Truck World: Australia

[Pimeuc]

I'm just wondering about this. If I 3D scan all of DFW to ground level including vehicle traces (which would be linear data), import the render to Unreal Engine and tie Google Maps data to trace the streets and vehicle behavior to add AI traffic, would that be a 1:1 map? People already 3D scanned their ENTIRE towns and imported them to UE.

Truck World Studio can do that. Scary.

Well at least that can solve the map problem.

[Optional Features]

I'm just wondering about this. If I 3D scan all of DFW to ground level including vehicle traces (which would be linear data), import the render to Unreal Engine and tie Google Maps data to trace the streets and vehicle behavior to add AI traffic, would that be a 1:1 map? People already 3D scanned their ENTIRE towns and imported them to UE.

Truck World Studio can do that. Scary.

Well at least that can solve the map problem.

There's also procedural mapping in UE5: while not accurate to irl buildings, it could allow mappers to create believable generic spots like suburbs or industrial areas with zoning and some simple inputs. No placing houses or warehouses one by one.

But the real issue is how SCS treats the map: they treat it as if it was the game itself. I mean they published a blog on tunnels today. Tunnels! Not that tunnels are not important, but so are road textures. Neither needs a separate blog.

[Pimeuc]

I'm just wondering about this. If I 3D scan all of DFW to ground level including vehicle traces (which would be linear data), import the render to Unreal Engine and tie Google Maps data to trace the streets and vehicle behavior to add AI traffic, would that be a 1:1 map? People already 3D scanned their ENTIRE towns and imported them to UE.

Truck World Studio can do that. Scary.

Well at least that can solve the map problem.

There's also procedural mapping in UE5: while not accurate to irl buildings, it could allow mappers to create believable generic spots like suburbs or industrial areas with zoning and some simple inputs. No placing houses or warehouses one by one.

But the real issue is how SCS treats the map: they treat it as if it was the game itself. I mean they published a blog on tunnels today. Tunnels! Not that tunnels are not important, but so are road textures. Neither needs a separate blog.

Yeah, I don't get all the hype centered around a new map. It's exciting to see how much detail they put in per DLC, but still it's should not be hyped too much. I personally think with the ability of procedural landscapes and buildings, and render scanning in UE5, it is very likely there would be an SCS eater in a few years.

If SCS would have to win the competition, they would have to focus on immersion and functional updates. @55sixxx mentioned map size, but that can easily be tackled. Current SCS just has an empty map devoid of AI traffic and activity.

[Optional Features]

@Pimeuc Yeah, there are many benefits to a large map, but SCS games have few of them. You can't customize your garage to have a place that feels like home. You can't leave equipment all over the map to fetch later. You can't walk around to explore some of the nicely done small towns. And worst of all, after driving 1000+ miles, you're probably delivering to a building that is in every way the same one near the area you left.

Dock variety alone could do so much for this game, but SCS puts most of their effort into parts of the map that are decorative.

It's one of the greatest missed opportunities in game history: I don't think any other developer has managed to make a map of this scale that is basically only a backdrop for screens. Imagine playing GTA cops and robbers cross country or farming in multiple states? Imagine having a virtual Cannonball Run in a racing sim? Imagine taking a passenger train from Chicago to LA. All of these are dreams and will never be realized. Any other dev with a map like this would have done so much more with it.

[Shiva]

Optional Features and Pimeuc, TW:A, what scale will it be?
1:1?
GTA? Optional Features, what scale would you say their map is?
What scale is ETS2 and ATS? And how do SCS do, to have their map appear bigger than it is?

I'm just wondering about this. If I 3D scan all of DFW to ground level including vehicle traces (which would be linear data), import the render to Unreal Engine and tie Google Maps data to trace the streets and vehicle behavior to add AI traffic, would that be a 1:1 map? People already 3D scanned their ENTIRE towns and imported them to UE.

Truck World Studio can do that. Scary.

Well at least that can solve the map problem.

I am curious, how much, or little, harddrive space, did those 3D scans take?
Any links to those that scanned their entire towns to UE and how it looks?


Cooper Pedy, google maps and 0:16 on the TW:A Environment video. Blink and you miss it.

[Pimeuc]

Optional Features and Pimeuc, TW:A, what scale will it be?
1:1?
GTA? Optional Features, what scale would you say their map is?
What scale is ETS2 and ATS? And how do SCS do, to have their map appear bigger than it is?

I'm just wondering about this. If I 3D scan all of DFW to ground level including vehicle traces (which would be linear data), import the render to Unreal Engine and tie Google Maps data to trace the streets and vehicle behavior to add AI traffic, would that be a 1:1 map? People already 3D scanned their ENTIRE towns and imported them to UE.

Truck World Studio can do that. Scary.

Well at least that can solve the map problem.

I am curious, how much, or little, harddrive space, did those 3D scans take?
Any links to those that scanned their entire towns to UE and how it looks?


Cooper Pedy, google maps and 0:16 on the TW:A Environment video. Blink and you miss it.

Yes, it would be 1:1 or 1:5 to say the least by the details per town that would be scanned. Here is the post: https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglev ... al_engine/
A lot of iPhones have Lidar these days. https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comment ... iphone_12/

@Pimeuc Yeah, there are many benefits to a large map, but SCS games have few of them. You can't customize your garage to have a place that feels like home. You can't leave equipment all over the map to fetch later. You can't walk around to explore some of the nicely done small towns. And worst of all, after driving 1000+ miles, you're probably delivering to a building that is in every way the same one near the area you left.

Dock variety alone could do so much for this game, but SCS puts most of their effort into parts of the map that are decorative.

It's one of the greatest missed opportunities in game history: I don't think any other developer has managed to make a map of this scale that is basically only a backdrop for screens. Imagine playing GTA cops and robbers cross country or farming in multiple states? Imagine having a virtual Cannonball Run in a racing sim? Imagine taking a passenger train from Chicago to LA. All of these are dreams and will never be realized. Any other dev with a map like this would have done so much more with it.

Yeah, everything is decorative. It would be nice for an NPC to get out of the truck, sit in the benches, or fuel by plugging in a pump. Yeah, the Wallbert in Dallas looks a lot like the Wallbert in Pueblo, and the funny thing is that the Wallbert in Pueblo isn't even a Walmart in real life. ATS should be more interactive. Why not have trains to board? Or cop chases and red light runners? A cops and robbers update would be awesome to fathom. But no, all it is would signify magically getting a ticket when nobody gets out of the car. Or 30 million fines and you still don't lose your license.

TWA devs you reading?

[Supernovae]

Are the vehicle physics really better? So far driving games made in Unreal Engine have quite bad physics and based on the demo they released, physics are not any better than what SCS currently has.

Not claiming TW:A or most UE based games have good driving physics, but Asseto Corsa Competizione is quite impressive.

There's also procedural mapping in UE5: while not accurate to irl buildings, it could allow mappers to create believable generic spots like suburbs or industrial areas with zoning and some simple inputs. No placing houses or warehouses one by one.

I agree procedural mapping can be an amazing tool for world design but it has limits. The Long Drive has a procedurally mapped world and the rally mode of Dirt 4 has procedurally mapped stages. I love The Long Drive, but I don't think it would work very well as an OTR trucking game because you lose the sense of place a handcrafted map has. Dirt 4's rally stages try to capture the essence of rally by making you rely on codriver calls more than memorising the stage, but handcrafted stages in Dirt Rally and WRC 8 feel more authentic than procedurally generated cookie cutter stages.
I think using procedural generation alongside handcrafted tweaks for a static world map could be extremely powerful, but it's still going to be handcrafted areas like the Million Dollar Highway in Colorado that make the world feel special.

There's certainly a balance of scale and detail, but I think players still need to feel like they're going down unique routes to varied destinations to stay engaged for hundreds or thousands of hours. If TW:A's map felt like 18 WOS Extreme Trucker's Outback map it could be fun for some hours but driving up and down the same roads consecutively would get pretty repetitive quickly. Likewise, if the map was a 1:1 scan of Australia, driving 500 miles across the outback would take way too much time IRL and feel very repetitive even if the road segment was technically "different".

There's a lot of artistry that makes a game feel solid. If sound design or physics are off, brilliant looking games can feel extremely cheap. Likewise, games lacking in the graphics department can often feel so good the visual fidelity doesn't particularly matter.

[Optional Features]

@Shiva It has to be 1:20 or smaller, but it feels large. You can drive on every road in the map, and fences and gates are sometimes destructible.

The funny thing is that while the GTA map is fictional, so is the SCS map. But the SCS map team seems to refuse to use more editorial liberties to fill in spots or connect roads that might not be connected irl. The SCS map is way bigger than what it seems, but so much space is wasted.

For offroad sections specifically, they could do so much more to vary up the experience a bit.

[Shiva]

Ok, cheers, every road driveable.
Scale, no one knows yet?

SCS games, yes. There is stuff that could be added.
But sometimes, less is more.

[Supernovae]

Ok, cheers, every road driveable.
Scale, no one knows yet?

SCS games, yes. There is stuff that could be added.
But sometimes, less is more.

Less but quality is better than more and rubbish. But there still needs to be enough good base content.