Are FDev still optimizing Odyssey? Or is this it?

"For Science" ... Well, out of curiosity, I did go to a surface conflict zone (albeit a low intensity one) just to see how bad it would be. I was actually surprised at how smooth it was even though the fps was in the 20's. I did a capture but it seems MSI Afterburner capture scales down to 1080 - the game is running at 2560x1440 in Ultra even though the video is 1080.

(You will note that I have absolutely no idea what I am supposed to be doing, I am surprised I didn't die much earlier. LOL )


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwbCqojAQ8E



(I have since tried to get OBS to work, I am not having any success at doing so for some reason, it used to work back before I had to reinstall my OS.)
Thanks, I appreciate the extra mile.

I think we have a different meaning of ”perfectly playable”. Personally I would not call 20 FPS smooth in any case.
I mean no offense - the GPU is doing surprisingly well and I understand that you don’t play the on-foot part so you won’t be running into the problem I am having.
I simply expect a far better performance on my PC, especially when I consider how the game looks and how long it has been out. Unfortunately, the ball is in FDev’s court because my rig far exceeds the minimum and recommended requirements and there is only so much players can do about it.
 
Thanks, I appreciate the extra mile.

I think we have a different meaning of ”perfectly playable”. Personally I would not call 20 FPS smooth in any case.
I mean no offense - the GPU is doing surprisingly well and I understand that you don’t play the on-foot part so you won’t be running into the problem I am having.
I simply expect a far better performance on my PC, especially when I consider how the game looks and how long it has been out. Unfortunately, the ball is in FDev’s court because my rig far exceeds the minimum and recommended requirements and there is only so much players can do about it.

I wasn't saying ground combat was "perfectly playable" - I had said that Elite was perfectly playable for me - I am not at all interested in surface combat.

Also, I had said " I was actually surprised at how smooth it was " - meaning that there was no noticeable stuttering and that I was expecting it to be really poor - whether it is playable or not I don't have an opinion.

P.S. I have no idea why my youtubes are not playable for me on Firefox, others' do play no problem and mine plays in Edge - I even enabled all frontier's cookies, still no joy.
 
Last edited:
We were all expecting Horizons on foot, what we got wasnt that. Yes its not Cod but it shouldnt be so hard to add on foot to horizons etc as it was very similar in graphical fidelity as it is now.
 
We were all expecting Horizons on foot, what we got wasnt that. Yes its not Cod but it shouldnt be so hard to add on foot to horizons etc as it was very similar in graphical fidelity as it is now.
20220828235540_1.jpg


Close up of Odyssey feet standing on a Horizons building asset. I personally don't regard that as similar graphical fidelity, I think it's quite the difference.
 
View attachment 327641

Close up of Odyssey feet standing on a Horizons building asset. I personally don't regard that as similar graphical fidelity, I think it's quite the difference.
What i meant is we had loads of ground bases already for us to SRV through, surely i wasnt to difficult to add a person to that when they get out the SRV. Personally i was expecting Horizons with legs not a complete rewrite to cater for legs, i can run it ok but i am surprised that uber PCs are having problems still.
 
What i meant is we had loads of ground bases already for us to SRV through, surely i wasnt to difficult to add a person to that when they get out the SRV. Personally i was expecting Horizons with legs not a complete rewrite to cater for legs, i can run it ok but i am surprised that uber PCs are having problems still.
They were not ground bases. They were just big polygons with textures, like a movie fake decors.
Meaning they had not interiors, no way you could enter this on-foot.

Edit: I assume you're talking about OD "settlements". Not just surface ports.
Edit2: It's not just a polygons question. The difference is between "plain VS hollow" building. The logic differs a bit.
 
Last edited:
You should note that the Call of Duty quip was in response to the other poster asking about performance in "high intensity surface conflict zone" - so a first person shooter, on the ground. Saying "... It elite dangerous, but on-foot ... " [sic] is just sophistry and is typical of the response from people who like shooters to people like me who don't want to "do" on-foot combat and feel it has detracted from Elite's development.

Next you will be saying "It is Elite DANGEROUS after all." :rolleyes:
lol. What a loud of rubbish you have just written. Its like calling the space part of the game space invaders, because it has shooting in it.

Its still not "Call of Duty", it is Elite Dangerous, but on legs. Combat is just an aspect of what you can do, just like it is when flying your ships. The game is not a FPS, the feet section is not a separate game, it is an extension of the same game we play. Nothing more, nothing less. Yes, shooting is involved if you so wish and that is the difference between a first person shooter game and Elite Dangerous. In a First Person Shooter, shooting in mandatory. In Elite, even in the on-foot sections it is not.

I'm not a big fan of first person shooters either, but I really do enjoy the on-foot stuff that I do in Elite Dangerous. It certainly has not detracted from the development in my view, it's made me think I am a person in the ED universe, instead just a ship.
 
....
Its still not "Call of Duty", it is Elite Dangerous, but on legs. Combat is just an aspect of what you can do, just like it is when flying your ships. The game is not a FPS, the feet section is not a separate game, it is an extension of the same game we play. Nothing more, nothing less. Yes, shooting is involved if you so wish and that is the difference between a first person shooter game and Elite Dangerous. In a First Person Shooter, shooting in mandatory. In Elite, even in the on-foot sections it is not.
.....

I would have prefered a more Thief than COD game as that requires stealth
...

Oh, sorry, I can't be doing that, some people are insisting there is no link between foot and ship and that EDO is COD... How remiss of me!

It's nothing like COD.

Oh for goodness sake, I said " ...I don't "do" on foot combat - I bought Elite Dangerous, not Call of Duty. ;) So I have no idea what would happen in a high intensity surface conflict zone ... " In a flippant throw-away jokey response to someone. NOTE THE WINKING SMILEY. Jeeze, make a joke in here and get lynched. (n)(n)

:rolleyes:
 
What i meant is we had loads of ground bases already for us to SRV through, surely i wasnt to difficult to add a person to that when they get out the SRV. Personally i was expecting Horizons with legs not a complete rewrite to cater for legs, i can run it ok but i am surprised that uber PCs are having problems still.
Fair enough, but I think the image shows the issue with what you're suggesting, notice that the wall of the building in the background looks fine though it's the same texture fidelity as the ledge underneath the feet. The fidelity in Horizons was fine for the distances that you could see with ships/srv, but I don't think it would have worked for Odyssey.

However, I am not suggesting that Odyssey is flawless either, but I think bringing Elite up to date with better textures, or 'fidelity', was the right move, and I think does explain a part of the higher requirements to run it.

Elite: Dangerous was released in 2014, Odyssey in 2021, it's 2022 now and 2023 is around the corner, and barring the Horizons legacy stuff still in the game, which ironically was used by some detractors, Farseer's base being a notable instance, to show, of all things, that Odyssey was a graphical downgrade, I think Elite has generallly never looked better. Sure, if one wants to find ugly stuff, it's there - same could be said about Horizons, but it is vastly outweighed by the better sense of realism, presence, and sheer beauty that the new higher fidelity planetary tech brings when you come across the myriad of places where it shines, some of the vistas I've seen in the game so far can be quite breathtaking.

Again, I'm not saying it's all roses, and again I'll say that it never was in Horizons either, but moving forward I believe it's better to concentrate on what can be fixed/refined rather than suggesting a reversion or having coulda-woulda-shoulda conversations which at this point, even innocently, can only bring negativity to the discussion, because Odyssey is where we are at now and there's no going back. And I for one am perfectly fine with it and looking forward to what Odyssey brings for the future.
 
Last edited:
I am a bit curious what the new Thargoids are going to look like when they arrive... Most of the assets were probably completed ages ago, and are ship-play-bound, so probably do not need close-up inspection amount of detail...

That much is fine enough; What still gives me a little bit of pause, is that the existing static goid objects are among those that have never been given care and attention after the 4.0 shader/material switch. There used to be this cool iridescent effect over an insect wing pattern, when you drove close, but today, the various crashed ships somehow manages to simultaneously look grey, and dully, diffusively, flat, like some reeeally old game graphics (granted: they have have been lying there in the sand for quite some time), and ridiculously reflective and specular, to the point that if you look at them at night, their (low res) normal map features come out looking monochrome - stark white pixellated outlines on solid black. Neither aspect inspires confidence...

Well, only a few weeks to go, before we get to see... :7
 
I am a bit curious what the new Thargoids are going to look like when they arrive... Most of the assets were probably completed ages ago, and are ship-play-bound, so probably do not need close-up inspection amount of detail...

That much is fine enough; What still gives me a little bit of pause, is that the existing static goid objects are among those that have never been given care and attention after the 4.0 shader/material switch. There used to be this cool iridescent effect over an insect wing pattern, when you drove close, but today, the various crashed ships somehow manages to simultaneously look grey, and dully, diffusively, flat, like some reeeally old game graphics (granted: they have have been lying there in the sand for quite some time), and ridiculously reflective and specular, to the point that if you look at them at night, their (low res) normal map features come out looking monochrome - stark white pixellated outlines on solid black. Neither aspect inspires confidence...

Well, only a few weeks to go, before we get to see... :7
It's clear that Frontier left the Horizons building/base assets that appear in Odyssey alone, and I guess that they're not playing fantastically well with the new lighting and stick out compared to the rest of it. I can't know for sure, but I can imagine it being either a decision based on a technical reason or, imo more likely, that it was a lower priority item that got pushed aside due to Odyssey being behind schedule and the need to get it to release.

Though I fail to see how pointing that out is relevant, leading on from what wrote above, it's also clear that assets produced for Odyssey are well made and I highly doubt that onfoot Thargoids will not have been made to the same standard, being that they would have been exclusively made to exist in Odyssey, you can look at the SRV and ships to see that where they have put the effort to update Horizons era assets, they have come out looking perfectly fine.
 
It's clear that Frontier left the Horizons building/base assets that appear in Odyssey alone, and I guess that they're not playing fantastically well with the new lighting and stick out compared to the rest of it. I can't know for sure, but I can imagine it being either a decision based on a technical reason or, imo more likely, that it was a lower priority item that got pushed aside due to Odyssey being behind schedule and the need to get it to release.

Though I fail to see how pointing that out is relevant, leading on from what wrote above, it's also clear that assets produced for Odyssey are well made and I highly doubt that onfoot Thargoids will not have been made to the same standard, being that they would have been exclusively made to exist in Odyssey, you can look at the SRV and ships to see that where they have put the effort to update Horizons era assets, they have come out looking perfectly fine.
Leading on from what I wrote, or from what you wrote?

I was not necessarily directly addressing the near discussion -- more spinning off from it. Nor did I restrict my musings to possible on-foot Thargoid content; I strongly suspect that if there are Titans coming (or whatever they may end up being called in-game), they were made Horizons era, but not released until now -- have they since been updated? -Who knows....

Ship and SRV texturing was problematic at Odyssey launch, and there are still dashboards that are so shiny (...and the more aggressive tone mapping doesn't help either, I suppose), that it is difficult to read the holographic displays they go behind, but at least all the emissive textures in the cockpit and elsewhere, which launched diffuse, have now mostly been sorted out.

As for on-foot Thargoid action: I am sure if it is coming, it will be strictly cordoned off to "blue icon" locations. Whether this only means current Odyssey settlements coming under attack, or the Thargoids establishing their own freshly designed ones: Who knows...

What I was imagining, was that if Thargoid stuff is to dominate the larger narrative for some time to come, Thargoid asset texturing might have been bumped up in the: "Whenever you've got a spare minute, fix some of the old stuff that broke with the update" queue, now that commanders are revisiting old locations to try new stuff, such as discovering the new property of transforming Guardian relics....

We do have that old place where there are some parts of what may once have been a leggy Thargoid strewn about... A bit of cyclops-like carapace, and some blue pincers - all with very low resolution texturing; They seem to look nothing like the leathery fellow we've seen in concept art, which would make me a bit sad, because I think that one looks absolutely great (the other one, not so much); In any case, the apparent scale would seem to imply that if these gals are to enter settlement buildings, they are really going to have to crouch down to pass through the airlock. :p

I never noticed before, by the way, that tablets left on tables in the game can have music playing on them.... Or maybe this is just a one-off seasonal addition, given the music choice in the one I walked past a while ago. :7 (Maybe also made possible by the same update that enabled the graffiti decals at select concourses.)
 
Last edited:
Oh for goodness sake, I said " ...I don't "do" on foot combat - I bought Elite Dangerous, not Call of Duty. ;) So I have no idea what would happen in a high intensity surface conflict zone ... " In a flippant throw-away jokey response to someone. NOTE THE WINKING SMILEY. Jeeze, make a joke in here and get lynched. (n)(n)

:rolleyes:
No one is forcing you to do on-foot combat.
 
Back
Top Bottom