Hard Light Productions Forums

Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: Dragon on May 15, 2009, 01:36:17 pm

Title: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 15, 2009, 01:36:17 pm: I was messing with planet models from Startrek mod ,Cardinal's Spear and Ott and noticed really weird thing.
All planets are ridicolusly small.
Just take a look at the sceenshot ,Archangel is indeed huge ,but not that much!
All planets I found are in such scale ,can you make some new planet models ,this time in right scale?
I'm very intested in planet models ,I noticed lot of people say they are substandard ,but I want to use them when player is in low orbit and maybe in cojunction of autopilot cutscenes ,which can render modelled planets really useful (you fly ultrahuge distance and planet lightning isn't changing a bit ,isn't that a bit unrealistic? Because that's what you get with skybox).
Planets from Startrek mod are excelent quality and should be getting more attention.
(also ,you should try to look at Startrek Earth model with mainhall music set to "Abandoned" from High Noon V2.0 ,it gave me unforgetable feeling.)
I will soon upload planet pack to FSMods.

[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: General Battuta on May 15, 2009, 01:43:42 pm: Can't you just use skyboxes?
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: The E on May 15, 2009, 01:46:40 pm: My question as well. The "planets" in BtRL looked more realistic than a 3d model would have in the same place, IMHO. The question is, what does a 3d planet offer that a skybox can't?
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: BengalTiger on May 15, 2009, 01:56:36 pm: Quote from: The E on May 15, 2009, 01:46:40 pm
The question is, what does a 3d planet offer that a skybox can't?

You can collide with it? :p
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: shiv on May 15, 2009, 01:57:25 pm: 3d planets are not recommended.

Now skyboxes are standard. just take a look how beatifulthey can be:
(http://diaspora-game.com/images/screens/screen_003_colonial_one.jpg)
(http://diaspora-game.com/images/screens/screen_011_heavy_raider.jpg)
(http://diaspora-game.com/images/screens/screen_012_viper_mk7e.jpg)
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Rodo on May 15, 2009, 01:57:50 pm: Quote from: The E on May 15, 2009, 01:46:40 pm
My question as well. The "planets" in BtRL looked more realistic than a 3d model would have in the same place, IMHO. The question is, what does a 3d planet offer that a skybox can't?

aproaching feeling?

well hell damn me... those look nice ^^
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: shiv on May 15, 2009, 02:04:30 pm: Quote from: Rodo on May 15, 2009, 01:57:50 pm
aproaching feeling?
In space distances are that big that you wouldn't even notice aproach feeling even after long flight.
There's no point in absoleately ugly 3d planets, while skyboxes look sumply pretty and are easier and more convenient.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: The E on May 15, 2009, 02:06:00 pm: Quote from: BengalTiger on May 15, 2009, 01:56:36 pm
You can collide with it? :p

Quote from: Rodo on May 15, 2009, 01:57:50 pm
aproaching feeling?

Two things that, at least for me, would break the all-important immersion.

Take this example:
(http://diaspora-game.com/images/screens/screen_003_colonial_one.jpg)
If this was a texture on a 3d sphere, and I would move closer to it, the Image quality would soon degrade into a pixel-y mess. And without some sort of atmosphere simulation to do some sort of reentry effect, it would just be like running into a particularly big immobile object, meaning I would bounce off it and a small particle spew would be spawned. Granted, you could insta-kill the player if he collides with the planet, but I believe that the skybox solution is still the best available right now.

Quote from: shiv on May 15, 2009, 02:04:30 pm
In space distances are that big that you wouldn't even notice aproach feeling even after long flight.
There's no point in absoleately ugly 3d planets, while skyboxes look sumply pretty and are easier and more convenient.

^^ What he said.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 15, 2009, 02:17:35 pm: 3d planets still have some adventages over skyboxes. (I'm howewer not negating the role of skyboxes ,they also look great ,but are good ,for example ,for short range flights ,orbital battles and missions where you don't need to use autopilot an fly very large distances. And I cannot wait all those stuff you're going to use in ED)
3d planets may atmosphere rotation (it's on trek models) and possiblity to fly
around them with autopilot cutscenes.
(if there will be a possibility of in-game texture replacement ,then it will improve in-game bombardment ,just cover planet with explosions ,replace the textures ,clear explosions and voila).
Not to mention models are nessesary in any mod that want in-game planet-killers.
Take a look at Sol: A History ,and tell my how to remake
Spoiler:
Mission when you have to destroy JCC Destroyer that wants to attack
EA HQ ,if you fail to do it in time it fires it's forward beam at the Earth ,destroying the HQ.

Using skyboxes.
But I agree with one thing.
There is no point in using ugly planet models and that's why I'm drawing your attention to this matter.
I don't want to use ugly planets ,but planets like this one (disregard F3 lab lightnig method ,in mission it's going to look even better).

[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: The E on May 15, 2009, 02:22:33 pm: My point is, on the scale that FS usually operates on, meaning single fighters or capships, in missions lasting < 30 Minutes playtime on average, the player is not able to move fast or far enough to make a 3d Planet worthwhile. You have a point with autopilot cutscenes, but i seem to remember a request by the WCS team concerning changing skyboxes and in-mission lighting via SEXPs.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: shiv on May 15, 2009, 02:32:22 pm: Quote
Take a look at Sol: A History ,and tell my how to remake
(...Spoiler...)
Use SJD Sathanas with special explosion, placed on a long distance?That way beams will hit that SJD and destroy it. Effect will look like base exploding on planet's surface.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 15, 2009, 02:40:38 pm: Quote from: The E on May 15, 2009, 02:22:33 pm
You have a point with autopilot cutscenes, but i seem to remember a request by the WCS team concerning changing skyboxes and in-mission lighting via SEXPs.
Yes ,but there are some questions.
Will the skybox lighning be handled via changing lightning on one texture ,or perhaps by separate textures?
Will there will be multiple textures for all skyboxes ,positioned in all the ways modders can want them to?
What if I imagine the mission where I want player to be fighting over north pole of Earth?
Will there will be also skybox for that?
Also ,there is one word in all those questions: "Will" .
We already have decent planet models ,and I think retexturing and enlarging existing ,working models is much easier then implementing whole new feature in the code (it doesn't mean I don't want to see it there).
And don't forget you cannot blow skybox up.
(though Shiv have a point with simulated explosion(s) on surface)
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: The E on May 15, 2009, 02:50:14 pm: Well, there is only so much that can be done to cut down on the workload new modders have.

Question: From a standpoint of performance, what would be better: Having a skybox (Which has a pretty simple geometry with a few big textures, IIRC), or having a big planet model, that is detailed enough to not appear blocky?

Ultimately, if 3d planets work for you, do them. I'm just saying that, from my arguably limited perspective, skyboxes are a shorter, less complicated, and less hardware-intensive way to achieve impressive low-orbit vistas.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Angelus on May 15, 2009, 02:57:44 pm: Quote from: Dragon on May 15, 2009, 02:40:38 pm

We already have decent planet models ,and I think retexturing and enlarging existing ,working models is much easier then implementing whole new feature in the code (it doesn't mean I don't want to see it there).
And don't forget you cannot blow skybox up.
(though Shiv have a point with simulated explosion(s) on surface)

It's easy to re-size the planet models to any size you want.

There are some problems of course:

1. The larger the planet model, the more polys it should have otherwise it looks "edgy"
To much polys and your performance drops, especially if you have some action going on and i'm not even
talking about BoE here.
Load one of the models in PCS2, save it as *cob, go to preferences and change the scale factor so that
the model has a size of 170kilometers ( deathstar size ), load the model save again as *pof and see how it looks ingame.

