What happened to the graphics / textures?

Caramel Clown

Caramel Clown
I think there were certain improvements to graphics since that time, but it's hard not to agree that it seems we've lost much more in exchange.
 

Turranius

Turranius
They unified the planets to make it more scientifically accurate. Sadly that also turned all the planets beige and boring.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: NW3

FrogsFriend

FrogsFriend
babelfisch said:
How about optional high res textures and stuff for those who can handle it?
Click to expand...

Sounds good. But I don't think we'll get completely different textures just for the highest option settings, and if I remember right those super high res asteroids used to stall even the highest spec machines.

Extended draw distance would also be a good option though, even with the current textures.
 

Cervantes01

Cervantes01
OP that's a stunning looking picture, I wish we'd see that in game now. Still compromises must be made, not everybody has a pc that can run at that level so perhaps we'll see it in the future when most people have upgraded. I'd love to see optional high res for those that can run it though, I'm sure obsidian ant would capitalise greatly on images like this in his videos.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: NW3

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
My graphics look good. Not sure what the problem is. And that imgur album shows one of those fancy station interiors, that isn't early graphics.

I think the only real issue at the moment that many seem upset over is the beigification of planets, but i don't see that changing any time soon.
 

Cmdr Eagleboy

Cmdr Eagleboy
Lot of improvements, some subjective regressions. Calling them dull is a bit...cheap.

If you wanted answer that they got degraded for reason x, then no, it hasn't happened.

Also few of those screenshots are actually concept shots from early development.

As usual with development, things change and move around, especially with frame rate requirements, new additional things to see in game, and so on and so forth.

edit: if I have to compare....planets don't tank my frame rate, not game become jerky when closing to planets, especially those who are landable. That had always taken me out of the game, and I am frankly very happy it's gone. I would like to see more colours, yes, but that's not essentially a deal breaker for me. Earth like planets look breath taking comparing to first painfully obvious 2D balls at launch. Rings are way less jerky, and still look good (I wouldn't mind for them to look better though). Stars imho have been gradually improved, and 2.4 update with better smoke shaders have done wonders to them. Stations - again, does not tank my fps flying into them, and we have big variation of them now. Outposts have gotten several nice updates in last two releases, I have seen retouches and improvements there too.

so scratch it, graphics have gotten better.
 
Last edited:

dannysquid

dannysquid
The resolution seems a lot better than it did to me. Possibly I've just sorted out my settings better.

But let's not talk about beige.
 

Kerrash

Kerrash
The OP covers many aspects with each screen shot but to pick one out from the crowd, the old 'iceteroids' appear to have been rendered with an incorrect albedo value for the sub-surface scattering.
Whilst this produced a high contrast appearance that may be pleasing to the eyes of some people, it was not 'correct' in the sense of PBR.
I feel that people need to adjust their expectations to fit with the goal that Frontier is aiming for.

It's just a question of realism vs fantasy, reality is mostly dull and flat not high contrast and saturated colours.
I get the impression a lot of the negative attitude towards changes are the same arguments for using shader modifiers to 'enhance' the scene.

That being said, I would like to see some higher presets for people who can push the pixels; rather than having to resort to config file hacks.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: NW3

babelfisch

babelfisch
Kerrash said:
The OP covers many aspects with each screen shot but to pick one out from the crowd, the old 'iceteroids' appear to have been rendered with an incorrect albedo value for the sub-surface scattering.
Whilst this produced a high contrast appearance that may be pleasing to the eyes of some people, it was not 'correct' in the sense of PBR.
I feel that people need to adjust their expectations to fit with the goal that Frontier is aiming for.

It's just a question of realism vs fantasy, reality is mostly dull and flat not high contrast and saturated colours.
I get the impression a lot of the negative attitude towards changes are the same arguments for using shader modifiers to 'enhance' the scene.

That being said, I would like to see some higher presets for people who can push the pixels; rather than having to resort to config file hacks.
Click to expand...

True, the iceteroids don't look better, they look like Skyrim.
 

-VR- Max Factor

-VR- Max Factor
babelfisch said:
How about optional high res textures and stuff for those who can handle it?
Click to expand...

Its not the textures that where the issue. As of right now, the texture on planets are far better then what we ever had. I think the main issue is the colour. Look at the first image, the planet has a mixture of dark and light areas, which is realistic looking at planets/moons of our own solar system. These need to come back as at the moment a lot of the planets are a solid colour with very little variation. The textures are fine and hi-res as they are.
 

Kerrash

Kerrash
babelfisch said:
True, the iceteroids don't look better, they look like Skyrim.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and Skyrim is a prime example of where people chose to mod it to 'enhance' the look.
Personally I feel these mods are always over-saturated and look worse, and to further what I said above; how good something looks is a subjective argument.
I would have to assume that the OP prefers the high contrast lights and darks of the ice in the earlier shots over the more natural subtle colours now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom