Why such lack of assets of landscapes in Asset Store?

I'm really struggling with finding rather large good+ quality terrain maps.

All I found was:
- Low poly maps (which don't match the aesthetic)
- Map generators (which require complex settings up, and expensive for one-time use)
- Assets (trees, wheat, rockets, textures) (without demo scene, which would solve the issue)
- Exclusively mountain related and no flat-terrain/grass/trees.
- Tiny maps (not usable for larger scale, or map isn't flat enough to place buildings)

What are the reasons people don't make landscape vistas?

 

Creating a landscape is not inexpensive. You're not just creating a terrain. You're creating an entire pack of environmental assets. Textures, meshes, and so on. A high quality landscape will need high quality assets to make it come to life. Just look at the assets including in the following pack and consider how expensive it would be to create those.

https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/environments/landscapes/epic-mountains-pack-118023

 

33 USD is really cheap for that content, I bought this for our latest scene with less content for a higher price


https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/environments/rocks-pack-pbr-100777

 

As usually you speak for yourself. Cheap is relative term. Specially if you not earning USD.

 

Nah, cheap is in terms of the value of the product. If it's alot of money or not is relative to your person.

 

That said he's not wrong. It's a very good pack for the money.

 

That is correct. But as @Ryiah said, value for money is better term.
Which in either way, I agree, the pack looks good and probably is wort its price.

Where adding all together, it may be quite a sum, to build landscape, for average Joe.

 

Also high amount of content doesn't automatically means it's good value. The quality aspect is as important

 

Thanks, that's actually something that I have been looking for. It looks like it will fit my project quite well. I tried to create something in Gaia with CTS but CTS has a strange limitation with not allowing snow below y=0 (and the developer wasn't very helpful).

Despite the CTS developer not being too helpful, I have been able to create a few good landscapes with a combo of Aquas, Enviro, Gaia and CTS.

 

I wonder if there is a market for someone to pump out premade maps from a tool like Gaia. I'm not even sure how that would work license wise. But it could be an interesting avenue to pursue. I'm sure there is some middle ground in that market that's not being effectively exploited.

 

Pretty sure thats how the terrain assets are generating their map that are included in the assets.

 

I considered trying to sell terrains but that also means adding custom textures, which is a little above my skill level at the moment...given the time I have these days. Also, the guy above wanted trees and rocks and pretty much a completed terrain. That would take hours upon hours as one cannot use assets in their own assets.

I really wonder why someone wants to skip one of the most enjoyable part of game development! Making a world, playing a god, forming the valleys and mountains, etc. and then buy lovely assets from the talented creators of trees and grasses and textures on the asset store. Make your own world.

 

Maybe not every one enjoy painting trees and rocks?
Having tools is not everything.

 

I get that not everyone enjoys painting rocks and trees.

I do not get the part of the tools.

 

Buying smaller assets creates the risk that your game will face criticism such as: 1) The assets don't match from an art standpoint, or 2) that your game is an "asset flip" to some degree, or 3) that your game looks too much like some other game. And since a terrain is much more...in many cases defining your world, these risks would be greatly magnified.

Therefore, I wonder how much of a market there would be for these terrains. If they were cheap, I could see utility for prototyping, but even those would be expensive to make, so it would be challenging for authors to make any money from them. And if they weren't cheap, I think the market for these terrains would be fairly limited because developers would be reluctant to spend a significant amount of money on something that was purchased by other developers for reasons above.

 

I agree with that the terrain is a defining part of your game, but then not all games are published. Some are hobbyists, some want height maps they can use to combine with things like Gaia, others simply do not worry about such things.

There are some really nice assets out there that could make identical height maps look entirely different, such as Quixels textures and models, grasses and vegetation, tons of tree models, plus several really good terrain shaders. One could tint the ground, add color maps to create interesting color variations to the world, and one could also use a stamping tool such as the one in Gaia or in the future revamp of the Unity terrains.

So there is some re-usability. Much easier for someone to make a terrain look entirely different than a bunch of house models or characters.

Besides, asset flipping is really over rated. Most folks who do that never really release a game that becomes popular unless it is very simple. I doubt terrain would ever be an issue.

 

Check out world machine and speedtree. Both very easy to learn programs -- a few days and you can make all the terrain and trees you need. AAA quality work will take practice of course, but that's not our concern here. It's really not hard to make satisfactory stuff with just a few days to get up to speed with the programs.

For textures, you can generate some satisfactory stuff by using google earth and photoshop. Just grab screengrab images, go to town with the clone brush to make it tileable, and voila you've got decent terrain textures. Or you can check out places like textures.com or gametextures or whatever else.

But, just use Gaia. It's easy.

 

What I mean for example is, having just paints and brushes, don't makes us great artists.

 

With Gaia and other height map programs you do not need to be an artist to make a terrain. It is not that difficult, just takes time. With the procedural texturing which again, many of the terrain tools include, you can easily just pull in your textures from the places BigTimeMaster suggested above and use them to texture your terrain. I will never forget the first time I used Gaia to texture rather than paint on the terrain. The results were amazing. No artist required. You set the heights and slopes for the textures and it just magically works. This is NOT difficult. I have seen noobs with little Unity experience do this with various tools. One of the best out there just paints the terrain procedurally and is very inexpensive, Terra Painter, will do a great job for you and is very fast.

The art, in my opinion, comes in when designing levels. That is when the terrain with its beautiful texturing actually comes to life. You can use various spawning tools to place buildings and rocks and trees or you can place them by hand.

If you really want lovely vegetation, use Vegetation Studios. It is currently on sale and one of the best ways to procedurally generate vegetation for your terrain. It also helps you optimize so you can have more lush worlds.

So..there are several tools more suited to you technical folks than artists. No reason you cannot make a gorgeous terrain. You use tools to program (VS) and you use tools to make shaders, and animations, etc. If you want to make your own game, you MUST learn to use these tools. Otherwise, you should just get a template from the asset store and use that...and even then, you will want to change out the artwork.

If one can not do something...they can pay others, limit the scope of the game, or learn to use the tools. The only talent necessary is the ability to imagine what you want and go for it.

 

That is my exactly point, not everyone has that
I mean yes we can use such landscaping tools to create grate work.
Artist and level designers, will not have problem, I suppose..
But probably, everyone wants to crate stuff just bit better than average Joe.
But hey, why we have so many average Joe then in first place?

I am not saying average Joe makes bad stuff. Is just may look ... hmm Average?

 

One day I should just tie together my own heightmap generation tools and make them an asset store asset or something. Right now it's primitive as hell and entirely CPU bound so it's slow as molasses, but if I can get it working on the GPU it might be a less robust alternative to something like World Machine.

 

But we all start out average, or many below average. It is part of the process.

How can you make a game if you cannot imagine?? You can copy other games I imagine, but is not that not below "average Joe"? I mean even Joe can imagine games, maybe not great games, or better than average games, but at least he is making his game. His landscape may not be fabulous, his mechanics may be boring, his art may be dull, but he is MAKING a game!

Average Joe may someday, through practice, perseverance, and dedication make a really GREAT game! In fact, I bet many of those Joe's have made great games.

I do not think anyone deserves to have a better than average landscape or game or anything if they are not willing to put in the time to learn or the money to pay others to do what you cannot do. There is no god given right to make a great game.

I am guessing someone who does not want to be an average Joe but also does not want to learn to be more than average is never going to be anything but average. If we stop learning, we cannot move forward.

My suggestion....if you cannot even use the easy tools in the asset store, then lower your expectations. Buy sprites, buy 2d backgrounds, and make a game like Tetris or something. Do not even think about making a 3d rpg or fps that requires "above average" maps.

Or, get a job and pay someone in your country.

I am not a young person. I have science degrees, not game development. I came to game development with one skill..the ability to write lore. I have since learned to model, make landscapes (started with some really difficult to use software), write game design docs, understand code logic so I can work with programmers, and am currently learning to code. Plus, I hung out with others who knew more than I did and listened to them. I can now have intelligent conversations on a variety of game development related issues..or so I think I can. lol

I did all this because I could imagine the game I wanted and knew that without learning things myself and/or getting others to help me, that I would never be able to create what was in my head. When I see people who think it is impossible for them and that others should give away their talents for cheap so that someone else can reap the rewards, I am really sad. We can take credit for what others do and we can pay them nothing for their hard work, but if we do, we really are not the authors of the game/art/whatever that we think we have created. Only when we try to do it ourselves do we truly value the work they do. Only then do we realize they are worth more than we imagined.

Nothing feels better than to know you did it, and that you did it the right way.

 

If you only have the art skills of a programmer then you can just take the programmer route.

https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/terrain/mapmagic-world-generator-56762

 

@Teila
Ah, I didn't want to trigger your lore skills, to write essay
I was just simply stating things.

Don't get me wrong, I am likely with many things average, or below, while trying excel above other things.
Of course it is possible to skill things up over time.

My simple point was, If I get paints and brush, I probably never will be able to paint like Van Gog for example. Or at least will take long time to get to that point. Is just not my piece of pie. Therefore, I will be at most average here.

While the result may be satisfactory for my need, or my learning, still just about average. That's it, nothing more to it

 

But that's perfectly fine because none of the artwork you buy from the Asset Store will be a Van Gogh either.

There are many average games on Steam that are successfully selling. Average is not a bad thing.

 

How many of us will ever be Van Gogh?

I remember someone posting something on the forums somewhere here about the problem between what you see in your head and what you see in the finished product. There is that gap, that difference between wanting to create like Van Gogh and our own skills which are most likely far below his.

You see a painting like Van Gogh's and you want to make something of that quality. So in your head, this great painting sits there, waiting for you to paint it. But when you try, it is only average, or worse. So you feel bad and you give up.

But over time, you will close that gap. Will you be as good as Van Gogh? Probably not as there is a reason Van Gogh is a famous artist. However, you could close that gap enough to have above average work. If you set the bar too high, you can never jump over it. Be reasonable with yourself.

Make your game. Use your average art. If your talents lie in coding, give it amazing mechanics. Show off your game. Then....publish your game with your average art. When you make a bit of money, hire someone to make better art for your game. You may even find someone before you publish who loves your game so much that they want to make art for you.

Play to your strengths and find ways to solve the problems with your weaknesses.

Hey, I like to write essays. You can always skip them if you wish. lol

 

I wouldn't be replaying otherwise

This is exactly what I am focusing on
Here I am inspired of our Vang Gogh but in game mechanics. How far I will go, only time will show.

And again, that is correct.
For example, when I try something, but if I see something is too distance for me, I leave it and try next thing. Maybe next time I will come back, with more appropriate skills, which allows to accomplish task.

Probably, but if someone knows how to utilize it, it can excel the purpose. This way narrowing the gap.

Either way, with assets like Gaia for example, we surely raising the average bar.

 

Best way to get those skills is to use them. So watch some tutorials, read some tips, and then get back to it.

 

Definitely.
And then magically I am end up wasting time watching cats

 

I have four cats so I understand. Might help to stay off Facebook.

 

You don't have to know nothing about art to make a landscape. Just look at landscapes. Copy what you see. That's it.

Mountain goes here. Tree's go there. That's it.

You shouldn't expect to create Red Dead Redemption 2's landscapes, but I really believe anybody who can turn on a computer and type a line of code could manage to make a beautiful landscape world using some of these tools I've mentioned, and probably in not more than a couple weeks of working time.

 

Agree. But if one has it in their head that they cannot do it, then they probably cannot do it.

 

Give me a asset that can randomize terrain with thick forest foliage at 90 fps with single pass rendering.

 

1. Download uBlock Origin for your browser.
2. Open up the dashboard.
3. Click on My Filters.
4. Enter the following:
   
   Code (CSharp):

   1. www.youtube.com###watch-discussion
   2. www.youtube.com##.watch-sidebar-body
   3. www.youtube.com###chat
   4. www.youtube.com###related
   5. www.youtube.com###inline-recs-list-renderer
5. Never get stuck in a Youtube Hole ever again.

 

Height map can be anything, Gaia, World Creator, World Machine, etc.

As for the forest, Vegetation Studios Pro. I think you will be happy.

 

I am not familiar with terrain generation assets, but do you want to run randomize at 90 fps, or you want to render at 90 fps (for your VR obviously )

 

Looks like useful addon.
I will give a try.

 

Random once at design time, render at 90 fps (in VR )

 

I was in the beta, while a super nice asset it cant render dense foliage in VR just yet. Atleast I couldnt get ti todo that. Then yuo have the nice terrain shaders etc.. Maybe even some diceplacemnet for dirt roads etc. its not easy for even a high end machine.

edit: and real time shadows in forward rendering

 

Can you not reduce amount of effects / shaders? Surely there must be some options, which may not be needed.

 

It ends up pretty bland :/ Atleast when I do it. In our last map we had to remove the foliage in last minute becasue it made the game go beneath 90 fps at some parts of the map. Really sad, had found such nice foliage for it

https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/?stay#!/content/74198

 

They are looking good indeed.
Maybe render them in ECS, if that helps?

 

Asfar as I know speedtree is implemented with shaders. Though not an expert. But maybe I should give VS a go again. Maybe with the lower density of a desert it can work

 

I think the reason ready made landscapes are not more common is partly because every project will have different requirements and priorities, as well as a unique art style. So a ready made solution is only going to be suitable for a small sub-section of developers, for exactly the reasons you mention: too big/small, too flat/hilly, too much vegetation / not enough.

CityGen3D was born out of the desire to have a tool that could make a realistic environment with very little input from the user, including heightmapped terrains, water, roads & buildings.
So you can avoid spending time working on the environment if you simply want to test some gameplay out in a realistic location, while still allowing huge scope for customization and creativity should you want to explore that side of things.

What issues have you found with Map Generators in the past that make them hard to setup or use?
(Because the goal with CityGen3D is to make it so someone with no game dev experience could use it).

 

Obviously Unity has been reading this thread They just put a World Building bundle on sale for Black Friday. It includes Gaia, CTS, Enviro, and Aquas which I mentioned above as well as Coniferous Forest, Advanced Rock pack and Emerald AI. Emerald AI looks out of place but the rest look handy for building landscapes.