Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
528
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 18:31:08 -
[31] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:It's a mixed bag at the moment.
< detailed comments >
Thank you for taking the care and time to be specific. Feedback this specific is the most helpful to our art team.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 18:49:20 -
[32] - Quote
CCP Huskarl wrote:Hey pilots
I just want to give you a heads up on the issues related to the PBR (physically based rendering) conversion. I think there is no doubt that PBR gives us a much better and more realistic overall lighting in EVE. The ships feel more integrated into the scene since the reflection from the nebula has energy now and is actually lightening up the ships, the materials can look and behave very realistic as you can see with the Amarr gold for instance or the bright fresnel on some of the metals.
However there are some issues that we are fully aware of and are working hard to fix. The textures we are using were not made for PBR and it was a massive undertaking for the art team in a relatively short time to convert the textures and we will need to revisit a lot of them in the future. I-¦m aware of a lot of issues with some of the factions like for instance Sansha that was tweaked before we got the oil part of the PBR shader working properly. We plan to revisit all of them in the future and will look for feedback on the forums.
We are also looking into the "washed out" look and lack of sharpness as well as the dirt and scuffing on the ships looks very rough and flat. We have made some progress there and we will have to work out the best way to implement that as soon as possible.
07 Huskarl
Awesome! My wish was answered :) Glad to know CCP is keeping an eye on player feedback with regards to the issue.
CCP Darwin wrote:
Overall, feedback on PBR has been quite positive.
However, I do have to wonder if you guys have read most of the reactions in the graphics feedback thread - 'quite positive' is not how I would describe it. |
Andreus Ixiris
Duty. Circle-Of-Two
5069
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 19:10:59 -
[33] - Quote
CCP Huskarl wrote:Hey pilots
I just want to give you a heads up on the issues related to the PBR (physically based rendering) conversion. I think there is no doubt that PBR gives us a much better and more realistic overall lighting in EVE. The ships feel more integrated into the scene since the reflection from the nebula has energy now and is actually lightening up the ships, the materials can look and behave very realistic as you can see with the Amarr gold for instance or the bright fresnel on some of the metals.
However there are some issues that we are fully aware of and are working hard to fix. The textures we are using were not made for PBR and it was a massive undertaking for the art team in a relatively short time to convert the textures and we will need to revisit a lot of them in the future. I-¦m aware of a lot of issues with some of the factions like for instance Sansha that was tweaked before we got the oil part of the PBR shader working properly. We plan to revisit all of them in the future and will look for feedback on the forums.
We are also looking into the "washed out" look and lack of sharpness as well as the dirt and scuffing on the ships looks very rough and flat. We have made some progress there and we will have to work out the best way to implement that as soon as possible.
07 Huskarl Well the clear solution to this problem would simply be to scrub the release of PBR in Rhea and wait until the textures have been redone for PBR.
Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.
Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.
Andreus Ixiris > ...
Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
|
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union
185
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 19:22:39 -
[34] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Overall, feedback on PBR has been quite positive.
Most negative feedback on the forums has been in relation to the looks of specific ships or shared looks across individual factions, and those are the types of issues that we will focus on as we iterate. That feedback, particularly if it's presented specifically and clearly in relation to what details players feel don't work for them, can be very helpful.
Here's my specific feedback and spoiler alert, it's mostly not positive:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5273377#post5273377
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
529
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 19:38:57 -
[35] - Quote
Murkar Omaristos wrote:However, I do have to wonder if you guys have read most of the reactions in the graphics feedback thread - 'quite positive' is not how I would describe it.
I wasn't being a pollyanna.
My overall characterization of player response to the feature (not only from that feedback thread, but including it) is "quite positive about the feature in general, but making clear that there's lot of work to do on specific ships and factions to get where we'd like to be for the long run."
Of course, that qualification is an important one and I feel CCP Huskarl and I have been pretty clear that that's where we're headed.
EDIT:
Quote:Here's my specific feedback and spoiler alert, it's mostly not positive:
Your comments were exactly the kind of thing that we need at this point. Thanks for taking the time and effort to write them out in such detail.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Andreus Ixiris
Duty. Circle-Of-Two
5074
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 20:33:38 -
[36] - Quote
But seriously, Darwin, this very clearly seems like a feature you should hold off releasing until the visuals under PBR are satisfactory.
Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.
Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.
Andreus Ixiris > ...
Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
|
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 20:34:46 -
[37] - Quote
ok; thanks for the response! I tend to agree with what others are saying about the textures. CCP gets a lot of hate (and most of the time I think unwarranted given the quality of the game you guys have made). However I do think going ahead with this before textures are ready for PBR despite player feedback would be a poorly informed decision.
Only a small percentage of players are here on the forums - you will certainly hear a lot more if it's released on TQ, and it would be a shame to be scrambling to make changes due to negative feedback after the fact rather than waiting until all of the textures are ready and making PBR a really exceptional and well received update. |
Rhyme Bittern
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 21:36:16 -
[38] - Quote
As a side note, I like the new Paladin. The former glowing red of carthum ships always looked toy-ish to f the opposite of grand. The Absolution looked like a silly hot dog. The new darker hue of matte red is a positive change in that respect. |
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 21:42:34 -
[39] - Quote
yer the paladin does look super sexy |
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
493
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 00:29:58 -
[40] - Quote
I'd say I'm leaning more toward positive than negative.
Caldari ships are generally improved. Some VERY much so (Naga and Rokh). Guristas are as well, or at least the Gila looks better and that's the ship I spend all my time in.
Amarr gold is more gold looking. I really don't like the lightened "ivory" for reasons I went into earlier, but I have seen no one else complain about that. So maybe I am alone there. Popular impression of Amarr seems positive. Confessor will be one of the coolest looking ships in the game.
Minmatar is generally fine/sameish or improved, the Rupture actually doesn't look quite so terrible anymore. It's one of the worst looking and dated looking ships on TQ but the reskin on the test server helps it. We can actually see inside the Typhoon's mouth now, so that's cool. I'd like to see some more lights and texture details inside there to make it look more like the cool concept art that was done for it. The Fenrir and carriers are the main problem on the Minmatar side.
Gallente seems to be the main complaint from people. But taking a look on the test server again and they generally seem ok now. A little overboard on the chrome still on some ships. And the Vexor/Ishtar model looks really nasty. Globby normal map, and some surfaces that used to appear smooth now appear faceted/low poly. Maybe that's why I dislike like the Ishtar so much. Because the Eos and Sin actually don't look too bad.
Some of the pirate ships are upsetting people. Guess that's the main issue now.
I don't think they should hold PBR back from release. Hold it back just for some pirate factions and a few Gallente and Minmatar ships? Nah. Its an overall improvement. Ships pop out from the background better now. I don't feel like I'm straining my eyes so much when I look at my ship anymore. And just fly a ship around a space station and see how dated the stations look now in comparison.
|
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4006
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 02:40:56 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:However, across the range of hundreds of ships, they currently look pretty good, and each ship will at least meet our designers' minimum standard for that ship at release, while many will look much better. For most of us, "minimum standard" means at least on par with the current offering.
Quote:That doesn't mean that your favorite ship might not have lost an element of its look to which you've become attached. What it does mean is that you should offer your feelings about it, as you have here, and we'll iterate on ships as we can. I have. We have. But since you extended the offer, here's a re-cap: GÇó Mordus Legion ships should be matte black. GÇó Serpentis ships should be a semi-gloss black, not silver. Example. OK, perhaps not quite like this... GÇó Sansha ships should have the rainbow sheen currently present. GÇó Blood Raiders need a new colour scheme to accompany the crimson 'splatter' (black, crimson red and red running lights). GÇó Angels should have this colour scheme.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Inir Ishtori
Perkone Caldari State
65
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 02:42:34 -
[42] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote: Gallente seems to be the main complaint from people. But taking a look on the test server again and they generally seem ok now. A little overboard on the chrome still on some ships. And the Vexor/Ishtar model looks really nasty. Globby normal map, and some surfaces that used to appear smooth now appear faceted/low poly. Maybe that's why I dislike like the Ishtar so much. Because the Eos and Sin actually don't look too bad.
Some of the pirate ships are upsetting people. Guess that's the main issue now.
Ehh.. I'm on the opposite. The T1 lineup looks glorious right now. Chrome is good. In fact, chrome should be to Gallente what gold plating is to Amarr, making Gallente ships look more super funky high-tech with an alien touch and less like your typical sci-fi military ship you'd see at the Caldari side with their typical the dull paints. After all, Gallente is a Republic on top of it all, with some fairly wild fashions too, where certain aestethics are valued due to their representative role. Also, in my opinion, Vexor looks great right now - for the first time after all these years since the colour scheme debacle after the Trinity update.
Now about Gallente T2 lineup - yep, some stuff looks bad. Roden is okay(Phobos and Recon need more chrome, though), Ishkur looks really great, Sin is kinda okay, could be worse. The rest goes from sad to bad - every single Duvolle ship the former, Creodron with Ishtar and Imicus the latter.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4006
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 02:43:41 -
[43] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Your comments were exactly the kind of thing that we need at this point. Thanks for taking the time and effort to write them out in such detail. Did you guys stop following the other thread? There have been some lengthy and quite detailed write-ups including comparative screenshots posted there. But there hasn't been any dev interaction for quite some time now...
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Inir Ishtori
Perkone Caldari State
65
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 02:51:27 -
[44] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:CCP Darwin wrote:Your comments were exactly the kind of thing that we need at this point. Thanks for taking the time and effort to write them out in such detail. Did you guys stop following the other thread? There have been some lengthy and quite detailed write-ups including comparative screenshots posted there. But there hasn't been any dev interaction for quite some time now... They seem to be working instead of talking. Brutix was cleaned up a bit, Abaddon got some better hull structure, Myrmidon looks different, slightly cleaner. Sadly they alse seemed to have some chrome shine on a couple of ships |
|
CCP Darwin
C C P C C P Alliance
537
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 04:32:48 -
[45] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Did you guys stop following the other thread? There have been some lengthy and quite detailed write-ups including comparative screenshots posted there. But there hasn't been any dev interaction for quite some time now...
Actively interacting with the community is not a primary job responsibility for the EVE dev team. It's entirely on each of us how much or little we participate, though it's made clear to us that we're welcome if we would like to. So please don't assume that lack of a dev post means nobody's listening.
CCP Darwin GÇó Senior Technical Artist, EVE Online GÇó @mark_wilkins
|
|
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices Masters of Flying Objects
811
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 05:13:15 -
[46] - Quote
Thanks for the reply. Can you talk about the way sun ray effects only show up when the sun is in camera? Is it a defect or by design for now.
Thanks
If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide
See you around the universe.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4006
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 05:58:51 -
[47] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Actively interacting with the community is not a primary job responsibility for the EVE dev team (except, of course, for our hard-working community team.) It's entirely on each of us how much or little we participate, though it's made clear to us that we're welcome if we would like to. So please don't assume that lack of a dev post means nobody's listening. Ditto.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Worrff
Viziam Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 06:34:36 -
[48] - Quote
CCP Huskarl wrote:Hey pilots
I just want to give you a heads up on the issues related to the PBR (physically based rendering) conversion. I think there is no doubt that PBR gives us a much better and more realistic overall lighting in EVE. The ships feel more integrated into the scene since the reflection from the nebula has energy now and is actually lightening up the ships, the materials can look and behave very realistic as you can see with the Amarr gold for instance or the bright fresnel on some of the metals.
However there are some issues that we are fully aware of and are working hard to fix. The textures we are using were not made for PBR and it was a massive undertaking for the art team in a relatively short time to convert the textures and we will need to revisit a lot of them in the future. I-¦m aware of a lot of issues with some of the factions like for instance Sansha that was tweaked before we got the oil part of the PBR shader working properly. We plan to revisit all of them in the future and will look for feedback on the forums.
We are also looking into the "washed out" look and lack of sharpness as well as the dirt and scuffing on the ships looks very rough and flat. We have made some progress there and we will have to work out the best way to implement that as soon as possible.
07 Huskarl
All of this will be largely irrelevant for a lot of people.
Many players will be running with post-processing off to negate the annoying and nauseating effect of the new UI windows, as this is the only way to get the UI looking anything like it is now. This will inevitably reduce the quality of the shaders and rendering applied.
You may want to have a chat with your mates in the "crappy new UI" team to have them introduce an option to stick with current window scheme, so that all your work here is not made irrelevant, pointless and a complete waste of time.
Good luck with that, they have ignored everyone else.
|
Petra Hakaari
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
114
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 07:28:32 -
[49] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:CCP Huskarl, in his post, describes a number of details of ship look that he'd probably characterize as minor issues that he'd like to revisit over time after PBR's release. You largely agree on what the issues are, but you'd characterize them as game-breaking. Well, not game breaking, but really disappointing, i think we all rather see a finished product than some half done job, we've had bad experiences in the past regarding this type os strategy.
CCP Darwin wrote:That doesn't mean that your favorite ship might not have lost an element of its look to which you've become attached. What it does mean is that you should offer your feelings about it, as you have here, and we'll iterate on ships as we can. Phantasm: has lost the detail, the oil gleamy aura is gone... Paladin: so mux wax, where did the red go? Crow: why all the black? Windicator: its not black anymore :S Orthrus: has lost all its detail.
Basically the general feeling we get from all the ships (even the t1 amarr ships, basically) is that the textures are blurred, waxed and lost detail.
CCP Darwin wrote:However, across the range of hundreds of ships, they currently look pretty good, http://youtu.be/pWdd6_ZxX8c
CCP Darwin wrote:Overall, feedback on PBR has been quite positive. My man, have you been reading the same posts i have? Because all i read is "Yeah it might look good when you solve this and this and that and that other too".
And what most people is saying is also true, we here in the forums are just a bunch, and the ones among us in the forum that actually get into sisi its even smaller, so we are just saying that to spare the shitstorm that might come to the forums we humbly think that you should put PPBR on hold until you get the job right.
And if you want positive and specific feedback, you can read my opinion on just some ships on #1.
Because tities .
|
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
7223
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 09:40:18 -
[50] - Quote
Quote:http://youtu.be/pWdd6_ZxX8c PBR is an improvement, ask any 3D artist and game grapic designer out there. http://www.pbrt.org/
But it needs some textures, and they have to be reworked. And they were, and will be. They were, and they will be, its not like with your "AAA" titles, where you can just sit and cry because artist took the money and company fired him already or you wait for community update with MOD if game is modable.
Don't look any further for negative energy, you will find it by being lazy.
|
|
Petra Hakaari
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
114
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 09:50:38 -
[51] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:PBR is an improvement, ask any 3D artist and game grapic designer out there. I never said otherwise...
Bagrat Skalski wrote:But it needs some textures, and they have to be reworked. Thats all I'm saying, they need to be reworked before delivering the product.
Because tities .
|
Miyaki Ayu Chan
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 10:32:48 -
[52] - Quote
Dear CCP,
I am concerned about that you bring out the Update with those "new Graphics" on Tranquality Server on the 9th December with the actual graphics changes.
The reason for it is what I can explain in short examples and I think I speak for the most Players.
Beside of the Amarr Ships, which were highly rendered with the new Graphics and were almost perfectly done, the Minmatar Ships still look kinda like the same as before.
This was something I just wanted to mention.
Gallente Ships are almost perfect, but some Ships like the Kronos and stuffs still need some hard work.
To the Problems:
- Gallente Ships look quite better, but have rust on Ships. Why the hell should there be rust on the Ships, when those are built with the finest Ore's of the Universe, of which some of them are not even available on earth?
When EVE is Real, this can't be real.
- Caldari Ships have received a BIG DOWNGRADE in the Graphics. I beg you to just for a good example compare the Scorpion Navy Issue on Singularity and Tranquality and tell me, which of them looks Graphics updated the new Shine?
Definetely the old Shader.
So, dear CCP:
Please remove the Rust on the Ships because it's ugly, dumb and definetely not real.
Second and primarly complain and biggest mistake what CCP could do:
Don't update the Caldari Ships like this.
Get their old Shaders back or do it right.
How it is right now is a big Downgrade.
I'm sure you will hear many complains about that.
Well, Best Regards,
Miyaki Ayu Chan o/ |
Andreus Ixiris
Duty. Circle-Of-Two
5081
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 12:23:40 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:So please don't assume that lack of a dev post means nobody's listening. But that's what it can feel like when pretty much half the Test Server Feedback forum is telling you to drop PBR from Rhea and delay its release until work on the textures and shaders has allowed ships to reach graphical parity with their pre-PBR appearences.
Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.
Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.
Andreus Ixiris > ...
Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
|
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
7227
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 12:48:17 -
[54] - Quote
Quote:reach graphical parity with their pre-PBR appearences. Just no. That is not the point of applying PBR.
Don't look any further for negative energy, you will find it by being lazy.
|
Petra Hakaari
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
114
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 13:27:34 -
[55] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:Quote:reach graphical parity with their pre-PBR appearences. Just no. That is not the point of applying PBR. What he says can be udnerstood that he wants the ships to look the same way, and I think that's what you udnerstood, but what i think the man tries to say is the, at least, same level or quality, which they, clearly, don't have right now on sisi.
Because tities .
|
Claire Gally
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 13:30:30 -
[56] - Quote
CCP Huskarl wrote:I think there is no doubt that PBR gives us a much better and more realistic overall lighting in EVE.
No, just no. That's the theory about PBR, it is supposed to give a much better and more realistic overall lighting IF it's well-integrated. Which is not the case.
Launch up Sisi and watch for yourself.
In the meantime, PLEASE do NOT deploy that thing on TQ. Not until it looks good.
cheers, Claire |
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
7229
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 14:53:23 -
[57] - Quote
Quote:No, just no. That's the theory about PBR, it is supposed to give a much better and more realistic overall lighting IF it's well-integrated. Which is not the case.
It is well integrated, the issue is with certain ships and materials, but I think that after some tweaks they made until now even the worst looking textures on the ships in PBR look acceptable, even sansha without "oil spill". I say, bring it on, don't wait because of few ships that look different or not so shiny as they were.
Don't look any further for negative energy, you will find it by being lazy.
|
Shalashaska Adam
Partial Safety
46
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 15:11:46 -
[58] - Quote
I think it's a bit of a shame how everyone voicing their concerns here are being brushed off as emotional about a few ships, or not providing sufficient technical detail for CCP to care taking the feedback into account.
I wonder why anyone is here in this test server feedback forum in the first place, maybe perhaps they care about the game.
All I know is that come December 9th, this useless undetailed "non-specific" feedback is going to be all over GD, and corp ceos and vets alike will be running damage control with all the new members of eve to try and explain why CCP felt this graphic downgrade was justified. |
Shalashaska Adam
Partial Safety
46
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 15:12:52 -
[59] - Quote
doublepost |
PAPULA
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
33
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 15:53:10 -
[60] - Quote
CCP Huskarl wrote:However there are some issues that we are fully aware of and are working hard to fix. l Well machariel for example is very ugly using this new method, it's completely wrong in color. So i hope machariel will get same skin color / skin as on TQ.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |