DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha 182

[Jonado]

Okay, if the issue persists after my next LOD generation, I will return to you then. Don't know when I will have time for it though.

[UomoBruco]

Hello,

I have two Skyrim installations, one in the Steam folder and one in a GameRoot folder inside my Mo2 folder. When running TexGen thru Mo2 it targeted the game in the steam folder, but I fixed the RegKey so now it targets the one in the Mo2 Folder. Now, the other files targeted by TexGen are in Appdata and MyGames, more precisely the temp and plugin list are in Appdata and the ini, custom ini and save paths are in Documents/My Games. Is this the right location TexGen should be targeting? Or should it target the files inside the Mo2 game directory? I'm sorry if this is a stupid question but I'm pretty new to modding and this got me pretty confused. Thank you.

Edited March 26 by UomoBruco

[sheson]

2 hours ago, UomoBruco said:

Hello,

I have two Skyrim installations, one in the Steam folder and one in a GameRoot folder inside my Mo2 folder. When running TexGen thru Mo2 it targeted the game in the steam folder, but I fixed the RegKey so now it targets the one in the Mo2 Folder. Now, the other files targeted by TexGen are in Appdata and MyGames, more precisely the temp and plugin list are in Appdata and the ini, custom ini and save paths are in Documents/My Games. Is this the right location TexGen should be targeting? Or should it target the files inside the Mo2 game directory? I'm sorry if this is a stupid question but I'm pretty new to modding and this got me pretty confused. Thank you.

You seem to have a question about how MO2 works. I suggest to read the MO2 documentation and to ask questions about it on the MO2 forum/discord.

By default the game and thus every tool made for it uses the the hard coded folders c:\Users\[username]\AppData\Local\Skyrim Special Edition\ and c:\Users\[Username]\Documents\My Games\Skyrim Special Edition\.

Typically MO2 virtually maps files from its folders to their default locations the game and thus any tools made for it uses.

https://dyndolod.info/Installation-Instructions
https://dyndolod.info/Messages/Windows-Registry-Key
https://dyndolod.info/Help/Command-Line-Argument

[PRieST]

Hey,

I don't know if this is an error done by DynDOLOD or a usererror of myself.
I installed Unique Wooden Bridges - Base Object Swapper recently. Because I wanted to reduce the plugin count on my side I merged everything into my own .esp plugin together with the corresponding swap file.
The mod is also shipping a LOD model for the bridge.

During the new generation of DynDOLOD I saw this message - which is also mentioned in the summary:

Warning: Textures do not match for "Bridge01:1": textures\architecture\farmhouse\stonewall01.dds in woodenbridge01.nif -> textures\architecture\farmhouse\woodwalkway01.dds in woodenbridge01_lod.nif for LittlePatchFixes.esp EastMarchBridge01 [STAT:68005DE7]

Full Model:
https://postimg.cc/BjDN32vM (textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01.dds / textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01_n.dds)
LOD Model:
https://postimg.cc/94hbQzRV (textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01.dds / textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01_n.dds)
In a corresponding .bto file:
https://postimg.cc/sB4cQy7W (textures\architecture\farmhouse\stonewall01.dds / textures\architecture\farmhouse\stonewall01_n.dds)

This is the corresponding record in xEdit:
https://postimg.cc/D4ryFCt7
Also not inside the DynDOLOD_SWAP.ini.

The only thing I can assume from this is, that the texture for the LOD model gets not applied correctly. Or do I have to set up a specific mesh mask rule for the wooden bridge?

Here are the logs:
Logs on MediaFire

Edited March 26 by PRieST

[sheson]

12 hours ago, PRieST said:

Hey,

I don't know if this is an error done by DynDOLOD or a usererror of myself.
I installed Unique Wooden Bridges - Base Object Swapper recently. Because I wanted to reduce the plugin count on my side I merged everything into my own .esp plugin together with the corresponding swap file.
The mod is also shipping a LOD model for the bridge.

