Early days are the best times to bring up these issues.
Thrust pushes the UI bottom edge off screen
- Thread starter SilverbladeTE
- Start date
Presently I alternate between a 40" 1080p TV sitting merely 1,5 meters away from it and a 13.something" Monitor at 1366 x 768 (I think... Or close to that). Admittedly I'm only in premium beta, playing 1.1 now, so I don't know about docking yet.
Well, is the experience worse on the smaller monitor? Certainly it is, but I would rather attribute that to the screen size. IMHO the small screen inherently reduces the maximum possible feeling of immersion. This is true for all other games I play on both devices by the way. That is why I think that condensing the ED cockpit elements into the smallest possible
FOV would improve playability, but not the feeling of immersion.
Also regarding playability: Elite Dangerous has the HUD spread out across the cockpit instead of having it floating around artificially. In all Flight Sim games I have seen that even slightly simulated a real plane it was impossible to see all the important things without looking around in the cockpit. Although ED is not a simulation it does aim for a similar feeling in a sci-fi setting as far as I can tell.
Now, would it be possible to change this? I guess so, but what would be the consequences? Since the elements are not simply placed on the screen, but fixed to the cockpit the cockpit would have to be redesigned to put everything into the smallest possible FOV, which would essentially have a significantly negative effect on the immersion that users of large monitors or devices like Oculus Rift experience.
I do however see your problem, which is why I would propose the following solution:
As soon as the FOV slider is set at or below the level where certain cockpit elements drop out of the FOV that are visible from the default viewpoint the missing elements are put into a conventional, simple floating HUD that 'frames' the canopy. (and possibly takes less time to develop than redesigning the cockpit, which also would have other negative effects for other players) This would not improve immersion, but playability. IMHO playing on very small monitors playability would be more of a concern than immersion since significant levels of immersion cannot be achieved on small monitors anyway. However players who intermittently (or even regularly) use such monitors at least would not be at significant technical disadvantage. It also would not degrade the experience of players using very large monitors or HMDs or head tracking.
Well, is the experience worse on the smaller monitor? Certainly it is, but I would rather attribute that to the screen size. IMHO the small screen inherently reduces the maximum possible feeling of immersion. This is true for all other games I play on both devices by the way. That is why I think that condensing the ED cockpit elements into the smallest possible
FOV would improve playability, but not the feeling of immersion.
Also regarding playability: Elite Dangerous has the HUD spread out across the cockpit instead of having it floating around artificially. In all Flight Sim games I have seen that even slightly simulated a real plane it was impossible to see all the important things without looking around in the cockpit. Although ED is not a simulation it does aim for a similar feeling in a sci-fi setting as far as I can tell.
Now, would it be possible to change this? I guess so, but what would be the consequences? Since the elements are not simply placed on the screen, but fixed to the cockpit the cockpit would have to be redesigned to put everything into the smallest possible FOV, which would essentially have a significantly negative effect on the immersion that users of large monitors or devices like Oculus Rift experience.
I do however see your problem, which is why I would propose the following solution:
As soon as the FOV slider is set at or below the level where certain cockpit elements drop out of the FOV that are visible from the default viewpoint the missing elements are put into a conventional, simple floating HUD that 'frames' the canopy. (and possibly takes less time to develop than redesigning the cockpit, which also would have other negative effects for other players) This would not improve immersion, but playability. IMHO playing on very small monitors playability would be more of a concern than immersion since significant levels of immersion cannot be achieved on small monitors anyway. However players who intermittently (or even regularly) use such monitors at least would not be at significant technical disadvantage. It also would not degrade the experience of players using very large monitors or HMDs or head tracking.
Last edited:
If you are using a 16:10 or similar I may have a temporary workaround for you.
I made myself a custom resolution that was 16:9 (2560 x 1440 in my case) and turned off screen scaling. See my nVidia example in spoiler link, though I'm sure AMD has similar options.
Well for me the it's both a playability and immersion issue, but I agree with your solution.
Yep, a floating HUD that frames the canopy based on FOV settings, I think that would do it. We have to remember here folks, everyone has got their own situation and are only willing to invest so much into playing a computer game.
If FD desire to capture those folks as well, topics like these are exactly what need to be talked about now...
If FD desire to capture those folks as well, topics like these are exactly what need to be talked about now...
If things aren't mentioned early on then the dev response later on could well be "why did nobody mention this before?"
It is a shame for regular monitor users that the slider/off switch that will be available for Oculus Rift users cannot just be given to all. I don't understand sticking doggedly to design decisions that clearly make the game a worse experience for a significant amount of people - threads on view leading and cockpit "wobble" come up time and again. Given everyone the slider, default it to "on" so people new to the game experience it as the designers intended but have the option to not feel sick if they choose!
I too think this is a feature, not a bug. I for one am in favor. With the lack of g-force 'penalties' like black outs this is one small thing that you have to put up with. Considering the extreme speeds and maneuvering we do, I don't think it's too much at all.
My monitor is 1680x1050
that is MORE than sufficient to play any game
Not eveyrone is rich you know, some folks spend what they have on games they love and affording a new PC every 3 years or so.
i5 2400, 3.1GHz, 450GTX 2gig vid Ram, 8 gig main RAM
plenty fine to play this game and most others
I must have played a literal real life year on Elite Frontier on my Amiga back when, adored it!
But First Encounters...real pain, that was a work of art LOST, an opportunity WASTED because as far as I know and believe, publishers as so often forced the game out before ready.
I've suffered that with several other great or potentially bloody great games and their buggy releases or catastrophic failures hurt.
Games are THE 21st century art form, and I mean that sincerely, screwing up a game because of bad controller or other issues is like screwing up "The Maltese Falcon" by refusing to cast Humphrey Bogart because he wasn't pretty enough (there's another gripe, lol, far too sleek perfectionism in Hollywood has ruined a lot of films IMHO, lesson to be learned for games as well).
So please stop getting silly with "uberness" in computer/monitor specs, k?
It's damn foolish
most gamers are NOT very well heeled, and those of us who've been around know you get ripped of HUGELY in prices until hardware has been around a few years, so we also consider it nuts to pay say £250 for a graphic card 3 years form now will sell for £50 and STILL be suitable for very high quality grpahics.
alas I had to give away my 660 NVidia card I got cheap in a sale, as this damn newer case couldn't take it's length, so I had to use 450, blech! but my cousins' kid got the 660 and my older and waaaay cooler Antec 900 case, and he has a blast so hey it's ok
Now, as some have noted, the way the visuals stretch off the bottom *IS* bad because you lose important details you need to know to run the ship
So, if I may suggest, a compromise?
Acceleration on the "window screen" NOT the entire screen, hm?
Problem solved and still have good visual effect
and you would not expect acceleration like that in the cockpit unless hitting extreme speeds, ie, accelerating up to light speed etc.
Note I say "expect", it's all about perception and intent.
that is MORE than sufficient to play any game
Not eveyrone is rich you know, some folks spend what they have on games they love and affording a new PC every 3 years or so.
i5 2400, 3.1GHz, 450GTX 2gig vid Ram, 8 gig main RAM
plenty fine to play this game and most others
I must have played a literal real life year on Elite Frontier on my Amiga back when, adored it!
But First Encounters...real pain, that was a work of art LOST, an opportunity WASTED because as far as I know and believe, publishers as so often forced the game out before ready.
I've suffered that with several other great or potentially bloody great games and their buggy releases or catastrophic failures hurt.
Games are THE 21st century art form, and I mean that sincerely, screwing up a game because of bad controller or other issues is like screwing up "The Maltese Falcon" by refusing to cast Humphrey Bogart because he wasn't pretty enough (there's another gripe, lol, far too sleek perfectionism in Hollywood has ruined a lot of films IMHO, lesson to be learned for games as well).
So please stop getting silly with "uberness" in computer/monitor specs, k?
It's damn foolish
most gamers are NOT very well heeled, and those of us who've been around know you get ripped of HUGELY in prices until hardware has been around a few years, so we also consider it nuts to pay say £250 for a graphic card 3 years form now will sell for £50 and STILL be suitable for very high quality grpahics.
alas I had to give away my 660 NVidia card I got cheap in a sale, as this damn newer case couldn't take it's length, so I had to use 450, blech! but my cousins' kid got the 660 and my older and waaaay cooler Antec 900 case, and he has a blast so hey it's ok
Now, as some have noted, the way the visuals stretch off the bottom *IS* bad because you lose important details you need to know to run the ship
So, if I may suggest, a compromise?
Acceleration on the "window screen" NOT the entire screen, hm?
Problem solved and still have good visual effect
and you would not expect acceleration like that in the cockpit unless hitting extreme speeds, ie, accelerating up to light speed etc.
Note I say "expect", it's all about perception and intent.
I disagree. This is in there specifically for immersion.
Damn, then it's failed! My immersion goes from from 8.7 to 7.4 with this feature.
Then i suggest you buy an immersion upgrade
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Then i suggest you buy an immersion upgrade
Is that a deeper bath?
Damn, then it's failed! My immersion goes from from 8.7 to 7.4 with this feature.
Does going over speedbumps when you're driving lower your immersion too?
I'm all out of mersions.
The use of the "immersion" word is getting a bit ridiculous now. Sure, it's important, but the degree to which interface elements such as this will increase or decrease your immersion will vary from individual to individual. So it's impossible to say "it adds to immersion" or "it detracts from immersion". Either you like it or you don't. Personally, I find it pointless and irritating. In the context of the "i" word however, it removes my immersion because if I was in a real ship, my natural reaction would be to lower my gaze to bring the instrument panel back into sight. I'm acutely aware that I can't do this, because I'm looking at a computer monitor and I'm not in a real ship. Ergo, immersion-breaking.
I've been banging this drum forever now. People really are completely clueless that it's subjective and that using the word in isolation (i.e. without an explanation of what actually makes a feature feel immersive to you or otherwise) is NOT a valid argument. Perhaps it's reached critical mass and so many people use it that the rest feel they have to cram it into their posts somewhere too, or their argument will be somehow lacking in comparison. It's sad, and irritating. I've even started negative repping people who use it without explanation!
Couldn't agree more.