|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 17:45:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Gnulpie on 08/11/2009 17:56:15
Originally by: Alexeph Stoekai
Originally by: DasNara Aethelwulf
- Another nit-pick point would be they need to be moved into the inner solar system. Some of them are like 50 or 60 AU out from their star. I know that this is really minor, but since you are putting something new into the game, that level of detail now would be easy and something that i think adds to the game
You do realize that not all habitable zones are at 1AU, right? If a star was 50 or 60 times hotter than the Sun, its habitable zone would be farther out.
Since the energy transfer per area reduces with the power of THREE (after all we are in 3d space), a sun which radiates 60 times more energy would have an habitable zone only 4 times further away than the current earth, because the energy recieved at that distance would be the same energ which earth is recieving from sun currently (though the spectrum of a hotter sun would be shifted quite a bit into the ultraviolet part).
The ambient light IS FAR TO BRIGHT!!!!1111
To bright from a physical point of view as well as from an aestethical point of view.
This becomes on issue on the outer parts of the solar systems which should be really DARK or at least a lot more dim than the inner parts of the solar system, there should be really a drastically change in ambient light throught the solar systems. Bright at the inside, dark at the outside.
It also becomes an issue at the unlit sides of planets and moons, especially during an eclipse. Currently the night sides of the planets are all to bright and a sunset or sunrise is by far not spectacular enough.
The lava planets do not need any comment, they out just out of the scale.
So ....
-> Change the light distribution throughout the solar systems depending drastically on the distance to the local sun.
-> Reduce ambient light a lot and make the night sides of planets darker (easily done!) (example pic: earth eve planet)
-> Increase the atmosphere glow at sunrise/sunset a lot (this can be done easily with some cosinus) if you look straight at the sun. (example pics: sunset , sunrise)
-> Still the stars shine through the atmosphere unhindered and with the same brightness as they do on the sky without atmosphere. That might be a bit more tricky to fix though.
I noticed that some of the clouds have now pseudoshadows. That is a good improvement and adds a lot to the good eye candy! Thanks.
Edit: added links
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 08:54:00 -
[2]
AWEEEEEEESOME
Big thumps up to the gfx guys!
Most of the things I mentioned earlier in this thread are fixed and now the planets are looking soooooo beautiful (some are pretty dark and fearsome too), yay!
Of course not all is perfect :-) So here is what I think could be still improved
1) Clouds moving to fast on planets
2) Effects on planets like lightnings are to quick sometimes, there should be also some slow and majestic effects. Maybe some slow aurora
3) The atmosphere at the horizon is not think enough and too transparent.
4) The sunlight in the OUTER regions of the solar systems is still FAR TO BRIGHT!!! The intensity of energy recieved goes down by the power of two! at the distance. 10 times greater distance means 10*10 = 100 times less energy from the sun. In Eve it is quite the opposite: 10 times greater distance means only sqrt(10) = 3.1 less energy from the sun. That should be really changed. It would also make the feeling of distances much more immersive.
I LOOOOOOOOVE the new lava planets :-) (and all the others also)
Great work.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 10:38:00 -
[3]
Originally by: PeHD0M Currently eve have a MASSIVE problem with logic of planets placement.
You cant have something like this:
planet 1-thunder 2-ice - ok, a weak star 3-earthlike - hmm, maybe a hotbed effect 4-lava - is there a second star nearby? 5-ice - ..nope 6-lava - wtf?
Planet 1 - thunder: is okay because the astronomists already discovered 'hot' gas planets around distant stars. So there could be as well lightning storms.
Planet 2 - ice: Really bad if we have ice planets close to a star.
Planet 3 - earthlike: If to close or to far away from the sun, outside the ecosphere that is, it is really bad. Otherwise fine.
Planet 4/6 - lava: the heat usually doesn't come from the star but from a) meteor bombardments, b) radioactive heat and c) tidal effects from nearby moons. Bad if a small or very large planet is lava though, that won't happen.
The distribution of planet types rock/gas was thought to be straightforward: inner planets rock and stone, outer planets gas giants. But the astronomers discovered during the couple last years hot gas giants very close to their sun, so it is absolutely possible that the inner planets can be gas giants also.
But yes, it would be VERY NICE if the distribution of the planets would follow at least a somewhat believable structure :-)
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 17:06:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Illectroculus Defined
Originally by: Gnulpie
Since the energy transfer per area reduces with the power of THREE (after all we are in 3d space)
Sorry I don't know where you learned your astrophysics, but the intensity of a point source decays by the inverse SQUARE law
Hehe, of course you are right.
Might I be excused from getting so excited about the new planetary graphics?
But the fact remains that the light fades away veryfast at the outer regions of the space, contrary to what we see now in Eve. I think it would add a lot more beauty, immersion and a bit more believability if the outer regions would be much darker than the inner regions.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:15:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Gnulpie on 12/11/2009 18:15:50
Originally by: Illectroculus Defined I'd kinda like to see that, but what I'd really like to see if a proper HDR implementation, where if you're next to a bright light source then the start and nebulae are invisible because of the overriding brightness of that object. When you'r close ot the sun and looking at it then you should only see the sun, when you're about an earth like planet and look at it then you shouldn't be seeing any stars or nebulae. Look away from the suns and the stars should start to show, as your eye/sensors adjust to the peak brightness in the frame. If you're a long way away from a low luminosity star then it should be reduced to nothing more than a star which appears brighter than those in the background.
The current nebula backgrounds in general need to be fainter, although there could certinaly be a few places which have epicly bright nebula these should be special cases.
Now if you do a dynamic sentitivity model then you can also make weapons fire and other effects feed into the brightness modelling, so when that ship explodes at the edge of the solar system you lose that dark adapatation for a few seconds and the stars become too faint to see.
Of course this will probably never happen because pretty graphics trump realism always.
In this case it would be pretty AND realistic. Only question is the amount of work it needs to implement.
But otherwise, yeah, that would be totally awesome!
Maybe in the next expansion?
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 13:17:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Gnulpie on 18/11/2009 13:20:38 The latest iteration on the lava planets is worse than the previous one. The previous was really astounding!
The current lava planets are again too bright. Far too bright! Please change it back.
Also the surface of all the planets - but especially the lava planets - is very 'grainy' and intersected into squares of maybe 5 pixel or so when you zoom in closely. I didn't notice that in the previous iteration either.
Edit: The background still has not enough red and blue stars. Red giants, blue supergiants, red dwarfs etc. Just look at that pic of the tarantula nebula to see what I mean. Eve background has almost only white/grey stars from a certain size on.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.18 19:32:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Gnulpie on 18/11/2009 19:35:07 New rings! -> Niiiiiiiice
I saw only a few of the planets with rings, so my observations might be not right. But what I saw is that most rings have many bands of smaller rings and most parts are very translucent. This is overdone a bit I think. I think there should be some more rings with broad bands which are only intersected a bit and they should be also a bit more 'dense'. At least some of the planets, not all of course (example pics: saturn rings with light, saturn rings with shadow, saturn rings with minor lens flare artifacts)!
What I also would like to see is that the background stars should vanish behind the different parts of the rings.
Also ... would it be possible that the sunlight gets reflected a bit from those rings? The often contain small ice particles which can reflect the light (example: reflection on saturn rings - caption ).
Sometimes the rings can slightly appear brighter or darker depending on the angle between observer and the sun (example pic).
But as I earlier said: Already very nice!
Originally by: Deviana Sevidon Also I would like to request, that a constant Lightning Storm, which some of the old Planets had, is brought back, but used sparingly and only on some Planets.
But the 'plasma' planets do have that lightning, don't they? Or did that get changed in the last iteration?
|
|
|
|