Bsp

[Cerberus]

Just a quick question about BSP based mapping.

My experience is mostly with Counter-Strike and Counter-Strike: Source maps where really, BSP based mapping is the main way of creating a map. Props (static meshes to the Unreal Engine guys) are then added in afterwards to fill in little bits of detail. So most of the map is actually made up of BSP brushes.

I'm now looking into UDK and Unreal Tournament mapping (to learn UDK and Unreal Engine games) and there is a real emphasis on the fact that most of the map is made up of models rather than brushes. But I just can't picture this myself. Surely, the wall, floors, ceilings etc are all made up of BSP entities and not models created in another 3D application? I can understand how say a door would be a model but surely the surrounding area is mostly BSP?

Could someone please provide an explanation to this and help me try to understand a little bit better because I feel like I'm looking at Unreal mapping in the wrong way. Thanks

[FRAG69]

Well the way I've been doing it is, I block out the general layout of my level with BSP to gain a better understanding of space and movement along with advantages and disadvantages on say a deathmatch map.

I use BSP for prototyping and 90% of them will be removed in place of custom made walls, pillars, doors and so on.

I do however sometimes keep BSP floors, If you don't need a custom floor then using a BSP is fine.

An example I can give you for making a mesh floor would be with this screenshot from Doom 3.



Now that grated floor would make me think there's tons of stuff underneath like pipes and cables, So I could create a grated floor mesh for my player to walk on and then create the pipes underneath.

OR

You could use a grated floor material that has transparency to show the underlining pipes and cables if your sticking with BSP.

At the end of the day, keeping BSP in your level is your choice but If you want a fully custom made level then you should really be using it for prototyping and covering small areas.

Hope I haven't confused you even more

[Aldighieri]

It really burns down to: "what looks better?"

Games are relying less and less on BSP and more on Models to make their game worlds. Why? Because it adds so many levels of depth and detail that BSP can only dream about. Take a look at these screenshotsLinks)

http://terrangaming.com/sites/defaul..._screen_13.jpg
http://web-vassets.ea.com/Assets/Ric...?cb=1330546564
http://web-vassets.ea.com/Assets/Ric...?cb=1330546564


Not a single BSP in sight. It just makes the world more convincing to the player. I also think it runs faster. That's always nice.

[BadSector]

@FRAG69:
I'm currently on my Mac where the Doom 3 editor doesn't work to confirm it, but i'm certain that the floor in your screenshot is made from brushes with a normal mapped material for the detail (holes, etc). Like Source, id Tech 4 uses brushes extensively - although probably not to the same extent (Doom 3 had a lot of static meshes and also id Tech 4 supports curved surfaces which were also used a lot in Doom 3).

However i think that your general approach is the most common one (based on what i've read around): block out the map using brushes and wherever it makes sense replace them with static geometry in the detailing pass later.

@Aldighieri:
AFAIK CryEngine does not support brushes/bsp at all (well, they call their models brushes but they're not the same thing as in id Tech, Source, Unreal, etc). A large part of your first screenshot could be made in an engine that supports curves and parallax mapped decals. id Tech 4 is one and Jupiter Ex (the FEAR/FEAR2 engine) is probably another.

@Cerberus:
The basic idea is to create reusable meshes, like legos. For example instead of creating the same complex frame in doors or the same steps or the same broken handles or whatever else using brushes, you model them once in a 3D modeling program and reuse them in your map. You also need to design your map in such a way that these reusable pieces can be placed neatly in your space.

Of course you can also go and create everything in a 3D modeling program and use the editor only to place items and do logic, but i believe that is harder - especially for someone used to creating levels using a dedicated level editor.

[FRAG69]

@BS

I was more looking at it from a design standpoint then what it actually is in Doom 3, I've played the series to death and I know that floor was just a texture, no idea If any of that changes in the BFG edition, would be nice if it does

[Cerberus]

Thanks for your replies.

In the Doom 3 screenshot I can see how a lot of that will need models to create that look and feel but take the first Crysis 2 screenshot - that floor could easily be done with BSP so why create a model for that? And what shape will that model be? Otherwise it won't be reusable so how many times will you need to replicate that floor model? Surely it's a waste of time to go and create a model for something like that when using BSP will give you the same look

[NightClucker]

>>that floor could easily be done with BSP so why create a model for that?
You can convert the BSP to static meshes in the editor (UDK). Usually what happens is that several pieces of needed BSP spaces (e.g. the floor) will be converted to a one giant static mesh. This cuts down on draw calls and improves performance.

I'm the same as everyone else. I shell the level using BSP and then I replace them wall with static meshes...but it's not like my bsp disappears entirely though. I generally convert them to blocking volumes (sometimes I do convert them to static meshes as well) so I know for sure the playable space didn't change drastically after meshing. As well I believe this is also easier on performance as most of my static meshes will have player collision turned off.

[Cerberus]

>>that floor could easily be done with BSP so why create a model for that?
You can convert the BSP to static meshes in the editor (UDK). Usually what happens is that several pieces of needed BSP spaces (e.g. the floor) will be converted to a one giant static mesh. This cuts down on draw calls and improves performance.

I'm the same as everyone else. I shell the level using BSP and then I replace them wall with static meshes...but it's not like my bsp disappears entirely though. I generally convert them to blocking volumes (sometimes I do convert them to static meshes as well) so I know for sure the playable space didn't change drastically after meshing. As well I believe this is also easier on performance as most of my static meshes will have player collision turned off.

Ok so what you're saying is you create a lot of your basic geometry (walls/floors etc) with BSP and then convert them in the editor to static meshes and not in an external application such as 3DS Max or Maya? This would make more sense if its to benefit performance. I thought everything had to be created outside the editor and so I was getting confused as to the point in it all. Also from looking at the screenshot how do you know that a floor is a static mesh rather than a BSP

[FRAG69]

You wouldn't know really, only the designer themselves would know if the floor was BSP or a mesh and yes that was one aspect I totally forgot about in UDK, you can convert your BSP into static meshes then export them back out again so you can create say UV maps for the mesh in 3DS Max or Maya.

[Aldighieri]

Well, floors tend to be flat anyways so BSP can be used there. It's when you need to add depth to a level that you want to use models.

I wouldn't really call it a waste of time, if Aesthetics are important to your game, then you want all the assets you can get.

[White Paper Games]

I didn't think this topic would take off so much, its cool to see.

I remember Warren (a WoLD forum memeber) once saying in a thread when working with Unreal (not exact words or a quote but similar..)

We flesh out the entire level with brushes, and then replace as many of the brushes with static meshes. Its a goal to hit if you can reach 0 BSPs in a level but there is sometimes a few left in. We also use blocking volumes over some meshes to stop players going to certain areas.

If you follow that formula you won't go wrong. That's the method I've started using for the past few years and it works great. BSP is for creating the gameplay and 'flow' of the game, but in the end you will want to remove as many as you can.

Also as a side note..I can't stand converting brushes into Meshes..urgh! If you measure how big your brush is in UDK you can just use the Maya units to quickly replicate it, so much easier and cleaner!

[Cerberus]

I didn't think this topic would take off so much, its cool to see.

I remember Warren (a WoLD forum memeber) once saying in a thread when working with Unreal (not exact words or a quote but similar..)

We flesh out the entire level with brushes, and then replace as many of the brushes with static meshes. Its a goal to hit if you can reach 0 BSPs in a level but there is sometimes a few left in. We also use blocking volumes over some meshes to stop players going to certain areas.

If you follow that formula you won't go wrong. That's the method I've started using for the past few years and it works great. BSP is for creating the gameplay and 'flow' of the game, but in the end you will want to remove as many as you can.

Also as a side note..I can't stand converting brushes into Meshes..urgh! If you measure how big your brush is in UDK you can just use the Maya units to quickly replicate it, so much easier and cleaner!

What is his benefit of doing that though? For complicated objects sure I can see the point. But for something like a floor turning it into a static mesh in Maya or 3DS Max is going to have no visual benefit at all. Why not just keep flat surfaces like floors as BSP? And how come you don't like converting brushes into meshes in the editor? Why go outside the editor?

[Aldighieri]

I think bsp is slower than using Static meshes in Unreal, which is why it's a good idea to replace it as often as possible. Even floors can benefit from being static meshes. Say you want broken tiles, or maybe a decrepit sewer walk-way. Your floors may be grates that give you a view of the level below you. Even a "flat" floor can benefit from that extra level of depth from replacing it with a static mesh.(Floors in real life are rarely perfectly flat.) It's another way to add depth and make your level just that more convincing.

[Cerberus]

I think bsp is slower than using Static meshes in Unreal, which is why it's a good idea to replace it as often as possible. Even floors can benefit from being static meshes. Say you want broken tiles, or maybe a decrepit sewer walk-way. Your floors may be grates that give you a view of the level below you. Even a "flat" floor can benefit from that extra level of depth from replacing it with a static mesh.(Floors in real life are rarely perfectly flat.) It's another way to add depth and make your level just that more convincing.

Would you normally create the entire section as one big static mesh or small, reusable parts similar to how textures work on flat surfaces where they are usually seamless?

[Aldighieri]

I am a fan of modular components. Big meshes can't really be reused that often, smaller meshes have all kinds of nifty uses. Think of them as Legos.