Ok so basically, I’m trying to make a huge pile of gold…
currently that huge pile is a bunch of unions and I want to know how (or if) I can make that into a mesh
(I should also note that I just want to fill it half way)
currently that huge pile is a bunch of unions and I want to know how (or if) I can make that into a mesh
2 Likes
Once you are done with the gold, export it to blender and re-import the whole thing as one mesh… it should help lag since the inner gold pieces wont have any triangles the way the unions do currently.
5 Likes
Hey @zachary108181!
The definitive solution to having the illusion of lots of coins without spamming 1000 parts is to represent a larger yield artistically.
Example: Pet Sim X
What they did exactly?
They took a higher detailed model and they baked the details of that model onto a lower triangle mesh and then stylized it accordingly. They went as far to delete the bottom faces to maximize performance. This is the way to do large amounts of gold without compromising on parts.
As for @RMofSBI’s response:
“Once you are done with the gold, export it to blender and re-import the whole thing as one mesh… it should help lag since the inner gold pieces wont have any triangles the way the unions do currently.”
This is completely fallacious. The root cause of poor performance described by Zachary revolves around the players’ need to render 1000+ parts and the compositional triangles that follow. Throwing all those parts into blender, and reimporting them as one object does not solve or diminish the gross triangle count, & asking someone who I’d assume is very new to blender that exasperates the problem.
Your solution of “export it to blender and re-import the whole thing as one mesh” justified by “it should help lag since the inner gold pieces wont have any triangles” is completely wrong. Blender does not take out the inner triangles at all by default. What you’re describing has a workflow and you haven’t mentioned that at all. You’re essentially asking him to export a triangle dense mesh that isn’t a “game ready asset”
TLDR:
Importing 1000+ objects (whatever the amount they’re using to create the goldpile) and exporting them as one object is NOT optimization. Don’t give people solutions that don’t work.
Disclaimer
While my solution is harder to reach especially if you’re new to 3D art it is going to take you a lot farther if you reach for it. Good luck and I hope to see you post again!
2 Likes
I got it down but thanks for the suggestion, I’m def going to do that next time lol
2 Likes
Although i get every word you’re saying this statement that you lead off with is completely wrong. Asking someone who wants to make a giant pot of gold coins to instead make one “artistically” large coin instead, to create an illusion of wealth in the game is not a solution, but an artistic endeavor. Why would you assume the OP wants a few giant coins instead of hundreds of small ones? He could easily easily have just made 5 large coins by scaling his one coin and be done with it… but he didn’t… he asked for a way to optimize his current artistic choice to have hundreds of small coins.
That being said, I agree my answer was short and in haste, but you didn’t see the intent. Which was to guide a fairly new user into the realm of Blender without explaining them the details of what is actually entailed. That usually pushes new people away from trying Blender actually. Had the OP asked for a better way to optimize their existing Blender object, ofcourse I would have gone into the length details of how to optimize the mesh and remove the triangles, but that doesnt help the OP in the short run because its too advanced for them at this stage.
And as you can see from the final solution in the video, the OP chose to keep the thousands of coins, because that was the original artistic attempt… not make a few giant coins like half the useless simulators which actually lack artistic creativity.
Lastly, there is some integrity to my statement that one mesh will certainly outperform 1000 unions… any experience with unions at all will show you that just ONE bad union will compromise your performance, let alone 1000… meshes dont have those same issues.
1 Like
The name of the post is “How would I make this less laggy”
Your solution fails this completely. Saying that, “one mesh will certainly outperform 1000 unions” as a justification by relativity shows how short sighted your answer is. The point of this forum is to provide the best solution to the post, not the easiest, your solution is moot.
Consider the fundamentals
What causes poor player performance in poor builds?
Triangle density,
Proximity of geometry relative to one another,
Amount of moving geometry,
and collision fidelity & cast shadows.
Does your solution satisfy all four of these fundamentals?
-
Triangle Density
You’re importing many objects into blender and exporting one triangle dense mesh. The end result is not performant. -
Geometry Proximity
You didn’t mention this at all and don’t pay respect to how much a player can render in one scene. Spamming triangles in front of a players’ camera like you’re describing with your solution taxed performance. -
Moving Geometry
Does not apply. -
Collision Fidelity
You haven’t even mentioned collision fidelity of cast shadow. That would grant a great uplift to performance if the player doesn’t have to render collisions nor generated shadows.
Full stop: Stop trying to justify your answer as expedient if the totality of it is:
“export it to blender and re-import the whole thing as one mesh… it should help lag since the inner gold pieces wont have any triangles the way the unions do currently.”
It’s simpler, more achievable but totally useless information. It by definition does not fulfill the title of this post. The amount of triangles before and after ARE THE SAME. What was your optimization?
Solutions
Solutions are pathways to a problem, I just presented one that fulfilled his title. If he wanted he could have also created a scene in blender with lots of coins, and baked the normals onto a plane and use that with a couple outcropping of actual coins. That’d be far more performant.
Your solution does not fulfill his question nor an introductory gateway into blender. It’s a quick fix that doesn’t teach him anything other than, wow I can use blender in this way to bypass learning it.
1 Like
And what was your solution? To copy 5 coins from pet simulator?
Spend more time offering solutions than criticizing others’ solutions.
My solutions:
Solution A: (The most optimized)
The definitive solution to having the illusion of lots of coins without spamming 1000 parts is to represent a larger yield artistically.
Explanation:
They took a higher detailed model and they baked the details of that model onto a lower triangle mesh and then stylized it accordingly. They went as far to delete the bottom faces to maximize performance. This is the way to do large amounts of gold without compromising on parts.
Solution B: (Moderately optimized, I presented this one because it illustrates the sea of coins look better)
Explanation:
If he wanted he could have also created a scene in blender with lots of coins, and baked the normals onto a plane and use that with a couple outcropping of actual coins. That’d be far more performant.
Disclaimer
I presented two different solutions. I am only criticizing your solution because you’re misinforming others about optimization. Your solution is not optimized, it’s an appalling misuse of blender and to peddle it to others hurts their learning experience.