Planet ground textures look like asp

[Mrax]

Mine look the same, if you look close enough. Just use your external camera and look close enough and you will notice a noticable drop in texture quality. There just doesn't seem to be a higher resoution texture for "extremely close up" (FD probably can make higher resolutions, but it's most likely not worth the effort right now, unless we get to walk arround planets ourselves).

Examples:

Spoiler

from higher up:

medium distance:

and finally... this:

and another one:

but wait, there's more:

And because you undertook the effort to view all these a bonus image just for you!

And for all of you asking, yes I use an extremely old graphics card (gtx 970 - for all of you saying I limit your graphics potential, I promise to get a new one as soon as the next generation comes out). My settings are at ultra (planetary generation (or whatever it's called) is default in the center).

If yours look better at these distances (zoom in with the external camera just before it blurs out), please post an image to prove me wrong, then I could finaly say my graphics card is dying (and get a new one) .

 

[GG7]

Mine look the same, if you look close enough. Just use your external camera and look close enough and you will notice a noticable drop in texture quality. There just doesn't seem to be a higher resoution texture for "extremely close up" (FD probably can make higher resolutions, but it's most likely not worth the effort right now, unless we get to walk arround planets ourselves).

Examples:

Spoiler

from higher up:
https://i.imgur.com/tjLzVJV.jpg

medium distance:
https://i.imgur.com/1Dl4yD3.jpg

and finally... this:
https://i.imgur.com/ecj2UM0.jpg


and another one:
https://i.imgur.com/m1uvGWt.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/BfwmRoH.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/b8wudMz.jpg

but wait, there's more:
https://i.imgur.com/6S9giom.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/XQVIKEu.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/eM5V7pL.jpg


And because you undertook the effort to view all these a bonus image just for you!
https://i.imgur.com/qWLov9T.jpg

And for all of you asking, yes I use an extremely old graphics card (gtx 970 - for all of you saying I limit your graphics potential, I promise to get a new one as soon as the next generation comes out). My settings are at ultra (planetary generation (or whatever it's called) is default in the center).

I think I mentioned this in this thread a ways back, but for those who may have missed it...

There is a UHD texture pack in the game, but you need to be running at native 4k to get it served to your client. If you are running at any resolution below Native 4k (which is 3840x2160) you will get the standard HD texture pack. The quality of those textures is based on your graphic quality settings.

And contrary to some opinions out there... Resolutions immediately below 3840x2160 are not UHD either.

 

[VR Morgan Grimes]

Here's a close up look of what the textures look like on planets. And trust me, in VR it looks much, much worse! Tessellation would help this.

Playing in VR on a 970 and mine doesn't look anything near as bad as that!

 

[amadeus1171]

I love all the armchair game devs out there that constantly say something is soooooo easy!!!! Lets face it if it was sooooo easy then FDev would be crazy not to put it in there. They might make some mistakes for sure but if it was such an easy task and not have it mess something else up of totally kill the engine then they would have done it already.

Personally I've been playing game since the dawn of the ZX spectum I currently play ED on a 60hz monitor with the frame rate throttled to 30fps. This sync properly with the monitor and doesn't cause any eye strain whatsoever. I have all setting to max and often find myself just driving around/flying low level over some planets cos they just looks so nice.
I'd rather FDev actually spend their dev time increasing the play ability and depth of the game than doing the 1% crap that doesn't actually mean a great deal to anyone other than the tech nerds who really get off on the little things.

I'm not an arm chair dev, by the way. I have a master's degree in computer science and am an Oracle DBA. Before that, I was a developer. I have also read up on graphics/game programming and know what's going on behind the scene. I have also been a manager and director and know by experience that you can't just focus on the big stuff and leave the little things behind. You also have to work on the minutiae, because those are what makes the big things appealing.

 

[amadeus1171]

I think I mentioned this in this thread a ways back, but for those who may have missed it...

There is a UHD texture pack in the game, but you need to be running at native 4k to get it served to your client. If you are running at any resolution below Native 4k (which is 3840x2160) you will get the standard HD texture pack. The quality of those textures is based on your graphic quality settings.

And contrary to some opinions out there... Resolutions immediately below 3840x2160 are not UHD either.

That's very interesting. I wonder if there is a way to trick the game into using the higher res textures.

I once happened on an article detailing how to present a higher resolution to the system, but render at the monitor's native display. It might be worth a read again. I found the options in the nVidia control panel.

 

[GG7]

That's very interesting. I wonder if there is a way to trick the game into using the higher res textures.

I once happened on an article detailing how to present a higher resolution to the system, but render at the monitor's native display. It might be worth a read again. I found the options in the nVidia control panel.

Sounds like you are referring to the Nvidia software upscaler/downscaler known as DSR. That is a really useful feature that is available to all Nvidia GPU owners EXCEPT those running in Native 4k. DSR is disabled at 3840x2160 for obvious reasons.

In terms of fooling the game into serving you the UHD textures... I'm thinking that it is unlikely, because your game resolution is basically hard coded into your client settings the second you select the resolution here:

Options/Graphics/Display/Resolution

The resolution options presented to you in the pull-down are derived from the GPU hardware the ED client IDs during the startup process. I assume those supported resolutions are coming from the Nvidia or AMD Control Panel and/or something else within Windows.

Not sure how you would go about spoofing a higher resolution than your GPU/Display can support without a significant risk of screwing up your game. Besides all that... If your GPU/Display does not actually support UHD, how would you be able to see the increased quality in the first place? [haha]

 

[Madrax573]

I'm not an arm chair dev, by the way. I have a master's degree in computer science and am an Oracle DBA. Before that, I was a developer. I have also read up on graphics/game programming and know what's going on behind the scene. I have also been a manager and director and know by experience that you can't just focus on the big stuff and leave the little things behind. You also have to work on the minutiae, because those are what makes the big things appealing.

Unless you run a game development company or have done in the past you are still an armchair dev regardless of how much other programming you have done. It's kinda like saying that you can ride a motorcycle because you've driven cars for so long. It kinda fun watching people do that

The little stuff gets worked on in the downtime between the big projects. 'little' projects often take up way more resources and time than the bigger projects for nowhere near the net gain. simple process management.

Lets face it a few slightly less realistic rock and crack on a planets surface is nowhere as game breaking as say BGS or PP or netcode etc, it's all about priorities.

Not saying they shouldn't work on it but by the fact that this has been discussed a few time of the years and yet it still isn't in the game indicates that it isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

ED has massive potential and I would love it to fulfil said potential but it WILL take a load of time and effort for all the little tweaks to be implemented.

 

[Mrax]

There is a UHD texture pack in the game, but you need to be running at native 4k to get it served to your client. If you are running at any resolution below Native 4k (which is 3840x2160) you will get the standard HD texture pack. The quality of those textures is based on your graphic quality settings.

Thank you, didn't know that. So here's another one with my game set to 3840x2160 running at native resolution on my 3840x2160 monitor. (FPS where in douple digits even!) But take these with a grain of salt as I ran out of VRAM, so there is no way to tell if these are actually the higher resolution textures (I guess they are, it looks better, but not... great).

Obviously, warning high resolution images inside:

Spoiler

Same as before, first image taken from higher up, last one just before the camera blurs out:
(this first one looks pixelated most likely due to low VRAM)

and another set:

and one more:

And before you say: "But these last ones look pixelated, because they are TINY little rocks!" No, these are actually quite large. (Maybe the size of a medium boulder.)

I'd say these look way better, which leads me to ask FD: Why isn't that part of the texture setting, but the resolution? (Yes, I know higher resolutions requires higher resolution textures to look decent, but if you have these, why not use them?)

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Unless you run a game development company or have done in the past you are still an armchair dev regardless of how much other programming you have done. It's kinda like saying that you can ride a motorcycle because you've driven cars for so long. It kinda fun watching people do that

The little stuff gets worked on in the downtime between the big projects. 'little' projects often take up way more resources and time than the bigger projects for nowhere near the net gain. simple process management.

Lets face it a few slightly less realistic rock and crack on a planets surface is nowhere as game breaking as say BGS or PP or netcode etc, it's all about priorities.

Not saying they shouldn't work on it but by the fact that this has been discussed a few time of the years and yet it still isn't in the game indicates that it isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

ED has massive potential and I would love it to fulfil said potential but it WILL take a load of time and effort for all the little tweaks to be implemented.

I'm sure you can still know about game development by working in a proper company. Not sure why you would need to run it.

 

[GG7]

Thank you, didn't know that. So here's another one with my game set to 3840x2160 running at native resolution on my 3840x2160 monitor. (FPS where in douple digits even!) But take these with a grain of salt as I ran out of VRAM, so there is no way to tell if these are actually the higher resolution textures (I guess they are, it looks better, but not... great).

Obviously, warning high resolution images inside:

Spoiler

Same as before, first image taken from higher up, last one just before the camera blurs out:
(this first one looks pixelated most likely due to low VRAM)
https://i.imgur.com/M9sZXPo.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/84N1SVJ.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/OHKgSGR.jpg

and another set:
https://i.imgur.com/fzN5PYA.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/NhaZDoE.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/z7rtNOA.jpg

and one more:

https://i.imgur.com/E1IiDRi.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/2DvfsLo.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/vVUFa6Y.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Vw5g1nI.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/hQbpPlB.jpg

And before you say: "But these last ones look pixelated, because they are TINY little rocks!" No, these are actually quite large. (Maybe the size of a medium boulder.)

I'd say these look way better, which leads me to ask FD: Why isn't that part of the texture setting, but the resolution? (Yes, I know higher resolutions requires higher resolution textures to look decent, but if you have these, why not use them?)

Cool! Glad I could help!

They most definitely look way better! But only those out here that have 4k resolution displays will truly be able to see what you are seeing on your end. That is another problem when it comes to being able to demonstrate 4k's benefits to those running sub-4k displays while also being online.

To attempt to answer your last question above...

I am thinking the reasons are all down to performance. The only GPUs on the market that can reliably run ED and most games at an acceptable FPS in Native 4k is an overclocked 1080ti or Titan XP.

My GPU is an EVGA FTW3 1080ti with a stable overclocked boost of 2070 MHz and a Memory Clock Boost to 5805 MHz. I can maintain a locked 60 fps with the expected 16ms frame time @ 3840x2160 using all Ultra/High settings and maintain this performance along with 24/7 reliability. (I thank the Silicon Lottery Gods every day for that!)

However, my card is more the exception than the rule. A stable 2070 MHz boost even on a quality built 1080ti is not a given. In fact, more TIs are likely to choke while trying to maintain a 2070 boost than run it without complaint. All down to the Silicon Lottery unfortunately.

So again... FDEV probably feels safer keeping the UHD textures tied to GPU model/performance spec. and that hardware's ability to reliably run the game at 3840x2160. As opposed to opening up UHD access to more "Iffy" hardware and running face first into all the potential downsides that could bring about.

That is my two cents. Nothing concrete or provable regarding FDEV's approaches to high resolutions . I'm just speculating based on my own personal experience with the game and my particular hardware.

 

[Hellakitty]

https://www.alpha-orbital.com/news/graphics-tweaks-and-ui-change-guide

Anyone can run 4K or even 8k textures on modest hardware with virtually no performance hit.

Little tweak to an xml file and you’re golden.

 

[Madrax573]

I'm sure you can still know about game development by working in a proper company. Not sure why you would need to run it.

There is a whole world of difference between theoretically knowing about something and actually doing it. See the motorcycle analogy.

After being involved in games (alpha/beta testing and QA) for over 30 years (damn I'm getting old!) I've seen way too many armchair devs say "how easy it all is and why can't you put in 'x' feature into your games" all the while not really understanding how it works at all.

And to really push forward an idea for improvement you don't come out say stuff like "come on devs are you stupid or what for not doing this super simple feature" (paraphrasing but that was the gist I got from the OP, backed up by the credential waving later) rather than putting forward a clear and concise argument for your suggestion and then letting the actual devs decide how to run with it. If it's that much of an issue for them then they should vote in the most meaningful way, by leaving the game and not supporting it any form... which is the strongest way to demonstrate your values and thoughts on the issue.

Just another armchair dev that knows more than the game devs about their own game engine in the anonymous interwebs I'm afraid. Pity. I like the idea of including tessellation to the textures, it's just not a big enough issue to waste too much resources on.

 

[crushdepth]

Consoles are not holding back tessalation. The example pic of ghost recon wildlands... playstation. In fact xbox one x smokes the "average" player's pc capabilities.

Nah, the xbone gpu is nothing to
write home about, even if you have a "recent" version and the cpu is kind of horrible IMHO.

And yes I'm down on consoles, diverting resources away from the PC version usually ends up doing nobody any favours. When they altered (dumbed down) the flight model in Planetside 2 to accomodate controllers most pilots left, and the air game never recovered.

You basically get the worst of all possible worlds.

 

[amadeus1171]

Thank you, didn't know that. So here's another one with my game set to 3840x2160 running at native resolution on my 3840x2160 monitor. (FPS where in douple digits even!) But take these with a grain of salt as I ran out of VRAM, so there is no way to tell if these are actually the higher resolution textures (I guess they are, it looks better, but not... great).

Obviously, warning high resolution images inside:

Spoiler

Same as before, first image taken from higher up, last one just before the camera blurs out:
(this first one looks pixelated most likely due to low VRAM)
https://i.imgur.com/M9sZXPo.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/84N1SVJ.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/OHKgSGR.jpg

and another set:
https://i.imgur.com/fzN5PYA.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/NhaZDoE.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/z7rtNOA.jpg

and one more:

https://i.imgur.com/E1IiDRi.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/2DvfsLo.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/vVUFa6Y.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Vw5g1nI.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/hQbpPlB.jpg

And before you say: "But these last ones look pixelated, because they are TINY little rocks!" No, these are actually quite large. (Maybe the size of a medium boulder.)

I'd say these look way better, which leads me to ask FD: Why isn't that part of the texture setting, but the resolution? (Yes, I know higher resolutions requires higher resolution textures to look decent, but if you have these, why not use them?)

Even with those hires images I still see opportunity for a more detailed displacement map. Perhaps that should be an option; the granularity of the displacement map.

And the question whether or not Elite is using tessellation is not answered. @Brett, can you inquire for us?

 

[amadeus1171]

Unless you run a game development company or have done in the past you are still an armchair dev regardless of how much other programming you have done. It's kinda like saying that you can ride a motorcycle because you've driven cars for so long. It kinda fun watching people do that

The little stuff gets worked on in the downtime between the big projects. 'little' projects often take up way more resources and time than the bigger projects for nowhere near the net gain. simple process management.

Lets face it a few slightly less realistic rock and crack on a planets surface is nowhere as game breaking as say BGS or PP or netcode etc, it's all about priorities.

Not saying they shouldn't work on it but by the fact that this has been discussed a few time of the years and yet it still isn't in the game indicates that it isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

ED has massive potential and I would love it to fulfil said potential but it WILL take a load of time and effort for all the little tweaks to be implemented.

Which led me to a thread I made a few months back on whether or no our programmers suck.

BTW, you can gain insight into game development from reading and experimenting on your own. That's how you learn. I actually learned how to program and the other facets of computer science before I started college/grad school, so I basically skated through class and was a pain in the asp to the professors.

I also know about and managed development cycles, and from what I have witnessed from FD's Elite releases, they are sorely lacking and found wanting. Perhaps it's their workflow. Or maybe their workplace culture. I don't know. But I digress from the topic of the thread. Perhaps we can open another thread to discuss?

