This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


OpenGL Large object in OpenGL look ugly???

Recommended Posts

I finally started the development of a 3D space game, I can move around the spaceship with real Newtonion acceleration/velocity physics already But of course a space game will require large planets, and I took an OpenGL unit of "1" to be 1 meter. So a realistic planet will have to be around the 20.000.000 OGL units. But just to test I made some cube-planets, and even if they're only 1000 units they're uglier than the EXACT same scene 1000 times smaller! This picture shows the difference: note the pink pixels on the right picture, that is another side of the cube that should be invisible. But for bigger scenes with more cubes at larger distances, it looks even worse that this. What can I do against that? EDIT: this pic shows it when I made the cubes 1.000.000 OGL units [edited by - Lode on July 30, 2002 7:24:44 AM]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do backface culling - what you are seeing is a classic symptom of no backface culling. This is (probably) compounded by the fact that your near and far clipping planes will have to be displaced to a much greater degree in the larger scene, leading to a lower resolution in the zbuffer at greater distances and showing the effect of not backface culling.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, better for size 1000 already but still not good for size 1.000.000

I use



And the sides of the cubes are oriented correctly, and if the cubes have size 1.000.000 it looks like this (two times a screenie of the same):

Am I doing something totally stupid here?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm I don''t know :/
I use basecode from nehe to initialize OpenGL, so probably the same as nehe''s basecode...
Is it even possible to use extremely big worlds or is that at the cost of small details? I mean, even if I''d use a LOD system so that detailed spaceships are only drawn if they''re close to me and only big undetailed planets are drawn far away, would it be possible?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
the way it works in spacegames is: without z buffer

you have to sort your scene and polys, maybe you can draw the nearest highdetail objects with a zbuffer (and a near farclipping plane).

there are some algorithms which might help you.
BSP - to sort the polys inside a object
multiple indexlist- make at leats 6 indexlist which have different polygone order, so depending on the view of the camera you can use the best matching one.

of course, first you have to sort the objects.


[edited by - rapso on July 30, 2002 9:23:01 AM]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW what I want to achieve is that there''s no skybox at all, all stars, planets, ... should be real 3D objects (well I''ll turn them into a simple point if they''re far away but you can fly to it if you want to and then they become spheres), and at the same time relatively detailed ships, spacestations, ... should be visible.
Does there exist an open source project like this somewhere that I can take a look at maybe?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
You''re trying to be too ambitious. You can''t accurately represent the size of astronomical units seamlessly. Check out gamasutras three articles on rendering a procedural universe. It talks about pitfalls and solutions of trying to render planets, systems, and galaxies to scale.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
You might run into floating precision problems doing so.. not only for z-buffer errors, but also for object detail.. polys might start jumping around at far distance from the origin. you might wanna try doubles instead of floats.
hope that helped,

Visit Rarebyte!
and no!, there are NO kangaroos in Austria (I got this questions a few times over in the states )

