We need better trees now that MSFS2024 has set the bar

[rocket302]

the trees need to include dead trees or more realistic like Microsoft flight 2024. MSFS2024 terrain looks incredible.

yes i know DCS is a combat sim, I'm just saying we could have better trees.  forest does have solid perfect green trees. We need either create random dead ones or a larger variations.

- Also in the mission editor damage should effect trees too.

 

if DCS will not do this does anyone know how to maybe modify the maps, or use a script to randomly put a static dead tree among the forest?

 

[draconus]

If you want to remove the trees there's a trigger action "scenery destruction zone".

There's no "dead tree" static or any tree for that matter. You can see leafless trees in the winter season if the map provides one.

[Dragon1-1]

Well, that's what this post is about. There should be a much greater variety of trees in DCS. Helo drivers would particularly appreciate this, I imagine.

[Darcaem]

While I do agree that more tree variations would be welcome, and 100% support you wish, maybe MSFS2024 is not the best title to set as the benchmark...   I mean, it does "look" great but...

Sorry, jokes aside, specially in Kola map sometimes trees look too similar. On the other maps I don't really notice it that much.

[Beirut]

Unless I'm having a senior moment, the trees change on the Normandy map with the seasons. They get nice fall/winter colours. 

[cfrag]

8 hours ago, rocket302 said:

We need either create random dead ones or a larger variations.

We don’t really need to do that, and yes, it would be nice to have. REALLY nice. I believe that the issue why wo currently don’t is two-fold: one is performance, and I think that this can be well-controlled.

The other is cost. IIRC, DCS uses a licensed version of SpeedTree, licensed a very long time ago. Adding new trees to e.g. Caucasus (which is free) can add significant cost with little to no tangible returns (the occasional better-looking tree will not convince many players to buy more modules). I’m too hoping for a generational leap in wooded quality, maybe in DCS 3. Seeing how little ED invests in the core versus new modules, I’m not holding my breath.

[rocket302]

Well I would think “speedtree” would have given more variety.  I don’t think Dcs team will do anything either but I was wondering if there was a way we could just make a mod or something we could do. 
 

I have tied the distraction zone but it seems trees are not effected 

[draconus]

42 minutes ago, rocket302 said:

I have tied the distraction zone but it seems trees are not effected

Show your miz.

[MissionCMDR]

So removing 1 Million feet of forest for science, in the Caucasus takes 20-25mins to process, and yielded worse performance than just leaving them there.

Without the trees, FPS was bouncing between 54 and 90 literally and had a weird pause every few seconds. With the trees, it's a butter smooth, solid 90 (I have it locked there).

 

 

[SOLIDKREATE]

MSFS is on a completely different engine than what we play on. They also have infinite money. I do admit that the engine, IMO, is getting dated very quickly. Soon ED wil either have to re-build or make the jump to UE5. I don't think UE5 would be very friendly to a DCS type of game. Sure it will look pretty but we would lose a lot I think, correct me if I am wrong. They probably have to create some sort of add-on to do all the math stuff.

[draconus]

10 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

Soon ED wil either have to re-build or make the jump to UE5.

ED's EDGE is still fine and have much potential for growth esp. with MT and Vulcan coming. They tested other engines and found them not up for the task.

[Dragon1-1]

Yeah, UE5 in particular looks pretty, but it has serious issues under the hood. I'd rather see them stick with EDGE. 

[DimSim]

Posted similar over here: