Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zuyax
Thanks for the replies everyone.
Quote:
...but they only grow along the shoreline. 
|
yeah they do but Unfortunately I dont think there is much that can be done about that without better access to certain parts of the code
Quote:
|
I took a look at the .dds and yes, i think they are. Tried to resize them but don't look as nice then actually, and Kelp gets freaking big, that's a fact.
|
I have updated the origian post to include links to a new version in which I reduced the height of the plants by 50% for any which are bothered by the height of the full size set. As you noted they didnt look as good so I increased the texture size to compensate...It didnt make too much diference to my framerates but I guess if someone is just hovering on the edge of playability as it is then perhaps they might want to give the smaller height plants a miss. |
Yes, the way it implemented is a barrier, but let me offer a broader statement to indicate where I am coming from: my real issue is with the choice of giant plants to represent the covering of the ocean bottom globally in the game. This seems a very odd choice, as leafy plants in general (and giant kelps in particular) form a very small portion of the covering of the ocean floor. Giant kelp may be capable of growing to 300 feet (and this is truly extraordinary when it occurs), but that does not mean that where ever there is 300 feet of water, you will find giant kelp (or any large plants). To represent the floor of the ocean globally at all depths and all distances from shore, sand, mud, encrusted rock and filter feeders would be more appropiate. I think the desire to replace the obviously bizarre giant plants included by the devs with a "more realistic" plant is misplaced. Ideally, these plant objects could be used to give the sea floor more texture and depth without making it look like a scene out of
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.