New Terrain

Discuss the future of Warzone 2100 with us.
User avatar
psychopompos
Trained
Trained
Posts: 470
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 09:18
Location: UK

Re: New Terrain

Post by psychopompos » 20 Nov 2008, 00:02

Dr_Frodo wrote:I like the new terrain textures very much, except for the foliage/plant life. It looks weird especially being flat, besides, there shouldn't be plant life in WZ should there?
Chernobyl.
plant life is fine, animals will still die or suffer mutation to this day.

User avatar
whippersnapper
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1183
Joined: 21 Feb 2007, 15:46

Re: New Terrain

Post by whippersnapper » 20 Nov 2008, 04:12

.
psychopompos wrote:
Dr_Frodo wrote:I like the new terrain textures very much, except for the foliage/plant life. It looks weird especially being flat, besides, there shouldn't be plant life in WZ should there?
Chernobyl.
plant life is fine, animals will still die or suffer mutation to this day.
well the answer to these questions of the state of the world after a post nuke holocaust-nuke winter depends on your assumptions.

my assumptions make for a different forecast than what is generally put forth about WZ.

one: re-establishment and reclamation of the biosphere would be part of any survival contingency plan priority for a number of
reasons, not the least being the food-chain.

two: forecasting from current technologies (80 years into the future) makes for the above mentioned contingency plans being plausible.
i'll just pick 2 to keep this brief:

Eating Radiation: A New Form of Energy?

Bacteria that bind toxic metals: Are they the future of nuclear waste cleanup?

working with these 2 assumptions presents entirely different scenario of possibilities - including "looks" as well as gpms.

i'm not trying to propose or persuade anyone that this be taken into account in WZ creations. just sharing how i'm
approaching it in my own game work.

.
.
"I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction." Anthem

"Art is the selective recreation of reality according to the artist's metaphysical value judgments." A. Rand
.

User avatar
kage
Regular
Regular
Posts: 751
Joined: 05 Dec 2006, 21:45

Re: New Terrain

Post by kage » 20 Nov 2008, 06:04

psychopompos wrote:
Dr_Frodo wrote:I like the new terrain textures very much, except for the foliage/plant life. It looks weird especially being flat, besides, there shouldn't be plant life in WZ should there?
Chernobyl.
plant life is fine, animals will still die or suffer mutation to this day.
isn't that because the plants have very low metabolisms, and thus have yet to display any serious effects?

Deus Siddis
Trained
Trained
Posts: 235
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 06:58

Re: New Terrain

Post by Deus Siddis » 20 Nov 2008, 06:33

kage wrote:
psychopompos wrote: Chernobyl.
plant life is fine, animals will still die or suffer mutation to this day.
isn't that because the plants have very low metabolisms, and thus have yet to display any serious effects?
You mean serious effects like growing toxic green energy crystals or uprooting themselves and eating people? xD

I'm certain the reason plants aren't affected is because they don't have all of the advanced stuff to lose that we have come to rely on like a nervous or digestive system.

User avatar
psychopompos
Trained
Trained
Posts: 470
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 09:18
Location: UK

Re: New Terrain

Post by psychopompos » 20 Nov 2008, 10:06

whippersnapper wrote:working with these 2 assumptions presents entirely different scenario of possibilities - including "looks" as well as gpms.

i'm not trying to propose or persuade anyone that this be taken into account in WZ creations. just sharing how i'm
approaching it in my own game work..
topography, thats a major part opf the reason fallout isnt being washed out of the countryside around chyrnoble.
that & the way the plant life up there tries to hold its water weans there isnt as much wash off as you would expect in other places
Deus Siddis wrote:You mean serious effects like growing toxic green energy crystals or uprooting themselves and eating people? xD
triffids had crystals? O_o
kage wrote:isn't that because the plants have very low metabolisms, and thus have yet to display any serious effects?
they just arent as susceptible.
also, the plants up there are partly to blame for the stuff not being washed out /dispersed as it could be in other places.

User avatar
whippersnapper
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1183
Joined: 21 Feb 2007, 15:46

Re: New Terrain

Post by whippersnapper » 20 Nov 2008, 17:25

.

Chernobyl is ground zero.... 60% of the radioactive fallout from Chernobyl landed in Belarus. Look-up Belarus... see how life has proceeded
since April 27, 1986..

ditto with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

a good example of nuke reclamation would be Rock Flats in Colorado.... not far from NORAD....hmmmm, ring a bell ? :ninja:

..
.
"I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction." Anthem

"Art is the selective recreation of reality according to the artist's metaphysical value judgments." A. Rand
.

User avatar
psychopompos
Trained
Trained
Posts: 470
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 09:18
Location: UK

Re: New Terrain

Post by psychopompos » 20 Nov 2008, 18:55

^ or the dirty bomb that went off in mexico.
that wasnt easy to clean.

User avatar
qubodup
Trained
Trained
Posts: 47
Joined: 18 Jul 2007, 03:30
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: New Terrain

Post by qubodup » 21 Nov 2008, 17:05

This looks sooo goood.

Konsequences are this blog post and this screenshot gallery.

