![]() |
Btw. nice WoP videos Mysticpuma. They look almost photorealistic!
|
Quote:
|
i have two things to say:
-in clod the very detailed elements of landscape "doesn´t come together". I hope you understand what i mean. In wop they come together more organic. -in wop the color filter is a little bit overdone. For some experts here: its not only a green filter. On some maps there are blue filters too. In Clod there is (except low sun scenarios) nearly no filter. We need for example for clod a little bit blue filter to simulate atmosphere (yes, its blue). The farer you can look, the more blue. |
Quote:
We may not be counting the trees as someone said but if you live here and its part of your history you'd like it to represent what it is. It's an important part of the immersion. "I'm flying over Kent, lets have a look. Oh no, it's a scene from the seven dwarfs." Apologies to 1C but you'll get the idea. |
Klem, that's exactly how I feel about it. Neatly put.
|
Quote:
I think it is a matter of distribution of "things" (tees, houses, willages etc) is a bit too even. From what I remember flying over England, trees would be clumped together in discreet woodlots, houses and farms would be found fairly close together etc. A quick look at Google Earth comnfirms this. That, and hedgerows! |
Quote:
|
Quite, but the question is how the landscape would differ. From literature, I would expect the landscape to be more small scale: Smaller fields, smaller roads, smaller farms (and more of them). The woodlots would probably have been larger and/or more numerous, and the suburbs would be much, much smaller than present, owing to smaller total population.
The hedgerows (if I remember this correctly) would have been more common than today. |
Quote:
|
Maybe they use a better method of drawing trees? You know, like RoF does.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.