low quality graphics ..

[Airat9000]

low quality graphics .. will there be a future development option? just a video card and the computer can’t cope ..

8gb in memory ..

[Airat9000]

not ideas?

[pyanodon]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

[darkfrei]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

Can you just resize old graphics? To 50% of the old resolution?

[Airat9000]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

You see, I play on a computer with an 8 gigabyte video card, and 32 GB of RAM .. and then my FPS drops to 15 ... in the middle of the game.


it would be nice to help or someone to do something together .. I would be ready to do it, but I do not have knowledge in design ..
but honestly, many people really want to play at standard, taking into account the shortage of video cards ..

and your mod is very cool - problem graphics

[immortal_sniper1]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

You see, I play on a computer with an 8 gigabyte video card, and 32 GB of RAM .. and then my FPS drops to 15 ... in the middle of the game.


it would be nice to help or someone to do something together .. I would be ready to do it, but I do not have knowledge in design ..
but honestly, many people really want to play at standard, taking into account the shortage of video cards ..

and your mod is very cool - problem graphics

FPS is sort of tied to UPS so if the base is massive there is a hard lock on FPS due to UPS ( if i remember well)
for factorio the GPU is not that important anyway CPU and RAM speed are much more important

if you want to squeeze some more performance do this: disable smoke and particle effects
also disabling biters and pollution will also save you a lot of resources

and if you ask about rigs i am building a megabase ( and the people on discord can see it is real and the scale of it) on a GTX 960M and 16gb RAM ( but is is doable on 8gb too , i did that pre pyAL in my last megabase)

[Airat9000]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

You see, I play on a computer with an 8 gigabyte video card, and 32 GB of RAM .. and then my FPS drops to 15 ... in the middle of the game.


it would be nice to help or someone to do something together .. I would be ready to do it, but I do not have knowledge in design ..
but honestly, many people really want to play at standard, taking into account the shortage of video cards ..

and your mod is very cool - problem graphics

FPS is sort of tied to UPS so if the base is massive there is a hard lock on FPS due to UPS ( if i remember well)
for factorio the GPU is not that important anyway CPU and RAM speed are much more important

if you want to squeeze some more performance do this: disable smoke and particle effects
also disabling biters and pollution will also save you a lot of resources

and if you ask about rigs i am building a megabase ( and the people on discord can see it is real and the scale of it) on a GTX 960M and 16gb RAM ( but is is doable on 8gb too , i did that pre pyAL in my last megabase)

I did so but it did not help me under 16 gigs, it eats everything. and fps under 15 fell .. is the problem in the power supply? if you turn it on at all, then the game hangs ..
maybe the problem is that my processor is too old? 6 AMD PHENOM II 1050 is outdated as I understand it for the game?

[immortal_sniper1]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

You see, I play on a computer with an 8 gigabyte video card, and 32 GB of RAM .. and then my FPS drops to 15 ... in the middle of the game.


it would be nice to help or someone to do something together .. I would be ready to do it, but I do not have knowledge in design ..
but honestly, many people really want to play at standard, taking into account the shortage of video cards ..

and your mod is very cool - problem graphics

FPS is sort of tied to UPS so if the base is massive there is a hard lock on FPS due to UPS ( if i remember well)
for factorio the GPU is not that important anyway CPU and RAM speed are much more important

if you want to squeeze some more performance do this: disable smoke and particle effects
also disabling biters and pollution will also save you a lot of resources

and if you ask about rigs i am building a megabase ( and the people on discord can see it is real and the scale of it) on a GTX 960M and 16gb RAM ( but is is doable on 8gb too , i did that pre pyAL in my last megabase)

I did so but it did not help me under 16 gigs, it eats everything. and fps under 15 fell .. is the problem in the power supply? if you turn it on at all, then the game hangs ..
maybe the problem is that my processor is too old? 6 AMD PHENOM II 1050 is outdated as I understand it for the game?

yes yout CPU is not that great also factorio uses a lot of single thread math so no of cores is not that important since u use a lot 1 core
also if PSU was the proglem PC would crash or stuff like that , unless there is some system that throthles the cpu/gpu when u get close to mapx psu load

[kirazy]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

While re-rendering produces superior results to a simple downscale of existing assets, it is simpler and faster to just downscale. What's needed isn't so much high quality low-resolution assets as just lower resolution assets to free up texture memory.

As long as the pixel dimensions of the source image are divisible by 2, you can just do a 50% downscale and re-use the same shift parameters as the hr_version. If they're not, you have to tweak the shifts slightly, but otherwise it's simple.

Much faster than re-rendering.

[eradicator]

It's not something the main mods have to do though. Technically you can just write a script that intakes all the mods and outputs a "low res texture pack" mod that replaces them in data stage. Thus people could have faster rendering at the cost of slightly more disk space. Ofc third parties can't do it because of the license, so @pyanodon would have to give permission to a willing maintainer if he doesn't want to do it himself.

[Pridesfall]

I did so but it did not help me under 16 gigs, it eats everything. and fps under 15 fell .. is the problem in the power supply? if you turn it on at all, then the game hangs ..
maybe the problem is that my processor is too old? 6 AMD PHENOM II 1050 is outdated as I understand it for the game?

I'm sure it is your cpu. My over 500 hour base is enormous and I'm still getting 60 fps on a 6700k. I get lower fps on my laptop with the same map.

[orzelek]

Grab gpu-z and check video memory usage in it. It will show you if you are actually filling up gpu's memory.

[pyanodon]

no hehehe. No way i will dedicate that hUGE amount of time to re-render and re-make every single building in all my mods. no....

While re-rendering produces superior results to a simple downscale of existing assets, it is simpler and faster to just downscale. What's needed isn't so much high quality low-resolution assets as just lower resolution assets to free up texture memory.

As long as the pixel dimensions of the source image are divisible by 2, you can just do a 50% downscale and re-use the same shift parameters as the hr_version. If they're not, you have to tweak the shifts slightly, but otherwise it's simple.

Much faster than re-rendering.

no...cant just downside the graphics and keep the same size in game without the graphics looks trash.

[kirazy]

no...cant just downside the graphics and keep the same size in game without the graphics looks trash.

I feel like you're not understanding the difference in intent for Normal vs High-res. High-res has 4x the number of pixels as normal res (in conventional implementation), and so there's a 4x increase in texture memory consumption.

Normal resolution is intended to be used in those situations where the texture memory requirements of high-res are negatively impacting performance. So yes, there is an intended drop in quality when you use normal resolution, and this is part of the trade off so you can have performance.

Conventional implementation is something along these lines:

Code: Select all

filename = "normal_size.png",
priority = "high",
width = 150,
height = 150,
shift = util.by_pixel(0, -16),
hr_version = {
    filename = "high_res_size.png",
    priority = "high",
    width = 300,
    height = 300,
    shift = util.by_pixel(0, -16),
    scale = 0.5,
}

So you could provide the lower resolution "normal" images by simply downscaling your high res images:

hr-lr-downscale-comparison.png (371.5 KiB) Viewed 7457 times

The results are perfectly satisfactory and avoids the tedious, time consuming efforts that come with re-rendering in lower resolution. You're not sacrificing anything for your high res images, as people can still use those (and by default are using those!) but it provides an option to use a lower resolution, for performance reasons, where needed.

Would the low-res look better if re-rendered at that target resolution? Absolutely. But if you don't want to put in the time, you can still provide the normal resolution options simply through downscaling.

[eradicator]

Would the low-res look better if re-rendered at that target resolution? Absolutely.

Actually the opposite. Re-rendering them at a lower resolution would look significantly worse than downsampling. That's what Supersampling and high-end graphic cards are all about.

A properly downsampled normal resolution graphic will look identical to the high res graphic unless you have 4k+ screen or you zoom in very far.

[kirazy]

Actually the opposite. Re-rendering them at a lower resolution would look significantly worse than downsampling. That's what Supersampling and high-end graphic cards are all about.

I mean, literally in the image in question that I posted, the one on the top left is a rendering that was output at the target resolution, and the one on the bottom left is a downscaling of the higher resolution image in Photoshop.

I direct your attention to the moiré pattern on the fins on the top right of the downscaled image, as well as the visual artifacting on the metal coil. To say the least.

A properly downsampled normal resolution graphic will look identical to the high res graphic unless you have 4k+ screen or you zoom in very far.

Or know what you're looking for. But it can't, by definition, as a normal resolution graphic has one fourth the pixels as a high res graphic.

To properly produce a normal resolution render, the rendering engine is essentially conducting supersampling in the production of the final image using the full model. If you downscale a high resolution image using a raster program on the other hand, e.g. Photoshop, you will be producing a lower-quality image. On one you're operating on the native model and have all the information available, on the other you're operating on a baked image and are already missing image information.

In Factorio, a normal resolution image will look better at native zoom (F9) than a scale = 0.5 high resolution image will. At 2x zoom (CTRL+F9), which is where you have your proper resolution for high res, the high res will look better.

Edit: Perhaps the issue is that you're talking about downSAMPLING, and I'm talking about downSCALING?

[Zanthra]

I found that I could get the best performance with small texture atlas sizes and VRAM usage set to all. This causes Factorio to build many small texture atlases, and loads them all into the graphics driver's memory. The graphics driver is then responsible for moving them between VRAM and System Ram as needed for rendering. While this can cost some extra CPU time for draw calls because it limits batching, I found that in general it was more than made up for by the memory flexibility to be able to be able to move the minimum of extra textures to and from system memory as different sprites are needed.

I am not sure how applicable this is to other people's systems, but I could usually get well over 60 FPS in most cases except when I zoomed out very far.

[pyanodon]

text

the sprites are already done in their sizes, to increase them i would need to re-render which i wont. Downsize them to make the actual as hi-res would mess with some pipe connections.

[eradicator]

Edit: Perhaps the issue is that you're talking about downSAMPLING, and I'm talking about downSCALING?

I think the issue is that I have a different notion of "rerender at native resolution". The "LRNATIVE" picture you show is clearly anti-aliased. And anti-aliasing is a form of (partial) supersampling, which isn't "native resolution" to me. Maybe I just don't have enough experience with blender. I'm also not sure what algorithm you used to downsample "in Photoshop", but in my experience distortions are usually a problem of cheap-to-calculate algos like bilinear interpolation (which as far as I remember is what factorio uses to do the zoom-scaling at runtime). For "comic" type graphics there are better solutions. Ultimately the semantics don't really matter as re-render isn't an option anyway.

the sprites are already done in their sizes, to increase them i would need to re-render which i wont. Downsize them to make the actual as hi-res would mess with some pipe connections.

I don't see how pipe connections would be affected here. The entity size would change neither "physically" nor visually.

[kirazy]

the sprites are already done in their sizes, to increase them i would need to re-render which i wont. Downsize them to make the actual as hi-res would mess with some pipe connections.

Hi-res assets require you to use scale = 0.5. Normal res assets use scale = 1. There is no apparent difference in perceived size in-game, the only different is the number of pixels that make up the sprite.