SV2.0's BogBug (untitled WIP)

[SV2.0]

Really? That hasn't been my experience at all. With the bigger levels at comparable complexity I get better performance with mesh. Weird.

[federico]

MESH.
Pro:
- It's easier to shape the geometry outside any of the RF editors.
- You can use the LOD system (but you have to break your level in little pieces to make it effective)
- You can render-to-texture the shadows over the mesh and avoid realtime shadowing (much faster).
- Newton Physics can provide a good geometry way better than the genesis one.

Cons:
- There is no in-engine optimization: the engine simply draws the mesh, period. Distance Fog and Plane works only if you break the mesh in several pieces. You have to do the optimization outside the engine.
- Collision isn't good at all.
- Raycasting the mesh geometry doesn't work. Everything that involves the raycasting procedure can't be done: projectile collision and decals for example.

Summarizing the facts. You can achieve good visual results using the mesh, but you have to prepare all the optimization process outside the world editor: lighting the level using a program like giles, take notes about the lights position and color, breaking the geometry in several pieces, creating lod's for the geometry parts, importing the geometry in the editor and recreating the alignment, placing the lights... etc..
If your level is big and complex enough RFedit pro can simply refuse to let you work without any mercy (crashing, freezing). It can be really painful.
If you search the forum for the posts of the user Tabulanis, you can see some amazing visuals created using this procedure, but I think he wasted more time putting the things together in the editor instead of creating the level geometry in the modelerer...

At least the resulting optimized geometry isn't more complex than the one we can get using a good leveleditor. I think that's the point: to create a new leveleditor or to make another one compatible.

[SV2.0]

Yeah, thats pretty much what I've been doing. A few points I wasn't aware of though, so thanks for the comment. If I use bsp for collision will raycasting work on an invisible face?

[federico]

I wrote

- Newton Physics can provide a good geometry way better than the genesis one.

I mean instead

- Newton Physics can provide a good COLLISION geometry way better than the genesis one.

Raycasting over clip geometry? Yes it will work, but you will use the same data two times (for visuals and geometry). Not exactly optimized.
The screenshot you posted above shows the same clever and simple design you used for the actors so I think you could do the same good work inside the worldedit, if it wasn't so hard to use. So the decision is up to you. My suggest is: consider the worldeditor, try different editing procedures, then choose thinking about your gameplay.
Some likely editing combination:
- bsp only
- bsp+mesh details
- mesh visuals + bsp collision
- mesh visuals + NGD physics collisions

[Agentarrow]

Yes, He did resident awesome, super awesome bros, awesome the hedgehog, tetrawesome, the legend of awesome, awesome may cry, awesome fantasy, awesome crossing, and a few others as well.

[SV2.0]

@Federico
Thanks for the tips man. Really helpfull!

@AgentArrow
Yeah, I thought so. Awesome Crossing huh? I'll have to check that one out...

[darksmaster923]

Yes, He did resident awesome, super awesome bros, awesome the hedgehog, tetrawesome, the legend of awesome, awesome may cry, awesome fantasy, awesome crossing, and a few others as well.

what????

[Agentarrow]

Guy that made a ton of Youtube videos, parodies of famous video games

[SV2.0]

I've finally got some decent screens to post. These are from the first level. Took some time to get just this far, due to some problems such as my mesh based level not liking lights and my thumbdrive getting corrupted, taking with it half my work. So now the level is all bsp, mostly built in QuArK.

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/981/ ... ug4ca6.jpg
Money shot of our hero.

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2981 ... ug1os2.jpg
To give you an idea of the scale, that's a cinder block buried in the wall.

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/6553 ... ug3dl1.jpg
The level is basically a hole in the ground with a path spiraling up to the surface.

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/3742 ... ug2ua0.jpg
The way out.

Also, here's a render of the first enemy in the game. These Gnomes are crude, disgusting louts that must be dispatched simply on principle.
http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/7664/gnome1ej5.jpg

[Matte]

It's great to have you back here SV2.0! That's some really nice work!
Some of these shots remind me of the Tarnished Coast in GW:Eotn, what is a very good thing, because those locations are great!
Is Quark easier than RFEditPro?
Good luck!

[SV2.0]

Thanks a lot for the comments, I'm glad you like it.
QuArK isn't exactly easier but it is more flexible. Just having vertex control brings it leaps and bounds above RFedit. (Wink wink, nudge nudge to the dev team)

[Agentarrow]

nice, the locations for some reason remind me of pikmin

[SV2.0]

Yeah, It's hard not to look like that when your making a game at this scale. I'll definately take that as a compliment though, since Pikmin was visually awesome.

[metal_head]

man that game looks amazing! Did you make all the textures yoursefl (I'm talking about the level textures)
The idea for the charater is great!

[SV2.0]

Yeah, I do all my own textures, mesh, animations and music. Glad you like it, man. In all honesty though, the level really is very simple. Most of the reason it looks good is the lighting. In film lighting is key, and it isn't any different in games. I use shadows a lot to hide the rough parts and highlight paths. If you look at that last shot of the level (looking at the ceiling with the hole) where the ceiling joins the wall, it's a right angle. But since it's so dark there and the light coming from the hole is so bright, it keeps you from noticing so much and it appears almost domed.