Montana Discussion Thread

luetze
Posts: 180
Joined: 11 Apr 2020 11:47

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3641 Post by luetze » 08 Aug 2022 18:56

@killingjoke28336 Actually I like the DoF effect but for testing I turned it off already and I didn't get the impression it made such a big difference in that particular case because the textures are just too low res. If you use the free camera you can see how poor these textures actually look.

@flight50 Thanks for clarifying your point as well. I think we can totally agree here.

Btt did I mentioned already that I really like Montana so far :D The problem with any new DLC now is that it gets harder and harder to go back into the old parts of the base map^^
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30154
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3642 Post by flight50 » 08 Aug 2022 19:26

lol. Yes new dlc's do make it harder. But luckily since Idaho, things are starting to level off more. Me personally, Idaho, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana and soon to be Texas are all one the same playing field. Now beauty wise no. Texas is not like the others but the quality and the same standards will be there. What separates them from one another is the details that each state offers. So different detailing. If any of these states flipped around release wise, I still don't think we'd see huge jumps. This is good. Leveling off is good. That means they can focus on other things.

Utah, Washington are about on the same playing field imo. Then Oregon and New Mexico. All paid dlc's hold up but we can see Oregon/New Mexico to Wyoming/Montana jumps. Older dlc's will need a bit of touch up but not like the base map. The base maps will be on par with the first tier....the current dlc's. So the 2nd and 3rd tier will be the weaker dlc's after the base map rebuilds.
User avatar
55sixxx
Posts: 3392
Joined: 02 May 2020 23:11
Location: 34° 4′ 35″ N, 118° 25′ 46.6″ W
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3643 Post by 55sixxx » 08 Aug 2022 21:07

Call me crazy but I think New Mexico and Oregon are still looking pretty good... Only thing that NM needs is revamped cities and Oregon is great as it is.
killingjoke28336
Posts: 522
Joined: 02 Sep 2019 12:50

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3644 Post by killingjoke28336 » 08 Aug 2022 21:13

New Mexico is amazing still. The jump they made from Arizon to NM is astonishing.
User avatar
Marcello Julio
Posts: 5664
Joined: 12 Nov 2016 19:27
Location: Ceará, Brazil

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3645 Post by Marcello Julio » 08 Aug 2022 21:13

I also consider New Mexico and Oregon to be very good.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30154
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3646 Post by flight50 » 08 Aug 2022 21:49

Agreed. Textures and getting rid of those base map mountains is all NM and Oregon needs. I don't even think the cities need to be touched honestly. Outside of a few added roads, they stand up well.
Trakaplex
Posts: 833
Joined: 13 Jan 2021 23:24
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3647 Post by Trakaplex » 08 Aug 2022 21:56

I think NM is the halfway point between the base map and Colorado in terms of quality. It still is good though. And believe it or not, I think Utah is lower quality than Washington. I'd put Washington about the same as Colorado.
Rule 2.3 - GDPR Violation
User avatar
oldmanclippy
Posts: 5379
Joined: 15 Jul 2020 02:23
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3648 Post by oldmanclippy » 08 Aug 2022 22:31

I think the only part of Oregon that is noticeably substandard is the unrealistic curves on I-84, and the lack of good Ag in the Willamette Valley. Other than that, just touchups.

New Mexico needs better mountain textures and the cities need to be refreshed since a lot of them still use a lot of base map prefabs, but other than that just touchups.

Washington holds up pretty darn well. I think I would put it in the tier just below Colorado and Wyoming in terms of overall quality. Mile by mile basis, Idaho and Utah probably hold up better for the most part. But Washington gets a better grade/score overall for me. Montana sans I-94 gets its own tier at the top I think.

Tier 1a: Montana without I-94
Tier 1b: Colorado, Wyoming, and Reworked California
Tier 2a: Washington, Reworked Nevada, and Montana with I-94
Tier 2b: Utah and Idaho
Tier 3: New Mexico, Oregon, and Newer Arizona Additions
Tier 4: Original Arizona
Tier 5a: Unreworked Nevada
Tier 5b: Unreworked California
blog screenshot IRL maps: Greece | Nordic Horizons | see profile for link to Germany cities and Switzerland rework maps
prediction maps: Greece | ATS 2024-2025 DLCs
research map: Upper Midwest (work in progress)
Optional Features
Posts: 4784
Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3649 Post by Optional Features » 08 Aug 2022 23:03

I-5 in Oregon is terrible. 84 is ok, but definitely shows the effects of scale. 205 could be better. 26 is missing. The coast is alright.

I would put it in the middle of state quality. Scenery wise it's decent, but vibe wise it is off in several spots.

The problems are mainly scale: to make it feel right, something would have to be removed.
User avatar
LAFAYET47
Posts: 1328
Joined: 02 Nov 2017 23:14
Location: Poland/Spain

Re: Montana Discussion Thread

#3650 Post by LAFAYET47 » 08 Aug 2022 23:23

Hi guys, do you know what could be those unmarked prefabs in Miles City and Lewistown? is that a bug on my end? all map layers are enabled and still got that view. Also made sure to disable my map background and google maps nav mod just in case, but that didn´t help either. The misterious prefabs are still there :)

[ external image ]
[ external image ]
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], gaillard, joshuatree, LeGod7, oldmanclippy, S3XT9 and 12 guests