View Full Version : Tom, a couple of questions
1) any limits to the number of roads and polygons in a scenery?
2) does a lot of points contained in a polygon affect frame rates?
3) does a lot of ground polygons affect frams rates?
Cheers and thanks for all your ever ready help.
10-11-2001, 03:33 PM
I hope others will also add their experience. From what I know:
1. There is no limit on the number of points
2. points probably does affect frame rates
3. number of ground polygons probably does affect frame rates.
I created a test file which I put one of every 3D object in the Airport library on the scenery in a group. When I turn the plane to look at it, the frame rate STOPS COLD. All the macros really make the program slow. So a lot of polygons must also make a difference.
Thanks Tom, got your email and will pick up B118 with the new goodies. As usual will keep a lookout for any areas which might need your meticulous attention!
10-12-2001, 01:40 AM
It might be of interest to note that too many points in a polygon will really cause trouble and mess up scenery bad.
I have found that when you approach 128 points and above your scenery will really mess up in FS2000.
I ran into this on a lake polygon I was making. It is best to not make more than 50 points and not too much concave shapes.
To correct the problem I made two polygons of about 65 points and lapped them to make the lake, and I got by fine with that. I was using a USGS topo map to outline the lake and there were quite a bit of concave shapes to the shoreline. However I got by good with the two 65 point Polygons.
10-12-2001, 04:56 PM
There are not really any limits on the number of poly's within a scenery but the more points placed on roads and poly's will draw on FS performance and frame rates. Less is better if possible.
In some testings I've done with Textured Polygons or TexPoly's, (Hand painted or aerial photo images), I've noticed a rather large increase in performance and frame rates because these type of polygons are placed within the scenery with only 4 points each. I guess that means I could add a couple more object macros. :)
Another great way to increase FS performance and frame rates with polygons is to use the default type "Extended Format" Bitmap Textures instead of the older FS98 .r8 formats.
I created a rather large lake scenery and used an old water.r8 texture. When I was finished with the scenery I was getting 10 fps. I then simply converted the .r8 to an Extended format bitmap, water.bmp, and replaced the .r8 with it. After doing that I got 18 fps so I'd say it's probably a big advantage. Since that experiment I convert even macro textures to Extended Format for best results.
I hope ya find this helpful.
Yep, thanks Ken for sharing your observations.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.