Texas Discussion Thread

User avatar
Marcello Julio
Posts: 5667
Joined: 12 Nov 2016 19:27
Location: Ceará, Brazil

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3741 Post by Marcello Julio » 24 Jun 2022 12:13

As oldmanclippy said a few pages ago, I don't mind too if they reuse prefabs as long as they trick me into thinking that they're not. Reusing assets is a very common thing within the gaming industry, people are amazed as if it never existed. As long as you do it in a way that it's not obvious that it's 100% reuse, I have no problem with this.
Shiva
Posts: 4974
Joined: 21 Dec 2018 16:16

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3742 Post by Shiva » 24 Jun 2022 12:25

Seerman wrote: 24 Jun 2022 10:27 Texas is late due to the non-release of HoR. All forces were sent to Montana to make up for the lack of released DLS in the current year. Why Montana? Because it's smaller. That's all.

This is my proposition.
And I think you are wrong.
There can't be too many mappers, etc, per area.
NTM's B-Double Telescopic Skeletal Container Carrier. Youtube video on how it works. W & S thread.
B-Double trailer and short modes: EN 7.82 swap body, 20’ or 30’ containers.
Standalone 40' mode: EN 7.82 swap body, 20', 30', 40' or 2 x 20' trailer.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3743 Post by Tristman » 24 Jun 2022 13:05

The release of Texas and the non-release of HoR are completely unrelated.. Most of the ETS2 devs don't work on ATS, and a lot of the ETS2 players don't play ATS.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30163
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3744 Post by flight50 » 24 Jun 2022 13:11

@Quark is pretty much correct. Texas and Iberia are more equal in sq km. Population wise....nah. Not even close. Road density (irl) they are probably about the same. Like Quark said, its about the zoom level on Google. Zoom all the way in an see all roads, they are about the same. Zoom out and only the major roads for both are displayed.

@Vinnie Terranova Texas should be the densest US state by far simply because it has the space. But no way SCS gets in all the US roads. If I had to guess 25% of them make the 1:20 dlc. For a state with tons of roads, 25% is high. Now 25% for Montana is low. Montana should get nearly 80% of the its US roads simply because it lacks the density compared to Texas. Impossible at the scale to get all backroads in Texas but I do think they get in a good amount. I loved when we got the summary blogs for new dlc's and it gave road miles. SCS stopped doing that for some reason with Colorado. Texas would generate some hype just knowing the comparison to other dlc's. The road network should be one of the best assets for Texas though. I'm still going with Texas having 1100+ road miles. For paid dlc's, to date, I believe Oregon's 5,000 miles is the most based on summary blogs. Colorado was the first dlc that the road miles ceased and Wyoming followed. I wish SCS brought back that detail in blogs.
werewoooooooolf wrote: 24 Jun 2022 10:23 Agreed. Texas is a highly anticipated DLC and seen as a game changer for ATS. SCS literally cannot afford any screw-ups.
Exactly why I always say don't rush Texas. Sure its just another state for many people, but once you consider what it can feature and what it could do for SCS, yeah its a game changer. Texas is about SCS, not us. Texas can do a lot for SCS for ATS. Many people outside of the US are wanting this state for their own reasons. Then you have people in NA that want it for their own reason. What ever the reason is, each state to me will always be unique. Texas for the ATS map team will be weight off the shoulders. It huge, its time consuming. Its a huge chunk of I-10 dead smack in the middle of the US. If it feels the same as another state, that just means similarities exist. Doesn't mean SCS made it that way on purpose. Check out Googles maps in multiple places that are being compared and judge by real life before judging the mappers. If the mappers dropped the ball........then yeah, that is on SCS. If Google shows similar, the ball is you. Some are expecting different when there is no difference. Only thing should feel copy paste are the prefabs.

But like oldmanclippy and Marcello Julio stated, just trick the eye as best as you can. The nature of the prefabs is for a reason. Drop and go. Design around it. If they customized every single prefab, we'd probably be back on Idaho just now releasing. People complain about the speed that map dlc's release. Well there has to be some compromises somewhere. In order to speed up the process, a number of things have to happen. Large team....check. Quicker mapping....check. Terrain models, prefabs...the more templates made, the drop and go happens. I'd love to see the US completed in my life time and finding ways to push that, is what SCS will do.
Seerman wrote: 24 Jun 2022 10:27 Texas is late due to the non-release of HoR. All forces were sent to Montana to make up for the lack of released DLS in the current year. Why Montana? Because it's smaller. That's all.

This is my proposition.
I'd have to say this is a false statement. HoR has nothing to do with Texas. ATS map team is independent of the ETS2 map team. Texas would have come after HoR no matter what. Imho, HoR was a 1.44 map release until things got derailed. Like @Shiva said, they can only have so many mappers. You never want to many people per sector. Better to have consistency with fewer people than a ton of people. Only one person can work a sector at a time. I'd rather a mapper get 4-5 sectors per project than a mapper get 2-3 sectors. Too many people, too many different skill levels. Both Texas and Montana pulled from the California team so no, all forces did not got to Montana. The vast majority of ATS mappers are in Texas still. If I had to put a number on it, 65-70% of ATS mappers are probably in Texas, 3 are probably still on the reworks (per stream with Jakub) and the rest in Montana. Texas has been in the works for 3.5 years. By time it releases, it will be just under 4 or at 4 years. That's a lot of dev time. Texas will have to get out the door within the next 5-8 months. Especially with no HoR. Montana will do fine but Texas will fair better and perhaps bring more ETS2 players that have been holding out. Pavel explained the Texas/Montana situation on last year's xmas stream. Its a little obvious which one is getting pushed ahead though. Texas may have been in production longer but Montana is no Texas so it can be done faster.
Trakaplex
Posts: 833
Joined: 13 Jan 2021 23:24
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3745 Post by Trakaplex » 24 Jun 2022 14:17

[ external image ]

This is US-287 across the Red River facing southbound. There are buildings in the distance. It's definitely too small for Estelline (or even for Estelline to be in the game). Has Childress been confirmed?
Rule 2.3 - GDPR Violation
User avatar
Bedavd
Posts: 1651
Joined: 31 May 2018 15:09
Location: Michigan -> Washington

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3746 Post by Bedavd » 24 Jun 2022 17:23

Hey everyone. Sorry I've been pretty MIA these last few weeks. Started my first full-time lawyer job at the beginning of the month and I've had very little time to check the blogs and hunt down locations with y'all. But I went back in and added all the locations you've found onto my map as usual!

Here's an updated map of the blog photo locations for Texas as well! We're definitely getting a lot more photos from throughout the state, but nothing on I-10 between Fort Stockton and Houston now. Excited to see San Antonio soon since that's where I spend almost all of my time in Texas.

[ external image ]
Check out my Michigan research map!
Check out my ATS IRL map! -> Leave any feedback in my thread!
Kansas added! Up-to-date blog photo locations for upcoming states also included.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3747 Post by Tristman » 24 Jun 2022 17:56

Nice to see the map updated. Now half the forum has their references in check again. :D
Regarding San Antonio, it’s a bit odd that we haven’t seen anything, but it’s also a prime candidate for its own blog. So we will probably see tons of it at some point before release.
User avatar
Kaleidescoop
Posts: 171
Joined: 20 Oct 2018 06:46
Contact:

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3748 Post by Kaleidescoop » 24 Jun 2022 17:57

Marcello Julio wrote: 24 Jun 2022 12:13 As oldmanclippy said a few pages ago, I don't mind too if they reuse prefabs as long as they trick me into thinking that they're not. Reusing assets is a very common thing within the gaming industry, people are amazed as if it never existed. As long as you do it in a way that it's not obvious that it's 100% reuse, I have no problem with this.
I agree, there's no shame in re-using assets if you can make them believably fit. That's a common, standard practice with game development. The problem here is that it is getting very obvious to many who have played the game for a decent amount of time how much asset re-use there is for major locations like company delivery points, assets that are completely pre-defined and unable to be changed in any way by the map designers themselves (no matter how much they try and disguise it).

It's not just company prefabs too, it's increasingly obvious how much they re-use the "generic" building models with the same barbershop, butcher, etc. signs on them with no changes at all throughout pretty much every single city in every single state in this game. When you drive down the street in one city and see the exact same building with the exact same logo as from the last four cities you've visited, it starts feeling a little lazy. Not to mention times where you can spot the same building and sign multiple times on the same street.

I'm not an expert game developer and I don't know enough about SCS's Prism3D engine (I do level editing and modding for the Source engine), but I have enough experience to know there are multiple ways to solve this problem with not a whole lot of effort (multiple skins for buildings which change the color of the building and the company logo, modular system where the signs are separate from the buildings themselves and can be placed in the map editor, etc). I imagine it would be relatively easy for map designers to work with this too, as they can just take a cursory glance at the surroundings and select an appropriate model skin and sign within seconds. If systems like this are already available for SCS developers, it doesn't feel like they're being taken advantage of to their fullest potential.
I think trucks are cool.
User avatar
SouthernMan
Posts: 885
Joined: 07 Jun 2021 19:38
Location: Pilgrim on Earth

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3749 Post by SouthernMan » 24 Jun 2022 18:48

@Kaleidescoop As for what you last put in "multiple skins in buildings", yes, that is possible. It's just like the real skins in the traffic you see around, it's the same trailer/truck(3D), but it has 10 different skins. Now why SCS is not doing this in some buildings I don't know.
Study will not always make you wise, sometimes it will simply make you more superb.
Tristman
Posts: 1543
Joined: 17 Mar 2021 20:15
Location: Pizza Hut

Re: Texas Discussion Thread

#3750 Post by Tristman » 24 Jun 2022 19:09

I think they are already planning on doing such a thing, judging by the microsite "extras" which show for example identical gas stations with different branding as well as branding variations for restaurants and arcade halls.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DracoTorre, Google [Bot], Kaleidescoop, Ryley03d, Shiva and 9 guests