Quote from: Oshyan on July 06, 2011, 02:21:36 AM
Er, they look more like hair than grass I guess? Too... "fuzzy". Hard to describe properly. Maybe also too long and/or dark/saturated coloring? Again, hard to put my finger on it. Just doesn't look quite right to my eye. But it may just be me. 
- Oshyan
Well, I think Bob is a bit more accurate about the issue and it is indeed a bit of you
The shading is anything but dark and saturated, nor did I add any of those in post.
I can see what you mean with hairy, but this is just what you see when you see a lot of grasses on mid-range to far away if you'd ask me.
Quote from: choronr on July 06, 2011, 02:26:06 AM
Lighting is everything. if you notice the bush at lower right, it is perfect. The shaded ones don't share the same quality, most likely due to the lighting on them.
I agree.
In my opinion it is too hard in TG2 to get the balancing act right between directly lit parts of terrain objects and indirect lighted or shaded parts.
The buildup in shadow darkness over distance is too strong for instance.
Like you mentioned you can have a nicely lit bush/tree in direct lighting but it is very likely, even with GI=2 or >2, that it won't look the same, or better said as expected, in the shade.
You
can get it right, but the error-tolerance in settings is very very tight.
Maybe with 1 or 2 extra recursions in the renderer the lighting could be more easily balanced as shadows will be defined/filled better which would perhaps save countless hours of fine-tuning for texture diffuse colour, transparency and reflectivity.
