.png)
Rigging for Real Time: Keeping Performance High
- Mimic Productions
- Jan 13
- 11 min read
Rigging for offline rendering invites indulgence. You can stack deformers, layer simulation, and rely on a powerful render farm to brute force the result. The moment a character moves into a game engine or interactive environment, that luxury disappears. Every extra joint, constraint, or corrective now has a frame cost.
Real time rigging is the craft of preserving nuance, personality, and physical believability within strict performance budgets. It is not a reduced version of character rigging, it is a different discipline with its own architecture, profiling habits, and technical guard rails. At Mimic Productions, this is where scanning, motion capture, body and facial controls, and real time integration meet in a single, carefully tuned system.
This article looks at how to keep performance high when preparing rigs for engines, how engine constraints shape rig design, and which practices consistently survive the jump from DCC to runtime.
Table of Contents
Understanding the shift to engine ready rigs
In a pure animation or VFX pipeline, rigs are built for animators first and machines second. Complex control hierarchies, layered constraints, and procedural deformers are acceptable because the rig evaluates in a DCC, then the result is baked and rendered offline.
For interactive characters, the evaluation happens live. Game engines and real time renderers do not execute arbitrary rig graphs from tools like Maya. Instead, they rely on a combination of skeleton transforms, skinning, blendshapes or morph targets, and a limited set of runtime solvers. The true output of the rig is no longer the viewport in the DCC, it is the skeleton, deformation and data that can be reproduced inside the engine.
This is why production teams increasingly think of character rigging as a two stage process. The first stage is a high control animator rig in the DCC. The second stage is an engine ready representation, often with a leaner hierarchy and a simplified control surface, that keeps just enough structure to preserve silhouette, volume, and facial performance.
Studios that specialise in body and facial setups, such as the dedicated body and facial rigging work at Mimic Productions, treat this handover as a design problem rather than a compromise. The goal is not to strip away detail, but to decide which details truly need to survive at runtime.
Engine constraints and how they shape rig design
Real time characters live inside hard limits. These limits vary between platforms and projects, but they always exist. Effective real time rigging begins with a clear understanding of these constraints and the best practices they imply.
Typical constraints include:
Maximum joint count per character
Maximum influences per vertex and skinning method
Number of active blendshapes or morph targets
Allowed runtime constraints or solvers
Per frame CPU and GPU time per character
Memory and streaming limits for meshes and animation clips
Engine constraints and best practices are not abstract guidelines. They dictate how many twist joints you can afford, whether you rely on joint driven deformation or shape based systems, how you structure lods, and how many separate meshes your character can be split into without destroying batching.
If the rigging team understands these guard rails early, they can design the skeleton and control scheme around them. When those limits are treated as an afterthought, rig reduction becomes an emergency exercise, usually at the end of production when changing topology or joint layout is most painful.
Good practice is to document a simple engine profile before touching a joint: target platform, typical triangle budgets, acceptable rig cost for hero and secondary characters, and which engine features are actually enabled in that project. From there, every rig decision is evaluated against impact on deformation quality and cost.
Building efficient deformation systems
The heart of any rig is deformation. For engines, the goal is to capture the richness of offline setups with ingredients the engine can actually evaluate.
Key principles for efficient deformation:
Topology that supports motion: Flow around shoulders, hips, knees and elbows must respect deformation, not just sculpted form. Edge loops should support twist, bend and volume preservation, so fewer corrective shapes are needed.
Skeleton design through the lens of skinning: Joint placement should be driven by how vertices will move, not only by anatomy. Helper joints can be worth their cost when they replace heavy correctives, but every extra transform should be justified against engine constraints and best practices for that platform.
Balanced use of corrective shapes: Corrective shapes are powerful for elbows, shoulders and extreme poses. In real time, each shape carries memory cost, and each active shape adds to evaluation. The aim is a minimal, surgically chosen set of correctives that fix real problems visible in motion.
Consistent weighting rules: Tight control of skin weights and influence counts keeps deformation predictable and engine friendly. Many engines prefer three or four influences per vertex at most. Rigging tools should be configured so these limits are respected throughout the process.
Applied well, these principles allow character rigging to serve both animators and engineers. Animators get reliable, expressive controls. Engineers get predictable costs and clean data for runtime.
A deeper discussion of deformation setups in traditional animation rigs can be found in Mimic Productions coverage of rigging in animation, which explores how control systems support performance before any real time considerations are applied.
Facial setups for interactive performance
Facial work is where interactive rigs are most at risk of becoming too heavy. Cinematic pipelines sometimes run dozens of facial joints alongside large sets of high resolution blendshapes. In engines, that volume must be curated.
There are three common patterns for facial construction in real time:
Primarily joint driven faces with a modest number of corrective shapes
Primarily blendshape based faces with a reduced joint layer for jaw, eyes and major forms
Hybrid systems that use joints for primary volume and shapes for speech and expression details
In all three, the key is to design a compact set of controls that supports natural speech, emotional range, and recognisable likeness without exceeding engine limits. That means careful selection of phoneme shapes, reuse of expression targets across emotions, and considered lod strategies where far distance faces fall back to simpler solutions.
Because facial capture and retargeting are often streamed from performance capture sessions directly onto these rigs, stability is critical. Any real time rigging strategy for faces must handle both authored animation and dense capture data without flicker, popping, or unexpected constraint behavior when driven at frame rate.
When the same character appears in both offline renderings and interactive experiences, it is common to maintain a high detail facial rig in the DCC and derive a runtime face from it. The mapping between the two needs to be clear and robust, so that changes to performance notes or expressions in the offline version can be reflected in the engine without reauthoring everything.
Animation sources, retargeting and runtime stability
No rig exists in isolation. Its behavior is revealed by motion. For game engines, animation usually comes from three primary sources: keyframe animation, motion capture, and procedural or AI driven systems. Each places different demands on the rig.
Performance capture is particularly sensitive. Dense, continuous motion from a motion capture volume will stress the skeleton and deformation setup in ways that a few test poses never will. It will expose weighting issues, twist distribution problems, and facial shapes that do not interpolate gracefully.
This is why real time character rigs should be tested early with realistic motion capture data, not just with simple animator poses. A practical way to do this is to retarget a sample library of moves through the rig and into the engine, then profile and review visually. Mimic Productions motion capture services are frequently used this way, as a proving ground for rigs before they are locked for integration.
Retargeting itself must be designed into the system. Consistent skeleton naming, predictable proportions, and well defined reference poses reduce the complexity of retargeting solvers in the engine. For AI driven animation systems and conversational avatars, these constraints are even more important, as motion generation is automated and must remain stable over long sessions.
Runtime stability is not only technical. It is also about predictability for design and animation teams. A well built engine rig produces the same result whether it is driven by a prebaked animation, live mocap stream, or AI system.
Workflow, profiling and iteration
High quality real time rigging is inseparable from profiling. Without measurement, all performance claims are guesses. With it, rigging becomes a controllable engineering task.
A robust workflow typically includes:
Early prototype rig: Build a simple version of the character, push it into the engine, and use it to validate joint counts, skinning limits, and baseline performance.
Automated export and validation: Scripts that export the skeleton and deformation, then run basic checks on influences, naming, and required attributes before the asset even reaches the engine.
In engine profiling sessions: Use the engine profiler to measure CPU and GPU time per character in realistic scenes. Test extremes, such as crowds or many instances of the same rig, not just hero shots.
Feedback loops between rigging and integration teams: There should be a direct line of communication between the rigging department and the real time integration team. At Mimic Productions, this is formalised through real time integration services that ensure rigs do not lose quality once they leave the DCC.
Controlled versioning: Changes to rigs must be tracked. If a new corrective or joint is added, the impact on performance should be measured and documented.
Over time, these practices allow teams to build a library of proven solutions. That is where engine constraints and best practices become institutional knowledge rather than recurring firefights.
Comparison table
Aspect | Offline cinematic rigs | Engine ready real time rigs |
Primary goal | Animator freedom and maximum deformation quality | Stable performance at frame rate with strong visual fidelity |
Rig complexity | Large control sets, many constraints and deformers | Lean hierarchies, minimal runtime constraints, controlled complexity |
Deformation | Multiple corrective stacks, complex procedural setups | Carefully chosen correctives, reliance on clean skinning |
Facial system | Extensive blendshape libraries and joint networks | Curated shape sets and focused joint systems |
Simulation | Rich cloth and hair simulation per shot | Limited runtime physics or baked motion where possible |
Evaluation environment | DCC and render farm | Game engine or interactive renderer |
Iteration cost | Higher render cost, flexible rig changes mid production | Lower per frame cost, but topology and skeleton changes are expensive once integrated |
Profiling focus | Render time and memory | CPU time, GPU time, draw calls, memory and streaming |
Applications
Efficient engine ready rigs are now central to many forms of digital production:
Games and interactive entertainment: Player controlled characters, enemies, and companions all rely on predictable, performant rigs that still respond with weight and emotion.
Virtual production: Digital doubles on led volumes demand rigs that are expressive enough for close ups, yet light enough to run live during shooting.
Virtual presenters and AI driven avatars: Customer support agents, brand ambassadors, and virtual influencers must perform for long sessions in real time. Here, facial rigs and lip sync stability are crucial.
Training and simulation: Medical, industrial, and sports simulations depend on anatomically respectful rigs that behave consistently across a wide range of motions.
Location based experiences and XR: In XR environments, the character rig shares the budget with tracking, environment rendering, and input devices, so efficiency in the rig directly translates into overall responsiveness.
In each of these spaces, character rigging is not an isolated discipline. It is an integrated component of the larger performance capture, animation, and rendering pipeline.
Benefits
When real time rigging is approached systematically, the benefits are significant:
Predictable frame rate across a variety of scenes and platforms
Higher visual fidelity within the same performance budget
Faster iteration cycles, because rigs and exports do not constantly break engine limits
Cleaner handoff between rigging, animation, and engineering teams
Reduced technical debt when characters need to live across both offline and realtime contexts
Better reuse of motion libraries, as rigs are designed with retargeting in mind
Well planned rigs also extend the life of a character. The same setup can power a cinematic trailer, an in engine experience, and future AI driven interactive uses, without being rebuilt from scratch.
For a closer look at how rig structures support expressive performance across different mediums, see Mimic Productions reflection on character rigging as a foundation for believable movement.
Challenges
The most common challenges are not purely technical. They are often decisions about priorities.
Balancing quality and cost: There is always one more corrective shape that could improve a shoulder or hip. Choosing when to stop is a creative and technical judgement.
Late discovery of engine limits: If performance constraints are not considered early, rigs may need to be rebuilt just as production ramps up.
Cross platform support: A rig that runs comfortably on high end hardware may be too heavy for mobile or embedded devices. Supporting both often requires multiple levels of complexity.
Tooling gaps: Many studios still lack automated validation and export tools, which leads to fragile handoffs and subtle errors in skeleton or skinning data.
Evolving engine features: Engine capabilities change over time. Features such as new skinning methods or improved blendshape support can shift what is optimal, so teams must remain willing to refine their best practices.
Addressing these challenges requires collaboration between rigging artists, technical directors, engine programmers, and production.
Future Outlook
The line between offline and real time characters continues to blur. Engines are gaining more advanced deformation options, improved facial pipelines, and better support for hardware accelerated skinning and shape evaluation.
Machine learning is starting to appear in rigging and deformation, with models that predict muscle behavior or generate secondary motion. For these techniques to be viable in real time, they must be integrated with an awareness of engine constraints and best practices, not treated as opaque black boxes.
As digital humans and virtual performers move into live contexts, from streaming shows to interactive brand experiences, the requirement for stable real time rigs will only grow. Studios that build rigorous, tested workflows today will be those able to deliver photoreal characters across mediums tomorrow.
FAQs
1. What is the main difference between a typical animation rig and a real time rig?
An animation rig in a DCC is built to maximise control for artists, often using complex constraints and deformers that never leave the authoring environment. A real time rig is the subset of that system that can be reproduced inside an engine using skeleton transforms, skinning, shapes, and limited runtime solvers, all within strict performance budgets.
2. How do I know if my rig is too heavy for real time use?
The only reliable way is to profile it in the target engine. If adding a single character causes frame time spikes or breaks your frame rate target, the rig is too costly. Signs include excessive joint counts, many active shapes, or a large number of separate meshes on a single character.
3. Should I design one rig for offline and real time, or separate rigs?
A common approach is a single high level rig in the DCC that drives both offline and engine outputs, with an explicit export stage that simplifies and normalises data for real time. Completely separate rigs can drift apart and become difficult to maintain, while forcing a single structure to satisfy both extremes often leads to compromise.
4. How early should engine constraints be defined in the project?
Ideally before the first production rig is built. Basic limits on joints, influences, shapes, and lod strategies should be agreed between technical and art leadership so that every rig follows the same constraints and best practices from the start.
5. Can I retrofit an existing high detail rig for real time use?
Yes, but it may require substantial simplification. Often the process includes removing nonessential controls, reducing joint counts, reworking skinning to respect influence limits, and baking down complex deformation into a smaller set of shapes. Testing and profiling in the engine at each step is essential.
Conclusion
Rigging for real time is an exercise in restraint and intention. It asks the same questions as any high level character work – what makes this figure feel alive, specific, and believable – and then insists that the answers fit within a frame budget.
When teams treat character rigging, integration, and engine profiling as a shared responsibility, they build systems that travel cleanly from DCC to runtime. The result is digital humans and interactive characters that move with cinematic nuance and still hit performance targets, whether they are driving a game, a virtual production shoot, or an AI powered avatar.
Contact us For further information and queries, please contact Press Department, Mimic Productions: info@mimicproductions.com
Comments