I recently saw the new skybox tinting for myself. Yikes.

[John Sheridan]

I have read several posts, watched several videos, and looked at several screenshots which were related to complaints about the new lighting in regard to how it tints the galactic skybox. I wholeheartedly agree with those who believe that tinting the galactic skybox the same color as the primary star in the system is a bad thing and scientifically inaccurate. I play (or should I say played) Elite Dangerous on the Xbox One because I like the experience with my large tv. I decided to start up the game again after a fairly long hiatus, in part to see if the tinting was really that bad. I intentionally jumped to a system with a white dwarf star to see the tinting effect. It was noticeable and mildly irritating. Next, I jumped to a system with a red dwarf. My goodness, it looked worse than I thought it would. The galaxy pretty much turned into a Giant Red Smear. Is this supposed to be No Man's Sky or something? It looks terrible. I actually uninstalled the game after that lol. I would give up a whole weeks paycheck to hear David Braben's opinion on this.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

I don't mind it, and the effect subsides once you move further away from the star.

As for uninstalling the game because of this... Your call I guess. Hope you don't react as drastically to other minor gripes in life

 

[Rat Catcher]

They have reduced the effect since it originally appeared in game. As @ObiW notes, as you put distance between your ship and the main star the effect reduces considerably. Much nicer now than previously, but perception of if it is good or bad is an individual's opinion. Just be happy you didn't see the skybox in the 3.3 release

 

[Old Duck]

I don't like the tinted skybox either. The one saving grace is that it "fades away" as you fly away from the star. I try to mind-splain it as my (auto-darkening) cockpit glass being saturated with insanely bright starlight (suns are much brighter than ED portrays), and that's what is tinting the view.

I think the original system was much more accurate and logical, where you couldn't see anything but black space and a few of the brightest stars while near the sun, and then as you flew away and your cockpit adjusted, stars began to appear. Why Frontier traded that in for No Man's Sky vision is beyond me.

As for Braben, I don't think he's in charge anymore, LOL. The inmates are running the asylum!

 

[Rat Catcher]

No, ED isn't quite as gross as NMS...

Something to be grateful about...

 

[Stealthie]

Heh, kind of good timing....

Back when 3.3 was released, I found the contrast/saturation caused by the new lighting made the game genuinely unplayable.
I'm not being melodramatic here; in bright light the contrast and saturation were so high that things displayed in the HUDs and on the scanner were either invisible or over-saturated to the point where multiple contacts were just a giant orange blob.

I stopped playing for a month and then I discovered a way to disable the new lighting effects, which allowed me to start playing again.
Then I stopped playing again.
When I started playing again, again, I noticed that the new lighting effects were being applied but I wasn't having the issues with the HUDs/Scanner any more.

Seems like, somewhere along the line, FDev either twiddled something or adjusted something to work better with different bits of hardware.

 

[Jack Schitt]

As for uninstalling the game because of this... Your call I guess. Hope you don't react as drastically to other minor gripes in life

It's not the scale of the individual gripes, it's the cumulative effect.

I won't lie, despite a fair number of animated discussions about ED's shortcomings over the years I am so in love with this entire franchise that I struggle to imagine how badly they'd have to break it before I uninstalled. But we're all different. I can't speak for the OP so I don't know how close to his reality this is, but if I found myself so disillusioned with the rest of the game that deep space exploration was the only thing keeping me going, I can appreciate how something as seemingly minor as a skybox rendering change could put me over the edge.

As for my subjective view of the current wash effect, I will concede that it's better than it was. It's more subtle on many of the main sequence stars, and it fades more quickly as you leave the star's vicinity so if you're hanging around and flying to planets rather than just using the FSS you don't have to endure it for long. It's still very in-your-face in rarer systems though. Neutron star systems still have that oily blue vista, and arriving in a system with a giant white star is like walking into an Apple Store.

I'd be much happier if this effect was removed entirely, but mileages vary and FD don't have a good history when it comes to admitting mistakes to the extent of completely rolling stuff back. And of course there are people who don't just tolerate it but who genuinely like it, which would mean some people got an nice "improvement" to their game that was then taken away by community pressure. That would make for some interesting forum discussions.

NMS comparisons are a little unfair, I think. NMS was designed to evoke that over-saturated 1970s SF art aesthetic and they've absolutely nailed it. ED was supposed to be about the realism, and the Stellar Forge is mostly very good in that regard.

 

[galahad2069]

Heh, kind of good timing....

Back when 3.3 was released, I found the contrast/saturation caused by the new lighting made the game genuinely unplayable.
I'm not being melodramatic here; in bright light the contrast and saturation were so high that things displayed in the HUDs and on the scanner were either invisible or over-saturated to the point where multiple contacts were just a giant orange blob.

I stopped playing for a month and then I discovered a way to disable the new lighting effects, which allowed me to start playing again.
Then I stopped playing again.
When I started playing again, again, I noticed that the new lighting effects were being applied but I wasn't having the issues with the HUDs/Scanner any more.

Seems like, somewhere along the line, FDev either twiddled something or adjusted something to work better with different bits of hardware.

Yeah this^.

On top of the fact that the dimmest part of the HUD is.... the aiming reticle. What else?

 

[Vingtetun]

Just checking. You uninstalled the game because of a tint to the screen colour?

Also, would love it if David replied here and his chosen charity gained a month's paycheque.

 

[hems303]

I have read several posts, watched several videos, and looked at several screenshots which were related to complaints about the new lighting in regard to how it tints the galactic skybox. I would give up a whole weeks paycheck to hear David Braben's opinion on this.

Commander John don't worry your paycheck is safe...oh so very safe .... o7

 

[Rat Catcher]

NMS comparisons are a little unfair, I think. NMS was designed to evoke that over-saturated 1970s SF art aesthetic and they've absolutely nailed it. ED was supposed to be about the realism, and the Stellar Forge is mostly very good in that regard.

I quite like NMS for its 'cartoony' game graphics and rather enjoy the difference between both games, interested to see what the VR offering will be like next week

With the tinting in ED I don't actively dislike it, and it has been 'toned down' recently, so just 'lore' it off as monochromatic light effects when close to the star, at least we got 'proper' darkside in bodies at the same time!

 

[Deleted member 182079]

It's not the scale of the individual gripes, it's the cumulative effect.

I won't lie, despite a fair number of animated discussions about ED's shortcomings over the years I am so in love with this entire franchise that I struggle to imagine how badly they'd have to break it before I uninstalled. But we're all different. I can't speak for the OP so I don't know how close to his reality this is, but if I found myself so disillusioned with the rest of the game that deep space exploration was the only thing keeping me going, I can appreciate how something as seemingly minor as a skybox rendering change could put me over the edge.

As for my subjective view of the current wash effect, I will concede that it's better than it was. It's more subtle on many of the main sequence stars, and it fades more quickly as you leave the star's vicinity so if you're hanging around and flying to planets rather than just using the FSS you don't have to endure it for long. It's still very in-your-face in rarer systems though. Neutron star systems still have that oily blue vista, and arriving in a system with a giant white star is like walking into an Apple Store.

I'd be much happier if this effect was removed entirely, but mileages vary and FD don't have a good history when it comes to admitting mistakes to the extent of completely rolling stuff back. And of course there are people who don't just tolerate it but who genuinely like it, which would mean some people got an nice "improvement" to their game that was then taken away by community pressure. That would make for some interesting forum discussions.

NMS comparisons are a little unfair, I think. NMS was designed to evoke that over-saturated 1970s SF art aesthetic and they've absolutely nailed it. ED was supposed to be about the realism, and the Stellar Forge is mostly very good in that regard.

If it's a "straw that broke the camel's back" situation then fair enough I can understand it. Although, given he hasn't seen this before it suggests he hasn't played since pre 3.3, and despite the many bugs left/introduced in the meantime, the game is still much better compared to then.

I'll have more colour over the beigification any day - while the tint effect isn't realistic it still gives systems a distinguished character depending on the star in question. But I accept others disagree. Still no reason to quit the game over though.

And you could always turn down saturation on your TV/monitor instead, first

 

[Deleted member 182079]

No, ED isn't quite as gross as NMS...
View attachment 139922

Something to be grateful about...
View attachment 139923

I wish the game looked like that on my PC (laptop). Because it's such an unoptimised mess, I have to run it at medium/low detail at 720p (yes) to get it to run at 30fps (mostly). Really hope the Beyond update will address performance or I will remove NMS from my harddisk in the end! (only half joking there).

 

[Riverside]

I don't even notice this unless something (this thread for example) reminds me to look for it. I agree the skybox should not be tinted by the star colour unless I am actually looking through it's atmosphere (which may extend some distance from the star).

But mostly I am surprised that an issue that affects screenshots is not given much higher priority

 

[Rat Catcher]

I wish the game looked like that on my PC (laptop). Because it's such an unoptimised mess, I have to run it at medium/low detail at 720p (yes) to get it to run at 30fps (mostly). Really hope the Beyond update will address performance or I will remove NMS from my harddisk in the end! (only half joking there).

Did you download the experimental version with Vulkan? There was a reasonable performance boost (even with pretty reasonable specs to start with) - it appears to be the foundation of their VR offering by intimation.

 

[znôrt]

And of course there are people who don't just tolerate it but who genuinely like it, which would mean some people got an nice "improvement" to their game that was then taken away by community pressure.

i liked the new lighting (vr) overall despite its lack of realism (the previous system wasn't much better in that regard anyway), but even among those who liked it there was broad consensus that it needed to be toned down. workaround was to reduce gamma. the real bummer is the lack of multiple light sources.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Did you download the experimental version with Vulkan? There was a reasonable performance boost (even with pretty reasonable specs to start with) - it appears to be the foundation of their VR offering by intimation.

I read about it, but have no idea how to obtain it - I'm on Steam, and can't find any beta (or whatever it is?) version there. The fact that VR is incoming (Beyond is out next week isn't it?) is filling me with hope, but yeah right now it runs like a dog.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I read about it, but have no idea how to obtain it - I'm on Steam, and can't find any beta (or whatever it is?) version there. The fact that VR is incoming (Beyond is out next week isn't it?) is filling me with hope, but yeah right now it runs like a dog.

Here you go, if you'd like to try it out over the weekend:

To play in Experimental, right-click on No Man's Sky from the Steam library page and select "Properties". Among the available tabs will be the "BETAS" tab. Enter "3xperimental" in the textbox and click "Check Code". "experimental - Experimental" will now be available in the dropdown menu under "Select the beta you would like to opt into".

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Here you go, if you'd like to try it out over the weekend:

To play in Experimental, right-click on No Man's Sky from the Steam library page and select "Properties". Among the available tabs will be the "BETAS" tab. Enter "3xperimental" in the textbox and click "Check Code". "experimental - Experimental" will now be available in the dropdown menu under "Select the beta you would like to opt into".

Excellent, thanks! Will give that a whirl later.

 

[Mako The Grey]

I have read several posts, watched several videos, and looked at several screenshots which were related to complaints about the new lighting in regard to how it tints the galactic skybox. I wholeheartedly agree with those who believe that tinting the galactic skybox the same color as the primary star in the system is a bad thing and scientifically inaccurate.

I'm not sure it's really scientifically inaccurate. We don't have any real life images showing how the sky box looks to human eyes when dropping into normal space close to a star. Maybe it really does look like that due to conditions close to a star and does fade as one moves a way. Could be related to the windshield material as well. May be many years before we know the truth first hand.