During the new generation of DynDOLOD I saw this message - which is also mentioned in the summary:

Warning: Textures do not match for "Bridge01:1": textures\architecture\farmhouse\stonewall01.dds in woodenbridge01.nif -> textures\architecture\farmhouse\woodwalkway01.dds in woodenbridge01_lod.nif for LittlePatchFixes.esp EastMarchBridge01 [STAT:68005DE7]

Full Model:
https://postimg.cc/BjDN32vM (textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01.dds / textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01_n.dds)
LOD Model:
https://postimg.cc/94hbQzRV (textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01.dds / textures\architecture\farmhouse\WoodWalkway01_n.dds)
In a corresponding .bto file:
https://postimg.cc/sB4cQy7W (textures\architecture\farmhouse\stonewall01.dds / textures\architecture\farmhouse\stonewall01_n.dds)

This is the corresponding record in xEdit:
https://postimg.cc/D4ryFCt7
Also not inside the DynDOLOD_SWAP.ini.

The only thing I can assume from this is, that the texture for the LOD model gets not applied correctly. Or do I have to set up a specific mesh mask rule for the wooden bridge?

Here are the logs:
Logs on MediaFire

As you can see by the messages and when comparing the full model and the "LOD" model in NifSkope, the shape names do not match, thus causing the textures to not match.

The wooden pathway is "Bridge01:3" in the full model and "Bridge01:1" in the "LOD" model.
The wooden beams and railing is "Bridge:01:4" in the full model and "Bridge01:2" in the "LOD" model.
The shape names in the "LOD" model should match the names in the full models instead. That should address any wrong texture replacements.

The "LOD" model is not really an optimized/decimated LOD model. It would benefit already from its UVs being adjusted to be between 0.0 and 1.0.
The "LOD" model should be in ..\Data\Meshes\LOD\Bridge\ or ..\Data\Meshes\UniqueWoodenBridges\LOD\ or ..\Data\Meshes\UWB\LOD\ or something similar.

There seems to be a newer version of the mod that has the Radius 0.0 fixed which reported in your logs. See https://dyndolod.info/Messages/Radius-00.

[PRieST]

1 hour ago, sheson said:

As you can see by the messages and when comparing the full model and the "LOD" model in NifSkope, the shape names do not match, thus causing the textures to not match.

The wooden pathway is "Bridge01:3" in the full model and "Bridge01:1" in the "LOD" model.
The wooden beams and railing is "Bridge:01:4" in the full model and "Bridge01:2" in the "LOD" model.
The shape names in the "LOD" model should match the names in the full models instead. That should address any wrong texture replacements.

Oh, ok, it's because of the naming. Now that I know that...this should be something I need to consider for the other 'textures not match' messages :/

Quote

The "LOD" model is not really an optimized/decimated LOD model. It would benefit already from its UVs being adjusted to be between 0.0 and 1.0.
The "LOD" model should be in ..\Data\Meshes\LOD\Bridge\ or ..\Data\Meshes\UniqueWoodenBridges\LOD\ or ..\Data\Meshes\UWB\LOD\ or something similar.

There seems to be a newer version of the mod that has the Radius 0.0 fixed which reported in your logs. See https://dyndolod.info/Messages/Radius-00.

I'll see if I can even further decimate the model myself. But wouldn't this one not ok for level 1 and a more optimized version for level 2 - and if I am correct renaming the mesh to *_lod_1.nif and *_lod_2.nif would than apply it correspondingly?

I thought the new version only changed the NiTriShapes to BSTriShapes - will use the new version now.

[sheson]

7 hours ago, PRieST said:

Oh, ok, it's because of the naming. Now that I know that...this should be something I need to consider for the other 'textures not match' messages :/

I'll see if I can even further decimate the model myself. But wouldn't this one not ok for level 1 and a more optimized version for level 2 - and if I am correct renaming the mesh to *_lod_1.nif and *_lod_2.nif would than apply it correspondingly?

I thought the new version only changed the NiTriShapes to BSTriShapes - will use the new version now.

