Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 19:45:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Zendoren on 13/12/2010 19:56:02 Months ago in a dev blog far far away, CCP mentioned that a revamp of the in-game effects are inbound and that new effects artists are on the job. Well, I can't speak for everyone, but where are these new cool effects? Seems like you guys peaked when changing over the new shield and armor effects giving the "wham bam thank you mam" impression and basically saying, "Thats it we're done!" leaving myself (and possibly the rest of the EVE community) unsatisfied! (much like a married couple, with CCP being the guy and the EVE user being the girl )
I'm sure most of you guys are wondering what brought on this most recent rant. In a nutshell this did. If a 15 man dev crew can put together something as visually stimulating as this, I'm sure CCP can find a way to, lets say, update the tractor beam effects or the mining lazers? Hell why not the entire lazer effects all together?
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:23:00 -
[2]
I asked for this at least 3 times in the last year and many others did so too.
Fact is that Eve effects are from 2003 like the backgrounds in all systems except wormholes and some exceptions like i dont know.
Just have a look at the boring thrusters, the poor artillery effects, the 2 or 3 explosion types that exist in the game for all shipexplosions (frig and battleship have the same!), the laser effects, the stupid oversized torpedo shockwaves that look just uggly, the damage effect when you are on structure (lol) and so on. I really hope that the only reason we are still waiting for an effectexpansion is that it will be outstanding and that they redo all effects at once.
|
Xercodo
Amarr INESTO Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:36:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Captain Futur3
Fact is that Eve effects are from 2003 like the backgrounds in all systems except wormholes and some exceptions like i dont know.
eh? they were all redone in Apocrypha....
-------------------------------------------------- The drake is a lie
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:39:00 -
[4]
We need another of these.
-- I can not decide on a sig yet.
Under Construction.
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:45:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Captain Futur3 on 13/12/2010 20:46:28
Originally by: Xercodo
Originally by: Captain Futur3
Fact is that Eve effects are from 2003 like the backgrounds in all systems except wormholes and some exceptions like i dont know.
eh? they were all redone in Apocrypha....
and that means? Unreal Tournament 2004 has better effects than what i see in eve... just because the effects are redone does not make them up to date (when apoc was released).
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:47:00 -
[6]
In some cases what we actually need is the old effects. -
I wish I was a three foot tall doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes |
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:50:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Crumplecorn In some cases what we actually need is the old effects.
I would freak a little bit if I saw a real Cyno open infront of my Cane. You would see quite a big engine trail of GTFO.
-- I can not decide on a sig yet.
Under Construction.
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 20:58:00 -
[8]
Really? Are you really comparing a 2D top down shooter to EVE? EVE should look more like this. - It's not "Play through a pre-set story, become stronger, do endgame". Gameplay is open ended, and you make your own story. Unless you're too afraid of 'pvp grief' to do anything relevant |
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 21:05:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Vaal Erit Really? Are you really comparing a 2D top down shooter to EVE? EVE should look more like this.
cool!
|
Triple Entendre
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 21:53:00 -
[10]
If by 'new effects', you mean 'old effects (and engine trails)', I concur wholeheartedly.
Originally by: CCP Zulu You're assuming I read threads before I turdpost in them :)
|
|
Alyth
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 22:22:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Alyth on 13/12/2010 22:25:02
Originally by: Vaal Erit Really? Are you really comparing a 2D top down shooter to EVE? EVE should look more like this.
The only thing EVE needs from that is the shield effects and the tracking effect of those projectiles i.e. a spray that follows the turrets rotation rather than the straight path they currently follow. I guess it would be doable now by having autos 'permanantly' firing, then when they cycle, have the tracers impact the target rinse repeat. If they added those I would literally orgasm with glee.
|
DarkXale
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 22:42:00 -
[12]
Edited by: DarkXale on 13/12/2010 22:42:46
Originally by: Captain Futur3 and that means? Unreal Tournament 2004 has better effects than what i see in eve...
Which is also because thats a game designed for a very low amount of actors. The Unreal engine is not designed to handle much more than 32 players, and 16 at most is "Recommended". If you want to support a massive amount of actors in a given scenario - complexity and detail takes a hit.
Global Agenda had to completely abandon its planned largescale warfare because of it - and work on releasing a completely separate game instead. It simply wasn't possible to get the unreal engine to work with the intended amount of players and objects. And that amount still only equals about 1/10 of what the playerbase demands EVE to handle. (2000-3000)
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 22:50:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Captain Futur3 on 13/12/2010 22:53:20
Originally by: DarkXale Edited by: DarkXale on 13/12/2010 22:42:46
Originally by: Captain Futur3 and that means? Unreal Tournament 2004 has better effects than what i see in eve...
Which is also because thats a game designed for a very low amount of actors. The Unreal engine is not designed to handle much more than 32 players, and 16 at most is "Recommended". If you want to support a massive amount of actors in a given scenario - complexity and detail takes a hit.
