Page 11 of 162 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 2428

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: Do we have a ETA on the cure for the beige plague?

  1. #151
    Those screenshots, Red Anders, are making me depressed.


  2. #152
    Originally Posted by playfuldreamer View Post (Source)
    Those screenshots, Red Anders, are making me depressed.

    You can have an entirely masculine hug as along as we offset it by talking about football or something after.

  3. #153
    My old GTX 980 runs ED on ultra 1080p 2x SS at 60fps, without issue. The game has a lot of scope to increase the performance ceiling.

  4. #154
    After all I don't think this "downgrade" or "beigification" has anything to do with low-end machines or consoles at all, as many people still seem to believe, despite the devs having rejected this suspicion quite a few times. I rather suspect an "accident" on the course of general optimizations that has to be done anyway. Not to make it playable on low-end machines (on PC no one is forcing us to play in high or ultra settings and the game scales already quite nicely, there's also the 'preparing planetary generation system' after each hardware or driver update, that's for a reason I guess). Downgrading of certain (ideally not so obviously visible) features is simply a necessity, otherwise the whole project would sink in its own bloat in no time, resulting in no room for further extensions. Average users or small scale programmers tend to ignore this obvious fact, sometimes even the big companies pretend they could ignore this (I guess you know who I have in mind) but that's another story...

  5. #155
    It was certainly far more of a resource hog prior to the changes. I'd say it was an attempt at finding a more efficient way at achieving the same results.

  6. #156
    Originally Posted by playfuldreamer View Post (Source)
    Those screenshots, Red Anders, are making me depressed.

    Same here...

  7. #157
    Come on Fdev, you've had plenty of time to carefully consider the wording of your statement on this, let's hear it please!!

  8. #158
    Originally Posted by Aashenfox View Post (Source)
    Come on Fdev, you've had plenty of time to carefully consider the wording of your statement on this, let's hear it please!!
    Agreed. It would be very nice of a dev to drop by and let us know if they are still working on it and hopefully give us a estimate date for a fix.

  9. #159
    Originally Posted by Mengy View Post (Source)
    Yep, it's very bad and a huge contrast between what we had in 2.1 versus 2.2.

    Here's another example, an HMC planet I absolutely loved to visit for a long time, Qiedeau WP-W d2-17, planet C4:

    http://i.imgur.com/4oaeR14.jpg

    One half of a binary pair of planets out along the way to the Crab Nebula, it was stunningly beautiful. Very real world Mars like, with many shades of reds and browns, covered with interesting mountain ranges and awesome canyons tough to traverse. I have literally spent dozens of hours just driving around this planet sightseeing.



    Now, here is a shot from that world, note the coordinates and planet name in the HUD:

    http://i.imgur.com/KVAKhvj.jpg

    Okay, now I've been back to my little red planet since 2.2 released, here is a shot from that same planet, exact same coordinates, same altitude, facing the same bearing of 200:

    http://i.imgur.com/YLbnfXF.jpg

    The difference is nothing short of devastatingly terrible. What was once a super interesting and colorful world is now just another beige, bland, boring planet, just like 99% of the rest of the HMC's out there.

    Here are some more shots of how it looks today, all from the exact same location as the pics above, though you'd never know it from the stark differences:



    So yeah, this is a big issue for me as an explorer, because this one planet is indicative of the problem which plagues ALL metal worlds since 2.2.
    Mengy, are you sure one isn't day and the other night ? (as the 'night' piccy looks like that ghastly artificial 'night light' we get so as not to have pitch black,or very dark)

  10. #160
    Originally Posted by dognosh View Post (Source)
    Mengy, are you sure one isn't day and the other night ? (as the 'night' piccy looks like that ghastly artificial 'night light' we get so as not to have pitch black,or very dark)
    This is without a doubt a bad idea that doesn't even look real. Case in point...I fly to the dark side and from here, it looks dark like it should, then cross the dark light boundary and it's dark, happy days.

    The effect one experiences after this point is akin to someone turning the lights on by using a dimmer switch to make what was dark into daytime light...

    Its an insult to realism and along with beigeification, possibly two most hateful bugs to have to live with. I call the dark side issue a bug because if I learned this was an intentional change, then I would lose what little faith I have in them. Does anyone like it this way? Is it supposed to be like that where light replaces dark like tuning up a dimmer switch? It's not even remotely realistic or helpful because geysers are easier to find when it was a proper dark side ^

    4 klys left...had a good night last night and made up nearly 7 klys in 4 hours...not bad fer non engineered standard jump range ^

  11. #161
    Originally Posted by verminstar View Post (Source)
    This is without a doubt a bad idea that doesn't even look real. Case in point...I fly to the dark side and from here, it looks dark like it should, then cross the dark light boundary and it's dark, happy days.

    The effect one experiences after this point is akin to someone turning the lights on by using a dimmer switch to make what was dark into daytime light...

    Its an insult to realism and along with beigeification, possibly two most hateful bugs to have to live with. I call the dark side issue a bug because if I learned this was an intentional change, then I would lose what little faith I have in them. Does anyone like it this way? Is it supposed to be like that where light replaces dark like tuning up a dimmer switch? It's not even remotely realistic or helpful because geysers are easier to find when it was a proper dark side ^

    4 klys left...had a good night last night and made up nearly 7 klys in 4 hours...not bad fer non engineered standard jump range ^
    Worst thing ever was the artificial 'Night' , on dark sides I want dark !!!!!!!!!
    Seeing as it is dark initially then goes 'artificial dark' why not give us an option in GRAPHICS ?

  12. #162
    Originally Posted by dognosh View Post (Source)
    Worst thing ever was the artificial 'Night' , on dark sides I want dark !!!!!!!!!
    Seeing as it is dark initially then goes 'artificial dark' why not give us an option in GRAPHICS ?
    I havent seen anyone actually supporting this...whoever asked fer this travesty is staying awfully quiet too. We got some word from fd about these two things would go a long way to making me personally a very happy bunny indeed...that would shut me up and have me singing their praises again. The alternative is keeping this thread going by constantly bumping it to the the top of the page. Childish and immature absolutely, but absolutely necessary because they will only answer when players cry loud enough ^

  13. #163
    Originally Posted by dognosh View Post (Source)
    Worst thing ever was the artificial 'Night' , on dark sides I want dark !!!!!!!!!
    Seeing as it is dark initially then goes 'artificial dark' why not give us an option in GRAPHICS ?
    the problem is there wrong use of image based lighting, when they do not support HDR.
    even in an area with millions of stars nearby (eg. close to the core) i would never expect those stars beeing able to actually light up the dark side of a planet enough to see anything.
    i don't know how that makes for better gameplay to be able to see everything in the dark, making the headlights on the ships or srv's pointless.

    they would be better off if they made the headlights have a more realistic illumination.
    in a couple of hundreds of years in the future,
    i would expect exploration vehicles not beeing outfitted like cars, but more with some wide-angle bright leds
    like seen here: https://youtu.be/-JVqRy0sWWY?t=1m43s

  14. #164
    Originally Posted by Aashenfox View Post (Source)
    Come on Fdev, you've had plenty of time to carefully consider the wording of your statement on this, let's hear it please!!
    I am supporting and signing this wonderful request.

  15. #165
    B tier team is B tier

    Frontier are pretty weak at Procedural generation... yes David used to be at a forefront. Some 20 years ago when he was young and still a programmer and a developer as opposed to a businessman. But his team is nowhere close. Check out space engine and cry.

    All we have is a "Canyon like shape generating" noise algorithm," Crater generating" noise algorithm, and a general noise algorithm for all other height maps... PG 101. All with a very low resolution and roughness value, and now with crappy bugs and feature normalisation

    The rendering engine is also stuck in the previous gen rendering techniques and even those are handled very poorly, the lighting techniques are like something from 2007

    What we have is what we will get. Don`t expect any better quality

    If you want good PG check out Infinity Battlescape and Space engine, or even some Demoscene stuff, or Outerra.
    FD have no idea

Page 11 of 162 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast