Page 2 of 150 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 2237

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. #16
    If y'all want 'spaced out pretty coloured planets' my suggestion is go to here:

    https://www.nomanssky.com/

    You get some really psychedelic Planet colours there!


    "The probability of success is difficult to estimate; but if we never search the chance of success is zero"

  2. #17
    Originally Posted by babelfisch View Post (Source)
    To me this sounds like it's both, intended and unintended:
    Fair comment.

    It would be nice to get some news on the issue...

    Never incur the wrath of the Mods!

  3. #18
    Originally Posted by Wasp0 View Post (Source)
    If y'all want 'spaced out pretty coloured planets' my suggestion is go to here:

    https://www.nomanssky.com/

    You get some really psychedelic Planet colours there!
    There's a middle ground between LSD land and plain brown.

    We don't want NMS type of planets, we want a rollback to what was before the beige plague.
    Call me Sutek.

  4. #19
    Originally Posted by Bran Tse Mallory View Post (Source)
    I have a bad feeling they've decided to do nothing...

    I hope to proven wrong.
    I'm hoping the wait is because there's no point in fixing it until something else goes in. Perhaps they're revamping the lighting (multiple shadow-casters) or adding Thargoid worlds (!) or just giving a general beauty pass to things. Who knows? They won't be not adding it just to annoy us.

  5. #20
    Originally Posted by Bran Tse Mallory View Post (Source)
    Fair comment.

    It would be nice to get some news on the issue...
    I am hoping it will be in for 2.4. I have been doing a lot less exploring these days and I would like to get back out there, but I find the beigeification to much to cope with.

  6. #21
    Originally Posted by Suteksio View Post (Source)
    There's a middle ground between LSD land and plain brown.

    We don't want NMS type of planets, we want a rollback to what was before the beige plague.
    so does anyone in this real world know exactly what colour these planets really are? for all we know they may well all be brown or variants of brown, i mean the planets in our own Solar System aren't exactly streaming with colour, so why can't we buy into FD vision that this may well be the colours of distant planets.

    For me personally i care not a jot about the browness of the said planets, the terrain has improved and that is a far greater importance to me personally.


    "The probability of success is difficult to estimate; but if we never search the chance of success is zero"

  7. #22
    Natural colours or No Man's Sky?

    I will forever choose the natural.

    But, of course, I would like to see a wider range of planet types to land on.

  8. #23
    +1 for this. It would make a lot of people very happy to know we were going to get some more variation on planetary surfaces in 2.4 - I for one would be entirely comfortable about sacrificing a deal of 'realism' for some pretty planets!

    Like the poster above I have been purposely holding off exploration - would love to undertake the last leg of my journey to Elite with deeper mechanics, more varied colours and (one can dream) atmospheric planets!

  9. #24
    Originally Posted by Bran Tse Mallory View Post (Source)
    As a former PM for a software house I can also say there are things which never get done for various reasons.
    lol, true enough. We have several items on our list that won't get done because, quite frankly, nobody wants to do it.

    Originally Posted by Bran Tse Mallory View Post (Source)
    Lets remember that this was a change - not a bug. This is something Frontier wanted and were not prepared for the players reaction or the extent of the changes they caused. Yes they said they would look at it but is it seen as a bug by them?
    Aye, I'd forgotten it wasn't a bug. Therefore, if the design was to create a more accurate look, as Michael stated was the purpose, then no, I don't think they'd see it as a bug; however he did say that they are working on a more flexible system; so maybe, right now, it's "good enough" (which as you know, in development, means it's okay to release and ignore for a while) whilst they work on this new system; which could just be taking a long time to develop, test and get right.

    I'm not too bothered by the beige, so I tend to ignore it.

  10. #25
    Originally Posted by Infidel Deity View Post (Source)
    Natural colours or No Man's Sky?

    I will forever choose the natural.

    But, of course, I would like to see a wider range of planet types to land on.
    I like natural, but I'd be okay with a bit of creative flair.





  11. #26
    Originally Posted by Infidel Deity View Post (Source)
    Natural colours or No Man's Sky?

    I will forever choose the natural.

    But, of course, I would like to see a wider range of planet types to land on.
    The best thing is to try and use our own solar system as a reference. And we seem to have a multitude of colours. Even pluto an ice planet isn't just white, it has different coloured patches on it.

    Pluto:



    So I would say something betweeen NMS and what we have now, but more leaning to what we have now, would be more accurate. But it isn't easy to know for sure.

