• Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By racarate
      Hey everybody!
      I am trying to replicate all these cool on-screen debug visuals I see in all the SIGGRAPH and GDC talks, but I really don't know where to start.  The only resource I know of is almost 16 years old:
      http://number-none.com/product/Interactive Profiling, Part 1/index.html
      Does anybody have a more up-to-date reference?  Do people use minimal UI libraries like Dear ImgGui?  Also, If I am profiling OpenGL ES 3.0 (which doesn't have timer queries) is there really anything I can do to measure performance GPU-wise?  Or should I just chart CPU-side frame time?  I feel like this is something people re-invent for every game there has gotta be a tutorial out there... right?
       
       
    • By Achivai
      Hey, I am semi-new to 3d-programming and I've hit a snag. I have one object, let's call it Object A. This object has a long int array of 3d xyz-positions stored in it's vbo as an instanced attribute. I am using these numbers to instance object A a couple of thousand times. So far so good. 
      Now I've hit a point where I want to remove one of these instances of object A while the game is running, but I'm not quite sure how to go about it. At first my thought was to update the instanced attribute of Object A and change the positions to some dummy number that I could catch in the vertex shader and then decide there whether to draw the instance of Object A or not, but I think that would be expensive to do while the game is running, considering that it might have to be done several times every frame in some cases. 
      I'm not sure how to proceed, anyone have any tips?
    • By fleissi
      Hey guys!

      I'm new here and I recently started developing my own rendering engine. It's open source, based on OpenGL/DirectX and C++.
      The full source code is hosted on github:
      https://github.com/fleissna/flyEngine

      I would appreciate if people with experience in game development / engine desgin could take a look at my source code. I'm looking for honest, constructive criticism on how to improve the engine.
      I'm currently writing my master's thesis in computer science and in the recent year I've gone through all the basics about graphics programming, learned DirectX and OpenGL, read some articles on Nvidia GPU Gems, read books and integrated some of this stuff step by step into the engine.

      I know about the basics, but I feel like there is some missing link that I didn't get yet to merge all those little pieces together.

      Features I have so far:
      - Dynamic shader generation based on material properties
      - Dynamic sorting of meshes to be renderd based on shader and material
      - Rendering large amounts of static meshes
      - Hierarchical culling (detail + view frustum)
      - Limited support for dynamic (i.e. moving) meshes
      - Normal, Parallax and Relief Mapping implementations
      - Wind animations based on vertex displacement
      - A very basic integration of the Bullet physics engine
      - Procedural Grass generation
      - Some post processing effects (Depth of Field, Light Volumes, Screen Space Reflections, God Rays)
      - Caching mechanisms for textures, shaders, materials and meshes

      Features I would like to have:
      - Global illumination methods
      - Scalable physics
      - Occlusion culling
      - A nice procedural terrain generator
      - Scripting
      - Level Editing
      - Sound system
      - Optimization techniques

      Books I have so far:
      - Real-Time Rendering Third Edition
      - 3D Game Programming with DirectX 11
      - Vulkan Cookbook (not started yet)

      I hope you guys can take a look at my source code and if you're really motivated, feel free to contribute :-)
      There are some videos on youtube that demonstrate some of the features:
      Procedural grass on the GPU
      Procedural Terrain Engine
      Quadtree detail and view frustum culling

      The long term goal is to turn this into a commercial game engine. I'm aware that this is a very ambitious goal, but I'm sure it's possible if you work hard for it.

      Bye,

      Phil
    • By tj8146
      I have attached my project in a .zip file if you wish to run it for yourself.
      I am making a simple 2d top-down game and I am trying to run my code to see if my window creation is working and to see if my timer is also working with it. Every time I run it though I get errors. And when I fix those errors, more come, then the same errors keep appearing. I end up just going round in circles.  Is there anyone who could help with this? 
       
      Errors when I build my code:
      1>Renderer.cpp 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.h(15): error C2039: 'string': is not a member of 'std' 1>c:\program files (x86)\windows kits\10\include\10.0.16299.0\ucrt\stddef.h(18): note: see declaration of 'std' 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.h(15): error C2061: syntax error: identifier 'string' 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.cpp(28): error C2511: 'bool Game::Rendering::initialize(int,int,bool,std::string)': overloaded member function not found in 'Game::Rendering' 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.h(9): note: see declaration of 'Game::Rendering' 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.cpp(35): error C2597: illegal reference to non-static member 'Game::Rendering::window' 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.cpp(36): error C2597: illegal reference to non-static member 'Game::Rendering::window' 1>c:\users\documents\opengl\game\game\renderer.cpp(43): error C2597: illegal reference to non-static member 'Game::Rendering::window' 1>Done building project "Game.vcxproj" -- FAILED. ========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 0 up-to-date, 0 skipped ==========  
       
      Renderer.cpp
      #include <GL/glew.h> #include <GLFW/glfw3.h> #include "Renderer.h" #include "Timer.h" #include <iostream> namespace Game { GLFWwindow* window; /* Initialize the library */ Rendering::Rendering() { mClock = new Clock; } Rendering::~Rendering() { shutdown(); } bool Rendering::initialize(uint width, uint height, bool fullscreen, std::string window_title) { if (!glfwInit()) { return -1; } /* Create a windowed mode window and its OpenGL context */ window = glfwCreateWindow(640, 480, "Hello World", NULL, NULL); if (!window) { glfwTerminate(); return -1; } /* Make the window's context current */ glfwMakeContextCurrent(window); glViewport(0, 0, (GLsizei)width, (GLsizei)height); glOrtho(0, (GLsizei)width, (GLsizei)height, 0, 1, -1); glMatrixMode(GL_PROJECTION); glLoadIdentity(); glfwSwapInterval(1); glEnable(GL_SMOOTH); glEnable(GL_DEPTH_TEST); glEnable(GL_BLEND); glDepthFunc(GL_LEQUAL); glHint(GL_PERSPECTIVE_CORRECTION_HINT, GL_NICEST); glEnable(GL_TEXTURE_2D); glLoadIdentity(); return true; } bool Rendering::render() { /* Loop until the user closes the window */ if (!glfwWindowShouldClose(window)) return false; /* Render here */ mClock->reset(); glfwPollEvents(); if (mClock->step()) { glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT | GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT); glfwSwapBuffers(window); mClock->update(); } return true; } void Rendering::shutdown() { glfwDestroyWindow(window); glfwTerminate(); } GLFWwindow* Rendering::getCurrentWindow() { return window; } } Renderer.h
      #pragma once namespace Game { class Clock; class Rendering { public: Rendering(); ~Rendering(); bool initialize(uint width, uint height, bool fullscreen, std::string window_title = "Rendering window"); void shutdown(); bool render(); GLFWwindow* getCurrentWindow(); private: GLFWwindow * window; Clock* mClock; }; } Timer.cpp
      #include <GL/glew.h> #include <GLFW/glfw3.h> #include <time.h> #include "Timer.h" namespace Game { Clock::Clock() : mTicksPerSecond(50), mSkipTics(1000 / mTicksPerSecond), mMaxFrameSkip(10), mLoops(0) { mLastTick = tick(); } Clock::~Clock() { } bool Clock::step() { if (tick() > mLastTick && mLoops < mMaxFrameSkip) return true; return false; } void Clock::reset() { mLoops = 0; } void Clock::update() { mLastTick += mSkipTics; mLoops++; } clock_t Clock::tick() { return clock(); } } TImer.h
      #pragma once #include "Common.h" namespace Game { class Clock { public: Clock(); ~Clock(); void update(); bool step(); void reset(); clock_t tick(); private: uint mTicksPerSecond; ufloat mSkipTics; uint mMaxFrameSkip; uint mLoops; uint mLastTick; }; } Common.h
      #pragma once #include <cstdio> #include <cstdlib> #include <ctime> #include <cstring> #include <cmath> #include <iostream> namespace Game { typedef unsigned char uchar; typedef unsigned short ushort; typedef unsigned int uint; typedef unsigned long ulong; typedef float ufloat; }  
      Game.zip
    • By lxjk
      Hi guys,
      There are many ways to do light culling in tile-based shading. I've been playing with this idea for a while, and just want to throw it out there.
      Because tile frustums are general small compared to light radius, I tried using cone test to reduce false positives introduced by commonly used sphere-frustum test.
      On top of that, I use distance to camera rather than depth for near/far test (aka. sliced by spheres).
      This method can be naturally extended to clustered light culling as well.
      The following image shows the general ideas

       
      Performance-wise I get around 15% improvement over sphere-frustum test. You can also see how a single light performs as the following: from left to right (1) standard rendering of a point light; then tiles passed the test of (2) sphere-frustum test; (3) cone test; (4) spherical-sliced cone test
       

       
      I put the details in my blog post (https://lxjk.github.io/2018/03/25/Improve-Tile-based-Light-Culling-with-Spherical-sliced-Cone.html), GLSL source code included!
       
      Eric
  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL StarFox == OpenGL 1.1?

This topic is 4314 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement
Maybe picking a (very) low resolution, use flat-shading instead of smooth shading, use simple colors instead of textures(in most cases), only 1 light-source(or maybe none at all), low-poly models, low-res sprites for meteors...?
The environment is just a background texture that rotates with you somehow, and maybe you need a (flat) for rendering the ground in case you fly above the surface of a planet. The rest are just simple models with simple lighting I think.

I never knew there was a second Star Fox by the way.

Greetings,
Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so basic, regular ol' OGL 1.1 (and equivalent D3D API) would be overkill for something like Star Fox then.

[Edited by - Alpha_ProgDes on July 4, 2006 2:12:09 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Alpha_ProgDes
so basic, regular ol' OGL 1.1 (and equivalent D3D API)bwould be overkill for something like Star Fox then.


Pretty much anything over coding your own software renderer is going to be overkill on a PC. The SuperFX chip could only draw a few hundred polygons, and they where non-lit, non-textured, low resolution polygons at that.

Why are you so concerned about "overkill" though. You should use the tool that provides that is the most productive and best suited for the task, not the other way around. OGL 1.1 could easily reproduce StarFox, plus it's compatible with pretty much everything made in the last decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could easily do Starfox in software without any 3D API or hardware acceleration. Starfox had sub-Quake 1 graphics (non-textured flat shaded low poly), and Quake 1 was pure software that ran on a Pentium 66. Games using the same flat shaded polygons as Starfox like Spectre (though Spectre had much, much less on the screen at once) ran on 286 hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Scet
Quote:
Original post by Alpha_ProgDes
so basic, regular ol' OGL 1.1 (and equivalent D3D API)bwould be overkill for something like Star Fox then.


Pretty much anything over coding your own software renderer is going to be overkill on a PC. The SuperFX chip could only draw a few hundred polygons, and they where non-lit, non-textured, low resolution polygons at that.

Why are you so concerned about "overkill" though. You should use the tool that provides that is the most productive and best suited for the task, not the other way around. OGL 1.1 could easily reproduce StarFox, plus it's compatible with pretty much everything made in the last decade.

Ok. I didn't know the capabilities of OGL 1.1 and I was trying to figure out a game that was easy to produce and fun. Star Fox came to mind. I'm not concerned about overkill just whether or not it could do the job and what the job entailed. From what everyone is saying, it's a good fit between the two.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by spek

I never knew there was a second Star Fox by the way.



It was in development and had been publically announced, but it was cancelled shortly after the Nintendo 64 was released, and development resources were shifted to StarFox 64.

Anyway, back on topic, the SuperFX chip used in StarFox was basically a custom-built DSP optimized for 3D rendering running at 10.74 mHz; It rendered graphics at, I believe, 128x192 resolution with 8-bit color depth at about 15 fps (StarFox 2 and a handful of other titles used the upgraded SuperFX2 that ran at 21.48 mHz). Note however that many of the game's graphics weren't in fact rendered by the SuperFX; the backround image was a standard SNES background that made heavy use of the SNES's HDMA and vertical-offset-per-tile capabilities, many of the UI elements were sprite overlays, and some visual effects (such as the Nova Bomb explosion) were done entirely on the SNES PPU. In fact, the rendered image itself had to be transfered to the SNES's VRAM to be displayed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I hated that adventure spinoff. Assault is awesome though, if what I hear about GC title being playable on Wii and all that, I'm getting a Wii!
(In addition to my planned PS3, of course.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement