Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
met worst
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:04:00 -
[31] - Quote
Avila Cracko wrote:The nebula's dark areas, the ones that are supposed to be unlit actually show all of the background stars. That's is killing 3D look of nebulaes and they are looking like wallpapers... Players wrote about that problem in Test Server Feedback forums for weeks but no one wants to talk to us... like some other problems too... We are a little disappointed with this. The nebulae should look as how they're shown in this video. They should definitely possess some depth to them. And we are disappointed with CCPs "communication" with players that are testing features on SiSi before releasing on TQ. We just want to show you the problems... and if you cant fix it... just say it... don't ignore us. If this is the biggest problem this week, I am happy for us all. |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
388
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:14:00 -
[32] - Quote
Sure, OP, you just write some code to make the 2D nebula textures 3D objects and position these objects at distances of actually several light-years. Hmm.... Maybe you could make nebulae a 3D cloud of particles, too, so that you can faintly see stars within the nebulae. So, yeah, you'd pretty much have to scrap the nebulae right now. I'm sure it'd be absolutely no problem. |
Velarra
Ghost Festival Naraka.
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:38:00 -
[33] - Quote
Oberine Noriepa wrote:2GB for the entire uncompressed pack really isn't so bad. Since there are 68 unique backgrounds now, you're looking at 29MB per background. There are plenty of GPUs that can handle this, so something like an optional download for the people who want and can run it is certainly realistic. The nebulae featured in the Crucible wallpapers are cube maps. They're static images and not the actual CG renders of the nebulae.
Client size is the only limiting factor on CCP's end. Offer an optional download and everyone will be happy. If anything, I would think that CCP would like to have an option like this available for those who want it since they put so much hard work into these backgrounds to begin with.
These optional downloads would be great, particularly with optional lighting settings in the client: Dark, Medium & Bright. As currently the once dark/black regions of space now seem rather patchy, greyish and washed out. |
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
180
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 15:36:00 -
[34] - Quote
Your ellipsis abuse is infuriating. It reminds me of those people who would talk with an odd rising inflection in their voice at the end of every sentence. |
Solstice Project
Cult of Personality
202
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 15:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:If you actually THINK for 2 seconds.....the programming code and video card power needed to generate all the Particle stuff for actual 3D Gas Nebulae so that YOU can be 'physically encompassed' by them.........I do not want to PAY for that.
Indeed a ridiculous WHINE here............................
THEY LOOK FREAKING FANTASTIC.
Well, actually, it wasn't a big problem to run one million particles on GeForce 6 Series already ... now scale that to modern times and you get something like this -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSWm_VImgFQ
Your argument bares any base. It's ******* easy to do volumetric clouds and it's not a hard effort for nowadays GPUs to render a million particles, which would already be enough for any amount of nebulaes on screen.
Ridiculous ... congratulations. |
Oberine Noriepa
227
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 16:17:00 -
[36] - Quote
Solstice Project wrote:Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:If you actually THINK for 2 seconds.....the programming code and video card power needed to generate all the Particle stuff for actual 3D Gas Nebulae so that YOU can be 'physically encompassed' by them.........I do not want to PAY for that.
Indeed a ridiculous WHINE here............................
THEY LOOK FREAKING FANTASTIC. Well, actually, it wasn't a big problem to run one million particles on GeForce 6 Series already ... now scale that to modern times and you get something like this -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSWm_VImgFQYour argument bares any base. It's ******* easy to do volumetric clouds and it's not a hard effort for nowadays GPUs to render a million particles, which would already be enough for any amount of nebulaes on screen. Ridiculous ... congratulations. I have Krixtal on ignore. Maybe you should do the same since they never have a clue as to what they're talking about.
Really, when we're talking about the depth of the nebulae, we're talking about this:
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Did I mention yet that the nebula's dark areas, the ones that are supposed to be unlit actually show the background stars?
Damn, someone messed up the alpha channels, ending up just turning black areas to transparent and now instead of dark dust obscuring stars they instead show everything behind.
Watch this video and look at the Gallente nebula. See those dark brown sections? In that video, they're very opaque, thus giving the nebula a good sense of depth. Now look at the same nebula on Singularity. Those brown sections are completely transparent when they shouldn't be. I mean, sure, it's perfectly okay to see stars in front of the nebula now that we have the new star field that shows nearby stars, but background stars should be blocked out, and in this case, they aren't.
Also notice the muddy nebula texture in that screenshot. I hate it. That muddiness is exactly why I want that 2GB nebula pack. |
Avila Cracko
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 17:44:00 -
[37] - Quote
Oberine Noriepa wrote:Solstice Project wrote:Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:If you actually THINK for 2 seconds.....the programming code and video card power needed to generate all the Particle stuff for actual 3D Gas Nebulae so that YOU can be 'physically encompassed' by them.........I do not want to PAY for that.
Indeed a ridiculous WHINE here............................
THEY LOOK FREAKING FANTASTIC. Well, actually, it wasn't a big problem to run one million particles on GeForce 6 Series already ... now scale that to modern times and you get something like this -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSWm_VImgFQYour argument bares any base. It's ******* easy to do volumetric clouds and it's not a hard effort for nowadays GPUs to render a million particles, which would already be enough for any amount of nebulaes on screen. Ridiculous ... congratulations. I have Krixtal on ignore. Maybe you should do the same since they never have a clue as to what they're talking about. Really, when we're talking about the depth of the nebulae, we're talking about this: Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Did I mention yet that the nebula's dark areas, the ones that are supposed to be unlit actually show the background stars?
Damn, someone messed up the alpha channels, ending up just turning black areas to transparent and now instead of dark dust obscuring stars they instead show everything behind. Watch this video and look at the Gallente nebula. See those dark brown sections? In that video, they're very opaque, thus giving the nebula a good sense of depth. Now look at the same nebula on Singularity. Those brown sections are completely transparent when they shouldn't be. I mean, sure, it's perfectly okay to see stars in front of the nebula now that we have the new star field that shows nearby stars, but background stars should be blocked out, and in this case, they aren't. Also notice the muddy nebula texture in that screenshot. I hate it. That muddiness is exactly why I want that 2GB nebula pack.
Thnx... maybe ppl will understand you... |
Jack Tronic
borkedLabs
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 18:16:00 -
[38] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:If you actually THINK for 2 seconds.....the programming code and video card power needed to generate all the Particle stuff for actual 3D Gas Nebulae so that YOU can be 'physically encompassed' by them.........I do not want to PAY for that.
Indeed a ridiculous WHINE here............................
THEY LOOK FREAKING FANTASTIC.
It's incredibly cheap and easy to simulate nebulaes, you don't even have to simulate every single last freaking atom in them which for some reason you assume. Otherwise how do you think other game's do smoke effects? They don't simulate down to atom's. It's just a mix of maths. |
Covert Kitty
SRS Industries SRS.
55
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 19:25:00 -
[39] - Quote
Quote:Also, we didn't realize that the nebula's are 13 billion lightyears away, and that is why we can see all the stars of the galaxy in the dark areas. Not sure if you were attempting to troll. The entire diameter of the milky way is just 100k ly across. The crab nebula is about 6500 ly away from earth, and about 11ly in diameter. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1024
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 19:33:00 -
[40] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Denidil wrote:you realize that stars can be in front of the dust lanes right? No, we didn't realize that. Also, we didn't realize that the nebula's are 13 billion lightyears away, and that is why we can see all the stars of the galaxy in the dark areas.
nebulae are not necessarily at the edge of the known universe meight |
|
Oberine Noriepa
227
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 21:11:00 -
[41] - Quote
Andski wrote:Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Denidil wrote:you realize that stars can be in front of the dust lanes right? No, we didn't realize that. Also, we didn't realize that the nebula's are 13 billion lightyears away, and that is why we can see all the stars of the galaxy in the dark areas. nebulae are not necessarily at the edge of the known universe meight I think he was being sarcastic. |
Krixtal Icefluxor
Bison - Ammatar Thunder
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 00:57:00 -
[42] - Quote
Avila Cracko wrote:Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:If you actually THINK for 2 seconds.....the programming code and video card power needed to generate all the Particle stuff for actual 3D Gas Nebulae so that YOU can be 'physically encompassed' by them.........I do not want to PAY for that.
Indeed a ridiculous WHINE here............................
THEY LOOK FREAKING FANTASTIC. what particle??? only thing that can use more power is if solid color use more power then transparent...
You know nothng of coding. OMG He Spent His Free-áAURUM ! God is simply-áthe very extraordinary power of the Universe to organize Itself as percieved.
-á- Lee Smolin "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" |
Amro One
One.
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 01:04:00 -
[43] - Quote
Can I have your stuff? |
Avila Cracko
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 09:37:00 -
[44] - Quote
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:Avila Cracko wrote:Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:If you actually THINK for 2 seconds.....the programming code and video card power needed to generate all the Particle stuff for actual 3D Gas Nebulae so that YOU can be 'physically encompassed' by them.........I do not want to PAY for that.
Indeed a ridiculous WHINE here............................
THEY LOOK FREAKING FANTASTIC. what particle??? only thing that can use more power is if solid color use more power then transparent... You know nothng of coding.
And you know nothing of basic usage of PC... you know what are alpha channels??? that's only messed up here... |
tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
Morganta wrote:tiberiusric wrote:I must admit the nebs do just look like pictures stuck in space, they dont look immersive, or cloud dusty. I thought you was supposed to be able to fly into them and be covered, it snot that case. sadly another half assed finished feature...nothing changes eh lol, expectations are your problem it was never to be what you said its designed to look better and retain its relative positioning as you travel, so you appear to be traveling in respect to the background, and not traveling in a skybox. IE if you move lightyears closer to a feature of a neb, it should appear that way in space
I think you need to go view the art dept youtube video again then. Im sorry it looks so unrealistic, obviously im not the only one that thinks that. Also i really cant understand why everyone is tugging themselves, this is nothing new at all, nebs in spaces games have been out for years, CCP are just 5 years behind! You need to get out more :) I mean sorry but Galaxy on Fire 2 on a bloody smart phone looks better space wise! Sorry but it does! even X3 looked better and that was 5 years ago! I dont mean to put a dampner on it but seriously get a grip, in year 2011 game graphics have moved in massively, eve is still way behind... |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
406
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:19:00 -
[46] - Quote
Pictures or it didnt happen becuase I have no idea what shes ratting on.
Aside from that I am extremly glad CCP took screen captures of the models instead of having us RENDER said models. Shivers at the thought of the 400mb scene captures they had to deal with, which means the real model is somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple terrabytes large.
Also Planets in X3 are flat, not real models there is no way you can crash into them if you wanted to.
|
tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:22:00 -
[47] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Pictures or it didnt happen becuase I have no idea what shes ratting on.
Aside from that I am extremly glad CCP took screen captures of the models instead of having us RENDER said models. Shivers at the thought of the 400mb scene captures they had to deal with, which means the real model is somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple terrabytes large.
Maybe you should get into the year 2011? Rather than 1990? |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
406
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:23:00 -
[48] - Quote
err.. meants to say 400gigs.
Also this is stuff you cannot simply have downloaded on the harddrive and have it load up into the client as you play you would simply not have the memory like some of the developers fun toys do.
|
tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:33:00 -
[49] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:err.. meants to say 400gigs.
Also this is stuff you cannot simply have downloaded on the harddrive and have it load up into the client as you play you would simply not have the memory like some of the developers fun toys do.
You do realise that games have moved on now dont you? For instance both my MW3 and BF3 installations are nearlying 14GB each?! This is the norm now (sadly) but it is. The reason for that is that they are using 'state of the art' technology and graphics... i wont be surprised in next couple of years everything will be on bluray discs and installations be 20,30gb. Times have moved on, its about time CCP and EVE did..There is no excuse anymore about games being MMOs, none at all. People have much larger internet connections, ,much more powerful PCs. Every other MMO manages, why doesnt EVE? Reason because they are still using old technology and old techniques, and sadly STILL continue to do so. Tell me how the hell can a smartphone game as in GOTF2 look better than eve? and thats on a bloody smartphone which has none of the power of a pc.
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
406
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:44:00 -
[50] - Quote
lets see.
You want ships with 500mb shadowmaps there are about 610 models now so thats 305 gigs there of infomration
Then the captures are 400gigs each with 80 regions total that puts us at 36.8 terrabytes.
|
|
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
83
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 13:46:00 -
[51] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:lets see.
You want ships with 500mb shadowmaps there are about 610 models now so thats 305 gigs there of infomration
Then the captures are 400gigs each with 80 regions total that puts us at 36.8 terrabytes.
sounds reasonable. |
tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 14:01:00 -
[52] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:lets see.
You want ships with 500mb shadowmaps there are about 610 models now so thats 305 gigs there of infomration
Then the captures are 400gigs each with 80 regions total that puts us at 36.8 terrabytes.
Strange how other MMOs and games manage to do it is it, whos doing it wrong? Stop coming out with stupid stats like this. Perhaps you should load up battlefield 3, take a look at 2011 |
Cedar Locus
Superfission
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 14:02:00 -
[53] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:fully agreed. hopefully it's fixed over time, but it's a half-assed job now and a wasted of potential
you mean eve or the nebula's? |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
407
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:23:00 -
[54] - Quote
I spat out those numbers to give you guys an inkling what the art tech department job is. Its to turn those massive numbers into something crunchable. So instead of our computers dealing with 400gb captures we are dealing with probably 10mb '.png'-ish quality maps instead.
In house resources will always be nearly impossible to run on homecomputers at least on the required 60fps and as fantastic as they look for thier trailers that alot of companies enjoy rendering.
Battlefield 3 is by far one of the biggest graphics cheaters out there. Why else do you think everything in BF3 looks like it belongs in memory lane scene or slice of heaven movie? Its a nice way to hide alot of imperfections it has. Turn that off and BF3 gets ugly real fast. Also another thing you'll probably wont notice in BF3, the eyes are static they dont blink becuase there are no bones for it. Other games like mass effect accounts for eyelids at least. BF3 is just a real good shining example of 2006 over glorified again.
Its all mearly cost for effect, why bother with eyelids when people arent going to be looking that close anyways? Same reason why you dont model every thread and hair on somones skull.
All games do this by the way, they all cheat, they cheat thier original resources to make them operable on computers you and I can afford.
Whole reason why the several thousand polygonal characters alot of games have in the in house resource are around 200 polys on your end software they use the original source to help create the cheats, normal/bumb maps, shadowmaps, light maps, HD textures, all infinetly cheaper resoruce way to project extended complexity.
Also other mmos get it wrong all the time just have to look for it. Most notorius things alot of mmos gets wrong, clipping. Then again I think thats every game in existence.
There are very few engines out there that allows a modder to turn around and try to match inhouse resources and make thier own computers cry for mercy, besedea comes to mind along with crytek. But even then they start hitting engine limits as well.
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
167
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
tiberiusric wrote: I think you need to go view the art dept youtube video again then. Im sorry it looks so unrealistic, obviously im not the only one that thinks that. Also i really cant understand why everyone is tugging themselves, this is nothing new at all, nebs in spaces games have been out for years, CCP are just 5 years behind! You need to get out more :) I mean sorry but Galaxy on Fire 2 on a bloody smart phone looks better space wise! Sorry but it does! even X3 looked better and that was 5 years ago! I dont mean to put a dampner on it but seriously get a grip, in year 2011 game graphics have moved in massively, eve is still way behind...
+1111
I agree.. dude you must be right, Eve looks terrible. I bet you have some nebula work that will show them how it's done. I mean, the ones that scale on an MMO like eve.
Please show me more of your incredible artwork! You have a DA portfolio to highlight your experience right? |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
407
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 17:32:00 -
[56] - Quote
Unlike some other poster I'm willing to throw down the towel and I am happy to annouce that my own nebulas suck.
Proof
also for that matter how many of these other better looking games allows you to at least give you the illusion you are going thought these backgrounds, Last time I checked they're all static with no chance in hek you'd ever fly though em.
Ill mention it with X3 again, you cant crash into that planet no matter how time dialted you inflate your plank bubble.
|
Oberine Noriepa
227
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 19:54:00 -
[57] - Quote
No one is asking for the game to render the actual nebula models, because that would be insane and/or impossible to run unless you were using a Cray supercomputer or something similar.
See below:
Really, when we're talking about the depth of the nebulae, we're talking about this:
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:Did I mention yet that the nebula's dark areas, the ones that are supposed to be unlit actually show the background stars?
Damn, someone messed up the alpha channels, ending up just turning black areas to transparent and now instead of dark dust obscuring stars they instead show everything behind.
Watch this video and look at the Gallente nebula. See those dark brown sections? In that video, they're very opaque, thus giving the nebula a good sense of depth. Now look at the same nebula on Singularity. Those brown sections are completely transparent when they shouldn't be. I mean, sure, it's perfectly okay to see stars in front of the nebula now that we have the new star field that shows nearby stars, but background stars should be blocked out, and in this case, they aren't.
Also notice the muddy nebula texture in that screenshot. I hate it. That muddiness is exactly why I want that 2GB nebula pack.
Furthermore on an uncompressed nebula pack:
I want a optional high quality nebulae pack, please.
I posted this in the other thread ("The new nebulae."):
Ranger 1 wrote:Considering those are screen shots done with a top of the line video card, I'd say optional is not an option. See below:
CCP t0rfifrans wrote:So you will be downloading 201 megs, which are then compressed, I can't tell you the exact compressed size at this time. The maps were authored at twice the resolution we are delivering them in, and they are compressed. Ofc, they look much better uncompressed and in full resolution, so we might offer those as an optional download at some point in the future, for the die hard astronomy addicts with space on their hard drives and video ram to spare.
CCP Atropos wrote:When they went in initially, raw from the rendering farm, they were about 2GB in size, which caused a few issues in client size 2GB for the entire uncompressed pack really isn't so bad. Since there are 68 unique backgrounds now, you're looking at 29MB per background. There are plenty of GPUs that can handle this, so something like an optional download for the people who want and can run it is certainly realistic. The nebulae featured in the Crucible wallpapers are cube maps. They're static images and not the actual CG renders of the nebulae.
Client size is the only limiting factor on CCP's end. Offer an optional download and everyone will be happy. If anything, I would think that CCP would like to have an option like this available for those who want it since they put so much hard work into these backgrounds to begin with. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
412
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 20:04:00 -
[58] - Quote
Oberine thank you for pointing out what I asked for several posts back. Pictures.
The fact i didnt see this as a problem until pointed out however may just been me.
Now that I do see the problem and if i recall right the star sphere is a seperate layer form the nebula one. I am not sure how'd they go about fixing this to the point that it looks right but Im sure they could possibly do something tweak a spectrum map of the star sphere to that stars that arent near light soruces be more visible than those that arent. Like the ones way far away from the nebulas.
This would require some recoding and relaying the star layer but none the less should be a much more doable episode than a new background per constellation/solar system episode.
|
Echo Falls
Adherents of the Repeated Meme
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 20:16:00 -
[59] - Quote
You can't have the stars behind the nebula any more than you can have them in front.
Why?
Because "some" of them are in the nebula, and some are not. The game engine renders two wrappable layers and overlays them so you can zoom in and out etc.
If I am for example in Luminere I would see "some" of the stars inside the nebula but most of the rest outside.
So the game engine would have to recalculate all of the stars per system relative to a flat render of a nebula.
But guess what? Nebulae are not flat so depending on where you are inside the nebula then other stars would be hidden depending on the protrusion of the cloud.
I can think of better things for the dev's to be doing to be honest. |
Zakuak
Dark Star Confederation The Ancients.
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 20:28:00 -
[60] - Quote
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:Nova Fox wrote:lets see.
You want ships with 500mb shadowmaps there are about 610 models now so thats 305 gigs there of infomration
Then the captures are 400gigs each with 80 regions total that puts us at 36.8 terrabytes. sounds reasonable.
^^ LMFAO |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |