I'm just wondering whether anyone has tried making a map of the Walt Disney World property in Florida. There's a lot of land to cover, and it could be fun driving around the parks and resorts. I've searched for such a mod, but I haven't found any yet. UPDATE: How about just the Test Track ride at Epcot?
No, there isnt. And there never will be. The file size would be huge and it would be an incredibly hard task to do if you want it to be SEMI-detailed.
You can't say there never will be. But yes, it would be a huge undertaking. It's like 100x100 km, which means the terrain resolution would be poor. Unless it was just some subsections. Still a big job though due to the unconventional objects required and the fact you'd need it to be accurate to be worth it.
I'm just getting into the game, so I don't know the limitations. Maybe somebody could do a replica of the Test Track ride in Epcot?
That could be done. Not by me, but you could pay someone to do it. However, if you wanted to pay someone, get your money's worth and ask for a sector of Disney World. Like magic kingdom, animal kingdom, hollywood studios or like you said, epcot. Some should be small-ish enough to recreate for a decent price, but others might take more cash.
Technically speaking, due to the limitation of how many objects can actually be placed on a map, it is actually impossible to do. And thats just one of many challeges needed to be overcame: -Heightmapping: Unless you want to hand mold all of the terrain by hand, maps are generated through heightmapping, which involves using an image with different shades of a colour to determine position and height of terrain elements. I do not have experience heightmapping for BeamNG but i can tell you that heightmapping, while the quickest and easiest way of generating terrain, has huge limitations when it comes to map size. Imagine for a moment that the average image unsed for heightmapping is a 512x512 pixel image. If we were making a map that was 1kmx1km, each pixel could represent approx. 2m, meaning terrain changes could be detailled to about 2m intervals (usually the computer will blend the heights together and create more smoother curves instead of just squares with different heights but its not fully perfect). to make it 100kmx100km, each pixel would display terrain changes over 200m intervals, which would be like trying to generate the ECUSA map using 4 different pixels for height in perspective. Terrain changes would lack any and all detail and like not even be noticable. All terrain would then have to manually be edited by hand and at that point it would be just as easy to edit the terrain of 100kmx100km of land in real life using a backhoe. -Object limitations: There are limits to the number of objects that can be placed on a map at any time, to my knowledge this limit is rather high and has been raised at one point, but only to the point where 20kmx20km maps would be viable to have the detail of a standard in game map. -Repository placement: Disney is obviously a trademarked corporation and own the rights to alot of things, notably, they own the rights to their name, logo, image, park property and the likeness of any and all buildings built on it, this includes the monorail design, the rides, and the big castle. To say this wouldn't be allowed on the repo would be the understatement of the century and considering what BlueBird schoolbusses considered doing to BeamNG because someone made a schoolbus mod I would say that a Disney park mod that recreates the entire park online would not be permitted to exist on any legitimate mod hosting site. -File size: To host the heightmap, assets, and all of the other things needed for this map, the filesize needed would be immense. Considering that almost all assets made for this map would need to be made from scratch instead of being reused from the game, and as a result all would need to be in the map file instead of being taken from the game files, my best estimate is that the map file would be about half the size of the actual game file. -Performance: Even though BeamNG has gotten better with performance issues for large maps, it is still far from perfect and seriously compromises the visuals of the game in order to do so. To anyone who isnt running a next-next-gen gaming computer the map would likely be impossible to open, let alone play. If it even did run, the graphics of the game would need to be set to the lowest of the low and the whole thing would look like it was left in a hot car for a little too long with the windows up. Especially in the world editor it would be near impossible to do any work on the map due to the game trying to process all of the objects loaded into the world editor. Around the halfway mark I'd wager you would end up getting a solid 5fps just placing tree models on the map without even trying to drive around and test it. -Pure size: Mapmaking is far from a quick and easy task. To properly test a map, ensure all textures are present, all roadsurfaces are smooth and cause no bad collisions, to ensure all objects have proper collisions and to ensure every aspect of the map is properly placed and not floating/clipping through the ground takes huge amounts of time even on smaller sized maps. The Los Injurus map, one which is to my knowledge approximately 10kmx10km and as a result 100 times smaller than the Disney park, took half a decade to do. By this comparison I will be about to retire with my pension before you even get to release the map unless you can find 100 people and figure out a way where everyone can simultaneously work on the map. So, yes, he can most certainly say there never will be....
I still disagree you can say never. To take your arguments one-by-one. -Heightmapping: The maximum heighmap resolution to import is 8192x8192, which over 100km gives you a pixel for every approx. 12.2m. This is pretty rough, but in a relatively flat area, it isn't that big an issue. I've made maps of this size, the biggest issue is the juddering you get from the lack of large-world coords (floating-point computation issues at large distances from the origin). -Object limitations: The original request didn't state that there needed to be an extreme level of detail. I think you could do a passable effort within the scope of the game, just think of the many other large maps (like Los Injurus, as you say). -Repository placement: This is an issue, but it could exist outside of the repository. Plenty of people have made maps and cars that go against copyright regs. -File size: I point again to Los Injurus. It is massive. There are also tricks you can use to reduce the file sizes of maps. The main one being to use low res textures or to re-use objects. This could work well for the plasticy/signle colour style of Disney stuff. Plus the OP didn't state any real level of accuracy, so you could use a lot of vanilla assets. -Performance: Again, all depends on how much detail, and how you have it set up. Well made models, with good low-poly and billboard settings, you could make something passable. -Pure size: This is the most compelling argument, and the one that I used for why I don't think it will happen. Map making is hard and time-consuming work. So yes, I agree it would be an astronomical undertaking, and I don't personally think it will happen. But as I said "You can't say there never will be". I stand by this. Things change, technology changes, the world editor may change. What is possible with BeamNG now wasn't possible 5 years ago. What was impossible in computing is relatively easy these days. I got quite far with a semi automated map-making workflow that created heightmapped landscape, roads, trees and other forest items with very little input, using Lidar data and OSM data, and I'm quite crap at this stuff compared to others. It isn't so far-fetched to imagine someone better doing a passable job of it.
I'm sure it could be possible in some other game, for sure, but considering how BeamNG is set up, it would need to be majorly reworked in order to even allow this map to be humanly possible. Also, to address your concerns with my concerns: -Heightmapping: While the maximum heightmap resolution to import is indeed 8192x8192, which wouldnt be bad for a flat map this size, it does however mean that any features such as waterways, hills, and any of the sort would likely need to be done by hand due to purely how crude the heightmapping would be. This would certainly take huge amounts of time and even soething as simple as a river could take days to do depending on the length of it through the map -Object Limitations: Los Injurus can skirt around the object limitations not simply because of a reduced level of detail, it also features large vast areas of nothingness. A huge portion of the map is taken up by heightmapped hills which are designed to block views of the whole map at once to make it feel larger than it is and to hide how little is rendered beyond the small draw distance. If you were to apply this to a flat map like disneyland there would be large portions that look alien and out of place due to the fact that the surrounding landmarks would phase out of existence. Additionally, at some point a lack of detail on a map makes it not worth pursuing, and given the projected advancements in BeamNG's technology it is currently unfeasible that any of us will witness a map half this size be made with any amount of relative detail that makes it usable. -Repository Placement: While it could exist outside of the repo, the Bluebird schoolbus I had mentioned also never existed on the repo and was still forced to be taken down due to copyright concerns, being wiped from the forums completely. The biggest concern surrounding this is the premise that by creating this map in BeamNG, it makes a competing experience with the real park, and people will download the Beam version instead of checking it out themselves. It also means people could do things like make "crashes at disneyland compilation" videos which likely wouldn't be received too well by Disney. -File Size: While vanilla assets could be used, you would be hard pressed to find vanilla assets that would match Disneyland. Of course, basic vegetation yes, but park decorations, buildings, etc would need to all be done by scratch or found online. Finding them online would save the mapmaker plenty of time but come with a likely much higher poly count than desired. As for textures, Disney (as far as I remember) employs a huge amount of different themed areas with very unique ambience and looks between them, this would lead to an increase in textures needed to distinguish all of these zones, unless, of course, you lower the detail to make them all look more similar, but at that point the map becomes compromised and bland in comparison. Additionally, to lower the detail to allow for the map to be usable limits the usage of the map. One post above had mentioned a desire to drive on the rides, which would need much more detail then making all of the buildings closed. If all you modelled were ride exteriors in the most basic sense, you would just have a 3D google maps of Disney you could drive in, the novelty of it is somewhat reduced when the quality is reduced to the point where it is usable. -Performance: As above The pure size of the map is definitely the kicker, sure it could be physically possible if only the items mentioned above existed in an isolated environment. But considering that all of this needs to be done by at least 1 human being with dedication means it's almost impossible. I get it that there are some Disney fans who would kill for a virtual park experience, but when you realize that it would be years of effort to come out with a map that likely has the polish and detail of the Remastered GTA3 you have to realize no one would find the undertaking worth it to even try. My earlier comparison in build time to Los Injurus was flawed, mostly because I forgot to account for the fact that over half of Los Injurus is empty space surrounded by highways, and it's been in the works for much longer than the 3 years I had referenced. Even if someone was crazy enough to start this and stick to it, even if they worked on it like a full time job, they would probably be dead or nearly dead by the time it was finished. So fairly confident in the never bit of it
Yeah, it's definitely in the realms of the extremely extremely (ad infinitum) unlikely. But after the last year we've had in computing, I don't use the word never lightly... However, as really we are on the same side (I'm just being a bit facetious about the terminology), the only other way I would see it working would be a large fairly sparse map with the roads and trees between different sections, and then the actual sections themselves being whole objects (like the Nürburgring map, or the new WCUSA island, etc.) That would allow focussed detail where it was required for the attractions. That would of course ramp up the object sizes, and would create a massive file size issue, but it could still be done (or applicable to a similar issue on a smaller scale). Much more likely is a map with some individual section/attraction, or a mini re-make of it. For the copyright, it would just be something on youtube or another forum. It is very challenging for these companies to stop people doing this sort of thing and releasing it if they decide to.
Well if someone ever does make a full sized disneyworld map that is a full 100kmx100km recreation that even includes the most spartan of detail, I will eat my pants on live video. That's how confident I am in using never
i dont know how to even do blender or any modding skills at all but i kinda wanna do a disney map now.
Would you refresh my memory of the Blue Bird incident? I remember it somewhat, but not the specifics.
Basically a dude made a Bluebird schoolbus mod but because it got so heavily used in crash compilations Bluebird company threatened to sue for the following: -Recreating a trademark property of their -Making said property appear to behave poorly in crashes (the bus realistically deformed but the company did not enjoy the idea of the bus being able to deform at all) At which point they contacted BeamNG and told them that because the mod was hosted on the forums of their website they were responsible for it and it would need to be taken down immediately. So it got a bunch of work done to differentiate it from the Bluebird and was reuploaded
