open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Incarna build on Duality, Friday May 27th
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 : last (10)

Author Topic

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 01:43:00 - [181]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 16:36:15
Graphics performance : 3 out of 5 max

Overall performance : 2 out of 5 max

General feedback:

GPU 460 GTX with 5% factory overclock, CPU i5 760, latest NVIDIA drivers, Win7Ult64
1600x1024 fixed window on 1600x1200@85Hz desktop, no AA
Idle card temp 37C with room temp around 26C (it gets up to 40C during summer afternoons).

| detail&FPS, vsynch off | card temp, vsynch on (85 FPS max)
------------|------------------------|----------------------------------
Station TQ | min 490 ; max 230 | min 44C ; max 56C
Char recust.| min 230 ; max 83 | min 47C ; max 69C
Duality CQ | min 150 ; max 60 | min 64C ; max 72C


FPS for Duality CQ measured in Caldari station interior, default load location, camera moved to center character in game window, character's head centered in the middle of the big screen on the wall.
__

First off, my MOST IMPORTANT beef is the fact that "the space game" doesn't have completely separate graphics settings from "the CQ part".
As you can clearly see from the above, I'd very much like to have MAXIMUM detail at all times with the space part, but I'd like even less detail than the minimum possible now for the CQ part (even if for minimum graphics detail, characters actually look ugly enough already).
Well, that, or for you guys to find a way to more than double the current CQ FPS, but I guess that's not that easy.
If you won't let us turn the damn thing off, at least give us completely separate graphics settings for it.

The second most most annoying thing was LIGHTING. I don't know who decides where light sources should be, how strong and how focused or polarized or whatever they should be and how low the general ambient level is supposed to be, but, boy, does the character's face look like it's out of a horror movie (or at least trying to tell a scary story while using a flashlight under the chin) more than half the time.
IT'S HORRIBLE.
Flog somebody, pinch somebody, slap sombody, I don't care what it takes, but for the love of god, ramp down the intensity of directed spotlights and ramp up the "ambient" light level.

And the third most annoying thing was the walking, both the actual walking and the control method.
What are the characters trying to do, balance an I-beam on their shoulders while walking ? Seriously, what's with the posture ? It feels like I'm walking a zombie, not a human being. Move those damn shoulders a bit, move that ass, swing those hands. AND FOR THE LOVE OF CHRONOS, PICK UP THE PACE, YOU'RE NOT TAKING A SUMMER EVENING WALK IN THE PARK WHILE BORED TO DEATH. I walk faster in my own damn house.
Speaking of which, what the bloody hell is with the controls ? Are they relative to the camera, relative to the character, a combination of both, are they completely free or orthogonal and on a grid, or what the bloody hell ? I can seldom get the character to actually move precisely where I want it to go.

The last annoyance is a minor one, but still - what's with only 2 camera positions ?
Why can't I move the camera wherever I damn well please ? I am mainly talking about zoom in and zoom out here.

Soden Rah
Gallente
EVE University
Ivy League
Posted - 2011.05.29 02:18:00 - [182]
 

I posted this somewhere else on the forums... decided it was possibly the clearest I had articulated what was wrong with the current way CQ was being done and so am reposting it here in the hope of feedback from you and ccp actually reading it.
(it was in response to another post but I have edited that out as it wasn't relevant to the main point for the purposes of this thread. original here)


I run on 2560x1024 and still don't have enough space to use CQ properly without minimising all/most of the windows I need to actually do stuff I do in station.
I 'could' make all the open windows smaller to give me enough space to just about make it work, and gimp myself in the process, but what's the point?
All the new UI does is open the same old windows, but make it take longer to get in range of the buttons when I already have them duplicated on the neocom.

CCP would be much better off making CQ and WIS totally separate from flying in space,
by having the regular hanger when you dock and then having a 'leave ship, enter CQ button' that put you in station.
That way they wouldn't need to have the old neocom there at all.
Leaving your pod to go walking about in station should be a different experience from being in pod and flying ships.
It should take longer to do things, with you having to actually go places yourself and push buttons, there should be a disconnect.

but they can't do it while CQ is ALSO your hanger view because your supposed to be able to pretend your not in CQ at all and use everything like normal.

To make Incarna work they need a proper 3d UI working FIRST that lets you do everything you need to do in incarna in the 3d environment, so if you get information from a screen it is there ON the screen not in a pop-up window ect.

And it needs to be disconnected from flying in space,
(different graphix settings, different window layout [still have chat windows?], different short-cuts etc...) so you can role-play the world they have built.
and so when they put desirable content in incarna you have to weigh up the costs of leaving your pod.
If something urgent happens you really will have to run all the way back to your quarters to get to your pod to undock.

This would fit in with the in game lore, keep Incarna optional, but hopefully desirable, and allow people to set different settings for the different environments and have different window layout for the different environments.

When you leave your pod to go walking in stations it should be for a reason, and you should be wanting to do different things while in the station rather than in your pod. Its in trying to get us to do both at the same time that it lands up doing neither well.

Brock Nelson
Posted - 2011.05.29 06:59:00 - [183]
 

Edited by: Brock Nelson on 29/05/2011 07:23:24
I get a strange lights everywhere

Strange Light 1

Stragne Light 2

The link has an example of the strange light. In the first example, its red, apparently its something coming off from the TV. The second example appears to be ambient lights coming from the light source on the wall.

In all case, when moving the camera around, the light moves as well. Disabling Post-Processing seems to resolve this.

Misplaced TV

Obviously I don't need to tell you that the left and right TV is in the wrong place.

Hole in the floor 1
Hole in the floor 2

There seems to be an hole in the floor just before the doorway. It seems like if I was to look through it, it would be the station dock environment. The second screenshot show that better. This is persistent across 3 different account.

Strange Light in Station Environment

There this blue light right above the walkway. If you look around it, it comes from nowhere.

Safety Violation

This is clearly a safety violation. I would hate it if my character had a unfortunate accident and fall off the balcony.

Grey Hair

Brown Hair

Moving the camera around seems to cause my hair to suddenly revert back to its youth. While I appreciate CCP looking out for my interest in looking good, its kind of annoying.

Upon playing around with it some more, I notice that this happens when I walk up to the railing and stop, that's when the hair seems to disappear.

Broken Pipes

Standing on the balcony and looking around, there are numerous broken pipes. How am I suppose to refuel my ship if the pipes are broken?

Black character

In certain lighting on the walkway, the character goes completely black.

ATI Radeon HD 5700
Windows 7 64 bit
AMD Phenom 3.2 GHz

Graphic settings are
Resource Cache Disabled
HDR Disabled
Dept Effects Disabled
AA Disabled
Shader Quality Low
Texture Quality Medium
LOD Quality Low
Shadow Quality Disabled
Interior Effects High

Khaine Beralt
Wolves Of Legend
Posted - 2011.05.29 09:52:00 - [184]
 

There are no cigarettes to fill my new ashtray.

Hiram Alexander
Caldari
Capital Enrichment Services
Posted - 2011.05.29 11:58:00 - [185]
 

Edited by: Hiram Alexander on 29/05/2011 12:27:39
Edited by: Hiram Alexander on 29/05/2011 12:25:59

Runs great for me, though like many others I'm still seeing 'skin' in the middle of the room for certain body parts/clothes - but at least it's white now instead of red... ;)

Using the right mouse button to move the camera's 'focus' (like you can do in space, or when using the ship viewer, doesn't seem to work for me when viewing stuff in the new Store.


Things I'd personally like to see improved:

  • Zoom control - More of it. I'd like to be able to zoom close up to the face, and far enough away from the character to get a full-body shot. Ideally, zooming all the way in would change things to a first-person view.


  • The walkway looks great now that the textures are finished, but I'm a bit disappointed that the (kind-of) red LED panel stuff on the side walls didn't make it in (from the design artwork) - it would have been an excellent detail, and would have made the red under-floor strobes less jarring to the eye - because there's nothing red in the scene I kept thinking I had a graphics glitch, which made me stop to try and recreate it, instead of enjoying the scene.


  • The Pod looks great, but it's in a horrible location. Really bad. Please move it to a Pod-room with a shower, etc.


  • The 'TV' screens - unless I'm mistaken, didn't these originally have side-brackets...? I think the left and right monitors look terrible just 'hanging' there by one edge. It might be a silly detail, but it actually bugs me.


  • The Agent-finder tool is excellent, but please add an option for 'Locator' agents.


  • Ship scale. Please bring the larger ships closer, or something. I shouldn't be able to take-in the view of a Charon in one glance. The thing is huge, but you'd never guess that by what you see. When you start to walk up the walkway you get a much better sense of scale because you can only see a small portion of the ship - it looks HUGE, but then you get to the hangar, and that sense just vanishes.


  • Corp Logos - They seem to be wrong. For example, The Night Crew logo has a very 'flat' yellow-gold sword on it, but in CQ it's a 'shaded' silver, and an alt-industry corp of mine has a white background, which in CQ is transparent...


  • Character animations are looking great, but there's a not enough variation, ie. The Amarr guy I was testing on seemed to scratch at his neck every two minutes - either it was the ghastly Minnie surroundings or his robe's helluva itchy....


  • 'WASD' Movement - 'S' should make you step backwards, not turn 180 degrees. Please stand too close to something, ie. a mirror or fridge in real life, realise that you've done it, then move back for a better view. If you turned 180 and stepped back a few, then did another 180 to see if you were far enough away yet, then realised you weren't... please report to the nearest asylum ;)


  • And although I've said it before, please make all kiddie cereal 'decor' optional.

Sim Cognito
Cognito Consortium
Posted - 2011.05.29 14:10:00 - [186]
 

Graphics Performance: 3/5

I believe that it still needs some attention. Average computers will have very noticeable problems. If any optimizations are possible they should be done

Overall Performance: 3/5

Looks stable. There was a significant performacne drop when using interface windows such as the market though.


Overall I would say it is quite well done and enjoyable except for a few things. First, take a look here there should be seperate graphics settings for CQ and in-space as they are very different in terms of performance.

Performance still is not very good for mid range computers. I would say that it needs more attention in the technical side, infact improving performance should be a prime priority.

Movement can be clunky and a bit unresponsive at times.



Thanks Wink

tatsudoshi I
Gallente
The Venus Project - Zeitgeist Movement
Posted - 2011.05.29 14:11:00 - [187]
 

Can't get access as my account has expired on the mirror.

As I only could see the settings I will comment on that.
The move from 1/16x to low/high in the aa setting is not good. Since aa has so much impact on performance why do I need to run "tests" on low/med/high to figure out what setting works when I know a specific X amount works? I know you guys want to make eve more consistent but at what cost? Really this is just silly.

I liked the speed, the snappynesses of the windows, scratch that, the tabs in the settings. Blazing fast, GJ devs ugh

RENNONN
Posted - 2011.05.29 14:21:00 - [188]
 

Edited by: RENNONN on 29/05/2011 14:21:09
how to install on Mac?

I have it downloaded but: unable to connect

get this message:

There was an unexpected error while retrieving update status:

An update file for your build number is not available.
You will have to update manually.


Do you want to go to support page?




thx you

Helenna
Posted - 2011.05.29 16:26:00 - [189]
 

Edited by: Helenna on 29/05/2011 16:26:58
The lighting in the room still needs some work.

I find that in most locations around the room the character looks nothing like the model I created during the character creation process. This is actually a very big deal as Incarna is all about the characters.

There are only a few locations in the room where the character actually looks ok. One is under the center light, the other is in front of the mirror.

In the rest of the room the character looks pretty poor, and is d****d in shadows that deform the appearance of the models.

Examples:
Bad Shadows/Lighting messing up Characters

The difference in lighting on those characters is simply a matter of moving a few steps into the room. Pretty drastic stuff!

Blue VanMeer
Posted - 2011.05.29 16:36:00 - [190]
 

I participated in the last test as well, and I have to say this is a lot worse. Half the CQ isn't even rendering for me, the monitors are embedded in the goddamn ceiling for some reason, the hair physics, while they do not make my character bald, are causing various weird glitches, my skin still floats in the entrance to the CQ....

The new turrets and Maller model are pretty rad, some of the UI tweaks look great, and what did render was extremely smooth (to answer your questions, 1. 4 and 2. 2). I like where this is going, I really do, but this is an insect preserve right now.

Bunch of bug reports incoming. Enjoy your weekend bug hunters, next week is gonna be a rough one ugh

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.05.29 16:37:00 - [191]
 

Originally by: Helenna
There are only a few locations in the room where the character actually looks ok. One is under the center light, the other is in front of the mirror.

In the rest of the room the character looks pretty poor, and is d****d in shadows that deform the appearance of the models.

Examples:
Bad Shadows/Lighting messing up Characters

The difference in lighting on those characters is simply a matter of moving a few steps into the room. Pretty drastic stuff!
Well yeah. That's why photographers lug around a whole bunch of extra lights and flashes to get a good shot. Those shadows are not bad they're very good exactly because of how they make the character look. It looks like actual shadows created by actual lighting.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 16:42:00 - [192]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 16:54:44

Originally by: Helenna
The lighting in the room still needs some work. There are only a few locations in the room where the character actually looks ok.

Thanks for reminding me of the not-strictly-performance related issues.
I have had exactly the same experience with the lighting system.
Edited my above post to include non-FPS info.
Originally by: Tippia
Those shadows are not bad they're very good exactly because of how they make the character look. It looks like actual shadows created by actual lighting.

If the whole CQ was full of non-reflective surfaces and a whole lot of spotlights coming from the oddest of angles, sure.
I can assure you though, you will never see THOSE kinds of ultra-hard shadows in a regular room made out of regular materials illuminated by normal indoor light fixtures.

Oh, and by the way, this comes AFTER the Fanfest talks and much earlier techdemo presentations about how they worked so hard to make the illumination just right and soft and diffuse and from many sources at the same time and everything else you can think of.
Well, I can't see much of that work in the current CQ implementation.
If the tech is actually there, they need to tweak the light source parameters.
Either way, needs work.

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.05.29 17:35:00 - [193]
 

Nice and cozy lighting for your CQ will cost you Aurum.

Othar en'gilliath
Caldari
OMNI Technologies
Posted - 2011.05.29 17:53:00 - [194]
 

Edited by: Othar en''gilliath on 29/05/2011 17:55:03
i get 20-30 fps in CQ that is more then enough 20 is perfectly fine imo as we arnt shooting people in the head
and yes that is MAX Grahpics

on a GTS 450 factory overclocked 1 GB GDDR5 RAM

Its a test Build All the graphics probably arnt 100% done yet


about character movement it needs to be smoother and i cant even get my character to go NORTH EAST OR SOUTH WEST in movement ....she stuck with up down left right ..where is are Diagonal movement?

Di Mulle
Posted - 2011.05.29 17:54:00 - [195]
 

Originally by: Tippia
[Well yeah. That's why photographers lug around a whole bunch of extra lights and flashes to get a good shot. Those shadows are not bad they're very good exactly because of how they make the character look. It looks like actual shadows created by actual lighting.


Opposite, to get that cartoonish look will require photographers to make pretty elaborated - and weird - lighting setup, and even then I doubt it would be possible.

