the distance have generally less polygons than more visible objects. How do developers know when 5,000 polygons will work versus 500, especially when creating things like dynamic meshes?
Game engines sometimes implement level of detail groups, where an object has a few meshes with varying levels of detail / number of polygons. As objects come closer to the camera, the engine switches from lower polygon meshes to the higher polygon meshes.
Actually developers do not always know how many ploygons will work,and put too many ploygons in the scene which causes performance issues. For instance, rencent games like Palu world and Wo long uses massive ploygons on stones which greatly reduces gaming experience. Unreal Engine 5 introduces Nanite to automatically handle level of details. You can check https://docs.unrealengine.com/5.0/en-US/nanite-virtualized-geometry-in-unreal-engine/ if you are interested in.
As machines get more powerful over time it is interesting how the graphics of various things (3D animation/video games) also change with it. With quadratic error mesh simplification I am beginning to really understand the significant complexities of 3D graphics in video games/movies I play/watch frequently. This technique optimizes the meshes in a way that they are more efficient with resources, thus improving rendering, memory usage, and simulation, among other things, while also preserving its overall visual shape. I wonder as machines continue to improve if more complicated meshes will become more common in popular video games?
I was curious if this is the way video games "reduce graphic load" settings work. Even if there are less triangles, we would still need to sample all of the potential points. In popular video games like GTA or Call of Duty, I noticed that if I turn down the graphics setting to low, the shapes don't usually get deformed or look boxier, but the texture gets pixilated (as if they are using a smaller mipmap file). I think sampling needed for ray tracing is far more expensive than having less triangles to represent a scene.