• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
NathanRidley

OpenGL
State-of-the-art 3D engines accessible to .Net developers?

7 posts in this topic

I'm doing everything with .Net. I'm using SharpDX as the basis of my learning right now and worrying about learning OpenGL at a later date. One of my friends criticized my approach saying I should be using an existing 3D engine rather than trying to write this stuff myself from the ground up. Now of course he is right with regards to game programming in general, though I actually want to write 3D engine code as one of my skills.

 

Let's say I decided I want to jump in and just get going making a really great looking game with a huge amount of flexibility and power? Yeah I guess I could use Unity, though... I wish there were other options. I know there's Axiom? Though I've heard people dismissing it for various reasons.

 

Those over in C++ land have access to amazing engines like CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3 and many others. What choices do I have as a .Net developer? Don't get me wrong, I am continuing my path learning 3D programming with DirectX (and later, OpenGL) but I'd love to know if, as far as existing 3D game engines go, I'm basically restricted to Unity or if there are any other really good, modern, state-of-the-art options I can choose from. They don't need to be free, but they should at least be financially accessible to one-man indie developers.

Edited by axefrog
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Unity is probably your best option, although one must never forget about p/invoke. Most C++ code can be accessed from .Net with a little extra work but there will also be a slight performance loss. SharpDX uses p/invoke to access the DirectX APIs from .Net, but the performance loss is very minor because it's generated directly from the DirectX SDK header files. C++ CLI might be another option for you, this would allow you to develop your game in C++ and still have the power of .Net framework and the Common Language Infrastructure.

 

I've asked myself this same question many times. Eventually I ended up developing my own 3D engine for the programming experience. Every 3rd party game engine has it's pros and cons, it's really all about preference. I couldn't find a game engine that suited my needs so I had to write my own.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not completely sure what you mean by .NET...I assume you mean being able to code mixed cpp, c# and visual basic? I'm not an expert but I would be a performance hit for that kind of freedom. Although it would definitely make it easier for people to collaborate, maintain and re-use code. You pay a price for that.

 

I tried the game engine route in early college (Torque Game Engine and Terathon C4) but stopped because I didn't have the skills/experience to understand just what the hell the graphics engine code was doing. I realized I would never be able to make anything truly unique or special without understanding how the graphics worked. Hence I have jumped into XNA and OpenGL to try to write my own engine since then. So yeah...I kind of get where you are coming from when you say you want to build it from the ground up.

Anyway check out Terathon C4...it has come a long way. Although you'll have to stick to CPP in that case...but it's still relatively cheap.

Edited by timothyjlaird
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're a beginner, you don't really need to be pushing the state of the art. That's probably more harmful than helpful...

If you want to have the ability to make graphics engines as a skill, then it's a really good idea to use a lot of them first. You don't want someone who's never driven a car to be designing one, or someone who doesn't drink coffee working as a barista! wink.png

 

Many open source engines written in languages like C/C++ will often have "bindings" to other languages, such as C# (much how SharpDX is a C# binding for C++ D3D), e.g.

http://horde3d.org/wiki/index.php5?title=Language_Bindings

 

If you've got the money, you certainly could be using CryEngine with C#, BTW cool.png tongue.png

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Unity is probably your best option, although one must never forget about p/invoke. Most C++ code can be accessed from .Net with a little extra work but there will also be a slight performance loss. SharpDX uses p/invoke to access the DirectX APIs from .Net, but the performance loss is very minor because it's generated directly from the DirectX SDK header files. C++ CLI might be another option for you, this would allow you to develop your game in C++ and still have the power of .Net framework and the Common Language Infrastructure.

 

I've asked myself this same question many times. Eventually I ended up developing my own 3D engine for the programming experience. Every 3rd party game engine has it's pros and cons, it's really all about preference. I couldn't find a game engine that suited my needs so I had to write my own.

 

When I understand something deeply, I'm more productive, I enjoy the work more and I'm able to produce the results I actually want a lot more readily than when I'm tied to someone else's framework. Not to mention I enjoy the task of getting the visuals rendering exactly right. So yeah, learning the 3D rendering skills myself is what I'm doing. I understand that P/Invoke is possible with most 3D engines but there's a lot of screwing around and intermediate layering that needs to be developed to bridge the gap between managed and unmanaged code and that's what I was hoping to avoid if I look at any 3D engines.

 

Not completely sure what you mean by .NET...I assume you mean being able to code mixed cpp, c# and visual basic? I'm not an expert but I would be a performance hit for that kind of freedom. Although it would definitely make it easier for people to collaborate, maintain and re-use code. You pay a price for that.

 

I tried the game engine route in early college (Torque Game Engine and Terathon C4) but stopped because I didn't have the skills/experience to understand just what the hell the graphics engine code was doing. I realized I would never be able to make anything truly unique or special without understanding how the graphics worked. Hence I have jumped into XNA and OpenGL to try to write my own engine since then. So yeah...I kind of get where you are coming from when you say you want to build it from the ground up.

Anyway check out Terathon C4...it has come a long way. Although you'll have to stick to CPP in that case...but it's still relatively cheap.

 

Not sure how you don't understand what I mean by .Net? C# also entails using the CLR and related managed libraries which are compiled to the .Net runtime. So when I say .Net, i mean managed code and in my case, with a focus on C#. Visual basic makes me want to puke. Mixing in C++ defeats the point of the exercise which is to stick to managed code (yes, I know I could use managed C++) but also I don't know C++ very well and that's yet another thing I'd need to learn.

 

If you're a beginner, you don't really need to be pushing the state of the art. That's probably more harmful than helpful...

If you want to have the ability to make graphics engines as a skill, then it's a really good idea to use a lot of them first. You don't want someone who's never driven a car to be designing one, or someone who doesn't drink coffee working as a barista! wink.png

 

Many open source engines written in languages like C/C++ will often have "bindings" to other languages, such as C# (much how SharpDX is a C# binding for C++ D3D), e.g.

http://horde3d.org/wiki/index.php5?title=Language_Bindings

 

If you've got the money, you certainly could be using CryEngine with C#, BTW cool.png tongue.png

 

I don't want to *stretch* the state of the art; that's academics and I have my hands full just learning to implement what we already know. I do, however, want access to some of those cutting edge features and techniques that others have already come up with, hence my reference to "state of the art" 3D engines. I know it's not important during early learning, but I'd still like to know that it is feasible that I could make use of some of those features should I want to. Thanks for the reference to Horde3D, that looks pretty decent actually. It hadn't occurred to me that some engines, while not being written in pure managed code, will still come with native bindings to the language/platform of my choice, so that's good to know. CryEngine doesn't require an investment up front, you just have to be willing to pay them 20% of your revenue, which is actually less than if you were developing a $2 iOS game for Apple's app store.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... Not sure how you don't understand what I mean by .Net? ... when I say .Net, i mean .. in my case .. C#.

There's many, many .Net/Mono/CLR languages, and you don't mention C# in the OP. The rest of us completely guessed that you actually meant C#.
You also mentioned Unity as an option, which BTW uses C#Mono rather than C#.Net cool.png (along with a bunch of other Mono-based languages)

CryEngine doesn't require an investment up front, you just have to be willing to pay them 20% of your revenue

That's not an automatic deal - it's down to negotiations between you and them - though yeah, that's their standard deal for studios with no money wink.png
If you want to use C# with Cry (again, of the Mono variety), then you can also negotiate a royalty-based license for CryMono.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that you are just looking for a way to look at implementations of modern techniques, which in general are 90% shader code, with only minimal CPU code to do the setup.  In that case, I think you could just study the shader implementations (regardless of the CPU language) that are found in the GPU Pro or equivalent books - the engine seems mostly irrelevant for what you are after.  If that isn't the case, then please feel free to correct me...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that you are just looking for a way to look at implementations of modern techniques, which in general are 90% shader code, with only minimal CPU code to do the setup.  In that case, I think you could just study the shader implementations (regardless of the CPU language) that are found in the GPU Pro or equivalent books - the engine seems mostly irrelevant for what you are after.  If that isn't the case, then please feel free to correct me...

You are probably right. It seems every day I'm discovering that more and more is done in shaders than I realised.

0

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  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By Solid_Spy
      Hello, I have been working on SH Irradiance map rendering, and I have been using a GLSL pixel shader to render SH irradiance to 2D irradiance maps for my static objects. I already have it working with 9 3D textures so far for the first 9 SH functions.
      In my GLSL shader, I have to send in 9 SH Coefficient 3D Texures that use RGBA8 as a pixel format. RGB being used for the coefficients for red, green, and blue, and the A for checking if the voxel is in use (for the 3D texture solidification shader to prevent bleeding).
      My problem is, I want to knock this number of textures down to something like 4 or 5. Getting even lower would be a godsend. This is because I eventually plan on adding more SH Coefficient 3D Textures for other parts of the game map (such as inside rooms, as opposed to the outside), to circumvent irradiance probe bleeding between rooms separated by walls. I don't want to reach the 32 texture limit too soon. Also, I figure that it would be a LOT faster.
      Is there a way I could, say, store 2 sets of SH Coefficients for 2 SH functions inside a texture with RGBA16 pixels? If so, how would I extract them from inside GLSL? Let me know if you have any suggestions ^^.
    • By DaniDesu
      #include "MyEngine.h" int main() { MyEngine myEngine; myEngine.run(); return 0; } MyEngine.h
      #pragma once #include "MyWindow.h" #include "MyShaders.h" #include "MyShapes.h" class MyEngine { private: GLFWwindow * myWindowHandle; MyWindow * myWindow; public: MyEngine(); ~MyEngine(); void run(); }; MyEngine.cpp
      #include "MyEngine.h" MyEngine::MyEngine() { MyWindow myWindow(800, 600, "My Game Engine"); this->myWindow = &myWindow; myWindow.createWindow(); this->myWindowHandle = myWindow.getWindowHandle(); // Load all OpenGL function pointers for use gladLoadGLLoader((GLADloadproc)glfwGetProcAddress); } MyEngine::~MyEngine() { this->myWindow->destroyWindow(); } void MyEngine::run() { MyShaders myShaders("VertexShader.glsl", "FragmentShader.glsl"); MyShapes myShapes; GLuint vertexArrayObjectHandle; float coordinates[] = { 0.5f, 0.5f, 0.0f, 0.5f, -0.5f, 0.0f, -0.5f, 0.5f, 0.0f }; vertexArrayObjectHandle = myShapes.drawTriangle(coordinates); while (!glfwWindowShouldClose(this->myWindowHandle)) { glClearColor(0.5f, 0.5f, 0.5f, 1.0f); glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT | GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT); // Draw something glUseProgram(myShaders.getShaderProgram()); glBindVertexArray(vertexArrayObjectHandle); glDrawArrays(GL_TRIANGLES, 0, 3); glfwSwapBuffers(this->myWindowHandle); glfwPollEvents(); } } MyShaders.h
      #pragma once #include <glad\glad.h> #include <GLFW\glfw3.h> #include "MyFileHandler.h" class MyShaders { private: const char * vertexShaderFileName; const char * fragmentShaderFileName; const char * vertexShaderCode; const char * fragmentShaderCode; GLuint vertexShaderHandle; GLuint fragmentShaderHandle; GLuint shaderProgram; void compileShaders(); public: MyShaders(const char * vertexShaderFileName, const char * fragmentShaderFileName); ~MyShaders(); GLuint getShaderProgram(); const char * getVertexShaderCode(); const char * getFragmentShaderCode(); }; MyShaders.cpp
      #include "MyShaders.h" MyShaders::MyShaders(const char * vertexShaderFileName, const char * fragmentShaderFileName) { this->vertexShaderFileName = vertexShaderFileName; this->fragmentShaderFileName = fragmentShaderFileName; // Load shaders from files MyFileHandler myVertexShaderFileHandler(this->vertexShaderFileName); this->vertexShaderCode = myVertexShaderFileHandler.readFile(); MyFileHandler myFragmentShaderFileHandler(this->fragmentShaderFileName); this->fragmentShaderCode = myFragmentShaderFileHandler.readFile(); // Compile shaders this->compileShaders(); } MyShaders::~MyShaders() { } void MyShaders::compileShaders() { this->vertexShaderHandle = glCreateShader(GL_VERTEX_SHADER); this->fragmentShaderHandle = glCreateShader(GL_FRAGMENT_SHADER); glShaderSource(this->vertexShaderHandle, 1, &(this->vertexShaderCode), NULL); glShaderSource(this->fragmentShaderHandle, 1, &(this->fragmentShaderCode), NULL); glCompileShader(this->vertexShaderHandle); glCompileShader(this->fragmentShaderHandle); this->shaderProgram = glCreateProgram(); glAttachShader(this->shaderProgram, this->vertexShaderHandle); glAttachShader(this->shaderProgram, this->fragmentShaderHandle); glLinkProgram(this->shaderProgram); return; } GLuint MyShaders::getShaderProgram() { return this->shaderProgram; } const char * MyShaders::getVertexShaderCode() { return this->vertexShaderCode; } const char * MyShaders::getFragmentShaderCode() { return this->fragmentShaderCode; } MyWindow.h
      #pragma once #include <glad\glad.h> #include <GLFW\glfw3.h> class MyWindow { private: GLFWwindow * windowHandle; int windowWidth; int windowHeight; const char * windowTitle; public: MyWindow(int windowWidth, int windowHeight, const char * windowTitle); ~MyWindow(); GLFWwindow * getWindowHandle(); void createWindow(); void MyWindow::destroyWindow(); }; MyWindow.cpp
      #include "MyWindow.h" MyWindow::MyWindow(int windowWidth, int windowHeight, const char * windowTitle) { this->windowHandle = NULL; this->windowWidth = windowWidth; this->windowWidth = windowWidth; this->windowHeight = windowHeight; this->windowTitle = windowTitle; glfwInit(); } MyWindow::~MyWindow() { } GLFWwindow * MyWindow::getWindowHandle() { return this->windowHandle; } void MyWindow::createWindow() { // Use OpenGL 3.3 and GLSL 3.3 glfwWindowHint(GLFW_CONTEXT_VERSION_MINOR, 3); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_CONTEXT_VERSION_MAJOR, 3); // Limit backwards compatibility glfwWindowHint(GLFW_OPENGL_PROFILE, GLFW_OPENGL_CORE_PROFILE); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_OPENGL_FORWARD_COMPAT, GL_TRUE); // Prevent resizing window glfwWindowHint(GLFW_RESIZABLE, GL_FALSE); // Create window this->windowHandle = glfwCreateWindow(this->windowWidth, this->windowHeight, this->windowTitle, NULL, NULL); glfwMakeContextCurrent(this->windowHandle); } void MyWindow::destroyWindow() { glfwTerminate(); } MyShapes.h
      #pragma once #include <glad\glad.h> #include <GLFW\glfw3.h> class MyShapes { public: MyShapes(); ~MyShapes(); GLuint & drawTriangle(float coordinates[]); }; MyShapes.cpp
      #include "MyShapes.h" MyShapes::MyShapes() { } MyShapes::~MyShapes() { } GLuint & MyShapes::drawTriangle(float coordinates[]) { GLuint vertexBufferObject{}; GLuint vertexArrayObject{}; // Create a VAO glGenVertexArrays(1, &vertexArrayObject); glBindVertexArray(vertexArrayObject); // Send vertices to the GPU glGenBuffers(1, &vertexBufferObject); glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, vertexBufferObject); glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, sizeof(coordinates), coordinates, GL_STATIC_DRAW); // Dertermine the interpretation of the array buffer glVertexAttribPointer(0, 3, GL_FLOAT, GL_FALSE, 3*sizeof(float), (void *)0); glEnableVertexAttribArray(0); // Unbind the buffers glBindBuffer(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, 0); glBindVertexArray(0); return vertexArrayObject; } MyFileHandler.h
      #pragma once #include <cstdio> #include <cstdlib> class MyFileHandler { private: const char * fileName; unsigned long fileSize; void setFileSize(); public: MyFileHandler(const char * fileName); ~MyFileHandler(); unsigned long getFileSize(); const char * readFile(); }; MyFileHandler.cpp
      #include "MyFileHandler.h" MyFileHandler::MyFileHandler(const char * fileName) { this->fileName = fileName; this->setFileSize(); } MyFileHandler::~MyFileHandler() { } void MyFileHandler::setFileSize() { FILE * fileHandle = NULL; fopen_s(&fileHandle, this->fileName, "rb"); fseek(fileHandle, 0L, SEEK_END); this->fileSize = ftell(fileHandle); rewind(fileHandle); fclose(fileHandle); return; } unsigned long MyFileHandler::getFileSize() { return (this->fileSize); } const char * MyFileHandler::readFile() { char * buffer = (char *)malloc((this->fileSize)+1); FILE * fileHandle = NULL; fopen_s(&fileHandle, this->fileName, "rb"); fread(buffer, this->fileSize, sizeof(char), fileHandle); fclose(fileHandle); buffer[this->fileSize] = '\0'; return buffer; } VertexShader.glsl
      #version 330 core layout (location = 0) vec3 VertexPositions; void main() { gl_Position = vec4(VertexPositions, 1.0f); } FragmentShader.glsl
      #version 330 core out vec4 FragmentColor; void main() { FragmentColor = vec4(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f); } I am attempting to create a simple engine/graphics utility using some object-oriented paradigms. My first goal is to get some output from my engine, namely, a simple red triangle.
      For this goal, the MyShapes class will be responsible for defining shapes such as triangles, polygons etc. Currently, there is only a drawTriangle() method implemented, because I first wanted to see whether it works or not before attempting to code other shape drawing methods.
      The constructor of the MyEngine class creates a GLFW window (GLAD is also initialized here to load all OpenGL functionality), and the myEngine.run() method in Main.cpp is responsible for firing up the engine. In this run() method, the shaders get loaded from files via the help of my FileHandler class. The vertices for the triangle are processed by the myShapes.drawTriangle() method where a vertex array object, a vertex buffer object and vertrex attributes are set for this purpose.
      The while loop in the run() method should be outputting me the desired red triangle, but all I get is a grey window area. Why?
      Note: The shaders are compiling and linking without any errors.
      (Note: I am aware that this code is not using any good software engineering practices (e.g. exceptions, error handling). I am planning to implement them later, once I get the hang of OpenGL.)

       
    • By KarimIO
      EDIT: I thought this was restricted to Attribute-Created GL contexts, but it isn't, so I rewrote the post.
      Hey guys, whenever I call SwapBuffers(hDC), I get a crash, and I get a "Too many posts were made to a semaphore." from Windows as I call SwapBuffers. What could be the cause of this?
      Update: No crash occurs if I don't draw, just clear and swap.
      static PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR pfd = // pfd Tells Windows How We Want Things To Be { sizeof(PIXELFORMATDESCRIPTOR), // Size Of This Pixel Format Descriptor 1, // Version Number PFD_DRAW_TO_WINDOW | // Format Must Support Window PFD_SUPPORT_OPENGL | // Format Must Support OpenGL PFD_DOUBLEBUFFER, // Must Support Double Buffering PFD_TYPE_RGBA, // Request An RGBA Format 32, // Select Our Color Depth 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, // Color Bits Ignored 0, // No Alpha Buffer 0, // Shift Bit Ignored 0, // No Accumulation Buffer 0, 0, 0, 0, // Accumulation Bits Ignored 24, // 24Bit Z-Buffer (Depth Buffer) 0, // No Stencil Buffer 0, // No Auxiliary Buffer PFD_MAIN_PLANE, // Main Drawing Layer 0, // Reserved 0, 0, 0 // Layer Masks Ignored }; if (!(hDC = GetDC(windowHandle))) return false; unsigned int PixelFormat; if (!(PixelFormat = ChoosePixelFormat(hDC, &pfd))) return false; if (!SetPixelFormat(hDC, PixelFormat, &pfd)) return false; hRC = wglCreateContext(hDC); if (!hRC) { std::cout << "wglCreateContext Failed!\n"; return false; } if (wglMakeCurrent(hDC, hRC) == NULL) { std::cout << "Make Context Current Second Failed!\n"; return false; } ... // OGL Buffer Initialization glClear(GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT | GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT); glBindVertexArray(vao); glUseProgram(myprogram); glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, indexCount, GL_UNSIGNED_SHORT, (void *)indexStart); SwapBuffers(GetDC(window_handle));  
    • By Tchom
      Hey devs!
       
      I've been working on a OpenGL ES 2.0 android engine and I have begun implementing some simple (point) lighting. I had something fairly simple working, so I tried to get fancy and added color-tinting light. And it works great... with only one or two lights. Any more than that, the application drops about 15 frames per light added (my ideal is at least 4 or 5). I know implementing lighting is expensive, I just didn't think it was that expensive. I'm fairly new to the world of OpenGL and GLSL, so there is a good chance I've written some crappy shader code. If anyone had any feedback or tips on how I can optimize this code, please let me know.
       
      Vertex Shader
      uniform mat4 u_MVPMatrix; uniform mat4 u_MVMatrix; attribute vec4 a_Position; attribute vec3 a_Normal; attribute vec2 a_TexCoordinate; varying vec3 v_Position; varying vec3 v_Normal; varying vec2 v_TexCoordinate; void main() { v_Position = vec3(u_MVMatrix * a_Position); v_TexCoordinate = a_TexCoordinate; v_Normal = vec3(u_MVMatrix * vec4(a_Normal, 0.0)); gl_Position = u_MVPMatrix * a_Position; } Fragment Shader
      precision mediump float; uniform vec4 u_LightPos["+numLights+"]; uniform vec4 u_LightColours["+numLights+"]; uniform float u_LightPower["+numLights+"]; uniform sampler2D u_Texture; varying vec3 v_Position; varying vec3 v_Normal; varying vec2 v_TexCoordinate; void main() { gl_FragColor = (texture2D(u_Texture, v_TexCoordinate)); float diffuse = 0.0; vec4 colourSum = vec4(1.0); for (int i = 0; i < "+numLights+"; i++) { vec3 toPointLight = vec3(u_LightPos[i]); float distance = length(toPointLight - v_Position); vec3 lightVector = normalize(toPointLight - v_Position); float diffuseDiff = 0.0; // The diffuse difference contributed from current light diffuseDiff = max(dot(v_Normal, lightVector), 0.0); diffuseDiff = diffuseDiff * (1.0 / (1.0 + ((1.0-u_LightPower[i])* distance * distance))); //Determine attenuatio diffuse += diffuseDiff; gl_FragColor.rgb *= vec3(1.0) / ((vec3(1.0) + ((vec3(1.0) - vec3(u_LightColours[i]))*diffuseDiff))); //The expensive part } diffuse += 0.1; //Add ambient light gl_FragColor.rgb *= diffuse; } Am I making any rookie mistakes? Or am I just being unrealistic about what I can do? Thanks in advance
    • By yahiko00
      Hi,
      Not sure to post at the right place, if not, please forgive me...
      For a game project I am working on, I would like to implement a 2D starfield as a background.
      I do not want to deal with static tiles, since I plan to slowly animate the starfield. So, I am trying to figure out how to generate a random starfield for the entire map.
      I feel that using a uniform distribution for the stars will not do the trick. Instead I would like something similar to the screenshot below, taken from the game Star Wars: Empire At War (all credits to Lucasfilm, Disney, and so on...).

      Is there someone who could have an idea of a distribution which could result in such a starfield?
      Any insight would be appreciated
  • Popular Now