User avatar
Dr_Frodo
Greenhorn
Posts: 10
Joined: 19 Oct 2008, 17:40

Re: New Terrain

Post by Dr_Frodo » 21 Nov 2008, 17:15

Chernobyl was a reactor that had a catastrophic failure, essentially the casing for the reactor tore and blew the reaction matter all over the place, it was not a fission explosion that gives you the familiar mushroom cloud. In fact, any reactor wouldn't blow like a fission bomb, that's just an assumption many people make, sure, if you nuke a reactor the mass may add to the initial reaction, but it would be hardly noticeable.

A fission bomb is designed to cause the most damage, ether by initial short lived radiation burst, the 'vacuum' that the explosion (technically not an explosion, a reaction) and the obvious thing of incredible heat. Fission reactor are not designed to work the same and are designed to output a certain limit of thermal energy for prolonged periods of time. The words 'nuclear bomb' and 'nuclear reactor' don't mean that they work the same, mearly that splitting of atoms is in effect.

Then there's the fact it said 'nuclear winter' within the game, if you had a nuclear winter for even one year, it would kill pretty much most plant life on the surface, which would then cause species that depend on it directly to die (herbivores) followed by a total collapse of the ecosystem as food chains would cease to exist. Humans would be able to survive until the winter had passes using tinned food and artificial food, even resorting to refrigerating any dead animals they come across for food.

Sorry for the slightly in depth post, but some people confuse the two types of usage of fission assuming that they are the same, then ignore the fact of a nuclear winter.

Deus Siddis
Trained
Trained
Posts: 235
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 06:58

Re: New Terrain

Post by Deus Siddis » 21 Nov 2008, 19:11

Dr_Frodo wrote:Then there's the fact it said 'nuclear winter' within the game, if you had a nuclear winter for even one year, it would kill pretty much most plant life on the surface, which would then cause species that depend on it directly to die (herbivores) followed by a total collapse of the ecosystem as food chains would cease to exist. Humans would be able to survive until the winter had passes using tinned food and artificial food, even resorting to refrigerating any dead animals they come across for food.
That is extreme speculation at best, probably a gross exaggeration. Even mega fauna have survived countless volcanoes and super volcanoes throwing shitloads of debris into the upper atmosphere. And we could never hope to do as good of a job as a super volcano.

There is no need to speculate either, since the game does depict living plant life, from grasses to trees. Given the size of the trees and the short time period between the war and the game time, we might also assume that those trees are older than the war, so even animals certainly could have survived by living off of them.

User avatar
qubodup
Trained
Trained
Posts: 47
Joined: 18 Jul 2007, 03:30
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: New Terrain

Post by qubodup » 21 Nov 2008, 21:32

does phpbb3 allow thread splitting?

PS: um. DELETEME *shame*

User avatar
psychopompos
Trained
Trained
Posts: 470
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 09:18
Location: UK

Re: New Terrain

Post by psychopompos » 21 Nov 2008, 23:13

Dr_Frodo wrote:A fission bomb is designed to cause the most damage, ether by initial short lived radiation burst, the 'vacuum' that the explosion (technically not an explosion, a reaction) and the obvious thing of incredible heat. Fission reactor are not designed to work the same and are designed to output a certain limit of thermal energy for prolonged periods of time. The words 'nuclear bomb' and 'nuclear reactor' don't mean that they work the same, mearly that splitting of atoms is in effect.
not all nuke weapons are designed to blast though, many are(where?) just to deliver fallout over a large area.
the biggest killer in a nuke strike is collapse of infrastructure.
with our the modern infrastructure, the uk could only support 10% of the current population.
if you poison the place preventing/delaying the rebuilding process, you kill more people.

gerard_
Trained
Trained
Posts: 71
Joined: 02 Nov 2006, 19:56

Re: New Terrain

Post by gerard_ » 22 Nov 2008, 19:58

I wrote the conversion logic and made some textures for the urban area:
urban1.jpg
urban2.jpg

fisk0
Trained
Trained
Posts: 245
Joined: 17 Aug 2008, 16:59
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: New Terrain

Post by fisk0 » 22 Nov 2008, 21:02

Looks good. I think you should try to find a mountain side texture (for both arizona and urban enviroments) that looks more rough and steep though. The original hill textures in Warzone 2100 looked steep and unclimbable, these look like they could cause some confusion like "hey, why can't my tank go up that slope, it doesn't look that steep?".
I'd try to make some for you, but I'm too inexperienced with textures in those resolutions, and I don't own a digital camera, sadly.
Desktop: AMD Athlon X3 440 3.0ghz, 4GB RAM, Radeon HD4200, Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Laptop: AMD Athlon X2 QL-64 2.1Ghz, 3GB RAM, Radeon HD3200, Windows Vista Home Basic 32-bit & Ubuntu 9.04 64-bit

User avatar
HolyDragoon
Trained
Trained
Posts: 60
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 13:02
Location: Portugal

Re: New Terrain

Post by HolyDragoon » 22 Nov 2008, 22:33

psychopompos wrote: triffids had crystals? O_o
Something to do with Tiberium, I think?
"Relativity applies to Physics, not Ethics." - Albert Einstein

Post Reply