test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
New bridge lightings bloopers!
saurializard
Member Posts: 4,404 Arc User
It's the New year and you know what always happens on the new year? Yep, we get bloopers about everything! And it's time for another series.
Q having recently updated all the galaxy's lighting to make it prettier (YMMV, as always with what Q does), I think it's time to reveal where he did troll Captains.
Whether because of hating them, forgetting about them or simply due to questionable tastes from the Continuum, this thread is about those bridges Q went through and that aren't to their captain's tastes who deems them as "miss", bad or plain epic fails. Too dark, too bright, too both at once, lack of shadows, light sources missing, everything goes!
So feel free to post your findings.
Let's start with a few:
Hazari Destroyer bridge (1.0)
Hazari Destroyer bridge (2.0)
Vaadwaur bridge (1.0)
Vaadwaur bridge (2.0)
Temporal Romulan ship bridge (1.0)
Temporal Romulan ship bridge (2.0)
Cardassian bridge (1.0)
Cardassian bridge (2.0)
Vorgon bridge (1.0)
Vorgon Bridge (2.0)
Q having recently updated all the galaxy's lighting to make it prettier (YMMV, as always with what Q does), I think it's time to reveal where he did troll Captains.
Whether because of hating them, forgetting about them or simply due to questionable tastes from the Continuum, this thread is about those bridges Q went through and that aren't to their captain's tastes who deems them as "miss", bad or plain epic fails. Too dark, too bright, too both at once, lack of shadows, light sources missing, everything goes!
So feel free to post your findings.
Let's start with a few:
Hazari Destroyer bridge (1.0)
Hazari Destroyer bridge (2.0)
Vaadwaur bridge (1.0)
Vaadwaur bridge (2.0)
Temporal Romulan ship bridge (1.0)
Temporal Romulan ship bridge (2.0)
Cardassian bridge (1.0)
Cardassian bridge (2.0)
Vorgon bridge (1.0)
Vorgon Bridge (2.0)
#TASforSTO
0
Comments
The example of your Wells is all-telling: it's beyond bad. Literally ALL subtle gradients and shades have gone. It's really unbelievable they delivered 'Lighting 2.0' like this. I mean, I understand they have a busy work-load; but then just don't release it yet.
Overall, the 2.0 lighting is terribad; way too overbright, often washing out any and all nuance, grossly overdone specular lighting, and 'plastic wraps' on your boffs, because someone at Cryptic deemed it a good idea to have boff skins be a reflective surface. The only place where 'Lighting 2.0' kinda works, is in areas that were otherwise too dark (like some bridges, like the Sphere Builder ones). And then they just applied that setting to everything, and called it the day.
Wells bridge (1.0)
Wells bridge (2.0)
It's really the KDF and especially the Romulan version that are all wrong.
That doesn't even look half bad.
An OPINION is never really wrong, and 1.0, for some, really is a better option. It has been around longer, they've worked all the kinks for different combinations of equipment. My system is supposed to be able to run 2.0, but 1.0 is better for me because when I turn on 2.0, the light bloom is blinding. I'm sure that eventually I'll be able to turn 2.0 on and be amazed, but until they've figured out whatever combination of cards/processors/drivers is causing these issues...
... for me. And I'm not...
I have to disagree. Right now its so bugged that its not even an opinion; 1.0 IS better. 2.0 has the bigger potential and could in theory be better, even far better; but right now? It ain't.
Agreed. From the pics posted here, it would seem existing 'scenes' need to be re-adjusted for 2.0, one by one, which may take a while (or will simply never happen). The only real risk is when Cryptic decides, in a few months, that they're going to retire the 1.0 lighting system (the 'shared experience', and all that). That would be bad.
I don't consider 'lighting broken on all bridges' an acceptable loss. So, until they fix it, they really should keep the 1.0 system.
When it comes to introducing new stuff, as always, I think Cryptic should adopt the final part of the Hippocratic Oath: above all, do no harm!
That's fine.
The older bridges probably aren't materials-enabled yet (for the specular lighting); but the lockbox ones I own, are.
