For cliffside rock like that, most of the time it's done with new assets of modular rocks. They just get nestled inside the terrain mesh. That's how it's done in engines like UDK and CryEngine.
You can always add the larger macro textures/flow/erosion maps for overall details, but unless you dramatically bump the res of the terrain, it'd be best to do the cliff rock with separate meshes.
Yep, I was going to push clusters of cliff rock meshes into the vertical bits of the crags. But for that I still need to sculpt them into the terrain so I'd have where to stick the meshes of rocks in, e.g.
Or do you think that making a variation of static meshes of the whole crag shape (so that would be cliff rocks, the lets say grassy top and the slopes on both sides) and then just sticking them into the slopes of the terrain and blending them in would work better?
Replies
You can always add the larger macro textures/flow/erosion maps for overall details, but unless you dramatically bump the res of the terrain, it'd be best to do the cliff rock with separate meshes.
Here's an example from Christopher Radsby:
Yep, I was going to push clusters of cliff rock meshes into the vertical bits of the crags. But for that I still need to sculpt them into the terrain so I'd have where to stick the meshes of rocks in, e.g.
Or do you think that making a variation of static meshes of the whole crag shape (so that would be cliff rocks, the lets say grassy top and the slopes on both sides) and then just sticking them into the slopes of the terrain and blending them in would work better?