• 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:

      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.


    • 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 ==========  
      #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; }  
    • 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!
    • 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 Why are most games not using hardware tessellation?

This topic is 2042 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

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

when the 720/PS4 come out with D11 capabilities, you will see a boom in it's use.

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

Right now, there's not much incentive to spend money developing tessellation tech (and as mentioned above, it's not just as simple as just turning it on; it has a big impact on your art pipeline) -- 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.

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

One reason could be, that the industry still makes games primary for Xbox360 and PS3.

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

wouldn't releasing D12 and D12 cards somehow damage the market?It'll just split the customers into even more groups.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement