Daggerfall Workshop Forums

There are now two versions available for Vibrant Wind addon on Nexus: 0.5 is for 0.10.24, 0.6 is for 0.10.25.

You can check if the mod is working with the following console commands:
If you see a visible difference in how the grass moves it means that the mod is working.

The main module of Real Grass is unaffected by engine upgrade and works on both versions.

I played around with grass distance using console commands and noticed I can easily go up to a distance of 1000 without major performance issues. Since I use distant terrain, this improves the look in the distance incredibly. But I have to set this each time I load a save. I tried to modify the json settings file of the mod directly, but the mod ignores this and stays at 300.

Would it be possible to allow such high values to set in the mod options in the next version, instead of the current maximum of 300?

haloterm wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 12:21 pm I played around with grass distance using console commands and noticed I can easily go up to a distance of 1000 without major performance issues. Since I use distant terrain, this improves the look in the distance incredibly. But I have to set this each time I load a save. I tried to modify the json settings file of the mod directly, but the mod ignores this and stays at 300.

Would it be possible to allow such high values to set in the mod options in the next version, instead of the current maximum of 300?

User settings are validated before they are given to mod, so there isn't any workaround. I'll keep this in mind for the next update.

Only issue with bigger grass distances is, that the density is too high in a distance, creating a unpleasant effect and sharp edge between the regions where the grass is visible and where its disabled due to the distance.

If the density could decrease with the distance, it would be performance friendly and at the same time look better. The transition between ON and OFF regions in the distance would be smoother.

King of Worms wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:17 pm Only issue with bigger grass distances is, that the density is too high in a distance, creating a unpleasant effect and sharp edge between the regions where the grass is visible and where its disabled due to the distance.

If the density could decrease with the distance, it would be performance friendly and at the same time look better. The transition between ON and OFF regions in the distance would be smoother.

I agree (but that's not related to my request for an increased total possible distance, but a general issue, regardless if drawing distance is 300 or 1000).

The longer the distance is, the more apparent the issue becomes.

With big enough distance, the grass becomes a monolithic mass and it looks just bad, especially in grass dense regions/season. This does not happen if you use lets say 150 distance, or at least its not so apparent.

So I think it is related. But honestly, related or not, it would be cool to have this feature (I spoke about it earlier in this thread btw) It will be performance friendly optimalization and look better at the same time, win-win.

King of Worms wrote: ↑Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:09 am With big enough distance, the grass becomes a monolithic mass and it looks just bad

I will make a comparison screenshot later when I am at home why I like the longer distance better.

King of Worms wrote: ↑Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:09 am With big enough distance, the grass becomes a monolithic mass and it looks just bad, especially in grass dense regions/season. This does not happen if you use lets say 150 distance, or at least its not so apparent.

Here's my comparison.

First, your suggested 150:


(Full size: https://xigwug.am.files.1drv.com/y4mqKo ... pmode=none)

Notice how bland and unnatural the hills (their color -- not the shape) in the distance look. Just flat green color. It nearly "screams": "Looks, here the grass stops for performance reasons".

Now, distance of 1000 forced in console:


(Full size: https://w4gwug.am.files.1drv.com/y4mMOK ... pmode=none)

To me, it looks much more natural in the distance, and I don't think it's a monolithic mass. (But I increase the grass distance to the maximum my PC can handle in all Elder Scrolls games, so it's just my personal taste.)

Anyway, I did only request the option. Of course it's a matter of taste if one wants to use it or not Also I agree to your suggestion to fade out the terrain once it nears the drawing border.

Well Im not in a argument about anything I just say it would be cool for the grass to fade out the density at distance and that it would help performance while improving the visual fidelity at the same time. Bottomline is, better fading will help in all cases, so....

Heres a image with grass distance = 512 where I try tho show it, I picked up a situation where its apparent - day, no tree foliage, flat surface.
U can see the straight cut as the grass distance hits its limit, also you can see the grass turns in the monolithic green, so it doesnt blend with the terrain...

Well thats all basically... if the density was not constant, but slowly getting lower with the distance, all the issues would be gone, we would get better image quality, better blending, and better performance. Also it would make the bigger grass distances actually work properly (and thats what you want - and I want it as well) so thats why I think its corelated to the topic.

Heres the same image without texts and arrows, so its more apparent.
Also, this is only 512 distance, with 1024 it get even more ridiculous ofc

I didn’t read fully through the thread so apologies if I missed a similar discussion but looking at screenshot directly above this post:
Is there anyway to pull/sample the vertex color from the terrain texture and apply that vertex color to the grass so it looks like they work better together? Bonus points if you can sample the vertex color and give it a small variation per sprite for slight randomization.