View Full Version : Determining poly counts?

01-21-2007, 10:55 AM
In modeler the statistics tab says 12012 polygons. In layout it says under the item properties that it is 107 534 polygons. There are substantial subpatchings going on. If i were to use a model like this in a game engine, which number determines it's polycount? Do game engines generally recognize a subpatch or does it count it as a frozen version (the answer to which would also solve the first query)?

01-21-2007, 02:59 PM
No game engine recognises subpatches, or quads for that matter, do you'd have to freeze it and then triple it, so you'd end up with a poly count of over 200,000 triangles.
You wouldn't want to put a model of that size in a game engine anyway. The idea is to make a low poly version of it and use a normal map to fake the high poly details.

Captain Obvious
01-21-2007, 06:09 PM
Not to be nitpicking, but there is actually a game engine that supports subdivision surfaces: http://www.fantasylab.com/newPages/FantasyEngineFeatures.html

Still, low poly + normal map really is the way to go.

01-22-2007, 02:50 AM
Yes, yes, i know that low poly and mapping was the way to go, and might be for the next twenty minutes. I was curious as to which one of these counts was the qote un quote correct count, which you boys have answered.
I do have to laugh at the low poly and mapping is the way to go, comment though. No offense, but have you guys been keeping up on the new tech? Check out the new max pc. Low poly and mapping will be a thing of the past.
And since i concern myself with what is and what will be, i will continue the direction i'm going in, thank you very much.
I know, the tired old arguments about " most gamers won't own a machine like that, you have to build for the lowest common denominator,blah, blah....".
BULL****! If that were the case, games would not need to progress much past windows 98. As far as i'm concerned build for the technology available, not for the monkey at the table too scared, stupid, or broke to keep up. Most end users have to be forced to change. The gamers i know who consider themselves serious (whatever being serious about games is supposed to be anyway) have the newest up to date gear and can run stuff that doesn't exist yet! Have you seen Crisis? Low poly is Donkey Kong, goodby, and good riddance.
Directx 10, man. Procedurally rendered effects in real time, not based on pre-fab geometry or vertices.That, Captain Obvious is the way to go, spread the word.
Please don't consider this a shot at you guys as i appreciate your comments, you answered my questions, and i thank you.

01-22-2007, 02:52 AM
By the way that game engine looks sweet, thanks for the link. I have heard of a couple others that support subdivision surfaces, but their names escape me at the moment.

01-22-2007, 05:10 AM
Low poly and mapping will be the way to go for years to come.
Even if you had a budget of 20,000 polys per character, you couldn't get any real detail in without normal maps.
You'd need a budget of a few hundred thousand polys to do it all with real geometry, and that will never make sense, it will always be more economical to use normal or displacement maps.
The point of using subd surfaces in this new game engine is to make the deformations more realistic for animation.

01-26-2007, 02:45 AM
Oddity, though i respect your opinion and your skill, i have to say that i disagree with the mapping for years to come. You are right about needing several (100) thousand polys for any real detail, i think it will be more of a hybrid, with budgets of 50 000 plus and mapping to a certain degree. And, i don't think it will be years to come. Maybe 2-3 max before we start seeing movie quality or better. I know a lot of big producers think it isn't necessary, but wasn't it Bill Gates who said no one will need more than 500 mb (or something stupid like that) of hard drive space? These are also the same people who don't find a problem shoving the same game down your throat (with a different title and characters, but essentially the same game), every christmas for $50-60 with a straight face, remember. Most seroius (there's that word again) gamers i know don't play the 6th incarnation of half life because it's the same as the first one and every other fps out there. They are drooling over the stuff that is coming next and upgrading for it. Imagine there displeasure at finding the same old rehash, with **** graphics that dx9 could have handled. That won't hold water and some of the dinosaurs running these companies need to realize that or suffer the consequences ($ > :screwy: or inaction = :cry: ) .