High Detail Cockpits in SF2

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

most of you know that Sophocles is working on a new F-5A / RF-5A with a high detail cockpit and i work on the F-4G also with a new high detail cockpit , Sophocles is able to get the lod size to about 3,84 MB and lower , i have try to do the same but i dont get lower than 6,73 MB for the  lod of the single piece winshield version an up to a max of 7,10 MB for the lod the F-4G_78 versions , the F-4G_85 cockpit has a lod sice of 6,83 MB and the F-4G_89 cockpit a lod sice of 6,84 MB

as you can see that this lod sices are way above of cockpits we have right now in game , on the Buccaneer i had between 2,93 MB and 3,0 MB and on the F-16C i got the lod sice between 3,0 MB and 3,30 MB so nothing close to the 7,1 MB i have currently on the F-4G_78 cockpit , the problem is now that i found out that this new F-G aircraft with this large cockpits have problems on a specific terrain , the Anatolia terrain , i have 3 versions of this Anatolia terrain a version 0 that is a BETA file i got to test it than a version 1 this was the first released version and the version 2 that is the final version , on the final version i dont have to try my luck because even my F-4E model with TW cockpit is not flying there the only terrain version i can get my F-4G to fly is the version 0

i try to find out what exactly is the problem with this particular terrain an i notice that if the airfield you start on is near to a large city you dont even have to try your luck on terrain version 1 and 2 , i notice in air if i fly  over mountain with tree´s up to the horizon i have no problem as soon as i get near to a city my FPS drops down up to 14 FPS if im over the city , so i think the problem is the tod files used for this citys , now i have the heavily moded Germany CE terrain from Rends i try my luck there but with not so high expetations knowing the result from my Anatolia terrains but i got surprised all my F-4G work on this terrain with out any problems

now i have to make a desission and for this i need the help of the pilots who maby will fly my F-4G later on , all cockpits are done now but they dont have a ejection seat , my fear is if i add this seat model to the cockpit that this F-4G will no longer fly in a modded terrain , if i dont add the seat some people may ask me why i dont put a seat in that cockpit , i know that Sophocles is adding now different ejection Seats to his cockpits but Sophocles does not have my lod size problems

an other think is that i was ask already if i make new cockpits for all other F-4´s out of this existing new ones , problem here is the same as with the seat the lod size my come up over 7,1 MB on some F-4E version

i think Sophocles is with his beautiful new cockpits on a safe side , i´m not so sure with my F-4G cockpits , this is the problem if you try to get the cockpits as realistic as possible

some info on the new F-4G cockpit compared to  the F-4G_78 cockpit , F-4E_78 has 100 entrys for gauges , funktions and lights the F-4G cockpits have up to 226 entrys

so let me know what you think about a possible ejection seat and the Anatolia terrain problem

[+Menrva 4,200]

23 minutes ago, ravenclaw_007 said:

so let me know what you think about a possible ejection seat and the Anatolia terrain problem

Hi, Raven!

Speaking of the Anatolia terrain, it's a very particular one; it's much bigger than a stock TW terrain and it uses a lot of custom 3d models for airports, cities and so on. TODs affect FPS very much as well. So, it's no wonder you're having issues. Terrains like Anatolia, combined with highly detailed cockpits and aircraft, reach the limits of what the game can render at the same time. The SF2 engine is old and poorly optimized! By now, TK should be on his way to finalize work on the so called SF2 Win10 Edition; it will use DirectX 12, so lots of improvements should happen in this regard, given you're on recent hardware.

It's really important that you reduce the LOD's size any way you can. Other 3d modellers might have suggestions. Some things are better left as textures+bump maps, instead of having them modelled.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Menrva

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

15 minutes ago, Menrva said:

Hi, Raven!

Speaking of the Anatolia terrain, it's a very particular one; it's much bigger than a stock TW terrain and it uses a lot of custom 3d models for airports, cities and so on. TODs affect FPS very much as well. So, it's no wonder you're having issues. Terrains like Anatolia, combined with highly detailed cockpits and aircraft, reach the limits of what the game can render at the same time. The SF2 engine is old and poorly optimized! By now, TK should be on his way to finalize work on the so called SF2 Win10 Edition; it will use DirectX 12, so lots of improvements should happen in this regard, given you're on recent hardware.

It's really important that you reduce the LOD's size any way you can. Other 3d modellers might have suggestions. Some things are better left as textures+bump maps, instead of having them modelled.

if i remove this caps ( red arrow ) and replace them with a texture i could reduce the lod size from 7,1 MB to 6,53 MB , i added this caps because the texture did not satisfy me  

i could do the same with the DZUS ( green arrow ) the lod size would be reduced but i dont think the cockpit would look the same anymore , as i mention above it is high detailed , by the way all in game not visible surfaces are already deleted and i reduced vertices especially on rounded edges and rivets where i  removed a lot without losing the appearance

[+yakarov79 11,084]

1 hour ago, Menrva said:

Some things are better left as textures+bump maps, instead of having them modelled.

No. No bump on texture will give results as 3d mesh. 

But we can understand the concerns. I would like to suggest something but this pit is so pretty that I do not wish you to change anything.

 

Just tell me cuts on DZUS are on texture or modeled?

You want to add a whole seat or just frame and parts that are visible? 

What will happen if you will add this seat as a seat model for the pilots folder (external model) and make it visible from the cockpit? It is still high polycount to display but the size of the pit file will not increase. 

 

Out of curiosity, I've checked my new cockpits for Mojave and Huey and I just realized that Mojave is 6.26MB and Huey 7.10MB. 

 

[+russouk2004 6,958]

A good detaile texture can look as good as meshes....look at the engine pics I did last night ...looks as good as the meshes did ...maybe do it for the base panel rivets and screws....lower poly count on switches is suprisingly good if smoothed well etc...a good texture can hide a multitude of model sins lol

Edited April 20, 2020 by russouk2004

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

1 hour ago, yakarov79 said:

No. No bump on texture will give results as 3d mesh. 

But we can understand the concerns. I would like to suggest something but this pit is so pretty that I do not wish you to change anything.

 

Just tell me cuts on DZUS are on texture or modeled?

You want to add a whole seat or just frame and parts that are visible? 

What will happen if you will add this seat as a seat model for the pilots folder (external model) and make it visible from the cockpit? It is still high polycount to display but the size of the pit file will not increase. 

 

Out of curiosity, I've checked my new cockpits for Mojave and Huey and I just realized that Mojave is 6.26MB and Huey 7.10MB. 

 

the DZUS are modeled but could be changed to a textured solution  , actualy that is what it was originaly but i liked to have it in 3D so i made them as 3D model same with the Light_Caps

and you dont have any problems with this cockpits ?? did you try to fly on the Anatolia terrain with it ??

i just found some polys that i can remove , will be a long night

[+guuruu 5,909]

Yup, removing polys isn't fast job ;-), but you can really do pit lighter. I saved around 40% of size in Tonka this way.

[+sophocles 1,345]

4 hours ago, Menrva said:

By now, TK should be on his way to finalize work on the so called SF2 Win10 Edition; it will use DirectX 12, so lots of improvements should happen in this regard, given you're on recent hardware.

This would be a Godsend..

There's a lot of pain in the poly-reduction process.. but unavoidable at present If you want to enjoy reasonable frame-rates in the game.. it took me months to scale back the cockpit in the F-5a..

Edited April 20, 2020 by sophocles
spelling

[+yakarov79 11,084]

2 hours ago, ravenclaw_007 said:

and you dont have any problems with this cockpits ?? did you try to fly on the Anatolia terrain with it ??

I do not have Anatolia terrain. 

But on other terrains it is quite ok. Of course, there are some fps drops if encountering some specific cities/bases but nothing drastic. 

[+Menrva 4,200]

An addition to what I said before; since SF2 Win10 Edition is on the way, you guys might want to keep original copies of those extra detailed cockpits. They may not perform well on the current SF2, but on the next edition they may be usable without much of a hassle.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Menrva

[+Julhelm 266]

14 hours ago, yakarov79 said:

No. No bump on texture will give results as 3d mesh.

Yes it can, you just don't know how to bake properly.

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

14 hours ago, Menrva said:

An addition to what I said before; since SF2 Win10 Edition is on the way, you guys might want to keep original copies of those extra detailed cockpits. They may not perform well on the current SF2, but on the next edition they may be usable without much of a hassle.

just in case you have the impression that this cockpits dont work properly or give you problems so that you can not fly on any terrain that is NOT the case this cockpits work ok with all terrains i have , except with the Anatolia terrain there you will have problems

i think it is better if you and everybody who likes to take a look at this cockpit try it for your self , let me know if you get problems that makes this aircraft with this cockpit unflyable for you or the FPS drops below of an acceptable level

F-4G.7z

please remove any aircraft or weapon with the same name as the ones in this pack , before you install this new ones , Dont Overwrite Existing Aircrafts

Edited April 21, 2020 by ravenclaw_007

[+Menrva 4,200]

I will test. Anyway, I am on a low-end machine by today's standards, so I expect low FPS in any case. People with more recent hardware will surely offer a better test case.

On a side note... My old PC performed much better years ago, always on Windows 10. I believe that after the discovery of the Meltdown and Spectre hardware vulnerabilities, Microsoft has pushed some OS software updates in order to somewhat overcome them, at the cost of performance.

EDIT: I tested on stock TW's terrains; the cockpit does not create much issues on my crappy crate, it lowers FPS but that was expected. It will work without issues for mostly everyone.

It's amazingly detailed, a real love letter to all Phantom enthusiasts. Great job, @ravenclaw_007 

Edited April 21, 2020 by Menrva

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

pphhuuu.... i´m glad it worked , when you mention that you are on a old pc i got scared a bit

the lod is now below 7 MB so maybe that helps a bit more , i removed some polys last night and i will continou searching for polys that i can remove

[+russouk2004 6,958]

Quote

you just don't know how to bake properly.

Rubbish...I make wonderful cakes lol.....I start to learn baking textures...get mixed up and gave up  .   :(

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

55 minutes ago, russouk2004 said:

Rubbish...I make wonderful cakes lol.....I start to learn baking textures...get mixed up and gave up  .   :(

i would like to learn it , but i have no clue how to do it , i think Sophocles is using this or something similar for the F-5A cockpits

[RustyKurnass 658]

I tested the bird on the Lybian, North Cape and Iceland terrains without any problem of FPS.

My only issues was the lack of RWR sound and the impossibility of load Aim-7s or bomb from MER or TER, only single ordnance from parent pylons.

Figured out for the belly pykon and the RWR sound,as I lack in the test installation the indicated files, when dropped in the folder worked.

But still no TER in the inner pylons or Sparrows

Edited April 21, 2020 by RustyKurnass

[+yakarov79 11,084]

10 hours ago, Julhelm said:

Yes it can, you just don't know how to bake properly.

No.  

You can create an illusion of 3d objects on flat texture using a bump map. But it is still an illusion. No texture with a bump map will give you the effect of 3d mesh. Flat mesh with extra hyper texture will still be flat mesh. No matter what.

Maybe it is not so obvious in external model, but in the cockpit where POV is much closer to objects, the difference is noticeable.

But perhaps I am wrong I am not a 3d artist or graphic designer. Just my observations. 

 

I am quite good at baking by the way. 

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

32 minutes ago, RustyKurnass said:

I tested the bird on the Lybian, North Cape and Iceland terrains without any problem of FPS.

My only issues was the lack of RWR sound and the impossibility of load Aim-7s or bomb from MER or TER, only single ordnance from parent pylons.

Figured out for the belly pykon and the RWR sound,as I lack in the test installation the indicated files, when dropped in the folder worked.

But still no TER in the inner pylons or Sparrows

Sorry , i dont have this problem , the ter entry is in the data_ini as well as the AIM-7 they have a own specific weaponstation , and everything works fine here

[RustyKurnass 658]

31 minutes ago, ravenclaw_007 said:

Sorry , i dont have this problem , the ter entry is in the data_ini as well as the AIM-7 they have a own specific weaponstation , and everything works fine here

I solved all,for some reason adding in the data_ini AttachenentType=USAF,NATO worked .

I checked all the Sparrows data_ini and all the AttachmentType are labelled NATO only

Anyway,WOW! There no need other words,the pit is A-MA-ZING!!!

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

26 minutes ago, RustyKurnass said:

I solved all,for some reason adding in the data_ini AttachenentType=USAF,NATO worked .

I checked all the Sparrows data_ini and all the AttachmentType are labelled NATO only

Anyway,WOW! There no need other words,the pit is A-MA-ZING!!!

ok , that problem is gone with the weapons i will release with the F-4G

[+mue 715]

58 minutes ago, yakarov79 said:

You can create an illusion of 3d objects on flat texture using a bump map. But it is still an illusion. No texture with a bump map will give you the effect of 3d mesh. Flat mesh with extra hyper texture will still be flat mesh. No matter what.

Actually the whole rendering of a 3D scene onto a (2D) monitor is an illusion.
If the 3D objects are not that much extruded it shouldn't make a big difference if the surface normals (for lighting computation) come from a normal map or from a detailed mesh.

[+ravenclaw_007 7,633]

one question to the people who tested the cockpit , is the missing ejection seat an issue ???

[+yakarov79 11,084]

I flew a test mission. No issues with loadouts all is well as in the previous version of Weasel. So the user shouldn't have any problems if all installed correctly. 

I noticed that you reduced polycount (and size of the cockpit) compared to that one uploaded previously. 

As for the test. On highly modified Korea terrain. Two SEAD escort for four of my Harriers loaded with your bombs, escort with 8th of your F-4E, some additional fighter sweep with F-4S. A lot of enemy intercepts. All my red radars are from my mods..so also high details. And full loads of aircraft on airfield flightline. A lot of SAMs, explosions,  smoke etc...

I didn't have any problems with graphic performance. Only time screen was choppy occurred during landing when I was looking at a few parked Sea Stallions. So the mission was in a highly detailed environment. 

So please do not change a bit .

 

The ejection seat (or lack of it) is not an issue. But could be a nice touch...

[+yakarov79 11,084]

19 minutes ago, mue said:

If the 3D objects are not that much extruded it shouldn't make a big difference if the surface normals (for lighting computation) come from a normal map or from a detailed mesh.

Yes. But still, switch with normal texture will still be flat mesh. And switch made as 3d mesh will be 3d mesh. And if you are saying that it shouldn't make a big difference then I prefer 3d mesh than bumped texture.