Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UDK not showing static mesh when play testing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    UDK not showing static mesh when play testing

    I can import the mesh into UDK without any issue, but when I put it into my level and play test it I can't see it. I do get an error when I import any object that reads "Generated/imported vertex count ratio exceeds expected percentage" and gives me the number it is importing vs what it expected. Even so, I haven't had an issue until recently. Haven't changed any settings so I'm stumped.

    On a side note, is there anything you can do to stop UDK from adding triangles to your mesh after you import it? This is what's going on with my building



    I did a Boolean on the wall to add the windows. I know you can't get rid of the triangles it creates in 3ds Max, but I don't want the triangulation that happens after I import it to have an impact on performance.

    #2
    Have you saved your package?

    Comment


      #3
      I'm gonna go cry a little now haha. That worked. I wasn't saving it because I didn't want to keep deleting and re-saving just to check things out. Any suggestions on the triangulation issue?

      Comment


        #4
        That is not an issue. That's the way it is. If you don't like the way UDK triangulates it, you should triangulate it before importing it.

        Comment


          #5
          Any tips on doing it manually?

          Comment


            #6
            Depends on the software you use.

            Comment


              #7
              I'm using Max 2012. I'm wondering if triangulating manually and turning off triangulation in UDK is the best option or have it done automatically either by UDK or when I export it as a .FBX file. Which leads me to the question of .FBX or .ASE? I've been using .ASE, but .FBX seems like the standard.

              Comment


                #8
                With Max you can use the Turn To Mesh modifier to triangulate just uncheck Invisible Edges.

                your issue with triangulation is based on the topology of the model, for modeling purposes you should always model with quads, attempt to keep the wire density uniform and try too keep the quad angles close to 90degrees. Quads are great because when a model is triangulated its poly are just cut in half so if you have a model of 100 Polys (all quads) that's the same as 200 tris exactly.

                For file format I would suggest FBX, I use to use ASE but FBX is featured in all Autodesk products so whether your working in max or maya you can have the exact same export options.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Chaserm2 View Post
                  I'm using Max 2012. I'm wondering if triangulating manually and turning off triangulation in UDK is the best option or have it done automatically either by UDK or when I export it as a .FBX file. Which leads me to the question of .FBX or .ASE? I've been using .ASE, but .FBX seems like the standard.
                  UDK will ALWAYS triangulate anything that isn't triangle. Triangle is only shape it knows how to draw so you can't turn off triangulation and it's not hurting performance. That's same with almost every computer graphic software. It may appear that you're working in quads or pentagons but it's all triangles with hidden edges.

                  If you don't like the direction of the triangulation, you can triangulate it yourself in Max. Or add some divisions between those windows in your case so the triangulation comes out a little neater. But that will add to vertex count. If the mesh renders fine (which looks like it from your screenshot) and it's just the way it looks in the wireframe that bothers you, I'd leave it alone.

                  As for FBX vs ASE, there are pro's and cons. FBX is good that you can bulk export/import into UDK. And you still have to tweak the material but it automatically imports textures and keeps material assignment when imported into UDK. Biggest downside in my opinion is the collision. ActorX used to break up concave collisions into multiple convex shapes automatically but with FBX, I have to manually break it up.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    In Max, try the subdivide modifier and crank the size up. It does a decent job of triangulating. Aside from that, you can select two verts that you want the edge to be between and hit "connect". Or you can use the cut tool (which i HATE). I always work on editable polys since the tool set is more robust. Like taz said, EVERYTHING is triangulated in UDK (in fact, in EVERY package that renders it is). Renderers draw triangles.
                    Generally, the exporter/importers do a decent job at triangulating. But you need to avoid concave faces.
                    [SHOT]http://screencast.com/t/x15wHDW4b[/SHOT]

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Booleans are almost never useful. They just kill edge flow for pretty much everything unless used sparingly and fixed up a lot after being performed.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        There are many ways to manually triangulate meshes. One is to connect 2 opposite verts in a quad, and another is to delete the faces and create 2 new faces in its place (each beside each other).

                        Comment


                          #13
                          How you would go about adding recessed things like windows then? Adding connects and cuts doesn't seem like the best work flow, but I know what you mean about booleans being more destructive then helpful Jessie.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X