map performance -1 reply

Please wait...

korbin

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

28th September 2008

0 Uploads

14 Posts

0 Threads

#1 10 years ago

i wonder if when i make maps I should care about performance because most mappers who are good dont care about performance and players just seem to role play right? so should i try to make something that looks good and plays ok or poorly like that atlantica map runs soo slow and i thought it could have been optimized more to perform better but maybe people only care about how it looks?




SiLink

(JAWA) Leader

50 XP

13th February 2005

0 Uploads

1,663 Posts

0 Threads

#2 10 years ago

Me personally I prefer a mixture of both.

I intend no offence so Szico when I say this because I think Atlantica is (In my opinion) one of the best JKA maps ever built in terms of visuals and detail but the loading time is too much. Old cards either crash or take 20-40 minutes to load the map and newer cards like my 8800 GTS take around 5-10 minutes to load the map which is still a very very long time.

If the map has the balance of good looks, good FPS, good layout and quick loading times then you'll have a map which will be widely used, but that's just my view, I know others will disagree with me.




NAB622

EAT ME!

50 XP

8th October 2005

0 Uploads

6,921 Posts

0 Threads

#3 10 years ago

The best maps have many secrets and lots of interactive areas, IMHO. That way, you still have something to do when everyone else on a server disconnects.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#4 10 years ago

Just take this into consideration: good gameplay requires a strategically good map, along with a map with good fps. Good eye-candy just focuses on the good-looking stuff, ya know? A mix of both may mean lower fps in large, open areas, or less detail in open areas, and smaller areas have more detail, but not enough to slow fps down.




MaceCrusherMadunusus

Movie Battles II Mapper

50 XP

12th January 2005

0 Uploads

323 Posts

0 Threads

#5 10 years ago

korbin;4602419i wonder if when i make maps I should care about performance because most mappers who are good dont care about performance and players just seem to role play right? so should i try to make something that looks good and plays ok or poorly like that atlantica map runs soo slow and i thought it could have been optimized more to perform better but maybe people only care about how it looks?[/quote]

Most mappers who are good don't care about performance?!? What is that crap?

Of course we do, we also just create more detailed maps at the same time, so sometimes it negates it a bit. But what we do actually allows us to have better detail whilst remaining a same constant level of FPS.

Atlanticas optimization is fine, its more the fact that JKA cannot handle that size of maps... Texture issues (Low-End GFX cards tend to have an issue here... not enough Vram to hold all the data. 256mb is minimum I would recommend having... and thats pushing it, 512mb is what I would recommend as being the main. But thats coming from me who has 1gb Vram...[used to have 256])

JKA has more fail optimization than anything. Atlantica is fine.

[quote=SiLink;4602432]Old cards either crash or take 20-40 minutes to load the map and newer cards like my 8800 GTS take around 5-10 minutes to load the map which is still a very very long time.

Honestly, I dont know how it took that long for you. My old GFX card ( Nvidia 7800 GS 256mb AGP8x) loaded it in 2 minutes just fine.




SiLink

(JAWA) Leader

50 XP

13th February 2005

0 Uploads

1,663 Posts

0 Threads

#6 10 years ago
Honestly, I dont know how it took that long for you. My old GFX card ( Nvidia 7800 GS 256mb AGP8x) loaded it in 2 minutes just fine.

Hmm strange, well it definitely took around 5-10 minutes because I don't mind waiting a minute or two for a map to load up.

One user in (JAWA) who uses a mac told me it took 30 minutes to load and when it got to actually loading the player and such it just crashed x_o lol.




The One and Only

I R Scary Eyeball

50 XP

29th January 2004

0 Uploads

4,091 Posts

0 Threads

#7 10 years ago

30 minutes? It only took me 7 with a 64mb GeForce 4 MX!

If you don't optimise your map for good performance, you're limiting your player base to a a very small number of people - the idiots who treat JKA like a chatroom rather than going out and killing things!




Mikouen VIP Member

What?

145,650 XP

4th September 2005

4 Uploads

11,732 Posts

2 Threads

#8 10 years ago

I'm workin' on 1.5gb of graphics memory now and JA still freaks out when I try loading high-detail maps. It's a classic case of the modder's talents far outstripping the engine's capabilities.


I don't know how, and I don't know why, but this is totally Sheep's fault.



NAB622

EAT ME!

50 XP

8th October 2005

0 Uploads

6,921 Posts

0 Threads

#9 10 years ago

I limit all my work to about a minute, maybe two at tops. But I get impatient just waiting a minute, so.....yeah.




boddo

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

3rd September 2008

0 Uploads

14 Posts

0 Threads

#10 10 years ago

Performance can always be increased. It sometimes bothers me how performance is perceived. As if bigger and more brushes means things are higher quality and that equals skill. 'it runs poorly it must be high end'

the map I did 'Phantom' out performed LDJ's ffa_episode1_2004. kinda strange I put out something in 2008 that performs better than something from 2004. Im not saying my map is better, Im just saying there's a lot that can be done to improve performance that most mappers overlook.

Almost completely eliminated T-junc'ing blocksize 0 and manually hinted all areas. replaced large curved patch-mesh with models and a number of other things.

things that can be done to improve performance;

Lightmapping control. now I know noone does this, but for brushes that are small, steps, railings, small details like that, these things do not need to be lightmapped. Why? because by default, every vertex in a map, is assigned a light value when your map is compiled. You can set shaders to be lit by there vertex values alone and the quality difference is hardly noticeable at all on small surfaces. This saves precious lightmap space and helps avoid the dreaded black flicker that occurs when pushing the limit of lightmapped surfaces (advanced mappers probably know what im talking about) It also lowers the memory footprint. because lightmap is in essence, an additional image loaded into memory. How do you do this? associate a secondary shader for all your textures,

textures/gjs3/chrome_vertexlit { qer_editorimage textures/gjs3/env_map2 surfaceparm nolightmap q3map_novertexshadows { map textures/gjs3/env_map2 rgbGen vertex tcGen environment

} }

and apply it to surfaces that are small. (vertices for these surfaces should not be under other surfaces hidden from light sources)

Convert large high curvature patch-mesh brushes into ASE models. Now many think converting some patches too ase models, is optimizing. This is commonly not done properly though. most mappers do not scale down there work before converting. this is the vital step when converting large curved patch mesh into Ase models for performance reasons. The patchmesh should be scaled down so that when converted to an ASE model, a lower Lever Of Detail is baked in. leaving curved patchmesh in there original scale and converting to ASE models doesn't increase performance, because it bakes in a high Level Of Detail.

Extra load time can be avoided. A brush for each window blind. This is something Szico did in his Atlantica map. 6 polygons per blind. each lightmapped. How about this, 1 polygon per blind via simple patch mesh, with cull twosided, and vertex lit instead of lightmapped.

Environmentmaps. These hit performance hard. If its a multi stage shader and the environment map isnt the most noticeable, use a lower resolution image with it. If your shader is shiny chrome, it only needs 1 stage to the shader.

T-junctions, are created during compile to create intercept points for triangles on surfaces, this sometimes breaks surfaces up into way too many triangles. work around is to put caulk on the surfaces and throw a Simple Patch/mesh surface ontop of it, and texture that instead. Patch/mesh do not get t-junction'd.Theres some other benefits to doing this in certain circumstances.

there's a number of other things that can be done aswell..