Of course, simulated lighting can't be as natural as real one, but this one is pretty bad still.

As Akita, I wonder, what happened to that hyped super duper ultra natural lighting system ? Scrapped as everything else CCP bragged about for years ?

Helenna
Posted - 2011.05.29 17:55:00 - [196]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Those shadows are not bad they're very good exactly because of how they make the character look. It looks like actual shadows created by actual lighting.


I guess our definition of 'very good' is very different:

Bad Shadows/Lighting - this needs some major improvement.

Velani Askiras
Posted - 2011.05.29 18:03:00 - [197]
 

As many others here, include me to the people who would like to help testing but can't due to an outdated mirror.

I know creating a new mirror can take up several days...



Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.05.29 18:24:00 - [198]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 29/05/2011 18:26:59
Originally by: Helenna
I guess our definition of 'very good' is very different:

Bad Shadows/Lighting - this needs some major improvement.
No, I'd define that as a bug, because on my system, I'm lit just fine.

Originally by: Akita T
I can assure you though, you will never see THOSE kinds of ultra-hard shadows in a regular room made out of regular materials illuminated by normal indoor light fixtures.
Those are not "ultra hard" shadows the cheeks, sides of the face, and necks are still illuminated, and that look is not particularly difficult to create in real life.

Ferocitana
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.05.29 18:31:00 - [199]
 

striminers last so long the ship can turn around and mine a huge hole in their own ship.

technical translation:
Strip Miner I & II do not switch between the different turrets to hinder the lasers to pass through the ship. because of the long cycles.

The bantam should get new turretpoints or be remade to support the large turret models.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 19:35:00 - [200]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Akita T
I can assure you though, you will never see THOSE kinds of ultra-hard shadows in a regular room made out of regular materials illuminated by normal indoor light fixtures.
Those are not "ultra hard" shadows the cheeks, sides of the face, and necks are still illuminated, and that look is not particularly difficult to create in real life.

Blow up one of those screenshots on your entire scree, the take a hand mirror and walk around the room, tell me if you can find a place where the contrast is anywhere as strong as the one in the screenshots. MAYBE if you sit just below a light bulb, and even then just maybe. Or possibly outdoors on a cloudless day in the middle of the summer at mid-day.

Soden Rah
Gallente
EVE University
Ivy League
Posted - 2011.05.29 19:42:00 - [201]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Akita T
I can assure you though, you will never see THOSE kinds of ultra-hard shadows in a regular room made out of regular materials illuminated by normal indoor light fixtures.
Those are not "ultra hard" shadows the cheeks, sides of the face, and necks are still illuminated, and that look is not particularly difficult to create in real life.

Blow up one of those screenshots on your entire scree, the take a hand mirror and walk around the room, tell me if you can find a place where the contrast is anywhere as strong as the one in the screenshots. MAYBE if you sit just below a light bulb, and even then just maybe. Or possibly outdoors on a cloudless day in the middle of the summer at mid-day.


my thought when walking around was they needed some up-lighting, but you aught to get more reflected light. Although on the ramp/balcony, your walking on a grid with holes in it, which is going to significantly reduce reflected light.
It wouldn't be so bad if it was moody and dramatic, but it just makes my chars face look like its muddy.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 20:01:00 - [202]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 20:05:21

Here's a quick 44 seconds "test run" I took a few minutes ago on Duality.
DualityMaxTestrun.mkv (7.6 MB)
Take a look at it and tell me just how "nice" it looks and how it compares to the avatar you see on the forums.

The settings were on highest everything, even max ingame antialiasing, game window 1600x1024.
MPEG4 Video (H264) 512x688 30.00fps - that's at the natural pixel-to-pixel resolution, I merely cropped a lot of the image (crop settings 16 top, 320 bottom, 32 left, 1056 right).

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.05.29 20:24:00 - [203]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Blow up one of those screenshots on your entire scree, the take a hand mirror and walk around the room, tell me if you can find a place where the contrast is anywhere as strong as the one in the screenshots.
I don't have any spotlights, so no, but even so: it's not that hard, and I still wouldn't call those "ultra-hard" there's too much ambient light for that.

Yes, it's an underlit room, and maybe Enlighten isn't doing its job, but that's a different matter from saying the shadows are bad. Bad shadows is what you see in space or in Oblivion/Fallout 3.

And your movie file seems to generate a server error.

Hyperforce99
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.05.29 20:56:00 - [204]
 

I see the potential of CQ as a more in depth, immersive interface.
However, I think my immersion would be even more in depth if I had the option to board and disembark my ship INSIDE a station at will. This way CCP can even work in optional cutscenes of us entering or exiting our pods.

Imagine being podded and seeing a cut-scene where you wake up in a new body in a cloning facility or performing a clone jump.

I would prefer the CQ to be an optional environment to use. Especially because after just a few tries I already got tired of having to walk super slowly from the hangar balcony to the main room every time I docked.
Allow us to:

  • DOCK (enter the current hangar environment as your ship)
  • DOCK & DISEMBARK. (enter the Captains Quarters environment an avatar)
  • SWITCH BETWEEN CQ & HANGAR (when inside the station)


In short: CCP, GIVE US CHOICE!

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 21:01:00 - [205]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 22:00:50

Originally by: Tippia
And your movie file seems to generate a server error.

Gah, brilliant Rolling Eyes I'll see what I can do about that.

EDIT :
Tried uploading it inside a ZIP : Linkage.

EDIT 2 :
Downloaded 5 MB of it back, then it reported as complete even if it should be 7+ MB long.
Obviously, the ZIP won't unpack.

EDIT 3 :
And now the entire eve-files domain is no longer responding.
Creepy.

EDIT 4 :
Nah, apparently all is fine now and even the original file works.
Was just a temporary issue, it appears.

Quote:
Yes, it's an underlit room, and maybe Enlighten isn't doing its job, but that's a different matter from saying the shadows are bad.

Well, you know, bad shadows, shadows which are bad, unusual or unnatural shadows, whatever... English is a bit finicky when you try to express yourself properly. The main idea being that the lighting looks horrible.

Severian Carnifex
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.05.29 21:02:00 - [206]
 

i like it... :)

but... one thing... pod is there like object... there are stairs to get to the pod... can you allow us to get to the pod... (so we can get close to it...) :)

Helenna
Posted - 2011.05.29 21:43:00 - [207]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 29/05/2011 20:05:21

Here's a quick 44 seconds "test run" I took a few minutes ago on Duality.
DualityMaxTestrun.mkv (7.6 MB)
Take a look at it and tell me just how "nice" it looks and how it compares to the avatar you see on the forums.


Thanks for this Akita.

Many of us have put a lot of effort into how our characters look. And CCP obviously think that a characters appearance is important hence the entire Incarna expansion.

Yet it seems so silly that we have an impressive graphical engine that makes our characters look terrible due to poor lighting.

I find it extremely off-putting to the point I just don't want to even look at my characters...the lighting makes them look damn ugly.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.05.29 22:11:00 - [208]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 29/05/2011 22:11:45
Originally by: Akita T
Creepy. Did I just break EVE-Files ?
Yes! Everything is your fault! Ever! Razz
Quote:
Well, you know, bad shadows, shadows which are bad, unusual or unnatural shadows, whatever... English is a bit finicky when you try to express yourself properly. The main idea being that the lighting looks horrible.
Well, those are rather different things: I don't think the shadows look bad from ta technical standpoint they seem more correct than most games will offer. But the technical side is different from the scene lighting and artistic design. It sounds to me more like you're complaining about the latter, but at the same time suspecting that it is the former that is to blame?
Originally by: Helenna
Yet it seems so silly that we have an impressive graphical engine that makes our characters look terrible due to poor lighting.
And really, this is the key point I'm trying to make: an accurate lighting engine will do that. Making people look horrible due to poor lighting is very very easy in real life in fact, there are at least four whole professions dedicated to not making that happen, or to hide it when it (inevitably) does happen: photographers, gaffers, make-up artists and retouchers. And these pros only make it not happen under controlled circumstances.

From my perspective, the fact that the lighting engine and character design engines let the exact same character look both good and very very ugly, it means they are working. I don't see it as silly I see it as making it even more impressive.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.05.29 22:33:00 - [209]
 

Originally by: Tippia
I don't think the shadows look bad from ta technical standpoint they seem more correct than most games will offer. But the technical side is different from the scene lighting and artistic design. It sounds to me more like you're complaining about the latter, but at the same time suspecting that it is the former that is to blame?

More like, a combination of both.
No idea how much each is to be blamed though.

Technically speaking, at least SOME of the lights render somewhat realistically, I'll give you that.
HOWEVER.
If you would have that exact scene in reality, with that many visible light sources, you can bet you would not get those visuals. So while it might be closer to reality than some others, it's not close enough.
Call it the "uncanny valley" effect, but for lighting, if you will.

So there are some technical limitations that make you take some shortcuts with so many light sources around.
Well, fine, we can dig that, no problem. But CCP claimed they made extra-special efforts to get them "right", and they claimed they were happy with the results.
I don't know where their standards lie, but to me, looks like the bar was pretty damn low if this was the result of their best efforts, efforts they felt like bragging about.
Maybe these AREN'T those best efforts yet though, who knows. I just tell it like I see it. And right now, it looks crappy.

Ok, maybe it's not so much the technical side's problem, but more the art design people's problem (or whoever places the light sources).
If they're having so much trouble with so many different lights in the locations they placed them, well, what can I say other than "well, then you'd better damn well move them around or change them until it looks good".
Because, again, it just does not look good. Not even close. Sure, the FURNITURE might look good, but put some avatars in there, and they don't look so good anymore.
If I would have hired an interior designer, and he would have personally placed each light source in my house so that my face would look like that in so many places in the house, I'd ask for my money back and then some.

So, in conclusion, I have no idea who needs to be whipped or flogged, the coders, the art people, the modelers, the janitors or the cooking staff, but somebody at CCP needs to walk around inside CQ and go "bloody hell, why does the avatar look so awful so often ? we need to fix this", and actually do something about it.

Lettuce Prey
Rhinoceros Kitchen
Posted - 2011.05.29 22:40:00 - [210]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Edited by: Tippia on 29/05/2011 22:11:45
And really, this is the key point I'm trying to make: an accurate lighting engine will do that. Making people look horrible due to poor lighting is very very easy in real life in fact, there are at least four whole professions dedicated to not making that happen, or to hide it when it (inevitably) does happen: photographers, gaffers, make-up artists and retouchers. And these pros only make it not happen under controlled circumstances.

From my perspective, the fact that the lighting engine and character design engines let the exact same character look both good and very very ugly, it means they are working. I don't see it as silly I see it as making it even more impressive.


an important point in a sandbox game is that you can make mistakes.
like standing in a place where the light shines "improperly" across your face, or going to take a leak while autopilot takes you through 0.0 space.

i like what is being done here, i like where it seems to be going, and understand that it is still in the development phase.

i want to be able to either turn the graphics down in quality enough that my graphics card can keep up, or not go to my captains quarters at all, on occasion.


sure there will be times when i want to go to the CQ, and sometimes i'll want to crank the graphics quality to the nut, performance be damned.
but most of the time i just want to "shut up and roll the dice". [pen and paper gaming term there for those of you that don't recognize it]

i am sure that whatever comes out on the projected release date will be usable, and get patched later.
i'm ok with this.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 : last (10)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only