Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
O-san

Isometric shadow mapping

This topic is 3678 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

Hello! It’s been awhile since I posted in the isometric forum. I just wanted to share pictures of the recent development of my editor and encourage others to make isometric games!  These screenshots are quite similar to the once I’ve posted in the past. The difference this time is shadow mapping. I’ve talked about it a long time and now I’ve managed to implement it. The shadows are not pixel perfect because the underlying geometry is not perfect. The world is build using boxes that are “projection mapped” (lacking a better word) with my 2D graphics. This results in some distortion of the shadows, but I think the result is quite pleasing nevertheless. Hope you enjoy the screenshots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
Wow, they look exceptional! Really brings the world together.

Although the lighting that you have on the rest of it looks a bit like all of the edges have been smoothed out (Especially the bricks in the first shot), is that being looked at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the replies!
Quote:
Original post by PlayfulPuppy
Wow, they look exceptional! Really brings the world together.

Although the lighting that you have on the rest of it looks a bit like all of the edges have been smoothed out (Especially the bricks in the first shot), is that being looked at?


Yes the normals are smoothed out to handle any shape of 2D graphic, but the bricks confines themselves very exactly to the underlying geometry so in that case I should probably used hard-edged normals. It shouldn't be that hard to incorporate, some sort of checkbox in the editor should do the trick. Thanks for pointing it out.

Quote:
Original post by jonahrowley
Is that being done in real-time or is it pre-computed by the editor which spits out a new set of tiles?


It is real-time with one directional light casting shadow. With such a setup I get around 150 frames per second, when I add a point light (which casts no shadows) the frames drops to around 40-100 depending on how many objects are visible. At most I can have 4 point lights in the same area but that result in very poor fps. I think I will manage with the directional lighting in most cases and use point lights more sparsely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've now added hard edged normals and I have to agree that it does look better


Indoor areas will definitely benefit from this. Thanks for the suggestion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking very nice !

Though I'm curious what is the difference between this and using a 3D engine? I think the lighting and shadow mapping must get pretty complicated at this point and I get that the speed is slower. Are you doing it for the graphical style or what? Nevertheless I think its great you are doing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Wrath
Looking very nice !

Though I'm curious what is the difference between this and using a 3D engine? I think the lighting and shadow mapping must get pretty complicated at this point and I get that the speed is slower. Are you doing it for the graphical style or what? Nevertheless I think its great you are doing this.


Thank you! Well... there really isn't much difference except I render my objects from 2D images instead of real 3D objects. The under laying engine of the isometric graphics shown above is an ordinary 3D engine. The difference lays in how I map my textures onto the objects.

I can draw all my isometric objects in an ordinary painting program; the detail level is not restricted by polygon count. For example this pillar can be drawn in Photoshop and rendered in game using 6 triangles; this speed up the manufacturing time of resources and uses fewer polygons than a real 3D object would... which results in faster frame rate. And yes, I also like the graphical style of isometric engines.

Another benefit of using 3D hardware is that the objects can be rendered without sorting them back to front and I also don’t need to cut them for the sorting to work. This was actually the main purpose why I switched from 2D to 3D. The development of a multi depth isometric engine can be a real headache without 3D hardware.

Share this post


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

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!