• Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • 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
    • By Fadey Duh
      Good evening everyone!

      I was wondering if there is something equivalent of  GL_NV_blend_equation_advanced for AMD?
      Basically I'm trying to find more compatible version of it.

      Thank you!
    • By Jens Eckervogt
      Hello guys, 
       
      Please tell me! 
      How do I know? Why does wavefront not show for me?
      I already checked I have non errors yet.
      using OpenTK; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.IO; using System.Text; namespace Tutorial_08.net.sourceskyboxer { public class WaveFrontLoader { private static List<Vector3> inPositions; private static List<Vector2> inTexcoords; private static List<Vector3> inNormals; private static List<float> positions; private static List<float> texcoords; private static List<int> indices; public static RawModel LoadObjModel(string filename, Loader loader) { inPositions = new List<Vector3>(); inTexcoords = new List<Vector2>(); inNormals = new List<Vector3>(); positions = new List<float>(); texcoords = new List<float>(); indices = new List<int>(); int nextIdx = 0; using (var reader = new StreamReader(File.Open("Contents/" + filename + ".obj", FileMode.Open), Encoding.UTF8)) { string line = reader.ReadLine(); int i = reader.Read(); while (true) { string[] currentLine = line.Split(); if (currentLine[0] == "v") { Vector3 pos = new Vector3(float.Parse(currentLine[1]), float.Parse(currentLine[2]), float.Parse(currentLine[3])); inPositions.Add(pos); if (currentLine[1] == "t") { Vector2 tex = new Vector2(float.Parse(currentLine[1]), float.Parse(currentLine[2])); inTexcoords.Add(tex); } if (currentLine[1] == "n") { Vector3 nom = new Vector3(float.Parse(currentLine[1]), float.Parse(currentLine[2]), float.Parse(currentLine[3])); inNormals.Add(nom); } } if (currentLine[0] == "f") { Vector3 pos = inPositions[0]; positions.Add(pos.X); positions.Add(pos.Y); positions.Add(pos.Z); Vector2 tc = inTexcoords[0]; texcoords.Add(tc.X); texcoords.Add(tc.Y); indices.Add(nextIdx); ++nextIdx; } reader.Close(); return loader.loadToVAO(positions.ToArray(), texcoords.ToArray(), indices.ToArray()); } } } } } And It have tried other method but it can't show for me.  I am mad now. Because any OpenTK developers won't help me.
      Please help me how do I fix.

      And my download (mega.nz) should it is original but I tried no success...
      - Add blend source and png file here I have tried tried,.....  
       
      PS: Why is our community not active? I wait very longer. Stop to lie me!
      Thanks !
  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  

OpenGL VBOs vs. immediate mode for 2D sprites

This topic is 2765 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

I am working on a project using C++ and SDL+OpenGL. I was rendering 2D sprites to the screen using immediate mode. However, hoping to improve rendering performance, I spent the last few days figuring out how to use VBOs. Unfortunately, now that I've got them working, I have found that they have almost no effect on performance whatsoever. In fact, the game runs slightly slower (a .02 ms/frame difference on average).

To clarify, I'm storing an array of vertices and indices in a VBO for each spritesheet. So, for example, the player will have one VBO for all of his animations.

Does this sound like I've done something wrong in implementing VBOs, or could it just be that VBOs aren't very helpful with what I'm doing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
I'm going to guess that it's not helping you that much, depending on how you're batching your calls.

The big draw of VBO is that it allows you to minimize data transfer and the number of API calls. When you have big meshes moving from immediate to VBO saves you from having to transmit the entire mesh each frame. Though with small quads the saving is pretty minimal.

The one thing you could do is to try to minimize your number of draw calls, this is one way you could get extra performance.

Calling draw once for each tile is pretty bad, try to put all of your stationary objects into a single buffer (or as many of them as you can that share a single spritesheet).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you mean limiting my use of glDrawElements() ?

That does get called once per tile. However, I don't see how I could call it any less, as I change things using glTranslate, etc. in between draw calls.

Is there something I am missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, you want to reduce glDrawElements as much as possible. If every single thing on your screen is moving independently of each other than you probably can't do any better.

Is that really your case though? If there's anything in your scene that is stationary you may be able to combine them together.

For example instead of drawing a tile at (0,0), translating to the right 1, and then drawing another tile at (0,0), you can make a VBO that draws two tiles at (0,0) and (1,0). See if you can batch anything together into a single call (multiple grass tiles, trees, walls, etc). I don't have any idea what your game is like though so it might not be applicable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, rats, then it probably won't help me much. I am working on the rendering code for a platformer project I have, but I am much more interested in using it for a strategy game (which will pretty much be only moving objects, heh).

So, on a slightly related topic, is this pretty much as good as it gets for a 2D game? I'd really love to be able to render tens of thousands (a couple tens of thousands, anyway) of sprites onscreen and get some kind of decent performance. Is this completely impractical? I wouldn't mind moving on to a 3D engine like Ogre or something if I could create a 2D (gameplay-wise) game with tons of units flying about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even if you can't reduce the number of draw calls, there's still other performance tricks you could use.

Are you minimizing your state/texture changes? (Don't set the texture for every tile, group all tiles that use the same texture and render them together).

Hows your fill rate? Could you get any benefit from sorting your objects front to back to minimize overdraw?

I'm having a hard time imagining any game that needs tens of thousands of independently moving entities on screen at the same time, could you describe more what kind of game you're envisioning? That seems pretty excessive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I already do limit texture changes to an extent (that is something I will improve upon in the new project).

I don't believe there is anything else I could do to limit overdraw, as the tiles prevent the player (or other stuff) from going on top/behind things.

I'm picturing a really large-scale space strategy game, with tons of ships (just a few different kinds). So, very little to render aside from some backgrounds, the ships themselves, and planets or whatever. The only thing that would be large in number would be the ships, but I wanted to play around with a very large number just to see if it is fun. I can still just do that and see what happens, I just wanted to work on the rendering stuff now, since I'm working on it for something else.

Perhaps tens of thousands of ships onscreen is an overestimate. Basically, I am thinking they would be large enough to only show a reasonable number onscreen if zoomed all the way in, but I want to add the ability to zoom the camera out. Perhaps beyond a certain point, only large ships (if any) would show up, thus preventing tens of thousands of tiny ships being shown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another thing you may want to look into is geometry instancing. It's a relatively new extension so I don't know too much about it, but its essentially a way to stamp down hundreds of copies of a mesh in different places from one draw call. Might help you out in your spaceships example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
glDrawElements in itself isn't necessarily a problem. When I tested NVidias stateless drawing extension a while ago, I wrote a test that draws 12,500 objects with a separate glDrawElements for each object, and that runs at 60 FPS. Changing matrices with glTranslatef for 10k objects however can be significantly more expensive. (Though you definitely want to avoid calling it 10k times a frame, but 1k should be OK most of the time).

Just to reiterate what karwosts have said, if you have a tile-map, you can easily draw 10,000 tiles with a single glDrawElements, since these tiles don't move independently of each other. If you have 10,000 ships that move independently, then you might need more calls. Instancing can be good if each ship uses the same model and texture, but has a different translation.

There are also other ways of drawing the ships in a single draw call. Do you plan to keep your game in 2D so that each ship is a single quad?
Do you rotate the quads to rotate the ships, or is everything handled by changing the sprite texture, so that the quad can always remain a rectangle?
Also, what OpenGL version and hardware are you targeting?
And lastly, are you using shaders, or are you otherwise willing to use them?

Share this post


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

  • Advertisement