Support NeoGAF

[hukasmokincaterpillar]

Whole thread on it on the opengl forums, I just watched the vid linked in the first post. This is pretty cool.

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/cgi_directory/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=013411

 

[sprsk]

posting while downloading

 

[akascream]

Wow, that is pretty cool! =)

 

[olimario]

What am I looking at?

 

[Zilch]

That really is cool. Those are just flat models/polygons with relief-mapped textures applied to them, right?

 

[gofreak]

Very nice.

Yes, this is just mapping on flat geometry.

 

[Late Stage Marxist]

Subtle but nice.

 

[olimario]

Now I see it. Very cool.
How taxing is something like this?

 

[akascream]

Now I see it. Very cool.
How taxing is something like this?

Not sure, that thread says it runs at 50fps on a 6800, but who knows what other settings that guy had set up. Also it looks like it only runs on a 6800, but cool nonetheless.

 

[Borys]

Man that's very cool.
How is this different from paralax-mapping?

How taxing is this?

Playable in 1280 with 6800U, in 1024 with 6800 from what I read.

 

[hukasmokincaterpillar]

I think they should call it Balco-Mapping. Get it?

 

[Pimpwerx]

*waits for transfer*

This better be better than the crappy normal maps they had before. Normal maps look muddy and crappy IMO in Quake/Doom shots I've seen so far. I don't know why we have such low-geometry models for normal maps. I figure we can still get next-gen geometry with these things.

*watches the vid*

Meh. What's the difference between relief maps and normal maps? Looks like the same process to me. I believe normal maps let you recreate lighting and shadows in realtime too. I like this technique for walls and stuff like that. But for characters, I think it's just plain lazy. I'd rather they use more geometry and save the normals for accessories or stuff like hair. PEACE.

 

[zooL]

Comparison screenshots please?

 

[hooo]

It looks like they use normal maps to create actual geometry. There're some comparison shots in the linked thread.

 

[Gattsu25]

*watches the vid*

Meh. What's the difference between relief maps and normal maps? Looks like the same process to me. I believe normal maps let you recreate lighting and shadows in realtime too. I like this technique for walls and stuff like that. But for characters, I think it's just plain lazy. I'd rather they use more geometry and save the normals for accessories or stuff like hair. PEACE.

dood? The difference is huge...while normal maps only simulate the shadows of light, this relief mapping stuff uses what looks like voxels to add actual depth (based on the normal maps, I figure). look at the first comparison...that bulge on the floor ACTUALLY appears to be sticking out of the floor

 

[RiZ III]

I cant believe people actually care about this stuff. Such an insignificant change. If your really playing the game, ud never notice.

 

[Discordian_taco]

It looks like they use normal maps to create actual geometry

There is no geometry being created. Its a parallax map using intersection tests depending upon the ray being cast by the camera.

 

[blackadde]

'real' displacement mapping (as opposed to bump maps) = the illusion of self-occlusion, correct self-shadowing

If you have a texture + bump map on a flat plane, and you look at it from a shallow angle you still still see the entire texture and entire bump map. It will have different brightness values depending on the light source(s) and bump map but otherwise you get the full deal. With displacement mapping (or I guess releif mapping, fuck, why are there so many names for the same thing?) if you look at the same flat plane from the same angle, parts of the texture will be obscured by closer, higher valued portions of the texture. It is a huge difference.

 

[Tain]

I cant believe people actually care about this stuff. Such an insignificant change. If your really playing the game, ud never notice.

Sorry, but no. It's like night and day.

Awesome to see. There was a demo for 3ds max 7 (which has a realtime DX9 renderer) on cgtalk doing this same thing, and I was blown away by it then. Even more amazing to see this ingame.

I'll have to try this mod tonight.

 

[WHOAguitarninja]

I tried this out. It looks great (although seems to go a little weird on one specific texture...and looks a bit odd at sharp angles), but comes with a large performance hit on my 6600gt. I also had 2xaa and 4xaniso on so that might've caused some problems as well.

 

[Pimpwerx]

Thanks for the explanation guys. Definitely cool. PEACE.

 

[Tain]

Just a note: It only runs on NV series 6 cards.

 

[Gattsu25]

Just a note: It only runs on NV series 6 cards.

Relief mapping on PS3!!!??? :b

 

[Monk]

WTF? While the first one in the movie is hard to notice, but the rest... wow. And this is like coming from someone who can barely notice the difference between 800X600 and 1600X1200.

 

[Borys]

WTF? While the first one in the movie is hard to notice, but the rest... wow. And this is like coming from someone who can barely notice the difference between 800X600 and 1600X1200.

I wonder if this is treated like a "real" geometry meaning I can shot at this and all?

 

[gofreak]

Relief mapping on PS3!!!??? :b

It's a SM3.0 thing rather than an NVidia thing NVidia are using a relief mapping demo to show off the G70, though, presumably they feel there's enough power to use it in games now.

I wonder if this is treated like a "real" geometry meaning I can shot at this and all?

