Image not available

690x690

IMG_0740.jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 997995

What went wrong?

Image not available

2758x1950

file.png

Anonymous No. 997997

looks good to me, or did you want to look at smeary normal maps for the rest of your life?

Anonymous No. 997998

>>997995
>What went wrong?
Probably fake, like that starfield sandwich

Anonymous No. 997999

>>997998
Nvm, didn't see the "topology after nanite" bit at the bottom, perfectly normal in this case

Anonymous No. 998001

>converting models from an engine that works in a completely different way to standard 3d software
>"wHy dOeS tHe tOpOlOgY lOoK sO sTrAnGe :OO

Anonymous No. 998004

>>997995
nanite really is black magic

Anonymous No. 998005

>>997999
>>998004
I think the use of Nanite in this image is just a joke - like a meme reference. No matter how you put it though it would’ve been better to retopro the head

Anonymous No. 998008

>>998005
The game does not use nanite
streamable.com/iz1h6d

Anonymous No. 998010

>>998008
In that case grim. But if it works it works, not like that piece needs proper topology for deformation, the performance impact should be pretty negligible, my biggest concern would be shading but it seems to be fine. It looks like the devs really wanted to show 3d details on edges such as here >>997997. Not sure how reasonable this is

Anonymous No. 998011

>>998008
>shows clip of user turning nanite off
lol.

Anonymous No. 998012

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M00DGjAP-mU

Image not available

1033x458

03-normal-vs-disp....jpg

Anonymous No. 998014

>>997995
I wonder if OP is fake like the Starfield Sandwich. Remember the faked Starfield sandwich?

>>997997
>>998010
Can't they just use a displacement map? Displacement maps actually alter the profile of the geometry. Look at the edges in pic related.

Anonymous No. 998015

>>998014
it would be a lot more expensive to do displacement to achieve the same level of detail
meshlets just werk

Anonymous No. 998026

>>998014
Displacement maps only work if it they points to displace. They don't create points from the aether

Anonymous No. 998032

>>998014
Anyone actually using true displacement maps in realtime in games? Idk why to use them instead of just baking them in 3d editor into geometry and then decimating to remove tons of unneeded geometry which exists because displacement needed cosmic subdivisions to work with. For realtime I would probably ever consider POMs, not real displacement.

Anonymous No. 998071

>>998015
>it would be a lot more expensive
No, it wouldn't. Meshets have a ridiculously shit baseline performance and only look good when compared to rendering extremely unoptimized meshes.

Anonymous No. 998076

>>998071
>mesh shaders go brrr
sorry grandpa, it's time to move on

Anonymous No. 998079

>>998076
>mesh shaders
Nanite doesn't even use mesh shaders by default.

Anonymous No. 998122

>>998071
not true at all, polygons are cheap now

it really is time to move on, grampa

🗑️ Anonymous No. 998154

>>998122
agreed, God of War did it

Anonymous No. 998158

>>998076
>>998122
Oh you're that troll who is too incompetent for faster boards got it

Anonymous No. 998177

>>998122
This. I work at ubisoft they just ask me to send them sculpts and they put them in game, industry standard saar!

Anonymous No. 998558

Not sure

🗑️ Anonymous No. 998696

>>998177
You technically can though in UE5. It does work and you can rig it. You btfod yourself

Anonymous No. 998702

>>998696
As I've said saar!

Anonymous No. 998912

>>998122
>Hardware improves
>*Bloats software*
>"waaaaaaa games are unoptimised!!1!!!!"

Anonymous No. 999048

>>997995
Why not use tessellation? I remember all the ype for it with DX11, what happened?
>>998122
>polygons are cheap now
not on my hard drive

Anonymous No. 999091

>>999048
>Why not use tessellation
It has to be done linearly over the geometry primitives, which means that its performance scales linearly. If you double the available hardware and double the processing speed, fragment processing becomes 2*2 times faster while vertex processing only becomes 2 times faster.

Anonymous No. 1002606

a thread full of retards who don't understand what Nanite is or does

Anonymous No. 1002609

>>998122
yeah, before you start shading them

Anonymous No. 1002707

>>997995

They're using nanite, after using decimation master. It's the normal workflow.

Anonymous No. 1002781

>>997995
The people who do the work have to submit it to someone for approval. The things we percieve as flaws are nonissues to the person signing off on them. There are two options:
- The person signing off on this doesn't know enough about what they are signing off on.
- The pipeline for the production doesn't consider mesh optimization as high a priority as deadlines, or prioritizes high-end user functionality over low end user functionality.
I think it could swing either way.

Anonymous No. 1002960

>>1002606
I'm pretty sure it was moved over from /v/, that's the only explanation for the extremely low IQ ITT.

Anonymous No. 1002987

>>997995
fake and gay like the starfield sandwich and 2b's ass
amazing how many people today play so many videogames and yet know not even a little bit about how 3dshit works despite staring at it all the time

Image not available

928x1020

1678461178906.png

Anonymous No. 1003547

>/3/ discovers hero assets

Anonymous No. 1003598

>>1003547
>hero assets = shit tier topology that will fuck up the rasterizing performance
retard

Anonymous No. 1003786

>>1003598
If there's only one in the entire scene it isnt as much of pain to optimise
This isn't a 2k poly can model that's everywhere

Anonymous No. 1003972

>>997995
They're using Nanite exactly as intended. Notice how the body's topology is clean, since it's not able to use Nanite and needs to be able to deform cleanly, unlike the head.