It wasn't polite...
Funny, for me it's the exact opposite.
I was aware of that, I just found it all the more interesting because this doesn't apply to the OP in the slightest. Perhaps it's an ironic self-burn.
I'm assuming you don't mean the exact opposite - I hope you also wouldn't mind options in the graphics settings menu to toggle the contrast on/off.
To be honest I am skeptical about quite a few items they claim will (likely) be fixed in U7. And while it is cool that stuff is 'ongoing', by the time EDO celebrates its sixth month post-release it should really be running stable and well. :/
The only other recent game I know of that spent as much time fixing and optimizing is Cyberpunk 2077; nearly a year post-launch with that game and it's only just at a stage that people feel it is adequately "fixed" (bad intrinsic game design notwithstanding).
I meant that Horizons looks better than EDO when I compare the same scenario (such as being in the asteroid rings, docked in a station, looking at my cockpit, at my cosmetics, at the various SFX that seem outright missing in EDO etc etc) while it performs decidedly smoother as well.
When Frontier announced lighting to be fixed when it clearly isn't, I realised they will only address stuff if they get enough complaints about it. It's a pity that they don't take pride in their product anymore and take the path of least resistance, which to me just gives it more of an EoL/maintenance mode vibe than anything.
It depends on what you are talking about. While its not as obvious on my laptop, on my OLED it is really clear that EDO nails 'black' way better than Horizons. In Horizons its always a darkish grey instead. Which is fine on a monitor that cannot do perfect black anyway, but it is annoying otherwise. In EDO I have the klind of shots like the gas giant in interstellar: deep black space with brightly lit sharp contrasted planet in front. Looks amazing.
Sorry, but that is nonsense. It has nothing to do with 'pride', but there being 24h in a day and resources being finite. They have enough on their to-do list for the next twenty decades, so unless people loudly protest about something not already on the list they aint gonna tackle it. Not because they dont care, but because caring about X means you cant care about Y.
I still can't really properly compare or judge the OD aesthetics, because if the OP is correct, it shouldn't be looking like this at all.
The pride comment wasn't entirely serious and stems from my own attitude towards my own work - I feel embarrassed if I deliver a shoddy product (or rather service), so I do my utmost to get it right first time, which nips the need for correctional work in the bud straightaway, or go out of my way to fix errors asap. Because if I start getting a bad rep because I don't deliver, I'll eventually struggle to get new work.
The problem is that FD could spend more time on X to polish it, but then they couldn't work on Y. And the community generally feels that FD should not just deliver better polished content, but also deliver more. Faster. Which is obviously impossible. And while EDO's launch has been problematic, FD's general approach has been nothing but a resounding success.
Not working in this industry myself, the following remark might seem insensitive. But for 3 years worth of development, I found Odyssey neither heavy on content nor very polished.
That is pretty much the mentality I was referring to.
Well, Elite was already polished, until they un-polished it (visually speaking now). And instead of asking the community to point out issues, perhaps it's time Frontier looked at it themselves given they have both clients operating next to each other still, and worked out what is fixed and what isn't.The problem is that FD could spend more time on X to polish it, but then they couldn't work on Y. And the community generally feels that FD should not just deliver better polished content, but also deliver more. Faster. Which is obviously impossible. And while EDO's launch has been problematic, FD's general approach has been nothing but a resounding success.
Its a general issue in the genre. If you spend time on polish, you lack content. If you add broad content you lack depth. Its why most AAA studios stay aways from this, because what the consumer want (a huge interstellar gameworld, with loads of deep gameplay loops, well polished, and developed in a time span that allows it to release as a state-of-the-art product) is simply a pipe-dream. Its a genre that by definition is build on compromise, cutter corners and prioritising one thing over another.
And the gamers' unwillingness to accept this common sense reality has led to Star Citizen, which at this point is little more than the monetization of willful ignorance.
So it's the customer's fault now that Frontier keep overpromising and underdelivering? While charging quite confident prices for their products at the same time? Surely not.That is pretty much the mentality I was referring to.
Sorry, not interested in such straw men. What I mean is this:
