Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

#ActualHodgman

Posted 14 April 2013 - 09:42 PM

I also use the multiple buckets approach. Sorting 5 lists is faster than sorting a single list that's 5 times bigger.
AFAIK, you can't use a single list (with a single stage identifier) for repeated stages like shadow mapping, because each light/shadow-stage will have different culling results. You also probably don't want to share items between the shadow list and the g-buffer/forward list, because objects that are 3-draw calls in the latter (3 materials) can be just one draw call in the former (z-only pass disregards material).

In that article, he's talking about what they happened to do on their PS2 games, not necessarily saying that one approach is PS2 era and one is PS3 era. Also, IIRC, GoW didn't use deferred shading, and made little use of shadow mapping - they merge many lights together into a single light for forward shading, which seems incompatible with having shadow maps per light.


#1Hodgman

Posted 13 April 2013 - 08:37 PM

I also use the multiple buckets approach. Sorting 5 lists is faster than sorting a single list that's 5 times bigger.
AFAIK, you can't use a single list for repeated stages like shadow mapping, because each light will have different culling results. You also probably don't want to share items between the shadow list and he g-buffer/forward list, because objects that are 3-draw calls in the latter (3 materials) can be just one draw call in the former (z-only pass disregards material).

In that article, he's talking about what they happened to do on their PS2 games, not necessarily saying that one approach is PS2 era and one is PS3 era. Also, IIRC, GoW didn't use deferred shading, and made little use of shadow mapping - they merge many lights together into a single light for forward shading, which seems incompatible with having shadow maps per light.

PARTNERS