Planetary Tech Improvements: 24hr stream

[Barking_Mad]

Edit: covered in a later post.

 

[Aashenfox]

All (hopefully constructive) criticizing aside, what I certainly do not want is diversity at all costs. Even in their current monotone shape I still prefer ED's planetary surfaces a hundred times over that of NMS. As long as I'm able to fantasising myself into the illusion of actually 'being there' the game is still working for me. In this regard, especially compared to some other projects, FD is doing a great job here. Many players seem to play with a certain distance to a game or it's environment in which case the play- and colorful world of NMS makes some sense. Unfortunately that's not my cup of tea.

Hear hear.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

All (hopefully constructive) criticizing aside, what I certainly do not want is diversity at all costs. Even in their current monotone shape I still prefer ED's planetary surfaces a hundred times over that of NMS. As long as I'm able to fantasising myself into the illusion of actually 'being there' the game is still working for me. In this regard, especially compared to some other projects, FD is doing a great job here. Many players seem to play with a certain distance to a game or it's environment in which case the play- and colorful world of NMS makes some sense. Unfortunately that's not my cup of tea.

To be fair, I don't think we will ever be going down the NMS art directions. While I have no issues with NMS myself (i have the game), it is a very different game to ED. The new planet tech looks good and realistic if you look at what planets look like in out own solar system, and I am really looking forward to seeing it.

I know why people bring up NMS though. It's to proove a point that earth like planets can be done on current software. Sure the assets have a different art style, but it shows what can be done. FDev will not do cartoony graphics like NMS, they will make it as realistic as they possibly can.

 

[Old Duck]

I know why people bring up NMS though. It's to proove a point that earth like planets can be done on current software. Sure the assets have a different art style, but it shows what can be done. FDev will not do cartoony graphics like NMS, they will make it as realistic as they possibly can.

I think NMS would look similar to ED if they chose a more "muted" color pallet. ED is currently not as realistic-looking in the foliage department as we might like to think - just take the camera view for a stroll in one of the "park stations".

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I think NMS would look similar to ED if they chose a more "muted" color pallet. ED is currently not as realistic-looking in the foliage department as we might like to think - just take the camera view for a stroll in one of the "park stations".

They are not exactly Hi-Res due to the fact that we can't walk around them at the moment, what is the point in putting in highly detailed foliage when we cant properly interact with it. That is not a fair comparison in the slightest.

As a comparison. Look at the cockpits/Bridges of the ships as a comparison to the difference in graphics. Also maybe you should look at the brain trees and other assets like that as a proper comparison, which look in my view much more realistic then NMS.

Don't get me wrong though. NMS is a good game, after all the updates. It's jsut got a very different type of art style to ED, and I am pretty confident that they will not look similar.

 

[Cheapchips]

I like what NMS does with its planets. It's the best version of Sci-fi cover art we have.

It doesn't do large scale geology very well, but then they're not really going for that.

What ED has done so far is unique, in trying to make planet look like natural process have formed them.

(I like IB's planet too, but they're pretty unrealistic outside of the lighting)

Looks like you can't have everything you'd want with video game planets. Not yet at least.

 

[Mengy]

Also, if you compare current surfaces with those of this pre-Horizons stream they look somewhat homogenized now, something that probably was necessary due to performance issues and/or console requirements. FD was never really open about the reason for this decision.

Surface terrain was normalized in 2.2 alongside the beigification. It was a double whammy so to speak, and this is largely why 2.2 all but killed exploration for me. Adam from Frontier stated they normalized the terrain in order to reduce mesh errors. Unfortunately it greatly homogenized surface terrain variety, leveling everything out and reducing both height variations and terrain diversity.

I don't think the Q1 update is going to do anything to offset this, so essentially the Q1 patch is only fixing half of the problem which 2.2 created. I'm not sure if Frontier ever intends to improve the terrain normalization, but I really hope they do someday as I miss the pre-2.2 terrain so much.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Surface terrain was normalized in 2.2 alongside the beigification. It was a double whammy so to speak, and this is largely why 2.2 all but killed exploration for me. Adam from Frontier stated they normalized the terrain in order to reduce mesh errors. Unfortunately it greatly homogenized surface terrain variety, leveling everything out and reducing both height variations and terrain diversity.

I don't think the Q1 update is going to do anything to offset this, so essentially the Q1 patch is only fixing half of the problem which 2.2 created. I'm not sure if Frontier ever intends to improve the terrain normalization, but I really hope they do someday as I miss the pre-2.2 terrain so much.

I haven't noticed too much with the terrain. I still find massive gorges, huge mountain ranges and amazing valleys.