100% Proof Planets have lost their colour. [UPDATED with official Dev reason and plan to improve]

[verminstar]

At the end it doesn't help the discussion. Don't expect FD getting involved in such threads, just look at some of the comments.

The only one not helping the discussion right now is you, and as fer looking at the comments to be held up as an example, most of them were written by you. What was yer original point anyway? Apart from trying to take OA down because of some comments on his video?

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Obsidian Ant himself acknowledged, that only HMCs ans MRs are hit. That is only about 33% of landable planets.

Yet watching some of the statements and videos, you get the impression the whole galaxy gone beige. People are discouraged from exploration and for some this is just another opportunity to go out on a forum rampage.

At the end it doesn't help the discussion. Don't expect FD getting involved in such threads, just look at some of the comments.

Pretty sure every time I have brought the subject up, I have said it only affects metal content planets (and in this thread I discovered it affects some rocky worlds).

(I'm also fairly sure that that it is not me who is the one making presumptive unfounded (and incorrect) statements here. But hey, that's totally fine - because this is my final comment to you on that particular subject. )

 

[CMDR Ofan]

Fsd is bound by the rules of physics only when it feels like it.
Stars shouldn't slow you down when passing near them, they should actually accelerate you.

I'm not saying stars act as they have no mass at all, but it's disproportionated, stars have millions of times the mass of planets, but ingame I can feel much more pull from a rocky body. Such realism.
You're also talking about exclusion zone, but that's just a limit for imprudent explorers to not die too quickly, it has nothing to do with realism nor mass.

The representation of (most) the stars is wrong, it's dumbed down for aesthetically pleasing and gameplay mechanics, and rightfully so, I'm not complaining about it. The point is that if they reserve that kind of gamey treatment for something, like stars in this case, they should do it for everything else. Planets included.

In a game where stars are as bright as the led of my alarm clock, realism it's not a valid excuse to justify the lack of variety on hmc and rocky worlds.

You are aware of the distances involved here yes and just becasue a star looks to be close it is much further away than a planet that slows you?

Secondly a star would speed you up as you approached only if you were in normal space not a bubble of warped space a la FSD. FSD works by warping space so the distension of space by another body will impinge on it's anbility to function, which is why stars and planets slow you down in game. When you say they are dumbed down apart from your monitor not emitting blinding light and harmful radiation, which of course it can't do, what do you mean? Maybe you should PM me so as we dont derail this thread

 

[Ziljan]

Common guys, there is plenty of material to discuss here without getting personal. It's not like this a design choice issue were opinions and personalities matter. We have an actual opportunity here: This is clearly a technical issue, and one where we can finally have a cool headed forum conversation based on facts.

 

[Wylie28]

We are like a week away from 2.3 and someone from Frontier has said that the color changes were due to a change in the way lighting is handled from the stars. Its clear to me this is a bug of some sort. Real planets have plenty of color changes like that and there weren't any performance problems associated with the color. What reason so they have to "dumb down" colors? Just wait a week and lets see what these planets look like in 2.3.

 

[CMDR MadRaptor]

#ColoredPlanetsMatter

 

[Jon flint]

Pretty sure every time I have brought the subject up, I have said it only affects metal content planets (and in this thread I discovered it affects some rocky worlds).

(I'm also fairly sure that that it is not me who is the one making presumptive unfounded (and incorrect) statements here. But hey, that's totally fine - because this is my final comment to you on that particular subject. )

Didn't it also affect Pomeche 2c? I'm sure that's an icy world, that used to look amazing?

Haven't visited it myself since 2.2 but I'm told it was changed.. used to look like this....

Spoiler

 

[Blackcompany]

#ColoredPlanetsMatter

When I get home, that's going in my signature with MEGA.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Didn't it also affect Pomeche 2c? I'm sure that's an icy world, that used to look amazing?

Haven't visited it myself since 2.2 but I'm told it was changed.. used to look like this....

Spoiler

http://i.imgur.com/oHm93BK.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/9wpHE7F.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/18whioL.jpg

What a stunning looking world! I will go take a look...

 

[ToCoSo]

Did this happen when the much more detailed surfaces started, I wonder if the texture is adding an overall brown tint to everything. But I miss the more colourful planets it made exploration a lot more interesting.

 

[Dubber]

I did have an argument I haven't got a proper answer for in the first place. I didn't label him toxic, only some of his videos, indirectly. Big difference.

Christ Alive. If you think any of Ants videos are toxic I can only assume you don't get out much.

 

[Ziljan]

What a stunning looking world! I will go take a look...

I would prefer it if the planets were more realistic, ie they looked exactly like this from up close: deeply rilled with fumey chasms, but from far away had realistic "smoother" height maps and finer detailed canyon systems across the actually stressed parts of their surface. Not covering the whole planet though. That's like having a super model whose body is covered from head to toe in mammories.

 

[Iskariot]

I thought they had replied on this issue - that it's down to realism and they don't consider it an issue they want to fix.

If true, then I hope they reconsider, because I do not at all mind a bit of unrealistic, but beautiful color variation in a gaming universe I spend thousands of hours in.

Also just have a look at a barren planet like Pluto. It has spectacular colour variation: red, yellow, black and white.
Mars (in our time) has light and deep dark orange tints with blackish patches.

There should be enough natural realistic reasons to make at least some of the planets have a bit more character, be a bit more spectacular.

What I also would like to see is alien atmospheric planets with colours that indicate alien vegetation, or microbial life.
There could be seas with extraordinary colors because of alien plankton or algae.
There could be planes with red or purple grasses. Even planets with earthlike atmospheres do not all have to have exclusively green plant life for example. This might even be very unlikely.
Currently alien atmospheric planets have none of that kind of true alien weirdness.


Having said all that. I realize this might be planned for the future.
We have no idea of course what FD has in store in this respect.

 

[DaveB]

Icy worlds and Rocky Ice worlds don't suffer from the same issues, at least nowhere near the same degree of HMC/MR worlds. Any idea why it would cause problems to HMC/MR and not to Icy/Rocky Ice?

I don't know for certain but I'd hazard a guess...

I suspect that FD use different parameters - potentially completely different algorithms - to generate planetary textures based on the body type. In fact, given that they haven't just quietly made a tweak since folks started pointing out the issue I begin to suspect it may actually be different algorithms rather than just a matter of changed parameters. If they had an easily tweaked parameter set that could enhance the appearance of rocky worlds without making them look too much like the other types they'd probably have gone ahead and done it.

That might also explain the delay in addressing it too, because if they are - as has been hinted - in the process of developing a better planet-rendering solution across the board it would be completely understandable that they wouldn't bother to recode one aberrant texture-generator which is going to be replaced within a few releases anyway. It would be equally understandable for them to stay quiet beyond these vague hints too, since code in development is something nobody likes to tip their hand about until they actually have something near enough to release that it's worth showing in a beta or sneak peek.

 

[Iskariot]

I would prefer it the planets were more realistic, ie they looked exactly like this from up close: deeply rilled with fumey chasms, but from far away had realistic "smoother" height maps and finer detailed canyon systems across the actually stressed parts of their surface. Not the whole thing though. That's like having a super model whose body is covered in mammories.

I agree about the mammaries.
Some of the planet's canyons look quite excessive indeed.

 

[Thetele]

This fifty shades of beige is really annoying. Put this kind of threads shouldn't be posted during weekend, so someone might at frontier would actually see it. Many create discussions have been started during weekend in past and Monday when more eyes at frontier has possibility to see the thread it has already been buried under other stuff.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

I would prefer it if the planets were more realistic, ie they looked exactly like this from up close: deeply rilled with fumey chasms, but from far away had realistic "smoother" height maps and finer detailed canyon systems across the actually stressed parts of their surface. Not covering the whole planet though. That's like having a super model whose body is covered from head to toe in mammories.

It would be great to see the planets you describe! I also think there is room for exceptions to the rule. I certainly wouldn't want all planets look like the one in the screenshot, and perhaps not even a large number. I don't see a problem with the occasional planet looking like this, especially (as judging from the image) this appears to be a small world.

I love your analogy though...

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

The only one not helping the discussion right now is you, and as fer looking at the comments to be held up as an example, most of them were written by you. What was yer original point anyway? Apart from trying to take OA down because of some comments on his video?

What do you mean? In one of my two first posts I detailed the 2.2 changes, showcasing that at least it is a mixed bag. In my view 2.2 was a defininte improvement with some steps backwards and with still ample of room for improvement. The other, addressed to OA, was just highlighting that some of his videos were a one-sided and hyperbolic - he can claim, that he adds details in the fine print, but just look what the title of this very thread suggests. He should know better about packaging... God, on these forums you can bash FDev in any way you can, but you can't express critisicim of a youtuber?

And why I said it results in toxic discussions? Because on earlier threads some explicitly based their views on OA's videos - and believe me, even by showing screenshots I didn't have a chance proving my point.

 

[PyrateLV]

Cant we all agree that the Galaxy is severely lacking in a diverse and varied Planetary colour palette?
Realism and Fantasy aside.

#ColouredPlanetsMatter

 

[Some1else]

Cant we all agree that the Galaxy is severely lacking in a diverse and varied Planetary colour palette?
Realism and Fantasy aside.

#ColouredPlanetsMatter

Could we please stop with the "Realism" part of this discussion? That word implies the idea that there is some kind of evidence to back up the claim. There is none.

I did find a beigie beigie system with some rather beige rocky moons.

Spoiler

S1E