Diablo 3- Wings question

hi Guys

I have a following problem and am currently on puzzle how I used this method best on GameStudio converting.

I would like something like this currently , and retained that deliver on models

https://simonschreibt.de/gat/diablo-3-wings-of-angels/

the engine dosent use the textur layer of the alpha kanal , and the question is now alternativ solution without shader.

basically i need the alpha channels only there to mask out . possibly it is sufficient but even if you render the additive wings and mask vertex color. thats right ?

Thanks in advance !

The only idea I have in my head is, that you could create a plane model and then move their vertixes up/down to mimic that waving effect (like in older water examples), then on the model's skin itself you could use alpha channel to make only those wing lines visible, this might work. But to make it glowing as on the video you anyway will need to use glow shader + hdr I guess.

Greets!

iknow what you mean.
the glow shader is alrady in the projekt and I tested it with



but it is not the same.

this method I wanted to use for multiple purposes.
can i not really play a texture within an alpha channel multiple on the mesh `?


its not the same ,but with his idea can i could create something like this also

You could perhaps try particles with Beam or Streak effect and move it in such a way that it looks branched out with some random numbers to let it look natural. Than you could use Bright to give it a bit of glow effect. No idea if it will turn out good looking though.

I'd be willing to work on this. Or rather this solution interest me so I'll test it out and post result img/vids. Next few days.

The idea was there , fear proposal is the framerate then this chrashes

I know from experience Beam or the Streak effect ,have summoned then at least quite frame problems

I will also sit the next week and try somehow implement

big thank repays advance!

, I would be interested in the results too

, do you mean that it would eat fps or that it will look wrong with sudden fps drops?

both, it's really hard to judge the whole , but we shall see which method will be better ,

, that was quick lol

Particle wings are coming along.. My art skills or not so great. I can not speak to fps on any other system. I've worked with solid beam , moving beam and moving none-beam particles. I used a 2 planes (one each wing) and vertex animated them with a noise like movement. I then used vertex points on the planes as particle locations. I've also used my spline code.

Pictures and videos within the up-coming week.

Take Care --

Here is an un-optimized version. 1000+ particles!!! I left the vertex animated planes 50% alpha. Also the noise on the planes doesn't do the over lapping on the z axis like the video.. I'll add that later. So let me know if your still interested in the particle solution, or I can stop.



video https://youtu.be/HI_4JiiEL4M -- available up top x1080

I think it looks pretty cool. How much fps would this cost on a decent system, 1-3 fps? Or perhaps more cause of the functions to 'connect/position' the particles?

The biggest problem would be I think would be that in order to make it really cool, you would need 6-12 wings instead fo ~4, so that probably will cost some fps. Except if it could be still optimized alot ofcourse.

This is really variable on each system, background software and of course every other thing in the level. First you have to pick a target fps , a max fps and a min fps. I use fps_max =60; and try to keep everything at 60 fps. To do so your whole scene must render in 16 milliseconds or less. Checking your render time for levels, ents, and script will give you a total. Subtract that from 16 milliseconds and the remainder is your head room for more actions. I personal can render 1000 particles in 1 millisecond, leaving 15 milliseconds for other actions.


It can be a lot more optimized for sure. First with changing the curve algorithm. I currently use a simple 3 point curve causing the need for two separate for_loops for each wing line. Using a better curve solution can reduce this. Next there is the step size. Small steps make smoother curves but finding a good balance is smarter.Because with smaller steps comes more particles and draws. Also I wouldn't render the wing surface at all or as transparent. I'd ignore it in the render stage. I just want it's vertex positions. However, loading a vector map of the them and there animation changes into memory could save the cost of loading the ent , animating it and doing the look-ups for the vertex positions.

New videos <-- UP top x1080 Of course my art skills are lacking..
https://youtu.be/JJo7kta0Soo
https://youtu.be/L_y-XLLh3d8

Over all I never spent no more than 1 millisecond and rendered up to 1500 particles.

I would call this a bad solution. It's a lot of work that can be done better in a shader or texture fx.

A high level of particles would be needed for a great looking fx and would eat as much as 2 milliseconds for set. x4 ent thats 8 millisecond or 30 fps.

ok I have already this guessed , but thanks for trying.

Unfortunately, I came not yet to give it a try yourself , not on THEREFORE I admit .

Can you send me the 2 examples on PN ore upload .
i want to expand your work .

A final truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgnEJ7K5gnw

Download

Salud!

, takes the cake. Though I could see a combination work. When you use txesmi's solution/shader as the base and add some additional sparkles sparkles or falling feathers or whatever as details.

txesmi for the win!!!

It's a shader world now, no point in living in denial.

@txesmi --> the default.c debug panel shows a ENTITY render time of 0.1 milliseconds is this how we measure the shaders cost? And how expensive is it to make a whole set of wings? Is there a better method for finding the render cost of shaders?

@BlackJack -->

I'm not sure what you would like. The code base is an un-optimized mess, that is only partly realized. Besides clean up, it needs rewriting and redesign ( most of all on the curves methods and implementations). I have rushed to show-and-tell but it's no where no ideal for release. I'd be happy to write a document on the process I used and the greater idea.
In the end txesmi's solution is the correct way and shaders are almost always the better solution when GPU particle systems are not part of an engine (or direct x implementation as dx9), like is the case with 3dgs. The entity vertex animation and the particles are run on the CPU and GPU systems shader cores and now particles have long-ago eclipses CPU systems. I would avoid CPU operations and particles as much as possible.

It is not easy to meassure shaders real cost because it encreases two values on the stats panel: ent and ref

A try on a mesh. I played with the alfa channel over a full white, so it does not need to mix colors in reference to its translucency and it avoids some sorting troubles tha appear when ZWriteEnable is disabled. It survives prety well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz2QhHP2NE8

Salud!

you are my Hero !
Thanks, the think of this has made me more crazy.
with the appropriate model and the matching sprite it will look pretty good.