A lot of important changes in this patch - great work FD!
Patch Notes Update Horizons Beta 4 Incoming - 4pm GMT
- Thread starter Michael Brookes
- Start date
- Status
If the Cutter is not getting a buff and it is not a Warship then at least fix the 'bug' where it is compared to the Corvette in its description.
Before desiring this, (and definitely 'stating' it); -check out more planets; different star types and distances. Makes for a better informed opinion, less chance of a perhaps undesirable nerf.
+10 this, I need turret sensitivity sliders, would like to use the little analog stick on my CH Pro Throttle; the turret rotation speed is so slow as to be unusable with it. I have to use the mouse instead, because additionally the CH Fighterstick seems to suffer from the inability to use its buttons for the data link scanner.
Amazing work, FD, I haven't been able to stop playing Elite for over a week, make Horizons launch soon so I can buy it for my friends and engage in planetary shenanigans with them! =)
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
i absolutely love what the 2nd pass has done to the ice moons.
the rockyones also look better over all, although some of the dust effects seem better in beta 3 on those images.
if anyone happens to have taken some planet shots in beta 3, and then again from exactly the same place in beta 4, that may show it better.
if anyone has them please share.
the rockyones also look better over all, although some of the dust effects seem better in beta 3 on those images.
if anyone happens to have taken some planet shots in beta 3, and then again from exactly the same place in beta 4, that may show it better.
if anyone has them please share.
I've checked out plenty. Hardly any sleep!!!
I'm not talking about a "nerf" just toning it down a tiny bit on certain materials (not all). To strong normal mapping often gives a cartoony look to things. It is most obvious on "rocky mountain" materials though as far as I can tell.
Basically, the difference between these two...
Here is a ingame example:
The LOD field closest to the camera is fine...but the peaks further away is a bit overdone IMO.
However, we are very much in "personal preferences land" at this point. Looks great either way.
You can set axis sensitivity in the ch calibration software directly, works wonders.
I started doing that a long time before horizons and I can land with vertical thrust at 3ms and use it for the turret as well.
Not to mention I can practically drive normally while in turret mode.
CH gear is best gear hehe.
I can also use my secondary fire on the data scanner, but to get it to deploy I stil have to set "deploy hardpoints on fire" to on, that's the only way to get the scanner to deploy and it has been like this since beta 1.
Last edited:
Prior to beta 4 I was driving with drive assist on and being annoyed by the accel/decel buttons - that behaviour hasn't changed has it? With drive assist off they work exactly how I want, but I don't get the drive assist correction
It would be nice to have the option of both, but if not I won't shed too many tears as I am getting pretty good at driving without it, it seems.I've checked out plenty. Hardly any sleep!!!
I'm not talking about a "nerf" just toning it down a tiny bit on certain materials (not all). To strong normal mapping often gives a cartoony look to things. It is most obvious on "rocky mountain" materials though as far as I can tell.
Basically, the difference between these two...
http://i.imgur.com/dXVwarg.png
Here is a ingame example:
http://i.imgur.com/iTuAHNc.png
The LOD field closest to the camera is fine...but the peaks further away is a bit overdone IMO.
However, we are very much in "personal preferences land" at this point. Looks great either way.
It is a personal preference, but I'm also in agreement here. It's particularly the cartoony-ness of over cranked normal maps I'm particularly not keen on. Nice use of examples and illustrations by the way
It is a personal preference, but I'm also in agreement here. It's particularly the cartoony-ness of over cranked normal maps I'm particularly not keen on. Nice use of examples and illustrations by the way
Thought about it some more...
I do concede that the strong normal maps might actually be more realistic since we are talking about worlds without atmosphere and therefore no scattering of light to smooth these out...hmmm...might actually change my mind due to this!
We have to hope and beg Developers to do something to increase texture quality for 1 GIG card owners.
Anyway i am saveing up money for GTX 660 Ti with 2 Gigs of Vram, and i hope it will do what it should do.
Want that game look well before Christmas. :/
I've checked out plenty. Hardly any sleep!!!
I'm not talking about a "nerf" just toning it down a tiny bit on certain materials (not all). To strong normal mapping often gives a cartoony look to things. It is most obvious on "rocky mountain" materials though as far as I can tell.
Basically, the difference between these two...
http://i.imgur.com/dXVwarg.png
Here is a ingame example:
http://i.imgur.com/iTuAHNc.png
The LOD field closest to the camera is fine...but the peaks further away is a bit overdone IMO.
However, we are very much in "personal preferences land" at this point. Looks great either way.
I'd argue, that the cartoony look is the result of having textures with dramatic rocky normal maps painted on smoot flowing surfaces. Of course it looks silly to our eyes. The geometry should be horizontally displaced at that distance as well, corresponding to what the texture currently tries to emulate.
Especially on such a cracked/rocky surface. The solution is not to remove the cracked rocky surface, but to make it convincing instead.(*Horizontal displacement FTW*!)
The fact that the texture definition is much better with this update is much appreciated though!
Last edited:
I'd argue, that the cartoony look is the result of having textures with dramatic rocky normal maps painted on smoot flowing surfaces. Of course it looks silly to our eyes. The geometry should be horizontally displaced at that distance as well, corresponding to what the texture currently tries to emulate.
(*Horizontal displacement FTW*!)
The fact that the texture definition is much better with this update is much appreciated though!
Nope...if normal maps are used correctly then you can't see the difference really at a distance.
I don't see what horizontal displacement has to do with this really...
If it's Outterra you are referring too then they are using normal maps at a distance too...doing full on displacement (horizontal or vertical) at distances where your eyes can't tell the difference anyway is an enormous waste of GPU power.
Last edited:
Awesome updates however this happened after patch http://www.twitch.tv/londongaming4fun/v/29042193 and also some random npc followed me in supercruise/jumping systems for over 600 ly jumps with a "mission target" tag on it...nothing in transactions/inbox message and when i finally had enough if it following me it said it was a bounty hunter sent after me for failing a previous mission..
Don't get me wrong it was amazing when we figured out it was from a smuggling mission i had failed due to being scanned(2 days ago I might add)but without having a mission update or inbox message on the UI telling me there was no way of knowing why...
Keep up the great Work just can't wait till another patch
Don't get me wrong it was amazing when we figured out it was from a smuggling mission i had failed due to being scanned(2 days ago I might add
)but without having a mission update or inbox message on the UI telling me there was no way of knowing why...Keep up the great Work just can't wait till another patch
To the bolded part: A whole lot actually. Because this is not the distance and resolution where our eyes can't tell. Those soft lines on the "horizon" simply don't correspond to what the texture is suggesting:
Just as the normal mapping in your first example "breaks" the illusion on the edges. There, we we can identify the underlying geometry, which runs through the geometry suggested by the normal maps like a clear cut.
Add actually displaced details (or meshes, but the displacement seems far more versatile and suited for procedural generation) that break up these soft, flowing shapes and cast shadows/break up the lines on the horizon and you can get away with such a dramatic texture a lot more easily. The trick here seems to be to hide the place where the normal map becomes recognizable as such. In case of Elite, it's for closer geometry, where the normal map's angle becomes too flat relative to the POV and a rounded hill top is visible as such against another hill or where it is contrasted by the horizon. As this is by no means a scene with extraordinary geometrical detail, this shouldn't be impossible.
Last edited:
No - the Fer De Lance has always been overly sensitive to weight re its manouevering and turning but always had a decent boost - it's the boost which is so appalling on the Cobra IV but which is great on the Mk III which is the main problem.
The FDL was never quite right hence it has been modified.
- Status