 

[amadeus1171]

There is a whole world of difference between theoretically knowing about something and actually doing it. See the motorcycle analogy.

After being involved in games (alpha/beta testing and QA) for over 30 years (damn I'm getting old!) I've seen way too many armchair devs say "how easy it all is and why can't you put in 'x' feature into your games" all the while not really understanding how it works at all.

And to really push forward an idea for improvement you don't come out say stuff like "come on devs are you stupid or what for not doing this super simple feature" (paraphrasing but that was the gist I got from the OP, backed up by the credential waving later) rather than putting forward a clear and concise argument for your suggestion and then letting the actual devs decide how to run with it. If it's that much of an issue for them then they should vote in the most meaningful way, by leaving the game and not supporting it any form... which is the strongest way to demonstrate your values and thoughts on the issue.

Just another armchair dev that knows more than the game devs about their own game engine in the anonymous interwebs I'm afraid. Pity. I like the idea of including tessellation to the textures, it's just not a big enough issue to waste too much resources on.

I knew someone would bring up "credential waving." I tried my best not to, but in the end I had to to show I knew what I was talking about.

You know? Sometimes you just have to wave those credentials; damn (If damn was censored then I describe it as someting that holds back water) the critics!

 

[Shinji Ikari]

There is a whole world of difference between theoretically knowing about something and actually doing it. See the motorcycle analogy.

After being involved in games (alpha/beta testing and QA) for over 30 years (damn I'm getting old!) I've seen way too many armchair devs say "how easy it all is and why can't you put in 'x' feature into your games" all the while not really understanding how it works at all.

And to really push forward an idea for improvement you don't come out say stuff like "come on devs are you stupid or what for not doing this super simple feature" (paraphrasing but that was the gist I got from the OP, backed up by the credential waving later) rather than putting forward a clear and concise argument for your suggestion and then letting the actual devs decide how to run with it. If it's that much of an issue for them then they should vote in the most meaningful way, by leaving the game and not supporting it any form... which is the strongest way to demonstrate your values and thoughts on the issue.

Just another armchair dev that knows more than the game devs about their own game engine in the anonymous interwebs I'm afraid. Pity. I like the idea of including tessellation to the textures, it's just not a big enough issue to waste too much resources on.

You totally misunderstood my reply. I'm just saying you don't need to be the owner of a game developing company to understand about the perks of programming a game. You could easily be an employee in such company.

 

[Madrax573]

I knew someone would bring up "credential waving." I tried my best not to, but in the end I had to to show I knew what I was talking about.

You know? Sometimes you just have to wave those credentials; damn (If damn was censored then I describe it as someting that holds back water) the critics!

Yeah sorry about that. I do a lot of system stuff for work and it gets to me when everyone is an expert about how easy stuff is to do and when they finally get to do it it suddenly become way harder than it 'should' be according to them.

I agree with you around using GFX to maximum capability etc but these things are never as easy as most people think they are.

You totally misunderstood my reply. I'm just saying you don't need to be the owner of a game developing company to understand about the perks of programming a game. You could easily be an employee in such company.

Sorry. I understood I just had a bit of rant with it being a bit of a sticky point with me where others often profess more knowledge/ability than the people who do it for a living etc.

 

[amadeus1171]

Y...and when they finally get to do it it suddenly become way harder than it 'should' be according to them.

That's why you always pad your estimates.

This is every programmer's most hated question:
So, how long is this going to take?

And they ask it *right* after describing what they want you to do.
And you try to give them an accurate response, despite not having the time to do research into complexity, and they say, "I'm sorry. That timeline won't work for me."
Then they give you an impossible schedule.
And you try to meet that schedule, but of course you fail.
And they get mad and blame you for missed deadlines.

lol
Ah, the joys of a developer.

 

[amadeus1171]

Here are some pictures I took work all the way to the left.
I think they look better, but you can still see some flat rocks without height data. Some of these I took in VR and they still look like ASP.