@PROPER_VegetationReplacement - beta release

[Panda-PL- 0]

How about lowering textures res? Turning it down from normal to low gives 15 fps boost here but makes rest also blurry, maybe same stuff can be done with "addons" like this by changing first lod texture to 512x512? Because to be honest this current way looks kinda messy.  

Lowering texture quality in ArmA results in textures above the set resolution (I think 2048x2048 is very high, 1024x1024 high and so on) being scaled down.

So I think that making one 2048x2048 texture instead of 4 1024x1024 will result in this texture being scalled down by half when textures are set to high and by 4x when normal, while 4 1024x1024 textures will not be scalled down untill we set textures to low (that is, if I'm not mistaken).

So you can force the resolution dropdown to occur earlier on threes than on weapons/buildings if you make 2048x2048 sheets.

[the-f 0]

@ Aug. 14 2007,18:49)]

floating trees  

I might have a fix for this.

I think setting the correct vertex properties will bring the threes back to the correct level.

I would use the "constant height", esspecially for forrests. I was surprised to see floating trees in ArmA Everon.

Hope this is the sollution.

Quote[/b] ]1. ArmA.RPT is poluted with these error-messages:

I think it's because we're using the old format and ArmA has it's own ODOL. ArmA RPT is ment for ArmA.

Anyways: how many addon models are there that menage to pass ArmA.rpt? Can you point me to any at all?

I think it doesn't matter at all.

Setting it on "on surface" result in some funny appearances of the trees.

Set the settings on only the shown tree. You can walk/shot through the trees

Image

[alpha125rbf 0]

Wow - Arma becomes playable with the old trees at every location.

The flying trees are disturbing, and the old Malden bushes are little crazy, but now I can play everywhere!

Why were the trees maked so complicated? To show the world their Graphics cards are not good enough?

For me the resistance trees (without changing lods) are the best trees ever!

[ExtracTioN 0]

A middle east scenario would be perfect get rid of trees grass and make a desert island with a few trees no grass an iraq or afghanistan alike scenario was better for this engine.

Hope GC comes like a middle east looking island.

[Panda-PL- 0]

Setting it on "on surface" result in some funny appearances of the trees.

Set the settings on only the shown tree. You can walk/shot through the trees

That's because "On Surface" is supposed to be used for verticles that should be... on surface.

Above surface is for roads and decals.

I'm not sure if they still work in ArmA trougth.

Use constant height. Should work.

Walk/shoot? OMG. Maybe you need the vertex properties for these aswell?

Yes, there is also a slight chance that BIS did change something and we need to wait for THE TOOLS. Or for someone to hack the new ODOL format.

[.kju 3245]

some told us to set autocenter=0

either in the frist LOD or in the geo LOD.

however doesn't seem to work here.

the reason might be that this is kind of a hack.. with the p3d replacement

if one would actually replace the vegetation in the islands,

it might work as supposed to. no idea.

Quote[/b] ]ArmA.RPT

well. true to some point. however the error messages is quite

descriptive, so i hope a modeler knows how to fix this

[van Nistelrooy 0]

Hi,

I've just tested this mod. Even if I will not play with it (there are too much trees that are flying...), it confirms what I'm thinking about ArmA's vegetation. I don't know what's the problem with BI original trees, but that's the only reason why I loose so much FPS in game.

With BI original vegetation, I'm about 20 FPS maximum in forests, with all details on "medium".

With your vegetation replacement mod, the game is completely smooth, 35 FPS minimum in forests with all details on "very high".

So please BI, if you read this, would it be possible to optimize your trees ? I don't know how it could be resolved, but I'm sure you can do it .

I hope this could be fixed someday, that's the only think I'm waiting about you...

For information, here is my config:

Athlon 64 X2 4200+, Corsair TwinX 2048 Mo PC3200, Leadtek 7950GX2 1024Mo, Raptor 74Go 10K RPM.

[Synide 0]

A simple report of a ArmA tree... as you can see there doesn't seem to be any 'wizzy' LOD property...

And, Q seems to have most of those already defined...

as panda says... i think we'll probably find that the 'per vertex' properties/flags are the ones that would be needed to be set...

also, just about every model that's been viewed so far has it's Y-coordinate starting in the 'negative'.

eg. this tree's base is 3m below y-axis

which gives me the impression that there is an as yet unknown relative origin point that is different in ArmA to OFP.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">

ODOL v40 Report

str_vrba.p3d

No Of Resolutions = 10

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

======================================================================

[0] 1.0 (Offset=213651)

[Polygons]=5246

[Vertices]=4089

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.paa

ca\plants\data\vrba_0_ca.paa

----------------------------------------

[Materials]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_0.rvmat

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.rvmat

----------------------------------------

[Properties]=1

lodnoshadow=1

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[1] 2.0 (Offset=92257)

[Polygons]=2632

[Vertices]=2065

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.paa

ca\plants\data\vrba_1_ca.paa

----------------------------------------

[Materials]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_1.rvmat

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.rvmat

----------------------------------------

[Properties]=1

lodnoshadow=1

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[2] 3.0 (Offset=31994)

[Polygons]=1292

[Vertices]=1029

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.paa

ca\plants\data\vrba_2_ca.paa

----------------------------------------

[Materials]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_2.rvmat

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.rvmat

----------------------------------------

[Properties]=1

lodnoshadow=1

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[3] 4.0 (Offset=10584)

[Polygons]=343

[Vertices]=417

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.paa

ca\plants\data\vrba_3_ca.paa

----------------------------------------

[Materials]=2

ca\plants\data\vrba_3.rvmat

ca\plants\data\vrba_kmen.rvmat

----------------------------------------

[Properties]=1

lodnoshadow=1

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[4] 5.0 (Offset=9146)

[Polygons]=6

[Vertices]=12

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=1

ca\plants\data\vrba_4_ca.paa

----------------------------------------

[Materials]=1

ca\plants\data\vrba_4.rvmat

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[5] 1.00E+004 - Stencil Shadow (Offset=6169)

[Polygons]=208

[Vertices]=156

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=1

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[6] 1.10E+004 - Shadow Volume (Offset=5373)

[Polygons]=20

[Vertices]=20

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=1

ca\plants\data\vrba_3_ca.paa

----------------------------------------

[Properties]=1

lodnoshadow=1

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[7] 1.00E+013 - Geometry (Offset=4437)

[Polygons]=20

[Vertices]=22

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=1

----------------------------------------

[Properties]=7

canocclude=0

map=tree

dammage=tree

class=treesoft

shadow=hybrid

sbsource=explicit

prefershadowvolume=0

----------------------------------------

[Components]=3

component01

component02

component03

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[8] 6.00E+015 - View Geometry (Offset=2768)

[Polygons]=48

[Vertices]=42

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=1

----------------------------------------

[Materials]=1

ca\plants\data\tree_crown.rvmat

----------------------------------------

[Components]=3

component01

component02

component03

----------------------------------------

======================================================================

[9] 7.00E+015 - Fire Geometry (Offset=470)

[Polygons]=73

[Vertices]=80

----------------------------------------

[Textures]=1

----------------------------------------

[Components]=5

component01

component02

component03

component04

component05

----------------------------------------

there is a property called 'placement=slopelandcontact' but i think this is more for cfgVehicle type models as opposed to 'static' type island object models. also, that property requires that there be a 'Land Contact' LOD present in the model...

I would have thought the details about a 'static' models placement would be entirely within the .wrp file? and the dimensional and volumetric info. in the model...

Question. has the .wrp format been entirely deduced?

[pathetic_berserker 4]

This pic - clickety clack - shows alot of the unnecessary model parts which you´d never see as long as you don´t encounter this gfx bug.

Unnecessary?? how could a trunk be unnesscessary.

Anyways looks like a great start point for war torn, scared landscape

[Pulverizer 1]

Unnecessary?? how could a trunk be unnesscessary.

Obviously, he means the branches that will be hidden for the most part. I don't think those are a big problem though compared to the amount of polys that make up the leaves. But these things do add up when you have a thousand plants visible.

... hehe, wouldn't it be cool if you could throw a nade near a bush and it would turn into a leafless bunch of branches like in the pic.

[-Puma- 2]

ok some1 tell me what the does LOD mean ??

[Shadow NX 1]

Level Of Detail

You need to make lods that have lower and lower polycounts each time so things that are far away arent shown with all their details cause you wont see them anyway.

Or better said the engine switches trough the lods the more far you are away from a object to save performance.

[Panda-PL- 0]

Ok, I actually recall a simmilar problem we had when working on tracer model (I mean centering). In ArmA centering is often done based on the far-most verticles. So if a tree appears too high you can try adding a single verticle above the tree in each resolution LOD to move the model's "center" up and force the actual tree down.

[.kju 3245]

We are open to suggestion which models you like to have replaced - please provide screenshots though!

---

thanks for your response Skaven and MehMan!

thanks for all the suggestions and thoughts Panda[PL]!

No luck so for unfortunately

I sent a pm to BI - hopefully they will provide us the correct

answer.

Quote[/b] ]joe public

Quote[/b] ]ArmA.rpt

What about people having done experiments with normal maps? Any idea how to remove these?

Help is appreciated a lot!

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Warnings in ca\plants\palm_02.p3d:4.5

Warning: ca\plants\bolsevnik_group.p3d:0 Face 13, point 42, face points 40,

42,13 - very small normal 0,0,0

@Synide

Quote[/b] ]has the .wrp format been entirely deduced?

The OFP wrp format should have been by dschulle (now working

for BIA on VBS) and Snake_man.

Try contacting Snake_man via the forum here.

thanks for your thoughts Synide!

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Merging textures and updating the model

If someone would be so kind to post a (detailed) step by step

tutorial how to do this, we would most probably do this for the

models!

Quote[/b] ]So if a tree appears too high you can try adding a single verticle above the tree in each resolution LOD to move the model's "center" up and force the actual tree down.

Sounds like much try and check work

If we don't get a response by BI, we will at least check if this

would fix the floating trees problem.

Sidenote: Its kinda strange the only trees fly and NOT bushes.

Or did anyone see flying bushes too?

[.kju 3245]

BETA 2 is also available for download now.

It doesn't change the actual addon.

However it now contains a fully automated build process

(one click solution)!

Check the second post for the download link.

Please read the note about mirroring - thank you!

[FlyinBullets 0]

BETA 2 is also available for download now.

It doesn't change the actual addon.

However it now contains a fully automated build process

(one click solution)!  

Check the second post for the download link.

Please read the note about mirroring - thank you!

Does it change the floating trees at all?

[.kju 3245]

Nope. Sadly we haven't found a solution yet.

[.kju 3245]

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Leider schweben die

Bäume meistens in der Luft.

Ist es möglich diesen Umstand über das Model (p3d file) zu

beheben oder liegt die Ursache / die Information ausschließlich

in der Insel-Datei (wrp) ?

Das Problem ist, das die Modelle unterschiedlich gross sind. Die

Arma Bäume sind im Durschnitt um einiges grösser als die alten OFP Modelle.

Dadurch wird ein falscher Offset gespeichert. Evtle Lösung: die

Modelle hochskallieren, bis sie denen entsprechen, die sie ersetzen sollen.

by Rastavovic

Short translation:

The problem is the different sizes the models. Those

ArmA trees are larger in the average than the old OFP of models.

Thus a wrong offset is stored.

Possible solution: upscaling those models, until they correspond

to those, which they are meant to replace.

--

so from what i understand / guess the offset is saved in the wrp

file. to change the offset in the wrp file should be hardly feasible.

we will check the upscaling idea

[paragraphic l 2]

We are open to suggestion which models you like to have replaced - please provide screenshots though!

I think berghoff's nature packs are all great, but for use in Sahrani I think his Mediterranean pack is best suited.

Nature Pack 4

Img2

Img3

Img4

Hope you can get his permission, or even better; Hope he is working on some ArmA stuff

EDIT: I just tested this for my first time, and expected the trees to stand out way to much, but they quite fit in except for the blacklines around them. If you could also replace the grass then we all can play this game how we should. I finally can visit all the great spots north-sahrani has to offer and it really was a shame I couldn't before.

BIS! Please take not of this solution because you all put way to much effort in creating such a nice environment that we should be able to enjoy it with decent frame rates

[alpha125rbf 0]

My greatest respect if the "hanging tree" bug will be fixed. Then I can make and play forest missions..

But without the editing tools - or the editing hack?! it is unrealistic to edit the p3d object properties of the modifyed engine.

[bravo 6 0]

i just tryed the beta2,

i really don't see any differences/improvements in fps from ArmA original vegetation.

near corazol i have exactly the same fps 24. and the image, when i drag the mouse is not smooth at all, in both vegetations.

im doomed untill i get a new computer

[IronTiger 0]

@im doomed untill i get a new computer

U saying my words,hehe

[.kju 3245]

@bravo 6

i guess you did this at least somewhere else in this forum..

can you please post your hardware and ArmA settings or

link to a post where did so in the past - cheers!

[bravo 6 0]

@bravo 6

i guess you did this at least somewhere else in this forum..

can you please post your hardware and ArmA settings or

link to a post where did so in the past - cheers!

here's my specs:

my 2nd post inthere

atm i run arma with no grass, all settings very low and disabled.

its the only way i can run it smooth as i like.

[alpha125rbf 0]

-bravo 6

Jo man, if you have not bought your system yesterday, (i have not) you can say you need a better hardware!

The programmers have to look that their software can run at as many PCs as possible, and ArmA has this framekilling vegetation.

We will have to wait the EDITING TOOLS..