The Planetary landing and planetside missions discussion Thread
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mexican(mexico) nexus
people saying it's beta and basically "mock-up"...its two months from release....its doubtful its gonna look that much different when its out.
Didn't FD say a lot of the work left to do was texturing?
On a side note, I hope all the planets we can land on aren't this dark and gloomy...
Last edited:
There are these things called stars. Giant balls of flame. They give off light and heat. Take a look outside your window during the daytime, you might see one. How bright the planet is depends highly on this giant ball of flame - distance, rotation, etc.
Without an atmosphere, the sky will always be dark though, its only due to out atmosphere the sky appears blue, so don't go expecting different coloured skies until we get atmospheres.
You win the Patronization Award of 2015! Well done!
You also win Duh Moment of 2015.
The last screen from the POV of the Scarab was equally gloomy. Surely at this stage of development there should be more variety than gloomy brown & gloomy brown, unless all of these are taken from the same test planet, in which case FD's resources are probably right at the limit of efficiency in regards to developing Horizons, which wouldn't surprise me.
Oh, and before I get another response like "You know the air you feel is wind HOHO blew your mind" I don't expect anything other than rocky/icy landscapes, but the lighting currently seems to be very dull & limited. Maybe it's the textures & details not being present/final?
Last edited:
The surface detail is very impressive if you ask me and better than I thought it was going to be. FD have obviously spent a long time getting this to look as real as possible. The rocky, dusty appearance looks extremely good and the shadowing is just as impressive. I can't think of another game that comes close to this level of detail. Nice one FD.
Well, it's a known fact that lighting in general is not one of the Elite's strong points; here I mean "celestial-level" lighting: planets and especially planetary rings aren't picking up the star's light and colour properly, background light (coming from nebulas, galactic plane etc) is not being considered at all, there are no multiple sources, no shadows (moon/planet, ring/planet), and so on.
I agree that the terrain might be lacking fine details (like, more rocks scattered around), but I scaled down my expectations long ago - thus I find these screnshots relatively satisfying. We certainly aren't getting Unreal 4 Open World, Outerra, or Space Engine quality. It's the gameplay I am more interested in now.
Last edited:
The pictures are nice but are not the final result. Frontier will improve, certainly much. As usual
Excellent! Been after that one for ages. Looks like i missed the saracasm award though. Ill see if i can get it next time around
When i see those screenshots i am really confident about FD work on that planetary landing stuff. These one's are just work in progress. I have no doubts about a perfect polished work at launch in december 2015, judging by the quality of commander's avatar to the other side of the game features.
Last edited:
My thoughts exactly. Been there. We should be prepared to get little more than is in these screen shots. Lots of identical planets with buried T9s. Who knows, it might end up a tad better.
Last edited:
I think those shots are looking good so far, and as for wrecks showing on sensors, would a totally dead ship with no power, or systems active, covered in dust, give off any type of signal for a scanner to pick up anyway.
I prefer the idea of having to fly around close to the surface to find them.
I prefer the idea of having to fly around close to the surface to find them.
I'm not so sure. Look how asteroids and ringed planets changed, presumably for GFX performance.
Textures on Ice & rocks have always looked amazing in ED.. It was the draw distance and fog that was screwed up. Thankfully it is much improved in 1.4
@Everyone else.. David Braben could have borrowed a few billion of Chris Roberts and taken actual pictures from the surface of a planet, some here would still complain that it looks fake/lifeless and boring..
Last edited:
I suspect crash sites will be as you see, basically intact ships. I suspect the insides are not fully modeled, that will come in a later season when we get to walk about inside them. I would imagine this is the sort of element that will develop over the seasons. I do think we need to manage expectations here and not get carried away. If you look at the development time and potential size of team its probably eighty people with a budget of 4 million Sterling - that is not going to get you micro detail. (Based on the ED development originally being a team of eighty at around 4 million Sterling per annum). The key elements are getting the ground and driving parts feeling right. Then they can build out the experience. Who knows - one day you might be getting out and having to manually unbolt panels, get out the oxy torch in order to get to a downed pilot.
You mean, using only Eyeball Mk1? Good luck finding anything on planet with surface area measured in hundreds of millions km2. Unless, of course, it works like USS: "this guy has been driving around for 2 minutes, time to spawn a crash site for him".
Last edited:
It looks....
...bland, the textures of the surface, the wrecked ship, just bland.
FD if you want all that money from me you will have to improve a lot the quality, a lot!
...bland, the textures of the surface, the wrecked ship, just bland.
FD if you want all that money from me you will have to improve a lot the quality, a lot!