Maps in Operation Flashpoint 2?

[spring-R]

ok the main area of concern is the playing areas in OFP 2.

im really anxious as to how the maps/islands? will be formed.
in OFP the playing areas were fictionary islands. the water surrounding these islands stopped/limitted the player from going further.

BUT, in OFP2, there will be theaters such as Middle East, Asia, Africa and Europe. this means REAL places, not fiction Everon or Nogova. so how will they limit the maps? (they could make the whole continent a playing area) http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

[funnyguy1]

Kolgujev is real... I know that for sure.
Malden, Everon...hmm i don`t know.

It`ll be great to see real places in OFP2, existing in the real world.
You`ll be able to go there, and you`ll just know the place because It was already in the game.

And what about Vietnam? Somebody wrote there will be no `nam in the game.

[868]

Fictional vs Non-Fictional

Fictional:

a) Able to make up any type of scenario to suit the island.
b) Not limited to a certain type of 'current events'
c) Use any units from all over the globe
d) Realism is not required

Non-Fictional:

a) Good for re-creating the past wars
b) Needs to be somewhat realistic/relavent to the scenario
c) Limited to a unit stationed all over the globe
d) Realism is required

*I am sure there are more, but personally I would rather stick with 'Fictional' rather than 'non-fictional'

my two cents

[Norris]

I agree, it would be best to have fictional generic islands each based on a different 'climate', like snowy island, desert island, jungle island etc. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[caprera]

i agree too http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Is best to have fictional locations for the game story...U can simply create a village of fantasy and say for the game story that this village is in russia, philippines or elswere...no? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif

[wichtel1983]

Yeah, fiction better suits the 'what-it-is-all-about', giving the mission designers easier ways to generate a fascinating environment without having to be aware that everything is realistic.
And, who does really care about this middle-eastern dune or piece of rock looking EXACTLY like the real one in an israelian desert? I think that doesnt matter that much http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .

But, what about the point spring mentioned in the first post? I'm also very interested in how they will limit me from flying from Israel to Europe http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif (ok, thats a bit exaggerated).
And isn't development yet in the last state of development?
I thought someone would be bound to have information about how they will realize it. I really wanna know, as they can't surround every (non-fictional) battlefield by an ocean of their choice http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .

Just cant wait http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

[Skewballzz]

All the stock islands for CWC are scaled down versions of real islands. All BIS did was change the name and put objects wherever they wanted.

AVON FAQ page about this... (http://www.theavonlady.org/theofpfaq/misc/realislands.htm)

[Crowley]

All the stock islands for CWC are scaled down versions of real islands. All BIS did was change the name and put objects wherever they wanted.

AVON FAQ page about this... (http://www.theavonlady.org/theofpfaq/misc/realislands.htm)
So the terrain is inspired by real locations, everything else is fictional. It gives the designers some leeway when creating scenarios. As long as the fictional islands are realistically portrayed, they'll be as good or better than real islands for imaginary scenarios.

[MadDogX]

Somewhere I read that BIS are going to use 'on the fly' data streaming when loading maps in OFP2, allowing for much larger map sizes with less memory consumption. Nevertheless every map must have a boundary somewhere, so it's either gonna be islands again or they've got to have come up with some other intelligent way of limiting the map size. Either that or they've just resorted to the usual unrealistic invisible barriers that restrict the player's movement, like in other games.  http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

[shinRaiden]

My understanding was that those statements were attributed back to VBS1 statements, which was just marketing spins saying that Visitor could handle data sets large enough and accurate enough to handle GIS data. I still have not found anything 'official' that says how to get GIS data into Visitor, but I believe that is the answer.

If you are dynamically generating your maps, how would you handle all the object placement? How would you determine road and building and texture placement? That data is not stored in data files like DEM's and DTE's. That data is stored in overlay files that can be linked in editor programs. So I don't think that there is any 'new' system here, just the standard that we've been using so far.

As for the 'island' factor, I'd like to see something other as well, perhaps some sort of 'modular' system, where you have a dump of smaller 'mini' maps, say 10x 1.28km instead of 1x 12.8km, and then only have the cell you are in and the 8 surrounding ones (9x square) dynamically loaded. Not significantly different for normal size islands, but this could help speed up large maps, as well as help dynamicallly tune sp and mp lag.

[Jakerod]

Quote[/b] ] Nevertheless every map must have a boundary somewhere,

wouldn't it kick a** though if they somehow made the whole world. Do this whole big world war 3 scenario.

[sim]

If they did the whole world then knowbody would be able to play it... lagorama!!! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

sim

[Longjocks]

If they did the whole world then knowbody would be able to play it... lagorama!!!
I was about to say that. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

I won't be happy unless they map the whole world, dmanit! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

[sim]

lol...

he's mad http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

sim

[The Frenchman]

It was a old idea stated before:

Quote[/b] ]South East Asia- main spot and would have never ending jungle
Central Europe-similar to SEA but have never ending plains, occasional tree, a house..

[VerySolidSnake]

screw islands, i want continents! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

[SCFan42]

As for the 'island' factor, I'd like to see something other as well, perhaps some sort of 'modular' system, where you have a dump of smaller 'mini' maps, say 10x 1.28km instead of 1x 12.8km, and then only have the cell you are in and the 8 surrounding ones (9x square) dynamically loaded. Not significantly different for normal size islands, but this could help speed up large maps, as well as help dynamicallly tune sp and mp lag.
I think that's a great idea, instead of 25x25km islands, having a set of smaller 6x6km 'islands', with a maximum of four being loaded at once, but the overall size being hundred of kilometers in size. With only four being loaded at once, that'd be 36 square km per 'island' times four would be 144 square km, which would probably perform better than Tonal, but a little bit less than Nogo since it's 100 square km.

[Korax]

So.. basically your suggesting streaming terrain? where only the area your in is loaded at a time?
They already said they were going to implement that.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge_o.gif

[gandalf the white]

kinda limits the possibility for cutscenes http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif ...

just an island is good enough, it's the engine that caused problems sometimes ( i play OFP with 15 FPS while Doom 3 runs at 60+ FPS ?!)

[tankieboy]

Who really cares for cut scenes when you can have rolling tank battles for example over vast terrain.

[orson]

Anyone ever thought about shrinking units etc down to make larger playing areas ?

Martin made a mini huey and jeep , and they work great.

Shrink units to a 10th usual size , 10m square becomes 100m/s . Massive maps .

Am i lost in space or is this possible ?   http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif

Probly would require a physics engine overhaul to take the small scale into account

[shinRaiden]

One option is to fiddle with the landgrid setting. The standard is 50m, but you can crank it up above that too. While this may make for jaggier islands on the same view detail settings, it's one step to giving the OFP pilots more wing room without running into the vibration problem.

The problem with that though is that all 3 wrp editors currently available presume that you are using a landgrid setting of 50m, and don't have offsets to correct the placement of objects. This is because objects are placed independently with absolute values, and the only adjust vertically in certain cases like bridges. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif

[MaximoPoder]

May be big islands on a same place .. loaded like on GTA Vice City ...

[Jinef]

I would like large terrains showing climate types, which are large and constant to their theme. I would also like real locations with real scale, real names and real roads/bridges.

Islands like gaia, where people look like they could live. Agriculture, industry, residential areas, large road networks.

Itricate terrain features!

Ditches
Curved roads
banks
hedges
Streams
Marshes
Different water levels

etc.

Make it as complex as possible.

Reasoning -

Only now are PCs just starting to play OFP - 5000 viewdistance and high terrain detail. So by 2010 we should be playing OFP, and have enough mods and realism to it so that wars are instead fought by 1000s of teenagers in mass war computer rooms - The countries of the world will no longer need militaries, they will just need a internet connection.

Ok... it went a bit skewed at the end.

[dabitup]

Only now are PCs just starting to play OFP - 5000 viewdistance and high terrain detail. So by 2010 we should be playing OFP, and have enough mods and realism to it so that wars are instead fought by 1000s of teenagers in mass war computer rooms - The countries of the world will no longer need militaries, they will just need a internet connection.

Ok... it went a bit skewed at the end.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rock.gif

good idea, though

[IceFire]

Hmm, I'm not sure how it would work. I'm sure it is possible though.

For instance, they could make it so that you have never ending jungles or deserts. After some time of moving in one direction you would notice a "patern" in which certain trees and farms appear.

[Madus_Maximus]

Imagine how big the map would have to be (map as in the pressing M thing) if you had never ending land? Anyway, I trust BIS to do a good job on it, as long as we dont get stupid "invisible edges" like in Battlefield and so on, i hate that.

[KimTuomi]

Quote[/b] ]Anyway, I trust BIS to do a good job on it, as long as we dont get stupid "invisible edges" like in Battlefield and so on, i hate that.

I agree! BIS made a simple but very effective restrictions for OFP1 maps: water. It's easy to accept; you are on an island! Those invisible barriers are stupid.

I am not into car racing games at all, but my friend's son was playing a demo of Xpand Rally or something. There I realized that the terrain engine might be very, very suitable for OFP2. It seems to be good, unrestricted and good looking. Also the graphics is not polished to be candy-dandy. I want my OFP to be a bit "harsh" looking, graphics-wise and especially color-wise!

[JPSelter]

The Xpand-Rally area isn´t unrestricted. It´s surrounded by hills you cannot climb with your car. I think there´s nothing beyond those.

There is really only one game in PC-game-history that had an UNLIMITED area. You could walk for hours, days and months in one direction: Project IGI. The landscape was a mathematical production so it was endless. If you could combine this with automatic scenery population you could have a whole continent for your OPF2 http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif

[KimTuomi]

I didn't bother to watch the rally game being played forever by 3 year old, we had more important stuff to do like drinking beer and barbecue (sorry, offtopic, BUT): it seemed for me to be quite good terrain engine and by general overview, it seemed to be unrestricted. Even my friend told me that he *knew* I would be saying the thing.. thing about OFP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif

I never actually played IGI (tried it briefly) so didn't actually check out "how deep the rabbit hole goes".

[sk@m]

Hi,guys!

Well,i just saw the first post,and i'm wondering 2,bout the locations of the maps,and all this stuff.Also i think,i've read
before something about,tha OFP2 will have 3 difrent campaigns.That might be quite good,but i also read a post from here,that there will be no 'nam' campaign.Why every one is so stuck?I mean,there is too many fresh ideas of making new theaters of war,such as Golf war,Afghanistan,Somalia,Caucasus crisis,and so on.Or even phillipenes or something like that.We can't get loose of the old stuffs?

Now,about,the music...i think FDF hade the best band ever.
And i mean the finnish rock-metal band 'Airut'.
Something like that it would be awesome!
At the end,for the matter of limmitation within the maps,i can't figure out any solution,but don't worry,hell,they'll find something to work it out! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/ghostface.gif

[BennyBoy]

The Xpand-Rally area isn´t unrestricted. It´s surrounded by hills you cannot climb with your car. I think there´s nothing beyond those.

There is really only one game in PC-game-history that had an UNLIMITED area. You could walk for hours, days and months in one direction: Project IGI. The landscape was a mathematical production so it was endless. If you could combine this with automatic scenery population you could have a whole continent for your OPF2 http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Tribes and Tribes 2 also used a mathematical engine, only object placement was restricted to a limited area.