Community Forum

Hidden faces - what is best for the game engine?

Forum Overview >> Farming Simulator 19

CategoryFarming Simulator 19
Created29.03.2020 22:15

Unknown 29.03.2020 22:15
Hi, I am making a new model and would like to know how to tackle hidden faces. For example, a beam that meets with a large cube, I delete the end surface of the beam as it is invisible, but is it best to make a cutout in the cube and delete any surface that is covered by the beam, or is it best to leave it as is?

And with best, I mean best for the game engine. What has the largest memory demands? I want to optimize my model for low slot count on consoles but I'm not sure which method is best.

Anyone has the answer? Maybe someone from Giants?


Luca Braun (Bigfarmer145) 16.04.2020 11:17

Deleting not visible faces is always a good idea.

Cutting holes for reducing covered faces depends on the size. It will increase the Poly-count for sure. But it reduces the amount of (unused)-UV-space on your texture.
Texturespace is more valueable in performance, as the bottleneck on consoles must be Ram-Memory (i think).
This is the Reason why in the storeData the MemoryUsage of the mod is specified. You will see that texturespace is always one decade greater then vertexspace.
That doesnt mean you sould increase your texturesize generally. But you sould be economical with your UV-Space and not only use 2^n x 2^n (like 1024x1024) maps but try 2^m x 2^n (like 512x1024) if possible.

In my opinion, your cutout in the cube for the beam should only be made, if the hole would be greater than 10x10cm as a empirical value.

Unknown 16.04.2020 11:27
Thanks for the explanation!
At the moment I have not cut any holes where faces were invisible, just deleted the endfaces that are invisible. I have no area larger than 10x10 that could be cut away so I'll leave it like this.
My model is symmetrical, so right now I put everything on a 1024x1024 map but only UV-mapped one side of the model. I then mirrored it and overlayed the UV's, so the texture will also be symmetrical. Did this to economise UV space, but is this a clever thing to do or will this increase the load on the system and reduce performance?

Luca Braun (Bigfarmer145) 16.04.2020 11:45
Very good.

As i understand, the symmetrical-UV layout is a good thing and it will improve the pixel per m^2 ratio on the model. This enables the possibility to reduce the texture resolution for a still appropriate texture-appearance.

One disadvantage of this trick is, that you can see the symmetric texture when it comes to the dirt or used-map. This needs some effort in let it look not symmetric.
Also you can earn some black lines on the symmetry-edge when zooming out, or looking from far distance and dark environment. This is caused by the AO-Map when the background is black, and Mip-maps where active. But this is really rare effect nowadays and easy to fix.

Note: Log in to post. Create a new account here.