These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Oceanus Graphics Feedback

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#41 - 2014-09-04 09:15:47 UTC
Enrique Castillo wrote:
Can we please get the UI to say "cloak engaged" when turned on and "cloak disengaged" when turned off. Big smileBig smileQuestionAttention


I don't know about others, but that would annoy the hell out of me with all the deliberate cloaking and decloaking I do.
Durzel
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#42 - 2014-09-04 10:14:41 UTC
shutupandtakemymoney.jpg

I've been lusting after better wormhole visualisations since Apocrypha came out. The fact astute people can tell roughly what region they go to felt like a rewarding progression in w-space life. I really LOVE the idea that we have to learn where wormholes go from visuals alone, without hand-holding "show infos". In fact, the less information available on it the better.
CCP Sledgehammer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#43 - 2014-09-04 10:15:31 UTC
Clavo wrote:
Some ships on test server are transparent while docked. After undocking and redocking they are OK until you make active another ship.

Ships


Yeah we're looking into this now, cheers!

Graphical QA Analyst | EVE Quality Assurance | Team TriLambda
CCP Sledgehammer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#44 - 2014-09-04 10:16:58 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
I know that this isn't directly related to the OP, but you your title wasn't very specific. One thing I've noticed since the improved lighting was introd a few patches back (around the January time frame I think?) is that jaggies have become a lot worse. Almost every ship I've tried this on looks horrible in the new system. I have a GTX 670 running everything at max, so the likely hood of it being my system is not very high, but do you have any thoughts as to why things look so bad?


As it stands, our AA works on the geometry of the model only, rather than the textures as well. The linear lighting introduced better lighting, which has shown this up a bit more.

Graphical QA Analyst | EVE Quality Assurance | Team TriLambda
CCP Sledgehammer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#45 - 2014-09-04 10:18:28 UTC
Thead Enco wrote:
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Hi everyone!

Oceanus, in it's infant stages, is now live on Singularity. As some of you have already discovered, we have some tasty new graphical effects for you!
[img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/forums/EVE/Oceanus.png[/img]

  • New cloaking effect! This is currently a variable effect depending on your shader settings, but on High you will see an awesome, hex-based cloaking field spreading from a random point on your ship until you are fully engulfed, and invisible to third parties.

  • New wormhole effects! In addition to the classic nebulae visualisations that you could use to predict roughly in which region the wormhole exited, wormholes will now feature new visual clues as to the upper limit of mass that they can transmit as well as new distortion and ribbon effects.

  • A new LOD system! Instead of seeing ships pop-in at the appropriate detail level, they will be loaded with Low level of detail, then stream up to the appropriate level. This is very pertinent to the next point.

  • The Space Object Factory! This is a radical reworking of the way in which the client loads and handles objects in space, and is currently only in use for ships. More info to come in a Devblog soon.
    • What this means for you: If the Space Object Factory is working correctly, then you should see no aesthetic difference in any of the ships you fly. We have had to do some minor updates to certain ships, but this system will create uniformity in general across factions and significantly increase flexibility for adding anything that affects ships aesthetically.



If you see any green Apocalypses or red Brutixes then the system is not working correctly, so I'd like to ask people to be mindful of this and please submit a bug report.

The same goes for the other changes I've mentioned.

Hope you enjoy all this amazing new eye candy! We're really looking forwards to your feedback!

Sledge.


Nice, But Sov Revamp? Idea


That would be something for Game Design teams, not the Graphics team.

Graphical QA Analyst | EVE Quality Assurance | Team TriLambda
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#46 - 2014-09-04 10:35:05 UTC
Looks great. Takes a bit long.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Durzel
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#47 - 2014-09-04 10:47:26 UTC
Any chance of a better looking WH jump animation too? The current one is pretty underwhelming compared to the new gate jump visual (I know that's a controversial subject).

A much shortened of this, for example, would be awesome!
Fonac
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2014-09-04 11:06:35 UTC
Awesome cloak effect! - As someone who uses cloaks alot, this is a welcome change... The fact that you can see your ship, while cloaked is very usefull.


A question regarding the ongoing graphic improvements... What about Smoke? - Some complex sites, has extensive smoke features. This cripples almost all pc's.

I myself is running with a Gigabyte 780, 1ghz clocked version, on a 2560x1440, resolution screen. Usually i'm hovering at the 60 fps mark, on all other situations, than in sites, where i sometimes dip below 20 fps.

There was some talk, a while ago, that a button could disable smoke, but appearently it didn't make it past QA.


O/
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#49 - 2014-09-04 11:13:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Thead Enco wrote:
Nice, But Sov Revamp? Idea

That would be something for Game Design teams, not the Graphics team.


I for one am curious to see what sort of revamp would happen if Team TriLambda & Friends were to be turned loose with pens and paper (or markers and whiteboards) and allowed to design a whole new sov mechanic based on just whatever they wanted.

To be more on-topic though, am I correct to assume that the new concentric circles are the mass indicator and that larger amounts/sizes of circles would correspond to higher mass limits?
CCP Sledgehammer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#50 - 2014-09-04 11:19:34 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Thead Enco wrote:
Nice, But Sov Revamp? Idea

That would be something for Game Design teams, not the Graphics team.


I for one am curious to see what sort of revamp would happen if Team TriLambda & Friends were to be turned loose with pens and paper (or markers and whiteboards) and allowed to design a whole new sov mechanic based on just whatever they wanted.

To be more on-topic though, am I correct to assume that the new concentric circles are the mass indicator and that larger amounts/sizes of circles would correspond to higher mass limits?


Ach I don't want to spoil the sense of discovery for you guys!

Graphical QA Analyst | EVE Quality Assurance | Team TriLambda
Felo Maxun
Felmax Trade Inc
#51 - 2014-09-04 12:51:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Felo Maxun
Whats the likelihood of wrecks (the most visually broken part of eve IMO) being looked at as part of Oceanus ?

Obviously high res models of destroyed ships isn't on the cards, but using the low poly models (used in the LOD system you have mentioned) with a bit of black pain on would be a step forward :)
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2014-09-04 13:54:24 UTC
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Thead Enco wrote:
Nice, But Sov Revamp? Idea

That would be something for Game Design teams, not the Graphics team.


I for one am curious to see what sort of revamp would happen if Team TriLambda & Friends were to be turned loose with pens and paper (or markers and whiteboards) and allowed to design a whole new sov mechanic based on just whatever they wanted.

To be more on-topic though, am I correct to assume that the new concentric circles are the mass indicator and that larger amounts/sizes of circles would correspond to higher mass limits?


Ach I don't want to spoil the sense of discovery for you guys!


Will we be able to tell all of them appart on lowest details level?

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
CCP Sledgehammer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#53 - 2014-09-04 14:27:46 UTC
Max Kolonko wrote:
Will we be able to tell all of them appart on lowest details level?


Yes.

Graphical QA Analyst | EVE Quality Assurance | Team TriLambda
Harkin Issier
Lethal Devotion
#54 - 2014-09-04 14:37:28 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Speed up the animation. It's an amazing animation and it's what cloaking probably should have been all this time, but it should be about 20% faster. No, I'm not making a pony joke.

The second thing: Having tried out the various shader quality settings, I see how the cloak effect works. The ship fades to wireframe with a swirly white effect going around which (at high shaders) is diffused through the hexagonal "bubbles".

My second suggestion is that you cut the brightness of the white swirly bit by about half. With that, your ship (and the effect) should still be clearly visible to you (moreso than now, even) without the brightness being distracting or jarring or feeling totally out-of-place with the idea of being cloaked and invisible.


I'll disagree on the animation speed. I love how slow it is.

Totally agreed on making the ship more visible with lower brightness. Right now the "cloaked" effect is obnoxiously visible. Tone it down closer to the old one (in brightness, not in complexity/style) so we actually feel less visible rather than highlighted.
Sir Constantin
#55 - 2014-09-04 14:37:30 UTC
The new cloack effect is awesome but it should be used as a transtion from visible to invisible.

Currently it looks kinda weird, like your ship is packaged in a bubble wrap.
Valterra Craven
#56 - 2014-09-04 14:42:51 UTC
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
I know that this isn't directly related to the OP, but you your title wasn't very specific. One thing I've noticed since the improved lighting was introd a few patches back (around the January time frame I think?) is that jaggies have become a lot worse. Almost every ship I've tried this on looks horrible in the new system. I have a GTX 670 running everything at max, so the likely hood of it being my system is not very high, but do you have any thoughts as to why things look so bad?


As it stands, our AA works on the geometry of the model only, rather than the textures as well. The linear lighting introduced better lighting, which has shown this up a bit more.



Ah, good to know. Are there any plans in the roadmap (ie next six months) to improve AA?
Harkin Issier
Lethal Devotion
#57 - 2014-09-04 14:46:23 UTC
Sir Constantin wrote:
The new cloak effect is awesome but it should be used as a transition from visible to invisible.

Currently it looks kinda weird, like your ship is packaged in a bubble wrap.


I sorta agree. I think that currently the effect is too pronounced. Perhaps during the transition it has bright hexes, then when you're fully invisible the effect damps and softens, lowering brightness and muting the hexes.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#58 - 2014-09-04 15:00:24 UTC
does the new effect happen when you jump through a gate or WH?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
CCP Sledgehammer
C C P
C C P Alliance
#59 - 2014-09-04 15:04:09 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
CCP Sledgehammer wrote:
Valterra Craven wrote:
I know that this isn't directly related to the OP, but you your title wasn't very specific. One thing I've noticed since the improved lighting was introd a few patches back (around the January time frame I think?) is that jaggies have become a lot worse. Almost every ship I've tried this on looks horrible in the new system. I have a GTX 670 running everything at max, so the likely hood of it being my system is not very high, but do you have any thoughts as to why things look so bad?


As it stands, our AA works on the geometry of the model only, rather than the textures as well. The linear lighting introduced better lighting, which has shown this up a bit more.



Ah, good to know. Are there any plans in the roadmap (ie next six months) to improve AA?


Can neither confirm nor deny.

Graphical QA Analyst | EVE Quality Assurance | Team TriLambda
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#60 - 2014-09-04 16:11:57 UTC
sorry, just came back to lear at the pretty gfx

(O_____O)
! <------------drool

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=