Global Agenda had to completely abandon its planned largescale warfare because of it - and work on releasing a completely separate game instead. It simply wasn't possible to get the unreal engine to work with the intended amount of players and objects. And that amount still only equals about 1/10 of what the playerbase demands EVE to handle. (2000-3000)
You are missing the point that effects are scalable with different level of details. If you see more than 16 *detailed* ships on your screen you most probably will have zoomed out and therefore the effects you see are less detailed (if well done). If you see more than 100 ships on your screen, this effect will be even stronger that means that an explosion looks very small because the ships are far away from you and the consequence will be that the explosion will be shown in a low level of detail. This is already integrated into the game by a very simple method. If you zoom max out, most objects will not be visible at all, or you will not see any weapon effects.
edit: I am a bit tired of hearing excuses why the effects are that bad in the game all the time. There is absolutely no reason except the work which has to be done by CCP to improve effects a lot. Nearly everyone i asked has a stady ~60fps all the time in game except some very seldom situations.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 23:06:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Crumplecorn In some cases what we actually need is the old effects.
Originally by: Triple Entendre If by 'new effects', you mean 'old effects (and engine trails)', I concur wholeheartedly.
- I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
hired goon
|
Posted - 2010.12.13 23:51:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Vaal Erit Really? Are you really comparing a 2D top down shooter to EVE? EVE should look more like this.
It's sad isn't it? We're fantasizing that Eve might be improved to look like something half a decade old.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 00:11:00 -
[16]
old cyno effect, engine trails, and the old cnr model, and I could die a happy plankton.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 00:54:00 -
[17]
Where are all the particle effects we were told about what, a couple or three years ago? Remember the NOS particle effect that was shown at the 2008(?) fanfest? Or the stargate particle effects that were accidentally left on SISI for a short while before Quantum Rise, and then were gone?
It seems CCP's effects team is only marginally more productive than their sound team (though we're looking at some pretty small magnitudes, so who could tell really). ...
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 02:59:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Vaal Erit Really? Are you really comparing a 2D top down shooter to EVE? EVE should look more like this.
To be fair, I never said I was comparing it to that game. What set me off is the particle physics engine that is showcased in that game and how CCP has mentioned that something similar was planed but never delivered! BTW, kick ass trailer, and thanks for reinforcing my point.
Originally by: DarkXale
Which is also because thats a game designed for a very low amount of actors. The Unreal engine is not designed to handle much more than 32 players, and 16 at most is "Recommended". If you want to support a massive amount of actors in a given scenario - complexity and detail takes a hit.
Global Agenda had to completely abandon its planned largescale warfare because of it - and work on releasing a completely separate game instead. It simply wasn't possible to get the unreal engine to work with the intended amount of players and objects. And that amount still only equals about 1/10 of what the playerbase demands EVE to handle. (2000-3000)
TBH, EVEs large fleet battles should not be in a discussion about graphics. IMHO i think the graphics engine on the client should auto scale depending on a combination of the amount of people in a bubble (that "the Grid" for the rest of us) and the capabilities of the your system. Just like when CCP folded both the premium client and the old client together , they need to expand on this concept and create a system the grows and shrinks dependent on the situation and the system its ran on.
My discussion is on maxing out the graphics and effects and then scaling it down from there. IMHO, CCP needs to reach for excellence on this one as EVE Online has always been know for its stunning beauty. It seems to me the Trinity graphics upgrade is showing its age and needs a little somethn' somethn' However, my main gripe is with the effects and not with the graphics engine as a whole (yet) i think it still has a few more expansions until an over haul is warranted. The effects, on the other hand, Need CPR ASAP!!!!
|
Snowmann
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 03:44:00 -
[19]
Changing things like effects usually causes a serious amount of whinnage. You can never make everyone happy and trying to normally ****es off everyone.
And then you have the guys who really don't care either way and only want to cause outrage, hence follows the trolls. They only get really ****ed when most people are happy. They are the "anti" in anti-matter.
Basically, you're right, but expect epic tears proportional to how much is changed.
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 11:53:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Snowmann Changing things like effects usually causes a serious amount of whinnage. You can never make everyone happy and trying to normally ****es off everyone.
And then you have the guys who really don't care either way and only want to cause outrage, hence follows the trolls. They only get really ****ed when most people are happy. They are the "anti" in anti-matter.
Basically, you're right, but expect epic tears proportional to how much is changed.
lol? You dont want to change the grafic of a 10 yar old game just because you think the grafic can get even worse? It is like if someone is redesigning the grafics of X-Wing in the year 2010 and you fear he can make it look worse. Also i disagree that "there are always some people who dont like the grafics". A counter example is crysis for example. I doubt that anyone thinks the grafics are bad.
|
|
Shurikane
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 12:20:00 -
[21]
You will crucify me for this, but on my wishlist is: "Turn EVE's combat experience into something approaching COD."
Put the pitchforks down! Lemme explain.
In COD, combat was a rather intense thing. You heard tank shells, and gunfire, and ricochets, and people yelling, and grenades, the sound of your breath, the rain - a massive overload of the senses that gave the whole thing a gritty feeling. This is in comparison to EVE where most turret sounds are muffled and the explosion of a battleship the size of Manhattan results in a tiny and somewhat anticlimactic little pop.
I remember the first time I got struck by missiles. I was a Gallente pilot - never had used them things, so the first time I saw a glowing ball headed for me and go "KA-BLAM!!" with a screenshake, I almost shat my pants and got the hell outta there. That's what I'm looking for. But not on just missiles.
- I want gunfire to be rocking. I want my guns to feel powerful. I don't want Star Wars pew-pew cannons, I want to railguns that look like they're firing a slug made of neutrons. I want blasters that look like they're unleashing a close-range explosion.
- I want my ship to look like it's taking punishment. I want to see its exterior dull as its armor gets eaten away. I want to see a part of the ship explode as the structure gets breached. I want to feel the urgency of my situation.
- I want screenshakes. Not just on missiles. I want a screenshake when I get a critical wrecking hit. I want to feel like I'm on the bridge of my ship and feeling whatever it feels.
- I want my in-space display to be on an in-game screen. I want to actually be on the bridge, inside my pod with a window so I can see crew working and a bay window that lets me see space in front of me. I want big hits to shake my display and stun me. I want to see the blinding ray of that doomsday device headed straight for me. I want a virtual ****pit affected by space around me.
Some of my wishes are possible. Some are impractical. Some are downright impossible. But I was on a roll.
|
Lump Hammer
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 12:21:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Crumplecorn In some cases what we actually need is the old effects.
Agreed. Bring back the blue whirly things that used to go round and round my Prowler!
|
Ak'athra J'ador
Amarr Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 12:34:00 -
[23]
oh yeah its time for new effects.
I mean the explosions are so crappy... a big ship should have smaller explosions first, then secondary, then going in half, there is so much you could do, cause the explosion effect really sucks right now.
also missiles salvos can be made far more awesome than a travelling light bulb.
|
YERMO
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 12:40:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Ak'athra J'ador oh yeah its time for new effects.
I mean the explosions are so crappy... a big ship should have smaller explosions first, then secondary, then going in half, there is so much you could do, cause the explosion effect really sucks right now.
also missiles salvos can be made far more awesome than a travelling light bulb.
meh...gimme old BS tracking and no sentry guns that sounds more like a winner
|
Captain Futur3
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 13:45:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Captain Futur3 on 14/12/2010 13:44:55 CCP: can you please confirm or deny if effects are in developement or not? Nearly all of the eve players i know and i think a lot of other people are very interested in this.
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 16:16:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Snowmann Changing things like effects usually causes a serious amount of whinnage. You can never make everyone happy and trying to normally ****es off everyone.
And then you have the guys who really don't care either way and only want to cause outrage, hence follows the trolls. They only get really ****ed when most people are happy. They are the "anti" in anti-matter.
Basically, you're right, but expect epic tears proportional to how much is changed.
This can be said for almost every change in game to date!
I don't see a point why this should be a deciding factor. "Haters going to Hate" Best thing is to leave them alone and let them hate!
|
Caphelo
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 16:35:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Xercodo
Originally by: Captain Futur3
Fact is that Eve effects are from 2003 like the backgrounds in all systems except wormholes and some exceptions like i dont know.
eh? they were all redone in Apocrypha....
Hardly. They made a new effect for wormholes and then used it for everything else too.
|
|
CCP StevieSG
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 16:37:00 -
[28]
Moved to Features and Ideas from EVE General.
|
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 16:39:00 -
[29]
Originally by: CCP StevieSG Moved to Features and Ideas from EVE General.
|
Skulldilocks
|
Posted - 2010.12.14 19:37:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Skulldilocks on 14/12/2010 19:37:03
Originally by: Vaal Erit Really? Are you really comparing a 2D top down shooter to EVE? EVE should look more like this.
EVE wishes it looked and felt that real. Instead we get
drones and fighters that orbit to shoot, even though their guns face forward
missiles that launch from the center of the ship even though many ships have launchers on the model turret effects that are completely uninspiring (the projectile and hybrids specifically, lasers are OK),
Poorly textured ships with no thought to scale. Notice how EVERYTHING is textured at the same resolution, even your guns. Just zoom in on your turrets and you'll see how detailed it is, but the ship its anchored to looks terrible at that zoom. Capital ships, especially titans, look terrible up close and zoomed in as well.
Bland backgrounds, everywhere you go its the same boring cloud. Can we get black space for once please?
TLDR: EVE NEEDS A NEW PHYSICS AND GRAPHICS ENGINE, NOT AN OVERHAUL
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |