Landscape Almost Real

[.kju 3239]

As the new blog entry seems to have gone unnoticed, here is

a copy and paste from: Inside BI - Developer's Blog

---

Written by Ivan Buchta

Thursday, 20 September 2007

In our company, there was always an ambition to create

landscape which would feel real. As we constantly improved our

tools and refined our technology, it is finally possible to take the

image of real-life countryside and bring the best of it into ARMA

2. We have chosen a piece of forgotten land somewhere in

North Bohemia in the hopes of bring you a wild and hilly

environment suitable for large-scale combat operations.

From the map of Chernarus.

From our designers' point of view, real-life landscape offers the

structure of real land, which allows us to utilize all of the

vehicles and weapon platforms available, and offer you at least

a little bit of the soldier's life, which surprisingly consists of very

little actual combat and hours of movement. Of course, the

combat will be your major experience in ARMAA 2, and as the

battles will take place in landscape that really exists, we hope

that the impression from such battles will surpass anything

you've seen in a wargame so far.

Real-life terrain

It was always my big ambition to recreate some place that I

know to the latest detail. Fortunately, there were others around

who reminded me to not to forget about gameplay and visual

appearance. When you want to give people something nice to

play with, the reality must be sometimes abandoned. This means

you would not see a carbon-copy of real countryside including

all the boring parts, but the gaming environment loosely based

on that terrain. However, we were still able to take plenty of

reference from real-life data, including aerial photography and

proprietary GIS database which we created solely for the

purpose of building the Northern Region of Chernarus.

Game terrain prototype

Certain artistic freedom had to be applied to the sea coast,

which unfortunately does not exist in North Bohemia. As you see

from the comparison images above, we also decided to choose

different composition of tree species, inspired mainly by my

recent visit of the Czech-Slovak border mountains. Prevalence

of spruce trees certainly helped us to achieve a more

"mountainous" look compared to the map's real counterpart,

which would match perfectly to the original proposal of "distant

mountainous country somewhere in Eastern Europe, swarming

with hostile insurgent factions."

PS: RSS feeds wanted for the blog please.

[opteryx 1562]

Do we get to bomb BI Studios?

[jasono 0]

Very nice. Thanks for the heads up.

[Heatseeker 0]

We had 6 years to play eastern europe theme to death (OPF:R) and tbh i dont even like the northern half of Sahrani much, south Sahrani looks, plays and performs better.

That Chernarus picture reminds me of North Sahrani so im not jumping on my chair here .

But its way too early to jump into conclusions..

[fasad 1]

Ooo, I have to go to the Czech Rep. someday, looks beautiful to my eyes (used to looking at 5 shades of yellow and drab grey vegetation).

[Linker Split 0]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

[Dwarden 1124]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

[Linker Split 0]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

I know about some engines (like CryEngine by Crytek, or Call of Duty's one, where the terrain is recreated perfectly with all the particulars) that have been created about 1 year ago... and they recreate terrain really detailed I know!

ArmA one is so good, but for example the new Cryengine for Cryis is incredible: my question is: why doesn't BIS try to do the same?

[opteryx 1562]

-edited for the sake of not killing the thread-

Roger that Hoz.

[hoz 0]

Lets not turn this into another vbs vs arma thread or I will close it.

[Mr_Tea 0]

Crysis will never see such big battles, as in ArmA or ArmA2.

We don`t have super computers at home, that can handle that job atm.

[jerryhopper 285]

Lets not turn this into another vbs vs arma thread or I will close it.

i played VBS2 and from my view its not even worth comparing them. i dont see any 'inferiour' things in arma in comparison to VBS2.

After expiriencing VBS2 in the dutch army, i really dont see any good arguments why VBS2 would be superior.

With a pro-sim of that caliber you dont expect getting stuck on a 2cm high brick do you?

ArmA is not what you compare it to : its what you want it to be, if you have the creative skills to do so.

Back on topic, im more impressed with this read, to learn about the 'drive' to recreate real life surroundings and get them ingame as 'slick' as possible.

the images look awesome, although i think the creative freedom is good, i have the feeling that on some places it sometimes might be a bit 'overdone'

Again, it might be me, but i see a bit too much high needle trees. i would love to see more normal 'leaf' trees.

