Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sig Sour
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 21:12:00 -
[31]
When I saw the lava planets, I assumed the materials were not set up properly. That is the way it looks to me. Didnt think I would assume the role of art director at CCP and go make a thread about it.
|
DasNara Aethelwulf
Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:09:00 -
[32]
Edited by: DasNara Aethelwulf on 10/11/2009 22:14:46
Originally by: Alexeph Stoekai Edited by: Alexeph Stoekai on 08/11/2009 10:38:28
Originally by: DasNara Aethelwulf remember we are still not in orbit, like has been pointed out in this thread, i was reminded that we are not actually in orbit, that is why we should see the planet spinning.
Sigh... I welcome you to make some calculations or to actually study the subject. Even if you were in a stationary position, the visual evidence of the Earth's rotation would be negligible. I believe it was stated that, at the range we warped in at the old planet models, even a planet with the sidereal rotational speed of Jupiter would only be moving a pixel every few minutes.
First, keep your sighs to yourself, you sound like you are twelve. Second, reading about astrodynamics on wikipedia doesnt give the authority to speak to me like you know more than me, i do study/have studied astrodynamics. You welcome me to apply the fundimental mechanics of astrodynamics to a planet that is one, not rotating and two, as far as i know, not even orbiting the star at which it's suppose to be bound to. So since it's not obeying kepler's laws, it's pretty easy to have an answer; if you were asking me to calculate the speed of the object in orbit....it's 0m/s. All the planets, the last time i looked on sisi, are tidally locked to their suns. I did stay in orbit for several hours and didnt notice a change, this could also be that they are still in the WIP stage and that part hasn't been turned on. They stated they were placing the warp-ins closer, not placing us in orbit. Whether we are in low or high orbit; which i think we still are in high orbit(since you know, what is our altidtude now on sisi), it doesnt matter if you are in geostationary orbit, which you tried to impliy, not all orbits are geostationary. now you keep not reading or understanding every other word that i'm writing, This is just a simple feedback on the aesthetics of the planets with a little RL thrown in for reference. It's an art critque, as very little math is applied to this game and i think that some of the dev's heads would expolde if i tried to explain astrodynamics, spherical geometry or whatever. So again, this was an art critque, nothing more, for aesthetics, lets change the rotation of the planets from 0 to about the speed of the clouds right now on sisi, then change the movement of the clouds to practically nothing. Thats it, math not required. so calm down, and just have fun dont troll
My left is in retreat, my center is giving way; situation excellent, I attack - Joffe 1916 |
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:20:00 -
[33]
You are really not getting my point at all.
If you were somehow able to sit in a fixed position from which you could observe a planet in our solar system, you would have a very hard time noticing its rotation unless you set up a time lapse camera.
The old planets in EVE have been animated to rotate, but the speed at which those planets rotate is simply absurd.
Sure, it might look cool, but it wouldn't help immersion to see a planet twirl like an interstellar dreidl. -----
|
DasNara Aethelwulf
Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:24:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Sig Sour When I saw the lava planets, I assumed the materials were not set up properly. That is the way it looks to me. Didnt think I would assume the role of art director at CCP and go make a thread about it.
lol, go troll go!!!! if you read, i said these cant be finished, but the purpose of this section of forum was feedback, so i said too much yellow...but go troll go....
My left is in retreat, my center is giving way; situation excellent, I attack - Joffe 1916 |
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:33:00 -
[35]
In other news, the newest build has a whole bunch of new planets. Thunderstorm, Sandstorm, Plasma, a multitude of Gas Giants... it's fun -----
|
DasNara Aethelwulf
Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:46:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Alexeph Stoekai You are really not getting my point at all.
If you were somehow able to sit in a fixed position from which you could observe a planet in our solar system, you would have a very hard time noticing its rotation unless you set up a time lapse camera.
The old planets in EVE have been animated to rotate, but the speed at which those planets rotate is simply absurd.
Sure, it might look cool, but it wouldn't help immersion to see a planet twirl like an interstellar dreidl.
my appologies....agreed, but can we have a little rotation to see the other side...even it takes a couple of hours?...what about that? i wasnt thinkign imersion
My left is in retreat, my center is giving way; situation excellent, I attack - Joffe 1916 |
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:48:00 -
[37]
Originally by: DasNara Aethelwulf
Originally by: Alexeph Stoekai You are really not getting my point at all.
If you were somehow able to sit in a fixed position from which you could observe a planet in our solar system, you would have a very hard time noticing its rotation unless you set up a time lapse camera.
The old planets in EVE have been animated to rotate, but the speed at which those planets rotate is simply absurd.
Sure, it might look cool, but it wouldn't help immersion to see a planet twirl like an interstellar dreidl.
my appologies....agreed, but can we have a little rotation to see the other side...even it takes a couple of hours?...what about that? i wasnt thinkign imersion
It would be a nice touch, if the graphics guys can catch a Trinity coder to push a rotation animation on the planets. -----
|
DaxSnake
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 22:52:00 -
[38]
Everyone complaining about lava planets.
Its the test server, half the planets arent even finished. Do you REALLY think that Lava planet is the finished product?
Its call placeholder graphics.
|
Pattern Clarc
Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 00:11:00 -
[39]
Massive updates to all the planets Everything's about a million times better
Waiting for ring systems and the warp in's fixed but that's about it.
http://theskyunion.com/screen1.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen_2.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen_3.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-4.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-5.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-6.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-7.jpg ____ Domination Balance (Or how we fix the Tempest) |
Solomon Weyland
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 00:23:00 -
[40]
The planets do indeed look awesome, even if in the latest update some of them seem to have some weird out of place texture thing going on. I also wonder if we could at some point get an option to turn off the nebula backgrounds. A feature to kill the fruit salad effect and allow me to enjoy the planets against actual space would make my day.
|
|
Pattern Clarc
Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 01:35:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 11/11/2009 01:42:55 Yeah, the Moon warp in's are way off, it would be nice if moon warp ins where less than 1000km from the surface.
Stargates and some more asteroid belts could do with being about 10,000km away from some of the nicer planets...
Also, could some textures such as the ice planets have there textures at higher res?
More planet sexiness...
http://theskyunion.com/screen-8.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-9.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-10.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-11.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-12.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-13.jpg http://theskyunion.com/screen-14.jpg
Now if only there was a tactical reason to fight at planets.... ____ Domination Balance (Or how we fix the Tempest) |
Camios
Minmatar Insurgent New Eden Tribe Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 09:57:00 -
[42]
Now the planets look good! I don't see any of the problem i complained about Here.
I really like the color chioces now, they decided to change the planet instead of the backgrounds (I suggested the opposite) but I like very much it now. Good job!
Just two things: 1. It seems to me that Eartlikhe planet now have just clouds and no mountains or seas. Am i right? If I am, I hope there will be another iteration (pretty obvious, but let me write it) 2. I would like to see more colors on Gas planets. Even if I like them right now, they looks just like black and white photos of Jupiter. And there are no "spots" like the jupiter's Great Red Spot (if you look at real photos of jupiter there are many spots actually).
Keep up the good work.
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 12:11:00 -
[43]
3 weeks to go expect another round of enhancements Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 08:54:00 -
[44]
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.
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 09:01:00 -
[45]
read elsewhere the low res texutures now on sisi are desinged to keep the download to a smaller amount and we will see em in all their glory on dominions deployment Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
PeHD0M
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 10:24:00 -
[46]
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?
This is a very immersion breaking!
Btw, there are some problems: 1. need more colors for gas giants (includind blue, yellow etc) 2. planet rings are absent 3. ocean planets have texturing issues
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 10:38:00 -
[47]
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 :-)
|
Camios
Minmatar Insurgent New Eden Tribe Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 10:41:00 -
[48]
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?
This is a very immersion breaking!
I totally support this comment. Just ask some astronomer and they will give you some parameters to set the planets right. PUT THOSE PLANETS RIGHT!
Originally by: PeHD0M
Btw, there are some problems: 1. need more colors for gas giants (includind blue, yellow etc) 2. planet rings are absent 3. ocean planets have texturing issues
I am confident in these issue being fixed (more than about the previous one)
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:31:00 -
[49]
i think a few points - gas rings around gas planet comes into play later on with planetary ring mining
Solid planets are looking good, more colour variance ( goes for gas planet to) make it like spore full spectrum of possible colours Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Aerin Cloudfayr
the evil ones G-R-I-E-V-A-N-C-E
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 11:49:00 -
[50]
Can I ask how these planet surfaces and starfields are being generated? While they look great (damn impressed with the starfield) I'm very concerned it may be an oblique cause for pre-load/cahe lag.
I've been suffering from huge hangs of anything from a few seconds, up to several minutes while i engage warp, lose my ship, or undock. It is extremely annoying, and it locks up my whole PC.
basically -
Causes: 1) When jumping into a new system (even empty systems) 2) Warping from planet to empty, unpopulated planet etc. 3) When anything warps in/out (myself or other players)
eg;
I undocked from the Bank in FD-MLJ and began writing this post. a total of 6 hangs happened, all of them holding up my entire machine. I could not type, but what I had typed during these pauses was not lost.
When I warped to an uninhabited planet, It hung for a few seconds doing something, as there was nothing but a single Raven parked in the instance. The Raven left, and from here on I experienced not one hang.
I'm under the impression that these surfaces are procedurally generated from fractals etc at the instances' initialisation, instead of being pre-generated and dumped into cache well before the event actually occurs. I would much prefer the game used huge amounts of available memory, than hang for minutes while it generates imagedata for a planet I will never really look at. It's beautiful, but it has to be friendly as well.
Any information would be grand, but I will be submitting this as a bug report once I find out how...
|
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 12:46:00 -
[51]
procedual generation looks to be the go suggest u warp about 300 planets saw a earthlike with like 5 little islands another was much greener and had mountains and very little sea Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Inara Tyana
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 15:07:00 -
[52]
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?
Actually, its entirely possible to have a lava planet further out than an ice planet. High energy collisions can create a sea of lava on terestrial planets. AFAIK earth was once a magma ocean after a high energy collision, same event created the moon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis
|
Buster Awesomo
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 15:55:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Buster Awesomo on 12/11/2009 15:55:45 Gas Giants - nice work the banding looks good and i personaly dont think the speed of the cloud layer is too fast, any slower and you wouldn't notice the effect and therefore what the point in having it!, the speed is about right.
The Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilites between cloud bands works well and is somethign I didn't expect you to add, obv not 100% accurate but a damn excellent addition, top work go have an extra beer this friday at lunch.
"Great spot" storms are the only issue i have, they appear to bloom from the center outwards instead of having a rotation, not sure how you could encode this into the layer without having an additionaly one so i'll let you off on that, tho if you can make them rotate then i think you win ... win everything!
All in all the new graphic for space, planets etc are very nice they give new eden the depth it has needed. |
PeHD0M
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 16:16:00 -
[54]
Another example:
synchelle
p1 - earthlike - 0.2 au p2 - lava - 0.5 au p3 - ice - 1.0 au p4 - earthlike - 1.4 au p5 - lava - 2.9 au p6 - gas - 7.6 au p7 - gas - 14.3 au
Don't you think that is strange?
I suggest they use the type of star, the distance to it, and planet atmosphere pressure as basic values for measuring the possible temperature of planets.
|
Illectroculus Defined
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 16:39:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Gnulpie
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).
Sorry I don't know where you learned your astrophysics, but the intensity of a point source decays by the inverse SQUARE law, just imagine you're taking all these photons streaming away from the star and spreading them over the surface of a sphere - so it's the surface are of a sphere that's important.
Another basic observation from astronomy is that the luminosity of a star is roughly proportional to the cube of it's mass (actually it's nearer to m^3.5), which means those 10 solar mass stars are putting out 1000-3000 times the luminosity of our humble G type star which we call Sol. Habitable zones can easily extend out to 100AU depending on the star type, and closer in it's quite possible that the planets are essentialy liquid rock, evaporating away slowly into the solar wind.
Having said that, the creators of New Eden haven't really applied the physics too well and as someone who spent 10 years in research modelling this kind of thing it grates immensely. Hell maybe I should just download the DB and throw some of my old planetology code at it and see what I can produce, although it is in Fortran, I might have to rewrite it first.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 17:06:00 -
[56]
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.
|
Illectroculus Defined
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 17:57:00 -
[57]
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.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.12 18:15:00 -
[58]
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?
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 00:12:00 -
[59]
i think a full HDR implementation might be something to do down the track Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00 |
Jana Tanaka
Caldari Tanaka Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 01:11:00 -
[60]
I love the changes so far.
With regards to the question of realism.
Now.. really.. I am pretty sure the planets are also not on realistic orbits and hey... the number of habitable planets is vastly unrealistic as well...
Now that we are talking, whats up with that immersion breaking propulsion concept and those silly 250km limits to weapon ranging..
Now really get a grasp on realism.. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |