This is a Truck with large tires, Instead of a 2 Seater Truck, I figure I like to make a one seater! Still workin on the texture
I think this truck has lots of triangles that can be deleted. Can you post the tricount? Also 2048x2048 is a bit high for a lowpoly texture, switch down to 512*512 and it will do!
Yeah, just as expected! There are a lot of N-gons (faces with more than 4 sides). You should connect the verts in order to have only quad-shaped and triangle-shaped polygons. Here it is a quick edit I did for you. Try to do somehing like that!
After that, you still need to consider not the polygon count, but the triangle count.
I minimized the polycount, adding.. The so called triangles increases polycount, which minimizes performance
Are you sure?
Trust me, you can have as much N-gons as you want, but the performance is always the same, because the 3D software (or the game engine) counts triangles and quads, but not polygons.
Its Low poly as it stands. I can minimize the texture If I wanted to but Im going to leave it in higher resolution.
A 2048*2048 texture will significantly lower the performance... Mine was a suggest, but I repeat, I think that you may better switch to 512*512 or even 256*256, unless you don't want extreme close-ups of the model!
dv8ix, I hope you know, that every model has triangles, cuz every polygon has two triangles, it doesn't matter if you are connected opposite vertexes of polygon. Visible triangles doesn't eat more than invisible. =]
By the way, it is better to have no more than four side polygon for games.
Its Low poly as it stands. I can minimize the texture If I wanted to but Im going to leave it in higher resolution. I minimized the polycount, adding.. The so called triangles increases polycount, which minimizes performance
You do realise that pretty much every platform/3D engine renders in triangles anyway right? And that if you convert those n-gons into quads/tris it won't make any difference at all to performance, as they are probably being internally rendered as triangles anyway.
In fact, in max go to viewport configuration, and choose show statistics with tris ticked as well as polys. You'll notice your tri count is at least twice that of the poly count, because those n-gons and quads get split into triangles anyway. Quads are used for ease of modelling.
No man, thats where you are wrong, becuase. I have a shitty computer with no video memory. And when I start getting over 300 polycount, the computer lags bad. The less polycount the better. And thats what I aim for, creating more triangles will create more lag. Im sorry Im stickin to what I know best and I beleive its working out very good for me.
Yes that is correct: the less polys you have, the less tris you have. And the less tris you have, the faster your GPU will process your 3D-data.
The point here was that n-gons (= polys with more than 4 sides) are NOT any better than triangles. Sure it may look like that one big n-gon is faster/easier/what-ever to render than, let's say, 4 tris, but that is not the case. GPUs' work is based on triangles, and before the object can be rendered, it needs to be broken down into triangles. Not all engines/softwares are able to do that properly, and that is why you should NEVER leave n-gons in your model.
No offense but I think most of the guys here have a little more expirience with lowpoly models than you.
Just because youยดve been doing it wrong for 2 years doesnยดt make it right.
Say's Who? I dont know about you guys but my models hold up in Game maker. They way I have been doing it for almost 2 years now. There simply is no sense in putting a triangles or whatever. Take a look at the tire for example. I broke it down in several spots to eliminate polycount, As long as the shape holds in place. Mission accomplished!
no sense in putting more poly into things. There is No problem with the model. none. And if you wanted to triangulate it or whatever, it will run slower.
You have no idea what you're talking about. If your 3D app doesn't triangulate it on export, then whatever 3D engine you put the model into, does. Either way it ends up as triangles.
[EDIT] 'Object 2' shows a count of 6 polygons. These are in this case so called quads. And a quad consists out of two triangles. So the total triangle count of Object 2 is 12. It doesn't make a difference if you connect that edge on the quad or not. The triangle count will be the same.
@dv8ix
Open up Max, right click on the view label in the top left corner of your screen. Now go to "configure..." and select the "statistics" tab. Check on the "triangle count" box and go back to your model to see.
You will notice that no matter how many sides your polygons have, your triangles will remain the same. That is because polygons are MADE OF triangles. Give it a try. Go to one of your ugly n-gons and split it up at the current vertices. You will notice that the triangle count doesn't change.
You can't trick the computer no matter how much you think you can trick yourself, and you're certainly not fooling anyone else. Stop calling everyone else wrong when YOU are the one talking out of his ass with no idea of what he's really saying, please. I am only saying this to help you out.
yes engines triangulate in run time, but no you don't need to triangulate before export in most cases, because the engine will do this for you.
dv8ix - what people are saying is that there is no benefit to ignoring your tri count, because at the end of the day, it's important. They are not asking you to triangulate before export just be aware of it.
We mostly agree that modeling in quads is easier and the way to go.
Using your same stupid example! Please note that the triangles are the same with both, and whether you see them or not, they EXIST and they count towards your rendering because that is how computer graphics works!
Using your same stupid example! Please note that the triangles are the same with both, and whether you see them or not, they EXIST and they count towards your rendering because that is how computer graphics works!
Yeah Except you just added another 6 polycount triangulating it. which is alot slower than your original 6 polycount 12 polycount triangulating it isnt good. not good at all
This is starting to remind me of why I turn off viewing comments in youtube... hahaha
@harry: Man, that is looking great! I'm glad you took out the dark spots under the eyes. Makes for a more convincing symmetry. I will be watching this progress and taking notes on the paint job!
dv8ix: download unity, make a model, import into unity and see what it does...you will see what everyone is talking about. Also, you seem very defensive about this; chill out and realize people aren't saying you're stupid, just misunderstanding this concept. They're trying to help:D
Nobody thinks that triangulating makes models run faster (since models don't run...). You CAN have any amount of sides on your polygons as you want, but at the end of the day graphics cards deal only with vertices and the edges that connect them, which are triangles.
You should stop saying that people don't know what they are talking about though, really.
dv - this is very very simple, whether you can see the triangles or not, and whether your model looks the same or not, the 3D engine in "Game Maker" renders triangles, not n-gons. So you can delete as many edges as you want, creating n-gons, and reducing "polygons" but ultimately, your triangle count is exactly the same, and that's what counts.
Note - the suggested count for this thread was 500 triangles, not polygons. An n-gon is also a polygon, but could be made of many triangles.
Therefore you could create a model with 500 n-gons, but the actual triangle count could be 2000, making it completely unfair compared to other models in this thread that are 500 triangles.
You could draw the outline of a car, extrude it, and each side panel of the car would be counted as one "polygon". The 3D engine you render your model in doesn't render that one polygon, it breaks it down into many triangles, hence the triangle count being the important factor, and why triangles was the chosen count for this thread.
Replies
I think this truck has lots of triangles that can be deleted. Can you post the tricount? Also 2048x2048 is a bit high for a lowpoly texture, switch down to 512*512 and it will do!
After that, you still need to consider not the polygon count, but the triangle count.
Trust me, you can have as much N-gons as you want, but the performance is always the same, because the 3D software (or the game engine) counts triangles and quads, but not polygons.
A 2048*2048 texture will significantly lower the performance... Mine was a suggest, but I repeat, I think that you may better switch to 512*512 or even 256*256, unless you don't want extreme close-ups of the model!
P100 w/ Voodoo2 (from 1998 ) can go 45fps with 3500 polys onscreen with 5 256x256 textures on 640x480
By the way, it is better to have no more than four side polygon for games.
You do realise that pretty much every platform/3D engine renders in triangles anyway right? And that if you convert those n-gons into quads/tris it won't make any difference at all to performance, as they are probably being internally rendered as triangles anyway.
In fact, in max go to viewport configuration, and choose show statistics with tris ticked as well as polys. You'll notice your tri count is at least twice that of the poly count, because those n-gons and quads get split into triangles anyway. Quads are used for ease of modelling.
The point here was that n-gons (= polys with more than 4 sides) are NOT any better than triangles. Sure it may look like that one big n-gon is faster/easier/what-ever to render than, let's say, 4 tris, but that is not the case. GPUs' work is based on triangles, and before the object can be rendered, it needs to be broken down into triangles. Not all engines/softwares are able to do that properly, and that is why you should NEVER leave n-gons in your model.
Oh f. This is like trying to have a reasonable conversation with fanatic Christian :-|
Just because youยดve been doing it wrong for 2 years doesnยดt make it right.
You have no idea what you're talking about. If your 3D app doesn't triangulate it on export, then whatever 3D engine you put the model into, does. Either way it ends up as triangles.
dv8ix, maybe this helps http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygonal_modeling
[EDIT] 'Object 2' shows a count of 6 polygons. These are in this case so called quads. And a quad consists out of two triangles. So the total triangle count of Object 2 is 12. It doesn't make a difference if you connect that edge on the quad or not. The triangle count will be the same.
Open up Max, right click on the view label in the top left corner of your screen. Now go to "configure..." and select the "statistics" tab. Check on the "triangle count" box and go back to your model to see.
You will notice that no matter how many sides your polygons have, your triangles will remain the same. That is because polygons are MADE OF triangles. Give it a try. Go to one of your ugly n-gons and split it up at the current vertices. You will notice that the triangle count doesn't change.
You can't trick the computer no matter how much you think you can trick yourself, and you're certainly not fooling anyone else. Stop calling everyone else wrong when YOU are the one talking out of his ass with no idea of what he's really saying, please. I am only saying this to help you out.
yes engines triangulate in run time, but no you don't need to triangulate before export in most cases, because the engine will do this for you.
dv8ix - what people are saying is that there is no benefit to ignoring your tri count, because at the end of the day, it's important. They are not asking you to triangulate before export just be aware of it.
We mostly agree that modeling in quads is easier and the way to go.
Another picture to explain which I found in another thread:
triangle = 3 sided
quad = 4 sided
modeling software = anything ok
game engine / graphics card = breaks everything down to triangles anyway
Using your same stupid example! Please note that the triangles are the same with both, and whether you see them or not, they EXIST and they count towards your rendering because that is how computer graphics works!
they triangulate at "run time". it doesn't affect your saved data or assets in some engines, like you suggest.
sorry but this is a genuine fact.
your ngon is still x triangles to the computer.
Yeah Except you just added another 6 polycount triangulating it. which is alot slower than your original 6 polycount
The cube above has 8 verts right?
4 verts are filled with a polygon.
Every polygon is made from triangles.
say you have 5 verts being filled. This is 3 triangles to the engine.
Lets say you have 8 verts as constructed as above, this is 6 polygons or 12 triangles to a game engine.
But in another configuration, where the 8 verts are filled with one polygon, this is 6 triangles.
better?
This is starting to remind me of why I turn off viewing comments in youtube... hahaha
@harry: Man, that is looking great! I'm glad you took out the dark spots under the eyes. Makes for a more convincing symmetry. I will be watching this progress and taking notes on the paint job!
You should stop saying that people don't know what they are talking about though, really.
(lol @ aesir)
dv - this is very very simple, whether you can see the triangles or not, and whether your model looks the same or not, the 3D engine in "Game Maker" renders triangles, not n-gons. So you can delete as many edges as you want, creating n-gons, and reducing "polygons" but ultimately, your triangle count is exactly the same, and that's what counts.
Note - the suggested count for this thread was 500 triangles, not polygons. An n-gon is also a polygon, but could be made of many triangles.
Therefore you could create a model with 500 n-gons, but the actual triangle count could be 2000, making it completely unfair compared to other models in this thread that are 500 triangles.
You could draw the outline of a car, extrude it, and each side panel of the car would be counted as one "polygon". The 3D engine you render your model in doesn't render that one polygon, it breaks it down into many triangles, hence the triangle count being the important factor, and why triangles was the chosen count for this thread.
The quads are defined by triangles. Note that I did not 'triangulated' the model. Just made the triangles of the mesh visible.