![[VR] Mad Mike](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
i would love it if someone form FD would throw in on this topic and let us know if it is open to being looked at again, or if that is that....
Anaconda 2.2 vs. 2.3 Cockpit Changes
- Thread starter Cosmo
- Start date
This just isnt cricket at all ! In fact, Its an absolute shower !
I'm generally very happy with this game and play it almost daily. I don't use Wings,CQC, and won't be using multicrew as I'm a solo player.
...But please don't reduce my cockpit views. I mean, won't anybody think about the children !!?!!!!!
Flimley
I'm generally very happy with this game and play it almost daily. I don't use Wings,CQC, and won't be using multicrew as I'm a solo player.
...But please don't reduce my cockpit views. I mean, won't anybody think about the children !!?!!!!!
Flimley
Any word on this? Even watching via Twitch it was immediately noticeable. Hopefully 2.3 will be the same as 2.2!
To be honest this really bums me out since the Anaconda is easily my favorite ship. I loved looking around the cockpit and the sense of being in a big ship with a lot of gadgets and all that. This new incarnation just looks like a sterilized version of that.
It does look pretty bloody dreadful. Something - and the only rational candidate is the addition of holo-crew - required the artists to take an axe - no, a chainsaw - to the polygon budget in the cockpit model. I feel for them, I really do, because either they were given so little time to achieve it or such a draconianly low final target that they ended up turning out this crude result. In their position I would be ashamed and embarrassed for this to be potentially going out the door with my name in the game credits. I'd feel like Gordon Ramsay serving up Heinz spaghetti loops or Vermeer signing his name to a childs finger-painting.
This could be the start of allowing us to customise the cockpit of our ships. Perhaps an unannounced part of the upcoming patch.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed it, will be disappointed if this is the start of lowering the graphic level.
Are the other ships altered as well?
Are the other ships altered as well?
i would be somewhat torn on this.
customising our ship... cool of course.... but stripping down to bare bones BEFORE presumably adding stuff in the cash shop to bring it back up to 2.2 levels.
that would be a bit off imo.
I just dont see it. i think this is to get it running better on low end hardware.... which is fine, in a lower graphic setting.
This has nothing to do with performance problems, at least it shouldn't - plycount isn't a problem on todays graphics hardware.
It's more a case of untalented designer overhauling the cockpit for telepresents pilots.
I find it really sad to see what they have done to the Anaconda bridge.
Now it looks as entertaining as a prison cell.
Barren and boring.
Hope FDEV will go away from the new "solution".
AND fix the wiring.
Now it looks as entertaining as a prison cell.
Barren and boring.
Hope FDEV will go away from the new "solution".
AND fix the wiring.
Great. A graphics nerf to allow for the addition a feature I don;t plan on using.
Got to call you on that one. Yes it bloody well DOES matter. The actual numbers at which you start thinking "that's too many" may be significantly higher than they were a couple of years ago but there very much IS still an upper limit where pushing the polycount higher will crater even a high-end graphics setup. The moment you forget that, you start designing models like the insane ear-ring I mentioned a few posts back, you start g out the physics engine with more degenerate triangles than a banana republic has degenerate politicians, you create intricate geometry on hidden surfaces of your model and the graphics hardware has to render it only to cull it later. You get the kind of models making it into production where you could hook the shaders to render the scene in wireframe and barely see the difference Give me a couple of afternoons sat in front of blender and I'll show you two identical looking short sequences, one of which renders smoothly on even moderate graphics hardware and the other I could pretty much guarantee would bring any graphics setup on the market to its knees.
But optimized doesn't have to look bad.
Well that's a nice positive spin!
Most likely unfounded but I like your sense of optimism Cmdr.
Which one looks better? 2.3 looks cleaner, has more paint decorations, but no computer screens and less metallic textures. The loose wiring is the same in both. The floor looks very smooth in 2.3 it needs a more textured surface imo.
Could you have found a smaller pic OP
Last edited:
