Wow, they removed trees from chernarus.

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

Then you would have people who try to run this on a overclocked potato complaining.

 

Yet again...

 

They can add graphical fidelity, yes, but they have to mantain the option for people to lower that fidelity.

 

Just because people do not have supa computas doesn't mean they are blocked from improving the graphics of the game, they just have to make it so people can downgrade the graphics to where you currently can so that they can still run the game..,

[gibonez 3633]

Yet again...

 

They can add graphical fidelity, yes, but they have to mantain the option for people to lower that fidelity.

 

Just because people do not have supa computas doesn't mean they are blocked from improving the graphics of the game, they just have to make it so people can downgrade the graphics to where you currently can so that they can still run the game..,

 

One thing I think everyone can agree on however is that there needs to be a baseline level of graphics and certain things being forced to render in order to not give people who crank their graphics to the lowest settings an advantage.

 

If anything those with high spec machines should be rewarded for pushing forward technology by having a the ability to render objects further, longer view distances etc.

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

One thing I think everyone can agree on however is that there needs to be a baseline level of graphics and certain things being forced to render in order to not give people who crank their graphics to the lowest settings an advantage.

 

If anything those with high spec machines should be rewarded for pushing forward technology by having a the ability to render objects further, longer view distances etc.

As long as it can be done without ruining presently stable framerates for people with outdated technology who are in a financial status that does not allow them to upgrade.

 

If they update the game and force everyone to do this, this, and that, tons of people will no longer be able to run the game. That is plain silly, so they need to figure out a way to do these things without jeopardizing people's framerates...

[gibonez 3633]

As long as it can be done without ruining presently stable framerates for people with outdated technology who are in a financial status that does not allow them to upgrade.

 

If they update the game and force everyone to do this, this, and that, tons of people will no longer be able to run the game. That is plain silly, so they need to figure out a way to do these things without jeopardizing people's framerates...

 

Frame rates should only go up from here.

 

With more optimization people who run this game should be able to get better frame rates hopefully.

 

Everyone who has arma 3 can see how much better optimized that game is even though it looks so much better than stand alone.

 

Even with the more demanding visuals in arma 3 , arma 3 gets a much better frame rate due to optimization.

[Leto (DayZ) 72]

Just found this screen on DayzTv. Seems like they reduced many trees, maybe thats why chernarus+ doesn't feel as Vanilla Chernarus.

 

On this screen also the ground texture seems a bit blurry, whats the deal here?

 

 

Removed tree?

 

The forests are identical. The only difference is the lower angle on the first screen makes them look slightly thicker. The camera is further back on the second screen and the angle is higher which makes everything smaller and shows more space between the trees.

[rybo 171]

It's true this game would have been top of the line had they used the A3 engine. Instead they mashed two broken engines together hoping to fix old problems. Sounds like a bad idea on the outside, no? Especially considering A3 has most of the A2 issues resolved...

 

Everything about A3 is better. Lighting, movement, FPS, guns and all....

 

I will add that yes it took them after launch to get everything working. But that's just the new industry standard. Pushing games out before they are ready and don't think for one second that Dayz will be any different.

 

I highly expect us waiting up too 3 months after launch for everything to work semi-correctly.

 

 

 

As for the tree's and new towns the game needs them. People like me who have been playing on Cherno since it was made need these changes. The map was purely designed for large scale combat. Hence why everything looks bland expect the new towns. Other than the new towns it doesn't even feel like a A-poc is even going on. Then add in the wack-a-mole Zeds and all the other issues it's almost laughable.

 

 

It will be about 2 years before this games becomes what most thought it would be. So your choices are burn yourself out early or wait for the goods.

Edited April 29, 2014 by RyBo

[BadAsh (DayZ) 1513]

Removed tree?

 

The forests are identical. The only difference is the lower angle on the first screen makes them look slightly thicker. The camera is further back on the second screen and the angle is higher which makes everything smaller and shows more space between the trees.

 

I must admit I have spent several minutes comparing both pictures and also failed miserable in determining which image was supposed to be the one that was the "Wow! They removed trees!" example.

[gibonez 3633]

I must admit I have spent several minutes comparing both pictures and also failed miserable in determining which image was supposed to be the one that was the "Wow! They removed trees!" example.

 

 

They appear the same the only differnce is the standalone picture has absolutely crappy object render distance.

 

Those mountains out back have no trees in them they are just bald and naked.

 

The object render distance in stand alone is sooo crappy

[zeroy 240]

Everything in stand alone appears squished and up close 100m looks like 30m, 600m looks like 200m. Stand alone does a real bad job at demonstrating distance the vastness of terrain.

 

Sorry but I cannot see what you mean at all - please post comparison shots and dont use the fly option - in game you are firmly on the ground :)

[zeroy 240]

The object render distance in stand alone is sooo crappy

 

http://dayzintel.com/dayz-standalone/dayz-standalone-performance-guide

 

Check the part for config files where you can increase/decrease object view/draw distance.

[Karmaterror 982]

They appear the same the only differnce is the standalone picture has absolutely crappy object render distance.

 

Those mountains out back have no trees in them they are just bald and naked.

 

The object render distance in stand alone is sooo crappy

 

Object render distance seems fine to me.

 

Most mod servers ran a 1k view distance so ya never saw those bare hills. 3k in SA means ya do.

 

Hills are bare like that in the A2 editor aswell when ya crank view distance

[gibonez 3633]

Object render distance seems fine to me.

 

Most mod servers ran a 1k view distance so ya never saw those bare hills. 3k in SA means ya do.

 

Hills are bare like that in the A2 editor aswell when ya crank view distance

 

Not for me .

 

There are two different settings view distance and object render distance.

 

While the view distance seems nice and good in standalone at 3km the object render distance seems much lower than even the mod.

[Karmaterror 982]

Not for me .

 

There are two different settings view distance and object render distance.

 

While the view distance seems nice and good in standalone at 3km the object render distance seems much lower than even the mod.

 

Trust me its an illusion created by the bigger view distance....im 99.9% sure on this. Was in A2 editor just last night and saw the same thing while making a naval war games mission. Used to play a mod server that had 2k view distance and same phenomenon.

 

Its like when people were posting that the map was smaller, that was also an illusion created by being able to see much farther, give it a try in the editor  ;)

 

If they get some optimisation in we might see it cranked a bit in beta. I wouldn't mind dropping view dist to 2k and upping object load to say 1.5....2k if they can. Could be a good trade off, leaving no bare terrain  :)

Edited April 30, 2014 by Karmaterror

[brumey 116]

imo

 

out of all the arma games (arma2, dayz sa, arma3). the standalone Looks best!!!!  just look at the detailed character models!  how cool they made the animations.  it has pointing, clapping, asshole finger, ..... i miss These things in altis life rpg!!!   what else would u want?

the sky and clouds look also better in SA!

 

the only Thing dayz could borrow from arma3 is the stance System! but its no biggie! since sa's stance System is ok for me!

[EliJK7 0]

I really hope that this doesn't become a suburban game, let alone having skyscrapers. I enjoy sneaking around in the forest with the immersive ambience and great textures. Say Chernarus becomes one big city, no wilderness, no trees, (sort of like black Ops 2) that would completely ruin the game for me. It would take all the fun out of wandering around in the forest.

[maninthewall 470]

It is amazing how much better chenarus looks in the Arma 3 engine.

 

 

 

<snip ing TNC breaking images>

 

The biggest improvement I think with the arma 3 engine is how it demonstrates distance.

 

You really get a sense of distance and scale in Arma 3 that you do not get in Stand alone .

 

That red house to the right is 600m away it looks so far away as it should.

 

Everything in stand alone appears squished and up close 100m looks like 30m, 600m looks like 200m. Stand alone does a real bad job at demonstrating distance the vastness of terrain.

 

Also take a look at that sweet m16 model , the arma modding community is amazing I love how they can just crank out high quality gun models . The model is beautiful but not only that the Irons on it are functional as they should be, Shooting 600m with irons is doable because of the weapon models excellent quality.

Maybe if you stop running DayZ on normal settings you can see how it actually looks

Edited August 1, 2014 by orlok

[gibonez 3633]

Maybe if you stop running DayZ on normal settings you can see how it actually looks

 

Got everything cranked up still looks like poo.

[maninthewall 470]

Got everything cranked up still looks like poo.

I think DayZ looks better than ArmA 3 tbh

[gibonez 3633]

I think DayZ looks better than ArmA 3 tbh

 

not to me.

 

Arma 3 when maxed out has better image quality, better lighting, far better object render distance and sharpness.

 

SA just looks like arma 2 to me.

 

Right now arma 3 loos miles better than SA.

 

However that should hopefully change.

Edited April 30, 2014 by gibonez

[acdc_bag 32]

So you are saying that Iron sights should be useless past 300m within the context of Arma and standalone or within the context of real life ?

 

If you honestly can't tell that I'm making posts in a DayZ game forum about the DayZ Standalone game, maybe you should take a break.

 

 

 

not to me.

 

Arma 3 when maxed out has better image quality, better lighting, far better object render distance and sharpness.

 

SA just looks like arma 2 to me.

 

 

 

Right now arma 3 loos miles better than SA.

 

However that should hopefully change.

 

 

Dude if you think Standalone looks anything like ArmA 2 you need to get your eyes checked, immediately.  The character models/clothing textures of Standalone look miles ahead of ArmA 3's 10 clothing skins.  When you talk about comparing graphics you're really comparing engines, lighting, shadows, texture resolution.  The fact is, they're the same engines with different lighting, basically the same shadow quality (Standalone's shadows cranked up look the same as Arma 3's), and different textures, possibly different resolutions, as the housing models and such were brought over from ArmA 2 models.  However, most all of the houses that existed before were redone to allow entry and have internal rooms, so they've more than likely all been upscaled if they needed it.

 

Arma 3 and Standalone both use the Real Virtuality 4 engine, just like Take On Helicopters.  But I suppose you think TOH looks like ArmA 2 also.

Edited May 2, 2014 by acdc_bag

[NinjaTurkey 255]

To be honest id prefer more trees and less buildings. Id like to play with decent fps and not a see a slideshow all the time. Makes recording an absolute pain.

[pilgrim* 3514]

I guess all you people just live in the cities

Of course there are a lot less trees, whole areas deforested, more space between trees.

 

Why don't you ASK the Devs?

 

also, there is another 'Cherno size' city planned for the mid north

 

xx pilgrim

[Steak and Potatoes 13480]

We need to link arms and unite against the logging companies.

 

[Deathlove 2286]

We need to link arms and unite against the logging companies.

 

LOL wut? XD

[jubeidok 495]