Torque 3D Terrain System
by Bloodknight · in Torque 3D Professional · 10/18/2012 (4:59 pm) · 34 replies
Since the release of the MIT version of torque a lot of newcomers have come and gone, some left their comments and as to be expected some are less than favourable. But one thing did kind of strike me and that was the several 'complaints' about the terrain system. Amongst these complaints were various links posted (sorry i cant find and repost them) of other engines and how their systems were better, yet on inspection the majority of system posted used an almost identical method for terrains as torque, heightmap import with or without a single base texture also with and without additional painted terrains. It should also be noted that these other engines and their 'fantastic' terrains are almost always shows screen shotted from some considerable distance so as to not reveal close up inspection of terrain features and painting.
It should also be noted that the only terrain that showed any kind of 'quality' was one that a guy spent half a day of expert working with world machine and its huge array of filters and outputted a map that was less than 1 pixel per meter.
So my question is why are these other engines heightmap import terrains so superior to the torque system?
It should also be noted that the only terrain that showed any kind of 'quality' was one that a guy spent half a day of expert working with world machine and its huge array of filters and outputted a map that was less than 1 pixel per meter.
So my question is why are these other engines heightmap import terrains so superior to the torque system?
About the author
#2
media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/10/9393/Terrain_01_Maya_01_14.jpg is a good example of a terrain with good blending.
www.garagegames.com/community/resources/view/21953 - is a hack that makes it look better. Also Jakob is working on a blending shader which should help.
10/18/2012 (11:39 pm)
I've mentioned the Wenda tutorial before in IRC. That's probably what you're thinking of. I'm currently working on trying to implement it in Torque. www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0o3bqoM0Qg is a link to the tutorial. My problem personally is that the blending between layers looks like crap (i.e. there is none) and there's nothing I can do to fix it. The transitions are jarring and they really throw off the sense of immersion. Also, there's something about the way tiling is done in the terrain layer that looks like it's from 2002 or something. media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/10/9393/Terrain_01_Maya_01_14.jpg is a good example of a terrain with good blending.
www.garagegames.com/community/resources/view/21953 - is a hack that makes it look better. Also Jakob is working on a blending shader which should help.
#3
I have a bit of time put in working with the terrain editor in Torque and it has it's problems and limits, but I think you need to look at the terrain editor as just that, an editor. I discovered something else along the way as well.... I am not the best terrain guy around! There is a big difference between what I do and what a real pro does when it comes to terrain and terrain mapping. Here is an example of a Work in Progress that Dan Webb has done for me:
Now here is one of my own terrains:
As you can see, experience and having a solid art pipeline makes a HUGE difference. I think many people that complain about Torque are complaining about it not being easy. It's not easy, but when you know what you are doing, it can do some pretty amazing things. I think the key is to have guys like Dan create tutorials and share their experience and art pipelines. Torque is capable of much more than what is just on the surface.
Additionally, with T3D going open source, we have an opportunity to correct shortcomings and we need to work as a community to fix them. We all can lean on each other and 'fix' what we don't like. Something to think about.
Ron
10/19/2012 (7:46 am)
I am going to throw my 2 cents here. Mostly because I have heard complaints about this in the past and honestly, I think the problem stems from a lack of a clear production pipeline. Dashiva, your first screenshot is a render from Maya and I am willing to bet it would not look 100% like that in a real-time game engine. That's a little like trying to compare apples to oranges. I have a bit of time put in working with the terrain editor in Torque and it has it's problems and limits, but I think you need to look at the terrain editor as just that, an editor. I discovered something else along the way as well.... I am not the best terrain guy around! There is a big difference between what I do and what a real pro does when it comes to terrain and terrain mapping. Here is an example of a Work in Progress that Dan Webb has done for me:
Now here is one of my own terrains:
As you can see, experience and having a solid art pipeline makes a HUGE difference. I think many people that complain about Torque are complaining about it not being easy. It's not easy, but when you know what you are doing, it can do some pretty amazing things. I think the key is to have guys like Dan create tutorials and share their experience and art pipelines. Torque is capable of much more than what is just on the surface.
Additionally, with T3D going open source, we have an opportunity to correct shortcomings and we need to work as a community to fix them. We all can lean on each other and 'fix' what we don't like. Something to think about.
Ron
#4
Also, I do know what I'm doing when I talk about this stuff. I've made terrains in both UDK and Cryengine (and also sculpted them and imported them into various idtech engines). My pipeline uses World Machine / L3dt and either Z-Brush or Blender.
10/19/2012 (11:14 am)
My posting of the Maya screenshot was to show blending rather than realtime terrain. However, it does run in realtime, you can see it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_Gvb01572g&feature=plcp Granted there is a ton of stuff going on in that video that makes it better looking, from global illumination to realtime precipitation. Also, I do know what I'm doing when I talk about this stuff. I've made terrains in both UDK and Cryengine (and also sculpted them and imported them into various idtech engines). My pipeline uses World Machine / L3dt and either Z-Brush or Blender.
#5
@Dashiva - I don't think Ron was saying you don't know terrains. I believe his frustration was ained towards Bloodknight (or any naysayers). Not you.
Might want to check out some of my shots (no, not to stroke my ego) here, as I think they show what can be achieved in Torque without much work at all. Once I get better at using the tools in my pipeline those should look cheap and amateurish by comparison. That those screenies aren't the best now isn't a fault of Torque's. It's my lack of skill and experience.
10/19/2012 (11:32 am)
@Ron - Why are you showing the old, crappy terrain? And thanks for talking me up! :D @Dashiva - I don't think Ron was saying you don't know terrains. I believe his frustration was ained towards Bloodknight (or any naysayers). Not you.
Might want to check out some of my shots (no, not to stroke my ego) here, as I think they show what can be achieved in Torque without much work at all. Once I get better at using the tools in my pipeline those should look cheap and amateurish by comparison. That those screenies aren't the best now isn't a fault of Torque's. It's my lack of skill and experience.
#6
It does look really good in real time. Also, my little rant was not pointed at any particular user, sorry if it appeared that way.
The last part of my rant was about production pipeline and knowing what you are doing. You obviously have a good pipeline in place and understand how these things work. My rant was aimed at those that don't understand the work and want a 'make my game pretty' button as an answer. We both know that is not how it works. Yes, many tools in Torque need to improve and they will. The terrain editor and material editor especially.
Ron
10/19/2012 (11:36 am)
Dashiva,It does look really good in real time. Also, my little rant was not pointed at any particular user, sorry if it appeared that way.
The last part of my rant was about production pipeline and knowing what you are doing. You obviously have a good pipeline in place and understand how these things work. My rant was aimed at those that don't understand the work and want a 'make my game pretty' button as an answer. We both know that is not how it works. Yes, many tools in Torque need to improve and they will. The terrain editor and material editor especially.
Ron
#7
While I have my own minor frustrations over the minor close up painting issues of terrains, the terrains themselves are the exact same as in most other engines and as such are no better or worse, i just get irritated by people clearly talking about stuff that's irrelevant to the issue.
NB:- as for minor issues, yes they are minor, unless you entire game is using only terrain as content then you are in somewhat deeper shit than you think, and stop blaming the engine for your lack of content :p
Bloodknight edit:- oops, this is what happens when i read stuff when using the other computer after my son has been logged on
10/19/2012 (12:10 pm)
do I really have to add sarcasm tags to everything I post?While I have my own minor frustrations over the minor close up painting issues of terrains, the terrains themselves are the exact same as in most other engines and as such are no better or worse, i just get irritated by people clearly talking about stuff that's irrelevant to the issue.
NB:- as for minor issues, yes they are minor, unless you entire game is using only terrain as content then you are in somewhat deeper shit than you think, and stop blaming the engine for your lack of content :p
Bloodknight edit:- oops, this is what happens when i read stuff when using the other computer after my son has been logged on
#8
of course, i look at dans link after i post, and those screens highlight exactly what i mean, you cannot really see that there is a paining issue with close up terrains when you have content to look at.
10/19/2012 (12:14 pm)
and back to my computer.of course, i look at dans link after i post, and those screens highlight exactly what i mean, you cannot really see that there is a paining issue with close up terrains when you have content to look at.
#9
Oh yeah. @ Dan... showing it because your 'crappy' old terrain is better than my 'took hours to do it' terrain.... Wait till you see your new one...He he.
Ron
10/19/2012 (2:52 pm)
@bloodknight: Uhm, ok. So we are ranting to the already aware....figures. LOL. Either way, I have proved that I still suck at terrains! LOL! Oh yeah. @ Dan... showing it because your 'crappy' old terrain is better than my 'took hours to do it' terrain.... Wait till you see your new one...He he.
Ron
#10
The thing is, any team will have specialists, and the "awesome shots" from other engines came from said specialists. Torque has always had a bunch of generalists in the community, and only now it seems people are starting to settle into their preferred areas of specialisation.
That's how it seems to me at least.
10/19/2012 (5:01 pm)
Guys, seriously, there's only one reason my terrains turn out half-decent and others sometimes don't. It's because it's all I bloody do. You lot are all actually doing stuff with the engine. I'm just moving from World Machine to Torque and then back again. How could anyone who loves terrains and does nothing but terrain work suck?The thing is, any team will have specialists, and the "awesome shots" from other engines came from said specialists. Torque has always had a bunch of generalists in the community, and only now it seems people are starting to settle into their preferred areas of specialisation.
That's how it seems to me at least.
#11
The guy who dashiva mentions and posts the video of, does a lot of work in maya and world machine, and the terrain looks damn fine, the problem is this is being shown as a cryengine terrain because thats what its used in at the very end of the video, and the hours of work and god knows how many hours of experience thats gone into building that terrain before its eve got anywhere near a game engine are just dismissed.
I'm almost willing to be that if he shared his files we could take that terrain and make it work in torque.
10/19/2012 (5:57 pm)
again, this just re-enforces my point, that like anything else in this business the more work you do the better it is.The guy who dashiva mentions and posts the video of, does a lot of work in maya and world machine, and the terrain looks damn fine, the problem is this is being shown as a cryengine terrain because thats what its used in at the very end of the video, and the hours of work and god knows how many hours of experience thats gone into building that terrain before its eve got anywhere near a game engine are just dismissed.
I'm almost willing to be that if he shared his files we could take that terrain and make it work in torque.
#12
Hmmm... gives me some ideas.
@Ron, do you have detail textures on it? I don't. Just sayin'. :P
10/19/2012 (8:11 pm)
I'd agree Bloodknight. I don't think Torque's issues are render related, but tool related. In my case, I use 3rd party tools to make up for the lack of any inside Torque. I'm serious. I do very little terrain work inside Torque. It's all imported ready to go. Torque may as well not even feature a "terrain editor" in my opionion. Just a set of plugins to import the stuff. I'm increasingly turning to the .mis files rather than fire up the editor.Hmmm... gives me some ideas.
@Ron, do you have detail textures on it? I don't. Just sayin'. :P
#13
First is texturing tools. Instead of the current system, where you have X number of diffuse textures, and each diffuse texture has a detail texture(which leads to lots of tiling if the textures aren't handled very specifically), I'd plan more around the what (I think it was) Andy Wight did. Remove the diffuse slot for each material, and just have a single terrain-stretching master diffuse. The terrain detail textures painted in the editor would be what the player usually sees up close anyways, so that's where all the attention should be focused. As it is now, the tools steer you towards the diffuse textures, which don't really work the way most people think they do. This would work especially well for people using external tools to generate the heightmaps and diffuse maps, as they could export the diffuse texture, plug in into the master diffuse slot, and just focus on working with whatever number of detail textures they need for up close. Maybe even integrate a highpass filter into the shaders or something to resolve colored detail texture problems.
The other change would be allowing you to use a greyscale image as a brush. Torque's built in deformation tools are workable, but nothing mind blowing, and getting more realistic terrain takes a lot more work and effort than it probably should. Being able to use brushes defined off a texture lets the artist decide exactly how things are molded much quicker.
Heck, in theory, you could take something like World Machine, export out grey-scaled heightmaps of different terrain areas, and build a 'prefab' library that lets you quickly iterate terrain shapes to more closely mimic 3rd part utilities without needing the extra work for each individual terrain. In addition to that, better integration to other tools(like letting the terrain mold to river/road objects) would be a bonus to this.
Obviously, terrain generated in specialty tools and a good workflow would trounce the above changes in final quality, but given what I've seen, those 2 changes would make the existing internal tools a lot more intuitive to use, and give people fewer (largely unfounded) complaints about the terrain system.
I'm kinda curious what other people think would be good tools for the internal terrain editing too.
10/20/2012 (12:37 am)
I'd been looking at what I want out of the terrain editing tools(once my current project is complete, I've been planning on doing an overhaul pass on several of the editors in torque) and going off what I've personally dealt with, and what I've seen on the forums is there'd be 2 changes I'd make.First is texturing tools. Instead of the current system, where you have X number of diffuse textures, and each diffuse texture has a detail texture(which leads to lots of tiling if the textures aren't handled very specifically), I'd plan more around the what (I think it was) Andy Wight did. Remove the diffuse slot for each material, and just have a single terrain-stretching master diffuse. The terrain detail textures painted in the editor would be what the player usually sees up close anyways, so that's where all the attention should be focused. As it is now, the tools steer you towards the diffuse textures, which don't really work the way most people think they do. This would work especially well for people using external tools to generate the heightmaps and diffuse maps, as they could export the diffuse texture, plug in into the master diffuse slot, and just focus on working with whatever number of detail textures they need for up close. Maybe even integrate a highpass filter into the shaders or something to resolve colored detail texture problems.
The other change would be allowing you to use a greyscale image as a brush. Torque's built in deformation tools are workable, but nothing mind blowing, and getting more realistic terrain takes a lot more work and effort than it probably should. Being able to use brushes defined off a texture lets the artist decide exactly how things are molded much quicker.
Heck, in theory, you could take something like World Machine, export out grey-scaled heightmaps of different terrain areas, and build a 'prefab' library that lets you quickly iterate terrain shapes to more closely mimic 3rd part utilities without needing the extra work for each individual terrain. In addition to that, better integration to other tools(like letting the terrain mold to river/road objects) would be a bonus to this.
Obviously, terrain generated in specialty tools and a good workflow would trounce the above changes in final quality, but given what I've seen, those 2 changes would make the existing internal tools a lot more intuitive to use, and give people fewer (largely unfounded) complaints about the terrain system.
I'm kinda curious what other people think would be good tools for the internal terrain editing too.
#14
Forgive me for being so short here. Just kind of blows my mind. I do not believe the diffuse layer was ever meant to be tiled.
10/20/2012 (12:53 am)
Either I am miscommunicating, or nobody listens. I never tile my diffuse map. I recommend time and again for people to do likewise. I even blogged about it, and still we see the "tiling diffuse" question repeated.Forgive me for being so short here. Just kind of blows my mind. I do not believe the diffuse layer was ever meant to be tiled.
#15
The editor design language is structured to encourage using tiled diffuse maps.
When you make a new terrain material(layer), it requires a diffuse and detail texture.
This(especially in new people not used to using the terrain tools) encourages the idea you would have each layer be whatever texture you want, like dirt, grass, etc, and the detail is some bonus detailing.
But the best terrains the community have put out are like what you have, where it's a single stretched diffuse shared between layers, and the detail textures are what's unique.
That's why when I get to doing my overhaul of some of the editors, that'll be one of the first things I change, because as it is now is not intuitive to producing nice looking terrains.
10/20/2012 (1:40 am)
Dan, that's kind of the point I was making.The editor design language is structured to encourage using tiled diffuse maps.
When you make a new terrain material(layer), it requires a diffuse and detail texture.
This(especially in new people not used to using the terrain tools) encourages the idea you would have each layer be whatever texture you want, like dirt, grass, etc, and the detail is some bonus detailing.
But the best terrains the community have put out are like what you have, where it's a single stretched diffuse shared between layers, and the detail textures are what's unique.
That's why when I get to doing my overhaul of some of the editors, that'll be one of the first things I change, because as it is now is not intuitive to producing nice looking terrains.
#16
@Ron: I feel your pain!
@Jeff: I would be very interested to see the changes you suggest made.
I'll keep watching :-)
10/20/2012 (3:34 am)
I have been following this thread with some interest as I suck at terrains@Ron: I feel your pain!
@Jeff: I would be very interested to see the changes you suggest made.
I'll keep watching :-)
#17
I also believe that many people (me included) are expecting too much from our terrains, the ability to create and paint a cliff as part of the terrain for example, in the case of the one mentioned and linked above, the ability to have a lump of rock jutting from the terrain itself rather than using models for such, and the reasoning behind that is fairly straightforward tbh, hiding the seams between terain and model can be damn awkward at the best of times, the problem is again with some people (me included) is that we want those high quality details... on a 50km x 50km map :p
10/20/2012 (2:21 pm)
I think that one of the problems is that the diffuse texture is a single texture, and the fact that this isnt really explained very well is what causes some of the problems when people work with terrain painting, and why some of us (well me at least) have resorted to using full colour detail maps and extended view distances in detail to make the terrain look decent overall.I also believe that many people (me included) are expecting too much from our terrains, the ability to create and paint a cliff as part of the terrain for example, in the case of the one mentioned and linked above, the ability to have a lump of rock jutting from the terrain itself rather than using models for such, and the reasoning behind that is fairly straightforward tbh, hiding the seams between terain and model can be damn awkward at the best of times, the problem is again with some people (me included) is that we want those high quality details... on a 50km x 50km map :p
#18
Also, for everyone, if you have a feature request use the new form so that we on the committee can track it and get these things implemented. You can find it here: garagegames.uservoice.com/forums/178972-torque-3d-mit
Ron
10/24/2012 (8:25 am)
Good conversation here. I am going to bookmark this because I think I can get some of these features and issues added into future master versions of the engine. I agree with everyone. The terrain tools need to be updated and become way more functional. Since we usually design a game from the ground up, I think the ground is a good place to start tweeking and fixing. There will be some new info concerning features and bug fixes coming out soon.Also, for everyone, if you have a feature request use the new form so that we on the committee can track it and get these things implemented. You can find it here: garagegames.uservoice.com/forums/178972-torque-3d-mit
Ron
#19
10/25/2012 (7:41 pm)
We don't have to spend points on suggestions do we? Because I only have one left after putting 3 on the current terrain suggestion.
#20
I spend hours in the terrain editor trying to make a terrain look nice. I kept getting terrible aliasing effects, couldn't make the normal maps and spec maps work right, and the day/night system did really weird things to the light which made the textures appear incredibly bright sometimes and then when i moved a few steps it all went black.
It just all felt terribly quirky and impossible to make anything that looked nice.
I am sure a real pro could make the terrain look pretty good, but even Ron's terrain above looks a little 2002 to me if I'm honest.
I'm sure the final version is much better looking and all, with Dan crafting and importing it all with external tools but most of us don't have the skills, in-depth knowledge or the time for that. :(
With things like Unity, it all just works and you can have a nice looking terrain in an hour without any weird looking texture repeating etc.
11/02/2012 (4:05 am)
Speaking as one of these "newcomers who have come and gone", I can say the terrain engine was also the main thing that turned me off.I spend hours in the terrain editor trying to make a terrain look nice. I kept getting terrible aliasing effects, couldn't make the normal maps and spec maps work right, and the day/night system did really weird things to the light which made the textures appear incredibly bright sometimes and then when i moved a few steps it all went black.
It just all felt terribly quirky and impossible to make anything that looked nice.
I am sure a real pro could make the terrain look pretty good, but even Ron's terrain above looks a little 2002 to me if I'm honest.
I'm sure the final version is much better looking and all, with Dan crafting and importing it all with external tools but most of us don't have the skills, in-depth knowledge or the time for that. :(
With things like Unity, it all just works and you can have a nice looking terrain in an hour without any weird looking texture repeating etc.
Torque Owner Dan Webb
PsyCandy Games
Each and every engine will have its strengths and weaknesses. I've found Torque's strengths and work with them, and my pipeline is tailored to that. No doubt I'd change it altogether to match Unity or UDK.
Have you got a link to that WM guy? I'd love to see this and compare it with my own stuff.