2. Textures: Your texture map has to be huge, 4096*2 upwards or you have to use tiling to make it
look halfway decent.

3. Models above a certain size causes problems

For now, skyboxes are the way to go, at least 'till someone rewrites the code.
You're right, you can't blow them up, but you can fake it with FRED.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Getter Robo G on May 16, 2009, 01:36:46 am: Yes... But Omni's Earth had a separte cloud layer (I forgot if it was animated or not)
Plus you could have the model rotate... Again further development was halted as Omni got into BTRL...
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Droid803 on May 16, 2009, 11:14:31 am: You can have animated clouds on a skybox texture as well. Case and point? Subspace corridor.
Well, at least I know it's possible.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 16, 2009, 12:32:01 pm: Are you sure that subspace corridor isn't handled a different way than skyboxes?
It's composed of two separate models and is enabled via "takes place in subspace" button if FRED rather than skybox field.
And where I can get Omniscrapper's Earth model?
Is it the trek one ,or some other ,even better?
Startrek Earth (as well as Ferenginar ,Kronos ,Romulus and Remus) is animated via four slowly moving subobjects and takes 1411kB (much less than Steve'o's updated Hyperion which takes 11306kB).
I believe BOE above such planet would be a bit less stressing to computer than BOE with pair of Hyperions (they are said to work in pairs).
I will try rescaling ,but I don't like it because it's causing a lot of problems (all the things I rescaled worked strange except GTD Daegon whith have simple structure and is easy to resize).
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Droid803 on May 16, 2009, 12:40:36 pm: Well, the subspace corridor looks like a skybox to me, and behaves like one (you're always at it's center).

Bottom line, planet models look fugly unless you make them really high poly and have hi res textures, in which case it becomes a performance drag. Just don't do it.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Angelus on May 16, 2009, 02:05:17 pm: Quote from: Dragon on May 16, 2009, 12:32:01 pm
Are you sure that subspace corridor isn't handled a different way than skyboxes?
It's composed of two separate models and is enabled via "takes place in subspace" button if FRED rather than skybox field.
And where I can get Omniscrapper's Earth model?
Is it the trek one ,or some other ,even better?
Startrek Earth (as well as Ferenginar ,Kronos ,Romulus and Remus) is animated via four slowly moving subobjects and takes 1411kB (much less than Steve'o's updated Hyperion which takes 11306kB).
I believe BOE above such planet would be a bit less stressing to computer than BOE with pair of Hyperions (they are said to work in pairs).
I will try rescaling ,but I don't like it because it's causing a lot of problems (all the things I rescaled worked strange except GTD Daegon whith have simple structure and is easy to resize).

The BtrL demo has a astlayer model that has a rotating inner ring to simulate a "active" asteroid field.
While the filesize of that model isn't that big, the impact it has on performance is, on lower end computers - like mine - quite huge.
I have only around 20fps, the same mission without that model runs on 50-60fps.

Ships with a high poly count are split into several subobjects and have LODs, which improves the performance, the same ship without that stuff is a entirely different matter.
The planet should be created that way too, but in this case LODs are pretty much useless, 'cause you never get that far from the planet in a mission too make LODs useful.

I think a BoE over such a planet would kill performance, or would cause strange things.

In which size do you need the planet ( diameter in meters )?
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 16, 2009, 03:05:30 pm: Earth from INF has 12740000m in diameter.
I would like to see planets in that size.
Trek planets are good looking ,but have mere 20080m in diameter.
And for LODs ,Hyperion lacks them and is actually one of most Hi-Poly ships out here (with rotating section).
INF Earth was quite no-stressing and I seen Shadow0000's upgrade here: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,37185.0.html
There is a beautyful Earth render ,cetrainly in game and most likely with unchanged ,or only slightly change model.
The problem is I cannot find it anywhere (link in post is dead as a doorknob).
Can you reupload this Hi-res Earth to FSMods?
I tried to resize trek Earth but got weird problems (see first attachment).
As for planet usage I also have something that will make you ROTFL.
I made a short mission to demonstrate planet models and included a battleship bombarding the Earth for testing.
The problem is ,I made it without checking planet's HP or balancing the beam cannons ,so battleship blew up the planet (and it wasn't my upgraded Eclipse ,only this Archangel from the first screen).
Last screenshot shows it ,middle one is Earth in-game.

