Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: THE justification for removing Vertex Lighting thread.  (Read 16980 times)
SharpestTool
Lesser Nub


Cakes -27
Posts: 143


« on: May 26, 2009, 08:39:01 AM »

taking vertex out and adding nothing else is no evolution ... it's degeneration!!!
remember when wolfenstein: enemy territory  removed vertex light? Jeez it reduced it to a pile of rubble no one plays now! you're right. no one has the right to take away our professional cheatvantages!

Drawing on the vertex lighting discussion that keeps going around...I put down a ton of thoughts of why it SHOULD BE REMOVED.  
Please be advised: This informative post does contain a healthy dose of sarcasm and ranting.  

Because the Q3 engine is written in 'C', all the code runs sequentially-it's like one big layered script. Running through the top-most layer ("Main" loop) of the script once amounts to one "Frame."  That said, frames per second (FPS) is not just the video generated by the "Renderer" but the number of times the "Computer" runs through this top-most layer of code--hence why the cvar to cap it is COM_maxfps and NOT R_maxfps.  Yes, the "Renderer" makes the biggest impact on the number of FPS possible to obtain-but as a subordinate portion of the code, it is an impossibility for it to run faster than the whole (or "sum" in simple math terms).


To detail why Wolf:ET removed vertex lighting, they added so many features that turning it on/off made a marginal difference at best.
1. Increased player support to 64, 128 or some other crazy number of players that the engine had so much more info to process before it sent it all to the Renderer for you to see on screen.
 
2. Gamelogic, added a ton of increase in communications between the different "game/cgame/ui" modules that the increase of code to run through wasn't simple mathematical addition, but more like "multiplication" and in some cases worse, "exponentiation." (This actually has it's roots in the TeamArena UI design).

3. HUGE maps with a GAZILLION polygons. An P4 2.8/NVIDIA 6600GT comp can't run more than 40fps constant on some maps.



ALL THAT SAID, the justification for removing "craptex" lighting in OA is this:
NOTE: SARCASM BEGINS HERE

1. The art quality for OA is significantly increasing over-time...this means the mappers/modelers are developing much larger, more complex, and more detailed maps. (Which FYI, the complexity of the map has the largest impact on how long the RENDERER takes to run) The gap in time it takes to render a polygon/texture combo with lightmap lighting, versus the "hacktastic" shortcut of "craptex" lighting has signficantly narrowed. Skeletal models will have a big impact too. You can have more of an impact on your overall FPS by turning off dynamic lighting, flares and bloom than by turning on "craptex" lighting.

2. The OpenArena (ioQuake3) engine HAS ADDED A TON OF IMPROVEMENTS. OGG Vorbis, OpenAL, etc. A biggie that comes to mind is VOIP, think of it like using TeamSpeak or Vent for any other game, just not having to d/l those spacehog pieces of bloatware. VOIP alone has added a signficant amount of stuff for the engine to process before anything is ever sent to the renderer.

3. Gamecode development is moving in a direction where it will add significantly to the "guts" and "overhead" of the overall game...that means the proportional impact on FPS by using "craptex" lighting is decreasing! . Things like more gametypes, using the MissionPack (Team Arena) UI, and the addition of RCON independent server administration Smiley will add more weight to the non-renderer side of the FPS equation.

4. If you have trouble "noticing" a black-uniform'd sarge hiding out in the shadows of Kaos2 or chilling in a corner on a space map, tough crap, that's part of the human side of the game.  If you have trouble "seeing" him, get your eyes checked :-p

5. The GAME IS FREAKING 10 YEARS OLD.  If you are playing OA on a system that still can't do Q3 decently that you HAVE to run vertex-lighting, you are either one of, or all-of-the-below:

a. Making the conscious decision to do so when you don't have to.  I love me some NES, but you don't see Nintendo developing games anymore for it now do ya? And last time I checked, they weren't making a Super Mario Brothers 4.

b. Don't have the money to upgrade. Don't know what to tell you about this one.  

c. Playing the game on a system so laden down with spyware/malware and other crap, you should think about giving it a good shakedown--On a Serious Note: If you're computer is newer, free of crapware, do some research on the antivirus/anticrapware programs out there...some of them eat up a ton of clock cycles...cough*PCTools*cough.

Why then keep around a feature which has little and decreasing impact on leveling the playing field from a software performance standpoint?

IMO: Keeping it around really is like baseball saying hey A-Rod, because you suck and are a huge playoff-choke, we will let you use a lighter bat or we will support your taking the 'roids which your cousin gives you.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2009, 10:05:23 AM by SharpestTool » Logged
kick52
Member


Cakes -1
Posts: 229


« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2009, 08:43:20 AM »

Whatever,  I use it on my 400mhz machine here.
Logged
SharpestTool
Lesser Nub


Cakes -27
Posts: 143


« Reply #2 on: May 26, 2009, 10:07:09 AM »

kick52, see point 5a. Smiley
Logged
feidi
Nub


Cakes 13
Posts: 46


WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 26, 2009, 01:40:25 PM »

And yet, for enjoyable gaming experience a smooth gameplay is essential (which means constant FPS). If, by turning off all the other stuff that was mentioned in the first post, this cannot be achieved without enabling vertex lighting - and sometimes even this is not enough - then how do you justify removing this feature? Also, I'd like to see more points about what's the harm of keeping it?
Logged

6lue Rose .:. http://6r-clan.org .:. irc://irc.freenode.net/6r
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14519



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2009, 02:55:35 PM »

Alright, feature rant thread

the real need for vertex lighting ended in 1998 when the Voodoo2 rolled out. The TNT came out with multitexturing as well and so did every other new card since. Vertex light is never used for 'performance' unless the so called pro player has a intended crap computer to justify THEIR excuse for the cheatvantage.


kick52's a hopeless hobo on a rage pro or something. on  a MAC!! with ASHTON KUTCHER HAIR.
$150 can get you a computer that can exceed OA's fps to over 800 at MAXIMUM DETAILS and high resolution so why even bother arguing FOR vertex light in 2009?

When Quake4 came out everyone whined about the low fps (10) on their macihnes. The whine came from most 'pros' however for some damned reason they were using FX5200 cards which were NOT IN THE MINIMUM REQURIEMENTS FOR THE GAME. But somehow they whined enough to get their way on r_ambientLight or so in to the patch without cheat protection, so now Quake4 is cheatariffic and only has that same vocal minority on the servers. Way to ruin the fun jerks.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys is the killer of Quakes. If there's only servers with THEM, then they have gotten their way, and they wonder why they can't get any fresh new blood who's never played "their way".

Seriously, if you want to game "for real", make sure you don't have a hobo computer. Rice it out with a dual core and a Radeon HD card and you're set.

Oh also PowerVR chipsets have 8 texture units, so your iPhone or eeePC or Pandora wouldn't need vertex light, either.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2009, 03:13:16 PM by leilol » Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
SharpestTool
Lesser Nub


Cakes -27
Posts: 143


« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2009, 03:19:37 PM »

If, by turning off all the other stuff that was mentioned in the first post, this cannot be achieved without enabling vertex lighting

Ummm...that's just flat out wrong/false. Reread the post, then Try these in the console:

r_flares 0
r_bloom 0
r_dynamiclight 0

And yet, for enjoyable gaming experience a smooth gameplay is essential (which means constant FPS).

Smooth gameplay is dependent on so many different other features than vertex lighting.  Reread the first part of the first post as well to understand what FPS actually is.
Along with the cvars I mentioned above, it is worth noting that when playing online, your network settings often have more to do with how smooth your gameplay is than your "renderer"/GFX settings. This is a long complex explanation of what and how the server and clients communicate to each other. Not worth mentioning here.

In all reality, your GFX card will never render anymore "Video" Frames in a single second than your Monitor's display refresh rate.  So if you use an LCD monitor it's probably limited in the hardware to around 60hz.  This means your GFX card will never tell your monitor to refresh more than 60 times a second.  The result is you never "see" more than 60 FPS.  Any com_maxFPS above this is just wasted CPU clock cycles since you don't see it.  In fact, it actually creates a bad playing situation known as "tearing." This is when your GFX card starts combining frames and you get what looks like frames colliding on screen.  

(Note: if you want the movement benefits of a higher constant fps, set pmove_fixed to 1.)  


Also, I'd like to see more points about what's the harm of keeping it?

1. If you use it because you can't see other players on a map, change your monitor's brightness settings.  Many maps are designed so that you can hide in shadows or dark areas.  This is called using tactics--brains versus just the ability to shoot. If all you want to do is aim/shoot...play Duck Hunt.

2. If you use it to see other players on a map which was designed for dark areas in which to hide, you're playing really really cheap/lazily and should just take it the extra small step and find a wall-hack.  

3. It is one more feature to worry about keeping in tact when updating the engine code.

4. It allows some mappers to be really lazy in designing their maps-GIGO. The biggest impact on your "FPS" is actually the polygon count.  Lazy mappers will forgo reducing the polygon count of a map if they are can just use vertex lighting.

5.  Last but not least...the game is 10 years old.  If your hardware is 5 years old or newer, you don't "need" vertexlight.  If your hardware is 5 years old or older...you should get new hardware or risk losing out on advancing game projects. 

PSSSTTT...fromhell...see point 5/5b on the first post Smiley
Logged
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14519



WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 26, 2009, 03:22:26 PM »

PSSSTTT...fromhell...see point 5/5b on the first post Smiley
you should have said "GET A JOB YOU BUM" in that one, or more like, "Ask your mother."


OA should have vertexlight forced at 0 unless it detects a Rage Pro, Riva 128 or PCX2. No other exceptions.
Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
SharpestTool
Lesser Nub


Cakes -27
Posts: 143


« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2009, 04:18:36 PM »

PSSSTTT...fromhell...see point 5/5b on the first post Smiley
you should have said "GET A JOB YOU BUM" in that one, or more like, "Ask your mother."


OA should have vertexlight forced at 0 unless it detects a Rage Pro, Riva 128 or PCX2. No other exceptions.

It's called "obsolescence!!!" Build a version of the engine for these clowns that only does craptex lighting, don't update it, and start making maps that flat out ignore vertex lighting considerations.  So while they want to hold on to 1999, the rest of the world will progress with a more thoughtful, and more complete engine.

"Let them eat (crap)!"

Logged
Snickersnack
Member


Cakes 1
Posts: 196


obnoxious OA fan


« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2009, 08:51:05 PM »

My notebook has a ragepro IGP. Sad

Is this about the preservation of dark spots in maps? If so, will the adjustment of the brightness settings be cracked down upon as well?

The dark environment of Doom3 was pretty cool.
Logged
andrewj
Member


Cakes 24
Posts: 581



« Reply #9 on: May 27, 2009, 12:20:28 AM »

Beating a dead horse here.  Vertex lighting was planned to be removed in version 0.alien but that didn't happen.  The developers love to bitch about it, but they will never remove such a popular feature.  I think it's a bit sad, but in a way it's also right to keep features that people want.
Logged
feidi
Nub


Cakes 13
Posts: 46


WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 27, 2009, 04:42:26 AM »

If, by turning off all the other stuff that was mentioned in the first post, this cannot be achieved without enabling vertex lighting

Ummm...that's just flat out wrong/false. Reread the post, then Try these in the console:

r_flares 0
r_bloom 0
r_dynamiclight 0
How can you know for sure what happens on my computer, or in this case a 2 years old mac.

And yet, for enjoyable gaming experience a smooth gameplay is essential (which means constant FPS).

Smooth gameplay is dependent on so many different other features than vertex lighting.  Reread the first part of the first post as well to understand what FPS actually is.
Along with the cvars I mentioned above, it is worth noting that when playing online, your network settings often have more to do with how smooth your gameplay is than your "renderer"/GFX settings. This is a long complex explanation of what and how the server and clients communicate to each other. Not worth mentioning here.
I didn't say that smooth gameplay is merely dependent on vertex lighting, but it certainly can help (and DOES help on my mac). And I do understand what FPS actually is myself, thank you.

In all reality, your GFX card will never render anymore "Video" Frames in a single second than your Monitor's display refresh rate.  So if you use an LCD monitor it's probably limited in the hardware to around 60hz.  This means your GFX card will never tell your monitor to refresh more than 60 times a second.  The result is you never "see" more than 60 FPS.  Any com_maxFPS above this is just wasted CPU clock cycles since you don't see it.  In fact, it actually creates a bad playing situation known as "tearing." This is when your GFX card starts combining frames and you get what looks like frames colliding on screen.  

(Note: if you want the movement benefits of a higher constant fps, set pmove_fixed to 1.)  
But the fact remains that on most servers you need at least 125 fps to be able to jump to the required height for many tricks.

Also, I'd like to see more points about what's the harm of keeping it?

1. If you use it because you can't see other players on a map, change your monitor's brightness settings.  Many maps are designed so that you can hide in shadows or dark areas.  This is called using tactics--brains versus just the ability to shoot. If all you want to do is aim/shoot...play Duck Hunt.
This is bad... and I never liked Duck Hunt.

2. If you use it to see other players on a map which was designed for dark areas in which to hide, you're playing really really cheap/lazily and should just take it the extra small step and find a wall-hack.  
This is even worse...

3. It is one more feature to worry about keeping in tact when updating the engine code.
This is ok, but is it really that hard?

4. It allows some mappers to be really lazy in designing their maps-GIGO. The biggest impact on your "FPS" is actually the polygon count.  Lazy mappers will forgo reducing the polygon count of a map if they are can just use vertex lighting.
This is a good point, and I agree with this, yet is removing vertex the only answer to this issue?

5.  Last but not least...the game is 10 years old.  If your hardware is 5 years old or newer, you don't "need" vertexlight.  If your hardware is 5 years old or older...you should get new hardware or risk losing out on advancing game projects.  
My hardware is ~ 2 years old.
Logged

6lue Rose .:. http://6r-clan.org .:. irc://irc.freenode.net/6r
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14519



WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2009, 05:37:08 AM »

a 2 years old mac.

is not the same as a 11 years old mac which had an ATI Rage Pro.
If your hardware is 2 years old, you're ready for Crysis. It's not an excuse for vertex. That's for hardware from 12 years ago.
Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
feidi
Nub


Cakes 13
Posts: 46


WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2009, 06:24:16 AM »

a 2 years old mac.

is not the same as a 11 years old mac which had an ATI Rage Pro.
If your hardware is 2 years old, you're ready for Crysis. It's not an excuse for vertex. That's for hardware from 12 years ago.

Well, I don't know if it is an excuse or not. I was just speaking of my own experience here. And just to make this clear: I actually prefer using lightmap instead of vertex lighting as it makes the game look better. But the reason why I have vertex lighting enabled is because that's the only way I can get stable enough fps in all maps and situations, not just some. For me it's highly more important to have smooth and consistent gameplay than great effects and visuals with sudden drops of fps. And by the way, I can only decently run Crysis with the most minimum settings, and at that point it is not visually pleasing anymore hence I don't play it (i.e. I do consider the visual aspect of the game I play, too).
Logged

6lue Rose .:. http://6r-clan.org .:. irc://irc.freenode.net/6r
SharpestTool
Lesser Nub


Cakes -27
Posts: 143


« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2009, 02:12:54 AM »

Feidi,

Have you tried bringing up the console and changing those three graphics cvars manually?


Also add the cvar manually "pmove_fixed 1." It will give you about 95% of the physics/movement/jumping benefit of a higher constant fps.  The FPS it approximates to is server dependent of course.  The server's value of pmove_msec determines this. 

How it all works is...

1000 / pmove_msec = FPS to mimic.   

Most servers have this set to 8. So setting pmove_fixed to 1 will mimic the physics movement you get at 125fps regardless of how many FPS your comp actually runs at.   

Logged
pulchr
Member


Cakes 34
Posts: 626



WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2009, 03:54:39 AM »

and make sure you have disabled detailed textures (r_detailtextures 0)
Logged
kit89
Member


Cakes 6
Posts: 636


Shoot him..


« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2009, 04:01:01 AM »

Your best option is to actually change the Resolution your running OpenArena at.

If your running a low-end graphics card, this can improve performance greatly. Most Desktop machines run at a resolution of round about 1680x1050 or 1280x960. Though low-end cards can get away with this quite nicely for a standard desktop, for computer games it can't. At which a lower resolution is better. I usually suggest to try resolutions around 640x480 & 800x600.
Logged
feidi
Nub


Cakes 13
Posts: 46


WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2009, 04:06:47 AM »

Feidi,

Have you tried bringing up the console and changing those three graphics cvars manually?


Also add the cvar manually "pmove_fixed 1." It will give you about 95% of the physics/movement/jumping benefit of a higher constant fps.  The FPS it approximates to is server dependent of course.  The server's value of pmove_msec determines this. 

Yes I have, and not only those. (Almost) the same config file works fine in Q3 and QL with vertex lighting off, and, as I said, usually works fine in OA, too. But there are some maps or situations where I get FPS drops and there having vertex lighting turned on helps a bit (but as you said this probably could be fixed and should be fixed by fixing the maps themselves). Sometimes 95% is just not good enough, or even 99%.

pulchr, done that too. kit89, running at 1024x640. Anyway, I'm not asking for tips for improving FPS (since I do have pretty much constant fps 125 at the moment anyway), but I'm saying that removing vertex lighting will definitely have an impact - a negative impact - on that.
Logged

6lue Rose .:. http://6r-clan.org .:. irc://irc.freenode.net/6r
dash9
Member


Cakes 6
Posts: 189


« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2009, 06:33:23 PM »

the real need for vertex lighting ended in 1998 when the Voodoo2 rolled out.
It's not a matter of whether vertex lighting is needed, the question is whether removing this feature will bring any benefit.

The TNT came out with multitexturing as well and so did every other new card since. Vertex light is never used for 'performance' unless the so called pro player has a intended crap computer to justify THEIR excuse for the cheatvantage.
The pro players are worried that by investing time in removing a feature which is probably in use by some poor soul who really needs it, you guys won't have time to fix the real bugs: (DO NOT LINK) h t t p s : / / openarena . wikia . com/wiki/Bugs.

Cheatvantage? If you think that the poor noob won't be able to hide in the dark areas, this is hillarious. If noob plays vs pro, he'll be owned anyway.

Anyway, I'm curious, please give me an example of a map where you can use the dark areas to your advantage.

ps. I use lightmap. Cheesy
Logged

I found a great camping place: the enemy base!
Ivan_D
Nub


Cakes -1
Posts: 27



« Reply #18 on: June 01, 2009, 06:50:28 PM »

(deleted)
Logged

In Soviet Russia OpenArena plays you!
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14519



WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2009, 11:35:42 PM »

Anyway, I'm curious, please give me an example of a map where you can use the dark areas to your advantage.

oa_dm2 is a nice one, oa_shouse is another. Plenty of shadows to hide in. BUT OF COURSE THEY CAN't DO THAT ONLINE SINCE PEOPLE TAKE OFF THE SHADOWS AND SEE EVERYTHING making bad play experiences. Another side effect is a lack of popularity from such bad play experiences (no they won't move onto Warsow, but to a more strict shooter like Urban Terror or Alien Arena instead), but like i've always said, my personal development into OA isn't motivated by popularity.

Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
dash9
Member


Cakes 6
Posts: 189


« Reply #20 on: June 02, 2009, 03:32:10 PM »

Anyway, I'm curious, please give me an example of a map where you can use the dark areas to your advantage.

oa_dm2 is a nice one, oa_shouse is another. Plenty of shadows to hide in. BUT OF COURSE THEY CAN't DO THAT ONLINE SINCE PEOPLE TAKE OFF THE SHADOWS AND SEE EVERYTHING making bad play experiences. Another side effect is a lack of popularity from such bad play experiences (no they won't move onto Warsow, but to a more strict shooter like Urban Terror or Alien Arena instead), but like i've always said, my personal development into OA isn't motivated by popularity.

Aw, cmon.. a lil' bit of gamma and I can see you very well even if you go in the shadow. Cheesy Nowhere to hide.. Tongue
IMO it should be easier for you, if you really want more fairness, to make the following settings "read-only" when you connect to a pure server: r_vertexLight, cg_forceModel, r_fastSky, cg_bob*, r_gamma, com_blood, cg_gibs. Removing only r_vertexLight won't fix your problem.
Logged

I found a great camping place: the enemy base!
bill-----
Half-Nub


Cakes 8
Posts: 60


« Reply #21 on: June 02, 2009, 10:27:02 PM »

cg_bob*?!  And how does me having to play with barf all over my keyboard add more fairness? :-)
Logged
jackoverfull
Member


Cakes 14
Posts: 385


Member


WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 02, 2009, 11:20:50 PM »

still about vertex? I thought that the problem was solved eons ago. O_o

BTW, what's the problem with the ATI Rage Pro? I have a 2001 iMac G3 and it runs OA without vertex lighting…;)
Logged
SharpestTool
Lesser Nub


Cakes -27
Posts: 143


« Reply #23 on: June 02, 2009, 11:30:38 PM »

Aw, cmon.. a lil' bit of gamma and I can see you very well even if you go in the shadow. Cheesy Nowhere to hide.. Tongue
IMO it should be easier for you, if you really want more fairness, to make the following settings "read-only" when you connect to a pure server: r_vertexLight, cg_forceModel, r_fastSky, cg_bob*, r_gamma, com_blood, cg_gibs. Removing only r_vertexLight won't fix your problem.

You're right...

And on another note, this is why class-based team games rose so much in popularity, (think Team Fortress and RTCW) ...players can outsmart other players versus just having to out-gun them (or out buy them on hardware, or outscript them with craptastic binds, or supposedly "out-config" them)
Logged
pulchr
Member


Cakes 34
Posts: 626



WWW
« Reply #24 on: June 03, 2009, 12:35:26 AM »

Aw, cmon.. a lil' bit of gamma and I can see you very well even if you go in the shadow. Cheesy Nowhere to hide.. Tongue
IMO it should be easier for you, if you really want more fairness, to make the following settings "read-only" when you connect to a pure server: r_vertexLight, cg_forceModel, r_fastSky, cg_bob*, r_gamma, com_blood, cg_gibs. Removing only r_vertexLight won't fix your problem.

You're right...

And on another note, this is why class-based team games rose so much in popularity, (think Team Fortress and RTCW) ...players can outsmart other players versus just having to out-gun them (or out buy them on hardware, or outscript them with craptastic binds, or supposedly "out-config" them)

RTCW wasn't any better in regards to configs. sure there was punkbuster where each server decided what was allowed. but most servers had quite forgiving settings. however, it did indeed force players to cooperate to have a chance. very fun game - looking forward to the sequel Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to: