Not always, but in many cases yes. However, many models does not *need* to be all that detailed; for example, my Gibraltar model could be reduced by 50% or more just by deleting the interior - which isn??t neccecary anyway, it was just added for fun. Of course such drastic editing aren??t practical for the end user... But reducing texture quality, removing/substituting the models defined in the SSC and so on is trivial.maxim wrote:That's not so easy. Main culprit are the models.rthorvald wrote:If anyone is interested in building lower res, more userfriendly versions of my stuff, just ask...
You are completely right, of course. What you suggest is the optimal way to design; it is limited by the talent and expertise of the designer, though... As for myself, i??m not really a 3D modeller either; i am still at the low end of the learning curve, and working the way you suggest is one important aim.maxim wrote:Yes, but to get the polycount really low without loosing the vison (or allow other people to do so) the design approach should be different - i.e. by not modelling every part to death but use texturizing on simplyfied outlines so one could choose between low poly - high textures or high poly - low textures.
Well, it boils down to testing, cutting, testing, imagination and patience; i??m afraid i don??t believe there are shortcuts there...maxim wrote:Following argument above -> I'm not a modeller, so I wouldn't know how to really simplify the models and substitute that by indroducing textured surfaces instead
I??m not sure i understand what you propose here, but a brainstorming on how to build more efficiently and open-ended would be very interesting...maxim wrote:I would be very willing to discuss and initiate a production process that automates the creation and deployment of ready-to-use low-end addons out of a 'master addon'
One HUGE revision i would love to see is Virtual Virtual Textures!maxim wrote:The tricks would be a revision of Celestias code
(I want to be able to define ONE spesific tile to repeat X number of times in X directions on XY coordinates before the next tile is read in and applied by the program). And if something similar to VTs could be done with 3D building blocks, it would go a long way (build one cmod rock, and attach a definition or script for how it should be repeated)
maxim wrote:I know that some are arguing that they prefer detailed models over textured ones. But wouldn't it be nice if modelling was planned in a way, that some automation tools could be applied which strongly simplify the models and create textures instead to visualize the missing parts?
Something like that is beyond anything we could easily make... Better to focus on tricks that can be used in the software and processes we are using today.