Laguna Seca Version 2

Ladies and Gentlemen (at least the term "gentlemen" is used loosely..)

Version 2.21 info, released 6/29/2009

-Fixed a few roadtype surfaceType mistakes (in corner 6);
-Cones along the pit lane are much less annoying (don't hit them, though)

These alterations were actually done during the time leading up to the second rumble cup; just needed to finish a couple things & get it out.

Still to do:

-Maybe shift the control line some more in corner 11 to make the pits drivable (with the pax-curbs®™ there, though, I don't know if it's doable)
-whatever else I notice..

****Please remove previous versions manually****

Leo - This can go onto LoL for RLPAU to update. Thanks!

http://www.legacyoflies.com/devuploads/kenners/LagunaSecav2.redplug.zip

-K

Note:

My undying gratitude goes to Tell-san, slowDan, Ahruman, and all the others who have developed the tools I used. Especially slowDan, for his Blender python scripts (chicane exporter) and roadTyper, and Tell, for his modifications and continued development of RLPlist Road Editor. These tools are "freaking awesome"!

Kenners wrote:There are FPS issues at certain points.

Well, the work you've done on the track is great and I think it could be a wonderful Redline circuit... but for me it's utterly unplayable due to the frame rate problems. I'm running on good hardware here, which ironically seems to show up the performance dogs much more than lesser hardware.

The fences certainly aren't helping matters, but to me it seems that the enormous number of transparency-enabled trees are the biggest cause of the problem. I'm yo-yoing between 40 and 15 FPS, depending on how many trees and how much fence is visible. Bear in mind I average 65 FPS at Monaco and I can run almost every other track at a rock solid 75. I think you're going to have to re-think how to do the distant trees - peppering the landscape with those Y trees just isn't feasible.

But... take heart, you deserve much kudos for the work you've done so far!

djpimley wrote:

Kenners wrote:There are FPS issues at certain points.

Well, the work you've done on the track is great and I think it could be a wonderful Redline circuit... but for me it's utterly unplayable due to the frame rate problems. I'm running on good hardware here, which ironically seems to show up the performance dogs much more than lesser hardware.

The fences certainly aren't helping matters, but to me it seems that the enormous number of transparency-enabled trees are the biggest cause of the problem. I'm yo-yoing between 40 and 15 FPS, depending on how many trees and how much fence is visible. Bear in mind I average 65 FPS at Monaco and I can run almost every other track at a rock solid 75. I think you're going to have to re-think how to do the distant trees - peppering the landscape with those Y trees just isn't feasible.

But... take heart, you deserve much kudos for the work you've done so far!

I deleted the foliage from the mapinfo (11 models), and FPS is still lowest in the same places; before & after turn 11, coming around turn 2, going thru the corkscrew, and between turns 9 & 10. But, it does go up to around 30FPS in those areas. Fencing is next..

Cheers,

Kenners

Looks brilliant, good work!

djpimley wrote:I'm running on good hardware here, which ironically seems to show up the performance dogs much more than lesser hardware.

That's a strange one. I'm getting a reasonably consistent 30 FPS with my (ahem) low end graphics card and settings.

There must be a cheaper way to cover the hills in trees than repeating the rather nice model you have.

slowDan wrote:

djpimley wrote:I'm running on good hardware here, which ironically seems to show up the performance dogs much more than lesser hardware.

That's a strange one. I'm getting a reasonably consistent 30 FPS with my (ahem) low end graphics card and settings.

My normal experience is 75 FPS with all the graphics settings at maximum. I think having all that eye-candy switched on makes matters much worse when a badly behaving track or car is introduced, so I notice a much more drastic loss of performance than people running on lesser hardware with many graphics settings down a few notches. There is reasoning to my statement, not just trying to rub your "low-end" noses in it.

djpimley wrote:not just trying to rub your "low-end" noses in it.

Oh I'm fully aware of the pure horsepower of an intel gma 950 graphics chip!

Its just odd that I don't seem to get any patches where it slows down any more than usual. Until I get out of the car for a look around, then it takes a hit when there are huge amounts of trees in view.

I get a mixture of 35-75 fps except at the two westward pieces (>22 fps). MBP with all settings at maximum. The trees didn't cause a drop at my combination. Having lots of them in sight I get 75 fps also.

(But I get sick looking down through these holes on ground. )

slowDan wrote:I'm getting a reasonably consistent 30 FPS with my (ahem) low end graphics card and settings.

There seems to be a big difference in how badly computers with NVidia cards handle transparency compared to Intel GMA / ATI.

Kenners wrote:remove the chain link fences around the stands

No need to remove them, just disable alpha blending. At least my eyes appreciate the extra geometry, even if it doesn't look completely real.

Kenners, it may also be an idea to show us a screenshot from a version of the track that uses the high-poly "fractal lollipop trees" with alpha blending off instead of the transparent Y trees. Just so that people know their options. I agree that the transparent Y-trees look more real, but I don't think my NVidia 8800GT can handle the amount of transparency that they require.

Also, you should add the following to your to-do list: Remove all polygons from the treelines that are either below the ground or in any other way not visible in line of sight during racing. There's quite a lot of them to remove, and it should improve performance quite a bit.

I don't think you need to worry too much about texture size, that's pretty scaleable and can be adjusted in each user's graphics preferences. Focus on non-customizable and non-avoidable problems first.

On a brighter note: I really like the environment settings. The whole thing looks superb, too bad that we can't race on the track in it's current form.

C14ru5 wrote:

slowDan wrote:I'm getting a reasonably consistent 30 FPS with my (ahem) low end graphics card and settings.

There seems to be a big difference in how badly computers with NVidia cards handle transparency compared to Intel GMA / ATI.

Kenners wrote:remove the chain link fences around the stands

No need to remove them, just disable alpha blending. At least my eyes appreciate the extra geometry, even if it doesn't look completely real.

Kenners, it may also be an idea to show us a screenshot from a version of the track that uses the high-poly "fractal lollipop trees" with alpha blending off instead of the transparent Y trees. Just so that people know their options. I agree that the transparent Y-trees look more real, but I don't think my NVidia 8800GT can handle the amount of transparency that they require.

Also, you should add the following to your to-do list: Remove all polygons from the treelines that are either below the ground or in any other way not visible in line of sight during racing. There's quite a lot of them to remove, and it should improve performance quite a bit.

I don't think you need to worry too much about texture size, that's pretty scaleable and can be adjusted in each user's graphics preferences. Focus on non-customizable and non-avoidable problems first.

On a brighter note: I really like the environment settings. The whole thing looks superb, too bad that we can't race on the track in it's current form.

heh.. You wouldn't believe how many of those treeline polys I've already culled. I'll do some more, for sure. Also, with the Google Earth image, I can place those trees right where the green blobs are on the image, & have fewer, & see what people think.

I've already removed a bunch of fencing.. And I think it looks better that way. And, it's helped FPS some already. We'll see; on the stands, I may model some rails to keep them looking "right".

Until later,

Kenners

works like a charm here stuck on 75 the whole lap ... nice work so far!

note: shall i update legacy with this, or wait for further touch ups?

this is a completely new Laguna Seca experience. I had a try with an american muscle car like the CTS-V and the track give to this car a new feeling...

The performance on my GeForce 8800GT are not good as I am used, but im changing the video card with the Radeon HD 4870, so i will resolve definetely the trasparency issues.

Oh man what a gorgeous track !
I tested it on my mac mini core duo - most settings low.

Alone with a pimped audi i got from 10 to 70 fps (10 when I crash in the northernmost curve and see all the track while coming back on the tarmac - otherwise it's rather 15 to 70). Mostly 15 to 45. Good
Driving a gallardo with 11 other random cars in front of me I have from 5 to 15 fps, mostly 12. Ouch !

I hope gaining 10 fps is possible ?

C14ru5 wrote:There seems to be a big difference in how badly computers with NVidia cards handle transparency compared to Intel GMA / ATI.

I'm inclined to think that Redline's graphics engine is doing something very bad that Intel and ATI chipsets can handle but NVidia doesn't like at all. Remember the fuss over the Shiawassee Valley time trial? That track has very minimal transparency, a similar amount to many other tracks that play perfectly fine. We know Redline's roadtype rendering is terrible and I think the same bad code is affecting transparency rendering - Redline is doing something very wrong and NVidia cards can't cope with it.

If someone provides me with benchmarks that contradict these, I'll eat my hat. Until then I'm pointing my finger at Redline.

I'll back down on my beforementioned wish for high-poly trees without transparency. They honestly don't look that good. I had another idea, though.

Do we really need the treelines at all? Take a look at this before/after picture:
(I used dontDrawRoad 1 to show the transparent polygons that you don't see while racing)



I deleted all treeline materials, and saw a great performance increase. The only place I kept a treeline was in LSFoliage10.mdl, where I kept half of the treeline (the material that uses TSH_LAGA_D_LagSec.png), as that area (centered in the picture below) looked completely barren without it. What do you think? The area to the right had four treelines on top of each other where half of the polygons were below the line of sight, and I don't really miss any of them. If you didn't notice until I mentioned it, then you don't miss them either.



Final example of materials that don't need transparency:
(I'm not going to tell you where, just to prove my point)



The basic rule when killing your darlings: Try to write down a list off the top of your head that contains all objects in a track. The amount of objects that you forgot to write down equals the amount of objects that you can remove. (But which of the objects to remove is not specified by this rule)

C14ru5 wrote:Do we really need the treelines at all?

You're right, it looks perfectly fine without tree lines. In fact I prefer it - more definition of the trees against the sky.

C14ru5 wrote:Final example of materials that don't need transparency

Disagree there. That's what, 9 quads / 18 triangles? I'd rather see objects simply removed than degraded. Just my tuppence though - it's your baby.

Great suggestions all, so far. Here's what I've done so far, and the results..

-Removed chain link fences on the grandstands (opposite the big pit building, and by turn 4);

-Removed chain link fencing in many areas, generally leaving them where there are tire stacks;

-Removed chain link fence on the back of the pit building (now you can just fall right off the upper walkway);

-Removed a few of the road cones (they'll be .ents later anyways);

-Redid the foliage. I left the treelines, removed the Y-shaped trees, and put back in the full 200-poly trees, with no transparency.

My Mac is a first-model Mac Pro with an ATi X1900XT, everything set to max (by the way, I absolutely think DJ is right about the nVidia vs ATi thing)..

And I'm now never any less than 28 FPS by myself, and to about 12FPS with 12 '54 beetles in front of me. FWIW, the removed fencing itself brought significant improvements (just not through the corkscrew..)

I'm going to follow C's advice and play around more with the foliage, delete the treelines, try a couple other combinations of things. I'm anxious to model the track, see what that does to FPS, too.

Cheers,

Kenners

Kenners wrote:[I] put back in the full 200-poly trees, with no transparency

Eh, that's OK, I guess? But I thought I was the only one on the planet that supported that idea, and now that I've gotten comfortable with the transparent Y trees, you choose to try my faster but uglier solution anyway? I'm sorry if my opinion turned on a dime there.

Well, at least in this way you all get to see what I was thinking, and maybe it'll spawn some new great ideas about how we can improve performance without sacrificing visual detail. All ideas will come in handy for later track conversions...

numTypes 790

Anyone want to continue writing roadtypes by hand?

C14ru5 wrote:
Eh, that's OK, I guess? But I thought I was the only one on the planet that supported that idea, and now that I've gotten comfortable with the transparent Y trees, you choose to try my faster but uglier solution anyway? I'm sorry if my opinion turned on a dime there.

No prob; I wanted to see for myself what it'd look like. How do I post a screenshot here?

C14ru5 wrote:

numTypes 790

Anyone want to continue writing roadtypes by hand?

When you're going from a model, sD's chicane roadtype exporter is kickass. I learned a sh*tload of tricks to get it done quicker; Redline certainly doesn't seem to care how many roadtypes one uses. But - Not a thousand of them!

In general, though, that process isn't suited to making a track.

-K

Kenners wrote:How do I post a screenshot here?

After cropping your screenshot and other adjustments, post a reply and click the "Host an image" button (free registration required)



Choose the image from the file navigation window that appears when you click "Choose", resize if necessary (I usually do all that stuff beforehand), and "Host it"

The following panel can be confusing. The first two text fields contain code that you can copy and paste directly into your reply. (Use Command-C, or at least I can't get the "Copy" buttons to work.) The last text field contains the image URL itself - I usually select and copy the last text field to the clipboard, then click the Image button (orange highlight) and paste the URL into the text field that appears. Note: The "Upload" link brings you back to the initial file chooser.

Wow....this completely escaped me until today!!! Admittedly Monaco and the Glen are both great too, but could this now be the best-modelled Redline track ever???? Nice job!! No FPS issue here either, although I haven't tried Multiplayer yet. On a related note....I've forgotten how to get FPS displayed on-screen... How do you do that????

leoantix wrote:works like a charm here stuck on 75 the whole lap ... nice work so far!

note: shall i update legacy with this, or wait for further touch ups?

Sorry for the delay..

Don't post yet. Before releasing onto LoL, I want to have it more done.

Cheers,

Kenners

Battlewagon wrote:Wow....this completely escaped me until today!!! Admittedly Monaco and the Glen are both great too, but could this now be the best-modelled Redline track ever???? Nice job!! No FPS issue here either, although I haven't tried Multiplayer yet. On a related note....I've forgotten how to get FPS displayed on-screen... How do you do that????

Open "Redline Preferences" in your user folder/Library/Preferences; add:

performanceStats 1

somewhere in there; save, relaunch Redline.

Thanks for your input; Please remember: even though this has been a lot of work for me, the VAST majority was done by C's acquaintance (his handle escapes me) for rFactor. I just took the reverse-engineered track and have been re-assembling it for Redline.

I'd love to have a crack at Nordschlieffe (sp??) too.. And, if Mid Ohio can ever be found, that one, too..

Cheers,

Kenners

Kenners wrote:the VAST majority was done by C's acquaintance (his handle escapes me) for rFactor

His name is Com8, and make sure that you don't release the plug on LoL unless you give him credit! (At least in a stowed-away readme file, but preferably in the splash screen, which is both more visible and more practical)

C14ru5 wrote:

Kenners wrote:the VAST majority was done by C's acquaintance (his handle escapes me) for rFactor

His name is Com8, and make sure that you don't release the plug on LoL unless you give him credit! (At least in a stowed-away readme file, but preferably in the splash screen, which is both more visible and more practical)

Hey, can I have you do up a splash screen?

thx,

K

I can probably do that, no need to do anything more than take a screenshot and slap some text on there. Right now, however, my mind is all focused on finishing my Master's Thesis (four weeks left...) so it's a little hard for me to promise anything.