Question about draw distance

[R0B3RTF1SH3R 66]

 

This, all players disappear after 1000 m. Which is ridiculous, they should extend it to at least 1500 m or make it so servers can change it.

 

Sometimes I want to see if there is anything happening on the island before I make that long swim. But with it being over 1km in distance it's just a guess and could be a huge risk.

 

My reply was a response to this. 

Edited February 10, 2015 by R0B3RTF1SH3R

[-Gews- 7443]

so if you want to just go for player spotting, why have draw distance/rend distance over 1k? 

 

No reason.

[gibonez 3633]

Player render distance should absolutely be atleast 5km.

 

This goes for vehicles also.

 

Scouting and looking in advance should be a very powerful took in dayz.

[Apollo'sFire 31]

Everything needs to render at the same distance, except for maybe grass. I can't count how many times I thought I was "hiding" within a bush and my buddy spotted me with no trouble...and I'm over here like wtf??? Where did the bush go? If I have a full ghillie and I'm prone on a hillside, completely hidden to players within my eyesight but yet a new spawn can spot me while he advances on a town ie elektro and gives my position away etc. That seems broken to me

[Bororm 1156]

Player render distance should absolutely be atleast 5km.

 

This goes for vehicles also.

 

Scouting and looking in advance should be a very powerful took in dayz.

 

The distance between the western edge of cherno and the eastern edge of elektro is roughly 5km.  There's basically no circumstance in the game where you're going to need to see that far.  1km is absolutely fine for "scouting ahead."  It would be nice if it were up to like 1500 for sniping, but honestly for the vast majority of gameplay purposes there's no reason to go beyond that.  There's hardly any locations where you can even see that far without your view being obstructed.

 

Hell the map itself is 15km at its widest point, and 13km vertical (continent).  You're telling me being able to see roughly a third of the map is an "absolute" must?

 

It would also make your performance tank even harder.  The network bubble is there for a reason.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Bororm

[teddy911 1]

Grass definitely needs to render a lot further than at present. Trying to hide in grass on sniper hill, or anywhere else at the moment is pointless as is.

Ideally player render should be limited to the lowest render distance of other objects. But with grass only rendering at around 100m or less, this would not be ideal.

Would love to see grass render at least 300m.

[Calvin Candie 189]

No engine could render grass up to 300 or 500m as some wanted to without severe performance drop.

They need to figure this crap out somehow.

[gibonez 3633]

The distance between the western edge of cherno and the eastern edge of elektro is roughly 5km.  There's basically no circumstance in the game where you're going to need to see that far.  1km is absolutely fine for "scouting ahead."  It would be nice if it were up to like 1500 for sniping, but honestly for the vast majority of gameplay purposes there's no reason to go beyond that.  There's hardly any locations where you can even see that far without your view being obstructed.

 

Hell the map itself is 15km at its widest point, and 13km vertical (continent).  You're telling me being able to see roughly a third of the map is an "absolute" must?

 

It would also make your performance tank even harder.  The network bubble is there for a reason.

 

The 5km number is just something I threw out because that is the view distance that is possible in Arma 2 and Arma 3.

 

Any view distance shorter than that would be a monumental downgrade.

 

Player render distance should be a slider option if it is so detrimental to performance.

 

Those with good rigs can crank it up, those with potatoes can keep it low.

 

Performance should not be bad either way if they merely render what your characters eyes can see. A fog of war system would not only be good for gameplay but might help performance also.

Edited February 11, 2015 by gibonez

[-Gews- 7443]

The distance between the western edge of cherno and the eastern edge of elektro is roughly 5km.  There's basically no circumstance in the game where you're going to need to see that far.  1km is absolutely fine for "scouting ahead."  It would be nice if it were up to like 1500 for sniping, but honestly for the vast majority of gameplay purposes there's no reason to go beyond that.  There's hardly any locations where you can even see that far without your view being obstructed.

 

Hell the map itself is 15km at its widest point, and 13km vertical (continent).  You're telling me being able to see roughly a third of the map is an "absolute" must?

 

It would also make your performance tank even harder.  The network bubble is there for a reason.

 

Agreed 5 km is a bit much... may as well not have network bubble if it's 80 square km. Can't recall needing to see that far even in Takistan with an Abrams, more like half that range except when messing around in editor. ~2.5 km is fine for AS50, M107 class, not a concern for SA before mods, ~1.5 km is good enough for standalone 308/.300.1000 m is too small though, maybe they will change it, either way they should have seen such a small bubble would cause some issues... already it caused problem when I wanted to snipe hill to tower like so. Maybe they aren't much snipers. Another example is the new prison island which is out of the bubble from various high points on shore, a potential problem for people attempting to survey with binocs. Simply network bubble should be based on the weapons' ranges. 

[Bororm 1156]

The 5km number is just something I threw out because that is the view distance that is possible in Arma 2 and Arma 3.

 

Any view distance shorter than that would be a monumental downgrade.

 

Player render distance should be a slider option if it is so detrimental to performance.

 

Those with good rigs can crank it up, those with potatoes can keep it low.

 

Performance should not be bad either way if they merely render what your characters eyes can see. A fog of war system would not only be good for gameplay but might help performance also.

 

The performance issue isn't about rendering, it's that your client is receiving information about every other player in your bubble regardless of if you see them or not.  It's about lag.  It's why there were big issues with people nesting items in containers in containers early on causing a lot of lag for anyone who entered their bubble.  Or why before they took out the little connection chains you could tell when some one was entering your bubble if you got one or not.  I don't think the technology is sophisticated enough to restrict your interactions to only those players you have line of sight on/those who have it on you, so I don't think there's a middle ground there.

 

 

Agreed 5 km is a bit much... may as well not have network bubble if it's 80 square km. Can't recall needing to see that far even in Takistan with an Abrams, more like half that range except when messing around in editor. ~2.5 km is fine for AS50, M107 class, not a concern for SA before mods, ~1.5 km is good enough for standalone 308/.300.1000 m is too small though, maybe they will change it, either way they should have seen such a small bubble would cause some issues... already it caused problem when I wanted to snipe hill to tower like so. Maybe they aren't much snipers. Another example is the new prison island which is out of the bubble from various high points on shore, a potential problem for people attempting to survey with binocs. Simply network bubble should be based on the weapons' ranges. 

 

I think they didn't really make the decision based on what I bolded there, but I think it is a small part of the problem.  I don't want to rag on them too much, but we've seen the sorta terminology they use when talking about snipers (1337 snipex0rs etc) and the fact that sniper rifles are the only weapons they are regulating currently (waiting for the loot economy, not necessarily a bad decision but nothing else is being treated like that).  I think they have this strange fear that the game will devolve into people in the hills taking out fresh spawns, which happens but there's so many counter points to that argument that it's a bit absurd.  Any ways, bottom line is that while they might not actually hate snipers, I don't think they have enough love for them to increase the bubble just for that.  Not yet any ways.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Bororm