Poll - COD Terrain: Your Opinion

[JG52Uther]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Yes. But not terrain. One would hope it is a placeholder, but considering how much work the terrain needs, the team can't help but agree that it is a placeholder (i.e. they might have thought it was OK before release, but now they must realise that it could do with a lot of work, once all the other major issues have been ironed out).

I don't think they will fix it. IMO CoD is/was just a test bed for their Moscow sim, once they release that their huge Russian fanbase will be happy, the rest of us don't really count for much.

[robtek]

I thought this thread was only for voting and especially NOT for voicing opinions!!!

ILLITERATES, all together!!!

[Jatta Raso]

Originally Posted by robtek

I thought this thread was only for voting and especially NOT for voicing opinions!!!

ILLITERATES, all together!!!

when you see Hosni Mubarak send him regards from your behalf. ppl could vote in Egypt also, they just couldn't voice their opinions...

[robtek]

Originally Posted by Jatta Raso

when you see Hosni Mubarak send him regards from your behalf. ppl could vote in Egypt also, they just couldn't voice their opinions...

DID you read the OP????
Did anybody, voicing opinions here, read the OP??
When the respect is lost, everything else will follow soon.

Originally Posted by robtek

DID you read the OP????
Did anybody, voicing opinions here, read the OP??
When the respect is lost, everything else will follow soon.

How can we be expected to respect a company that decieved us all through the development process? Then to cap it all you cannot even get a refund through Steam. Respect for these guys is long long gone.

[Jatta Raso]

Originally Posted by robtek

DID you read the OP????
Did anybody, voicing opinions here, read the OP??
When the respect is lost, everything else will follow soon.

it was a joke... sorry if i offended! no need to be thin skinned especially after yelling 'illiterate' to everyone adding an opinion here.

i completely agree with your respect statement, although it doesn't seem to represent much lately; i keep seeing same few guys who are allowed to have atrocious behavior towards anyone targeted by their spam rage.

anyway ppl are voting and results are showing, what's not to like? perhaps that those same results backup the views these pretentious 'firewallers' tried to block or disrupt (but to no avail beyond their own sad amusement).

[Jatta Raso]

to Kendo's respect, i'm gonna make some at-the-moment analysis of the poll results:

Very Unhappy - 12 votes - 8.96%
this shows very few ppl are taking the terrain for garbage; furthermore, it shows that the assumption of everyone showing criticism towards the subject are saying that the terrain is trash, is just wrong. following that almost no one is saying that the terrain is trash, there's just some obsessed with the idea that that's the case. as if this analysis was needed to show such, simple logic and honest reading would do.

Generally Unhappy - 29 votes - 21.64%
again it shows there's no majority of ppl overly critic much less ready to throw the towel on the subject

Generally Happy - 86 votes - 64.18%
this result shows that users expecting improvements over the present state cover the majority of situations, as expressed and justified in a respectful tone on vast majority of terrain-criticizing posts (who btw took the time to point out specific issues and corresponding solutions, instead of vague and generalist swearing or bashing at the subject).

Very Happy - 7 votes - 5.22%
i could almost tell who they are

[LoBiSoMeM]

"How much work" the terrain need, Philip, besides some tweak in general colour and tree placement?

You talk like the terrain engine is a lot of crap and is totally wrong... The elevation data is great, 1:1, town and landmarks placement... The only MINOOOOOOOOOORRRRR flaws that I see in visuals are tweaks needed in colour and vegetation placement. The big part of problem still perfromace and optimization. And the water... I really will like the promised for future new water!

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

"How much work" the terrain need, Philip, besides some tweak in general colour and tree placement?

You talk like the terrain engine is a lot of crap and is totally wrong... The elevation data is great, 1:1, town and landmarks placement... The only MINOOOOOOOOOORRRRR flaws that I see in visuals are tweaks needed in colour and vegetation placement. The big part of problem still perfromace and optimization. And the water... I really will like the promised for future new water!

It sounds minor on paper, but it could be a huge undertaking. Let's put it this way (sorry if I sound like I am reciting the landscape-critics official hymn):

-the trees themselves need work. Obviously this is probably down to speed tree, but they need to be re-worked to the extent that the trunks are not visible from altitude. When driving in the country here in Kent, I can barely see the trunks of trees in the distance, so from altitude it just looks as though they are a great mass of foliage attached to the landscape. Am I knit-picking too much? Maybe, but it does make a massive difference to the landscape representation. The foliage should also be darker in colour. This is probably down to the lighting system, but it really needs looking into. Why should people revert to mods?
-Secondly, the tree-placing needs to be completely reworked. Forests should show a dense mass of foliage, and the majority of fields and roads should be relatively tree-free. Instead, the fields should be bounded by neat hedgerows which may grow steadily and smoothly into trees in a number of areas. Drive down a country lane in kent which may have a neat hedgerow, and you will observe that as the field boundary is passed, that neat hedgerow will probably become a chaotic mass of foliage, and trees will sprout within it; eventually creating one dense mass of greenery.
-Thirdly, the types of fields represented in the landscape needs looking into. Currently, the landscape looks like a patchwork quilt, when in actual fact, the landscape in England usually has large areas of grass-lands/fields which are pretty much the same colour. It is rare to look in all directions and see about 10 fields growing crops of different colours. It may sound a bit finicky, but if the landscape was seperated in a more ordered way, the surrounding would look a lot more natural (this may be difficult to implement due to the tiling system in place). At the end of the day, when flying over the countryside you will probably only see a few colour variations in the landscape here, as opposed to about a dozen or so in CloD.

Sorry if I sound like an anorak (really I'm not) but this is something which to me is quite obvious from living in Kent all my life. These things are just natural to me! I understand that most of the team have never seen the English landscape before, but IMHO that just shows that the team should listen to those of us who are quite clued-up on the matter. It's not a question of knowledge; more of common sense (which has been built up through years of living in this area). Drive around any part of England, and the majority of what I say is true. Obviously some areas of the country have their own quirky features (e.g the stone walls of some areas around the lake-district and, indeed, in the Cotswolds) but these are just extra parts of the landscape.

The landscape isn't complete and utter garbage; but it isn't Oleg's photorealism, and it really isn't the best the team could do.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

It sounds minor on paper, but it could be a huge undertaking. Let's put it this way (sorry if I sound like I am reciting the landscape-critics official hymn):

-the trees themselves need work. Obviously this is probably down to speed tree, but they need to be re-worked to the extent that the trunks are not visible from altitude. When driving in the country here in Kent, I can barely see the trunks of trees in the distance, so from altitude it just looks as though they are a great mass of foliage attached to the landscape. Am I knit-picking too much? Maybe, but it does make a massive difference to the landscape representation. The foliage should also be darker in colour. This is probably down to the lighting system, but it really needs looking into. Why should people revert to mods?
-Secondly, the tree-placing needs to be completely reworked. Forests should show a dense mass of foliage, and the majority of fields and roads should be relatively tree-free. Instead, the fields should be bounded by neat hedgerows which may grow steadily and smoothly into trees in a number of areas. Drive down a country lane in kent which may have a neat hedgerow, and you will observe that as the field boundary is passed, that neat hedgerow will probably become a chaotic mass of foliage, and trees will sprout within it; eventually creating one dense mass of greenery.
-Thirdly, the types of fields represented in the landscape needs looking into. Currently, the landscape looks like a patchwork quilt, when in actual fact, the landscape in England usually has large areas of grass-lands/fields which are pretty much the same colour. It is rare to look in all directions and see about 10 fields growing crops of different colours. It may sound a bit finicky, but if the landscape was seperated in a more ordered way, the surrounding would look a lot more natural (this may be difficult to implement due to the tiling system in place). At the end of the day, when flying over the countryside you will probably only see a few colour variations in the landscape here, as opposed to about a dozen or so in CloD.

Sorry if I sound like an anorak (really I'm not) but this is something which to me is quite obvious from living in Kent all my life. These things are just natural to me! I understand that most of the team have never seen the English landscape before, but IMHO that just shows that the team should listen to those of us who are quite clued-up on the matter. It's not a question of knowledge; more of common sense (which has been built up through years of living in this area). Drive around any part of England, and the majority of what I say is true. Obviously some areas of the country have their own quirky features (e.g the stone walls of some areas around the lake-district and, indeed, in the Cotswolds) but these are just extra parts of the landscape.

The landscape isn't complete and utter garbage; but it isn't Oleg's photorealism, and it really isn't the best the team could do.

+1 to that. But these are minor tweaks. The foliage in SpeedTree is easy task to do, no much worries. I'll like a lot to see bigger areas of the same texture in CloD as suggested, because will ease the texture lstreaming, ans if we have grass on, no need to so much texture work, just attention to textures junctions.

+1.000 to trees along roads... It's unreal, and its anoying when bombing/straffing units on roads... We really need more hedgerow...

But these points, I insist, are an "easy" task to do, and dev team CAN DO it easily... But now maybe the team focusi s in other issues more urgent. One point regards the graphic engine: we need simplified - but good looking - buildings textures, ASAP, to ease the streaming.