2 ms·
Modern GPUs - and really GPUs for about 10 years - are stupidly fast when it comes to rasterizing triangles, so artists simply work with quads (and polygons of
by badsectoracula 2y ago
Modern GPUs - and really GPUs for about 10 years - are stupidly fast when it comes to rasterizing triangles, so artists simply work with quads (and polygons of more than four vertices - when Blender added "n-gons" back in the day many artists rejoiced) and they just subdivide them if they want neater looking interpolation before triangulating them. But a lot of detail nowadays come from geometry anyway.
This could have been nice ~15 years ago when using much fewer poly counts and relying a lot more on textures for detail was more common. But at the same time, GPUs were also much slower so this approach would be slower too.
So in practice this is really a niche approach for when you want to have a large quad that isn't "perfectly" mapped to an underlying texture and you can't subdivide the quad. Nowadays such use cases are more likely to come from more procedural sides (or perhaps effects) of the engine than artists making assets for the game.
It might be useful for an artist wanting to use a modern engine running on a modern PC to make a low-poly retro-styled game though.
- GolDDranks 2y agoInteresting - low-poly (and 2D) are exactly where my interests are. Btw. wouldn't it be possible in modern pipelines to remap or "disfigure" the texture when converting to triangles, so that it counters the bias accordingly? Ah, but that bakes in the shape of the quad, so it can't be modified runtime or it will get distorted again, right.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]