Gamers claim Elite: Dangerous graphics have been watered down

[Yoinkerman]

I played elite on a potato with good settings. It's not a demanding game, even for consoles. It must be something else.

[Th3 Mans1ay3r]

"Lets fuck over PC players for PC console parity so console owners don't feel as bad." 

 

They say that isn't what it is, but it is. Looks like ED has acquired ED.

[sgloux3470]

So, they tweaked their dust shader and the lighting is in a completely different position in your comparison shots.

 

Does anyone play video games anymore?  Or do they just compare screenshots of the game on forums.

[Elapo]

Once the game is out don't be surprised to see a console port. At 900p 30fps with graphics not turned up it will be fine. We know it's not a resource issue because they keep adding more staff and more features at the drop of a hat.

Yea, because that wouldn't cause backlash. The game was funded ENTIRELY by PC gamers, do you really think they'll accept CIG making a console port with their money rather than additional content? I know I wouldn't like it. PC gamers paid for the game, we don't get anything from a console port.

I can see the threads already "Why console port and not X".

It'd be a PR nightmare, rest assured of that.

So, they tweaked their dust shader and the lighting is in a completely different position in your comparison shots.

 

Does anyone play video games anymore?  Or do they just compare screenshots of the game on forums.

Many PC gamers appreciate amazing looking graphics, that's why we pay for a gaming PC, and not just get a console. If graphics are then downgraded to suit console hardware, it pisses a lot of people off.

[Briggsy]

seems like Ambient occlusion is off in the newer screenshots.

[Jaybird]

If I remember correctly, they've always said "star citizen will never be on console". It's designed for PC alone.

consoles would not even be able to load the title screen before capping out on memory.

[dalekphalm]

Hopefully CIG never tries to get Star Citizen to work on consoles.

Current Gen consoles? Probably not. They could make it work, but they would have to significantly optimize and reduce quality settings.

 

Next gen consoles? I wouldn't be surprised at all for SC to be a launch title (Since by then, they'll have already completed the PC version). By that time, Console technology will have caught up a bit with current Gaming PC's.

 

Yea, because that wouldn't cause backlash. The game was funded ENTIRELY by PC gamers, do you really think they'll accept CIG making a console port with their money rather than additional content? I know I wouldn't like it. PC gamers paid for the game, we don't get anything from a console port.

I can see the threads already "Why console port and not X".

It'd be a PR nightmare, rest assured of that.

Many PC gamers appreciate amazing looking graphics, that's why we pay for a gaming PC, and not just get a console. If graphics are then downgraded to suit console hardware, it pisses a lot of people off.

To be perfectly honest, that attitude is complete shit. When you (and I, since I'm a backer) backed this game, we paid x amount, for y amount of content. They provided us with goals and features and what the game would be when they finished it.

 

If they can provide us with everything they promised, but still have the funds left over to invest into a Console Port, that does not affect the quality of the PC Port (Which will likely be finished before any Console Port is attempted), then who the fuck cares?

 

Yes, there might be a PR backlash... from the PCMR tards, who are entirely selfish and elitist. "Only we can have it! No one else!" Whatever the fuck happened to being inclusive for gamers?

 

If CIG ever ports to console, and does so without compromising the quality and integrity of the PC version, then what could it possibly matter to you? Besides, all those Console game sales, at $60 a pop (Since they won't get our awesome Steam sales, etc), will go towards helping fund SC2 or expansions/additional content, that you - as a PC gamer - WOULD benefit from.

 

I'm a PC Gamer through and through, but I have zero problem with them porting the game to Console after they've finished and released the game for PC.

[Elapo]

Current Gen consoles? Probably not. They could make it work, but they would have to significantly optimize and reduce quality settings.

 

Next gen consoles? I wouldn't be surprised at all for SC to be a launch title (Since by then, they'll have already completed the PC version). By that time, Console technology will have caught up a bit with current Gaming PC's.

 

To be perfectly honest, that attitude is complete shit. When you (and I, since I'm a backer) backed this game, we paid x amount, for y amount of content. They provided us with goals and features and what the game would be when they finished it.

 

If they can provide us with everything they promised, but still have the funds left over to invest into a Console Port, that does not affect the quality of the PC Port (Which will likely be finished before any Console Port is attempted), then who the fuck cares?

 

Yes, there might be a PR backlash... from the PCMR tards, who are entirely selfish and elitist. "Only we can have it! No one else!" Whatever the fuck happened to being inclusive for gamers?

 

If CIG ever ports to console, and does so without compromising the quality and integrity of the PC version, then what could it possibly matter to you? Besides, all those Console game sales, at $60 a pop (Since they won't get our awesome Steam sales, etc), will go towards helping fund SC2 or expansions/additional content, that you - as a PC gamer - WOULD benefit from.

 

I'm a PC Gamer through and through, but I have zero problem with them porting the game to Console after they've finished and released the game for PC.

 

Why would a console version get priority over more (paid) content for PC? And you know as well as everyone that it WILL compromise the PC version, don't lie to yourself. As much as I trust CIG I don't think the PC version wouldn't suffer because of a console version. More work for slightly more people equals less quality/content, if not anything else.

 

They'll still need that money to start developing future content. Rest assured that the quality of said content would suffer from a side project like console ports.

 

For me this isn't about "you can't play this". I just want SC to succeed and KEEP ON SUCCEEDING. Console ports would inevitably reduce the quality of upcoming content, either because lack of money or lack of manpower.

 

Maybe they should give the code to 10 people and give them 2 months to make the port. I'm sure that'd work.

[Trik'Stari]

consoles would not even be able to load the title screen before capping out on memory.

Luckily, the creator has flatout stated he has no desire to bring SC to console.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-18-roberts-vows-star-citizen-will-never-be-dumbed-down-for-a-lesser-platform

 

So it's not really even worth hypothesizing about. But the consoles would pretty much catch on fire if not just shut off entirely.

"IF the platform holders (Sony & Microsoft) allow us to update the code and data without restrictions and odious time consuming QC procedures, IF they allow our community to openly interact with each other across platforms then I would CONSIDER supporting them.

 

"Well because then they are essentially inexpensive small form factor PCs with a custom operating system focused on gaming and who wouldn't want a bigger community of Star Citizens? If Sony or Microsoft are willing to let their platform be open, then I see no real difference between them or Valve's Steambox, a Mac or a PC running Linux, all of which are platforms that I don't think this community would mind supporting as they are all viewed as 'PCs'. In fact most Macs are probably much worse gaming machines than a next gen console (as Apple is the antithesis of what I love about PCs)."

 

I guess it's possible, the biggest problem being MS and Sony themselves not wanting to offer an open and flexible platform.

[Recon97]

Warned you all.Kill all consoles.If you want the PC gaming to survive,do what I say!

[Recon97]

Warned you all.Kill all consoles.If you want the PC gaming to survive,do what I say!

In addition to it,people who own a PC and still buy consoles be like 'oh I just want to play console exclusive games! Ha ha. Ha......fuck me to eternity'

[Guest Kloaked]

This isn't the "console's" fault. Blame the devs.

[Jaybird]

Luckily, the creator has flatout stated he has no desire to bring SC to console.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-18-roberts-vows-star-citizen-will-never-be-dumbed-down-for-a-lesser-platform

 

So it's not really even worth hypothesizing about. But the consoles would pretty much catch on fire if not just shut off entirely.

"IF the platform holders (Sony & Microsoft) allow us to update the code and data without restrictions and odious time consuming QC procedures, IF they allow our community to openly interact with each other across platforms then I would CONSIDER supporting them.

 

"Well because then they are essentially inexpensive small form factor PCs with a custom operating system focused on gaming and who wouldn't want a bigger community of Star Citizens? If Sony or Microsoft are willing to let their platform be open, then I see no real difference between them or Valve's Steambox, a Mac or a PC running Linux, all of which are platforms that I don't think this community would mind supporting as they are all viewed as 'PCs'. In fact most Macs are probably much worse gaming machines than a next gen console (as Apple is the antithesis of what I love about PCs)."

