Sign in to follow this  
mrheisenberg

OpenGL Why are most games not using hardware tessellation?

Recommended Posts

It seems that most new games even ones using DirectX11 or OpenGL4 don't really employ tessellation much and the ones that do,use it in the wrong places.In some games they use it on flat objects that...well,remain flat even after they tessellate them.In fact they just tessellate things without applying displacement to them??But they don't use it to add a lot of detail to characters or stuff like that.The only game that I think makes good use of it is Alien vs. Predator.The alien looks amazing with all the tessellated spines and grooves on it's back and tail.So why do most developers stay away from it?It looks really simple to implement,especially by a well funded team that makes AAA games.Is it too heavy?What about tessellating only edges with some edge detection algorithm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't completely straightforward to implement if you have to account for "non-standard" meshes - e.g. non-quads, too many adjacent faces/edges, etc. (then you need a lot of pre-computation). Otherwise from that, I don't understand its absence either but Ashaman has a point. Unfortunately :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Hodgman' timestamp='1348056644' post='4981651']
when the 720/PS4 come out with D11 capabilities, you will see a boom in it's use.
[/quote]

I hope it will be at least D12 ;)
To the question- i think currently developers are used to parallax/normal mapping pipeline that in some way simulate tessellation,
also when you turn it on changes aren't so breath-taking. (mainly because currently it's just for having cool statement on the box)
currently you can see real potential only in some tech demos... Edited by joeblack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's complicated, it's performance-heavy, and depending on what you do with it it can have a major impact on the content pipeline. And of course after all of that, only a fraction of your userbase will have hardware that supports it (especially if you factor in consoles). In light of that it shouldn't be that surprising that games aren't bursting with tessellation, and the ones that do use it do it for a subset of assets and/or with techniques that require minimal impact on content authoring (PN triangles and detail displacement mapping for the most part). Edited by MJP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Hodgman' timestamp='1348056644' post='4981651']
Right now, there's not much incentive to spend money developing tessellation tech ([i]and as mentioned above, it's not just as simple as just turning it on; it has a big impact on your art pipeline[/i]) -- but as more PC users upgrade to D11 cards, and when the 720/PS4 come out with D11 capabilities, you will see a boom in it's use.
[/quote]

Yep, you're going to see a big jump starting late next year in minimum system requirements for the average game. I expect it won't be totally dramatic, the install base for the PS3/360 is still HUGE, it may take quite a while for games to totally dry up for those platforms.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how developers try to adapt. Tessellation is a clear win in many, many cases. But that's once you get over the hump of actually implementing it from engine to content pipeline. Heck, same goes for virtualized texturing. It's a fantastic win for almost all cases, but it's such a large initial investment programming wise that it's still used rarely.

Going off on this inane tangent, I'd like to predict that many more companies will be using some sort of licensed engine/central technology group with the coming generation. It's not content pipelines that are going to be impacted as much by far more powerful hardware as it is engine programming. Artists already have ultra high poly/high res models sitting in Z-Brush and etc. Heck some already complain when their beautiful work is squashed down into mud. But with increasing power comes the drive to make the most of it in ever more complex ways (at least in realtime). And that's going to take ever more complex programming, and studios not known for such are already having a hard time with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Ashaman73' timestamp='1348052597' post='4981630']
One reason could be, that the industry still makes games primary for Xbox360 and PS3.
[/quote]

Others have commented but I'll throw in my voice to this too.

While the internals of the renderer on our shiney new engine are designed/arranged in a D3D11 fashion it was only November of last year that we were given permission by management to drop/rip out the Windows DX9 path and only support DX11 (+feature levels), X360 and PS3 paths for the game we are working primarily with.

Even then however we don't have any support in place for compute shaders, tesselation, geo-shaders or any other 'post-DX9 hardware functionality' (cbuffers etc are of course used internally but that's an implementation detail and nothing more).

Post-game release we do have plans to add these things, as the game teams require it, but right now it's basically DX9 features on the DX11 API (not that the game supports DX9 hardware, but, ya know, details ;))

(side note: I had, however, considered hacking in PN Triangle/Phong triangle support for a few materials, unfortunately workloads haven't allowed it as yet and I'm not sure management would like me sneaking it in via a hidden command line option anyway ;))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='mrheisenberg' timestamp='1348073446' post='4981741']
wouldn't releasing D12 and D12 cards somehow damage the market?It'll just split the customers into even more groups.
[/quote]
it depends... but when you think about it, consoles should be more capable than pc, xbox360 had first unified shaders,also graphic specs are little more than dx9 i think. When they release consoles in one year with "old hardware" (dx11 is quite old already), it will cause that developers will move to dx11 (hopefully on pc also) and STICK there till next console is done in 5 years. So when dx12 will come out, developers will stay on dx11 (because of consoles). New consoles shall lead graphics,not use current gen pc possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Announcements

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      628333
    • Total Posts
      2982139
  • Similar Content

    • 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. 
      Thanks, 
      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!
      Thanks!
    • 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.
      Thanks.
    • By Abecederia
      So I've recently started learning some GLSL and now I'm toying with a POM shader. I'm trying to optimize it and notice that it starts having issues at high texture sizes, especially with self-shadowing.
      Now I know POM is expensive either way, but would pulling the heightmap out of the normalmap alpha channel and in it's own 8bit texture make doing all those dozens of texture fetches more cheap? Or is everything in the cache aligned to 32bit anyway? I haven't implemented texture compression yet, I think that would help? But regardless, should there be a performance boost from decoupling the heightmap? I could also keep it in a lower resolution than the normalmap if that would improve performance.
      Any help is much appreciated, please keep in mind I'm somewhat of a newbie. Thanks!
  • Popular Now