New graphics and using OpenGL?

[MeusH]

PM me about teh model and formats I can make so your demo will support it

[charlieg]

I think before we go down this path we need to consider the system demands of this project, remembering the large amount of land area needed to be displayed at the furthest zoom out. I am not suggesting it is impossible, I just recognise that this community is inherantly made up of people with varying computer specs (because the game will run on just about anything that is till likely to be in use) and we need to consider how many users we may kill by going down this path.

The updated hi-res 2D graphics are going to need a lot of memory regardless, ruling out lower spec machines anyway.

When using OpenGL, issues like seeing a large area of land can be overcome by intelligent use of LODs (at long distance, reduce buildings and trains to simple coloured cuboids) and tricks for combining like-land layout (a large piece of flat or sloped terrain can be rendered as a single polygon).

Going the OpenGL route would basically mean people have to have a 3D card, but not the latest uber-amazing one. There's no reason that a fairly attractive OpenGL game couldn't work with a GeForce2 and up, especially when combined with ability to reduce/disable features. And, really, how many people don't have a basic 3D card these days? [slightly facetious] Is it even possible to buy computers without 3D acceleration any more? [/slightly facetious]

There's no point limiting the graphical overhaul (which will take probably in excess of a year or so anyway) for the sake of people's PCs that are pretty much defunct anyway. Some of these old machines probably won't even last that much longer! It just means that when the 2D graphics set is completed, everybody will be moaning that it's now out of date and that an 3D/OpenGL version would have been better. Look to the completion date when thinking about specs and what is reasonable. What will things be like in a year or two? A basic machine with a basic 3D card will cost no more than a few hundred dollars. Hell, that's even true today.

Just weigh up the pros/cons of going 3D. The only real con is that it raises the machine spec, but since hi-res 2D graphics will do this anyway, is that really even an issue? I would say the pros far outweight the cons... pros including reduced developer effort (only need to make the building as a model, then it's ready), infinitely more flexible control over rendering the environment (any angle, any distance, lighting, etc), reduced memory (only need the model+textures, rather than bitmaps for different angles and different distances), etc etc etc.

Aim for 2 years from now, because that's how long it'll take to perfect things and the standards by which the project will be judged will be the standards then and not those of today.

[jabberwalkee_]

ironically you brought up a better point for not going 3d than i did.

There are a ton of graphics sets for the patch whose support may be just around the corner.

And as for your 3d card argument....like i said this game is inherantly going to be played on a broad range of computers

[MeusH]

I completly agree with Charlieg.

And Jabberwalkee_, if you want to play with sprites, go back to TTDpatch. Cya when you realize how OpenGL is amazing. It opens many ways to make games better!

Oh, about pros and cons... Having no graphic card with basic 3D support forces to buy one with 3D support, not complaining about gaming.

[nilsi]

Openttd is played by people liking TTD, so they will not complain about graphics.
Having a 3d graphics card is one thing, have it supported by,say, Freebsd
is another issue.
But maybe it is possible to have different graphical frontends, with the same game logic backend.

[Archonix]

I think that's already been ruled out a few times in other threads. Pity really, but apparently the effort involved in recoding the engine for a server.client model would be more than required for making a completely new game anyway. Or something.

I like OTTD the way it is. The new high-res graphcis will work perfectly well under Linux on some pretty ancient hardware - I'm getting ready to test it on a 486SX running Gentoo. If I can get that working then I may just set it up as my TTD box.

[Alltaken]

when you realize how OpenGL is amazing. It opens many ways to make games better!

lol

in my life i have yet to see a 3d game that has impressed me graphics-wise. i mean i look at them and go "wow is that realtime" but nothing has come even close to lifelikeness yet.

OpenGL does not "make games better" unless its a game that needs to be 3d.

having said this i think openGL could be used to speed up the rendering of sprites. and possibly used to create a diabloII style perspective.

Alltaken

[charlieg]

And as for your 3d card argument....like i said this game is inherantly going to be played on a broad range of computers

The hi-res graphics are going to eat memory for breakfast. You can kiss your old machines goodbye. That was my overall point, that the "3d card" point is void.

However, as others have put it, this whole 2d/3d argument has already been settled in favour of a 2d approach. At the end of the day it's those developers doing the work who make the decisions and us mere slackers can only do our best to add perspective to their opinions.

Fortunately it looks like Alltaken and co are doing most of their design in 3d then creating 2d sprites from said 3d models. This means that if somebody does persevere with a 3d ttd-like game then at least the material may be there (depending on license, I guess) to have great 3d content.

[Alltaken]

Fortunately it looks like Alltaken and co are doing most of their design in 3d then creating 2d sprites from said 3d models. This means that if somebody does persevere with a 3d ttd-like game then at least the material may be there (depending on license, I guess) to have great 3d content.

hopefully.

however most of MY personal models are very high in polys, and very low in textures. this makes them a bit harder to put into a game as they are.

however renderings of the vehicle can be taken and used as textures on a lower poly version. i.e. i have done it with buildings and cubes in the past and it works fairly reasonably.

but yes it is my hope that what is done could still be used if the format changes from what it is now. 3d/2d/4d i dunno



Alltaken

[init]

I love the ideas/features of new industries/cargo types/climates, bigger maps, and non-uniform stations, but leave my graphics engine alone.

Then we could always create a fork. The real solution would be to decouple the game logic (pathfinding, city growth, etc) from the graphics and create two (or more) graphical frontends.

You could even abandon the current 2D solution and go 3D entirely. Then those that prefer the isometric mode could just use an orthographic (as opposed to a perspective) projection. Lighting and such features would be the same for both. I am pretty sure that this is how games like Simcity 4 work, since they use 3D graphics, but no perspective.