Why do Reforged models have 4 copies of all mesh?

[Retera]

I have a technical question: why do Reforged models have 4 copies of each mesh tagged with different Level of Detail values? I thought this would be for some options menu setting to use the lower level of detail on slower computers, but I can't find any setting to use the lower level of detail at all.

So then I thought they were used based on camera distance, that surely a unit who was further away would use a lower level of detail (similar to mipmaps but for mesh). In my testing this did not appear to be the case, either.

So all I can see is that if I'm making a custom model I can delete 3/4 of the meshes ( all levels of detail except for highest ) and the custom model is still fine.

This is of course ridiculous if true, as it would mean 3/4ths of the meshes of all Reforged assets were junk data that we could get Blizzard to delete from the game to reduce the file size if it were true.

So it's probably not true. The LOD setting probably is used. But where? How? Is anyone able to tell?

Edit: This is important to modeling because if all that stuff is junk then we could make custom models with smaller file size by always just making 1 highest detail version of the custom model. But if it's not junk, then custom models need 4 copies as well.

 

[Daffa]

@Kam @MindWorX might be able to give some insight into the HD model.

 

[Razorclaw_X]

So all I can see is that if I'm making a custom model I can delete 3/4 of the meshes ( all levels of detail except for highest ) and the custom model is still fine.

This is what people should be doing anyway. Messing with LOD is too much work/trouble for the average person (not to mention we need to save the world from LOD3).

 

[Barorque]

This is what people should be doing anyway. Messing with LOD is too much work/trouble for the average person (not to mention we need to save the world from LOD3).

This.

LODs obviously mean Level of Detail, so that probably was the idea.

But no matter if LODs would even be used, it's just more work, as well as a larger file size. And the latter is crucial for now, since maps only support 256MB of data (barely enough for 2 races with custom assets).
Our project hasn't made a single model with LODs, and we're already at very large file sizes (since it's campaign it won't matter much anyways).

Funny enough there are a few model that don't have LODs, as well as all portraits. So it might just be an idea Blizzard had, and abandoned, but kept in place if it ever came to performance complaints.

So I would suggest to not make models LOD, and just select them and delete before you start making the model.

 

[Kam]

Retera pointed me here and I'll clarify that it's junk data you can remove to save space.

 

[Zorrot]

I have a technical question: why do Reforged models have 4 copies of each mesh tagged with different Level of Detail values? I thought this would be for some options menu setting to use the lower level of detail on slower computers, but I can't find any setting to use the lower level of detail at all.

So then I thought they were used based on camera distance, that surely a unit who was further away would use a lower level of detail (similar to mipmaps but for mesh). In my testing this did not appear to be the case, either.

So all I can see is that if I'm making a custom model I can delete 3/4 of the meshes ( all levels of detail except for highest ) and the custom model is still fine.

This is of course ridiculous if true, as it would mean 3/4ths of the meshes of all Reforged assets were junk data that we could get Blizzard to delete from the game to reduce the file size if it were true.

So it's probably not true. The LOD setting probably is used. But where? How? Is anyone able to tell?

Edit: This is important to modeling because if all that stuff is junk then we could make custom models with smaller file size by always just making 1 highest detail version of the custom model. But if it's not junk, then custom models need 4 copies as well.

Well it's just placeholder, and here is envidence, but i'm not sure if there is any tirgger.

Here is a war3log which can be find in mydocument/logs

As you can see, the lod is lock in level 1, which means neither they haven't build this system, or they don't want to open due to bugs.

BUT another interesting things may related in the regeditor, in warcraft 3 - video it has miplevel, modeldetail which is unchangeable in game.

I cant see different when change these setting, but I don't have an eagle eyes so maybe missed something, so I wonder if it's working.

 

[SebioL]

I always suggest that the LODs are not removed, concurrently keeping their corresponding "LOD's" activated in the editions of each of the main meshes, to have a synchronized change.
Even though we have a significant reduction in model size (after its removal), this only compensates for load memory capacity levels only on your computer, removing them does not interfere with the game graphics engine during matches. And quite the contrary, I think that using LOD's, we "should" get a reduction in the performance demands of our machines if we used a lot of realistic effects and models at the same time on one screen of battle. (at least I believe so far).
If they exist there, the Reforged mockup team probably did it for good reason.
I believe that possibly they can be used to work on reducing the overload on the graphics engine, as in the "Mipmap" existing in textures, which make textures smoother when the Zoom camera is removed (the texture decreases the quality), probably the LOD's can be the reducer of "polygons" between the model's Geosets. Modern computers do not suffer "Lag" because of more advanced technologies among the current machinery on the market (maybe that's why nobody cares), but those more primitive, even tend to suffer crashes if you use more than 200 units facing each other in the same screen with the maximum graphics.
It's like Zorrot pointed out, the function may not be enabled for the game. I believe that at the moment they don't have any kind of effect or even function as a graphical interference inside the Reforged engine.
Because I did some tests in a battle using 400 HD models with LOD's and then another test with the same amount, but without the LOD's, and unfortunately, I didn't identify any graphics smoothing. As Wc3 doesn't use exaggerated amounts of templates (unlike Sc2), maybe this reduction in graphics overhead isn't as significant or Blizzard continues to neglect yet another feature for Reforged.
So I think it's better not to remove them, maybe in the future the function will be released and for more primitive computers, it will be possible to have a better performance using a large number of HD models.

I could also be wrong, and this has nothing to do with the LOD's. lol

 

[GhostWolf]

There is a very noticeable effect of the files being bigger in general in Reforged - I've seen way too many people playing on HD when it was hyped and having constant freezes every time a new model was loaded into the game (SSDs help greatly here).
Removing a bunch of gigabytes of garbage data (LODs included, there's lots more) can impact the experience of players quite a bit if the resources a map uses are not preloaded.
I don't know if Blizzard updated the ladder in any way since the early Refogred days, but melee back then did not preload models.

Sadly most people that I've seen play HD are on twitch and have 0 technical know-how so the common complaint was "HD needs the best GPU in existence", but the reality is that HD graphics are not really more technically complex than SD graphics, and either way both of them are very simple compared to other games from the past decade.

Pre-TFT there were also LODs that were selected based on the game settings.
Those at least made sense - they didn't affect loading time since they were separate files, and they allowed for far more control over what exactly has less details.
Removing a bunch of polygons from the meshes will typically not be of any importance because that is not what bottlenecks the game in the first place.
Now if we had LODs that don't have 200 bones per model and tens of thousands of extra keyframes and garbage mesh skinning data and garbage meshes, and they were actually remotely decent models, and if every portrait wasn't literally a copy of the entire model with different animations...maybe we can talk about some extra USEFUL data.

But this can all be taken with a grain of salt, because the textures are much larger than the models, and there isn't much to do there other than not use DDS (but then you tradeoff HDD/SSD storage vs GPU memory and slower loads).

 

[SebioL]

There is a very noticeable effect of the files being bigger in general in Reforged - I've seen way too many people playing on HD when it was hyped and having constant freezes every time a new model was loaded into the game (SSDs help greatly here).
Removing a bunch of gigabytes of garbage data (LODs included, there's lots more) can impact the experience of players quite a bit if the resources a map uses are not preloaded.
I don't know if Blizzard updated the ladder in any way since the early Refogred days, but melee back then did not preload models.
Sadly most people that I've seen play HD are on twitch and have 0 technical know-how so the common complaint was "HD needs the best GPU in existence", but the reality is that HD graphics are not really more technically complex than SD graphics, and either way both of them are very simple compared to other games from the past decade.
Pre-TFT there were also LODs that were selected based on the game settings.
Those at least made sense - they didn't affect loading time since they were separate files, and they allowed for far more control over what exactly has less details.
Removing a bunch of polygons from the meshes will typically not be of any importance because that is not what bottlenecks the game in the first place.
Now if we had LODs that don't have 200 bones per model and tens of thousands of extra keyframes and garbage mesh skinning data and garbage meshes, and they were actually remotely decent models, and if every portrait wasn't literally a copy of the entire model with different animations...maybe we can talk about some extra USEFUL data.
But this can all be taken with a grain of salt, because the textures are much larger than the models, and there isn't much to do there other than not use DDS (but then you tradeoff HDD/SSD storage vs GPU memory and slower loads).

You're right, but not completely. High polygon complexity can affect performance depending on each case.
In the past it was said that importing HQ models into the Classic Wc3 didn't cause lag and didn't even interfere with the game engine and they really were right, in a way... after all, the game style doesn't require more than 150 units on the same screen (by default in between players).
The models with complex meshes don't change the performance that much, but try to put in the Classic WC3 itself a 400 vs 400 melee with all models in high vertex quantity to see if there will be no graphic unwanted behavior.

 

[Retera]

You're right, but not completely.

Hi man, GhostWolf is a genius hobbyist passionate contributor and I'm a fan of his work. It's late so I didnt read through everything he said again tonight, but just as a creepy hypothetical for you, what if GhostWolf was actually completely right about everything he said as a matter of principle?

In the past it was said that importing HQ models into the Classic Wc3 didn't cause lag and didn't even interfere with the game engine

This is totally the opposite of what I was told. As I understood it, back in the day there were more polygons on heroes because it was so important to limit the polygon count on nonhero units. Too many polygons and this game would stop rendering stuff and render garbled dancing shapes to the screen instead.

If they exist there, the Reforged mockup team probably did it for good reason.

Further up in this thread, when the user Kam posted:

Retera pointed me here and I'll clarify that it's junk data you can remove to save space.

It's worth noting that although Kam has been a Hive member for more than a dozen years, more recently he spent some time as an Blizzard Entertainment Associate Producer working on Warcraft III: Reforged. More than anyone else, when he says this is junk data, I believe this is information coming from a more primary source than any of the rest of us.

 

[SebioL]

Hi man, GhostWolf is a genius hobbyist passionate contributor and I'm a fan of his work. It's late so I didnt read through everything he said again tonight, but just as a creepy hypothetical for you, what if GhostWolf was actually completely right about everything he said as a matter of principle?

Do you have the courage to defend 100% of a person's ideas, even without knowing the content of a certain context stated by them... just for the jig, diploma or title? Einstein, despite all quality, throughout his studies made several mistakes, and his own theory of general relativity may in a few centuries prove to be another behavior, see the theories of quantum mechanics, their presumptions are already contrary.

I will not judge GhostWolf knowledge or abilities, I even respect his experience and competence in the area, I may have misunderstood your statement... But as I understand it, GhostWolf claimed that a bunch of polygons doesn't matter, meaning it wouldn't impact the game engine.
I agreed, because a common sampling screen with 50 full HD models doesn't even cause 0.1sec of imbalance, but I emphasized not totally, because giving as an example a battle with a colossal amount of units that have high vertices, it will significantly affect performance, no doubts.

This is totally the opposite of what I was told. As I understood it, back in the day there were more polygons on heroes because it was so important to limit the polygon count on nonhero units. Too many polygons and this game would stop rendering stuff and render garbled dancing shapes to the screen instead.

In Classic... I heard many users say that high polygon models didn't influence the game, but playing with only amounts of 50 units average per player (Wc3 standard), it will really have little or no impact. And I just said that a combat with numerous units, proves exactly that the complexity of polygons combined with that (and even more so using a primitive computer), really causes significant impacts.
That's why I was just defending the importance of reducing polygons with LOD's to models HD Reforged.
The LOD's they're "remain" useless, which may be different from "being useless" , after all, their function is not built into the game engine, example of what Zorrot showed... Also, possibly the patches with this limited update team show us that they will never incorporate it someday... Lol
In these circumstances so far, I agree that the LOD's really don't make a difference and they just boil down to memory accumulation.

 

[GhostWolf]

So...back to the topic.

I don't really see the idea behind dynamic LODs in a top-down strategy game where the distance between the camera and all visible models will be relatively close.
Maybe it would be meaningful in a map with a 1st person camera or something like that (but the game wasn't made for that and doesn't cull models behind objects so with any decent draw distance you'll get into trouble regardless).

It's not that polygons don't have a cost, but rather that their direct cost is usually not the bottleneck of games.
Once GPU buffers became a thing, and GPUs started having more memory, it became less and less of an issue.
When it comes to certain graphics settings taking massively more power than others, it will typically not be because of higher res meshes or higher res textures, unless your GPU lacks the memory to support them properly.
Rather it will be because of complex shaders doing lots and lots of complex math, and because of higher screen resolutions which means these complex shaders need to run a whole lot more.

Having a 800 unit fight can (and will) lag the game for various reasons, regardless of how many polygons you are seeing