The main performance improvement of LOD is reducing draw calls by combining lots of different object into supershapes sharing textures on the atlas. This only works if the UV is not titled for the actual LOD texture that is being used in the end. In case of this LOD model and the 3 textures it uses, it is always between 0.0 to 1.0.
LODGen will try to REUV/optimize on the fly but not sure how well it works in this case.
Reducing vertices/triangle count comes secondary.

One non actual LOD model here or there will not be noticeable, but more an more mods use full models or non actual LOD models it these things can add up, also prolonging generation time.

If you are actually using Blender or 3DMax to do things, look into Simplygon, it can tile the UV on top of decimating triangles.

[PRieST]

27 minutes ago, sheson said:

If you are actually using Blender or 3DMax to do things, look into Simplygon, it can tile the UV on top of decimating triangles.

I was already working with Simplygon via Blender, but haven't recognized the UV tiling feature.

Will take a look, thank you.

btw: Yep, renaming the BSTriShapes solved the issue as you said.

Edited March 27 by PRieST

[PRieST]

On 3/27/2024 at 7:09 PM, PRieST said:

I was already working with Simplygon via Blender, but haven't recognized the UV tiling feature.

Will take a look, thank you.

btw: Yep, renaming the BSTriShapes solved the issue as you said.

@sheson
Did what you suggested with Simplygon and the UV stuff. This is now the result of the same *32*.bto file (it's using textures from the atlas now as supposed to be).
The mesh itself is a little bit broken, but for the map it's absolutely fine:

vs. the old model:


Just wanted to give you/all other people here the info.
Of course best practice would be to reduce the overall polycount next, because you won't need all the little structures for the LOD-model at all - but I haven't worked on that, yet.

Edited March 29 by PRieST

[DoubleYou]

31 minutes ago, PRieST said:

@sheson
Did what you suggested with Simplygon and the UV stuff. This is now the result of the same *32*.bto file (it's using textures from the atlas now as supposed to be).
The mesh itself is a little bit broken, but for the map it's absolutely fine:

vs. the old model:


Just wanted to give you/all other people here the info.
Of course best practice would be to reduce the overall polycount next, because you won't need all the little structures for the LOD-model at all - but I haven't worked on that, yet.

Of note, Simplygon will no longer offer its free tier after March 31st.

[z929669]

58 minutes ago, DoubleYou said:

Of note, Simplygon will no longer offer its free tier after March 31st.

There's no clear way to get said "free" tier now that I can see

https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/simplygon-free-tier-abolished

[PRieST]

1 hour ago, DoubleYou said:

Of note, Simplygon will no longer offer its free tier after March 31st.

35k/year...holy... that's kind of a statement...

OK I guess that's it then. Glad I just finished this and a few other things earlier.

[User77111]

Logs: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Av1dDuTYEuYRgcpG0GjoBXG5bQVTuQ?e=Bru3fR

After updating DynDOLOD, all tree LOD in skyrim 3d trees LOD is very thin.

LOD:

Tree Model:

Console of tree:

[sheson]

46 minutes ago, User77111 said:

Logs: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Av1dDuTYEuYRgcpG0GjoBXG5bQVTuQ?e=Bru3fR

After updating DynDOLOD, all tree LOD in skyrim 3d trees LOD is very thin.

LOD:

Tree Model:

Console of tree:

You seem to have customized 3D tree LOD models with a higher alpha threshold then the ones from Skyrim3DTrees and Plants 3dLOD Resources 5.0.1.
Test with the original 3D tree LOD models that typically have a threshold of 128. 

[User77111]

50 minutes ago, sheson said:

You seem to have customized 3D tree LOD models with a higher alpha threshold then the ones from Skyrim3DTrees and Plants 3dLOD Resources 5.0.1.
Test with the original 3D tree LOD models that typically have a threshold of 128. 

It's just slightly better with the normal ones. Not as good as the custom ones I made. Is it possible to disable or adjust this automatic alpha threshold that was added?

Edited March 30 by User77111