PointlesS@Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:50 pm :
greetings...I'm comming from the world of unreal and I got a question...in unreal static meshes generally rendered faster than brushes and took up less memory...so for complex shapes you just created a model since a complex shape with brushes probably gave you holes and looked bad...but anyways is this the same for doom 3?



OrbWeaver@Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:30 pm :
PointlesS wrote:
greetings...I'm comming from the world of unreal and I got a question...in unreal static meshes generally rendered faster than brushes and took up less memory...so for complex shapes you just created a model since a complex shape with brushes probably gave you holes and looked bad...but anyways is this the same for doom 3?


Not really - Doom 3 uses a different geometry system which does not seem to have the complex mesh/simple brush distinction that exists for Unreal-based games. It's more a question of whether it is easier to create your model in a modelling program or if it can be done quickly in the editor.



PointlesS@Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:46 pm :
thanks...that's good to know :)



W01f@Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 12:51 am :
You'll still want to use static meshes for any sort of complex geometry or decoration (caves, desks/chairs ect..) but most of the levels "hull" and even bigger details should be made out of brushes. Take a look at some of the id levels to see how they used static meshes and brushes.



Mordenkainen@Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 3:08 am :
Take a look at: http://wiki.doom3reference.com/wiki/Modelling



DoV_Tomas@Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 3:27 am :
Actually saying the hull should be made of brushes rather than meshes is understating it as meshes do not seal and will cause leaks. Meshes always have to be backed up by brushes, and some people will even say caulk but I don't usually bother.

As far as performance, my own personal experience is that as long as the meshes are simple (3x3 or even 5x5) it doesn't tank fps too much. But, if you make complicated ones then yes, I find performance takes a hit. That's why the cave interiors in the ID maps are models. This not only simplifies construction, but also saves frame rate. I remember I made cave walls out of meshes once and the fps in the scene blew. I ended up deleting them - the detail was overkill anyway - and map ran much better.



PointlesS@Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 4:29 am :
I wouldn't dream about making a complicated object with patches/brushes...I was just wondering for simple stuff like railing and funky floor/wall patterns



The Happy Friar@Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 4:34 pm :
I actuatly made a small outside area with a cliff, big ditch, hills, & a cave (that was hard! Here's some pics: http://members.localnet.com/~elsysop/ga ... utside.htm ) completly out of meshes. I got ~20fps on a p3-667 I was working on at the time (with no monsters in it).

I did have problems with texture & shadows though. Shadows seemed to have z-fighting issues & textures stretched in paces.

I just recently found out that if you select brushes you can export them as .obj models & then use a free model program (wings 3d, blender, etc) to import it, do detail work unwrap for a texture & export as a .lwo file. I made a missle completly in the Doom 3 editor from a cylinder & then used Wings3d to convert it to a .lwo file to use it doom.

That could be done with terrain meshes (if you don't feel like learning a 3d modeling program)