Warzone 2100 Forums

Berg wrote:Just a screeny of a contrasting cliff you can actualy tell cliff from surrounding terrain..
Urban
Rockies
arizona

This is probably more to do with the wz map editor, but while the textures are truly awesome, looking at the terrain, especially on your Urban screen, it is hard to tell where the ground ends and where the cliff starts. Just perhaps a better division between the two might be in order? If this is totally to do with the maps, and not the textures, then obviously there's not much that you can do.

Here's an example from the Arizona cliff, I don't know about anyone else, but I can't tell where the edge of the cliff is... In any case, the textures look really good, and the only criticism I have there, is that I think the arizona cliff textures need more subtle striations, to give a Grand Canyon-ish look. At the moment, they look sort of... like lava?

Disclaimer: This post is completely my own opinion, and thus may be ignored by anyone who chooses.

berg where did your version of the game go, the one with shields? does that one have working savegames?

.

I like cliff formations a bunch & your Arizona texture inspired me to. Thanks.

Based on cliffs outside Grand Junction, Colorodo. As you can see Pumpkin's Rocky Mountain textures barely scratched the surface of what can be found in that state.

- Regards, RV.
.

Quick trick your cliff just for fun. And yes its seamless.
a_cliff,page-85,4.0 changed the scaling same texture

For those looking really good we would need real cliffs, vertical ones.
Maybe done as feature models, to allow them to be more detailed and bypass limitations of terrain rendering.

Emdek wrote:For those looking really good we would need real cliffs, vertical ones.
Maybe done as feature models, to allow them to be more detailed and bypass limitations of terrain rendering.

That's what Red Alert 3 does.

Slye_Fox, so if some other games uses that, then it might be not bad idea then.
I'm only unsure how it would work in game, I'm afraid mostly about seams.
Each tile set (Urban also could use that maybe, it would be needed mainly for Arizona) would require set of at least 6 models probably (to be not too much repetitive and have cases for cliff transitions).

Those updated Arizona cliffs look amazing!

aubergine, for me they look weird (but texture is fine), since they are on too "flat" space.

For me the issue is that the normal land terrain looks very low-resolution compared to the cliffs.

Maybe something like this would help: http://falln-stock.deviantart.com/art/N ... 1-50934627

aubergine, true, but rest of terrain (maybe except craters) don't need to be such detailed.
And this is not about texture but "model" details (currently terrain can't be so detailed, and you can't have details in vertical parts at all).

Maybe, but I still think those updated cliffs are way better than what we currently have. For me the benchmark for a good cliff image is something that looks like it would hurt if I got too close to the edge and fell over the side. The normal cliffs look like I would just slide down them, they look like the stuff a mansion's marble floor would be made out of. The updated cliffs look like I would end up in hospital or even dead, and hence I like them a lot more.

True, this is why I've said that texture is fine.
Just it doesn't show full potential with current terrain model.

Emdek wrote:For those looking really good we would need real cliffs, vertical ones.
Maybe done as feature models, to allow them to be more detailed and bypass limitations of terrain rendering.

That's exactly how we made cliffs in Warzone 2200 - as 3D feature models - and they did look spectacular. But what of the thousands of maps already made? The hand work involved would be prohibitive. Of course any new maps made going forward would be striking. And 6 was indeed the number of interlocking model segments we made / used for each 3D Cliff feature built in the Map Editor.

Berg: Well done! And btw Australia has some truely amazing rock formations.

.