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Similar Content

    • By test opty
      Hi all,
      I'm starting OpenGL using a tut on the Web. But at this point I would like to know the primitives needed for creating a window using OpenGL. So on Windows and using MS VS 2017, what is the simplest code required to render a window with the title of "First Rectangle", please?
    • By DejayHextrix
      Hi, New here. 
      I need some help. My fiance and I like to play this mobile game online that goes by real time. Her and I are always working but when we have free time we like to play this game. We don't always got time throughout the day to Queue Buildings, troops, Upgrades....etc.... 
      I was told to look into DLL Injection and OpenGL/DirectX Hooking. Is this true? Is this what I need to learn? 
      How do I read the Android files, or modify the files, or get the in-game tags/variables for the game I want? 
      Any assistance on this would be most appreciated. I been everywhere and seems no one knows or is to lazy to help me out. It would be nice to have assistance for once. I don't know what I need to learn. 
      So links of topics I need to learn within the comment section would be SOOOOO.....Helpful. Anything to just get me started. 
      Dejay Hextrix 
    • By mellinoe
      Hi all,
      First time poster here, although I've been reading posts here for quite a while. This place has been invaluable for learning graphics programming -- thanks for a great resource!
      Right now, I'm working on a graphics abstraction layer for .NET which supports D3D11, Vulkan, and OpenGL at the moment. I have implemented most of my planned features already, and things are working well. Some remaining features that I am planning are Compute Shaders, and some flavor of read-write shader resources. At the moment, my shaders can just get simple read-only access to a uniform (or constant) buffer, a texture, or a sampler. Unfortunately, I'm having a tough time grasping the distinctions between all of the different kinds of read-write resources that are available. In D3D alone, there seem to be 5 or 6 different kinds of resources with similar but different characteristics. On top of that, I get the impression that some of them are more or less "obsoleted" by the newer kinds, and don't have much of a place in modern code. There seem to be a few pivots:
      The data source/destination (buffer or texture) Read-write or read-only Structured or unstructured (?) Ordered vs unordered (?) These are just my observations based on a lot of MSDN and OpenGL doc reading. For my library, I'm not interested in exposing every possibility to the user -- just trying to find a good "middle-ground" that can be represented cleanly across API's which is good enough for common scenarios.
      Can anyone give a sort of "overview" of the different options, and perhaps compare/contrast the concepts between Direct3D, OpenGL, and Vulkan? I'd also be very interested in hearing how other folks have abstracted these concepts in their libraries.
    • By aejt
      I recently started getting into graphics programming (2nd try, first try was many years ago) and I'm working on a 3d rendering engine which I hope to be able to make a 3D game with sooner or later. I have plenty of C++ experience, but not a lot when it comes to graphics, and while it's definitely going much better this time, I'm having trouble figuring out how assets are usually handled by engines.
      I'm not having trouble with handling the GPU resources, but more so with how the resources should be defined and used in the system (materials, models, etc).
      This is my plan now, I've implemented most of it except for the XML parts and factories and those are the ones I'm not sure of at all:
      I have these classes:
      For GPU resources:
      Geometry: holds and manages everything needed to render a geometry: VAO, VBO, EBO. Texture: holds and manages a texture which is loaded into the GPU. Shader: holds and manages a shader which is loaded into the GPU. For assets relying on GPU resources:
      Material: holds a shader resource, multiple texture resources, as well as uniform settings. Mesh: holds a geometry and a material. Model: holds multiple meshes, possibly in a tree structure to more easily support skinning later on? For handling GPU resources:
      ResourceCache<T>: T can be any resource loaded into the GPU. It owns these resources and only hands out handles to them on request (currently string identifiers are used when requesting handles, but all resources are stored in a vector and each handle only contains resource's index in that vector) Resource<T>: The handles given out from ResourceCache. The handles are reference counted and to get the underlying resource you simply deference like with pointers (*handle).  
      And my plan is to define everything into these XML documents to abstract away files:
      Resources.xml for ref-counted GPU resources (geometry, shaders, textures) Resources are assigned names/ids and resource files, and possibly some attributes (what vertex attributes does this geometry have? what vertex attributes does this shader expect? what uniforms does this shader use? and so on) Are reference counted using ResourceCache<T> Assets.xml for assets using the GPU resources (materials, meshes, models) Assets are not reference counted, but they hold handles to ref-counted resources. References the resources defined in Resources.xml by names/ids. The XMLs are loaded into some structure in memory which is then used for loading the resources/assets using factory classes:
      Factory classes for resources:
      For example, a texture factory could contain the texture definitions from the XML containing data about textures in the game, as well as a cache containing all loaded textures. This means it has mappings from each name/id to a file and when asked to load a texture with a name/id, it can look up its path and use a "BinaryLoader" to either load the file and create the resource directly, or asynchronously load the file's data into a queue which then can be read from later to create the resources synchronously in the GL context. These factories only return handles.
      Factory classes for assets:
      Much like for resources, these classes contain the definitions for the assets they can load. For example, with the definition the MaterialFactory will know which shader, textures and possibly uniform a certain material has, and with the help of TextureFactory and ShaderFactory, it can retrieve handles to the resources it needs (Shader + Textures), setup itself from XML data (uniform values), and return a created instance of requested material. These factories return actual instances, not handles (but the instances contain handles).
      Is this a good or commonly used approach? Is this going to bite me in the ass later on? Are there other more preferable approaches? Is this outside of the scope of a 3d renderer and should be on the engine side? I'd love to receive and kind of advice or suggestions!
    • By nedondev
      I 'm learning how to create game by using opengl with c/c++ coding, so here is my fist game. In video description also have game contain in Dropbox. May be I will make it better in future.
  • Popular Now