Graphics engine improvement

[-SZ-Vladimir 0]

I think OFP can look realistic and use this effects. That don't affect players who don't have videocard with this effects, and game look better for players who have videocard with this effects...

Vladimir

[Schoeler 0]

I'm not much for the tech talk, but these are the sorts of graphics improvements I want to see:

When a shell explodes, I want to see dirt clods and dust. I want deformable terrain so we get shell craters, foxholes, trenches, caves etc..

I want dust on dry days when tanks roll over dirt, I want torn up grass and mud on rainly days.

Vegetation wise I want real grass that you can hide in

Better damage models on hit vehicles. Better fire effects. Rubble and really destroyed buildings.

Trees that sway in the wind, grass that ripples. Water that splashes in puddles, streams, paddies. Creeks, canals, small terrain features.

I know, I know. Wait until I get my 75GHz Pentium 14 system right!

[ralphwiggum 6]

to some extent, i'd love to see some graphics related stuffs like bushes and foliages be more realistic given that island size remains the same.

also, am i the only one who still feels uncomfortable with lighting in OFP with GF3 or higher(pixel shading related?)?

[ale2999 0]

I bet there is gonna be no islands, but I think that the visual improvement should be only in the models and foliage and the rest, lol I will not upgrade for 2-3 yrs so I would like a 2.4 with geforce4 4200 run it well lol. and please no ati trueform or ati optimization, they got lousy programmers. If u got a great card that can do only in benchmark but crash only in games 4get about it lol

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Could you show/tell what it does?

I just wanna keep the realistic way ofp:res looks, without adding to much junk that you dont see in th real world. <span id='postcolor'>

Vertex subdivision/tessellation

As I posted in the first post, and this is basically what ATI's trueform does only onboard the video processor instead of your CPU.

This, with proper usage will make things appear more realistic not less.

And you can't say things like "no ATI Trueform please" because it's just optional support which more cards I think will have in one form or another by the time OFP2 is released. If you say no Trueform support because ATI sucks so what? If people buy the video cards and OFP2 is for these people, why not support their video cards great features. I'm not pushing any brands here, it's just extremely important to utilize all hardware features in OFP since the battlefields are so large. The CPU has a very hard time as it is, the more work shifted to the GPU the better.

[hovmand 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ 26 April 2003,08:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Could you show/tell what it does?

I just wanna keep the realistic way ofp:res looks, without adding to much junk that you dont see in th real world. <span id='postcolor'>

Vertex subdivision/tessellation

As I posted in the first post, and this is basically what ATI's trueform does only onboard the video processor instead of your CPU.

This, with proper usage will make things appear more realistic not less.  

And you can't say things like "no ATI Trueform please" because it's just optional support which more cards I think will have in one form or another by the time OFP2 is released.  If you say no Trueform support because ATI sucks so what?  If people buy the video cards and OFP2 is for these people, why not support their video cards great features.    I'm not pushing any brands here, it's just extremely important to utilize all hardware features in OFP since the battlefields are so large.  The CPU has a very hard time as it is, the more work shifted to the GPU the better.<span id='postcolor'>

Oh okay, my mistake

Im sorry if you have misunderstood me, but i´ve never said i dont want Trueform, it should be in every game as it is not very hard to code in, or so i´ve heard.

Its a little hard for me to explain what i mean im not into all those technical terms.

Stuff like the water in Morrowind, yeah it looks good and all, but i just dont think it would fit in with the rest of the ofp enviroment.

[-SZ-Vladimir 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hovmand @ 26 April 2003,14:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Stuff like the water in Morrowind, yeah it looks good and all, but i just dont think it would fit in with the rest of the ofp enviroment.<span id='postcolor'>

If rest of environement is adaptaded that can be good... but you're right, for personn who havn't pixel or vertex shader (I never remember) that don't look good...

Vladimir

[bangcraher 0]

You have to feel you immersed by the rain, it was not the case with OFP 1, somethimes I even didn't realised it was raining.

Something that for example would greatly improve this are windscreen washers on the car like in the old game "Hard Truck", where you can see the droplets on the windscreen if you don't wash the windscreen, and the droplets that trickle on the side if you are moving and even more details.

During storms the flashs must be more impressive and the thunder must have better sound.

[Dwarden 1125]

Realistic and plastic seawaves ...

Water clarification

Waterfalls !!! (not only simple startedge-fall-poll) i mean stream, edge, notch, fall, rock, spatter, fall, rock, edge, notch, fall, pool) ... u get idea?

Grass !!! Huge load and variety of grass and small bushes, dynamic !

Dynamic shadows thru branches & foliage creating these fantastic light effect when u are in wood

etc...

[mads bahrt 0]

Support for larger maps would be nice. It seems that, in the current engine, the map displayer/editor is the limit on large maps like WRPdouble and WRPquad. It seems that this is due to the map being rendered at viewingtime. On the other hand there is no problem with these large maps in the game itself (excluding mapview). I think this is because the engine doesn't render beyond your viewdistance.

Instead of rendering the map from the 3d-model at playingtime the engine should just use a bitmap made at map-making time. It's not like the map changes during a game anyway.

[bn880 5]

The map you see in-game does change during the game. hehhe

EDIT: Position of bushes,trees etc is update live on the map...

[Lt_Damage 0]

got some new words for you: "terrain streaming"

[PitViper 0]

It may not possible, but I'd love to see fields, tall grass and underbrush. The forests are good but they are very bald at the ground level.

Perhaps this is something for the future

[andz 0]

guys,

all this talk about ATI Trueform is senseless, because this technology is already dead, or so to say only usefull for older games with low poly models.

no, I'm not a nVidia fanboy (I'm still uncertian which card to buy next, ATI or nVidia).

[bn880 5]

Eureka there... we are using it as an example of Hardware support.

EDIT: This thread is NOT about ATI Trueform, it's about improving the graphics engine and utilizing all possible HW acceleration.

[tracy_t 0]

I believe BIS need to address the "Pop-Up" graphical effect present in OFP, because it's a total nuisance.

How best to explain? Hmm...

In game, stand ~20ft away from any tree. Now, walk slowly towards the tree; you will notice that the tree suddenly sprouts branches and leaves. I find that really disconcerting - I think something's jumping out at me! (Attack of the killer trees, lol)

Yes, I know it's probably to do with LODs and the like, but I am sure OFP could "scale" the objects far better than they do now. And Bn880, love your idea about TruForm. I have an ATI 9700 myself and it's so underused by current games, it's a crime (sniff)

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Its called scalability tracy.

If the default settings were to have the tree details higher at further ranges, people with shit pcs wouldnt be able to play. Its assumed that if you have a decent pc you will tweak the LOD and drop down settings.

[tracy_t 0]

Erm,

Baron - I'm running a 3Ghz PC with Radeon 9700 Pro and 1Gb of RAM. I've set the graphics settings to 800x600 @60Hz (60Hz doesn't strain the adapter so much.)

Are you telling me my PC's not good enough? No matter what settings I have and how far I drop the view distance this happens, so what gives?

So, tell me what you know about LODs in OFP models? Feel free to explain in technical detail: I work as a software engineer abd am quite well versed in graphics programming so I'm sure I'll understand you. I await your reply.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Tracey, I didn't say that the effect could be removed, only that it would be adjusted.

I'm sure a software engineer can figure out which settings to change to give the best performance

(HINT - GAMES LOOK CRAP AT LOW RESOLUTIONS)

(HINT2 - if you want to raise visual range, lowering settings is unlikely to do so [may help it run better @ bigger range but wont give more range])

Settings you might like to tweak are

geometry performance

auto drop down

objects LOD

You can't stop the LOD changing but you can definitely make it happen further away.

Having entire forests 3k away in a 90degree view at maximum detail (IE LOTS of polys as opposed to 2) wil work on any pc.

Its simply not possible to display that many polys on todays hardware; you ARE going to get LOD changes at some point, and all you can change is the range they change at.

[bn880 5]

Okay first of all stop fighting here. It never goes well once people start getting personal.

tracy_t, I think you can completely disable user mipmaps in your driver configuration. That will be a killer on your system but there should be no more LOD flipping. Also in your video driver you may be able to tweak the LOD to a more -ive value.

No more of this in this thread please.

[gonk 0]

I just hope the new graphic engine allows larger maps. Plus be able to see further than about 1.5k's without slowing the game down to a slide show. I would love to be able to see rising smoke from miles away, to allow you to line up properly when flying suypport aircraft. Games like "Lock On" have promising terrain... a little under-detail for FPS/Military Sim but you get the idea.

[AngusHeaf 0]

While on the subject of graphical upgrades I have a few to add that I haven't seen addressed specifically. Although admittedly I haven't read EVERY post on this entire section of the forums, so forgive me if I am saying what someone else already has. I did read the FAQ though. Heh. Anyways...

1) Ability for water to occupy multiple levels is the world. Currently there's one global water level with tides and such. I would like the ability to do water at more than one elevation and water that slopes (such as a stream running downhill). A game I used I play all the time was Myth: The Fallen Lords (an RTS) and it had fixed water level. Later Myth 2: Soulblighter came out which included multiple water levels. It was accomplished simply by using a greyscale water elevation bitmap.

2) Ability for not all water to have tides. Pretty basic and probably mentioned before. But streams don't go up and down like the ocean.

3) Ability to go below mesh level. Right now if you place an object on the world mesh it sits right at ground level. If you were to make a basement of a building and set the building so that the basement was actually below the world mesh you can't go into it. Need to fix this (well, not fix, just add/update). This will add an entirely new element of tunnels (great if OFP2 is during Nam or something similar) and sewers and the aforementioned building basements. Things like true foxholes and fighting positions could then be done also.

Those 3 are my big big hopes. Finer mesh detail, deformable mesh (craters) better foliage and all that is just prettier windowdressing but doesn't really expand gameplay like the above suggestions would. I mean let's not get spoiled guys... we already play a game with probably the largest playing area that you can roam freely. Sure a 20km x 20km island would be great but can you imagine how long it would take to foliate (is that a word?)?

[//relic// 0]

bn880, the 9x00 series cannot do truform in hardware, so unless their target performance is based around an 8500 (and totally ignoring nvidia cards) then no truform for you...

Software implementations of adaptive tesselation yes - but not hardware ones, unless nvidia/ati produce something in the future using it.

[peanuckle_00 0]

The graphics are fine. Making the resolution any on objects any finer will only increase the specs required to play the game. Let's talk about increasing the draw distance even for flying jets.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (//relic// @ 05 May 2003,05:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">bn880, the 9x00 series cannot do truform in hardware, so unless their target performance is based around an 8500 (and totally ignoring nvidia cards) then no truform for you...

Software implementations of adaptive tesselation yes - but not hardware ones, unless nvidia/ati produce something in the future using it.<span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">EDIT: This thread is NOT about ATI Trueform, it's about improving the graphics engine and utilizing all possible HW acceleration.

<span id='postcolor'>