3 ms·
Aren't other optimizing techniques are out of scope? Why would author implement frustum culling in a tech demo for dynamic LODs?
by ivanjermakov 2y ago
Aren't other optimizing techniques are out of scope? Why would author implement frustum culling in a tech demo for dynamic LODs?
- andrewmcwatters 2y agoBecause it's a deeply integrated part of virtualized geometry. You could just cull an entire object, but the larger the associated geometry, the more unnecessary geometry you keep out of the viewport. This defeats a large selling point of virtualized geometry. It's not just about clustering and simplifying meshes from an extremely high detailed source, but also rendering the portions that are actually important. That being said, this implementation is very cool as it stands. It addresses arguably the most important actual parts of virtualized geometry, I think.
- tomovo 2y agoI'd say if it's proof of concept just to follow the process that Nanite does, then other optimizations are out of scope. However if it's supposed to achieve the same GOAL as Nanite, which I think is provide rich detail at reasonable frame rate then 1) add mode with full LOD to compare performance gains & visual impact 2) do low hanging fruit kind of optimizations as well to match whatever Unreal probably does as well.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]