DHMP (DOOM High-res Model Project)

15791011

Comments

  • They are models that could potentially be used in Dday once the new model renderer is implemented, so I figure I might as well link to this thread on Doomworld.

    http://www.doomworld.com/vb/doom-editin ... d-project/
  • Yeah, neat stuff on that commando and other demons. If we get decals or damage stages and different animations depending on how it's killed, that would make it perfect. Got to have that to make dealing with it in game any fun.

    Of course if the models are done and not put in a pack to be used, it would be for nothing. So hopefully it enters a pack.
  • Well, the reason behind posting that, was more a probably unrealistic idea of everybody joining forces to make a new model pack, rather than duplicating each others work.

    Something I've been wondering; what draws Doom model makers toward working on the monsters first and Heretic, HeXen model makers to working on non-monster mobjs first?

    I imagine that may be a very awkwardly worded question there :p

    I suppose Doom's monsters are iconic in and out of the games (i.e not every model made is nesscerilly designed for going in the game). While Heretic and HeXen's maps tend to feature a lot more non-monster mobj's in them than Doom.
  • Considering all the activity in that thread, I think it is safe to say the author intends to make it playable in game and may make his own pack or individual monster packs. Hopefully he won't allow the project to die before he finishes it. That would be my main concern because people have a habit of starting something and just letting it die. Often WIP of mods in general don't get finished, I notice. Like in that FreeSpace Open forum when one starts a ship model and it either takes forever to finish or it dies. Quite upsetting on those occasions when they get very close to finishing the model and then you don't hear from it again, which is a waste.
  • hello i made something basic that i do not intend to finish manly due to my inexperience in modeling but maybe someone else can finish it and texture it. http://nikulas.webs.com/Doom%20Lamp.objDoom%20Lamp%20wip%203.png
  • I don't think it's realistic to assume that we are all going to join forces. Me and KuriKai are working together on a pack, but s13n1 has a different style and we've already duplicated a lot of stuff already if we were to join forces. Most of these people are doing it for different reasons and they all tend to have different ways of looking at how to do this. Even with me and KuriKai, I tend to think that the models should look as cool as possible, but KuriKai is all "Sprites are Gospel".

    The only way I think you could have different people working on something like that would be if you made it a structured mod like Ascension or the Phobos project with a team structure including an art director who has final say on what gets included. We had a 'freeform' structure on the Duke HRP and loads of stuff got done, but it didn't really hang together as a whole. Even with the Ascension project, they pinky doesn't look like it came from the same pack as the other critters.

    *ahem* I've already made a few Heretic models. I contributed a few to Psychikon's pack. I'm also working on a Golem model.
  • i do see your point but as it stands now i am leaving it up for any one who wants to work on it since i can't do anything more with it. lol
  • @ Gorgon
    Your model have too much polys for a game asset. Try to to shrink it down to 300-500 triangles.
  • More polys is good and with modern computers, it shouldn't be a problem as long as the code is modern too.
  • You are totally wrong gary. The modern games have even more concern about art optimization than before. We (game developers) have to push graphics to sky-high on the same or even less powerful (PS4, Xbox One) hardware.
    In this example (click to enlarge) you can see the props models for the one of PS4 games Infamous Second Son.
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQkxBL6VsgnpmTnga5YrQGgStaLlzROjhExPUrUKquORhcJnz2VeA
    That pile of props in sum have less polycount than one Gordon's lamp stand.

    The geometry have only one purpose - to have a clean silhouette to cut the model from background. All other stuff left to textures and rendering system.
    The Gordon's model have a lot of small faces in the stand and in the cap that should be less than one pixel size in the most of game situations. Even at this very close up image I barely read some polys.
    In the game you never have a chance to see them, but they still consume the power.

    For that model the cylinder must to have 8 (Okay 12 :) ) sides maximum at 0 LOD. The cap and the stand have 3 cuts for curvature, and the rings a separated from the main cylinder.
  • Hmm, on one forum (for Freespace 2 Open)I recall someone saying that textures these days were the main issues, like huge textures. Of course they did have poly limits on ships, though they bumped them up from before. I would think that polys weren't a big deal these days since I thought that even back in the PS2 days, a video game character could have millions, unless I misread since I think more recently when I read about specs that it wasn't that many for PS2 or GameCube. I recall that generation of consoles in the specs supposedly supporting millions of polys way back then.

    Of course I know that normal maps is the high performance alternative to having way too many polys. So even if I got the best video card and combined it with my Vishera 8-core 4.0GHz processor with 16GB system RAM, and my SSD, the performance would still be poor if not careful on polys?
  • Yes, we can render more polys nowadays, but each polygon must be placed for a reason. We could save these polys for more detailed character design, geometric door handles, instead of drawn on the texture, more dense terrain topology and more detailed grass/trees (which are very polygon consuming). Even those polygons are fast degradate when moves far from the camera because of bunch of LODs.
    There are lot of rules about creating game assets, and lot of good articles in the internet. That's one of those https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Level_of_detail
  • veirdo wrote:
    Yes, we can render more polys nowadays, but each polygon must be placed for a reason. We could save these polys for more detailed character design, geometric door handles, instead of drawn on the texture, more dense terrain topology and more detailed grass/trees (which are very polygon consuming). Even those polygons are fast degradate when moves far from the camera because of bunch of LODs.
    There are lot of rules about creating game assets, and lot of good articles in the internet. That's one of those https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Level_of_detail
    that's a really good link. cheers for that
  • i used basic stuff i found in blender and your saying it has too many? well i can't argue one way or the other but i have seen stuff in games that have hi-poly counts or it could just be the normal maps. one game i know is Wallenstein the new order but then agen i do not know too much about this stuff.
  • For that model i used 224 triangles. That's enough.
    It's just an example, so I didn't much care about texture, clean uv's and other stuff
    colua_frame.png
  • that looks good and i can see what you did there to get that. i might try to fix up my model a bit and hopefully get proper uv maps.
  • You can't assume that everyone has a wonderful computer. As veirdo says, you have to think of the whole scene. It's not just your lamp, but all the other props, monsters and map geometry in a scene. It's much better to optimize your models and be able to have more of them in a scene. This especially applies to games like Doom, which were designed for sprites and have loads of monsters on the screen at one time.

    There is an art to optimizing meshes for games. Normal maps have let us be more brutal about optimizing polys, not let us off optimizing all together :D
  • I'm sure they can have different versions with different res and polygon counts so people can have a choice to download the better ones if they can handle it.

    Also if you want to game, then you got to invest into decent hardware. No point in gaming if you don't bother to at least have standard hardware. Even modern standard hardware can be had for a decent price for those who have 10 year old hardware. For people who keep around a decade old hardware that is low end, they may as well not play until they upgrade since if it is that important to them, they would at least get standard modern hardware, not necessarily high end. Also keeping old hardware around has a higher failure rate in which case they wished they upgraded.

    Of course having different detailed versions of the same model is a good thing so people with inferior systems and download the inferior version of the model and people with high end can download the super detailed version.

    And yes, optimizing is great as long as we don't lose detail, or at least isn't noticed.
  • Looks kind of cartoony, but neat to see in action.
  • what are you expecting to see?
  • Mancubus looks fantastic! Only thing I don't like is maybe too obvious dark lines on his body - I know that this lines are on original model, but in game they are less visible.
    Last time I have vein for making Imp (I totally redesign my old model) so I took I little break from head model.
    There is a lot more to do with it, but here is how it look on that moment. Teeth don't have material and there are some bugs here and there - this is still wip.

    http://i.imgur.com/oqNRPGx.jpg

    http://i.imgur.com/cUNazlX.jpg

    http://i.imgur.com/uI9GAs9.jpg

    http://i.imgur.com/4ZAdZgL.jpg
  • Don't take this the wrong way Reinchard but I think you need to take a step back and consider focusing on form before moving on to micro-scale surface details (like veins).

    In the early stages of producing a model such as this, the most important aspect of describing a biological entity are the large-scale body "masses", muscle definition, bone structure and the overall silhouette of the model. The latter being especially important as it is this (and diffuse colourization) which will convey the character of the entity, regardless of its distance from the viewer.

    Concentrating on these aspects will also help in the long run because making large-scale changes down the line will almost certainly lead to destruction of micro-scale details, which you'd end up having to recreate.

    This Imp model is certainly a good start but the lack of definition with regard to it's body mass and silhouette make the model difficult to "read", visually speaking. It appears more like an amorphous blob of roughly humanoid proportions with some spikes sticking out.
  • wow. are you saying that this can't be done? I thought it was probably the best ever emp.
  • Not at all. I offered constructive criticism from one artist to another. My intention is not to detract from the work done nor dissuade Reinchard from continuing with it.

    Feedback will help him to refine his craft and grow as an artist/content creator. It is hard to develop further if all one hears is positive comments.
  • KuriKai wrote:
    what are you expecting to see?
    Maybe something more realistic style. I just found this: http://s185.photobucket.com/user/Gruson ... 8.jpg.html

    Maybe something from here: http://www.doomworld.com/vb/doom-editin ... project/5/ or just real art style

    But yours is still a good replacement to the existing one and looks more real. this is a real style for the Pinky: https://www.flickr.com/photos/doomhd/16446243701/

    that is the detail that seems more real and not cellshaded.

    Reinhard has the preferred detail style, IMO.
  • I think DaniJ may have right. I'm working on it for so long, that I don't see this objectively. But what we see here may be caused more by render then model itself. Here is how look hipoly version (this one from previous post is lowpoly with baked normals on them):

    http://i.imgur.com/hbUHZFs.png

    http://i.imgur.com/0Pulj7X.png

    http://i.imgur.com/DT6MQOm.png

    Don't look at legs, missing materials in eyes and mouth areas and teeth - is still far from end.
  • I'm just talking about the realistic style is all. I like it. Without those teeth, it looks like an old man. :P Maybe a marshmallow head too
  • Here is the low poly bake of the Cyberdemon. No colours yet, but they w will come.

    cybesbake2small.jpg
  • Seeing him from the back, I'm personally not 100% sold on the waist on your model. The waist of the original sprite looks so narrow that one can seemingly see the front wires, and through gaps in them, from the back (frames B5 and D5).

    Obviously, the model will not match the sprite 100% though.
Sign In or Register to comment.