Normandy map lighting

[davidtsw]

Hey guys,

 

So I just bought the Normandy map after watching lots of videos on YT and screenshots and although I can't say I dislike it, it doesn't look as good as what I saw before buying. The lighting seems way off. The trees are bright whereas they look darker and more realistic in all the videos I've seen. The thing is though that in the Caucasus map I loved how the lighting looked and I didn't change any settings in the meantime. There's also lots of shimmering going on with the new map. No idea what's causing it but it almost seems like the map runs on a different engine altogether.

 

Any advice ?

[philstyle]

Hey guys,

So I just bought the Normandy map after watching lots of videos on YT and screenshots and although I can't say I dislike it, it doesn't look as good as what I saw before buying. The lighting seems way off. The trees are bright whereas they look darker and more realistic in all the videos I've seen. The thing is though that in the Caucasus map I loved how the lighting looked and I didn't change any settings in the meantime. There's also lots of shimmering going on with the new map. No idea what's causing it but it almost seems like the map runs on a different engine altogether.

Any advice ?

 

 

Yeah, the normandy map appears to have had different quality control standards to the other maps.

[davidtsw]

Damn. Really ?

 

What about all those videos on YT though ? They all look better than what I'm seeing in game.

 

P.S. I just fired up the Caucasus map. Same settings and it looks WAY better.

[philstyle]

Damn. Really ?

 

 

I only said it "appears" this way. We have no idea what really goes on at the supplier. We can only guess based on what we see.

[davidtsw]

I've been testing the new map and I've got to say I'm a little disappointed. I even thought of asking for a refund on Steam but since I've used the DLC for more than 2 hours they would probably refuse anyway.

 

How come my $50 map is in some aspects inferior to the free Caucasus ? This should simply not be the case. Yes, it looks and feels "authentic". Yes, the sensation of speed at low altitude is incomparably better than with the Caucasus thanks to correctly sized trees. And it's the only ww2 map we have where the ww2 birds we have don't feel out of place, but...

 

My free Caucasus map is much bigger, runs better, doesn't have any graphical glitches.

On the other hand, my $50 Normandy map is small (sure, I knew it before buying), runs a little slower (why?), the lighting seems to be less advanced (how come if it's the same engine?!) and trees change appearance in front of my aircraft which drives me nuts. It's like the LOD radius is so low that every tree changes from less to more detailed model as you're approaching it. The last issue is what bugs me the most right now. Is there any way to get rid of it or at least reduce it ?

 

I should have waited for a sale cause this map isn't worth the full price.

 

P.S. I used to be super excited for the new Syria map. Now I checked who's responsible for Normandy and I'll think twice before I buy their Syria DLC for sure.

 

P.P.S There has been some discussion about the size of the trees in the Caucasus map. Many were saying the trees are correct in size and the sensation of speed is fine and is mostly affected by FOV anyway. And here I am, using the exact same FOV and settings but with lower FPS, flying at 550 kmh in my Mustang low over Normandy wondering why it feels faster than flying a modern jet at twice this speed over the Caucasus... So much for correctly sized trees in the Caucasus :smilewink:

Edited April 9, 2019 by davidtsw

[tintifaxl]

Normandy map doesn't use SpeedTrees. That's the big difference compared to the Caucasus map.

[davidtsw]

Ah, that´s what it is.

 

Oh well, let´s hope that Normandy gets updated with the Speedtrees in the future and reaches the standard of the Caucasus (and other maps as it seems).

[philstyle]

Ah, that´s what it is.

Oh well, let´s hope that Normandy gets updated with the Speedtrees in the future and reaches the standard of the Caucasus (and other maps as it seems).

 

 

The normandy map issues cannot be boiled down to the trees though, IMO.

 

 

The repeated tiling of ground-layout even in the supposed high-deatil/resolution areas of the map near the normandy beaches is offputting. Oddly enugh, the landscape immedaitely around Bayeux is really nice. It's obvious that time and effort was put in to creating a concentric corcilaur field and road layout around the city. However, fly 10 miles away and this attentnion to detail is all but ignored. It is as though parts of the map were allocated to different people and they just got as far as they could with each bit before deadline day.

 

 

There are landscapes with un-nautrally aprupt borders. This is at its worst alongside rivers where the birght yellow/golden beaches have been placed between the river and the riverbanks. The textures have very abrupt and un-natural borders.

 

 

I did a bit of digging some time back to try and work out exactly who Ugra-Media were and where they operated from. Suffice to say that what I discovered didn't fill me with confidence.

[davidtsw]

Yeah, the more I fly over it the more issues I see.

 

True especially about what seems like unnatural borders between areas of the map. It looks like a bunch of generic textures automatically put together.

 

This, along with the trees and weird lighting is what stops me from really enjoying this map.

 

And this map has been out for a while. They really should have fixed all this by now.

 

Any news on who's making the new ww2 map(s) ?

[REDEYE_CVW-66]

Not Ugra. Hope to see the bar raised considerably. I am a huge DCS and WW2 enthusiast, and this map have been my biggest dissapointment. Lots of sloppy work, cut/pasting, terrible colours, shimmering all over. The consumers pointed out a ton of small fixes that could be made to increase accuracy, and only a handful were ever used.

 

Ironically, the colours of the pre-relase build (First spitfire trailer) is the best looking the map has ever been.

At least there, the famous sandy airstrips of Normandy were the colour of sand They were deep brown for months into release until they were slighty brighter and more believable. The trees and fields had believable shading, despite being pre-release it looked incredible.

 

Alas...

Instead we got brick buildings in airfields in airfields that never had them. Missing concrete on the fields that HAD it. Airfields littered with trees and bushes. No winter season. The forest shapes alone is priceless (Seriously, have a look around in the F10 map). There are modders map made on ten years older sims that are far more accurate than this and they were free of charge, and no, it can not be blamed on the map tools.

 

I could go on for pages with countless examples, but what is the use.

 

 

 

I still fly there though- because I totally need to have the location for the airframes and missions that I fly. If a new western front map comes out, I will not be returning.

Edited April 9, 2019 by zionid

[msalama]

Well the trees are really the only thing I'm not content with. The draw distance is way too short and the colors too bright, so they pop up under your nose and never blend in with the rest of the scenery.

[davidtsw]

Just to follow up on the issues mentioned above:

 

I've been playing around with with the settings, both in-game and in the Nvidia control panel and I've found that there are 2 ways to almost completely eliminate the infamous tree shimmering.

 

1. SSAA in the game settings: Makes everything look clearer and works like a charm for the shimmering. Unfortunately, it kills my framerate and I can't use it.

 

2. The almost as good and much more affordable alternative is to set the Antialiasing - Transparency to 4x (Supersample) or higher. This, combined with in-game MSAA set to 2 and the other filtering options in the Nvidia control panel enabled eliminates the shimmering in 80% for me. My framerate is still pretty good.

 

If you see lots of shimmering on trees, give it a try. It might be worth sacrificing some of the other settings to get rid of the shimmering. My Normandy looks much better now than it ever has.

 

This doesn't mean there aren't other issues with the map: questionable colors, no Speedtrees (low LOD radius, worse performance), Normandy sandy airfields, etc.

[Tiny Dot]

Just to follow up on the issues mentioned above:

 

 

2. The almost as good and much more affordable alternative is to set the Antialiasing - Transparency to 4x (Supersample) or higher. This, combined with in-game MSAA set to 2 and the other filtering options in the Nvidia control panel enabled eliminates the shimmering in 80% for me. My framerate is still pretty good.

 

 

Thanks for this, it made the map enjoyable again. Most of the shimmering i saw is gone :)

[PicksKing]

Funfact: I even mentioned the unrealistic lighting a year or so BEFORE release when the first screenshots were shown. Later I even created a thread about it but only very few cared because it seemed to be too early to judge. I hate being proved right.

 

But the worst thing about it isnt even the bad lighting or shimmering issue or the tiling effect.

Its how ugra media handles it. They published this map with the named issues and then faced new projects, like "well maybe we care about the normandy map again someday when we finished the syria map" and the customer has to deal with a somehow unfinished product, which he cant have much fun with for years. Atleast I cant.