Sky sphere theory
Hi all!
First off: this comes from a total newbie who''s justvstarting developing things resembling games. :-)
Anyway, I was working on my sky sphere today, and I started thinking on how to animate clouds and stuff, and my puny mind came up with this:
- have one BIG sky sphere, with a stary background, a static moon, or whatever the fixed elements iin you sky should be
- then have a smaller sky sphere textures with clouds, and have this rotate
I don''t know if this will work, and how it will look, that''s why I posted. With this technique, you could texture the inner sphere with different cloud sets, depending on the weather type (clear sky, heavy storm) and then rotate to the right ''strip'' on your sphere to simulate the effect... Problem here is that you might have to have a really big sphere compared to the world...
Anyway, let me know what you think, and if this totally doesn''t work, let me know too please.
Thank you,
Johan
For terran (earth-like) terrain, skyplanes work a helluva lot better. A skysphere, maybe, for the static elements (remember to chop the polycount down to the dirt, though), but a near-flat plane for the actual sky.
Why?
1) Easier and better-looking application of clouds moving across the sky.
2) Easier to emphasize distance hazing
3) Lower polygon count. A way-too-high-detail skyplane has 64 polygons. Tops. A good-enough-that-Wyrframe-won''t-notice-the-edges one has 16.
Why?
1) Easier and better-looking application of clouds moving across the sky.
2) Easier to emphasize distance hazing
3) Lower polygon count. A way-too-high-detail skyplane has 64 polygons. Tops. A good-enough-that-Wyrframe-won''t-notice-the-edges one has 16.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement