Level Design [Help] Intersection vs. Vertex Editing

[PotentiaLeaena]

Just curious which is cheaper to use?

 

[Murphy]

They're both free.

I honestly don't know what you mean. Care to elaborate?

 

[PotentiaLeaena]

They're both free.

I honestly don't know what you mean. Care to elaborate?

Okay, yeah, I probably could've worded that better.

I'm working on a very large map that has a lot of slanted hallways, etc. and I'm particularly concerned with optimization due to it's size. So I was curious, in terms of resources used, which was 'cheaper'?

Here's a picture of one of the areas I blocked out real quick:

http://leaenaslair.site.nfoservers.com/Map.pnghttp://leaenaslair.site.nfoservers.com/Map.png

Not sure if I'm even doing this right to begin with, and I know I'm going to run into issues with textures aligning if I do things the way I did there, but it was more a mental sketch than anything right now.

 

[Murphy]

I don't think the engine cares how a brush came to be as long as it's clean.

I still don't know what difference you're expecting this to make.

 

[PotentiaLeaena]

Nevermind, I think I managed to do what I wanted with the 2D Shape Editor.

For some reason I thought there'd be a difference in polygon count depending on the manner in which the brush was made, but I think I was just tired and confusing myself as well.

I did notice that intersection doesn't always seem to create a 'clean' brush. If you look at the image I linked above I think there are extra vertices (on the far back wall especially) that didn't really need to be there..

Would it be preferable to use a static mesh, or can I get away with using the 2D shape editor for curved hallways, etc?
​

 

[Murphy]

You should probably make anything curved a staticmesh.
The angles cut through your geometry (because the engine is weird) and it can cause problems later on. But perhaps more importantly: the way BSP receives light it makes corners very obvious so it's not going to look round.

StaticMeshes can smooth out the lighting via smoothing groups.


Complex shapes made with the 2d Shape Editor often have extra edges and vertices as well that wouldn't be needed to complete the shape but are there anyway. I would be careful with those because they have a tendency to cause cuts.
It's probably best to stick to cubes, where it's reasonable. E.g. when making a floor plan of an office floor, use individual cubes instead of one uber-complex 2d Shape Editor brush. Performance may be roughly the same but it's safer in the long run, in my experience.

 

[PotentiaLeaena]

You should probably make anything curved a staticmesh.
The angles cut through your geometry (because the engine is weird) and it can cause problems later on. But perhaps more importantly: the way BSP receives light it makes corners very obvious so it's not going to look round.

StaticMeshes can smooth out the lighting via smoothing groups.


Complex shapes made with the 2d Shape Editor often have extra edges and vertices as well that wouldn't be needed to complete the shape but are there anyway. I would be careful with those because they have a tendency to cause cuts.
It's probably best to stick to cubes, where it's reasonable. E.g. when making a floor plan of an office floor, use individual cubes instead of one uber-complex 2d Shape Editor brush. Performance may be roughly the same but it's safer in the long run, in my experience.

Okay, I'll definitely keep that in mind. At this point, I think I'm going to have to model a static mesh based on what my goals are for this map.

I wish I could do everything with cubes, but the map I'm working on is akin to a large underground subway system, and I don't think it would have the same feel if I did.

(Reference image: http://englishrussia.com/images/kiev/kiev-3.jpg[url]http://englishrussia.com/images/kiev/kiev-3.jpg[/URL])

 

[Murphy]

Ooh, looks like a cool project! Good luck with it!