What's happened to the ring systems?! They look terrible!!

[ZeeWolf]

More truth to Flip's theory, I imagine, than we would want to believe.

I may or may not have worked for the Mouse developing games for a time and there are soooo many decisions that come down from VPs in the corporation and/or 3rd party affiliates that dictate changes that are utter crap, even devastating to the quality of the game.

Whether it is to help sell a certain toy or brand, we get mandates that help the bottom line but destroy our metacritic score when the game comes out and all those compromises made break or cheapen the game's experience.

sigh....I really wouldn't be surprised if there was a request to cut some graphical benefits to the PC to help mitigate comparison shot campaigns bringing down XBOX one sales. People already have web posts asking "XBOX One or PC version of Elite: Dangerous" and so why would Microsoft want there to be too big a quality chasm between the platforms?

I bet this idea of a shady management striking a deal with Microsoft/Sony to downgrade the graphics of an existing PC game has never happened in the history of gaming.

It's one of those urban myths that pops up in threads and PC gamers start getting excited. Yeah...Yeah...Yeah evil people short changing me. Yeah.

They get the pitch forks out and bang cans more vigorously with cutlery. It's like watching a bunch of three year olds jumping up and down on a bouncy castle as someone turns the volume up on a stereo playing garage music.

Console companies have clear competitive strategies that involve exclusivity deals. They aren't going to be pumping money into something that people might not notice or care about. It has no tangible benefit to them. It's a conspiracy theory.

Besides, I prefer the answer that the guy that worked on both ED and Star Citizen put in the other thread.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I bet this idea of a shady management striking a deal with Microsoft/Sony to downgrade the graphics of an existing PC game has never happened in the history of gaming.

It's one of those urban myths that pops up in threads and PC gamers start getting excited. Yeah...Yeah...Yeah evil people short changing me. Yeah.

They get the pitch forks out and bang cans more vigorously with cutlery. It's like watching a bunch of three year olds jumping up and down on a bouncy castle as someone turns the volume up on a stereo playing garage music.

Console companies have clear competitive strategies that involve exclusivity deals. They aren't going to be pumping money into something that people might not notice or care about. It has no tangible benefit to them. It's a conspiracy theory.

Besides, I prefer the answer that the guy that worked on both ED and Star Citizen put in the other thread.

It's surprising why these myths just keep spreading, despite the fact most of them don't even survive logical evaluation.

For example Watch Dogs. Ohhh, famous first one of lineup of disastrous releases of AAA games in last year and sign that Ubisoft is in deep trouble. PC visual downgrade - it was discovered that many settings are just hidden from players, not removed entirely.

So what most likely happened? Most likely deadline happened. You see, getting game running smoothly with all visual blitz on very wide range on PC setups is huge undertaking, and one of most costly parts of porting game to PC. Most common sense says that Watch Dogs was already delayed multiple times and publisher didn't allow another one - thus ending with PC version getting downgrade and settings hidden due of fact they couldn't get it stable. With all complexities involved I am surprised how it didn't happen much more frequently with AAA games. Or maybe eye candy has been a topic for last 3 years or so.

However myth that Watch Dogs were downgrade for consoles to shine continue to live on despite lacking any facts or logical explanation. Why?

Because PC gamers are worried about dominance of consoles, and they express this fear in various shape or form, imagined or not. This doesn't justify spreading myths and FUD. Be open, critical, question everything, but also don't fall into stupid modern dogmas. Simplest explanation is always most closest to truth.

 

[CMDR MAIN SEQUENCE]

I still feel that we need more tinfoil hattage in this thread.

You think this thread is bad you should see the other thread.

Here's another angle that the 'blame it on the Xbox' gang may have overlooked - an Xbox owner hears about the game, he has a friend who has the PC version who gives him a demo - if the PC version has 'deliberately downgraded graphics', is our Xbox friend going to think "wow great graphics I must buy that?". No he isn't. Surely FD want the graphics quality on PC to be as high as they can be if only to show off the game to potential purchasers, regardless of platform.

 

[Ceekay]

From early May so 1.2

Spoiler

Same system (59 Virginis I think) although from a different angle taken June 26

Spoiler

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Nice screenshots Ceekay. Again it shows something is going on with the ring systems.

I've just recorded a video that highlights how this bug seems affect the ring system on the light side when compared to the dark side of a planet:

[video=youtube_share;z9zQB1x-kjg]http://youtu.be/z9zQB1x-kjg[/video]

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Eureka? Breakthrough?

Hi folks.

I reckon I may have solved the mystery of the dodgy RES graphics (and some other things).


I spent ages trying out different graphics settings, and looking at "GraphicsConfiguration.xml" in detail. When I got to SHADOW QUALITY, I found that none of the option choices did anything!


Please see my new support subforum thread...

Graphics "Shadow Quality" settings are broken (no effect changing between Off/Low/Medium/High/Ultra)

Please add your own testing results to that support thread, so FD have as much feedback as possible. Because I don't think it's just my system that's doing this.

 

[Sim Maker]

Nice screenshots Ceekay. Again it shows something is going on with the ring systems.

I've just recorded a video that highlights how this bug seems affect the ring system on the light side when compared to the dark side of a planet:

http://youtu.be/z9zQB1x-kjg

Oh my.....that is truly woeful......lol.....
.
I quite enjoyed my 2500 system trip back in the day and every now and then I get the smallest itch to go out again....but....nah........
.
OOI Ant, have you noticed any performance increases with these graphics downgrades? If they were doing all this for PC users, I would have expected stuttering near planets to be fixed etc........is this the case?

 

[Deleted member 38366]

--- Deleted ---

 

[Obsidian Ant]

I've just made a Test in an Icy Ring Belt System...
The result doesn't really need any further comment, doesn't get much worse than this.

Low Quality vs. Ultra Quality with Ship remaining in absolutely identical Position and the Sun located in the ideal position to produce optimal FX :

Spoiler

Low Quality
http://www.falconfly.de/temp/ELITE-V13-GraphicsLow.jpg

Ultra Quality
http://www.falconfly.de/temp/ELITE-V13-GraphicsUltra.jpg

---------------------------------------------

Low Quality
http://www.falconfly.de/temp/ELITE-V13-GraphicsLow2.jpg

Ultra Quality
http://www.falconfly.de/temp/ELITE-V13-GraphicsUltra2.jpg

PS.
Those ARE the differences between Low and Ultra Detail. Try it yourself. Graphics Settings are accessible while in Debug Cam mode...

PPS.
For your viewing pleasure, two shots in Ultra Settings, showing how the entire Planet clips in and out from minimal Cam movement - signs of a too aggressive Rendering optimization aimed at low-end GPUs.

Spoiler

http://www.falconfly.de/temp/ELITE-V13-GraphicsUltra-BonusUgly1.jpg

http://www.falconfly.de/temp/ELITE-V13-GraphicsUltra-BonusUgly2.jpg

I'm calling those Ultra Detail Images "Bugged Double-Ugly"... This is low-end Rendering Quality. Not even the slightest sign of anything I'd even remotely call Medium, let alone High Quality. Pathetic.
Not surprisingly, switching to Low Detail in that exact shot.... does almost nothing. Low or Ultra.... Both look bad and extremely ugly.

That just about sums up what I have been seeing lately too.

But not to worry FalconFly, someone will be along shortly to tell you that you are just imagining all of this...

It might be worth testing to see if the settings have any affect on planets and stations too. I will go take a look...

 

[CaptainKremmen]

I've just made a Test in an Icy Ring Belt System...
The result doesn't really need any further comment, doesn't get much worse than this.

<snip>

I'm calling those Ultra Detail Images "Bugged Double-Ugly"... This is low-end Rendering Quality. Not even the slightest sign of anything I'd even remotely call Medium, let alone High Quality. Pathetic.
Not surprisingly, switching to Low Detail in that exact shot.... does almost nothing. Low or Ultra.... Both look bad and extremely ugly.
[/spoiler]

Is this in response to my request for verification that stuff like "Shadow Quality" change has not effect? To post results of setting changes in the linked bug report thread?

Or did you post this without having seen my post above, writing it at the same time?

 

[Deleted member 38366]

--- Deleted ---

 

[Ben Parry]

For your viewing pleasure, two shots in Ultra Settings, showing how the entire Planet clips in and out from minimal Cam movement - signs of a too aggressive Rendering optimization aimed at low-end GPUs.

Not drawing the things that are behind you is not an "aggressive" optimisation. Things clipping just before they go out of sight is more likely to be a mistake.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Oh, good call.
I only wanted to throw it into "the bowl" of existing material.
I'll paste it into your Bug Report, though.

PS.
Strangely, the Ship itself does seem to reflect the Quality settings (at least to some extent)...

Great, thanks.

Yes, I can see that "Shadow Quality" OFF vs. ULTRA sees the ship cockpit with shadow-render differences. No impact I can see on the outside world, though.


Early versions definitely had visible impact in rings of "Shadows" vs "No Shadows"... asteroids would be brightly lit on all sides with shadows OFF. In the current client, however, this is simply not changing at all when we flip settings.


We can change things like shadows from OFF through to ULTRA, but the graphics engine is stuck. I reckon it's stuck on LOW - that the quality "switch" code has a fault, pure and simple.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Not drawing the things that are behind you is not an "aggressive" optimisation. Things clipping just before they go out of sight is more likely to be a mistake.

If you don't mind answering this, what could cause the asteroids in the Ultra screenshot to look worse than the ones in the Low quality screenshot? Surely that must be unintentional?

(Unless of course, he has labelled them around the wrong way...)

 

[Derath]

Hello there

I still feel that we need more tinfoil hattage in this thread.

Why do you guys *think* they would lower the graphical standard. What the the precedence for this? Name other examples where this has been a deliberate move which has been successful or beneficial?

The precedence is there is basically no multi-platform game that doesn't suffer graphically from a console port, you'd be better asking if there were any cases where the port didn't lower the graphics not the reverse.

 

[GJ51]

The precedence is there is basically no multi-platform game that doesn't suffer graphically from a console port, you'd be better asking if there were any cases where the port didn't lower the graphics not the reverse.

Oh, but they promised...

 

[whipdiddywhip]

The precedence is there is basically no multi-platform game that doesn't suffer graphically from a console port, you'd be better asking if there were any cases where the port didn't lower the graphics not the reverse.

battlefield's graphics don't downgrade because of consoles, their gameplay on the other hand does, so i guess its either gameplay or graphics that gets down graded due to consolitis

 

[Surly_Badger]

The precedence is there is basically no multi-platform game that doesn't suffer graphically from a console port, you'd be better asking if there were any cases where the port didn't lower the graphics not the reverse.

There have been plenty of explanations (including mine, in this thread) which show why that's not true. Why do you keep asserting it is?

 

[Derath]

battlefield's graphics don't downgrade because of consoles, their gameplay on the other hand does, so i guess its either gameplay or graphics that gets down graded due to consolitis

basically, something always suffers - its why PC players get so mad despite what the apologists claim, I'm basically a prolific lifetime gamer i've got plenty of experience of this its not a fabrication or some conspiracy theory, its to do with the specs and who the different platforms appeal to.

- - - Updated - - -

There have been plenty of explanations (including mine, in this thread) which show why that's not true. Why do you keep asserting it is?

you talk about it from a more sophisticated perspective, but realistically it doesn't work that way yes they don't have switches for console versions, but they just don't design them in the first place, or they obfuscate the pc options to such a degree that you have to go hack config files to get your graphics back that they so kindly turned down.

It is true, you can find cases where it hasn't happened but you can find far more where it has, so thats why I assert it

the most common outcome these days is they release the game, PC players notice, whine, they turn the features back on so we can once again turn the graphics back up.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Graphics "Shadow Quality" settings are broken (no effect changing between Off/Low/Medium/High/Ultra)

Please add your own testing results to that support thread, so FD have as much feedback as possible. Because I don't think it's just my system that's doing this.

The screenshots of the close-up asteroids were taken on Basic Combat, and the screenshots of the station were taken on the "Docking" tutorial mission. The asteroids in the animated gif were taken in Celeano.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Here's a smaller image for those that don't want to click the spoiler tags...