The latest ATV video was incredible. I love the attention to detail being applied to all polished aspects of procedural design so far, but I wanted to ask how much effort has gone into woodland/forest design so far? Because the few shots we've seen of it so far, either from the fly-by before the big gameplay demo last year, or from the shots in today's ATV, all show Star Citizen falling into very common woodland/forest design pitfalls in video games. I know this is all alpha, so hopefully this is all subject to big improvements? I'm an Ecologist irl. I survey across the UK for protected wildlife and environments, so natural environments are very important to me in video games. I have contributed plant and tree textures to the popular Skyrim Flora Overhaul mod, and assist the huge Beyond Skyrim team with some texture work and as an environment design adviser, mostly for woodland design. There are three common mistakes video games make with woodland design, and I'm worried Star Citizen might be falling into all three of them. I've knocked up a quick illustration of these mistakes and how they should look, and will outline them in detail below: 1) Tree shape and structure: Chances are this is just because you guys haven't put time into diverse vegetation assets yet, but you're using the same tree models for standalone trees as you are for woodland trees. They grow very differently in woodland since they don't have the luxury of spreading branches wide to soak up as much light as they want. They're all competing amongst each other to reach as high as possible, and grab what little light is available in such a cluttered environment. As a result they grow taller, don't spread as wide, and drop their lower branches since they aren't productive enough. This means woodland feels a lot more open once you're inside, rather than when you're outside looking in. Think of them like nature's cathedrals. 2) Understory and grasses: Understory relates to everything underneath the canopy level, but above the ground flora level. So saplings (young trees) and shade tolerant shrubs. The locations they grow are all determined by density of mature trees around them. Tree species like beech are less likely to have shrubs growing around them because they blot out so much of the sun. So shrubs tend to grow around younger trees and thinner trees. Grasses are less likely to grow in woodland since they rely on sunlight, so are likely to be replaced by shade tolerant ground flora like ferns and woodland plants like dogs mercury. Too many games use exactly the same grass species and grass density inside their woodland as grows outside the woodland. Not realistic. 3) Edge effect: Probably the hardest thing to achieve with procedural generation, but if you can get this right EVERYTHING will fall into place. Edge effect is, again, determined by light levels. Lots more light at the edge of woodland where it meets grassland, so trees at the edge of a wood will spread branches out in this direction, shrubs will thrive here, and grasses will also be high. It gives the illusion of woodland being dense and impassable when viewed from outside, but as soon as you work your way through those shrubs everything will open up inside. If you can get this working procedurally then woodland glades will fall into place procedurally as well: where old trees collapse, allowing light to penetrate the woodland canopy in this location, encouraging grasses and flowers to grow as well as saplings for new trees, until finally those saplings grow into mature trees and the grasses die off, sealing up the gap until another tree dies. With edge effect and understory / ground flora rules in place, all of this will happen procedurally when you generate woodland. I REALLY hope you guys will consider employing an environment adviser (if you haven't already) and consider making your procedural vegetation rule-set more robust (again, if that isn't happening already =P) because I would love to see vegetation in Star Citizen be as detailed as terrain and rock scattering rule sets are right now :smiley: