Name one please
I'm genuinely curious, I mean I have Odyssey now and I literally could not figure out which part of it might possibly be leaking fps
4.0 worst performance
- Thread starter Hank_esp
- Start date
I'm genuinely curious, I mean I have Odyssey now and I literally could not figure out which part of it might possibly be leaking fps
Name one please
I'm genuinely curious, I mean I have Odyssey now and I literally could not figure out which part of it might possibly be leaking fps
I gave you 2 screenshots, you've seen no difference between them, except in some color tainting (while i see a vast increase in detail levels, transparent surfaces where there were none, etc etc)
i rest my case
Like a whole new game better
Bad optimization.Name one please
I'm genuinely curious, I mean I have Odyssey now and I literally could not figure out which part of it might possibly be leaking fps
Hey, it's a reason! (And likely the correct reason at that)
Well the resolution of the images is not high enough to see all the details, maybe it looks better from up close, but the most obvious difference was definitely the color.I gave you 2 screenshots, you've seen no difference between them, except in some color tainting (while i see a vast increase in detail levels, transparent surfaces where there were none, etc etc)
i rest my case
There's only a pretty insignificant part in the images where the difference of the models is clearly visible, I doubt that it's large enough to justify a significant performance overhead:
This part could be truly better, were it not for the complete lack of anti-aliasing.
What I'm more concerned with is the skybox, that's something you can see way more often than your carrier after all, and it's way worse in Odyssey, just count the number of stars visible:
Here's a screenshot taken in Odyssey (it's closer to the galactic center, so stars are more numerous here):
Cool, but this is how it looks in Horizons - can you see the distant emission nebula which is totally absent in the first image?
I'm not saying everything should look like an astrophoto, but at least it's possible in Horizons with the graphic mod installed, without any kind of performance loss despite all the additional details:
Odyssey should totally be capable of the same thing, were it not for all the bugs.
Last edited:
Use:
1. dxvk.
2. add d3d11.samplerAnisotropy = 16 to dxvk.conf file.
(there are more options to add and rise fps in a cost of possible flickering).
True - but that Cutter has a much easier time landing in 3.8...
There are things I like in Oddity, such as SOME of the menu layouts, but the minuses to playability are just too much of a penalty over 3.8.
Sometimes I just run Courier Missions - of course, in my iCourier - and the pace of landing grabbing another batch and delivering just flows so much better in 3.8 - just one example.
And then the time it takes to change ships - so ridiculous in Oddity - how could that get so messed up?
Thrusters, DC, Gal Map, Shipyard, visibility of other ships around the docking port, station approach from SC - all are just way better in 3.8.
If I want to see a good looking FC up close I can switch to Oddity, but for actual flying, give me 3.8 and I pray the FD does NOTHING further to it for fear of them just adding new bugs we don't need/want.
EDIT: Don't forget the station docking port hologram being 90 degrees out of phase when you drop out of SC. It is so much easier to line up in 3.8 and the DC actually lines up on the horizontal axis instead of being tilted about 10 degrees clockwise on approach.
Last edited:
Don't forget the lovely blob on the scope.FWIW, a good place to see the difference between Horizons and Odyssey is when mining in a planet's ring.
If Horizons is "okay", Odyssey can look STUNNING when you've got the right lighting and conditions.
On the down-side, if you want Odyssey lighting, you also have to put up with Odyssey planet-tech'.
I do prefer the less realistic but the more astro-photographic style that we have in 3.8
So definitely (IMO) Horizons skybox looks better to me, but apparently there are lots of people that prefer the darker skybox in Odyssey
Anyway, the details that are killing our fps are in ships, stations, planets, not in the skybox
There are extra details in almost all Odyssey assets. However the lack of antialiasing kills a lot of those details - as is obvious in my carriers screenshots
Who said 3.8 is going to be removed?
It's just a fear
Once FD sees everybody back in 3.8 they could decide to kill it at any time
EDIT: After 8 years and probably about 15k invested in hardware I truly want ED to continue and be a success. The evidence however leaves me a skeptic.
It seems obvious the after 8 years there's likely no one left on the dev team who really understands the totality of the code. How else can you explain what has happened to Oddity? EDO plays like there's kludge on top of kludge just to get it to run and complaints about OBVIOUS bugs just keep getting ignored.
I'd do another Kickstarter if I thought we could get a new version with a competent dev team in place. I want ED to improve and stay best in genre.
Come on FD - get with it !!!
Last edited:
I see, apologies for my tone by the way; I was merely curious if this was confirmed or not.
The thing is that Odyssey can look very good but it’s just not consistent, and at any time go very dark.
It’s this inconsistency that bothers me and drives me back to Horizons.
Also when in my Clipper or Courier there is a large bright spot on the front radar screen that has been reported as a bug a long time ago and nothing has been done.
Kind of like if you love a movie and get disappointed by going to its sequel, we’ll that’s Odyssey…….. the sequel
It’s this inconsistency that bothers me and drives me back to Horizons.
Also when in my Clipper or Courier there is a large bright spot on the front radar screen that has been reported as a bug a long time ago and nothing has been done.
Kind of like if you love a movie and get disappointed by going to its sequel, we’ll that’s Odyssey…….. the sequel
That's fine but, in real life, stuff is simply there regardless of whether you can see it or not.
In a video game, it's kind of redundant to put all the effort into creating detailed graphics and textures and then not lighting them so that a player can see them.
Not only is it a waste of effort but it's also a waste of computing power to render all this stuff and then not light it so it's visible.
Personally, I like dark things to be dark but, equally, I like to see the stuff that my GFX card is working so hard to render.
Can't agree with that. It is simulation of things we will never see during our life in reality. So I want it to render as much realistic as possible. So I can pretend I'm there. I don't need fake lights or anything like that.
For now I have only 1 problem with Ody I consider a bug - "blinking stars" in space. But, I see it in SC only. So it can be feature of traveling with big speed.
Last edited:
I've seen this behavior on low capability hardware. It takes a lot for all of the carrier interior textures to load. Usually its only an issue with the elevators. I haven't seen this behavior elsewhere...yet.
No apology necessary.
I'm too old to be offended anymore
I didn't find your tone offensive in the least and didn't interpret it as directed at anyone in particular.
However when we have a new moon on earth, yes down on the surface is dark, but the sky is then full of stars, which are not hidden by the brightness of the full moon. Ody doesn't work that way. The sky box is much darker and it should not be, all the stars should be shining brighter that far from any light source like the sun.