Jump to content

Do shrubs etc fade with distance?


Recommended Posts

I'm not sure what you mean Sup. Do you mean you prefer better looking ground at your feet at the expense of stuff popping up in the distance. Doesn't the fact that it makes it hard to conceal yourself cause you don't know if the bush you are hid in is visible or not bother you?

  Oh and i know i'm a bit long winded sometimes but i like to get to the nitty gritty of stuff.  ;)

Oh, the terrible FOG issue. As a sniper I hate it, really do. Even though I loved playing BF2, I hated the 500 yards limit. And that with 100% visibility turned on. Can't we al remember one game:

Delta Force I, II and Land Warrior, they didn't use FOG. And as a sniper, I enjoyed these games too the fullest.

I surely hope, the line of sight in GRAW is extensive. Needs to be for us snipers!

As to the concealment, well, Delta Force II did it perfectly.

Cheers

Edited by M95-Sniper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

M95 maybe you mistake the meaning of concealment and cover. Delta Force 2 had no concealment at all. Either you got behind a solid object or you were visible even a a massive distance. Bullet drop off was great so the shot had to be ranged right but you could see a guy two miles off in that game and no bushes or grass would hide them.

Even Joint ops wich is basically DF5 could only make you a llighter shade of green when you are in a bush as it doesnt draw the bush.

This issue is very important actually.

Look at GR1. Perfect. If you see a tuft of grass at your feet and lay in it then any opponant will see that same tuft of grass even if they are at maximum range. Same for bushes etc.

Consistency is very very important and different people with different rigs and graphics options selected shouldn't be able to tweak an advantage. Nor should the desire for a prettier area with wavey dasies etc rob us of an even and consistant terrain in the distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M95 maybe you mistake the meaning of concealment and cover. Delta Force 2 had no concealment at all. Either you got behind a solid object or you were visible even a a massive distance. Bullet drop off was great so the shot had to be ranged right but you could see a guy two miles off in that game and no bushes or grass would hide them.

  Even Joint ops wich is basically DF5 could only make you a llighter shade of green when you are in a bush as it doesnt draw the bush.

This issue is very important actually.

Look at GR1. Perfect. If you see a tuft of grass at your feet and lay in it then any opponant will see that same tuft of grass even if they are at maximum range. Same for bushes etc.

  Consistency is very very important and different people with different rigs and graphics options selected shouldn't be able to tweak an advantage. Nor should the desire for a prettier area with wavey dasies etc rob us of an even and consistant terrain in the distance.

I always was under the impression that the grass in DF2 worked well in terms of concealment. Used to snipe from around the 1200-1500 meter mark, so I probably was 1 x 1 pixel.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it looks like in the newer screenshots there isnt a whole lot of fog. In Mexico city there would be more smog than fog anyways. the newer screenshots seem to support that too. doesnt seem to be any info on the srubs disappearing though. its not a game breaking feature but it makes the game more fun since you have places to hide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it wouldn't be a game 'breaking' feature no but it would be a feature (or lack of) that serverely impairs the game, just as it does in Joint Ops, BF2 etc. I played GR1 online in open servers and also clan matches from day 1 and to my memory an awful lot of it involved making your way to a spot and choosing very carefully a nice place with good shadow and concealment, one that you could see through to your approaching enemy but that would hide you so you could get the drop on them.

In GR1 you could trust that your concealing brush or whatever wouldnt be stripped away from you by the fact that your enemy was at a distance and the graphics engine needed to de prioritise the drawing of that distant bush you happned to be situated in.

Sniperer, you weren't a 1X1 pixel in DF2 because the game took the care to draw you more clearlly for what they probably considered a function of keeping the game flowing. You tended to be a very dark spot on a distant light landscape, one that was quite easy to notice even with the naked eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at GR1. Perfect. If you see a tuft of grass at your feet and lay in it then any opponant will see that same tuft of grass even if they are at maximum range. Same for bushes etc.

Consistency is very very important and different people with different rigs and graphics options selected shouldn't be able to tweak an advantage. Nor should the desire for a prettier area with wavey dasies etc rob us of an even and consistant terrain in the distance.

I like GR as much as the next guy but you paint it as the end-all of perfection in games.

Turn down the details and you have a significant advantage compared to someone else running everything on high ... trees and bushes look entirely different and are a lot easier to see through at low settings. Things might not've changed at distance but what does it matter when "distance" is limited by fog @ 100 meters? Not to mention the advantage of someone running shadows on high ... especially because that was probably the most taxing option in the game, so most people COULDN'T run shadows on high for a while.

It also a while before anyone could run the clear / no-fog maps with decent settings. It was great having things not disappear at range in those maps, but we're still talking 400 meters MAX ... that's where normal engagements begin in other games like OFP.

Compromises have to be made, no way around it. At least it won't be such a problem in the urban settings for GRAW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i wasn't saying GR1 was perfect. I havn't seen a perfect game yet. But when we discuss elements of games we can say so.

I agree the fog was awfully close, annoying much of the time. But that said, i was specifically stating that stuff stayed where it was from wherever the view.

If somone wanted to use sucky graphics to strip away some detail then go for it but i trusted that most wouldn't.

yeah for awhile my mate had an advantage over me cause i couldn' use shadows. Then i got my Gforce3 hehe.

But my main point was and is about the dissapearing 'concealment'.

You say that compromises have to be made and for all life in general that might be true but that implies a do or die option. Many of the cases in newer games are more of an extreme cosmetic factor. I mean they could have very lovely graphics at yoru feet that go on in a consistent way all to the end of the map. But instead they want stupendously gorgeous graphics at your feet and quite bare 100 meteres off int he distance.

I'm all for that for Quake 4 and it's ilk. I just think that given the option most people would opt for a more even distribution of resources in order to get consistency of scenery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it wouldn't be a game 'breaking' feature no but it would be a feature (or lack of) that serverely impairs the game, just as it does in Joint Ops, BF2 etc. I played GR1 online in open servers and also clan matches from day 1 and to my memory an awful lot of it involved making your way to a spot and choosing very carefully a nice place with good shadow and concealment, one that you could see through to your approaching enemy but that would hide you so you could get the drop on them.

  In GR1 you could trust that your concealing brush or whatever wouldnt be stripped away from you by the fact that your enemy was at a distance and the graphics engine needed to de prioritise the drawing of that distant bush you happned to be situated in.

Sniperer, you weren't a 1X1 pixel in DF2 because the game took the care to draw you more clearlly for what they probably considered a function of keeping the game flowing. You tended to be a very dark spot on a distant light landscape, one that was quite easy to notice even with the naked eye.

I had an unbelievable killingrate at DF2. Didn't get shot when I was that far away/ Never had a bullet drop near me.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe not the most pressing GRAW PC question but an important one to me.

Those triangular tuffts of grass that you could get laid up in as partial concealment would still hide you when an opponant was scoped in on your area from quite far off.

Actually this is a VERY good question from which the answer can break or make a game.

It irritated me relentlessly with FPS's having it's vegetation fade away through distance.

GR1 solved this perfectly with low-LOD's.

An answer from Bo would be very much appreciated :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well colin in that case a none answer from the devs is an anwer in its self. It must mean unfortunatly that vegitation 'does' fade/dissapear off the screen if it's in the distance.

Same goes for my question about if the cross come can be mantually turned off. Ulf's vague and evasive reply in the chats shows that a clear answer would be to our disliking and that would be tht it can't be removed.

As most of us would not be happy to hear that the veg fades, the none answer suggestst that this is the case.

If it's not too late i implore the devs to scale back a small percentage of the local texture quality and redirect that resourse to making the vegitation consistant.

If anything good can come from this new delay let it be this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well colin in that case a none answer from the devs is an anwer in its self. It must mean unfortunatly that vegitation 'does' fade/dissapear off the screen  if it's in the distance.

  Same goes for my question about if the cross come can be mantually turned off. Ulf's vague and evasive reply in the chats shows that a clear answer would be to our disliking and that would be tht it can't be removed.

  As most of us would not be happy to hear that the veg fades, the none answer suggestst that this is the case.

  If it's not too late i implore the devs to scale back a small percentage of the local texture quality and redirect that resourse to making the vegitation consistant.

  If anything good can come from this new delay let it be this.

Poita. You dont need to worry about this.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's put that question in order then. :P

And as great as it is for dev's like Bo to come on here and the UBI forums to answer questions, I'd be much happier knowing that they were working on the mod, instead of searching these forums for questions that customers are enquiring about.

Cheers for coming on here through your weekend Bo, do you ever rest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow Bo, you are one hardcore CEO!

Thank you for taking the time to answer this thread. Poita posted an interesting question here. From what I read about the 360 vegetation, fading vegetation is a problem. I'm relieved to know that this will not be a problem for the PC GR:AW.

silent_op

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow Bo, you are one hardcore CEO!

Thank you for taking the time to answer this thread. Poita  posted an interesting question here. From what I read about the 360 vegetation, fading vegetation is a problem. I'm relieved to know that this will not be a problem for the PC GR:AW.

silent_op

I usually relate hardcore to something me and the wife watch on occasion, :D

Edited by M95-Sniper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...