New lighting

babelfisch

babelfisch
I've seen some people claiming that tinting the screen would be the only thing the new lighting system does. Well, they are wrong. For most people actually knowing and playing the game it's obvious. But those who just love to spread negativity probably never checked it themselves.

If you take a look at this comparision (which I have stolen shamelessly from reddit) you'll see that there is more to it than a tinted screen.
There are probably more beautiful examples but I am lazy and beauty isn't the point of this post, just go and look at the screenshots thread...

t6uz4ufjpf321.jpg

https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDange...lighting_changes_before_and_after_not_sure_i/

People could argue that it's just brighter but that wouldn't be true, because the lighting isn't just brighter in general but based on the distance to the star, so two identic planetary bodies would look completely different based on their position in the system.


That doesn't mean there aren't justified debates about the tinting thing. In my opinion the effect on the HUD shouldn't be there or less prominent (they should keep colouring the rest of the cockpit based on distance though). I also don't like the tinting of the galaxy background. And they desperately need to add support for more light sources, even if it's just something for high end systems. But claiming that the new lighting system is just an instagram filter is just plain wrong.
 
Last edited:

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
For me it totally depends on the system, the position relative to the sun and the bodies illuminated for me to like it or hate it.

In most cases I love the new lightning, but there have been situations where I though "man, that is over the top..."

Uh, edit: yeah +1 for multiple light sources, that's sorely needed.
 
Last edited:

Maro-Val

Maro-Val
Just looks brighter and probably just is. Looks like a filter that applies to every single thing, thats whay it makes the galaxy look odd. It may look better in most cases.
 
Last edited:

Old Duck

Old Duck
babelfisch said:
But claiming that the new lighting system is just an instagram filter is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with you, specifically because of the word "just". I do think one of the aspects of lighting is a post-processing filter applied to the skybox, which is my biggest complaint (the color of distant stars should remain constant regardless the color of the system's main star). There are aspects of the new system I like - the bright, washed-out look when near a star, for example, feels much more realistic than the old "dim" star lighting. Planets (minus the ones that are bugged on PS4) look spectacular since this update, and I think that is at least partially due to the lighting. IMO many stations look better since the update, though some are too bright. This is probably just a variable that needs tweaked.

All that said, I suspect many of the people who don't like the new lighting specifically don't like the post-processing filter part of it. I want the old skybox back, but I'm happy with the rest of the changes (though I wouldn't mind a slider for color saturation, similar to our gamma slider) . I realize not everyone agrees with me, so I speak for myself alone in regards to this preference.


* note - the lighting seems to make good things look better and bad things look worse, so it's actually made shadows on PS4 (my infamous signature) look worse, but that's not the lighting system's fault.
 
Last edited:

babelfisch

babelfisch
Maro-Val said:
Just looks brighter and probably just is. Looks like a filter that applies to every single thing, thats whay it makes the galaxy look odd. It may look better in most cases.
Click to expand...

It's not just brighter. If the game would just be brighter, everything would be brighter. It isn't. In fact, some areas are a lot darker now, based on the amount / intensity of the light that is reaching it.
 

Riverside

Riverside
In general I like the new lighting system, in G, F & A class environments it looks (imo) better across a wide range of distances & environments.

Unlike many other games it has to be rule based rather than tailored to the particular situation the player is in so understandably as the environmental considerations become more extreme (really close to a massive star or brown dwarf) the look becomes less familiar to the player and the rules more compromised.

Much like the re-colouring of the planet surfaces in 3.0 there is a big chunk of aesthetic choice on the part of the designer that, since it has no significant effect on actual gameplay I'm happy for them to go nuts with as long as it doesn't look like a cartoon.

The main issue I've seen discussed is the colouration of the skybox. Close to the star arguably there may be some tinting while looking through plasma or a tinted visor, close to a planet surface there may be some similar atmospheric distortion but an independent light source (which the skybox is) shouldn't be affected by a different light source (ie the local star).

Overall I like it. For want of a better word it creates a more alien atmosphere ;)
 
Last edited:

Bunkerkind Anni

Bunkerkind Anni
i dont get the op.

the new lighting is just a post processing filter that applies the color AND brightness of the current main light source to the whole scene again.
a fake-HDR filter

when you turn it off, even the dark sides of planets will be lit again.

in terms of "lighting", nothing has changed.
 

[VR] M4st0d0n

[VR] M4st0d0n
babelfisch said:
I've seen some people claiming that tinting the screen would be the only thing the new lighting system does. Well, they are wrong. For most people actually knowing and playing the game it's obvious. But those who just love to spread negativity probably never checked it themselves.

If you take a look at this comparision (which I have stolen shamelessly from reddit) you'll see that there is more to it than a tinted screen.
There are probably more beautiful examples but I am lazy and beauty isn't the point of this post, just go and look at the screenshots thread...


https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDange...lighting_changes_before_and_after_not_sure_i/

People could argue that it's just brighter but that wouldn't be true, because the lighting isn't just brighter in general but based on the distance to the star, so two identic planetary bodies would look completely different based on their position in the system.


That doesn't mean there aren't justified debates about the tinting thing. In my opinion the effect on the HUD shouldn't be there or less prominent (they should keep colouring the rest of the cockpit based on distance though). I also don't like the tinting of the galaxy background. And they desperately need to add support for more light sources, even if it's just something for high end systems. But claiming that the new lighting system is just an instagram filter is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

HDR blur is so 2000s. I guess they want to cater to the Oblivion nostalgia crowd. Your exemple is plain ugly and cant justify the performance hit.

Funny thing is, in term of dynamic range, I'm pretty sure the first image presents more range than the second. Wich would make the second objectively worse. It's just like audio where people would compare overcompressed Death Magnetic with full ranged Chostakovitch. Are Humans just primitive wormlike animals? The harder the ground is pounded, the faster they dig out?
 
Last edited:

CMDR Carbo

CMDR Carbo
In the example in the OP, neither pictures looks good. The "After" picture is just as bad as the "Before", it's overly bright, washed out, the rings are so bright you can't see the darker regions anymore.
In the first image the empty space looks black, in the second one it looks grey.
Before it was lacking brightness, now it's too much, bleached out, and in addition has an ugly color filter.
I would prefer something in between and without the fantasy coloration and omnipresent fog.

Some people wanted dark sides to be dark, others liked the slight illumination from the skybox.
What's wrong with having options that make it work for most players?
If that's not possible then we need a middle way that works for all players, not too dark and not eye-blinding bright.
 
Last edited:

Old Duck

Old Duck
babelfisch said:
I don't even know why I bothered to write anything in OP.
Click to expand...

You premise is a bit academic, because nobody but Frontier knows exactly how this new lighting system is being implemented. They need to fix what's broken, keep what works, and then we can all happily fly our spaceships and argue about whether or not Thargoids taste like chicken.
 
Last edited:

Bunkerkind Anni

Bunkerkind Anni
babelfisch said:
I don't even know why I bothered to write anything in OP.
Click to expand...
the tl;dr of your post was for me "the new lighting is more then just a post processing filter" -> and my answer was "no, its not"
Old Duck said:
You premise is a bit academic, because nobody but Frontier knows exactly how this new lighting system is being implemented. They need to fix what's broken, keep what works, and then we can all happily fly our spaceships and argue about whether or not Thargoids taste like chicken.
Click to expand...
actually, can you point out any change in the lighting in 3.3 that was not achieved by applying a post processing filter to the whole scene?
i mean, the "nobody knows" what they did is kinda wrong placed, if there is not a single evidence for any other change then the "dynamic" pp filter
 

babelfisch

babelfisch
Bunkerkind Anni said:
the tl;dr of your post was for me "the new lighting is more then just a post processing filter" -> and my answer was "no, its not"
Click to expand...

TL;DR was they didn't just tint our screen. Anyway, apart from multiple lightsources (which have been ruled out for 3.3 earlier), what did you expect from the lighting update? Telling me might help to better understand your disappointment.
 

thistle

T
babelfisch said:
It's not just brighter. If the game would just be brighter, everything would be brighter. It isn't. In fact, some areas are a lot darker now, based on the amount / intensity of the light that is reaching it.
Click to expand...
Yes. The way surfaces are lit is actually completely different, its not as some claim just a filter (as ducky mentions that's part of it) but the lighting itself is lighting surfaces and edges differently. I really like it.
 

[VR] M4st0d0n

[VR] M4st0d0n
babelfisch said:
I don't even know why I bothered to write anything in OP.
Click to expand...

I know why. It's buyer remorse. You got hyped by this whole "new lighting for ED Cobra engine", then saw some UE4 footage and now want to rationalize why they tried to "improve" their old stuff with post processing.

You'll come to term with it eventually.
 

thistle

T
Bunkerkind Anni said:
the tl;dr of your post was for me "the new lighting is more then just a post processing filter" -> and my answer was "no, its not"

actually, can you point out any change in the lighting in 3.3 that was not achieved by applying a post processing filter to the whole scene?
i mean, the "nobody knows" what they did is kinda wrong placed, if there is not a single evidence for any other change then the "dynamic" pp filter
Click to expand...
A filter to the lighting would change the colour/intensity/sharpness etc of the edges and surfaces as they were lit by the previous engine. For example using reshade/edfx filters, as I used to use.

A new lighting system (also incorporating colour filters, sure) lights the edges and surfaces completely differently. That's whats happened.

Similarly, the old lighting system made the skybox very dark almost impossible to see close to the star entry point to the system, and it became brighter away from the star. That would still happen if the new lighting were just a filter ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom