Level of detail discussion

[Orion]

Thought I would start a discussion on this as while it comes up in related discussion, it is oft confused with things like the render range of animals and the like.

I find the current ranges for level of detail changes too short. This causes issues like being able to see an animal in plain sight but not scoped of which all will be aware of.

I would propose that an optional scenery complexity option be included that would match the full level of detail to about 200m up from what I believe is 50m so as to roughly match the animals render range. I am not sure if the recent changes to the very high scenery complexity have altered this but IMO the trees and other objects turn into ugly trees far too soon.

Now, obviously I do not think that my computer would be able to handle that but I also believe that software should be more capable than hardware and given how much people want an increase in animal render range, I think before any adjustment were made to that the level of detail ranges would need pushed out as I would say in 90%(wild assumption) of cases where animals are spotted in long range they are not viewable in short range due to the above issue.

It would help a lot with immersion as well for those that seek it. Of course I am not sure if changes such as this are difficult and would break other things or not but still... if it could be isolated from the other graphics options it would be nice.

So, discuss.

[DragonFire]

I would really like to see the rendering distance at least the same as JustCause2 that has got to be just about 3x what we have here.

[MonacoSteve]

Well, just that TH uses (still) an older engine than JC2

[Orion]

Well I don't see the engine situation changing this year really and I can live with what we have now.

It is perhaps a pity it is not just changing some variables in a file to be honest. Just think of how more difficult things like pheasant would be to find if the grass was always present.

[Peter Johansson]

I´d like to clarify some things about the animal render distance as this has been brought up many times. Hopefully this post can be a reference for future discussions on game performance as well.

It´s a complicated topic for reasons few are fully aware of. Of course we´d all love if we could simply increase the distance on which you could spot and hunt animals by increasing a number somewhere. But it´s not as simple as just "rendering/drawing" the animals on the screen over a larger distance. A game engine such as ours consist of a huge amount of systems working together, and one can almost look at it as a living organism where a ton of things depend on others and where a balance has to be carefully maintained otherwise it just won´t work anymore. Individual systems are always given specified amount of room (memory etc) within the computer to operate, and if we increase the requirements for one system we simply have to cut back on something else to avoid increasing system requirements for every other new feature we add to the game. Keeping the game operating satisfactory for everyone with low to high performance computers is very hard, and with all due respect to all of you who play this game we do our outmost to keep the system requirements down, and one simple reason for that is that theHunter is not only targeting regular "fps" gamers who usually own newer and more powerful computers.

Anyway, increasing the render distance for the animals mean several things, among them the following:

1. At the moment no physics are being processed on objects over a certain distance (which equals the render distance). The way things work at the moment is that beond the render distance the animals no longer exist in "physical" form. The easiest way to explain it is that they become "ghosts" that move around in the world using a very different (and non physical) set of rules and restrictions. This limit in calculating the physics (and also AI and animations) has to do with game performance and these things are partially linked to the core of how the game engine handle the world that we´re in. And while changing things here is far from impossible it would most certainly require resources that we simply do not have at the moment.

2. Increasing the render distance naturally mean rendering more animals on the screen. This would probably create a need to revise and optimize most of the animals we currently have. And while doing that is not a bad thing it will still require alot fo work.

3. More animal AI routines needs to be processed. Naturally this also have impact on performance and while I´m no expert here the constant and high number of checks done by each animal for it to behave correctly and avoid ground objects etc migt become a major concern.

4. Another thing that complicate things ever further are the fact that we use scopes, sometimes with alot of magnification on our weapons. Even if we did manage to adress and solve everything above once you look through that scope at an animal in the distance the whole focus are no longer around the player but around the point you look at. To change "the render/processing point of interest" adds even more required system dynamics. Stuff that is generall tied to the core of the engine.

With this said I really don´t intend to put and end to discussions about these things here, but only to shed some more light on the problems wich have to be dealt with. While I for one wish these limitations didn´t exist they still do, and we´ll always be forced to deal with them. All game engines have their strong AND weak points and if there is one thing I´ve learned during all my years in this industry it´s that you will never ever get away from that fact. Or I have yet to work with such an engine

[Peter Johansson]

I would really like to see the rendering distance at least the same as JustCause2 that has got to be just about 3x what we have here.

I´m also curious of exactly what you mean when you say that the render distance in JC2 are 3x higher than in theHunter? JC2 also has a render distance for the characters that should be the same as ours (JC2 characters = theHunter animals).

[butter8808]

I would a better render distance on trees shrubs rocks because I play on a 47 inch screen so it is really painfully obvious when things pop or that they look like crap at about 70 meters

[Orion]

Thank you for the post peter and hopefully useful for myself and of course others if a discussion regarding the animal render distance appears again which it will do.

@butter8808

It is noticeable regardless of screen size or resolution hence the topic. Although I think it is perhaps worse for those that use very high scenery complexity as we actually see how good it can look.

There have been some people who cannot see the high quality stuff and are amazed when they do an upgrade as to what actually is on offer, but once you get a taste of it you want more I find.

[ronMctube]

explains why in bf3 when you scope up at major range you get lower fps i guess

thehunter is still great looking .

[bromstarzan]

Thanks Peter for your thourough explanation about render distance.
So if I understand you right, when rendering the vegetation in scope/binocular mode it is possible to push the limit of vegetation out a bit? But in normal sight mode, the radius is shortened for the benefit of increased performance?

What I would like to see, is not a larger animal render radius, but rather "the same" vegetation/object render distance in both scoped and no-scope mode. This could be achieved by either
a) dropping the draw distance in scope mode to that of the no-scope mode, or
b) increase the draw distance in no-scope mode so it maches the scope mode.
I guess it still comes down to memory and CPU interactions even though we do not touch the animal AI and it's drawdistance?

For me personally, the big difference between the two viewpoints is a major issue. It would mean a big leap forward could it be overcome. Good idea to bring this up again Orion. I wonder what a poll would tell us from a user based choice between:
1) Match the no-scoped vegetation/object draw distance to that of scoped/binocular mode (keep animal drawdistance as is)
2) Increase the animal draw distance (keep vegetation/objects as is)
I suspect many players (majority?) would go for the development of no 2, while I would prefer to see work done in alternative 1.