• 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.

Volzotan

Members
  • Content count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

106 Neutral

About Volzotan

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Okay, here's a first result. Rendering with 77% of the triangles (by ignoring the last 23%, which are degenerate) gave me 110 fps instead of 90 fps (which I get if I render 100% of the triangles). So yes, there's indeed a speedup.   However, I still have to compare that particular example against the cache-optimized alternative mhagain also mentioned.
  2. Hey, thanks for your quick and detailed replies!       I'm not going to do such fancy things. Please excuse me for not being able to go into detail here, but let me clarify this a little bit:   The situation is simply that we know beforehand that, for our particular case, after a certain transformation in the vertex shader, we have - let's say - 50% of the triangles being degenerate, and at the same time being located at the back of our vertex and index buffers. So we could just ignore them in our drawcall, with actually zero overhead.   Of course, having the data re-organized this way (only once, during preprocessing!) instead of ordering it with a cache optimizer implies a certain overhead itself, as it potentially limits cache performance.   Please let us also assume that our application is vertex bound, e.g. because we have a large laser-scanned model, which is tesselated very regularly with many small triangles, and we use a moderately-sized viewport, instead of having a high-resolution viewport and optimized low-poly game models.   So, if I get you right, I can still expect a performance gain (-> vertex bound, 50% less vertex processing) by limiting my draw call to non-degenerate triangles, but in order to evaluate whether it's worth the effort, I have to compare my method with its re-organized data layout against a cache-optimized variant that renders all triangles and uses the GPU to discard degenerate ones, right? :-)
  3. Hi everyone,   I have been wondering how big the overhead of using degenerate triangles with indexed triangle lists is.   I've been asking around at NVIDIA DevZone, but not getting any reply:   https://devtalk.nvidia.com/default/topic/534530/general-graphics-programming/overhead-for-degenerate-triangles/?offset=2#3761674   I also saw that old GD thread, which was interesting, but did not give me a definite answer:   http://www.gamedev.net/topic/221281-render-cost-of-degenerate-triangles/     The situation is the following: - Render a list of indexed triangles - Do some fancy stuff in a vertex shader - After the vertex shader, some vertices will be located at the same world position, meaning there will be some degenerate tris     My Question: Assume I would know beforehand which triangles will become degenerate, and I could exclude them from rendering. How big do you think would the speedup be in that case?   Please note that the indices of the corresponding joint vertices might still be different, so the GPU should not be able to discard triangles before the vertex processing stage, meaning that it still has to transform each vertex before finding out which triangle is degenerate. BTW, does the GPU realize this at all in that case? Does anyone have a reference where some GPU manufacturer has explained how the filtering of degenerate triangles works, and when it is applied?   Any help is appreciated. Thanks a lot in advance!   Best,   Volzotan