Is this the kind of evidence you are looking for? Not trying to be snarky just generally trying to provide evidence where needed.
Please commit to rerolling the planets...
- Thread starter Aashenfox
- Start date
I haven't really played Odyssey since the 4th patch, as its effects for me were rather minimal. I'll be waiting for the 5th one to drop before my next go. But what my limited take on the planets showed me was, that it is more common to find a planet where the materials are broken than it is to find a planet where the materials work. I also noticed the materials seemed to work better on planets with atmospheres, most likely because that was where FD focused most of their efforts.
LOD is another big problem with Odyssey. That seems to be plain broken most of the time. I'd think it would be easy for even the most blindfolded superfan to notice the glaring issues Odyssey is suffering at the moment. They literally hit you on the face.
LOD is another big problem with Odyssey. That seems to be plain broken most of the time. I'd think it would be easy for even the most blindfolded superfan to notice the glaring issues Odyssey is suffering at the moment. They literally hit you on the face.
Is this the kind of evidence you are looking for? Not trying to be snarky just generally trying to provide evidence where needed.
I'm not looking for evidence, just describing my experience
I'm not trying to be snarky either, and I didn't think you were
You do appear to be missing the fact that the issues listed (again) by yourself are associated with planetary tech (allegedly being addressed at some point in the future) and with lighting - allegedly undergoing investigation (and a poor 'fix' in the last patch) and is in the pipeline to also be addressed.
Yes, it is buggy, yes it has issues, no, you can't play it on your hardware until 'proper' optimisation happens - if it happens.
Planets - shame you stopped exploring after 2 hours - but never mind, they will still be there, and maybe fixed, when Odyssey has been kicked into shape.
I know they are aware that planetary tech is bugged, but the whole point of this specific thread is about how they also said they won't do planetary regen. Despite the fact there are core issue that can't be solved without it.
So far, we don't have a list of what is acknowledged and whatnot. You'll note I didn't post the "obvious bugs" like lod problem, invisible rocks, buggy rock scattering and so on. Those are the one I expect to be fixed, sooner and later. They don't need planet generation either.
Well, doesn't help that everytime I go to a planet for a CG or something, it's full of repeating pattern and issues. It sure doesn't help.
And that's the point. I don't deny there are good planet somewhere. I actually saw one, and it was cool, blue sky and s***. The problem is how much poorly made planet I had to go through for that one. Not Horizon "generic dustball", but "I can't see the mirror in the magic trick" issue.
![[PS4] Filthymick420](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/201/201444.jpg?1555738739){kind=avatar}
Rat Catcher is the epitome of being EDO positive without being a white knight imo. Kudos cmdr
Indeed, 99% of Horizons bodies are dull & uninteresting too - I know, I've visited literally thousands!
Odyssey has its own ills - I don't know that a re-roll, whatever that is supposed to infer, will magically 'fix' things to anyone's liking... but it is a good drum to bang.
Once the issues are fixed, however that may be, I fully expect 99% of the Odyssey generated bodies to be dull & uninteresting too...
I look forward to it, truly. My issue is not how "boring" they look, but how "fake" they are, and the sense of repetition. One is fine in my book, the other is not.
I literally bought the DLC for planet exploration and stuff. I was eager to see the new planet gen in action. So yeah, I'm sad. It's important to me, whether it is for others or not.
So I'm going to keep talking about it until it's fixed. Because that's how I behave, whether it's a good thing or not. I certainly don't claim to be perfect.
Thank you, kind sir!
Yes, I'm able to play and enjoy Odyssey.
No, it isn't in a good place, even for me, as performance is all over the place and I have to play at a lower resolution than Horizons to keep 60+ FPS.
But, even with the myriad of issues Odyssey has, it brings new content to the game for me to play, so I will be positive, understandably.
Again, to bring back to the issue; it's not about textures, or LODs etc, nor icecream etc - it's about how the terrain of planets like Ariel has been lost and stamps are common.
Planets with this type of terrain were relatively common in Horizons, and completely absent in Odyssey. The new engine seems incapable of generating them anymore.
That's the problem. Everything now is too simple, and provides no opportunity for extreme flying. Good for walkers. Bad for good pilots.
Planets with this type of terrain were relatively common in Horizons, and completely absent in Odyssey. The new engine seems incapable of generating them anymore.
That's the problem. Everything now is too simple, and provides no opportunity for extreme flying. Good for walkers. Bad for good pilots.
Pomeche 2c also. There's is now a tourist beacon on a flat plain telling about the 'epic mountain range' that doesn't exist anymore.
I know - it's just a travesty. That planet's just a sad shadow of what it was, and it wasn't even anywhere near the best either. Just well known.Pomeche 2c also. There's is now a tourist beacon on a flat plain telling about the 'epic mountain range' that doesn't exist anymore.
View attachment 244518
I think they will fix it eventually but remember how long it took them to fix Beige planets, I think it will take them a long time to get the planetary tech correct. Unfortunately I cannot see how they will fix it without us beta testers trying and reporting our results. They need to co-ordinate with us though to get the testing done. If they are going to expand the range of landable planets, it might be that the larger planets will have higher mountain ranges.
I was wondering if they can test the planetary tech or some part of it using unit tests. I am sure it is possible, not easy (I reckon it would take at least 6 months to achieve). It would take some work because you are trying to check complex terrain features algorithmically. However, aren't these peeps top-dog Cambridge boffins? Isn't this kind of thing right up their street? The thing is once you have a bunch of unit tests done, then you can make further changes and be confident that most breaking changes would be picked up by the unit tests
The rendering definitely needs a lot of work to fix the popping and black holes (on planetary surfaces) etc. And then they can get the graphics fully optimised. Generally optimisation has to be done last after everything is fixed and working, in case a later fix breaks it again.
I was wondering if they can test the planetary tech or some part of it using unit tests. I am sure it is possible, not easy (I reckon it would take at least 6 months to achieve). It would take some work because you are trying to check complex terrain features algorithmically. However, aren't these peeps top-dog Cambridge boffins? Isn't this kind of thing right up their street? The thing is once you have a bunch of unit tests done, then you can make further changes and be confident that most breaking changes would be picked up by the unit tests
The rendering definitely needs a lot of work to fix the popping and black holes (on planetary surfaces) etc. And then they can get the graphics fully optimised. Generally optimisation has to be done last after everything is fixed and working, in case a later fix breaks it again.
This is exactly the problem the OP raises - redoing the terrain would require a reroll of the galaxy, which they've said they don't want to do.
Whilst optimising in advance and fixing the other texture/lod bugs is fine - unless they redo the whole thing from the 'ground up', that ground remains as is.
That means people have lost content they had and were using, and everyone else lost the opportunity for it - whether or not they'd ever use that.
It's shocking how much everything 'they don't want to do' coincides with what public outcry demands
When Dr Ross was talking on the stream about 'finishing' the new planetary tech, part of the 'fixing' was because the 'noise' was creating the seriously pimpled terrain we saw during the alpha.
It seems, to uneducated me, as if those changes just exasperated the 'height' of the terrain even more as it is even flatter now than in alpha. She is the wizard of proc-gen at Frontier, I hope she has her team 'playing the numbers' until both surface noise is acceptable and 'mountains' get to more than a couple of Km height without stretch marks.
I checked out Pomeche and there are still mountains and deep gorges there, the biggest I have seen anywhere so far, but are they not hand crafted? I am not sure if they are as deep as they were originally:
But generally I am not finding any high mountains (nothing more than 3-5 km) and I have been doing a lot of looking. Having said that what would they be realistically?
But generally I am not finding any high mountains (nothing more than 3-5 km) and I have been doing a lot of looking. Having said that what would they be realistically?
They said Pomeche was handcrafted, yes. It probably represents fdev's idea of the 'best' available. It demonstrates they are completely disconnected from how the terrain was used previously, and probably had no idea of just how fun this was.
All those screenshots you posted show simplistic terrain that is wide, shallow and utterly degraded from its complexity and opportunity in Horizons.
Posters for the banal.
My guess is that realistic terrain would be so rough as to be unlandable in most cases. And if you could land then then driving an SRV around would create so much wobble in the GUI that there would be people getting ill as they played: headaches, barfing, motion sickness, ... . Ouch, getting an acceptable range is going to be difficult, no matter how you look at it.
But I also remember that they mentioned that they had to change the terrain procedural generation because they could not use the existing algorithmns for modelling the terrain of other planetary types or something like that. Possibly, the Horizon's planetary procedural generation did not include any effects of an aptmosphere on the terrain generation. That would make sense, as they did not need to before.
But I also remember that they mentioned that they had to change the terrain procedural generation because they could not use the existing algorithmns for modelling the terrain of other planetary types or something like that. Possibly, the Horizon's planetary procedural generation did not include any effects of an aptmosphere on the terrain generation. That would make sense, as they did not need to before.
Last edited:
They're quite banal retentive