Maps with Lots of Trees

[LordGleedo]

Afternoon all,

Lets say for example I have a map that is going to have an area with a fairly dense woodland/forest. Is it ok to just use/duplicate tree meshes and change their size/rotation to make them look less duplicated, or should I be looking at using something like SpeedTree?

Is SpeedTree even supposed to be used for playable areas in maps or is it for background filling etc?

 

[toxic-sky]

Afternoon all,

Lets say for example I have a map that is going to have an area with a fairly dense woodland/forest. Is it ok to just use/duplicate tree meshes and change their size/rotation to make them look less duplicated, or should I be looking at using something like SpeedTree?

Is SpeedTree even supposed to be used for playable areas in maps or is it for background filling etc?

you could get away with scaling the trees a little bit but if you only have 1 tree model it is going to end up noticable, if you have a few different models to work with it helps alot. also RO2 does not support SpeedTree.

 

[LordGleedo]

Thanks for info on speedtree, that saved me looking into that bit.

A friend pointed me toward a 3dbuzz terrain tutorial where they actually used a decal layer to paint trees. I tried it and it does indeed work quite well. I wonder if that technique is used sparingly, if it wont impact performance.

 

[Le0]

you can use deco layers and foliage layers I don't think they impact performances besides the fact that you use many static meshes with them

 

[[TW]Swag]

Actually we chose not to use Speedtrees for various reasons but one of the biggest was because they light like ***... and not that good kind of *** either!

As for the OP, I'd suggest using a frontage of the forest for entrances so you can clearly show the canopy and trunks but once inside the forest use simpler trunks and a detached canopy that show the foliage from the vantage of being on the ground. You should be able to pull off a decent looking forest using that technique. If you thinking more of a copse of trees that is fairly dense then scaling and rotating to make it look less tiled should do you right.

 

[LordGleedo]

As for the OP, I'd suggest using a frontage of the forest for entrances so you can clearly show the canopy and trunks but once inside the forest use simpler trunks and a detached canopy that show the foliage from the vantage of being on the ground. You should be able to pull off a decent looking forest using that technique. If you thinking more of a copse of trees that is fairly dense then scaling and rotating to make it look less tiled should do you right.

You've lost me

What is a detached canopy

 

[[TW]Swag]

You've lost me

What is a detached canopy

All I mean by a detached canopy is that the leaves and branches don't have to be attached to the trunk of the trees allowing you to move the canopy up for a thinner feel and appearance and move it down for a more dense feel and appearance. Also you will be able to use relatively low poly trunks.

 

[LordGleedo]

All I mean by a detached canopy is that the leaves and branches don't have to be attached to the trunk of the trees allowing you to move the canopy up for a thinner feel and appearance and move it down for a more dense feel and appearance. Also you will be able to use relatively low poly trunks.

Interesting - so the trees in the Props_Vegetation package can somehow have the leaves/branches detached from the trunk? I will have to have a look.

Thanks for your help thus far

 

[[TW]Swag]

The trees that come with RO2 aren't exactly the best candidate for forests. There are some destroyed staticmesh branches that could be used but the item count in the map would go through the roof trying to use them. I'd suggest making something from scratch.

 

[LordGleedo]

The trees that come with RO2 aren't exactly the best candidate for forests. There are some destroyed staticmesh branches that could be used but the item count in the map would go through the roof trying to use them. I'd suggest making something from scratch.

****! The would involve me taking 10 years to learn maya/max

 

[captain0ats]

It doesn't take 10 years to learn a 3d package, well maybe if you were only putting in 5 minutes a week For a great tutorial on how to model trees/foliage inside 3d max I suggest a subscription to 3dmotive.com.

 

[LordGleedo]

It doesn't take 10 years to learn a 3d package, well maybe if you were only putting in 5 minutes a week For a great tutorial on how to model trees/foliage inside 3d max I suggest a subscription to 3dmotive.com.

tbh the problem is not the modelling but texturing them. I am totally colour blind

If I was not colour blind, I would have dedicated time to learning modelling years ago. Yes, I could still do it and rely on someone else to make the textures, but I don't like relying on other people.

 

[[TW]Swag]

I would not use the excuse of being color blind to deter you from learn 3d modeling since their isn't a shortage of 2d artists... you are going to run into the exact same problem in level design.

Furthermore, it won't take you 10 years to learn it for modeling. Shouldn't take you much longer than a week or two to get up to speed on how it works then however long it takes to put together the models.