New FSS Feedback thread - Good and Bad

VR SenseiMatty

VR SenseiMatty
Stephen Benedetti said:
Exploration
  • Implemented an alternative solution to help mitigate the long delay when scanning planets with geological sites.:
    • As it currently stands, in order for the geological/biological sites to be placed on the surface, the entire stellar body must be fully generated (we then know the topography and can place sites where they will be accessible), which can take tens of seconds.
    • As part of the January Update, we aim to address this with an alternative process. We have run tests on thousands of in-game planetary bodies and by using this data, we're able to extrapolate the likelihood of geological/biologic sites being present on similar stellar bodies. We then use this data, and indicate if the planet is ‘Unlikely’, ‘Likely’, or ‘Very Likely’ to have a geological/biological sites.
    • It is not 100% guaranteed that there will be a geological/biological site on the planetary body, but does give commanders a much faster indication of probability. This will enable commanders to quickly ascertain if the planet's worth a visit.
    • If the commander wants to have a definitive answer without travelling to the body they can still wait for the scan to complete in FSS. This data is also now shown in the body details on the system map.
    • Thargoid, Guardian or Human sites will show up instantaneously. These results have moved to the stellar body details shown on the right in the zoomed in FSS view.
Click to expand...

Thank you @Stephen Benedetti for this update.
To improve the game experience during the open beta, the forum community provided few suggestions.
  1. Remove the Location tab from the upper panel. DONE! Great, thanks!
  2. Add the biological/geological information in the system map. This has been truly added and it's great. Thanks for this.
  3. Add the same information in the UI navigation panel. Unfortunately this didn't make it. Is there any chance to see it in the next update?
  4. In the system map add a graphical identification to planets and moons with geological and biological locations. See below the representation suggested by @Kenneth Mcgrew. This suggestion, according to the people that replied to the Open Beta FSS Feedback Thread, could have been an important improvement, probably the most useful between all suggestions. Unfortunately this also didn't make it.
PrcAdYm.png


Let me exaplain you why this is so important with an example.
Yesterday I was testing the FSS and I discovered a system with several gas giants and a lot of associated moons. Some of them had geological locations, very few (2 or 3) also biological sites and the rest of course had nothing or were atmospheric worlds (so not explorable yet).
When I checked the system map looking for this information I was completely lost because I couldn't easily identify the moons with biological sites that I wanted to investigate. Let me add also that the System Map can't be navigated very quickly in VR (click to select body doesn't work).

So my feedback on the FSS improvement is that I appreciate FDEV effort in listening to the community, but the overall experience did not changed nor improved a lot because the loading time is still there (ok, we learned to accept it) and the alternate solution is only partially helping the exploration gameplay. It is my opinion that the integration of the other two points suggested during the open beta feedback, that didn't make it into the current build, would be a definitive solution.
 

Nutter

Nutter
SenseiMatty said:
Thank you @Stephen Benedetti for this update.
To improve the game experience during the open beta, the forum community provided few suggestions.
  1. Remove the Location tab from the upper panel. DONE! Great, thanks!
  2. Add the biological/geological information in the system map. This has been truly added and it's great. Thanks for this.
  3. Add the same information in the UI navigation panel. Unfortunately this didn't make it. Is there any chance to see it in the next update?
  4. In the system map add a graphical identification to planets and moons with geological and biological locations. See below the representation suggested by ....SNIP
Click to expand...

Yes these would have been nice, don't forget the scrolling 3 pages of mats, would be nice if they could put on one page. Loads of real estate on the right.
 

M00ka

M00ka
Okay, I know this will upset most here and I will be called all sorts of names but … I decided the ONLY way I could see what the fault was all about was to well play the game. So I jumped into my Phantom explorer (the Krait, not the ghost who walks kind). Did my normal 500/500/500 quick exploration. That is pick somewhere 500LY away, fly there. Pick a new spot 500ly away at kind of 90 degrees away and fly there. Hopefully if I have done it right, when I get to that destination, I will have around 500LY trip to get home. Oh always have the route plotter set to only go to unvisited stars.

The only problem I experienced was I wasn't too sure when the scanning was going on but apart from that didn't see any stuttering and actually found the scanning far quicker than yesterday. I know I am either the luckiest player in history, or some will call me a well names but I can only state what I experienced. Not saying that some did experience problems (bet no one reads that lol) just maybe it isn't a universal problem.
 

Deleted member 182079

D
M00ka said:
Okay, I know this will upset most here and I will be called all sorts of names but … I decided the ONLY way I could see what the fault was all about was to well play the game. So I jumped into my Phantom explorer (the Krait, not the ghost who walks kind). Did my normal 500/500/500 quick exploration. That is pick somewhere 500LY away, fly there. Pick a new spot 500ly away at kind of 90 degrees away and fly there. Hopefully if I have done it right, when I get to that destination, I will have around 500LY trip to get home. Oh always have the route plotter set to only go to unvisited stars.

The only problem I experienced was I wasn't too sure when the scanning was going on but apart from that didn't see any stuttering and actually found the scanning far quicker than yesterday. I know I am either the luckiest player in history, or some will call me a well names but I can only state what I experienced. Not saying that some did experience problems (bet no one reads that lol) just maybe it isn't a universal problem.
Click to expand...
What's your spec? Pretty sure if your PC (presume you're on that) is beefy enough you may not notice them.

I played briefly last night around Maia, and the stutter was very noticeable (usual locked 60fps dropped to 35-40 every few seconds for a few minutes, until I logged off).
 

M00ka

M00ka
ObiW said:
What's your spec? Pretty sure if your PC (presume you're on that) is beefy enough you may not notice them.

I played briefly last night around Maia, and the stutter was very noticeable (usual locked 60fps dropped to 35-40 every few seconds for a few minutes, until I logged off).
Click to expand...
Yeah your not going to like my answer - bog standard HP gaming laptop: i7 - 7700GHz processor, 16GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1050 video with 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD, 2TB HDD, Samsung 27" Curved Monitor running at 1920x1080 resolution. Input is Logitec G502 mouse, G510 keyboard and Thrustmaster T-FLIGHT HOTAS-X.

Average FPS is around 60, can drop lower. Definitely not a beefy system by any way shape or form!
 

Deleted member 182079

D
M00ka said:
Yeah your not going to like my answer - bog standard HP gaming laptop: i7 - 7700GHz processor, 16GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1050 video with 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD, 2TB HDD, Samsung 27" Curved Monitor running at 1920x1080 resolution. Input is Logitec G502 mouse, G510 keyboard and Thrustmaster T-FLIGHT HOTAS-X.

Average FPS is around 60, can drop lower. Definitely not a beefy system by any way shape or form!
Click to expand...
Still a lot beefier than mine;)

PS not about liking/disliking answers, just trying to figure out what's going on really... anyways patch is incoming today so hopefully it'll be addressed. Fwiw I run my version of the game pretty much on the limit in terms of settings vs performance so the slightest drops in frames are noticeable (and I'm very sensitive to performance drops in general).
 

M00ka

M00ka
ObiW said:
Still a lot beefier than mine;)

PS not about liking/disliking answers, just trying to figure out what's going on really... anyways patch is incoming today so hopefully it'll be addressed. Fwiw I run my version of the game pretty much on the limit in terms of settings vs performance so the slightest drops in frames are noticeable (and I'm very sensitive to performance drops in general).
Click to expand...

Maybe that is the answer, I haven't twiddled (god that is an old word lol) with any of the settings since installation. Let the settings as they defaulted, didn't even tweak them via the NVIDA GeForce Experience page. I know I could but since everything for me is working, why tempt fate by screwing around.
 

VR SenseiMatty

VR SenseiMatty
M00ka said:
Yeah your not going to like my answer - bog standard HP gaming laptop: i7 - 7700GHz processor, 16GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1050 video with 8GB RAM, 120GB SSD
Click to expand...

ObiW said:
Still a lot beefier than mine;)
Click to expand...

I have very similar spec (GTX1080 instead of GTX 1050). In VR I could notice the stuttering. I didn't play in 2D so I can't tell. To me it's a performance optimization problem that FDEV should be able to fix (can't tell in which time frame anyway)
 

Deleted member 182079

D
SenseiMatty said:
I have very similar spec (GTX1080 instead of GTX 1050). In VR I could notice the stuttering. I didn't play in 2D so I can't tell. To me it's a performance optimization problem that FDEV should be able to fix (can't tell in which time frame anyway)
Click to expand...
From what I read in other threads there's supposed to be a patch out today (at least for PC users) to hopefully fix this. Fingers crossed.
 

varonica

varonica
M00ka said:
The only problem I experienced was I wasn't too sure when the scanning was going on but apart from that didn't see any stuttering and actually found the scanning far quicker than yesterday. I know I am either the luckiest player in history, or some will call me a well names but I can only state what I experienced. Not saying that some did experience problems (bet no one reads that lol) just maybe it isn't a universal problem.
Click to expand...

I will also add here before and after patch, I noticed a slight amount of stuttering, very slight just after first entering systems and it was done before I finished fuel scooping so not really a big issue. Even on systems with a large number of landables and quite a few with features it wasn't bad. The advantage of seeing instantly what features were there was really good, now I have tested after the patch, the slight stuttering is gone, but has been replaced by several minutes of extra time (depends on number of bodies of course) spent waiting for bodies to resolve as I scanned, far longer and more annoying than the stuttering in my opinion.

Oh yes I am sure it's all down to hardware, I have a beefier gaming laptop with a Core i7-8750H with 16gb ram and a GeForce RTX 2070 with 16Gb ram plus all the SSD etc.

I much preferred it the way it was before the mini-patch, but if it really causing big problems for players with less powerful systems I can see the sense. For me the stuttering was mildly annoying, for others it may make it unplayable.
 

varonica

varonica
varonica said:
I much preferred it the way it was before the mini-patch, but if it really causing big problems for players with less powerful systems I can see the sense. For me the stuttering was mildly annoying, for others it may make it unplayable.
Click to expand...

Ok I was wrong, it's a disaster, I just did a quick test before, but now after some further testing.......this is not satisfactory, far from it in fact, it now no longer processes in the background. So us players who want full scans now have to wait the full period sitting focused on every. single. body. to get the full details! Previously I would zoom in and out quickly on moons around a gas giant, making mental note of the ones that needed to be checked for sites. So, a, b, and c had sites but not d onward. By the time I got to d I could go back to a and it would be resolved. But now that's NOT the case, when I go back to a I still have to sit there and wait for the full seven second scan, exactly the same amount of time it would take if I just sat there in the first place.

This is no good at all, it's a real blow to explorers who have mastered the old system and will make it much more time consuming scanning large systems, any systems in fact.

Well I will finish this run to the nebula and will stop and wait and see what happens now, you can't fix a problem that a group of players have been complaining about by making it worse for a different group!
 
Last edited:

-VR- Max Factor

-VR- Max Factor
varonica said:
Ok I was wrong, it's a disaster, I just did a quick test before, but now after some further testing.......this is not satisfactory, far from it in fact, it now no longer processes in the background. So us players who want full scans now have to wait the full period sitting focused on every. single. body. to get the full details! Previously I would zoom in and out quickly on moons around a gas giant, making mental note of the ones that needed to be checked for sites. So, a, b, and c had sites but not d onward. By the time I got to d I could go back to a and it would be resolved. But now that's NOT the case, when I go back to a I still have to sit there and wait for the full seven second scan, exactly the same amount of time it would take if I just sat there in the first place.

This is no good at all, it's a real blow to explorers who have mastered the old system and will make it much more time consuming scanning large systems, any systems in fact.

Well I will finish this run to the nebula and will stop and wait and see what happens now, you can't fix a problem that a group of players have been complaining about by making it worse for a different group!
Click to expand...
That's perfect. Exactly how I wanted it to be. Either use the very slightly but quick risky method or wait for the full proof method.

The choice is yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom