Outerra forum
Anteworld - Outerra Game => Tech demo, support, updates => Topic started by: Peca on March 26, 2016, 09:51:32 am
-
The river glitch I think is somehow created from waves on sea:
http://imgur.com/UjnxYSc
Another thing I discovered are stones or something in sea, where it should be nothing, because the sea is deep there. It is visible only from certain distance:
http://imgur.com/W3vMEIM vs. closer look http://imgur.com/AsgQlmd
Thanks for the new version, bugs are small and the overall look is great :-)
-
(http://t4.aimg.sk/pokec/fotoalbumy/00/o_476696552_b9c523b9071f010419f59dc38e07f1dd.jpg?t=&h=GIR0FLL4XpCP0W6zJMUCIg&e=2145916800&d=o_476696552_b9c523b9071f010419f59dc38e07f1dd.jpg)
(http://t2.aimg.sk/pokec/fotoalbumy/04/o_476696548_40b090dc7bbe1e18b9a657a8b84a40aa.jpg?t=&h=hbr_v3-ScIAZlk2bHLcwMQ&e=2145916800&d=o_476696548_40b090dc7bbe1e18b9a657a8b84a40aa.jpg)
Some blending issues ...
-
Another problem at a sea in Turkey ... probably got it wrong on the width but not sure how the global data was vectorized ... here the water ends a few meters from the bank and about 200 meters away there is some bad blending :
(http://t1.aimg.sk/pokec/fotoalbumy/06/o_476699718_055768c65f71ab9129c436252454d355.jpg?t=&h=BVh5y6sKyUz6AcFooOcUAQ&e=2145916800&d=o_476699718_055768c65f71ab9129c436252454d355.jpg)
(http://t2.aimg.sk/pokec/fotoalbumy/03/o_476699715_2df388c44ae0fa7dcb2a363cfebe50f5.jpg?t=&h=AWMCTv_A4JVZwFIwaPhP8g&e=2145916800&d=o_476699715_2df388c44ae0fa7dcb2a363cfebe50f5.jpg)
-
The Grand Canyon is awesome, but there is some serious strangeness happening around New York NY. :o
Not a biggie, I think we all expect teething pains with something this ambitious. 8)
(http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/a625/Multitesseract/screen_1459006875_zpsmotdxemu.jpg)
-
And some funny cutting. :D
(http://t3.aimg.sk/pokec/fotoalbumy/07/o_476700087_4ee97a2313581739712b77418444ac83.jpg?t=&h=64jL1jRgsbjhsDP3q-5vZw&e=2145916800&d=o_476700087_4ee97a2313581739712b77418444ac83.jpg)
Not really a problem but is kinda funny. ::)
-
The Grand Canyon is awesome, but there is some serious strangeness happening around New York NY. :o
Not a biggie, I think we all expect teething pains with something this ambitious. 8)
(http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/a625/Multitesseract/screen_1459006875_zpsmotdxemu.jpg)
Same thing happens with the river near me. It's the OSM river data overlapping with sea-level water.
-
Excellent!
This is normal?
https://youtu.be/Er8eI4Q8XPM
-
Excellent!
This is normal?
This is what we got :D
Try to place the US Coast Guard there. Quite unexpected behaviour I would say.
-
Excellent!
This is normal?
This is what we got :D
Try to place the US Coast Guard there. Quite unexpected behaviour I would say.
The thing is, making the water translucent and 3D probably makes things a lot harder for the devs. Something like FSX probably is a lot simpler to do when the water is essentially flat and opaque with zero actual depth.
Add in uneven world OSM coverage/accuracy and you have a recipe for a headache............ :o
-
Referring a question from Reddit: Strange problem near the Tigris river, Water Mask not extending to the actual shore. (looks odd)
Also the water itself pops up at a very close range. Is it possible for a user to extend the visible range of water and roads to at least ten miles? (or more)
-
One little thing i noticed ... some river-starts/ends end not well blended to the surrounding terrain - there are few that, if the river-end/start point i a little higher than the normal terrain keep the water-surface rectangle, that is hanging after it for blending in, is hanging or in a direction abowe the terrain after the river end/start point.
As it looks the tool has just defined terrain-alteration at 90 degrees from the river-vector ... (kinda like the roads) you plan something special for the ends in the future ?
Also, if runways/roads are placed in the riwers way ... terrain adjusts, but the water-surface texture remains ... kinda funny when it floats a half-meter abowe a road and then continues on afterwards. :D
-
One little thing i noticed ... some river-starts/ends end not well blended to the surrounding terrain - there are few that, if the river-end/start point i a little higher than the normal terrain keep the water-surface rectangle, that is hanging after it for blending in, is hanging or in a direction abowe the terrain after the river end/start point.
As it looks the tool has just defined terrain-alteration at 90 degrees from the river-vector ... (kinda like the roads) you plan something special for the ends in the future ?
Also, if runways/roads are placed in the riwers way ... terrain adjusts, but the water-surface texture remains ... kinda funny when it floats a half-meter abowe a road and then continues on afterwards. :D
It all makes me appreciate even more how complicated it is, what they are trying to do......... (and the fact that they will never be able to do it all themselves. Users will need tools to make local fixes, eventually.)
-
The new dataset still seems to have had little impact on defining accurate shorelines. Are there any theories about how to finally address this?
-
The new dataset still seems to have had little impact on defining accurate shorelines. Are there any theories about how to finally address this?
How flight simulators fix that? I remember something about masks for shorelines.
Would not be posible use the map lines for define the sea limit everywhere? That way, water would not be trespassing terrain above those lines. NO matter the heigh (now water sea is always there bellow zero meter).
I am seeing something rare. If i push G and switch between m,ap and satelite, sometimes the map is not matching with the satelite..
For example, some shorelines are farther in map than in satelite. And this case outerra was following satelite lines. So for this reason the river end is making that tailpiece, because osm lines are folowing the map lines.
You can test that in some coast lines and rivers with G key and ESC, so you can zoom in the map and switch betwen the two modes.
I dont know which lines are fine. I also saw that in some rivers inside. This explain why some little rivers in the mountains cut big rocks formations. Sometimes those rivers was supposed to be in the valley. If they move some meters they cut the rocks.
Its rare because i though those maps had total accuracy. Then they dont have or something is wrong between those maps?
-
I noticed some of the same things, giving me the impression that many rivers were off by a few meters. Also, many river sections "miss" each other, and the ends, instead of joining cleanly, are mismatched sometimes horizontally, sometimes vertically, sometimes both.
I was just flying to different areas of the world and exploring such places, when I saw Josem75's post, and it seems a common occurrence.
Also sharp bends in rivers tend to cause land artifacts/errors. (just like roads can)
It will be interesting to see how this changes as the various problems are addressed and the data refined.
-
I noticed some of the same things, giving me the impression that many rivers were off by a few meters. Also, many river sections "miss" each other, and the ends, instead of joining cleanly, are mismatched sometimes horizontally, sometimes vertically, sometimes both.
I was just flying to different areas of the world and exploring such places, when I saw Josem75's post, and it seems a common occurrence.
Also sharp bends in rivers tend to cause land artifacts/errors. (just like roads can)
It will be interesting to see how this changes as the various problems are addressed and the data refined.
Many, if not all, of this errors may be caused by bad OSM data.
-
I noticed some of the same things, giving me the impression that many rivers were off by a few meters. Also, many river sections "miss" each other, and the ends, instead of joining cleanly, are mismatched sometimes horizontally, sometimes vertically, sometimes both.
I was just flying to different areas of the world and exploring such places, when I saw Josem75's post, and it seems a common occurrence.
Also sharp bends in rivers tend to cause land artifacts/errors. (just like roads can)
It will be interesting to see how this changes as the various problems are addressed and the data refined.
Many, if not all, of this errors may be caused by bad OSM data.
Probably but one wonders how to address it. Cross-checking with other databases? Rules within Outerra that compensate? Is there much better osm data out there? Are there things that can be used besides osm for river data? As I said, it will be interesting to see how these things are solved.
In a way, the devs are following in the footsteps of X-plane, which also had to wade its way into the OSM swamp and dig for diamonds. They eventually came up with a ruleset that created "plausible" data from the base OSM mess.
I followed that pretty avidly as well. http://developer.x-plane.com/2011/12/where-is-my-water-the-roadmap-for-osm-and-vectors/
-
Indeed I already started to fix some nodes, especially those where rivers don't match: streams/waterways have to be connected, not just a stream with the polygon wich defines the shape.
We just need to be careful and (read &) follow the rules. Here is a good guide:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/River
-
Indeed I already started to fix some nodes, especially those where rivers don't match: streams/waterways have to be connected, not just a stream with the polygon wich defines the shape.
We just need to be careful and (read &) follow the rules. Here is a good guide:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/River
Since the germans are known as the most dedicated OSM enthusiasts out there, I've been doing a lot of exploring in Germany (and yes, the networks are great!)
It seems like a natural place to suggest for a showcase scenery if Outerra ever does one.
One thing I do notice however is width. Many rivers etc (Like the Rhine, for instance) are noticeably thinner than in real life.
-
These fixes should be done with the open street map editor I guess.
The Starnberg lake has an interesting thing going on. The osm mappers choose to create a detailed outline tagged as a lake but also used splines for the river that goes through the lake. Currently only the river is in outerra but not the lake based on its outline. I guess currently we only get splined rivers with width tags?
-
Yup, only rivers are currently present, and some smaller lakes that the splined river system can still support. Lakes will be done differently from satellite data, independent of OSM. Though, some smaller lakes are not present in satellite data that are acquired from wide band reflectance data, assuming they are too shallow or overgrown with vegetation.
-
Hudson river is a mess. Looks like it will be a nightmare to fix.......
Sea level waterways and the new rivers don't seem to like each other.
-
Rivers that are wider than ~60m (at least 2 pixels in 30m satellite maps) will be handled by the lake system, which will also generally handle water levels on terrain. There should not be a conflict between rivers and seas then.
-
Rivers that are wider than ~60m (at least 2 pixels in 30m satellite maps) will be handled by the lake system, which will also generally handle water levels on terrain. There should not be a conflict between rivers and seas then.
Its like watching a detective movie. I see things and wonder what you will do to escape the problem. Then I go off and look at what others have done. =D
-
Rivers that are wider than ~60m (at least 2 pixels in 30m satellite maps) will be handled by the lake system, which will also generally handle water levels on terrain. There should not be a conflict between rivers and seas then.
It seems then that lakes will have real water like sea?
PD: So maybe big rivers too?
-
Eventually everything will have a real water :)
I wasn't going to implement underwater rendering for rivers, because once the lake system is done, vector rivers will also use it for the final rendering (and physics).
-
cameni...whats the benefit of using so many datasources and not lets say take everything from OSM if its there? is it the lack of completeness? i would assume the osm dataset connects everything reasonably and if not it can be fixed fast. to have multiple sources creates all these potential gaps no?
-
OSM is incomplete and inconsistent, fixing it will require a lots of community effort. It's not reasonable to think it will be done anytime soon. Also, even if it was complete and clean tomorrow, as a map source it still lacks data like altitude above sea level that's needed for 3D reconstruction but not necessary for maps. And given the inconsistencies in the existing data, it would not be something we could rely upon. Fixing all the mess in the data is what takes most of the time spent on the importer by far.
During the OSM river import we are querying our elevation data to ensure 2D features match with the terrain.
If all seas, lakes and rivers were defined in OSM, we could use that to build the water level layer instead of using satellite reflectance data, but we'd still have to look up into the elevation data to determine the water levels.
We prefer more reliable data like satellite imagery that contains the water masks, but these are in lower resolution than proper OSM data and suffer from aliasing and filtering. One of the possibilities is to combine the two into a higher detail water mask map, so that we'd have ~30m resolution water bodies for the whole world, and finer shapes where they are available in OSM. However, this also brings in all the problems of OSM - it's not easy to determine algorithmically which OSM entities are erroneous and would actually introduce artifacts, and which ones are a refinement and can replace the rough raster data.
-
thx cameni for the quick answer. i see your perspective...you have actual use-cases that need plausible data short term. in my personal dream about outerra it would be a OSM visualizer, just because i think the worlds data cannot be cleaned up without crowd-sourcing it....but this takes way too long for your actual use-cases i guess. anyway keep up the good work! its always exciting to to see what you do
-
My question is about view distance. Ocean-based water seems to have effectively infinite view distance, while rivers have a relatively short one where large sections can appear abruptly as you are traversing an area at higher altitude.
Even changing terrain quality to 1080p doesn't completely address this.
Is this something that's expected to change, or even something that can already be changed in settings?
-
It will automagically fix with the lake system, since there will basically be a global water level map that will flood all terrain depressions, and terrain for which we do not have water depth info will be artificially adjusted to make river and lake beds (based on distance from shore and type).
In the meantime there might be a tweak that extends the range in which the vector data load, depending on the width, as this needs to be done for roads anyway.
-
I know that X-plane faced similar issues with whole areas that just popped into existence in front of the viewer (I did videos similar to this one at the time) but they weren't able to address it really until they went 64bit and had the headroom to preload distant objects out further. Memory cost was high.
Glad to know there is a solution in mind, here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UR9CqSrFAQ
-
OSM is incomplete and inconsistent, fixing it will require a lots of community effort. It's not reasonable to think it will be done anytime soon. Also, even if it was complete and clean tomorrow, as a map source it still lacks data like altitude above sea level that's needed for 3D reconstruction but not necessary for maps. And given the inconsistencies in the existing data, it would not be something we could rely upon. Fixing all the mess in the data is what takes most of the time spent on the importer by far.
During the OSM river import we are querying our elevation data to ensure 2D features match with the terrain.
If all seas, lakes and rivers were defined in OSM, we could use that to build the water level layer instead of using satellite reflectance data, but we'd still have to look up into the elevation data to determine the water levels.
We prefer more reliable data like satellite imagery that contains the water masks, but these are in lower resolution than proper OSM data and suffer from aliasing and filtering. One of the possibilities is to combine the two into a higher detail water mask map, so that we'd have ~30m resolution water bodies for the whole world, and finer shapes where they are available in OSM. However, this also brings in all the problems of OSM - it's not easy to determine algorithmically which OSM entities are erroneous and would actually introduce artifacts, and which ones are a refinement and can replace the rough raster data.
Very interesting mix.
I am thinking. Maybe using this 30m or even 60m satellite data for water masks, would be posible to try also for define the shorelines around the world?
You know. In many places we have water from sea coming inside the "cities". This satellite data surelly are showing the water line correct, not coming inside the city. Maybe would be useful for fix that shorelines problem.
-
Talking about bad OSM data... A river flowing in two directions:
(http://i.imgur.com/sdkzbL4.jpg)
-
Hmmmmm..... I know the hudson river (estuary, really) can flow in two directions, but I presume this is not an example of that sort of thing.....
-
Wonder if this could be useful, not particularly for rivers, but generally.
http://openpoimap.org/
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenPoiMap
http://openpoimap.org/?map=hotels&zoom=15&lat=37.78674&lon=-122.41575&layers=B00FFFFFTT