Drawing from my modest builder experience in Second Life, what *I* think is happening, is that materials-enabled surfaces** can't just be applied universally. If you give everything, say, a 75% reflectiveness, then everything which has strong nearby light-sources will become way too shiny (so as to become overbright). The pics of the Cardassian bridge posted above show that really well. So, either you tone down the reflectiveness of individual specular textures, or you tone down the nearby light-source intensity (and/or radius). Either way, you kinda need to go thru these changes manually, one by one; and I get the impression they just used some sort of universal '2.0 converter.'
** I'm sure the terminology will differ in STO, but the technology used is likely very similar to Second Life materials.
In the sheer unprecedented act of quoting myself, LOL, I just realized they really can't adjust the intensity of the light sources; at least, not for as long 1.0 is still active. Otherwise, good-looking maps, with lighting set for 2.0, would look way too dark when just watched in the 1.0 incarnation of the lighting system. Hmm, conundrum.
Most of that has nothing to do with what's going on.
There was no way we could manually light 1000+ maps in the time allotted to get 2.0 in place. We didn't use a "2.0 Converter" but we did use some tricks to pass lights around the game without having to do it all manually. Namely, we attached lights to objects, so that anywhere the object "Big_Bright_Light_01" showed up, there was an actual light attached to it. That worked to propagate the lights around the game, but in "Darkly_Dark_Map_16", "Big_Bright_Light_01" is placed, even though the map is dark. So now, that usually dark map is brightly lit. In other places (namely bridges that have lots of one off custom geo), no lights were attached to the objects, and so the bridge map remains darker in 2.0.
Admittedly, it was a somewhat ham-fisted method to pushing new lighting into all corners of the game, but there was no way we could feasibly do it all by hand in such a short time.
This is now how this works. All of our lights are separate. There is a set of lights for 1.0, and a set of lights for 2.0. Adjusting 2.0 lights won't make 1.0 brighter. But there are things like skyfiles, which contribute lighting to both, and thus adjusting a skyfile to look good in one mode will potentially make it look worse in the other.
Why, that was quite 'illuminating' (pun intended). But yeah, adjusting a 1,000 light sources manually will take time.
*nods* Well, as long as you guys are still working on it, it's all good.
This is really the biggest upgrade that simply makes things different but not necessarily at all better unless they are going to go thru all 1000+ maps in time and adjust them. It was a GREAT idea for console with only 2, or 3 variations of different consoles; unlike PC all we really have is something that's different and in most cases not even better.
I'd honestly be happy to see the next major update see Lighting 2.0 retired to be honest. Looking at all the before & after's it's certainly different but far from actually being better. I admit the new glow over some console's looks nicer but if they stuck with the original with minor enhancements perhaps we'd be far further ahead.
Feel free to disagree but I'd be HAPPY TO SEE everyone wish for Lighting 2.0 to be retired.
Well, I think Lighting 2.0 has potential; but, as I expected (and confirmed by Taco) getting it right will require thousands of light sources to be adjusted manually, and that takes time, which, in Cryptic's case, means it may either never be done, or will take a great long while (or worse, they may one day just call it the day, and make 2.0 the only thing available, ready or no).
In Second Life (there I go again), the introduction of specular lighting was spectacular; and when applied subtlely, and with grace, can really mean a world of difference. Thing is, Taco makes very pretty bridges.
I'll admit most of my posts are very supportive of Cryptic, but this is one I think they messed up in a very big way!
I like you don't think we'll see the day soon where all 1000+ maps manually adjusted... it's taken a year to get Romulan Warp Trail's removed from FED's ships...
I'd welcome Lighting 2.0 Retirement as a MAJOR FEATURE; except on maps where they took the time & quality to manually adjust lighting elements.
Actually, I'm quite happy with the work on Lightning 2.0, despite being very apprehensive and underwhelmed during its first stages on Tribble.
I think a good chunk of maps are vastly improved with it, like (YMMV, of course):
As for your new spoilers...
♠ Kelvin Constitution is not stunning, it's too bright in some area's; likely old system could have been enhanced.
♠ I'm not particular exited by the caverns, most character faces are dark, like many maps when not directly facing light.
♠ Borg Cube doesn't excite me either, aside from a few bright lights, most of the map/detail is very dark/hidden...
♠ Embassy not about it looks really any different than before.
♠ Federation Starbase I admit looks Nice, but other than contrasts changing just a little different.
- ♣ we don't see texture's that add detail to tiles, images, etc.. (not requiring a graphics updates just attention to detail)
♠ Drozana looks better but really the coolest element is the new console lighting.
- ♣ perhaps the other change was Devidian & purple color disappearing.
- ♣ subtle and effective: just wished they focused on more maps w/ manual enhancements where required.
♠ Next map completely too dark likely even with flashlight, including Dyson Sphere in Take Down before attacking Gaul.
- ♣ characters completely faded in the darkness, like many NPC's not facing direct light source.
- ♣ It occurs in the Krenim Research Station Conference room with light on NPC's back and dark faces.
♠ Drozana Lower Level there which was dark before, and still too dark with flashlight.
♠ Drozana (Early Time) again Lighting is different but I'd not say better or worse--just a change.
♠ Final spoiler is 'eh' so what... I guess lighting impressing me less, than the quality or detail of the objects.
- ♣ especially given even under 1.0 many original bridges had very nice lighting effects.
Most older map's look far better under the old system even without the glare or direct light sources. it's not like new maps, textures, or greater detail was introduced to 3D objects and those could all be done without graphics requirements changing. If people really wanted just a fresh look they could have easily adjusted brightness, contrast, hue, saturation, or so many other things to give older maps a new look.
All this has done is require new graphic requirements for a little bit of light often in the wrong place, it does not introduce more detailed artwork as that could have been done under the old system. I still think it's destroyed far more than it's enhanced by a WIDE margin.
IF only they had used the Subtlety & Grace to make a manually changes to a few maps slowly over time this would have been a massive success. Lighting 2.0 is a massive FAILURE in my books. I've been extremely supportive of Cryptic in almost every post, but this and it's not likely going to win me any favors but still needs to be said.
^^ This. And brighter isn't necessarily better, either.
It's not even just 1000 light sources. It's 1000 maps. Each of which has between 1 and several hundred lights on it.
I can take a look, but please keep in mind that DIFFERENT is not the same as WORSE. While we've done our best to replicate the feel of the previous lighting on a map, it is not possible to 100% replicate it. Some maps WILL look different between 1.0 and 2.0. That doesn't mean that 2.0's lighting is BAD, it just means it's different.
The lighting system is unquestionably better. It allows artists MUCH more control, and gives us much more to work with. We've been fighting against the constraints we had previously, since City of Heroes. 2.0 opens worlds of possibility.
But, trying to retrofit that into an existing game is not a simple thing. We've done our best to keep old maps feeling the way they did before. That, by its nature, means that we weren't trying to IMPROVE those maps. There was no other way, given the tight time constraints to implement 2.0.
However, at this point, with 2.0 out, and the vast majority of maps updated to at least a base level, we artists can start actually taking advantage of the system, and I think you'll see those benefits in upcoming maps.
You're welcome to wish as you please, but 2.0 is not going away.
There has been an issue with the lens flares on the Vengence bridge with 2.0. That's been sorted out. They should no longer be drawing through walls. But we also can't draw all of them at once. So it'll draw the ones nearby instead of everything.
That is overly broad, and pretty much wrong. There are 1000's of maps. There are a handful that have been made worse in 2.0, because they slipped through the cracks of the method of distribution we used. They will get fixed up.
For the rest, I will again say that looking different is not the same as looking bad. Right now, you have people complaining that ESD isn't completely blue inside anymore. I think in a year or two, you'll look back at old screenshots of ESD and cringe. But right now, people are used to what they're used to, and something changed. People don't like change, and it takes them a while to adapt. That's the period we're in now.
Honestly, if the majority of the game stayed looking roughly like it was, and a handful of maps look worse, but I now have many more options for lighting things in better, more interesting ways, I am 100% ok with that.
I concur. You will not see the day anytime soon, where all 1000+ maps have been hand touched up by an artist. But I also think that's perfectly fine. There are many maps where the auto upgrade worked fine, and they don't need much of a change. There are also many maps that look essentially the same as they used to, and if you sent an artist in, they'd change it all up. (that's kind of what we do).
That's not how this works. You don't get to pick and choose where 2.0 is. It's either everywhere or nowhere. And we're not ripping it out.
BCW