Jump to content

REMOVE Mesh scale effects on PE now!


Moo Spyker
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3701 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

This has got to go. It completely screws any large builders over. I uploaded a 4 prim mesh sci-fi hallway. It came in to small so I had to enlarge it for an AV to walk inside and the prim count jumped up to 18... I scaled it even larger to a 64M length and the prim count went to 38... This is complete s***. The hallway is 1026 polygons, VERY low poly count and should not effect prim count what so ever in relationship to its actual size. I heard people say its so at a long distance people have to view the highest LOD which I figured that is what draw distance is for... Change the code for that instead of the prim count effected against sims. I've been waiting for mesh to come out for years and now its here it is unusable for the large builders here in SL... I will NOT be using or supporting this if nothing is changed. The scale effecting PE count has got to be removed completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The details of the dpwnload weight calculation are particularly harsh on larger prims, perhaps more than is justified by the underlying argument. You can mitigate the problem by breaking a large construct into smaller pieces. This means that they switch LOD at shorter distances and that results in a loer overall PE. However, the problem really lies in the LOD mechanism's use of distance/size to determine the switch distances. This is not too unreasonable for other kinds of prim, but is quite unsuitable for meshes with their large range of size to detail ratios. I think the answer is to introduce adjustable LOD factors for meshes, which can be done in a quite simple way. This is described in CTS-631, which offer more discussion as well as a simple solution which does not compromise the underlying intentions of the PE system in any way. With any luck, given expressions of concern such as your own, this may receive some developer attention after release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely agreed.  Not everyone in SL wants to create AV attachments, there is so much more potential for mesh than that.  Removing the scaling effects is a start, but not a true fix for the problem.  Linden Labs needs to rethink their Mesh development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree completely. I know many people who were very willingly holding off on their projects and the like specifically for the purposes of waiting for Mesh. I believe that by ruining the building experience for large content creators takes out more than half of the content creators on Second Life. Not to mention a lot of the great content on Second Life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It turns into a compromise. Figure out what parts of your larger build can be accomplished with regular prims (walls, floors, ceilings, roofs, roads) and what definitely needs to be mesh. The regular prims solve all the hassle of the physics interaction and cost nothing, and you can do details in mesh with no physics costs where possible. Then hope for more in the future. For now, make the best of what we've got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Physical costs on mesh are perfect as I see it. You have full control to add in very low polygon models for them that really isnt an issue. On that hallway for example I had a physical model aswell and it counted as 0.63 prims physically in the uploader. With the mesh scale system removed I cannot even see a need for basic prims anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it should not have a single effect on the prim count what so ever. A change needs to be made to the code that deals with the distances at when stuff is viewable instead of upping the prim counts. It makes what I and so many others build here on Second Life impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can thank the anit-mesh crowd for this, they screamed that mesh would give us an unfair advantage over prim builders so LL made Mesh cost twice as much in PE  as a regular prim.

Which totally defeats the purpose of implementing mesh in the first place: To give us more room on our parcels so we can have better decorated houses and more detailed builds.

but hey I guess the anti-mesh people don't want fully furnished houses and cars that don't look like a box on wheels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The PE for large objects is extremely harsh. It really is a great shame as the landscape of SL is in great need of mesh. Avatar accessories hardly need mesh at all and end users new and old will notice no difference between a billion ploygon sculpty necklace and a billion polygon mesh necklace

We need mesh most IN the world not ON the avatars 

The look of SL could be transformed by mesh but the current mesh implementation with high PE for large objects will not improve the look of SL and hence will not improve SL retention rates :matte-motes-crying:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have said this before.  LL should not punish large mesh with such a harsh PE.  LL's concern over large mesh is the lag it will produce because large mesh can been seen from farther away.

The solutions I suggested is have large mesh have a different draw distance than regular prims.  For example, say your draw distance is set at 100 meters.  Large Mesh draw distance would automatically be set for 50 meters.  Indeed I suggested having a set of draw distance sliders so the individual could decided what was important to them and how much lag were they willing to put up with.  A draw distance for regular prims.  A draw distance for sculpties.  A draw distance for mesh and even a draw distance for avatars.  Which from what I hear avatars are what cause most of the lag in SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just a matter of draw distance, it is that they are catering to users with computers below their own minimum system requirements.  This penalizes everyone else, who *could* handle more detailed objects at longer distances.

The obvious solution for people doing large objects is to use sculpts for the visible shape, since that maintains a cost of 1 prim, and a low polygon mesh as the physics shape, but set invisible.  That way you can walk on it, bump into it, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Alternatively, stop makign low poly objects collapse.  My 8 poly couch/chair shouldn't look like a new age statue at 12 feet away.  Maybe a block but not a 3 d tetragon.  it starts out square, has a cube for physics and stays square.  it should be at least a cube at a whole 5 feet from the avatar and 12 feet from the camera angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3701 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...