No, I don't think so. I mean, you could map a decal onto it presumably to mark a shot or whatever, but actual destruction..no. At least not in a dynamically simulated sense..you could maybe precompute different stages of destruction and move between them as you shoot at something.

 

[cyberheater]

In modern GPU's. Is it faster to simulate geometry using this method or are you better of just putting in the geometry in the first place.

And can the 360 do this?

 

[hukasmokincaterpillar]

This is one of the cooler graphical effects just to gawk at since its like an optical illusion that you cant figure out. You know there isn't any geometry or "structure" there but you eyes have trouble telling the difference. With normal bump mapping the illusion is so transparent at certain angles it usually does more harm than good in my experience.

 

[gofreak]

In modern GPU's. Is it faster to simulate geometry using this method or are you better of just putting in the geometry in the first place.

It depends what you want to do. All mapping is about putting more detail on a surface. If that amount of detail was relatively low, and the surface was small, you could perhaps put the actual geometry there. But in the vast majority of cases, "faking it" is faster.

And can the 360 do this?

Yes. The reason why ATi chips at the moment can't is because they're not SM3.0 capable, which X360 is, and more specifically do not have dynamic branching. One of the reasons NVidia is using relief mapping to demo the G70 is because dynamic branching on the chip is apparently penalty-free (compared to the NV4x where you had to be very careful about how and where you used it), as well as the increased MADD capability.

 

[cyberheater]

Thanks gofreak. Your a mine of useful information.

Ta...

 

[Gattsu25]

It's a SM3.0 thing rather than an NVidia thing NVidia are using a relief mapping demo to show off the G70, though, presumably they feel there's enough power to use it in games now.

Regardless, the performance hit appears to be too great to be used either way...well...a more optimized and selectivce (not on every surface) implementation could prolly work for a next gen game

 

[gofreak]

Regardless, the performance hit appears to be too great to be used either way...well...a more optimized and selectivce (not on every surface) implementation could prolly work for a next gen game

Of course, it wouldn't be used on every surface. It wouldn't be needed on every surface.

The Doom3 mod's performance seems quite promising. On a 6800GT, it apparently runs at 50fps, though I admittedly don't know what resolution that's at - but this is just an apparently unoptimised mod working with an engine that wasn't designed to use relief mapping in the first place (the guy who made the demo mentions limitations he ran into due to the D3 render pipe in terms of optimisation). And that's on hardware that incurs significant penalties with dynamic branching, and just generally isn't anywhere as powerful as the next-gen chips.

Some early next-gen games are using a computationally cheaper alternative, Parallax Mapping, but that may be a result of them working on non-SM3.0 capable dev kits currently. Not necessarily a sign that relief mapping won't be adopted into games more fully with later games. Though of course, as with any technique, it'll be used judiciously.

 

[Gattsu25]

Relief Mapping
Parallax Mapping
Displacement Mapping

I'm getting lost here . . . ok...seems like Parallax Mapping is a method of faking Displacement Mapping...so is Relief Mapping the same as Displacement?

a gooooooooogle search on Relief Mapping appears to give the same results of Displacement Mapping...this implementation of it is faked though (the objects do not appear to be really 3D...noticable when viewed from sharp angles) so would this really be Parallax mapping? or...what?

 

[gofreak]

Relief Mapping
Parallax Mapping
Displacement Mapping

I'm getting lost here . . . ok...seems like Parallax Mapping is a method of faking Displacement Mapping...so is Relief Mapping the same as Displacement?

a gooooooooogle search on Relief Mapping appears to give the same results of Displacement Mapping...this implementation of it is faked though (the objects do not appear to be really 3D...noticable when viewed from sharp angles) so would this really be Parallax mapping? or...what?

AFAIK..

Displacement mapping actual modifies the surface's geometry.

Relief Mapping could be considered a step down from that.

And Parallax Mapping a further step down.

The distance between the steps would be variable

 

[Gattsu25]

here's a link I found regarding "Steep Parallax Mapping":

http://graphics.cs.brown.edu/games/SteepParallax/

credit (figures it would be from a discussion on this exact same doom3 mod)

Relief mapping appears to be similar...though from what I've seen of the vid, with less clarity and definition

edit: in the 'credit' link...a poster named Fingernail even came to the same conclusion as I did (that it looks like voxels)

 

[gofreak]

Relief mapping appears to be similar...though from what I've seen of the vid, with less clarity and definition

edit: in the 'credit' link...a poster named Fingernail even came to the same conclusion as I did (that it looks like voxels)

Relief mapping or Parallax Mapping? I think that poster was referring to the Steep Parallax Mapping, and I can see where he's coming from:

This particlular implementation even acknowledges shortcomings vs relief mapping (refers to the implementation by the same guy who did the D3 mod, btw ). Parallax Mapping in general seems to be a movement toward bringing a computationally cheaper alternative to relief-mapping into the games space, and there are tradeoffs. It may not be so necessary next-gen though, or at least not in all instances.

 

[cyberheater]

edit: in the 'credit' link...a poster named Fingernail even came to the same conclusion as I did (that it looks like voxels)

Yep. I see what you mean. Def looks like voxels.