Tesselation needs to come back, desperately

[Daffrendo]

@IronicParadox

@Frenetic

When mature, Nanite will (essentially) obviate the need for tessellation.

That’s what I’m saying… For now, deformed/skinned meshes can just be subdivided for more geometry. The increase in cost for the non-nanite mesh, that had to be subdivided for more geometry since tessellation is gone, will still be trivial compared to the savings in static nanite geometry in the scene. In some cases, the performance might equal the same vs a UE4 version of the scene, but in most cases, you’d probably still come out ahead on UE5, assuming you don’t have dozens of 500k characters on the screen being rendered at LOD0.

I appreciate your concept, that for skeletal mesh, one just need subdivide and then you have the mesh you wanted. Now, this would be indeed be wonderful if one could in fact do this through UE5’s modeling mode, where it could be operated through Nanite, but you cannot. As such, you have to do this externally, leading to the following:

(1) you have to employ labor to reassign said mesh, or engage time to reassign the existing Epic-marketplace purchased mesh to one of higher poly fidelity. This entails bone calibration work, UV texturing calibration work, and a general “new mesh” troubleshooting process.
(2) This new HD mesh cannot merely be ‘swapped-into’ your old skeletal mesh’s Blueprint. The AnimBP, for example, needs to be assigned to a new skeleton, so this will now involve troubleshooting the AnimBP AnimGraph and EventGraph, which likely will not function with the new mesh due to it not having the exact mesh ‘layout’ as the lower poly one. Everything needs to be troubleshooted and re-assembled.

But yeah, I’m with you…If you could quickly subdivide your already existing skeletal mesh in UE5, so it could be handled by Nanite, this would be a win. But in absence of that, users are asking for Tessellation. It’s a huge cost saver.