[attachment deleted by ninja]
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: blowfish on May 16, 2009, 03:13:12 pm: Still doesn't look as good as a background bitmap. And I've experienced weird clipping problems with planets viewed at a large distance.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: haloboy100 on May 16, 2009, 03:16:00 pm: Well, hey...Freelancer used models for planets, and I think it worked beautifully.
They used a pathetically small scale as well, though. Which really ticked me off. No wonder you never found a destroyer near a planet, because it's almost as big.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Kszyhu on May 16, 2009, 03:22:10 pm: Independence War II also used modelled planets, but they were looking jagged even from great distances involved. (which was acceptable back then). Anyway, IMHO planet models should only be used when fly-by is possible.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 17, 2009, 05:21:57 am: I seen very beautiful planets in X3 Terran Conflict (my father plays it ,I only played X2 and I never had enough patience to build buissness empire and buy something bigger than Osprey ,one Cattle Ranch and Power Plant).
I'm sure that SCP should handle planets with this quality ,they look even better than skyboxes.
I know that X3 have quality setting ,plantes with moving atmosphere and cloud shadows on surface show only on highest one ,so in my opinion introducing something like that to SCP should prevent slowdown on weaker computers. You can ,for example ,make two LOD planet and use .tbm to swith between them. (those who have low-end computer will use .tbm that only allows LOD1 to be shown and those with high-end use the one that makes planet to show LOD0 ,including such things like moving atmosphere).
Of course for planets that don't need flying around them we can still use skyboxes.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: haloboy100 on May 17, 2009, 10:30:28 am: Well, I don't think it's a question of if we should use them, but rather how well we could use them.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 17, 2009, 11:37:51 am: I'm sure that we can get very good effects using 3d plantes if only some modeling masters (Aldo_14 ,Esarai ,Stratcomm ,Steve'o ,Brandx are the examples) would get intrested in making planets.
I'd like to see planet models similar to X3 ones ,Trek ones would be good example if thy wasn't undersized.
I think planet models are far more flexible than skyboxes.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: haloboy100 on May 17, 2009, 11:56:03 am: I think they would be much better (if done well), if only for the sake of being dynamic.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: General Battuta on May 17, 2009, 11:56:17 am: They seem inferior in every situation except in cases where you have to move relative to the planet.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Herra Tohtori on May 17, 2009, 12:14:21 pm: Quote from: General Battuta on May 17, 2009, 11:56:17 am
They seem inferior in every situation except in cases where you have to move relative to the planet.

Err, if the engine supported procedural terrain generation, atmospheric effects and could actually render realistically sized planets, and supported orbital mechanics... it would be AWESOME.

But it doesn't. Realistically sized planets crap out the rendering engine, procedural terrain generation is not supported, and atmospheric effects are a pipe dream at best.

Ergo, skyboxes are better than 3D planets in FreeSpace Open. If the engine is built to support that kind of stuff from the get go... 3D planets would be quite vastly superior to background bitmaps.

Infinity engine does it pretty well...

Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BZNJOj3Sv0&fmt=18) are (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Dn76lJ082I&fmt=18) some samples (http://www.youtube.com/user/InfinitySupport).

Damn I hope that game is not aborted... it's so beautiful. :shaking:
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Angelus on May 17, 2009, 12:31:49 pm: What we need, is a army of coders to support the SCP team, with helluvalot of time to re-write the FSO code, then we'll have that too. :D

How hard can it be to find any? <--- rhetorical question
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Aardwolf on May 17, 2009, 12:38:55 pm: Did anyone consider how long it would take a ship with FreeSpace speeds at the sort of distances we get in FS to move far enough relative to a realistic-sized planet to get any visible change in what it looks like?
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 17, 2009, 12:49:42 pm: A mere seconds needed for autopilot cutscene.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 18, 2009, 09:32:17 am: OK ,I uploaded trek planet models here: http://www.freespacemods.net/download.php?view.549
The first thing I would like to see is one of them resized properly.
The second one are ,of course ,reskins.
Any reskin would be welcome ,it doesn't matter if this would be Mars of some kind of distant ,unnamed planet.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Angelus on May 18, 2009, 01:05:23 pm: I resized Kronos more or less properly ( earthsize +/- 20000m :D ).