 

I guess it's possible, the biggest problem being MS and Sony themselves not wanting to offer an open and flexible platform.

im fully aware. ive been on the hype train since day 436. 

[Dabombinable]

Because consoles, and fuck fuck PC gaming.

[iMikeTheKing]

If this is the star density on the console version than I don't think they are the problem. It looks like they are trying to fix the dust bug in the game and the other picture was just the game with different lighting.

[christianled59]

-snip-

Well, you're really missing the point then. If the game released with crap graphics, then fine. But when the game is already out and devs make it look worse after you bought it, then I think people have a very good reason for being upset. Especially if it is due to the limitations of a completely different platform. 

[Elapo]

-snip-

 

Anyone who spends more than $300 on graphics hardware. If every dev is going to downgrade to console grade graphics they should tell me beforehand so I don't have to waste money. I can just buy a 750ti until the next generation of consoles.

 

True, gameplay is arguably more important than graphics, but it IS why PC gaming exists: Graphics and smooth framerate (and open-ness, blahblah). Besides, it's not like elite has that much gameplay anyway, not to mention story, which is pretty much nonexistent (Story != lore, btw). We're paying for the FULL PACKAGE. Why is it too much to ask to want both? Can we not want a product that strives for perfection? Why should we have to give up one part for another? Answer: we shouldn't. Have you ever heard about another business where they first sell you a product and then take part of it away? Because I'm pretty sure that would be false advertising. Not in gaming though, where console sellers use PCs to show "console footage", where graphics downgrades are "optimizations" (even if they weren't needed) and where stealing is allowed if you call it "early access" or "pre-order".

 

It's also not so much about the graphical fidelity as it is about the style and consistency. Planetary rings fit in before and looked really good. Now they look weird and crappy.

 

That being said, I'm sorry that there are people who value graphics, I truly am. I'm very sorry people have different preferences. I'm sorry they are not in line with yours.

[sof006]

Oh....

[flibberdipper]

Well, you're really missing the point then. If the game released with crap graphics, then fine. But when the game is already out and devs make it look worse after you bought it, then I think people have a very good reason for being upset. Especially if it is due to the limitations of a completely different platform. 

I honestly couldn't see the pics (thanks ATT!) so I have no clue how badly this game in particular was handicapped.

[Guest]

OK so it ain't just me. I've been playing ED since 1.0 and noticed that planetary rings looks worse than they used to be. I agree that they shouldn't have downgraded the graphics, unless it is a big issue that will be fixed later on in a new release and graphics will be restored as they were or better. My R9 290 didn't see that much differences between the different versions of ED in terms of FPS.

[Ohlyver]

Since 1.3 my client is unstable , it keeps minimising and once it does it, I can't get it back

[Humbug]

I just want to post this video to demonstrate how well optimized Elite Dangerous was. This guy was running eyefinity with a 280x and a first gen bulldozer CPU with. All stock... very smooth gameplay.

 

[sgloux3470]

Many PC gamers appreciate amazing looking graphics, that's why we pay for a gaming PC, and not just get a console. If graphics are then downgraded to suit console hardware, it pisses a lot of people off.

They tweaked an unoptimized dust shader and the graphics whores rappel off the aide of the building to complain about the Xbox one port.

Unless anyone is sitting on some proper comparison shots this is much ado about nothing.

[Ohlyver]

That being said, I'm sorry that there are people who value graphics, I truly am. I'm very sorry people have different preferences. I'm sorry they are not in line with yours.

You're Canadian right??

[Elapo]

They tweaked an unoptimized dust shader and the graphics whores rappel off the aide of the building to complain about the Xbox one port.

Unless anyone is sitting on some proper comparison shots this is much ado about nothing.

 

The frontier forums contain some very good comparison shots, including proof that the cockpit mesh of some of the ships has been REDUCED in quality. That being said, I'd prefer the unoptimized dust shader back, as I had no problems before and it looked better.

 

Example of the mesh quality.

 

Also, OP Linked the post with comparison shots.

 

You're Canadian right??

 

No, but I do like Maple syrup and saying sorry, is that enough?