Comparative differences between games design and simulation design - Part 3: 3D modelling process

GAMES DESIGN AND SIMULATION – 3D MODELLING

INTRODUCTION

Whilst driving down the rabbit hole which is the simulation environment, another key area of the differences seen between core games design and simulation design is how models are made and the pipeline to process them. Although similar in the initial design aspects from conception (using reference imagery and plotting it out before modelling takes place in 3D modelling software, the differences are based on utilisation of mappings and design aspects that make it stand apart from both industries.

PIPELINE

In games design, the pipeline process normally can take the following stages.

Blockout > Low Poly > UV > High Poly > Baking (Mapping) > Export

Blockout > High Poly > UV > Low Poly > Baking (Mapping) > Export

Although depending on the software used, the main stages of modelling do stay the same with UV and baking being purposely positioned at key areas to ensure that the model adheres to key games design demands (prop objects stay under 10,000 polys (depending on the necessity of quality)) and in game items that are in your player characters face being of a higher polycount (around 15,000). The way that the models have a more realistic quality is in the overall maps (Normal, Ambient Occlusion, Light and Diffuse) where the more important quality of the model is inputted into so it doesn’t destroy the poly quantity and produce loading errors.

In simulation design, the process is a little different and although researching into different models, the quality of the models is done in a different manner. To brief it, the necessity of simulation isn’t really presented (as my perception from what I have worked alongside or practised on) on the quality of the model like in games design for games design but more for the object quality in representing the model that is being used in engine. The pipeline of modelling doesn’t go down the same direction with key parts either not being used as well or being bypassed overall, after looking at the examples, the significant differences that are mappings and UVs that are used to ensure that a model keeps the high quality model on a lower model in games design are bypassed or not needed and instead the diffuse map that is used for colouring is replaced with images of the object instead to make it look as realistic as the object it’s trying to represent that is used in real life.

It is very interesting that a model does this and although I cannot see any significant reasoning for why parts are missing but working alongside certain engines that more orientate around simulation than games design (VR Forces and OBS3 (Please check other blog for breakdown of this part of the differences of simulation to games design)) seem to be limit what can or cannot be processed or used model wise.

FORMATS OF FILES

GAMES DESIGN MODELLING

In modelling, the main formats of objects that I was taught was the more accessible and usable within gaming engines (Unreal, Unity, Lumberyard, Cry Engine and Stingray) was the following:

FBX (used in Autodesk Maya, Autodesk 3DS Max, Autodesk Mudbox, Blender and Zbrush)

OBJ (used in Autodesk Maya, Autodesk 3DS Max, Autodesk Mudbox, Blender and Zbrush)

And CAD (note that although CAD can be used, this was more of a suggestion from a colleague than practical use as it makes no sense to me but if the user is more wanting to use the software in that way.

SIMULATION MODELLING

In Simulation the main files formats that seem to be used are more orientated around the following file orientations.

FLT (OpenFlight – 3d geometry model designed specifically for 3d real time simulation image generators) Used in programs like Blender, Autodesk 3DS Max and Presagis Creator.)

KML (Keyhole Markup Language – Is an XML (web development) style for expressing geographic data with use of longitude and latitude data as well as most data in regards to X, Y, Z) strangely programs that can use this style of software more works in how it can be edited and worked with instead of creation; Working with programs like Blenders, Global mapper and Marble.)

CAD (most programs that work with this style of software is programs like AutoCAD and TurboCad).

TEXTURES

In relation to how the models hold the data is a different process. This is where a lot of differences happen between models used within games design and in simulation design. This is in relation to the modelling pipeline but with designing textures quality decisions change strongly dependant on quality and style.

GAMES DESIGN

Games designs process pushes the pipeline to make the strongest quality texture with use of the low poly input that promotes the quality improvement of the object without adding more strain (mostly) to the engine that is being used. With the main maps (diffuse, height, metallic, roughness and normal) used regularly basis to make an object look more stylised and realistic for the game in hand. Although it can depend on the game style which in term determines the objects look, the main pipeline process still orientates around the idea of quality onto low demand.

SIMULATION

Simulation however orientates around a different perspective in regards to quality of objects in simulation wanting more for affiliation to the real life object than something unique (unless specifically created for that simulation). The process for how it usually works in like slicing a full UV plane and putting the objects shapes over and making the objects fit rather than specifically designing the materials around the objects. The best information to break it down and explain it is like this.

TEXTURING OPINION

Games design is like painting a canvas ensuring that all details are specifically placed to give the best definition onto the object. That said, in simulation design, it’s the opposite of UV unwrapping (which is like peeling a banana) but instead positioning the peel to go back onto the object with the right skin in place to make it as realistic as possible.

It’s not about quality with simulations, in a sense it’s more about specifically to making objects as useful as possible and low processing as possible but keeps the look of the actual product.

LOD (LEVEL OF DESIGN)

Level of design is one of the big shocks to how it is used within both games design and simulations.

GAMES DESIGN

Although games design uses LOD in a different manner, you can essentially set the LOD to be set dependant on what is needed.

For instance, LOD can be used for quality of objects or environments to help with texture processing and control of texture memory in game. If the object is so far away, the idea of having some much detail seen makes no sense as you’re effectively using memory that isn’t needed to be used for that. With optimisation being key within modelling and the environment, LOD is important for realistic that rely on top level models to promote quality objects for immersion. As well, if attached to the game settings, allows for the quality difference setting that has been seen within games settings.

SIMULATIONS

Simulation takes the use of LOD and uses it in a completely different manner to what I thought it could be used. They use LOD levels for damage to objects such as tanks, buildings, planes etc which although is not an incorrect way of processing levels of damage; it shocked me when I first learnt it. That said, after learning more about sim engines and that quality isn’t an important / necessary thing, the use of LODS for something different such as damage control of objects does make sense as it’s a useful tool to keep an object variants together.

Thinking about it, I may want to put this into my project and see if there is a way to make it work for me in the same manner to not only provide that same realism, but save on memory allocation but the only way would be to create it with games that are specifically designed for low quality such as low poly games.

OVERALL EVALUATION SUMMARY

Overall, the modelling concept presents an interesting value of comparison in the similarities and differences in how modelling can present a core end goal for each type of project outcome. With mass Sims (as previously stated) the premise that it needs to look like it and although fidelity is key; quality is not the big necessary factor in “most cases”. Most cases breaks down to what the client wants and it’s interesting seeing it from a prospective of a small simulation designed environment (inside a chopper or race track) would be much better designed and created with a game engine using decent quality objects that were modelled than a vast city designed environment which would be more beneficial to the latter and instead of a more quantity and precision to quality of the end object. Although this can be viewed as a very biased opinion, looking at it from the perspective of a designer whose core emphasis within the simulation environment is to make it look as pretty as possible and doesn’t like block buildings with printed textures, it’s understanding that in a simulation; the simulation environment is just to make it look more visually understanding to whatever it is being used for an not in a games design aspect something you would stop and stare at and go “that’s really gorgeous”.

In terms for modelling, the process of the design especially with the LOD system (check game engines for the breakdown into this) where the LODs change are not really for quality but more for levels of damage, the whole process of modelling changes in its core functionality to ensure that the job is done. Although the pipeline changes and some parts of the process are not as important, the use of modelling and restrictions to what is allowed is still core set rules (poly count rules) that still are abide in today’s modern design criteria.