Higher Detail Ground Textures

[Nooch]

After watching Wags stream yesterday, I felt like I had to comment on Starway's upcoming DLC textures for the Caucasus map. They seemed to look very good at medium to high altitude but at low altitude they seemed to lack "detail". A bit like what we have right now with the stock textures in fact.

 

To clarify myself, I am not talking about the resolution of the textures but rather the way they were painted. It looked like puffs of colors drawn together, a bit like an impressionist painting if it makes sense. I've tried to find a picture (depicting the current stock textures) that shows best what I mean.

 

 

 

 

I had hoped for something with more precision, closer to what you can see on a photo. I think this is important if we want to get a convincing experience when flying low. Helicopter flight would be rendered much more enjoyable in my opinion. Below, here is something closer to what I'd like to see (Barthek's ground textures mod just as an example).

 

 

 

 

 

Lastly, please don't take my words as an offense to Starway's job. I respect his work and I'm sure he put a lot of efforts and many hours into his project. I hope that what I said will be taken just as constructive criticism. :)

Also I'd be disappointed if this thread turned into a war between people attacking and defending the different texture artists out there. This is not my aim here.

 

So guys what's your take on this?

Edited April 11, 2016 by Nooch

[Texac]

Well I agree with you but don't let us forget that this is a simulator with a huge map. More detail will cost more power from your computer and maybe more money aswell for some textures.

That's why I think it's okay for now. Now they should work on the new effcts like smoke,explosions and all that stuff that were mentioned.

That would make the people more happier.

Let's see how DCS will look with 2.5. I think, I hope we will see a difference.

[98abaile]

Yes, but no where near enough that I'd be willing to pay for it.

[Aginor]

To be honest: The textures are fine for me.

The real improvement would be a new geometry.

 

But then, even that is not too important for me. There are much more important things to improve in DCSW than graphics.

[Vitormouraa]

Well I agree with you but don't let us forget that this is a simulator with a huge map. More detail will cost more power from your computer and maybe more money aswell for some textures.

That's why I think it's okay for now. Now they should work on the new effcts like smoke,explosions and all that stuff that were mentioned.

That would make the people more happier.

Let's see how DCS will look with 2.5. I think, I hope we will see a difference.

 

I don't think so Nik. Look at Barthek's mod, the ground is really good with his textures. You can improve a lot the terrain textures yet, without FPS loss. I used for long time Starway's mod, it's great. But what I saw yesterday wasn't so good as I thought it would be. I have to assume I like more the Barthek's textures. Don't get me wrong, I just think it is better. And also, I didn't see a big difference from what we saw using Starway's mod. It is good, but.. it could be better. What do you guys think?

 

OBS: In 1.2 when I installed his mod (Starway) I was in love, terrain textures plus Afterburner mod. Like Matt said, it was hours and hours to make those textures, I know that.

[NineLine]

So the question is do we need better?

 

Isn't better better?

 

if you dont want better textures the stock ones will still be available. I am not sure I understand this poll, and I am afraid its going to turn into a war between everyones favorite texture artist... honestly both do great work.

 

SO really... I dont get the point of this poll.

Edited April 11, 2016 by NineLine

[Vitormouraa]

So the question is do we need better?

 

Isn't better better?

 

if you dont want better textures the stock ones will still be available. I am not sure I understand this poll, and I am afraid its going to turn into a war between everyones favorite texture artist... honestly both do great work.

 

SO really... I dont get the point of this poll.

 

Why not to improve the terrain textures? DCS uses Black Sea for long time. So we could improve it. Just saying.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Vitormouraa

[NineLine]

Why don't improve the terrain textures? DCS uses Black Sea for long time. So we could improve it. Just saying.

 

I dont get what you mean. Why wouldnt ED want to improve it, even through outside help.

[Vitormouraa]

Sorry Sith, Why not to improve the map**

[Fri13]

You should check the one of the latest ED news or something (don't really remember what it was) where they say they are trying to implement a new ground clutter feature for DCS.

 

I hope that would mean we get rocks, bushes, grass, small creeks, bumps, hills etc. All kind small details that will be laid all over places.

 

I would take a such for 1500-3000m drawing distance, all randomly generated database that then is used, so everyone still see same things.

 

The textures are very great and good, no need to have more detailed. But we just don't have the actual terrain objects there to take everything to life.

 

 

I have been flying all over the different places on DCS now, and it is really so dull and simple and empty that it isn't much courage to fly actually below 8-10km. Yes, at altitude. Because you just suddenly see the tree islands to pop-up, big buildings to pop-up and everything on just flat terrain. No small details, no objects that would make you want to get up to see better.

 

It really should be that the fields are the only clear and empty spaces, while the meadows and other forests are full of all kind grass, stones, small (-2-20m) variation of the terrain etc so we have hills etc.

 

It would make even DCS Combined Arms totally different kind because you wouldn't have those long engagement ranges or you would not see the ground units from up from the air because they would mix to terrain nicely.

 

Add there the camouflage nets and the units standard basic concealment procedure to cover vehicles with surrounding elements (tree branches, grass, moss etc) and you don't even see them in the thermal camera and if they don't move, you don't even see them when they sit just next to treeline or so.

 

Even from up in the air you shouldn't be able spot ground vehicles far (like 1000-1500m) unless they move or they create tracks that you can spot, once they are concealed. It would make very big reason to have recon units, have ground troops to actually move and search the enemy and then report their contacts back.

 

Now the Caucasus map is just like the NTTR, just with a different texture.

 

I really hope that EDGE really made it possible to smoothly read the high resolution randomly generated terrain mesh (randomly generated meaning ED adds noise and other to the height map so it is more detailed) without requiring to suck whole 8GB of RAM just for it.

Then get something for the unit detection at distance, even if it would be a transparency values, by changing it so that when vehicle is observed from far with wide view, it is semi-transparent. When vehicle is moving it is more opaque or when observed from closer or from narrower field of view you can start detecting the border lines (contrasty etc).

[Chief1942]

My sense is that ED has us where they can as regards terrain detail without driving many of the systems out there to their knees. All that fine detail most desire costs rendering power. Where would one suggest they scavenge that power simply to provide more detailed eye candy? Flight model? Cockpit detail and function? As GPU and CPU powers and abilities increase as they always have, I feel ED WILL use those more powerful future hardware assets to give us what we are wishing for. Patience I think is the key word. That's just my view, your milage may vary.

[Fri13]

To be honest: The textures are fine for me.

The real improvement would be a new geometry.

 

But then, even that is not too important for me. There are much more important things to improve in DCSW than graphics.

 

I hope you mean "in DCSW than textures" ;-)

 

Because new terrain mesh and ground clutter would radically improve the DCSW by making it far more difficult to fly and would require more usage of ground troops, block the ground troops movement by correctly denying the easy travel routes etc.

 

Now it is like billiard table, with couple balls (towns) there and everything you put on will be visible to everyone unless you put them behind the balls (buildings).

[possumkiller]

I like Starway's northern Europe textures. I use them currently. Bartek's are very detailed and well done just a bit bright for me. The one that Mustang is working on right now looks like the ultimate for me.

[cichlidfan]

... but at low altitude they seemed to lack "detail". A bit like what we have right now with the stock textures in fact.

 

SO really... I dont get the point of this poll.

 

I think the OP meant to ask about 'close up or low altitude' textures, not better textures in general.

[NineLine]

I like Starway's northern Europe textures. I use them currently. Bartek's are very detailed and well done just a bit bright for me. The one that Mustang is working on right now looks like the ultimate for me.

 

And it should also be noted, any of these people could submit to have their texture updates become a DLC for DCS World.

[Nooch]

I think the OP meant to ask about 'close up or low altitude' textures, not better textures in general.

 

Yup, correct. Current textures look fine at medium to high altitude. I was just asking for textures that look good down low as well.

 

My sense is that ED has us where they can as regards terrain detail without driving many of the systems out there to their knees. All that fine detail most desire costs rendering power.

 

No because here I'm just talking about drawing the textures differently, not increasing their resolution. And it's the resolution that is mostly responsible for the textures size and hit on frames per second.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Nooch

[secret1962]

And it should also be noted, any of these people could submit to have their texture updates become a DLC for DCS World.

 

Yes... but they could also keep them as a free mod... right ?

[cichlidfan]

Yes... but they could also keep them as a free mod... right ?

 

Not if the in game textures become closed off like compiled lua is.

[Fri13]

My sense is that ED has us where they can as regards terrain detail without driving many of the systems out there to their knees. All that fine detail most desire costs rendering power. Where would one suggest they scavenge that power simply to provide more detailed eye candy? Flight model? Cockpit detail and function? As GPU and CPU powers and abilities increase as they always have, I feel ED WILL use those more powerful future hardware assets to give us what we are wishing for. Patience I think is the key word. That's just my view, your milage may vary.

 

That requires that the graphical system and terrain system has been designed to offer that, it is not about hardware power (unless we talk that someone is flying still with PC from 2005 and wants full details).

 

[ame]

[/ame]

[ame]

[/ame]

[ame]

[/ame]

 

And what does automatic random terrain generation mean?

 

[ame]

[/ame]

 

 

We do not need an FPS gamers level of detail than at very close range, and that is what can be totally random (not-required to be synced with the clients), but then everything else requires to be synced, so it needs to be drawn from existing datapool that what is suppose to be where.

 

And that should be on the client-side, and it isn't really heavy in the end because you can't really be same time at high altitude seeing everything, and then be in the ground level seeing the rocks and grass, because only specific distance around you is getting drawn.

 

 

ED knows this, so should many others. And the real biggest resource hungry for that is simply the disk space.

 

I don't know about you guys, but I would be willing to drop 50GiB more for DCS if it would allow better terrain possibility as add-on.

 

And it wouldn't even be a such because I would say "Ditch the photorealism" and "Ditch the realism". I don't want that terrain is trying to do what Microsoft FSX or X-Plane does with the airports and cities etc, being ultra realistic where even handicapped parking lots are correctly placed.

 

Because I am not interested to operate on the airfields. My 99% of the time happens in elsewhere than admiring hangars and airfields operation, it happens on combat areas, it happens in the air and on the ground.

 

If you have textures, then you have basically already the mapping data for randomly generated terrain. You just spray that data there and done. No hand placing rocks, trees etc.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Fri13

[Plagi_Arism]

And it should also be noted, any of these people could submit to have their texture updates become a DLC for DCS World.

 

What means DCS textures will no longer be moddable in the future. :huh:

Except: through ED only.

[NineLine]

What means DCS textures will no longer be moddable in the future. :huh:

Except: through ED only.

 

Its possible thats what it means, future new maps will indeed be that way. I dont have any info on that though.

[Plagi_Arism]

Its possible thats what it means, future new maps will indeed be that way. I dont have any info on that though.

 

So, will this apply to all other (future) maps too? - and to all other serious non-texture mods too?

Everything must go DLC?

[NineLine]

So, will this apply to all other (future) maps too? - and to all other serious non-texture mods too?

Everything must go DLC?

 

The new maps are quite different, I dont know that retexturing options will be available right now... maybe years from now we will see. I dont think the new maps really will need much re-texturing...

[Aginor]

The new maps are quite different, I dont know that retexturing options will be available right now... maybe years from now we will see. I dont think the new maps really will need much re-texturing...

There's always room for improvement. :)

[NineLine]

There's always room for improvement. :)

 

Welcome to 2016, I am doubtful you will be able to poke around as much in the new maps compared to the older map.

 

Expect ED to keep pushing the new map tech forward as well ;)