Request Texture question

[CmputrBlu]

I'm sure this has been discussed before but I was just wondering if the texture we see (on the PC for example) are the best we'll ever get. Has there been any word on this from Farsight? On my Kindle fire HDX the textures appear much more crisp than they do on the PC for example. Now this might be due to the 8.9 screen size on the Kindle HDX as opposed to the 24 inch size of the LCD; but at the same time the screen resolution on my HDX does happen to be greater than what I'm using for my PC (1920x1200).

Are there higher resolution textures on our future? Will the pretty obvious horrible looking random textures at least be re-done at least? The texture on the glass near the instructions on Tales Of The Arabian Nights are just awful looking on the PC for example. Doesn't effect my enjoyment of the tables but the PC (at least) is able to handle higher res textures.

Again, sorry if I'm just repeating stuff that already been said ad-nausea.

 

[dada8787]

I have this game on my iphone ,xbox360 and PC. I agree that textures on many tables should be much better. I hope directx 11 patch will improve that. Or im wrong?

 

[LMA]

DX11 does nothing for textures only lighting and shaders. You could have 20000 x 20000 res textures with DX9 but we get around 1000 x 1000 for TPA some objects have far lower than that.

 

[JPelter]

DX11 does nothing for textures only lighting and shaders. You could have 20000 x 20000 res textures with DX9 but we get around 1000 x 1000 for TPA some objects have far lower than that.

I think someone said the PS4 version has some of the textures redone at higher resolution. If that's the case we should probably get that at the same time too. I'm not 100% sure on this though since I can't remember where I saw it.

 

[Alex Atkin UK]

From what I have seen the PC textures look better than the PS4 ones, but of course it can vary from table to table and I only have tried a few on both platforms.

 

[CmputrBlu]

As an interesting side note. Yesterday bought season 3 for the PC and was exploring the "Fish Tales" table up close. The surface of the play field it not bad; texture wise. You can tell it's a scan or photo of the real table. It's not perfect but works well; especially since you don't get that close during game-play. But then you got some textures on the bumpers that are just bad. This is on other tables too; some very good textures and others not. Not sure if this is the textures or the rendering of said textures. If the former; I wonder how that even happens.

 

[Longi]

I recognized that the Season 3 tables looks more high res.
The older Tables on my 40" PinCab seems washed out and blurry.
Sometimes I can't read the letter clearly although all PC settings maxed out

Mike could we see sharper play field scans in the future?

 

[Mike Reitmeyer]

The playfield textures are 1024x2048. I'm not sure if there are plans to go higher than that. Higher resolution textures require more graphics processing power.

 

[Longi]

Okay thanks Mike!
Maybe it could be possible to switch the resolution in the settings for people who have more processing power!?
That would be awesome! Like in other Games: more Power = higher settings

 

[mpad]

The playfield textures are 1024x2048. I'm not sure if there are plans to go higher than that. Higher resolution textures require more graphics processing power.

If all tables have this resolution it's fine with me, because on junk yard it looks awesome.

But then there's another problem besides resolution why other tables like monster bash or cftbl have such blurry textures that it hurts the eye. Just look at the triangular parts at the bottom of the cftbl table where "press flipper for..." is written. also the graphics on the slingshot etc. Terrible.
Those tables need the same eye candy as junk yard.

 

[BlackRainbowFT]

Yeah. I don't think you should limit the quality of the content because "it would need more processing power".
Like every other game out there, you could just put a "texture quality" option in the main menu.

I think it's very important to future proof your game... especially if you plan on doing 6 seasons or more...

 

[Mike Reitmeyer]

If all tables have this resolution it's fine with me, because on junk yard it looks awesome.

But then there's another problem besides resolution why other tables like monster bash or cftbl have such blurry textures that it hurts the eye. Just look at the triangular parts at the bottom of the cftbl table where "press flipper for..." is written. also the graphics on the slingshot etc. Terrible.
Those tables need the same eye candy as junk yard.

I checked ctfbl and it's also 1024x2048.

The slingshot plastics use a different texture than the playfield.

Yeah. I don't think you should limit the quality of the content because "it would need more processing power".
Like every other game out there, you could just put a "texture quality" option in the main menu.

I think it's very important to future proof your game... especially if you plan on doing 6 seasons or more...

There are 2 reasons I haven't done this.

1. We are using 1024x2048 and don't have larger. Also since those are nearly 1:1 texel to pixel ratio in portrait (2:1 in landscape), a higher resolution texture might not give a noticeable difference.
2. Our engine currently doesn't have a way to swap textures based on an option. It's doable, but would take a bit of time to implement.

 

[mpad]

I checked ctfbl and it's also 1024x2048.

The slingshot plastics use a different texture than the playfield.

I believe you , but then there's something else ruining the quality. Maybe the source? Or the artwork of the rt was blurry from the beginning?

Monster bash just looks blurry overall and it's hard to read the text. Junk yard istead is crisp and sharp everywhere.

Just thinking if the source files are all the same quality, maybe there went something wrong in post processing and it could an easy fix by just replacing them. Would be a nice treat for some tables.

If not I'm fine if you keep up the great quality of the current releases.

 

[SilverBalls]

Maybe Mike it is possible just to post the main playfield image asset that is used for the playfield. That way we could open it up in an image editor and determine if the issue is coming from elsewhere. The poor quality is particularly noticable in portrait on a large screen (42"). It is a shame because this would make a huge difference if can be improved.

 

[Sean DonCarlos]

Maybe Mike it is possible just to post the main playfield image asset that is used for the playfield. That way we could open it up in an image editor and determine if the issue is coming from elsewhere. The poor quality is particularly noticable in portrait on a large screen (42"). It is a shame because this would make a huge difference if can be improved.

I doubt he could do that due to their licensing agreements.

 

[Mike Reitmeyer]

I doubt he could do that due to their licensing agreements.

Yeah, not sure if I'm allowed to do that.

I will ask the art team to look over the older tables and see. We did switch to a much better camera a while back for taking the photos. That might be the reason they look better now.

 

[SilverBalls]

Yeah, not sure if I'm allowed to do that.

I will ask the art team to look over the older tables and see. We did switch to a much better camera a while back for taking the photos. That might be the reason they look better now.

Excellent - thanks.

 

[Roo]

Yeah, I've been complaining about this one since the beta. AFM and Whirlwind are very obvious with fuzzy/jagged lines around the flippers. But I've noticed and commented on how the playfields looked much better starting in season 3!

Old beta thread: http://digitalpinballfans.com/showthread.php/5445-Low-Quality-Playfield-Art-(AFM)

 

[lio]

1024x2048 should be good enough most of the time I guess - especially since the next step would be 2048x4096 which is probably overkill for todays screen resolutions.
But just because the texture has a resolution of 1024x2048 doesn't mean it takes advantage of that... you can also just blow up lower res textures to that size and not gain any detail - or you can kill a lot of the detail through compression - to me it still looks like a lot of the textures have bad compression artifacts especially in areas that have red next to black.
I'm a bit surprised Mike said "We are using 1024x2048 and don't have larger." I would have guessed that the source images you are working with would be a good deal higher res :-/

 

[Mike Reitmeyer]

1024x2048 should be good enough most of the time I guess - especially since the next step would be 2048x4096 which is probably overkill for todays screen resolutions.
But just because the texture has a resolution of 1024x2048 doesn't mean it takes advantage of that... you can also just blow up lower res textures to that size and not gain any detail - or you can kill a lot of the detail through compression - to me it still looks like a lot of the textures have bad compression artifacts especially in areas that have red next to black.
I'm a bit surprised Mike said "We are using 1024x2048 and don't have larger." I would have guessed that the source images you are working with would be a good deal higher res :-/

Sorry, I should have said "I don't have larger", meaning the art team may have larger source. I didn't see those in the project.

I've done a lot of photography on the side, and I know that the quality of the camera and lense can make a huge difference in the photos. We recently switched to using a Canon 5D Mark II with a high end L lense. I'm not sure what all was used in the past.