I saw nothing about impacts to FPS. What about FPS? I really did not like it when in the Sisi mass tests my fps dropped to 2.

When will PBR be added to T3 cruisers, stations and other structures?

I saw nothing about impacts to FPS. What about FPS? I really did not like it when in the Sisi mass tests my fps dropped to 2.

Hey! I don't know if this is the right place, but I'd love to have more info about the artistic job on those ships. They look fabulous !
Did the art team had to re-author specular textures in terms of roughness/metalness like in Unreal Engine 4 or did you manage to take those and plug them "as it" in your new renderer ?

"dynamic dirt levels (older ships showing their age?)"

YES PLEASE! I can also think this would allow dynamic damage on the hull, right?

On the dirty ships idea, I've always thought about what EVE would be like with a system that allowed a ship to "get old". Sort of like that trusty Corellian freighter that looks like crap but can still make the Kessel run in only 18 parsecs! It's not a gamechanger, but I think it would add a whole new dimension to ship ownership. It's the little things that make me excite! :)

(I've also asked this on reddit...)

I've taken a look at the resource files on Sisi and I have a few questions:

• What is the *_ap.dds texture? An albedo map + some kind of mask?
• The *_pgs.dds files are now *_pgr.dds files. What is the "R" channel that replaced the specular map? (Roughness?)
• The *.black files are gone, so where are the material definitions?

Once upon a time there was a Dev Blog that gave a nice breakdown:
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/art-blog-improvement-of-textures-and-a-new-scorpion-model/

I'm just wondering. There are a lot of people who like to use Eve assets in 3D projects and the new models are too beautiful to pass on!

I guess you can say that the new light modeling looks pretty... Schlick.

I mean the *_ap.dds files, just like I said...

http://i.imgur.com/0wSxcG1.png

I do understand that large models (capital ships, etc) have ambient occulsion maps in the *_ao.dds files. But, smaller ships do not. All ships using PBR have the *_ap.dds files.

Those files have greyscale texture data on the RGB channels with some colored data for "weathering" and fine painted details (as seen in the image I linked), and a mask for said fine painted details in the alpha channel.

That is a little strange formula for BRDF.
Second part look like Beckmann distribution, but were is 'e' it thats case? And whole top part is seems like oversimplified, isn't it should be e^(((n.h)^2-1)/C^4*(n.h)^2)? Assuming that C^4 = roughness^2?

And the third part kinda looks like Cook-Torrance geometric function (because using 'min'), but also look strange.
So, i'm just curious, what distribution/geometry term did you use?

(I've also asked this on reddit...)

I've taken a look at the resource files on Sisi and I have a few questions:

• What is the *_ap.dds texture? An albedo map + some kind of mask?
• The *_pgs.dds files are now *_pgr.dds files. What is the "R" channel that replaced the specular map? (Roughness?)
• The *.black files are gone, so where are the material definitions?

Once upon a time there was a Dev Blog that gave a nice breakdown:
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/art-blog-improvement-of-textures-and-a-new-scorpion-model/

I'm just wondering. There are a lot of people who like to use Eve assets in 3D projects and the new models are too beautiful to pass on!

And finally the black files for ships are all gone because all of this data moved into the SOF, as explained in this devblog!

Sooo, i had just looked at those same ships on SiSi moments before i read that blog....

While i was looking at the new ships i kept saying, that looks nothing like it...the one i'm seeing has no color minus a few spots...

Then my borther looks at them on his PC...his looks MUCH different....so we compare graphics settings...

As it was, most ships looked absolutely terribad on my PC...with these settings (note, not exactly 'everything at lowest possible' )

A-A = medium
P-P = Low
Shader = Medium
Texture = High
LOD = High
Shadow = Low
Interior EFX = Medium
Interior Shader = Low

---
Now once i changed everything to max did the ships look decent. Brutix still looks like i'm flying a chrome Christmas tree ornament.

I'm sorry, but did you even consider those of us that don't run our clients on full max GFX settings before you made the non-full versions? Very disappointed.

--
Okay, so i narrowed the biggest "ugliness" culprit down....its the "shader quality"

With everything else set on "high"...here is what happens with the model when changing "shader quality" from high-medium-low....something is off here....

High
Medium
Low

Maybe someone (i don't know, maybe the Imbedded QA????) should test their stuff before saying its 'done'. Good form CCP.

I suspect it is like this for numerous other ships as well. But since i'm paying you (CCP) to test these sort of things while you are developing them...and not the other way around...i have other things more important to do.

Would you folks care to give us a list of all the maps (and specific channels/masks) and other files you guys are using to texture with?

I smell a min spec increase on its way.

This just in:

CCP Vertex has to explain to a rude player that Low and Medium graphics settings don't look at good as high graphics settings.

Patience of a Saint...

If calling someone out because it looks like they did not do their job is considered rude...i can live with that.

Also, re-read the underlined parts...and look at the pics again...i think you missed those the first time around. I wasn't complaining that "low and medium graphics look worse than high"...of course they will...i was merely pointing out that the Low actually has more texture and color than the Medium, which seems bassackwards to me.

Strange effects with shadows in gas clouds earlier on. I saw the shadow of an asteroid on the gas cloud with a zone of no shadow in between.

It seems that it is just the gallente hulls that have this issue. Have you even considered this?

Instead of pulling out your soap box and telling all the dissidents to bugger off with their opinions (essentially that is your tone), why don't you take some time to see what the problem we are actually seeing is...

Found this gem when I was going to my recent screenshots... I know they say its not done yet as they only released like 1/3 of a full graphics system upgrade, but this just looks wrong.

The responses CCP have given from the start have been "well if you don't like the setting, don't use it"...while he was trying to tell them something looked wrong with the setting, not that he 'didn't like it', but that something looked wrong. Apparently, all while they were already internally aware to some extent and were 'talking about' working on it. Yet, it wasn't until the final response that they actually answered that the issue with the gallente hulls is something they are talking about working on.