  12. #27
    Unfortunately, planets without atmospheres seem to tend towards browns and greys. FD's intentional change might have things looking pretty accurate. The question might best be phrased as: should FD change it simply for aesthetic reasons, or leave it as it is for sim reasons?

    As noted above though, pluto is kind of brownish-grey, mars is more reddish (but apparently only skin deep).

    Maybe FD can tweak things a little to give a little more variety, without going overboard.

  13. #28
    Originally Posted by Agony_Aunt View Post (Source)
    Unfortunately, planets without atmospheres seem to tend towards browns and greys. FD's intentional change might have things looking pretty accurate. The question might best be phrased as: should FD change it simply for aesthetic reasons, or leave it as it is for sim reasons?
    It should be pointed out that Elite Dangerous has already chosen to aesthetics over strict realism in some cases, such as the way galaxies & nebulas are portrayed in the night sky (enhancing the brightness & even the colours, to more closely match those typically used in magazine articles).

    So even IF the current beige is realistic (and it seems that is not entirely so), that need not prevent FDev taking a bit of creative license :-) .
    Horizons is only 6-8 months behind schedule. Not as bad as I'd thought!

  14. #29
    I created a thread and a ticket in October. After more threads and a couple of Obsidian Ant's videos all begging for a response, we finally got a confirmation this was unintended and a bug in February. That's 3 months just to get noticed. 3 months. So, extrapolate from that how long you'll have to twiddle your thumbs to get some information on the progress of addressing this problem, not even considering how long you'll be twiddling for them to fix it. And I can spare you the disappointment. It's none. Not a single minute of a single developer has gone into fixing the beigification. There's Thargoids to think about. There's PS4 to think about.

    It seems that only heat metas and such combaty things warrant a quick response. Anything outside combat just has to suck it's thumb. You would think that the appearance of planets in a spacegame, especially planets of the landable kind, would get some attention from Frontier, but nope. You will have to beg and shout, plea and put on a parade to even get noticed. Frontier is willing to respond on a threat posted on reddit by SDC within days, but ask nicely and be ignored. If only that eagerness was shown to CMDRs who prefer the other trails that can be blazed.

    In short, it's not combat, thus at the bottom of the priority list. I was positive this would have been addressed in 2.4. But seeing how the limelight feature is Thargoids and a couple of Thargy installations, which is hilariously added to the exploration content nominator, that's our lot folks. Maybe, perhaps, who knows, in part 3 someone might actually attribute some capacity to this issue.

    I for one will be voting with my wallet. I will be judging the effort that went into the kind of playing style I chose to engage in up until season 3. One of those factors is a bug that ruins a large part of my game. A bug that means a lot to a lot of people playing the game, but doesn't register to those who develop it. A bug that rendered 3 signature planets that had meaning to be completely ridiculous. I won't buy a promise that that neglected playing style will get some attention in part 3. Fool me once, shame on me, fool me update after update after update, kindly go screw your little combat space game.

    Ziggy Whiny McWhinyface Stardust.

    Originally Posted by Agony_Aunt View Post (Source)
    Unfortunately, planets without atmospheres seem to tend towards browns and greys. FD's intentional change might have things looking pretty accurate. The question might best be phrased as: should FD change it simply for aesthetic reasons, or leave it as it is for sim reasons?
    No
    Originally Posted by Michael Brookes View Post (Source)
    however the problem is that those colours were based on Earth standard colouration for those materials, and most of those are beige/brown rather than the colours you might observe in the myriad of other possible conditions. We're currently working on a more flexible material system, and this will necessitate a fresh balance pass on these. That's not going to be in 2.3 though.

    Michael
    Sits like a man, smiles like a reptile
    CMDR Alad Insane - Exploratory Plonker - Boldy faffing where no man has faffed before

  15. #30
    Originally Posted by ChrisH View Post (Source)
    It should be pointed out that Elite Dangerous has already chosen to aesthetics over strict realism in some cases, such as the way galaxies & nebulas are portrayed in the night sky (enhancing the brightness & even the colours, to more closely match those typically used in magazine articles).

    So even IF the current beige is realistic (and it seems that is not entirely so), that need not prevent FDev taking a bit of creative license :-) .
    As said earlier, and repeated by Ziggy: it is not 'because of realism'. Its an error. They acknowledged it and are working to fix it. The only question is 'when will it be done', which is a fair question. Doubt we'll get an answer but still.


Page 2 of 150 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast