PolyBump on Handhelds?
- Thread starter Dave Baumann
- Start date
arjan de lumens
Veteran
DoomIII on a handheld? Could be cool ... although I haven't really played enough games on handhelds to assess whether it could set the mood with such a small screen.
Does the MBX support all the features necessary for Doom III-class games (like cube-mapping, stencil-buffering etc)?
Does the MBX support all the features necessary for Doom III-class games (like cube-mapping, stencil-buffering etc)?
I'll wager that, being more or less series3 based, Stencilling should be very good on MBX, seeing as KYRO had 32 Z/Stencil writes per clock (Kyro being an 32 pipe card by NVIDIA's definition! 
) I can't see that something similar wouldn't have carried across to MBX.
Does DoomIII require Cubemapping?
) I can't see that something similar wouldn't have carried across to MBX.Does DoomIII require Cubemapping?
arjan de lumens
Veteran
IIRC, Doom III uses cube-maps to normalize certain vectors for its per-pixel lighting calculations. I seem to remember some reflection effects as well, but I could be wrong on that one.
I've seen some recent discussions regarding the value of cube maps for normalisation vs impact on visual quality, given that they burn a not insignificant amount of fillrate without making a significant difference in many situations (obviously there are some in which they do)...
John.
John.
I've read of Normal Maps (Polybump) being used for character models in games, but what about them using the technique for weapon models in first person shooters? To me weapon models in most games come across as needing a boost in image quality more than player models. Would it be pointless to use Polybump for weapon models?
Luminescent
Veteran
How about normal-mapping every object/thing in a game. I'm sure these would benefit from the per-pixel lighting scheme of a much higher detail model, regardless of how many polygons they are composed of.
Brimstone:
> Would it be pointless to use Polybump for weapon models?
No. Although if you're talking about the gun the player controls so to speak using actual geometry will give a much better result.
BTW, PolyBump is a Crytek trademark. It's just a fancy name for their tools and code. You'll get a similar result by using ATI's free normal mapper utility. Dunno what this big deal is about this announcement.
> Would it be pointless to use Polybump for weapon models?
No. Although if you're talking about the gun the player controls so to speak using actual geometry will give a much better result.
BTW, PolyBump is a Crytek trademark. It's just a fancy name for their tools and code. You'll get a similar result by using ATI's free normal mapper utility. Dunno what this big deal is about this announcement.
Panajev2001a
Veteran
stencil ? booo-hissss.... Why don't modifier volumes make their comeback ???
Panajev2001a
Veteran
What I say is... Doom III on Dreamcast
Luminescent
Veteran
Well, regretfully, performance in those games, on today's powerful hardware is not that great (~35 fps w/o AA and aniso). I hope more algorithm optimizations are made to the technology.
Similar threads
- Sticky