Dirt textures on great Black Square airplanes
-
I wanted to ask what the limiting factor is when it comes to adding a dirt / wear system to your excellent aircraft — it would be amazing. I noticed that the aircraft already has a great subtle base wear texture. However, after several hours of flying, I didn’t notice any more noticeable cosmetic degradation.
I work as a 3D character artist, so creating a set of textures wouldn’t be a problem for me. If the obstacle lies elsewhere, I’d be very interested to know where. Asobo has this feature implemented by default.
-
I wanted to ask what the limiting factor is when it comes to adding a dirt / wear system to your excellent aircraft — it would be amazing. I noticed that the aircraft already has a great subtle base wear texture. However, after several hours of flying, I didn’t notice any more noticeable cosmetic degradation.
I work as a 3D character artist, so creating a set of textures wouldn’t be a problem for me. If the obstacle lies elsewhere, I’d be very interested to know where. Asobo has this feature implemented by default.
@fenthanyl I very much appreciate the offer! The way Asobo decided to implement this feature is arguably better than many gigabytes of different textures, which is how this used to be implemented. However, I find it to still be a tradeoff that I wasn't overly excited to commit to. You can read more about it in a discussion earlier this week here.
-
@Black-Square I read that small thread now; so the reason is optimization, which I understand. But why not make it an option—whether the user wants it or not—and enable or disable this feature in the tablet accordingly? Yes, it would certainly be more complex, and I’m not a programmer but a graphic artist. Still, I think people who have machines capable of handling it could easily keep it enabled, or define their own compromise by turning features on and off as they see fit. It’s a real shame, because it would add a strong visual element of realism to the aircraft, and I’m sure I’m not the only one who appreciates and actively looks for these kinds of details
-
@Black-Square I read that small thread now; so the reason is optimization, which I understand. But why not make it an option—whether the user wants it or not—and enable or disable this feature in the tablet accordingly? Yes, it would certainly be more complex, and I’m not a programmer but a graphic artist. Still, I think people who have machines capable of handling it could easily keep it enabled, or define their own compromise by turning features on and off as they see fit. It’s a real shame, because it would add a strong visual element of realism to the aircraft, and I’m sure I’m not the only one who appreciates and actively looks for these kinds of details
@fenthanyl It's a good suggestion, but the LOD system doesn't differentiate between visible and invisible components, so the popping problem would still persist. The only way I could provide an option would be to have two sets of the airframe models for each aircraft configuration, and allow the user to select via the menu, which is making a lot of trouble for one feature in my estimation. However, this is the kind of feature that I frequently "explore" with my users and beta testers as I go. As the bumps in the MSFS 2024 road get smoothed out and we understand the performance impact of certain features, I tend to add things over time, so I would not be surprised to find myself adding this to all my aircraft during a round of updates at some point in the future.
