FAO FRONTIER: List of Graphical Changes / Issues for since Patch 1.3

[ZeeWolf]

:S
I’m sure that the Xbone’s graphics can’t match that of a GTX970-GTX980
So as the game has been out for some time and that your hoping to gain sales on a new platform, you wouldn’t release a product that was inferior to the version before it.
So in doing so they have dulled the PC version to make the console version look shiny.

I still don't understand the logic. You are suggesting that Frontier want to compromise the PC version to migrate the PC market of a heavily control/peripheral focused product over to the console?

Seems like you are suggesting they are putting a massive amount of work in with no tangible gain, they would also have to assume that gamers are blithering idiots with no concept of the difference between consoles and premium graphics cards.

I would say this is a niche' PC game ported to a console as a sideline.

 

[Kandarus]

Of course we don't know the specifics and we never will because FD will never share them.

I just felt the need to reiterate this ...

 

[Obsidian Ant]

It's clear that there is a lot of FUD being spread around here, so it's worth pointing out that there is nothing worth debating until we understand the problem.
I can't comment on exactly how the engine works, but suffice to say, it's not just a simple 'give us a HQ texture pack' answer.

The most important part here is the first sentence. As you point out there certainly is a problem. The graphics have clearly taken a huge drop, and some of that certainly seems to be due to bugs...as for the rest we don't really know why and can only guess.

 

[ozrix84]

So "you know nothing about the engine so you better shut your mouth"? Until we understand the problem?

God bless you for your crude honesty. I, for one, am getting sick of the guy. Wish he'd just stick to his streams and stop ruffling his feathers when somebody dares to question the motives of the company.

 

[ZeeWolf]

I'm fairly sure personal attacks are against forum rules.

 

[tucker]

Except that the XBox One's graphically outperforms the minimum spec PC specced for Elite Dangerous. So if Frontier is happy to compromise the look of the game on low spec PCs, why would it be unhappy to compromise it less on the XBox One?

:S Frontier are not compromising the look of the game on low end PCs, they can just click the settings up a little. They are compromising the high end PC’s and not letting us set the graphics to where it was in beta. That’s why so many are editing the config files. The settings are there in the files but not in the game menus.

This thread is not about the quality of the game on minimum spec PCs. It’s about us with the high end rigs that have been locked out of banging on the setting that max out our cards and giving our graphics cards a good test of what for. Either due to the Xbone release or in the name of performance over quality.

 

[ozrix84]

I'm fairly sure personal attacks are against forum rules.

It's always someone else that's offended, huh?

 

[Obsidian Ant]

I still don't understand the logic. You are suggesting that Frontier want to compromise the PC version to migrate the PC market of a heavily control/peripheral focused product over to the console?

Seems like you are suggesting they are putting a massive amount of work in with no tangible gain, they would also have to assume that gamers are blithering idiots with no concept of the difference between consoles and premium graphics cards.

I would say this is a niche' PC game ported to a console as a sideline.

I'm gonna say something on that now, and please understand from my other posts you will know that I'm not jumping up and down claiming it's all related to the Xbox. Those few words from your post kinda makes me laugh (not in a bad way, or a mocking way) "they would also have to assume that gamers are blithering idiots with no concept of the difference between consoles and premium graphics cards." it's not funny because you said it. It's not even funny because I think it may or may not be true. What I find funny is that a lot of people don't seem to have noticed the drop in graphics quality. There was even a huge thread on Reddit where a lot of people were saying they 'prefer the quality of the new graphics', and then it turned out the 'new graphics' were bugged and merely the low quality setting being displayed instead of ultra. Whilst I understand that subjectively some people may prefer the appearance of low quality over the appearance of ultra quality...objectively it is a bit of a "blithering idiot" statement.

This isn't really related directly to what you were actually saying. It's just that a whole segment of the community either seem to not notice or not care about the reduction in graphical quality.

It's frustrating to see people arguing over theories (crack pot or otherwise) as to why the graphics have changed. When really we should be presenting a united front to Frontier and asking for a far more detailed explanation and update on what is happening with the graphics. It's a FACT that the graphics have changed and that in many places they now look worse. We know some of that is due to bugs - we don't know if Frontier intend for fix them. We also know that some of it is due to optimizations - we don't know if we will ever get the option for high end PC's to re-enable the higher quality versions. And finally there are a bunch of graphical changes that we have no clue what has happened with them one way or another. All we know for sure, is that in a lot of places the game no longer looks as good as it once did. We can argue over theories, and we can argue over subjective preference. But none of that changes the objective facts. (And yes, I think you are probably right - this isn't intentionally down to the Xbox, and I believe Frontier when the say that. But it's possible that some unintended changes have snuck their way into the PC build).

 

[possessed]

Because I do understand parts of engine but I am under NDA

Let's talk about the NDA, if FD expands their NDA on all files, they hard code all files (in the name of online gaming) but there is possibility to boost "client side" graphic performance and quality of the game, FD is nothing better than Sony, EA or any of the US game company out there, yes we was hoping that FD will bring a new era of gaming, and I ask you, where is that Elite what was back in alpha, beta, gamma all to 1.2.x

Ps: this pattern was exposed back 2002 and 2005 in SWG game (I was there with my 3800 hours for MMO) and same control over game/media is present to day, shame on you all who support this type game industry...

 

[CMDR Commander]

It's frustrating to see people arguing over theories (crack pot or otherwise) as to why the graphics have changed. When really we should be presenting a united front to Frontier and asking for a far more detailed explanation and update on what is happening with the graphics.

Exactly this. And no, "we'll discuss if we should add Ultra settings sometime in the future later, maybe" is not a satisfactory response. Neither is "MUH OPTIMISATIONS FOR MUH LOW END PEECEES!".

 

[Gédéon_Lecanard]

I'm gonna say something on that now, and please understand from my other posts you will know that I'm not jumping up and down claiming it's all related to the Xbox. Word post kinda makes me laugh (not in a bad way, or a mocking way) "they would also have to assume that gamers are blithering idiots with no concept of the difference between consoles and premium graphics cards." it's not funny because you said it. It's not even funny because I think it may or may not be true. What I find funny is that a lot of people don't seem to have noticed the drop in graphics quality. There was even a huge thread on Reddit where a lot of people were saying they 'prefer the quality of the new graphics', and then it turned out the 'new graphics' were bugged and merely the low quality setting being displayed instead of ultra. Whilst I understand that subjectively some people may prefer the appearance of low quality over the appearance of ultra quality...objectively it is a bit of a "blithering idiot" statement.

This isn't really related directly to what you were actually saying. It's just that a whole segment of the community either seem to not notice or not care about the reduction in graphical quality.

It's frustrating to see people arguing over theories (crack pot or otherwise) as to why the graphics have changed. When really we should be presenting a united front to Frontier and asking for a far more detailed explanation and update on what is happening with the graphics. It's a FACT that that the graphics have changed and that in many places they now look worse. We know some of that is due to bugs - we don't know if Frontier intend for fix them. We also know that some of it is due to optimizations - we don't know if we will ever get the option for high end PC's to re-enable the higher quality versions. And finally there are a bunch of graphical changes that we have no clue what has happened with them one way or another. All we know for sure, is that in a lot of places the game no longer looks as good as it once did. We can argue over theories, and we can argue over subjective preference. But none of that changes the objective facts. (And yes, I think you are probably right - this isn't intentionally down to the Xbox, and I believe Frontier when the say that. But it's possible that some unintended changes have snuck their way into the PC build).

Gee Granite, I'm actually contemplating adding a keyboard shortcut for repping you. If not for the limit, you'd have yet another one for this. You are spot on.

 

[ZeeWolf]

I'm gonna say something on that now, and please understand from my other posts you will know that I'm not jumping up and down claiming it's all related to the Xbox. Word post kinda makes me laugh (not in a bad way, or a mocking way) "they would also have to assume that gamers are blithering idiots with no concept of the difference between consoles and premium graphics cards." it's not funny because you said it. It's not even funny because I think it may or may not be true. What I find funny is that a lot of people don't seem to have noticed the drop in graphics quality. There was even a huge thread on Reddit where a lot of people were saying they 'prefer the quality of the new graphics', and then it turned out the 'new graphics' were bugged and merely the low quality setting being displayed instead of ultra. Whilst I understand that subjectively some people may prefer the appearance of low quality over the appearance of ultra quality...objectively it is a bit of a "blithering idiot" statement.

This isn't really related directly to what you were actually saying. It's just that a whole segment of the community either seem to not notice or not care about the reduction in graphical quality.

It's frustrating to see people arguing over theories (crack pot or otherwise) as to why the graphics have changed. When really we should be presenting a united front to Frontier and asking for a far more detailed explanation and update on what is happening with the graphics. It's a FACT that that the graphics have changed and that in many places they now look worse. We know some of that is due to bugs - we don't know if Frontier intend for fix them. We also know that some of it is due to optimizations - we don't know if we will ever get the option for high end PC's to re-enable the higher quality versions. And finally there are a bunch of graphical changes that we have no clue what has happened with them one way or another. All we know for sure, is that in a lot of places the game no longer looks as good as it once did. We can argue over theories, and we can argue over subjective preference. But none of that changes the objective facts. (And yes, I think you are probably right - this isn't intentionally down to the Xbox, and I believe Frontier when the say that. But it's possible that some unintended changes have snuck their way into the PC build).

I don't think there is any question over the changes in graphics. That's a solid discussion going on here and I agree that the ball is in Frontier's court.

I just haven't heard a really good logical argument from those dragging the console port in as the cause. The arguments always seem to be rather sweeping with a hint of folk feeling immediately "victimised". They range from not really understanding what a port is to suggesting that Microsoft are injecting enough cash for Frontier to want to undermine the PC version and pay off every developer involved for life ;-)

I need to understand it clearly from the developers perspective before I grab my pitch fork and torch.

In my mind it's far more reasonable to take hardware that the PC port will actually target. I could pick a random ATI card, for example, and make accusations that Frontier have downgraded the game to work on that hardware. Also I have videos that show how jerky this game was during Alpha, its not unreasonable that a fair amount of optimisation passes have occurred during development that make it easy to post screenshots showing the game looks different. In early builds we had a painted on sky-map!

 

[ozrix84]

But it's possible that some unintended changes have snuck their way into the PC build).

I kind of doubt that nobody out of the ~100 employees at Frontier didn't notice anything from the myriad of graphical issues up to the point when this thread was posted. The dodgy official response doesn't help sell that premise either.

 

[tucker]

I still don't understand the logic. You are suggesting that Frontier want to compromise the PC version to migrate the PC market of a heavily control/peripheral focused product over to the console?

Seems like you are suggesting they are putting a massive amount of work in with no tangible gain, they would also have to assume that gamers are blithering idiots with no concept of the difference between consoles and premium graphics cards.

I would say this is a niche' PC game ported to a console as a sideline.

WOW this reads like you have answered your own reply. The only massive amounts of work they have put in lately is all for the consoles. That’s why we haven’t seen our monthly updates I so look forward too.

 

[nexxo]

:S Frontier are not compromising the look of the game on low end PCs, they can just click the settings up a little. They are compromising the high end PC’s and not letting us set the graphics to where it was in beta. That’s why so many are editing the config files. The settings are there in the files but not in the game menus.

This thread is not about the quality of the game on minimum spec PCs. It’s about us with the high end rigs that have been locked out of banging on the setting that max out our cards and giving our graphics cards a good test of what for. Either due to the Xbone release or in the name of performance over quality.

Not getting your logic. Why would they deliberately make the game look less good than it could be on high spec PCs, when it is widely accepted by gamers that a low spec PC or XBox One will not perform as well as a high-spec PC? Especially when its biggest competitor, Star Citizen, is all about dialling the graphics up to 11? It makes no sense that Frontier would disadvantage its primary PC market in favour of its secondary console market.
.
I think that in the chase for eliminating stutter (that people here widely complained about) and streamlining the engine while also incorporating future features like planetary landings, it is possible that some graphic enhancements were inadvertently nerfed. But I don't think it's deliberate.
.
As for the massive work being put into consoles: the XBox One is basically a PC. Apart from remapping the controls not much work would have been needed on the graphics. I'd say the CQC arena probably took most of the work.
.
And would the 100+ devs at Frontier have noticed? Possibly they've been working flats-out just to make the code run, and squash bugs. I'm not sure they spent a lot of time admiring the specular highlights and bloom of sunlight bouncing off ice belts.

 

[tucker]

But it's possible that some unintended changes have snuck their way into the PC build).

Unintended or intended :S

Could work both ways, and as we have not seen the console version or an update on the PC for some time now, the progress to the console build has not farther updated the PC version.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

I don't think there is any question over the changes in graphics. That's a solid discussion going on here and I agree that the ball is in Frontier's court.

I just haven't heard a really good logical argument from those dragging the console port in as the cause. The arguments always seem to be rather sweeping with a hint of folk feeling immediately "victimised". They range from not really understanding what a port is to suggesting that Microsoft are injecting enough cash for Frontier to want to undermine the PC version and pay off every developer involved for life ;-)

I need to understand it clearly from the developers perspective before I grab my pitch fork and torch.

In my mind it's far more reasonable to take hardware that the PC port will actually target. I could pick a random ATI card, for example, and make accusations that Frontier have downgraded the game to work on that hardware. Also I have videos that show how jerky this game was during Alpha, its not unreasonable that a fair amount of optimisation passes have occurred during development that make it easy to post screenshots showing the game looks different. In early builds we had a painted on sky-map!

To be honest ZeeWolf, I'm reasonable enough to not go storming the walls of Frontier. I'm also reasonable enough to listen to their explanations.

But to be perfectly honest, I'm not happy about the graphical changes. A part of me (perhaps unreasonable) wants the good graphics back, and doesn't really care why they were made. In that regards, I'm prepared to get pretty angry about that, and be fairly unreasonable.

As for performance, the game certainly does run a lot better on my laptop. In a lot of places I'm getting well over twice the frame rate. That's good for my laptop, and for those with low-spec PC's. But if the price of that is taking the good stuff away from those with high-end PC's...well I maybe selfish to say, but I don't think it is a price worth paying from the point of view of a user with a pretty good PC. (Make sense for Frontier's business though).

Hopefully at some point, Frontier are able to turn things back up again for those able to run it, whilst retaining all the performance increases.

- - - Updated - - -

Unintended or intended :S

Could work both ways, and as we have not seen the console version or an update on the PC for some time now, the progress to the console build has not farther updated the PC version.

You're right. The why of it makes no difference to my personal feelings. Only thing I care about is how the game looks on my PC. And it doesn't look as good as it once did.

Some people say that is an unreasonable thing to say - but I've already covered that above.

 

[ozrix84]

Its not unreasonable that a fair amount of optimisation passes have occurred during development that make it easy to post screenshots showing the game looks different.

An optimisation is when you take something that's done, and make the routines that generate it faster. Decreasing object density, removing ambience, etc. is not an optimisation.

In early builds we had a painted on sky-map!

The sky map is painted on even now, what are you talking about?

 

[tucker]

Not getting your logic. Why would they deliberately make the game look less good than it could be on high spec PCs, when it is widely accepted by gamers that a low spec PC or XBox One will not perform as well as a high-spec PC? Especially when its biggest competitor, Star Citizen, is all about dialling the graphics up to 11? It makes no sense that Frontier would disadvantage its primary PC market in favour of its secondary console market.
.
I think that in the chase for eliminating stutter (that people here widely complained about) and streamlining the engine while also incorporating future features like planetary landings, it is possible that some graphic enhancements were inadvertently nerfed. But I don't think it's deliberate.

Why are you making it sound like the console market is not the priority market at this moment in time? From now on that is its market, they want to sell as many as possible that is why they are giving away a free PC version with it.

Now who is going to buy the PC version? No one.

Now I'd like to ask you, is PC the primary market?

 

[nexxo]

Well, guys with PCs and no XBox One for starters. As far as I know the Xbox One version does not come with a free PC version. And again: the Xbox One is basically a PC.
.
@ozrix84: In Alpha the sky-map was just a picture. Now it is an image generated from a point of view in the actual galaxy map.