[Darius]

The Artemis D. H. has a different tail structure. I expect it'll only make a minimal difference to it though.

[DaBrain]

It needs a completely different normal map, but that one is done already too.


Here is another one:

[taylor]

Which is actually better on system resources?

That all depends on just how far you want to go in terms of detail. If you intend to have all the hull plates and other details look 3d, go with a normal map in preference to modelling in that detail, because if you modelled it all in you'd be looking at thousands and thousands of extra polys.

However, normal mapping is currently best suited to only that kind of detail. If you need larger or more complex detail, then you'd be much better off modelling it in. An example of this is the Arcadia - even its small detail is too big to accurately portray using normal mapping, so I'll be modelling it in using detail boxes and stuff.

Basically: modelling it in is far less resource intensive than adding a normal map, but only up to a point. Beyond that point you'd be wasting thousands of polys where a normal map could be used instead.

Another thing that matters is engine upgrades.  Since memory usage from textures and effects has been one of our biggest problems, that area has received most of the work over the past couple of years.  Memory handling is now far superior to what it used to be.  The problem, is that now it can't get any better.

Geometry rendering has barely been touched though, and is extremely inefficient.  And for 3.7, fixing that is my primary concern.  It will likely take of couple of versions to actually get everything updated, but it will be worth it.  The collision detection code is also pretty crappy in the efficiency department, but there are some changes that could be made there to improve things as well.

What this all means is that normal maps can only slow things down.  More memory used means higher hardware requirements, which translates to it running slower for a lot of people.  Using more geometry on the other hand, will slow things down now, but in the future you could probably triple the geometry used on a ship and have it run at the same speed as it does now, if not faster.

So my advice has simply been to be selective about using normal maps.  Use them where you need them, not where you want them.  Some ships will do far better with a normal map than with more geometry, so go with a normal map there.  Other ships can benefit from a normal map, but to such a small degree that unless you are looking at the ship in the Lab you really aren't going to see any of that detail.  In cases like that you are only wasting memory, and more geometry detail would probably be advisable.  If you add more geometry and it gets slower then don't worry about it, because we've got a lot of room to work on the code to make it better.

[ARSPR]

And also in addition to normal maps, take notice that Taylor has also added parallax mapping (-height).   

Nevertheless, I really feel that in a game like this one, a space simulator where you don't move slowly and quite near other models to look at, (opposite to a FPS and room walls as example), parallax mapping IS THE GREAT LUXURY.

[Marcus Vesper]

And also in addition to normal maps, take notice that Taylor has also added parallax mapping (-height).   

Nevertheless, I really feel that in a game like this one, a space simulator where you don't move slowly and quite near other models to look at, (opposite to a FPS and room walls as example), parallax mapping IS THE GREAT LUXURY.

Of course, so long as it's an optional feature that isn't being enabled by default, where's the harm in including it?  Some of us have the speed to burn on graphic niceties like that.  Yay upgrades.

[WeatherOp]

Do the Moloch.

[DaBrain]

Partially, I already did.



Anyway, maybe you should give it a try too.

[Turambar]

I would if it worked on my card.

[bkd86]

Has anyone done normal maps for the asteroids? That would/could make a huge difference in them.

[DaBrain]

I think you should check this out:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,25406.msg1020869.html#msg1020869

[WeatherOp]

Partially, I already did.



Anyway, maybe you should give it a try too.

Nice.

In truth I need to remodel that thing, I might get around to it soon. Because a ton of the work done on the model, could now be done with normal maps(ribs). If you can DaBrain, after your done with the normal maps, post a screen of the Non-HTL model, I wanna see how the ribs look fully normal mapped.

[teistiz]

Has anyone been working on removing the existing shading from the MediaVP textures? When using normalmaps the usual colormap textures should _not_ contain any attempt at simulating lighting except ambience or the combination will look pretty horrible. I tried the nm_test.vp and noticed the Deimos corvettes still had the cartoonish shading in their colormaps while at least one of the textures it used had a corresponding normalmap. The result didn't look very good (well, ok, the Deimos textures never did).

[Vasudan Admiral]

We don't have self shadowing re-implemented at this stage, so in some cases painted on shading is still necessary. Certainly the pseudo directional lighting that I've always been painting onto hull plating needs to go (wow that will take some getting used to ), but at this stage places that wouldn't get much light such as some recesses, tunnels, holes and other various typically dark places will still need to be shaded as such on the map.

They should be kept as a separate layer though in case self shadowing makes a return, meaning most of them could be removed.

Oh yeah, and I've recently figured out how to bake ambient occlusion maps in blender, so I'll be overlaying that on all future textures because the fake shading it produces looks great. (and can't be done by normal mapping)

[teistiz]

but at this stage places that wouldn't get much light such as some recesses, tunnels, holes and other various typically dark places will still need to be shaded as such on the map.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant by mentioning getting rid of the shading except ambience in my post. Maybe it doesn't need to be as exagerrated as it is on some of the stock textures but removing it completely wouldn't look good either imho.

The ambient occlusion map's a kind of fake radiosity for ambient lighting, right? That should look pretty nice, at least on the smaller craft that it can be used with - the capital ships' use of repeating textures would probably make it impossible unless someone added a second set of texture coordinates.

[Vasudan Admiral]

Oh right. I assumed by 'ambience' you just meant having the map 100% uniformly lit. My bad.

And yeah, here's what the baked AO map looks like on the cockpit model:

(Ignore the stick - I messed up a bit there. Easy fix though.)
There's no lighting or shading or AO applied in that scene, just the baked texture displayed at 100% brightness - without it you'd just see a solid white outline. Overlaying this texture on the actual base map shades everything very nicely.

[Darklord42]

There is an Idea,  Normal Maps in cockpits.  I'm sure WCS would look into that once they are able to move instruments around.

[Marcus Vesper]

Yay, and I just got to Bearbaiting again yesterday, what perfect timing!

[TrashMan]

If I got this right, normal mapping is best used for fighters/bombers that don't have many polies allready and for metal panel like textures.

[Vasudan Admiral]

It's more of a per-ship decision really.

The Lucifer for example will benefit greatly once it has a final normal map because all the small-medium detail present on the UV map will be really brought out, whereas on something like the Ravana, Demon or Sathanas it won't be as noticable due to the relatively tiny details combined with the texture tiling. The Arcadia might benefit a bit, but it probably won't be a big enough difference the cost of a huge normal map for it (since I'll be UVing the thing).

Basically there aren't any set-in-stone rules for which types of ships are worth the effort and which aren't.

[BlackDove]

So.....where can we get the final normal map pack/updated map pack as they come out?