0

I have a retro-looking 2D game with a lot of sprites (reminiscent of Sega's Super Scaler arcades) which do not use semi-transparency. I have thought about using the Z-Buffer over sorting to simplify things. Ok, but by default writes are done to the Z-buffer even though alpha is zero, giving the effect illustrated here:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/ubLlp.png

Now, since I'm in OpenGL ES 2, I don't have alpha testing, so from what I understand my only possibility is to discard the pixel from the fragment shader if alpha is 0 so that it doesn't get written to the Z-Buffer. But in terms of performance this is SO wrong: not only the if is slow, but the discard basically kills the purpose since it disables early depth testing and the result is way worse than doing it in software.

if (val.a < 0.5) {
    discard;
}

Is there any other solution I could use which would not kill the performance? Do all 2D games sort sprites themselves and not use depth buffer?

Brunni
  • 143
  • 1
  • 11

1 Answers1

0

It's a tradeoff really. If you let the z-buffer do the sorting and use discard in your shaders then it's more expensive on the GPU because of branching and late depth testing as you say.

If you do the depth sorting yourself, then you'll find it's harder to issue your draw calls in an optimal order (e.g. you'll keep having to change texture). Draw calls on GLES2 have a very significant CPU hit on lower end devices and the count will probably go up.

If performance is a big concern, then probably the second option is better if you do it in conjunction with a big effort on the texture atlasing front to minimize your draw call count, this might be particularly effective if your sprites are low resolution retro sprites because you'll be able to get a lot of sprites per texture atlas. It isn't a clear winner by any stretch and I can imagine that different games take different approaches.

Also, you should take into account that the vast majority of target hardware is going to perform just fine whichever path you choose, and maybe you should just choose the one that is faster to implement and makes your code simpler (which is probably letting the z-buffer do the sorting).

If you fancy a technical challenge, I've often thought the best approach might be divide up your sprites into fully opaque sections and sections with transparency and render the two parts as separate meshes (they won't be quads any more). You'd have to do a lot of preprocessing and draw a lot more triangles, but by being able to do some rendering with fully-opaque parts then you can take advantage of the hidden-surface-removal tech in all iOS devices and lots of Android devices. Certainly by doing this you should be able to reduce your fill rate burden, but at a cost of increased draw calls, and there might be an unnecessarily high amount of added complexity to your code and your tools.

Columbo
  • 6,648
  • 4
  • 19
  • 30
  • Thanks for your comment! Just to make sure, what is the second option you're talking about? I'm drawing a lot of them (2000~3000 big sprites typically). So the interest of separating in transparent and opaque sections is that: - I render opaque textures with a simple shader that goes through and uses Z-buffering, - Then I render transparent sprite parts, using Z-buffer too (parts that have not yet been obscured) using the if+discard shader. - I try to remove most of totally transparent areas with preprocessing. Kinda reminds me of what we used to do with sprites on the Mega Drive ^^ – Brunni Jul 05 '16 at 23:37
  • I came across this Mali blog today which talks about splitting 2D sprites into opaque and transparent sections for efficiency reasons: https://community.arm.com/groups/arm-mali-graphics/blog/2015/11/19/mali-performance-7-accelerating-2d-rendering-using-opengl-es – Columbo Jul 27 '16 at 15:50