All in all, The new BIS site has already feed us more information than the old site in the last 2 years. a Great Job!

[whisper 0]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

I know about some engines (like CryEngine by Crytek, or Call of Duty's one, where the terrain is recreated perfectly with all the particulars) that have been created about 1 year ago... and they recreate terrain really detailed I know!

ArmA one is so good, but for example the new Cryengine for Cryis is incredible: my question is: why doesn't BIS try to do the same?

Size of Crysis & CoD maps? It's the whole difference.

[UNN 0]

I'm a little confused about the point behind the blog. I think the tools are already in place to recreate the topography of real world locations, with or without Arma 2?

It kind of comes across as either guilt or frustration, that real world objects can't be used. Because of fears they might be considered a little to drab, compared to the average gamers view of the European countryside?

To me at least, the Real-life terrain, looks just like the landscape in the North of England. So I could live without majestic pines

[Heatseeker 0]

Well, the entry itself is nice reading and shows where the inspiration for creating Chernarus comes from, i think its nice to know what they are up to.

One thing i hope for is that they make Arma 2's colours more vibrant, Arma is very pretty but a little dull compared to RL.

[Dwarden 1124]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

I know about some engines (like CryEngine by Crytek, or Call of Duty's one, where the terrain is recreated perfectly with all the particulars) that have been created about 1 year ago... and they recreate terrain really detailed I know!

ArmA one is so good, but for example the new Cryengine for Cryis is incredible: my question is: why doesn't BIS try to do the same?

FarCry even now is unable to use 1m satelitte geo data or recreate all detailed enviroment for huge battles

Call of Duty and detailed terrain ? You must be kidding

by this logic You must admit VBS1 based on OFPR already done what's mentioned here lol

and ArmA/VBS2 beat the hell out of these

and then You arguing with CryEngine 2 (Crysis) which is this year 2007 product

BIS don't have millions from EA with unlimited workforce available to match Crytek work on CryEngine 2/Crysis

anyway because this is upcoming game and work in project You can't tell what features ends inside and in theory it may match what You now imagine under 'Crysis'

[Linker Split 0]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

I know about some engines (like CryEngine by Crytek, or Call of Duty's one, where the terrain is recreated perfectly with all the particulars) that have been created about 1 year ago... and they recreate terrain really detailed I know!

ArmA one is so good, but for example the new Cryengine for Cryis is incredible: my question is: why doesn't BIS try to do the same?

FarCry even now is unable to use 1m satelitte geo data or recreate all detailed enviroment for huge battles

Call of Duty and detailed terrain ? You must be kidding

by this logic You must admit VBS1 based on OFPR already done what's mentioned here lol

and ArmA/VBS2 beat the hell out of these

and then You arguing with CryEngine 2 (Crysis) which is this year 2007 product

BIS don't have millions from EA with unlimited workforce available to match Crytek work on CryEngine 2/Crysis

anyway because this is upcoming game and work in project You can't tell what features ends inside and in theory it may match what You now imagine under 'Crysis'

ehi ehi ehi don't attack me...

[charliereddog 9]

Looking good. Much prefer to see the real trees there, rather than the spruce though. I'm sick of pine tree forests.

[Daniel 0]

It could still look a bit closer to be honest. I thought the real pic was in-game before I saw the pic below. It just looks like the lighting needs tweaking slightly in the in-game pic.

[Sennacherib 0]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

I know about some engines (like CryEngine by Crytek, or Call of Duty's one, where the terrain is recreated perfectly with all the particulars) that have been created about 1 year ago... and they recreate terrain really detailed I know!

ArmA one is so good, but for example the new Cryengine for Cryis is incredible: my question is: why doesn't BIS try to do the same?

FarCry even now is unable to use 1m satelitte geo data or recreate all detailed enviroment for huge battles

Call of Duty and detailed terrain ? You must be kidding

by this logic You must admit VBS1 based on OFPR already done what's mentioned here lol

and ArmA/VBS2 beat the hell out of these

and then You arguing with CryEngine 2 (Crysis) which is this year 2007 product

BIS don't have millions from EA with unlimited workforce available to match Crytek work on CryEngine 2/Crysis

anyway because this is upcoming game and work in project You can't tell what features ends inside and in theory it may match what You now imagine under 'Crysis'

ehi ehi ehi don't attack me...

the linkersplit's thought was that this technology is not new. why only to use it now?

sorry i'm not impressed by this terrain. because this is their job after all. i just wait to see the final result

one thing is funny, they seem like addons maker who are happy with their job. not really a professional attitude. i prefer the surprises

Quote[/b] ]BIS don't have millions from EA with unlimited workforce available to match Crytek work on CryEngine 2/Crysis

the money does not create the creativity

[-duke- 0]

how is it possible that now BI studios can recreate something like that, when other engines did it at least 2 years ago?

care to explain what u mean ?

I know about some engines (like CryEngine by Crytek, or Call of Duty's one, where the terrain is recreated perfectly with all the particulars) that have been created about 1 year ago... and they recreate terrain really detailed I know!

ArmA one is so good, but for example the new Cryengine for Cryis is incredible: my question is: why doesn't BIS try to do the same?

FarCry even now is unable to use 1m satelitte geo data or recreate all detailed enviroment for huge battles

Call of Duty and detailed terrain ? You must be kidding

by this logic You must admit VBS1 based on OFPR already done what's mentioned here lol

and ArmA/VBS2 beat the hell out of these

and then You arguing with CryEngine 2 (Crysis) which is this year 2007 product

BIS don't have millions from EA with unlimited workforce available to match Crytek work on CryEngine 2/Crysis

anyway because this is upcoming game and work in project You can't tell what features ends inside and in theory it may match what You now imagine under 'Crysis'

ehi ehi ehi don't attack me...

the linkersplit's thought was that this technology is not new. why only to use it now?

sorry i'm not impressed by this terrain. because this is their job after all. i just wait to see the final result

one thing is funny, they seem like addons maker who are happy with their job. not really a professional attitude. i prefer the surprises

Quote[/b] ]BIS don't have millions from EA with unlimited workforce available to match Crytek work on CryEngine 2/Crysis

the money does not create the creativity

More money = more resources = more creative input.

I'm glad to see that their moving forward with terrain modelling however, I'd be happy to see it remain even in it's current state of ArmA if it meant the addition of a deformable terrain model and buildings that fragment instead of collapse fully.

If you want to breathe more life into the landscape, add animals, fallen/dead trees, ambient sounds, wind, rain dripping from a gun barrel, puddles, running water, etc. I don't need more pixels on my trees to be convinced I'm in a forest, I need supporting environmental effects to make my forest feel alive.

Lastly, it would be a breath of fresh air if undergrowth, shrubbery and dense forest areas actually provided cover from AI as well.

[MehMan 0]

I hope this means some micro terrain possiblites. One thing that was bugging, no place to hide and using the terrain as cover.

[mr reality 0]

I hope this means some micro terrain possiblites. One thing that was bugging, no place to hide and using the terrain as cover.

This is one of my main gripes about ArmA forrests. The AI have an advantage when your fighting in wooded areas. The fact you could be lying behind a bush 15 foot behind the tree line and still get shot at by an AI unit.

What irks me though is that the devs are always striving to get more realistic looking trees. What about the ground, this is where an average grunt has to find cover when he hits the dirt. I don't know of many battles that took place in heavily wooded areas (bastoigne springs to mind but it wasnt so much a battle, more of a stategic defence). BIS are certainly going in the right direction with regards to terra firma but for the love of all that is holy, please lay of the pine trees.

Oh and can someone tell BIS that grass doesnt always grow the exact same length everywhere.

Why havn't we heard about lakes, rivers or terrain destruction. This is what i'm waiting for in ArmA 2. Not some pretty pine trees all lined up in a neat little row. I hope BIS make two versions of the new island and not just the autumn version. This way the campaign could be seen to run over a much longer period.

[volkov956 0]

and whats wrong with pine trees really there is pine trees all around me.

Deformable Terrain would be nice as long as when the actual terrain moves the objects dont seem to float that were on the terrain.

Anyone experience the floating trees in Arma yet in the remote regions of Sahrani. its ok but its funny I never seen a floating tree in OFP but in Arma there is.

Also there was rumour of Forest Fires in Arma anyone know if its still in the game but disabled?

[Hawke 0]

I hope BIS make two versions of the new island and not just the autumn version.

Would be nice if it had dynamic seasons.