Suijin

ARENA Suijin RC2

  • This map is featured! Our best maps, all together in one place for your viewing pleasure.

Freyja

aa
Jul 31, 2009
2,994
5,813
There is no problem then. The map is fully optimised. End of story.

To make this map run better I would have to basically have to remove what people love it for. So no.

Essentially, I value aesthetics over precious FPS where anything >60 is next to no change anyway.
 
Last edited:

DonutVikingChap

L5: Dapper Member
Mar 15, 2013
233
139
There is no problem then. The map is fully optimised. End of story.

To make this map run better I would have to basically have to remove what people love it for. So no.

Essentially, I value aesthetics over precious FPS where anything >60 is next to no change anyway.

I can tell you haven't tried 144Hz :)
 

Pocket

Half a Lambert is better than one.
aa
Nov 14, 2009
4,696
2,580
OK, so I pulled up the new map and ran around it and flew around it and turned on the FPS counter and experimented with mat_wireframe and uh, there are a few things I think could improve performance in some places, particularly where there's a lot of stuff still being rendered but not actually visible:

ONE: Seal your roofs with nodraw or something. Those areaportals you have stretched across the ceilings of the buildings aren't doing much, especially in the spawn building. Anything high up is still rendering when it shouldn't, particularly the props that form the outsides of the roofs. Which also means, you guessed it, the inside trim props are also visible from the outside, even from miles away. There should be enough room between them for a sliver of invisible brushwork. It might wreak havoc on the visleaf generation, but that should be preventable by surrounding the roof with a hint brush.

TWO: Your talk of "aggressive" LOD work made me assume that the roof props reduce to flat surfaces with painted-on AO at great distances. I was wrong. You really need to do this, even if you have to create an additional texture for each skin to make it work. I assume Source lets you set a custom distance for each LOD; even 2048, where players literally wouldn't be able to tell the difference at a glance, would be reasonable because of how much far away stuff is visible at any given time.

THREE: Fade distances. We need more of them. There's no reason some of these props need to be rendering from all the way on the other side of the map. I think you overestimate how much of your map is actually visible at one time from ground level or even the roofs they can stand on (except at mid). And people aren't going to notice a few missing trees when they're rocket jumping.

I realize that none of these are going to have a huge impact on performance in the worst spot, the upper floor of the far middle building facing the CP pagoda. But they should dramatically improve framerates in and around spawns at least.

And on a more minor note:

68D1717FBED5700CB681D443A038D8923A2C5AA9


This rock needs a big ol' occluder brush inside it.
 
Last edited:

Freyja

aa
Jul 31, 2009
2,994
5,813
That rock does have a big ol' occluder in it. But thank you, I will try to work onit for b3
 
Last edited:

A Boojum Snark

Toraipoddodezain Mazahabado
aa
Nov 2, 2007
4,775
7,670
While I have not seen the map in person, I would not think that rock is a place to have one. It doesn't look like it occupies a lot of screen space nor stays there very long. Occluders have a cost, and if they aren't reducing the workload enough to offset the overhead they become detrimental.
 

Pocket

Half a Lambert is better than one.
aa
Nov 14, 2009
4,696
2,580
That rock does have a big ol' occluder in it.
Well then it's not working. It's supposed to make props behind it disappear, and they don't.
 

Fruity Snacks

Creator of blackholes & memes. Destroyer of forums
aa
Sep 5, 2010
6,394
5,571
Well then it's not working. It's supposed to make props behind it disappear, and they don't.

If the model isn't fully covered according to vis, it will still render. If the occlude is rendering stuff, then it's just wasting power and giving a minor hit to performance.

(I learned this on backlot)
 

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
The quality of the trees is really letting this down now. Everything else is looking so fantastic.
I think the leaf planes on both types of tree, but particularly the cherry blossoms aren way too obvious and flat.

Then the lightingis horrible on the trees, you've got cherry blossom leaves that are pitch black while the leaves on the very top are over exposed thanks to the strong environment light. Fiddle with the options so that all the leaves are relatively uniformly lit.
 

Freyja

aa
Jul 31, 2009
2,994
5,813
I actually really like the shadow on the trees. I think it looks great, personally, that's why I haven't changed it. It makes them have depth and breaks up the colour. They wouldn't be uniformly lit in real life so why make them fullbright here?
 
Last edited:

YM

LVL100 YM
aa
Dec 5, 2007
7,135
6,056
I didn't mean fullbright. I said relatively uniform. The petals are light, fluffy and translucent, they let a lot of light through. Even at the bottom of a tree's canopy they'd still be getting a lot more light than yours are.
And to use your on words, they wouldn't be so dark in real life, so why have them so dark here?
 

Freyja

aa
Jul 31, 2009
2,994
5,813
That's probably true as B3's point is randomly broken (just stays locked), it's arena so it shouldn't be too big of an issue but recompiling fixed it (source engine?) so by next version it shoudl work.