I think we really need support of tessalation for the web-plugin out-of-the-box!
Since when creating a web game we need to shrink the size to the maximum, delivering as less as possible data.
And tessalation would save a lot of space! Please, if it’s possible, do it!
I have no idea what you mean. Tessellation is the process of subdividing a surface into smaller regions. In 3-D graphics, it is used in several different contexts. None of them have to do with making an asset consume less storage.
Perhaps you’re referring to reduction, which attempts to reduce the number of polygons in a model without affecting its appearance? If so, it’s hard to imagine how that could be integrated into the publish process for a p3d file, since that’s a very interactive process and doesn’t automate well.
In any case, the publish process already supports reasonable data compression.
David
Oh, I see from your other post that you’re referring to hardware tessellation, as supported by DirectX 11.
It will come to Panda eventually, especially if it proves to be generally useful (and time will tell on that). But don’t be misled by the hype: it’s not going to change the world. There are many graphics technologies that came out with a similar bang and flash and then disappeared just as quickly. Panda’s philosophy is to wait and see, rather than to jump on every new technology around the corner as soon as it emerges.
Remember, every 3-D game on the market right now does what it does without this feature.
Actually, there was a similar hype curve for parametric surfaces in the late 90’s, when Panda was originally being developed; and that’s why Panda includes built-in NURBS support (including things like egg-qtess). We were even talking with the SGI hardware team about adding hardware tessellation support to the graphics pipe, presumably via an OpenGL extension. But as time went on, parametric surfaces fell out of fashion, and polygons become king. Now the wheel appears to be rolling around again.
David
No no, I ment that when distributing a web-game, you have, no must shrink the size as much as possible. And this means as much as possible in-game generated content.
But if you want to create a fully-featured web-game, you’ll see that making too much polygons will extremely over-size the time needed to load the game.
The solution is easy, tessalation. So I’m asking how can this be done, and if it can’t be done I’d put it up on the suggestion-priority list high.
P.S.: I think it can be done through a simple geometric shader. But I have no experience with that. Although I heard that the terrain-creation utilities in panda already have terrain tessalation. Which might be useful!
Well, cya guys 
Dude, tesselation alone does not magically “convert” your low poly model to a high and higher poly one. So just forget about it and use Panda. Same with your DX11 thread by the way. If you think you need that or DX10 for a solid Panda game - or any game for that matter - you kind of missed the point.
I’ve read lot of articles about it even before DX11, and from what I know, if you give enough 3d data, it actually does it.
P.S.: I think there was some kind of trick, by simply making the whole model from quads, and then remove 3x3 blocks of nurbs-alike. Then you just re-generate it. One pass = 100% “regeneration”, two pass = a lot of data lost or jerky, player should not notice, 3 or more pass = highly visible.
Also normal maps are counted in the tessalation pass too, imho 
So you really think you get from 1 to 2 to 3 through tesselation alone?
Wow tesselation also automagically paints better textures
Bradamante, you little hater! Ofcourse not. I mean changing this:
aka. graphics delivered by the web-plugin
To this:
aka. graphics enhanced by end-user PC
Also, I’d like to note you don’t understand how bad web-graphics are. You must understand you have to fit in ~5mb or you immedately lose most of potential players.
A nice example should be this video: youtube.com/watch?v=wJ28DKQGzfU
@MentalDisaster: geometric detail is hardly a problem.
vertices take only very little storage. if you compress that data it’s even less. a several 10k tris model will still fit in well below half an MB. and that level of details is far higher than what you’r likely to use in a browsergame these days.
textures and sound tend to take a lot more space.
noone needed that feature so far, same goes for dx10 and dx11. there are almost no games using those anyway. so please stop nagging about that feature just because you think it’d be cool to have it. if you have a real need for them, go ahead and implement it.
Apparently, the OpenGL 4.0 specification has just been released, and it features hardware tesselation.
I may be missing something, but is that just about the same as subdivision modifier in blender?
GrizzLyCRO, sort of like that but you can write your own shader program to tessellate how you want.