This is what it looks like:

(http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/3604/kronos2.jpg)

(http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/7153/kronos.jpg)

In the second pic you can see the distance to the planet in the targeting box.
There's a second prob, besides the graphics issue, you can't come close enough to the planet,
which makes the point of having planet models pointless.
My ship was destroyed only 2 or 3 seconds after i took the second screen shot.

My guess is that the problems with the model are:

1. The engine doesn't like models that big
2. The model has 4 layers, which causes the problems with the texture

Do you have the model in 3DS format?

Maybe something went wrong during conversion so i'll try something different this time, but honestly i doubt that the result will be different.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: blowfish on May 18, 2009, 01:18:13 pm: I thought there was a practical limit to the distance from the origin any object could be ... something like 600 km maybe? :nervous: Also, I've experienced graphical problems even with single layer planets when viewed at that distance.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 18, 2009, 01:35:30 pm: I unfortunately don't have 3ds files for it ,do you know who was involved in this?:
http://www.unimatrix01-fs2.de/13906/home.html
That's where they originaly were (this mod seems to be completely unknown here ,one Whitelight linked to it in discussion about Startrek to FS2 TC) .
I'm sure that:
A. You can be close enough to it.
I made a mission when you start as close to it as when playing Inferno.
There was no problems.
B. That's not because of distance or size.
Earth in INF works well ,I seen HTL Mars (From Cardinal's Spear) from a great distance with no problems.
C. The glith you saw is because of conversion.
I also resized one of those models (Earth) and got the same.
Not resized models aren't causing this problem.
I even posted sceenshot of this glith some time ago and that's why I asked you to properly rescale it.
Simple POF-COB-POF route will not do it "properly".
And distance in targeting box can be adjusted ,this happens always if you resize the model and use the same table.
EDIT: A new file appeard on the site since I last visited it ,you can download "Startrek_UPD" and get Bajor planet model ,It's not included in my pack.
EDIT2: I found an information that the mod is by Omniscaper and sent him a PM.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 23, 2009, 07:31:07 am: Now I know why your ship was destroyed ,Angelus.
It was because of the built-in stray system ,I also had an encouncer with it ,but in a FS mod ,so command sent me a message that I has been considered deserter and I have to return to base.
I ignored it so a while after my ship was destroyed because of collision with myself. :)
I already started a thread in SCP forum about flag for disabling this behaviour.
(are you sure that you didn't received any stray messages as well? They seem to be in BtRL.)
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Getter Robo G on May 23, 2009, 08:28:06 am: I asked the SCP team to increase the distance (or eliminate it entirely) years ago...

I was told it was unneeded and basically to go away...
Something along the lines of "No one will ever need a play area that big, if you do then you have poor mission design."

;)
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Droid803 on May 23, 2009, 12:01:44 pm: It was already increased once.

Getting rid of it is unnecessary.
Noone wants to have to fly tens of thousands of clicks in a single direction a single mission -- That's just terrible mission design, because it would involve flying in a straight line for minutes on end with 64x time compression. Pointless. Even the largest of autopilot cutscenes shouldn't need an area larger than the one currently given, otherwise the length of it will be over 20 minutes - not anyone's idea of a good watch. I know I'd get bored and quit halfway through if I ever encountered something like that, and never touch the damn campaign again.

Don't do it, please. At least not until you get 256x time compression or something.
Title: Re: Planet models
Post by: Dragon on May 23, 2009, 12:23:35 pm: OK ,no problem ,it turned out it was my mistake ,I just gave it too big distance. I wanted 100km ,I got 1000km. :)
It's working now ,and I'm uploading it to FSMods.
Check out my new thread for planet landing concept.