Feedback for a complete beginner

tgonzo

Hi folks,

I decided to start learning to create some game assets. I have read a bunch about what is expected of such models but I got overwhelmed and confused with the information. I decided to go ahead and try my hand at a relatively simple model, so I created a spiked club. I had previously followed a quick course about creating a sword and wanted to try a different approach - namely sculpting. So this is what I came up with:

High poly -> Remesh to low poly -> Bake the normal maps. And here is the result (https://skfb.ly/o6AoH  and some images below)

To my beginner's eyes, it looks acceptable, but I am fairly certain this is not the case. I was hoping I could get some feedback to better focus my efforts on what to improve for my next models. Not to leave the question too open, though, some points:

1) Is the UV map fine? I have read that for hard surface models, the UV should be generally as straight as possible. It certainly didn't work here. I have fidgeted with this map/UV seams for while trying to get rid of overlapping faces and texture artefacts. I don't know however if the current layout would be prone to issues either in terms of visual artefacts or something else.

1.1) Related to the UV texture, I have baked them in 4k resolution and would, if needed, resize/rescale them. Is this a good approach or is better to generate the maps already in the appropriate resolution?

2) Is the topology reasonable? I have seen a lot discussed about keeping the silhouette, which I understand as keeping the overall shape in line with the high poly model. Is this correct and does this mean the internal geometry for static meshes are not that important?

3) I know this is a trick question, but is the poly count (~3k tris) reasonable? To make this a bit more targeted, I will give 2 scenarios: isometric (turn-based or diablo-like) game and FPS, thinking about a popular video card (GTX 1060).

4) Anything else I might be missing here?



Any feedback is greatly appreciated!

rexo12

This is a solid first attempt! To answer your questions:

The UV map has a lot of wasted space. Do you have the TexTools/Texel Density Checker/UVpackmaster plugins? Blender's default UV tools are woefully underdeveloped and these plugins will make your life a lot easier - TexTools at the very least. The unwrap is serviceable but all the fiddly holes and seams are not fantastic - probably the best you can do though. Make sure the islands are appropriately scaled and the pixels are square - it looks to me like these would end up being stretched? Check with a chequer grid.

I would probably align the islands along the vertical axis rather than the horizontal, as this follows the way my mind thinks about the object (tall-thin, not fat-wide), but that's just me.

I typically bake my maps at twice the resolution I need them in, yes. Frankly its probably unnecessary but it's just nice to have that flexibility. It's a workflow detail, whatever you are most comfortable with. So long as the final textures are at an appropriate resolution!

The topology is reasonable, and 3k is absolutely fine - perhaps even too little - for what you're targeting, although isometric/FPS are 2 very different perspectives. For FPS you could really go up to like 10-20k. I think you have been too aggressive with your low poly though, and you have failed to capture some silhouette details. The wrapping does not read at all in your low poly.

EDIT: I missed the sketchfab! The wrapping reads a lot better there - sorry. I still think you could get away with more geometry there to enhance the silhouette though.

That is a fair understanding of silhouette, but also consider it literally! As a little experiment: put a full-black emissive material on your low poly and ask someone to guess what it is - if they can't get it, there's probably not enough geometry. Internal geometry for static meshes is not that important, but good topology is always something to show off.

I think it's a common trap to get really wrapped up in the polycounts and texture resolutions and what-have-yous - and you do allude to that haha. Err on the side of detail rather than optimisation, particularly at this early stage.

You seem to have a solid grasp of what you need to be doing, which is good! I found teaching myself the whole baking workflow terribly confusing and it took me a long time for my workflow to mature (and it continues to do so). It will be the same for you, with practice.

tgonzo

Thanks a lot for the comments, rexo! I will give the plugins a shot. 

One question though: is there any preference for smaller/larger islands or is this entirely dependent on the model?

rexo12

The less seams you can get away with the better - usually. So long as there's no warping and it reaches your required texel density. I typically use texel density as the driving metric for laying out UV maps, striking a balance between 'sensible' unwraps and dense packing. So yes, it does depend on the model - but larger islands tend to be easier to work with.. generally**.

You will get a feel for what's most appropriate depending on your needs and workflow.