Static meshes or BSP Brushes(UDK)

melviso

I wanted to find out if static meshes are better performance wise than BSP brushes. From what I have gathered they are ppl saying static meshes are better and others saying BSP brushes are better.

From ur experience,which is in terms of performance but I am guessing static meshes look better?

Hourences

Meshes. A lot faster.

melviso

I see. Thanks for the reply.

|*BILLY$CLINT*|

melviso wrote: »

I wanted to find out if static meshes are better performance wise than BSP brushes. From what I have gathered they are ppl saying static meshes are better and others saying BSP brushes are better.

From ur experience,which is in terms of performance but I am guessing static meshes look better?

Static meshes are faster and better at occluding objects but BSP does offer some advantages. For example BSP is much faster and easier to use to block out your levels. Many studios use BSP to block out the levels and then export that to a DCC Tool and make it into a mesh that they then re-import into Unreal. But when push comes to shove your going to want to use a SM over BSP almost every single time.

|*BILLY$CLINT*|

melviso wrote: »

I wanted to find out if static meshes are better performance wise than BSP brushes. From what I have gathered they are ppl saying static meshes are better and others saying BSP brushes are better.

From ur experience,which is in terms of performance but I am guessing static meshes look better?

Mesh are better all around for performance but using BSP for some basic stuff in your level is not going to kill your FPS. The main thing that is going to kill your FPS is not so much Verts but the cost of drawing the Pixels to the screen.

McGreed

Yeah, BSP has some advantages, such as any BSP automatic has a bounding box that matches the shape of it, so its good for blocking out a level, as you can run through it and jump around, especially useful to figure out the heights of things (if you need people to be able to jump and reach areas).
Also, BSP is already there and doesn't require you to start importing/exporting assets, any shapes you are missing, you can "easy" create (within limits).
Downside is of course you are stuck with primitives, but it should be enough to get a good playable level layout. Also there is something about the shadows are calculated differently, can anyone confirm this?

melviso

Thanks,seems static meshes are better but when it comes to building lights and such, does bsp bake faster?
Some one I know is saying with bsp brushes u get way better performance and bsp brushes should be used as much as possible unless for meshes that require custom or complicated modeling like statues, trees e.t.c.

Hourences

Meshes are always better as I posted before.

If you run brushes on an ipad you will have 5 FPS (dependent on what you do of course), there is a reason for that -> inefficient at drawcalls for one.

What was true in 1999 does not go anymore. And the way brushes are rendered and calculated has changed over the years. Where we used to have zones, brushes are now occluded on a per poly basis sometimes resulting in smaller chunks thus more drawcalls. While we used to have control over the chunk fragmentation, that control is now gone. Etc. Add on top of that things that don't like brushes all that much like dynamic shadow (distance field can be very slow on brushes) and you got yourself something you should use in a limited amount only.
Add to that that brushes have tons of hidden do's and dont's workflow things (or you WILL break your level) and the result is a not very wonderful system to use in 2013. In 1999 we had a supercut view, in 2013 we do not. Tracing errors is painful already as it is, but with viewmodes removed it is even worse nowadays.

melviso

Okay, will use static mesh then. Thanks,Hourences.

alecchalmers

I was wondering the exact same thing today, great thread and thanks to everyone for the info.

melviso

Guys, what about terrain in udk?Are u better of with static mesh or udk's terrain is okay. Do game studios use udk's terrain or they import it from 3dsmax or Maya?

Hourences

It depends on the size and use. If small or distant, meshes are usually better. If large terrain tends to be much better. Meshes for one don't LOD well, not like terrains do at least, and collision can also be more costly on meshes compared to huge terrains. However terrains are made up of a range of textures and therefore take more memory. Therefore meshes are the better choice for small areas or distant things. In those situations the lack of lodding is no big issue anyway, nor is the collision, and you'd avoid the costly multi texture setup of terrains.

I have never done comparisons of what happens if you take a huge mesh, split it up into components like meshes, and then lod each component. That may actually proof to be faster (dependent on complexity and specific use - singeplayer vs 50 player vehicle combat etc) but even if it were faster the workflow of setting it up like that is not great imo.

Shift`

Melviso - Terrains are old in UDK standards, if you are going to use something to the same effect you want to go with Landscapes. On the same note, you will want to go with landscapes over meshes, they give you a lot more flexibility and stability, especially if you are doing something that is very expansive.

melviso

Thanks for the reply, Hourences and Shift.

I will try out landscapes then. Using static meshes for terrains would probably take more time to put together.