Weird graphic issue in battles

[Lord_Calidor]

Hi, I've noticed that units, when looking in extreme close up (maximum zoom in-game), lose details on textures even when slightly zoomed out. It's like they switch to lower mip map level (normal texture is 1024x1024, next lower mipmap level is 512x512) too soon. I'm talking abt few meters here. Look at these pics:

Here, you can see the difference between soldiers in first and second rows. Easiest to notice is difference in mail structure. First row is ok, second is just a grey blob. On this distance, normal map is also mipmapped, so the 2nd row looks like they are from plastic, and roughness is virtually non existant.
(be aware that some detail is lost coz of jpg compression)


Here's the same scene, slightly zoomed out. Now, even the guys in first row are blurred.


And the same, zoomed a bit further out. At this distance, models completely lose detail. Face is just a pink surface with some shadows, and mail & tunics are almost completely smoothed, without any texture.


In my opinion, mip mapping kicks in way too early. Just for test, I made a texture without any mip maps, and the models were transparent (meaning, no texture was applied) when standing in the second row of the formation. Only the first row was visible, which means that only at the extreme close up game is using the max. texture size of 1024x1024. Even at a slightest zoom-out, it switches to the 512x512 texture.

My specs are - Kingdoms with 1.5 patch, Stainless Steel 6.1, all graphic options on max except ground & grass, no AA, 4x AF (its the same at all AA & AF levels), shader 2, texture size highest, resolution 1024x768.

I have ATI Radeon 1950 Pro with 256 MB, latest Catalyst Omega drivers (same happens with official ATI Cat's), with texture mipmaping at the highest setting (best quality).

Medieval2 config is stock Kingdoms cfg file.

Is this normal game behaviour? Can you guys compare this and report, or give any suggestions how to increase the distance at which mipmapping kicks in?

Thnx a bunch.

[irishron]

The zoom levels is controlled in the animation folders of which I believe the main one being battle_models.modelsdb. For more info, search the modding forums, especially the subforum on skins and textures. They can give you more difinitive answers than we can.

[B. Ward]

All take a screen from some units of mine. I'll edit this and see

*edit* I don't really too much of a loss of detail within the first few rows of soldiers. Naturally I'd expect somewhat of a loss as it goes further back. But not as much.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Lord_Calidor]

Hmm, seems like you have larger threshold for mipmapping - looks like your first & second row are ok, but the third row uses lower res texture. What gfx card you have, and what are the options in it's drivers' control panel?
Also, with current PC power, I think we could use a bit longer thresholds, without significant performance loss. This is tied to applying the textures to the same models, and depends mainly on the video memory quantity on the gfx. Today's cards with 512 MB or more can handle this without a hitch. If only we could find out how to increase it.

@ Irishron, I'm familiar with modeldb file, as I've done some modeling myself (look my sig). That file only controls which 3D model to use at a specific distance from a viewpoint, however all those models (called lod0, lod1, etc...) use the same texture file.

[B. Ward]

Yea the texture quality does seem at a lower resolution once you get past the 3rd and some of the 4th rows. The system that picture was taken from has an 8800GTS 320MB. It's from my media center pc in the living room, but the card is decent enough to have just about everything on high at 1680 x 1050. Maybe I'll try some different render settings and see if they make a difference.

[irishron]

No need to bark at me because I can't see through your sig. I was just trying to help.

[Lord_Calidor]

No need to bark at me because I can't see through your sig. I was just trying to help.

I'm sry friend, it was not my intention to sound harsh. Apologies, once again.

[irishron]

Apology accepted.

[Martin N]

Well, its the same as rome, the lower detail your units have the further you zoom the blurrier they get, remedy this if you can by highering the Detail, if you cant try lower the resolution/unit size and try it if it bothers you so much, personally i dont see a problem at all, Medieval 2 units are not perfect, maybe its a mod your using ?

[Lord_Calidor]

Well, it's not such a problem per se, coz most of the time I'm controling the battle with the zoomed out view, and also I wasn't aware of this until I got to modding and making models/textures. But just by knowing that it switches to the lower-res textures so soon makes me wanna "fix" this.

If anyone with some modding background would like to get busy, here's a little test. Convert any unit's texture to DDS, open it in PS then save it again in DDS, but this time choosing don't generate MIP MAPs. Then convert it back in texture format and start the game, custom battle, gradually zoom in to the unit and make a screenshot when texture starts being visible (unit will be invisible at the zoomed out view, coz the engine can't find lower res mipmap texture).

In my case, with completely zoomed-in view, only a few of the soldiers in first row are visible. Some soldier to the side, and all others behind them, are invisible.

[Argent Usher]

During my work for RH i also had to determine the mipmap 1 (the first big one ) is only seen if the view is very close and so mostly we see the second and third in the battleview. I had a chat about the mipmap generating with Makayane see here:


A.U.: Can you write me the best settings for saving the .dds files for the mipmap and normal map (nvidia tools). I found out i gain a better result if i generate the mip maps, reopen my new file and use for the second and third mip maps the transform tools of GIMP or PS. If i sharpen the second then the change of the textures (very close to close view) in the game looks smoother but maybe it's just a illusion.

makanyane: I've not tried messing around with that just let it generate all MIP maps in the dds file (saving as DTX5) - would be interested to see your system working - can you make duplicate unit so you can get two of same thing (renamed) into same side in battle and show one with that method standing next to one without? That should prove if difference is noticeable and worth doing.....

A.U.: :hmmm:Making a video to prove it is quite expensive. But if you reopen a dds file and shrink the mipmap1 (50%) and paste it as a layer (right pos)- you should see easily the difference if you swap the layer.


Well today, I use only the autogenerate function but perhaps you give it a try to make the mipmaps with the transform tool (shrink 50% - 25% - etc.). I use sharpen soft in the sharpening option (nvidia tool plugin) but i am sure in the web you can find more about the settings.

Here is another strange thing:





The distance is irrelevant here (mipmap) - your texture is very blurry red arrows but the texture looks fine blue arrows therefore it must not be a mipmap error.


Regards A.U.

[Lord_Calidor]

Thnx AU, a worthy post it is.
I'm not sure how to manually edit the lower mipmap levels and make it stick, as the DDS plugin will re-generate & overwrite them when I save the file, right?

However, I've found a workaround of the problem - actually using the texture with more coarse mail pattern (if it's too fine/sharp, rings will get fused in the 512^2 texture and cause the grey blob effect), and generating the mipmaps using the box or point method (in the save DDS options window).

But as I said, it's only the workaround. It would be great if we find a solution for this, so we can increase the distance at which mipmaps switch from 1024 to 512 (at least to include the whole unit).

If anyone knows smth abt this, or have indepth knowledge of M2TW gfx engine, now would be a great time to chime in.