Skip to main content
gamedev.net
🔒 Locked

tile-based terrain engine

Started by fallex Jun 2, 2004 at 3:13 PM 4 replies 1k views
Original Post
fallex
fallex
I''m working on the tile-based terrain engine for RTS (like in Warcraft III). Now i have problem: bad quality of landscape. I used 4 vertex for each tile. I thought it would be enough... Now i want to upgrade my engine - to detail my landscape. But I don''t know, which algorithm would be better. ROAM, geomipmapping, chunkLOD or other. I''m using quad-tree. I can detail any tile (square area), but can''t unite few tiles in one. And i want to use both CPU and GPU. And another problem is storaging huge height-map.
Impossible
Impossible
LOD won''t give you a big advantage (if any) in a RTS game that uses a mostly fixed isometric or overhead view. In this case, you''ll get a much larger benefit from frustum culling than a game with a camera that looks at the horizon because you''ll always cull most of the terrain. Culling should be no problem for you, because you already have a quadtree. A 512x512 or 1024x1024 heightmap should be more than enough for detailed terrain, depending on how large your maps are.
Darkor
Darkor
What kind of terrain engine does C&C: Generals use?
snyp
snyp
quote:
Original post by Impossible
LOD won''t give you a big advantage (if any) in a RTS game that uses a mostly fixed isometric or overhead view. In this case, you''ll get a much larger benefit from frustum culling than a game with a camera that looks at the horizon because you''ll always cull most of the terrain. Culling should be no problem for you, because you already have a quadtree. A 512x512 or 1024x1024 heightmap should be more than enough for detailed terrain, depending on how large your maps are.


Are there any bigger trees other than octrees in culling. If so is it good to use them and are they worth the effort...
Actual Linux penguins were harmed in the making of this message.
Etnu
Etnu
"oct" is just a prefix meaning "eight". "quad" is a prefix meaning "four".

You can use any dimension of space partitioning that you want, it''s just that it''s most efficient to divide your boxes into halves, quarters, or eighths (depending on the particular functionality required).

You COULD divide your world up into 16x16 boxes, but after 2 iterations, you''d have 65536 leaf nodes. Traversing that would take you much longer than the overhead of the extra geometry.
---------------------------Hello, and Welcome to some arbitrary temporal location in the space-time continuum.
fallex
fallex
quote:
Original post by Impossible
LOD won''t give you a big advantage (if any) in a RTS game that uses a mostly fixed isometric or overhead view.

In my game i made fully free camera.

quote:
In this case, you''ll get a much larger benefit from frustum culling than a game with a camera that looks at the horizon because you''ll always cull most of the terrain. Culling should be no problem for you, because you already have a quadtree.

Yes - frustum cuuling already works good.

quote:

A 512x512 or 1024x1024 heightmap should be more than enough for detailed terrain, depending on how large your maps are.

This is the problem - it''s not enough, look:
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/1.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/2.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/3.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/4.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/5.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/6.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/7.htm
http://chaosrts.h12.ru/screenshots/8.htm

I want to make HUGE maps with good details. I want to detail each tile if need. But don''t know method. Which of these: ROAM, geomimapping, ChunkLOD better to use?




Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.

Sign in to reply to this topic.