Hi guys, this is a object which I wanted to be suitable for games like Crysis or Gears of War, the polycount of the building is around 17k triangles, without the machine guns. Hope I get some critics and comments, cheers all!
My mistake I didn't mention the softwares used - Autodesk Mudbox 2009 for the high poly, Meshlab for optimizing, Autodesk 3ds Max 2009 for base mesh, texturing and rendering ( V-ray here) here is an interior shot, polycount of each machine gun is 3300 quads ( I presume its also high)
cool. I`d say mesh lab has some uses, like making super high poly, app crashing models, more optimized and less app crashing), but making a lowpoly mesh is definatly not what it should be used for.
your best bet would be to re-model the low, over the high. at first this step sounds like a pain in the ass- but theres many ways to go about it.
my favorite way is polyboost`s polydraw tools. you can select a mesh, and then it gives you a nice set of options to create new geometry, that automatically conforms to the surface of your highpoly.
you can download a polyboost demo and give it a go- (its a max script that operates right inside max) OR max 10 has all the polyboost features built in.
it looks like mesh lab just evenly distributes the geometry instead of using it where it needs it (aka the edges). The guns aren't "too" bad, the render is too blurry to see the detail on the guns.
I really don't know what a proper topology for such a model should look like. Max has a optimizing feature, but I thought the geometry is too crappy for real use ( cuz it really looks twisted). I watched a DVD from Eat 3d, It was about doing a concrete pillar, and the guy used a similar program to make the low-res mesh. I actually tried to follow that worklflow. Anyways, thanx for the feedback , here is another shot of the gun
geometry mostly affects the silhouette and you can use normal maps to add detail and depth, if a wall is pretty much flat on the high poly is doesn't make much sense to have a lot of geometry there, it should pretty much be a plane with more details on the edges and corners.
i figured that was based on the eat3d tute, but i believe they optimized down a lot lower than you did, and even tho i thought it was slopy of them to auto decimate the model in that tute, specialy to make an ingame model, but oh well. get dirty an get into maya or max an make you a low poly thats such a simple object. heres an idea, this may be a bit too low, but teh basic idea is, as low as you can get and still capture the shape
I redid the geometry using topogun, and triangulated it. Now the counter hits 4452 tris, but as you all said, most, if not all the details are still there.Here are a few shots
Actually the holes and cracks are geometry but the renders are in V-ray's GI and they may seem flat. If weren't they, I would really make it like 300 triangles or so. I will try to make better renders.
The scale of the texture and the lighting is off. It looks like its a bunker for little G.I. Joe's The rebar seems a little thick too. Add some rust on the cement under them too make it looks more weathered.
I would redo your mesh like RhinoKey showed. You have way too many polies for that simple shape. You can't always rely on tools like Optimizer's and such, nothing beats good old fashioned manual labor
Thanx for the advices, but if I get it lower than 4k the holes and cracks and larger bumps would be flat ( just texture + normal) and that would make the high poly model pointless.
It doesn't make the hi poly process pointless, that's how you got your normal map A high poly baked normal map is always going to look better than one created in Photoshop... Rhino's wire paint over would yield the same result as what you have now.
Just remodel the piece for the low poly. Stop using the optimizer crap.
but if I get it lower than 4k the holes and cracks and larger bumps would be flat ( just texture + normal) and that would make the high poly model pointless
Small Holes and cracks are never modeled into the low poly model cause you don't see them and they are not worth the additional polygons (a general case, but obviously doesn't apply to everything). A good rule of thumb is, if you don't see a major change in the silhouette, then you don't need to model it out.
Also, sometimes the way your geometry looks, your gona have problems with lighting in some engines (UT3 for instance). Its gona look like shmuck and discombobulated. Clean polyflow pays off a great deal of the time, not only for lighting but for smoothing groups.
The second time I didn't use optimizer crap, I manually remodelled it. Topogun is something like Polyboost, but its a separate program, not a plugin. You import the highpoly and make polygons over it. I was referring to the "not so small" bullet holes in the front, and the crushed wall part in the sides.
Build a low poly roughly like Rhinokey's, then normal map, and ambient occulsion the high poly and stick it on the low poly. you should be able to retain most of the detail with a model under 2k tris. Here's a non optimized, and randomly tessellated low poly i threw together
You should see the potential you get from a very optimized mesh. A Polycount of 4000 Tris is not that much of overkill imo. But considering the visual detail of your Bunker there are plenty of wasted resources if you go with 4000 tris.
Just look at the Bunker Dippndots just rushed together. Take those 900 tris. You saved 3000 which you can spend for other to improve silhoutte or give additional details at the areas where the player will interact.
With the saved poly-budget you can add steel-wires, a armored door, a ladder or a hatch in the inside or what ever fits to a bunker of this type.
I say if you have a really great bunker with nice details 4000 tris is the way to go. But only for the building itself 4000 won't do a favor.
Edit: I just read that you did your second mesh without optimizers. So the advice to give now: You should aim for a cleaner geometry. Your model looks very chaotic although this might be an impression based on the triangulation in your wireframe. Use quads as much as possible when blocking things out.
Your coworkers would hate you if they would have to change anything in your second mesh. The topology in the model from dipndots allows easier changes to the mesh.
If you are planning to add this to a portfolio I strongly recommend that you do the geometry by hand. Using mesh optimzers as the only source for a lowpoly mesh will give a quite negative impression of your modelling abilities.
Just doodeling in zbrush or mudbox and hitting a mesh reduce button will not impress anyone about your ability to produce quality lowpoly assets.
Take the hard road and do the model by hand, it will be a nice practice and you are following the common asset-production-pipelines.
the point of your high poly in games is to get the normal map. you can get your low poly to have some similar details, but for the most part its going to be a flat surface faking high detail.
just build the actual low poly by hand and stop trying to use a make art button. also, maybe think of using tiling textures/blending instead of sculpting an entire building into one texture. its not going to have the resolution you want for a crysis or GoW type model.
Bunker is pretty cool. But I think its a little too high poly. I say take it into zbrush and add the crumble detail you want, and bake the normals onto a lower poly model (lower than the one you have now.
A couple other points:
- Do not render on top of white or black, ever. Use something between 33% and 66% brightness.
- See-through wireframes are incomprehensible. Just take screenshots of the max wireframe view or, even better, the max edged faces view.
If you are asking me if it is a 1 texture for the whole building, it is. (2048*2048 )
About the low poly mesh - I don't find it so intimidating to redo my topology by hand, having in mind that I have done it enough before - so it wasn't such a problem to make it manually the second time - actually is mostly quads, but I converted it to triangles with the Max object export. Anyways, thanks all for the replies, I think I got the point about the polycounts. I just wanted to really convey the surface details of my high poly mesh, but now I realize that I am doing it wrong. ( for that particular piece, ofc :P )
EDIT:Hi, I remodeled the thing, here is the first really low variant
but I didn't actually liked it so much so I made another, which was a bit more accurate, and textured it again.
So here are a few renders of the second one
Both versions are under 1k
thanks to you who told me that I could do it lower without crucial detail loss.
Cheers all!
it actually doesnt seem like it is made out of concrete. it almost seems like some sort of coral, or some stone that has been underwater. also, there are no definitive highlights on any edges at all, which make the entire thing seem extremely smooth. its way too bumped and the texture just seems a bit too complex. are you using references?
The model looks much, much better and much more efficient, great improvement! I think the reason that the concrete doesn't look like concrete is because of the scale of the texture. You used a very zoomed in image of concrete that doesn't work for the amount of surface area you have covered with it.
as already said, you should work on getting the scale to read in the model. Right now you cant tell if its realsize bunker, or a replica for you birds to swim in.
all!
Replies
Texture can be re-used though, so it should be a relatively straight forward process.
your best bet would be to re-model the low, over the high. at first this step sounds like a pain in the ass- but theres many ways to go about it.
my favorite way is polyboost`s polydraw tools. you can select a mesh, and then it gives you a nice set of options to create new geometry, that automatically conforms to the surface of your highpoly.
you can download a polyboost demo and give it a go- (its a max script that operates right inside max) OR max 10 has all the polyboost features built in.
*swears to god polyboost isnt paying me money*
I would redo your mesh like RhinoKey showed. You have way too many polies for that simple shape. You can't always rely on tools like Optimizer's and such, nothing beats good old fashioned manual labor
You have a good start, keep working at it!
Small Holes and cracks are never modeled into the low poly model cause you don't see them and they are not worth the additional polygons (a general case, but obviously doesn't apply to everything). A good rule of thumb is, if you don't see a major change in the silhouette, then you don't need to model it out.
Also, sometimes the way your geometry looks, your gona have problems with lighting in some engines (UT3 for instance). Its gona look like shmuck and discombobulated. Clean polyflow pays off a great deal of the time, not only for lighting but for smoothing groups.
Just look at the Bunker Dippndots just rushed together. Take those 900 tris. You saved 3000 which you can spend for other to improve silhoutte or give additional details at the areas where the player will interact.
With the saved poly-budget you can add steel-wires, a armored door, a ladder or a hatch in the inside or what ever fits to a bunker of this type.
I say if you have a really great bunker with nice details 4000 tris is the way to go. But only for the building itself 4000 won't do a favor.
Edit: I just read that you did your second mesh without optimizers. So the advice to give now: You should aim for a cleaner geometry. Your model looks very chaotic although this might be an impression based on the triangulation in your wireframe. Use quads as much as possible when blocking things out.
Your coworkers would hate you if they would have to change anything in your second mesh. The topology in the model from dipndots allows easier changes to the mesh.
If you are planning to add this to a portfolio I strongly recommend that you do the geometry by hand. Using mesh optimzers as the only source for a lowpoly mesh will give a quite negative impression of your modelling abilities.
Just doodeling in zbrush or mudbox and hitting a mesh reduce button will not impress anyone about your ability to produce quality lowpoly assets.
Take the hard road and do the model by hand, it will be a nice practice and you are following the common asset-production-pipelines.
just build the actual low poly by hand and stop trying to use a make art button. also, maybe think of using tiling textures/blending instead of sculpting an entire building into one texture. its not going to have the resolution you want for a crysis or GoW type model.
A couple other points:
- Do not render on top of white or black, ever. Use something between 33% and 66% brightness.
- See-through wireframes are incomprehensible. Just take screenshots of the max wireframe view or, even better, the max edged faces view.
About the low poly mesh - I don't find it so intimidating to redo my topology by hand, having in mind that I have done it enough before - so it wasn't such a problem to make it manually the second time - actually is mostly quads, but I converted it to triangles with the Max object export. Anyways, thanks all for the replies, I think I got the point about the polycounts. I just wanted to really convey the surface details of my high poly mesh, but now I realize that I am doing it wrong. ( for that particular piece, ofc :P )
EDIT:Hi, I remodeled the thing, here is the first really low variant
but I didn't actually liked it so much so I made another, which was a bit more accurate, and textured it again.
So here are a few renders of the second one
Both versions are under 1k
thanks to you who told me that I could do it lower without crucial detail loss.
Cheers all!
http://2e5.com/trip/denmark/IMG_4487a.JPG
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/2181184.jpg
http://www.dearwinona.com/bunker.jpg
Its looking much better tho.