Thanks, found it.
New Planet Tech is KILLER of Exploration (all terrain is tiling/repeating/not procedural/random)
- Thread starter BlackMaze
- Start date
That's because it was made for the promotional pictures and not get sued for the "ingame footage". It never say "and it's optimized" after all.
Remember when NMS left the planet they hand crafted for the trailer in the folder on release ? Yeah that to.
Not sure what you expect. The height map issue is a problem I admit, with the way too mathematical terrain at altitude. However the planets themselves when your on foot look tons better. I spend 30 seconds looking at the planet globe on the way in. I spend half an hour or more on the surface. If E
is unable to do better, well I think this is way better than Horizons. I took this two jumps from Colonia. That mountain would have been a bland red mound in Horizons. Also the ground itself is much better.
Yeah the planet was minecraft city on the way in but I'm not too bothered about that tbh.
is unable to do better, well I think this is way better than Horizons. I took this two jumps from Colonia. That mountain would have been a bland red mound in Horizons. Also the ground itself is much better.Yeah the planet was minecraft city on the way in but I'm not too bothered about that tbh.
Isn't this a planet screenshot from the Alpha? If it is, then that planet most likely doesn't look that good anymore as Frontier seemed to have nerfed the planet tech from the alpha (Rock scattering is lessened greatly in the current version). As for using ULTRAFORCAPTURE, that setting tanks performance for a lot of folks currently since FDEV decided to release Odyssey without a single shred of basic optimization such as culling.
P.S.
Are these tidally locked eyeball planets even in the final release of Odyssey? I haven't encountered any, let alone been able to land on one of these.
Yeah, thats why they made that fake planet preview algo quick before release (it wasnt available in alpha) so it will run fast. They could do better, but it seems dont had enough time. Dont blame devs for this, they made an excellent work for planet gen tech and it look great and full glory on decent pcs.
This was meant to be a big step up for terrain. Everyone was super excited by the new fidelity on the way.
So, considering it was described as such, having this kind of repitition appear once, let alone many times shows this new tech has failed to deliver.
Procedural generation is amazing and should be refined and built upon. This should have been an advanced version of what Horizons started to promise.
It clearly isn't.
We should be arguing about how much BETTER it is not whether it stacks up against its predecessor. The mere fact that so much comparison is going on reiterates it's failed to move things on.
Perhaps it will in time, perhaps this beta code will be refined into something beautiful and truly next level. Perhaps. I really hope so.
So, considering it was described as such, having this kind of repitition appear once, let alone many times shows this new tech has failed to deliver.
Procedural generation is amazing and should be refined and built upon. This should have been an advanced version of what Horizons started to promise.
It clearly isn't.
We should be arguing about how much BETTER it is not whether it stacks up against its predecessor. The mere fact that so much comparison is going on reiterates it's failed to move things on.
Perhaps it will in time, perhaps this beta code will be refined into something beautiful and truly next level. Perhaps. I really hope so.
Citation needed.
Also if this is remotely true, then the recommended hardware specification itself is humbug.
Its a screenshot from release version with ULTRAFORCAPTURE enabled.
As for rock scattering I dont see that as issue too, because I see a lot of rocks in many places on ultra settings (not ULTRAFORCAPTURE) They didnt downgrade it for sure.
Attachments
I'll go there myself and verify then.
In this unoptimized state: yes to the hardware
This seems to be another result of pushing out the release so fast after the Alpha.
Yes, "many times", maybe you can give some more exact data what is the ratio of those repetitive monsters to the rest of planets?
You would not jump into conclusions based on four examples here, would you?
It's technically true. Just super beefed up setting not intended for use. But legally, it's true, it's ingame footage, and that's all that matters.
I went to pay a visit to Qwent.
Jus to see how badly the update did to him.
Here is the planet Lucifer.
This is not an Icey planet, and I still fail to see the repetition.
And here is the base.
I admit, I find it odd how everything around the base looks sharp and detailed, but the terrain directly around the base looks somewhat low poly.
Besides that, its not that different to horizons.
Jus to see how badly the update did to him.
Here is the planet Lucifer.
This is not an Icey planet, and I still fail to see the repetition.
And here is the base.
I admit, I find it odd how everything around the base looks sharp and detailed, but the terrain directly around the base looks somewhat low poly.
Besides that, its not that different to horizons.
No, if we find two examples in such a short space of time - let's be generous and assume something like 200 systems searched so far - we can assume there are going to be A LOT.
I mean I literally found Wyrd 2B after about five minutes of looking.
If it was a rare event than how likely would it be to find it so soon? I mean out of BILLIONS of planets. We have the criteria of known examples, amount of potential, and the time committed.
It's not entirely unlike finding life, if we found a second example it would mean life is common, just by probability. Except the difference here is finding the first one alone suggests there are a whole lot because again what are the chances of finding it after a few days of release out of billions?
You really need to stop using ultraforceapture as your end-it-all. We shouldn't have to use such a drastic setting just to get what the planet should look like in the first place, where it matters, as a flyby or in orbit, where this issue is most prominent. While it did exist on a few planets in Horizons. It was nowhere close to being this bad and we didn't have to change the graphic settings so drastically to make it look good. As it should of if this new generation be actually better.
As for being on foot. Yes in some areas it does look better. But the first thing you see before footfall is the planet. It should be the first impression. Not what you see on 10 meters above the ground during normal gameplay. We shouldn't have to stop 100ls out just to change the graphic settings we didn't have to before just so it looks decent.
Last edited:
I meant the part where he explains that somehow magically lower then ultraforcapture conjures up a fake planetary map in orbit.
added another example there.
I agree, you would think Ultra would be enough.
My bad then. Yes it's the same planet. Just beefed up setting for marketing purposes.
Plus he hugely overrates how much better things look with UltraForcLag adds. It makes LoD look better at distance, it doesn't add planet detail at all. It will not change how tiling or planet generation works at all-- as it's just a level-of-detail setting.
As the name implies it is good for screenshots because when you look at those you notice the background detail, whereas you focus on what's going on infront of you when playing.