ChaiRuiPeng wrote:tmkye, that looks really nice![]()
i am guessing you are manually limiting fps at 60?
I suspect it's vsync
And the screenshot does look nice, but maybe some shadows and some brighter lighting would make it even better
ChaiRuiPeng wrote:tmkye, that looks really nice![]()
i am guessing you are manually limiting fps at 60?
ChaiRuiPeng wrote:i am guessing you are manually limiting fps at 60?
Radikalizm wrote: but maybe some shadows and some brighter lighting would make it even better
tmyke wrote:ChaiRuiPeng wrote:i am guessing you are manually limiting fps at 60?
Yes, but with 2 million polygons, I do not exceed 70/75 fps without sync (NVidia 8800GTX).
I can not rise above 2.3 million polygons, which is already well I think.Radikalizm wrote: but maybe some shadows and some brighter lighting would make it even better
Yes, but there, it will be more complicated in terms of technical and performance ...
Radikalizm wrote:2.3 million?Is that because of the grass or because of terrain?
tmyke wrote:Radikalizm wrote:2.3 million?Is that because of the grass or because of terrain?
on the scene of the screenshot, there is 80.000 poly for terrain, 1.200.000 for trees and 700.000 for the grass.
The loggers are on strike.
tmyke wrote:for grass, I use hardware instancing and frustum culling mechanisms.
For trees, it is true that do not mesh 'low polygon', it's just to test the charge, and i use StaticArea class with LOD technique (instancing software somehow).
ent1ty wrote:success is a matter of concentration and desire
at a cost measure in computer resourcesButler Lampson wrote: all problems in Computer Science can be solved by another level of indirection

tmyke wrote:After all depends on the power of the video card for your netbook.
ent1ty wrote:success is a matter of concentration and desire
at a cost measure in computer resourcesButler Lampson wrote: all problems in Computer Science can be solved by another level of indirection




Users browsing this forum: Nadro and 1 guest