3d trees
-
well this looks ugly. maybe if u put just the top of the trees on top of the flat areas it would look better.
I’m sure it will look lovely when u r at the same level as the trees like taxiing or takeoff but when above… hmmm it will look bad. -
well this looks ugly. maybe if u put just the top of the trees on top of the flat areas it would look better.
I’m sure it will look lovely when u r at the same level as the trees like taxiing or takeoff but when above… hmmm it will look bad.it depends on many factors, patch shape is better tuned now, smoothing is bad on sample image, colours are perhaps too bright compared to individual trees ( i am even thinking of dafragmentating texture)…posted sample model makes self shadow-casting …I doubt other models than player F-16 does that in simulation…?
U should imagine it rather with similar textures:
from above u would see the same or similar color as underlayered forrest texture, from 20k these objects will be off…
On the other hand, irregular pentagone(not pentagram as i wrote) model can be substituted with tree-cluster if desired…
-
Actually I like the idea, will be cool to see how it look in game.
-
I personally like the Lod 1. Looks really nice and it would be a pleasure to have this implemented in the BMS. Thanks for all your work!
-
I personally like the Lod 1. Looks really nice and it would be a pleasure to have this implemented in the BMS. Thanks for all your work!
In core DB? I rather not to see. It makes impossible to turn the focus shadows even I use LOD1 as LOD0.
-
-
?
A single tree group consists almost as many polygon as an AC. The impact pf FPS is way too high with JanHas trees.
-
I thaught, he was talking about L1 “pentagone” model (deformed one).These are just few polygons and no opacity maps.
Opacity maps are main FPS killer (if reasonable polycount) - when I fly through explosion during dogfight, my FPS drops from 80+ to single digit…. -
I thaught, he was talking about L1 “pentagone” model (deformed one).These are just few polygons and no opacity maps.
Opacity maps are main FPS killer (if reasonable polycount) - when I fly through explosion during dogfight, my FPS drops from 80+ to single digit….Yes, particle effects at close are totally FPS killers even if you use the lowres option in CE.
-
“I thaught, he was talking about L1 “pentagone” model (deformed one).These are just few polygons and no opacity maps.”
Correct. I was referring to your proposals of forest shapes. From non-technical knowledge and perspective I think that the Lod 1 (Lod 1 - deformed irregular surface) looks the best and most realistic. Obviously I have no idea on the FPS impact as well as what are minimum requirements.
IMHO, 3D forests would make a lot of missions quite interesting (where it would be harder for a visual identification).
-
Trees,trees,threes……;)
Here are some things to consider:Looking at Jans fine work for GUAM, do I really want “Joe User” to “spend” that much CPU to draw the trees??? Pretty as they are….NO!
So I degress to something easier for the hardware to digest:Not a lot of difference to the “Eye”, but way better for the hardware
In game we get better FPS:
Remember we render Triangles not Polygons in BMS……demer
Note: this approach should become obsolete in 3-4 Falcon weeks…:mrgreen: -
fantastic!!
-
Any update on this? The game wll benefit a lot from trees on the ground.