Why I'm disappointed with SFO, Unbelievable Grass, Dat Grass
#1
Posted 28 November 2014 - 11:04 PM
#2
Posted 28 November 2014 - 11:07 PM
By all means, start your own grass project if you're that unhappy with what's available.
#3
Posted 28 November 2014 - 11:21 PM
I should probably point out that what Skyrim also lacks is a game engine powerful enough to render a landscape and forests as you've described. Skyrim, quite simple, dies if you try to create a really dense, realistic looking forest. This is why it's far better to make the forest floor mostly grass, because you'd just end up with lots of light forests with lots of open mud/pine ground cover, which would look really weird. Unfortunately, it's extremely difficult to make a decent, realistic looking landscape in the Creation Engine as it's not really powerful enough for it.
#4
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:08 AM
Skyrim is based on Scandinavian countries like Norway, Denmark and Iceland not North America. Just look at Skyrim's architecture, it's very obvious Bethesda was influenced by Viking culture. Also, I'm pretty sure Vurt is Swedish and SFO is based on his home countries' landscape.
I'm kinda confused as to why you think Skyrim should look like Wisconsin.
I just wanted to add that there's nothing wrong with wanting it to look like Wisconsin, or North Dakota, or wherever. My copy of Skyrim looks more like something out of a child's nightmare thanks to darker fantasy mods. But saying all landscape and grass modders have it wrong because it doesn't look like your back yard is a bit rich. As Terra Nova said, if you want it to look like that, start your own mod and do it.
Edited by DurtyNelly, 29 November 2014 - 02:26 AM.
#5
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:32 AM
Nords are Vikings...
#6
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:35 AM
Gonna have to agree that Skyrim is in no way modeled after America, your looking in the wrong part of the world try instead heading to some of the Scandinavian countries I think then it would hold more salt if you lived there instead. IF your looking for realism, which I assume you are.
A large part of the lack of animals/creatures can more then likely be blamed on Skyrim needing to be packed up and put on a console, they put in the bare basics and called it a day. Thankfully there are mods that add more animals already out, Animallica, Farm animals, Birds of Skyrim, SkyBirds.
#7
Posted 29 November 2014 - 02:24 PM
I should probably point out that what Skyrim also lacks is a game engine powerful enough to render a landscape and forests as you've described. Skyrim, quite simple, dies if you try to create a really dense, realistic looking forest.
Yeah I was thinking this as well. Regardless of what Todd has told us, this engine is just a spiffier version of what was used to make Fallout 3, aka, it's OLD.
#8
Posted 30 November 2014 - 06:43 PM
I should probably point out that what Skyrim also lacks is a game engine powerful enough to render a landscape and forests as you've described. Skyrim, quite simple, dies if you try to create a really dense, realistic looking forest.
Yeah I was thinking this as well. Regardless of what Todd has told us, this engine is just a spiffier version of what was used to make Fallout 3, aka, it's OLD.
That's correct, the Creation Engine that powers Skyrim is just an upgraded and rebadged version of the ancient and run-down Gamebryo Engine, which is why things are so familiar.
#9
Posted 30 November 2014 - 07:23 PM
I should probably point out that what Skyrim also lacks is a game engine powerful enough to render a landscape and forests as you've described. Skyrim, quite simple, dies if you try to create a really dense, realistic looking forest.
Yeah I was thinking this as well. Regardless of what Todd has told us, this engine is just a spiffier version of what was used to make Fallout 3, aka, it's OLD.
That's correct, the Creation Engine that powers Skyrim is just an upgraded and rebadged version of the ancient and run-down Gamebryo Engine, which is why things are so familiar.
I like the familiar part, but god... Why can't we have a better engine?
#10
Posted 30 November 2014 - 10:15 PM
I should probably point out that what Skyrim also lacks is a game engine powerful enough to render a landscape and forests as you've described. Skyrim, quite simple, dies if you try to create a really dense, realistic looking forest.
Yeah I was thinking this as well. Regardless of what Todd has told us, this engine is just a spiffier version of what was used to make Fallout 3, aka, it's OLD.
That's correct, the Creation Engine that powers Skyrim is just an upgraded and rebadged version of the ancient and run-down Gamebryo Engine, which is why things are so familiar.
I like the familiar part, but god... Why can't we have a better engine?
Because Bethesda love being behind every other leading developer by half a decade or more.



Sign In
Create Account

Back to top









