Brilliant thread, OP!
Underground Activities in Starcraft 2 - Page 10
Forum Index > SC2 General |
blackbrownsocks
Singapore1 Post
Brilliant thread, OP! | ||
bubblegumbo
Taiwan1296 Posts
| ||
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
| ||
archonOOid
1983 Posts
| ||
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
Existential
Australia2107 Posts
| ||
Paincarnate
115 Posts
| ||
LeSioN
United States325 Posts
| ||
algorithm0r
Canada486 Posts
| ||
Chrono000
Korea (South)358 Posts
| ||
![]()
Smix
![]()
United States4549 Posts
| ||
Forikorder
Canada8840 Posts
i remember playing a few games with burrowed infesters (custom games) that yould get to an area you could see the burrowed infester but never thought that other models would have an underground apearence too really love the hatch find | ||
BadgKat
United States156 Posts
| ||
FatalStrik3x
United States3 Posts
| ||
shadowy
Bulgaria305 Posts
| ||
EatCrow
Estonia333 Posts
| ||
BadAim
Norway879 Posts
| ||
CooDu
Australia899 Posts
![]() | ||
claybones
United States244 Posts
| ||
Matt_D_
Australia14 Posts
normally you try and avoid "rendering" (as in, submitting for render, not actually rasterising) things you cant see, as you still have to perform "work" (ie: culling) to remove things which are underground, or occluded. or of course you just render everything and let the depth buffer sort it out, which also isnt exactly optimal as you waste GPU bandwith and shader time sending across, and potentially rasterising data you'll never actually use (and potential z fighting) things like the dark shrine, and bunker "highlights" being lobbed underground is certainly a hint at whatever shader they're using for the buildings potentially doesn't support runtime transparency modulation. the big one though is the borrowed units. why not LOD them out for a model that just has the bits you can see (but still has the same bone structure for animations) ? hmm... its an interesting choice. it'd certainly be an interesting question to ask someone on the team at blizzard "why". I'm sure there's a good, and probably interesting (at least for me anyway) answer ![]() | ||
| ||