[C4:AC][Art and Graphics] Some 3D Graphics Research.

[Blake]

To get the ball rolling on graphics work I've done some research.

Unit Construction:
In SMAC units are constructed from multiple 3D models. Like a rover is constructed from:
Axles & wheelhubs.
Connecting Bits.
Back Wheels
Front Wheels
Small Reactor
Cockpit (linked to reactor)
Weapon/Equipment
Armor
Special Ability Attachments

Many bits are shared between some chassis. For example Rover, Skimship and the 3 flying units use the same Reactor+Cockpit combo. The Cruiser and Hovertank use a heavy reactor (which has no associated cockpit). The Missiles use missile reactors.

Each individual part can be found in a .cvr file, which can be opened with cvrplay. smacksim hunted down the viewer and attached it in this thread.

It is unlikely we'll be able to use these .cvr files directly (both for technical and legal reasons) but they may provide useful templates for making 3D models with an authentic SMAC look. The next post will contain a preliminary list of useful .cvr files.

[Blake]

I've done some browsing of these files and found files that might be useful for modeling. For now I'm omitting the alien-only stuff. ? or * indicates a series of files starting with that name.

Whole Chassis
Ni	native isle
nlc	native locust
nlw	native worms(?)
vpt	probe team
vi	infantry

Chassis Bits
VGMC* 	Base chassis used for everything except Infantry,Hovertank,Missile.
VCL*	Infantry "equipment" vehicle bits.
VGMT* 	Infantry "offensive" Heavy Gun mount bits.
VCU	Generic "Reactor Mount" bit.
VSP*	Rover bits
VCT*	Chopper bits
VCU*	Cruiser bits (VCU is generic)
VGS* 	Gravship bits
VJT*	Noodle bits
VHT* 	Hovertank bits
VFL	foil
VM	missile


Reactors	
viptr0* big reactors
vpbr0*	missile reactors
vr0*	small reactors
vrcp0*	small cockpits

More Bits	
VA01	vehicle armor used for everything except infantry, tank, cruiser, missile.
VT	Infantry Formers bit.
Drop	infantry colony pod

Weapons/Equipment
vw??	weapons. In order of damage.
res*	resonace weapons
vw???	equipment.
ptmod	probeteam equipment
Droplet	colony pod equipment.
Funload	Fungal Missile
TECLOAD	tectonic missile

Special Abilities
S??     Most abilities
SP-*	AX abilities?
VHR	heavy artillery.

Misc:
select	selection circle :)

[Blake]

A possible design methodolgy:

In SMAC a Unity Foil is assembled from parts like this:

tada


This isn't a bad method for creating a great many unit combinations. It might be worthwhile using the same method, basically reproducing many of the cvr models as modern polygon meshes.

Ideally it would be possible for the Civ4 engine itself to stitch the units together, but if not we could always do it manually and be able to easily create a selection of units from the pre-made parts. (altough this would be at the expense of polycount)

[binTravkin]

polycount?

[GeoModder]

Size of the graphics file, in essence.

The more "poly's", the more resources needed to run it.

[Illuminatus]

Originally posted by binTravkin
polycount?

That would be number of polygons (usually triangles) in a 3D model. The lower the better, since resources will be needed for calculating other parts of game like AI behaviour, unit movement etc.

[binTravkin]

Hmm, still I don't think it would be of great issue.

Units have only a constant number of directions they can have thus each of them can be rendered during the game stage called 'loading graphics' and stored in memory as ready-to-use blocks requiring almost no CPU assistance when using in actual game.

It would be quite stupid for a programmer to rerender each unit.
That would mean a geometrical progression in CPU resource consumption based upon unit count.

[PJayTycy]

Originally posted by binTravkin
Units have only a constant number of directions they can have thus each of them can be rendered during the game stage called 'loading graphics' and stored in memory as ready-to-use blocks requiring almost no CPU assistance when using in actual game.

lol, kind of forgetting civ4's 3D engine where you can zoom and turn the world like you want... We have no choice but to use 3D models rendered realtime by your graphics card.

[wgabrie]

Hmm, the graphics look very simple not high-res. Most of the faces are simple rectangles with a diagnal line running through them, that makes it two triangles. A very simple model except for curves which are more densly packed. The rest of the detail comes from the textures painted on each face. Like the cockpit windows for example.

It should be simple enough to recreate most of the models and merge them. The animated ones will require a little more work though. We might also want to increase the polygon count for smoothing if Civ4 renders each face flatly.

[Koriand'r]

why not remove camera rotation? without that 2d models could be used instead and not be noticable.

[PJayTycy]

why would you that for???

Everybody who will play this mod, will have a pc that can handle the 3D models of civ4. So, they'll be able to use our 3D models too.

I really see no point in limiting civ4's free camera view. What's the benefit of 2d models ?

[Blake]

Originally posted by wgabrie
Hmm, the graphics look very simple not high-res. Most of the faces are simple rectangles with a diagnal line running through them, that makes it two triangles. A very simple model except for curves which are more densly packed. The rest of the detail comes from the textures painted on each face. Like the cockpit windows for example.

It should be simple enough to recreate most of the models and merge them. The animated ones will require a little more work though. We might also want to increase the polygon count for smoothing if Civ4 renders each face flatly.

SMAC uses voxels as far as I can tell. All the .cvr models are very detailed and some (like the cruiser) have pixel-perfect curves. I don't think they are texture mapped, being voxel models, each voxel is a different color. (you can use the cvrplay utility to see they are voxel models)

Also I believe SMAC renders the 3D graphics in realtime rather than pre-rendering, since units can face a great many different angles (rovers will align correctely to slopes and so on). This may sound like it would give implausibly bad performance but there are A LOT of optimizations which can be made for an isometric game like SMAC. For one, units are only rendered when they move or when scrolling brings them into view.

As far as polycount mattering for Civ3 it depends on how the engine works.... for example if it supports Imposters* we could get away with more highly detailed un-animated models.

* Imposters are when the graphics engine renders an object to a "billboard" then just blits that single texture when the object needs to be drawn onscreen (again). This obviously doesn't work when the camera is moving & looking around or the object is animating, but a heck of a lot of time is spent with the camera staying still and stuff isn't animating.

[Kataphraktoi]

Originally posted by PJayTycy
why would you that for???

Everybody who will play this mod, will have a pc that can handle the 3D models of civ4. So, they'll be able to use our 3D models too.

I really see no point in limiting civ4's free camera view. What's the benefit of 2d models ?

quicker but not neccisarily easier. much less hardware demands. looks fine

why would you WANT 3d? it sux,all TBS and RTS in 3d are quite poor at it,and the general feeling of playing in a game like that. even on very strong systems aoe3 for example,just dosnt move as fasr as aoe2 on item selection etc.just a gimicky ''oohh we must have glitz'' thing. we arnt selling the mod.dont need it.

keep 3d for shooters....

[Blake]

Moot point. The Civ4 world is a sphere, is it not?

[Mart]

Originally posted by Blake
Moot point. The Civ4 world is a sphere, is it not?

Looking at the planet pictures in screenshots, I have bad feeling about it, Blake. For me it looks more like a swollen cylinder. I wish I am wrong about it...

[Blake]

True, they can't have true spheres and square tiles (the distortion at the poles would be terrible).

But I mean the engine is built from ground up to be 3D, and converting it to 2D would be well.. possible, and probably not that hard. But benefit is dubious seeing as it's already a 3D engine. It's not like it'll make it run any faster or anything.

[PJayTycy]

And, the 3D engine will only be a few .dll's where we don't get the source for. I'm pretty sure we won't be able to change the engine. We might be able to lock the camera in a 2D-isometric kind of view, but even then, the world will still be rendered by the 3D engine as if it was still a full 3D world with a free camera.

[binTravkin]

Let's not pin our hopes down.
I am sure we will make some alterations to things so we can make it work at least close to what's in SMAC.

Alternatively one could write a script which goes through all possible chassis-weapon-armor-ability combinations and orders the 3D rendering software to make each of them ready as a sole 3D file.

[Kataphraktoi]

if the games c++ can be edited the graphics engine will be small chalange...do you actually code graphics engines? not a challange,just curious(i dont)

[PJayTycy]

Originally posted by Cataphract887
if the games c++ can be edited the graphics engine will be small chalange...do you actually code graphics engines? not a challange,just curious(i dont)

Well, Firaxis uses a 3D engine called Gamebryo. If firaxis releases the source code of that engine, the Gamebryo folks wouldn't be too happy (it costs 75,000 $)

Ofcourse, we could remove everything related with the on-screen-display (ie: all function calls to gamebryo) and write our own substitute, but then we aren't writing a mod anymore, but a full blown standalone game.

[PJayTycy]

Well, Firaxis uses a 3D engine called Gamebryo. If firaxis releases the source code of that engine, the Gamebryo folks wouldn't be too happy (it costs 75,000 $)

Ofcourse, we could remove everything related with the on-screen-display (ie: all function calls to gamebryo) and write our own substitute, but then we aren't writing a mod anymore, but a full blown standalone game.

(sorry for double post, I pressed "quote" instead of "edit")

[Kataphraktoi]

yall have 75,000$ right?

[binTravkin]

No, Gamebryo software will be compiled and non accessible for us, hence my offer to render all unit component combinations in case we can't build units from parts.

[gkclarkson]

A possible design methodolgy:
in SMAC a Unity Foil is assembled from parts like this:



tada


This isn't a bad method for creating a great many unit combinations. It might be worthwhile using the same method, basically reproducing many of the cvr models as modern polygon meshes.

Ideally it would be possible for the Civ4 engine itself to stitch the units together, but if not we could always do it manually and be able to easily create a selection of units from the pre-made parts. (altough this would be at the expense of polycount)

So if I were to amass a bunch of parts of units like this, we could just throw them together in every possible combination and then we would have our units?

Btw, how is that quality?

I would put those parts together into the foil, but I just spent an hour and a half on that, so meh.

EDIT- I need more of those parts blueprints - PM me

[gkclarkson]

Fine........

Just because I know you want it

There, a Unity Foil

um.. like 1500 poly's

I should probably get that down a little... can probably cut it down to ~ 1000

do I Have to put together every unit, or can one of you geniuses code it?

Edit: Blake, If you can get in contact with me somehow, I would like a jpeg of every one of those blueprints, as I cannot use the Caviar Viewer.

I think i could get every part done within a month and create the units by stitching together parts, I just need those pictures. There are not that many parts. Then we can work on the Texturing and Animations.
A quick graphic overhaul for the units, even untextured, would quickly draw attention, and it is one thing that would really give the SMAC feel.

[wgabrie]

Wow, you're great!

I think you've already done a major work here. The Copter, Foil, and Speeder units use the same cockpit and frame.

[Blake]

Holy crap man that's awesome!

I'll screenshot some more of the parts.

Whether or not the genius coders can assemble units on the fly depends mostly on the capabilities of the Civ4 engine. From python we certainly can't, and Firaxis implied that the guts of the graphics engine wont be exposed in the SDK - but we wont know for sure until the SDK comes out.

/me thinks the foil would already make a great publicity shot!

[Blake]

Okay here's the parts to make the iconic Former and Colony Pod! (And the transport module).

[Blake]

Okay here's some more bits.
Chopper, Rover (interesting to note: the wheels rotate and the hubs stay still ), Infanty weapon platform (that thing they push around). The weapon is impact.



We might be able to dynamically stich things together with XML alone!

[gkclarkson]

Nah, I figure that it would be easiest for me just to make each part of a unit in a different file, and to just throw together the combinations in a different file

There wouldn't be that many different combinations, and most aren't visually different; IE the different armor grades, they just have different numbers, not models. One thing I am set on is new models though. Low quality voxel graphics cannot go into this mod, it would be much better to use poly meshes.

And if you haven't seen yet

and


I already have eight parts of units done, between them three different units are possible. becuse I could stitch together a sea colony pod if I just attached the colony module to the foil parts.

I would need to know exactly what format the models will be in, as well as a way to coler code them for factions. I have no idea how that is done in-game.