Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Obsidian Hawk
Free Galactic Enterprises FREGE
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 07:42:00 -
[1]
Hey OH here just wanted to give some ideas to CCP's eye candy team.
As many players know there are several and very beautiful environments around eve. some that are so specatcular you just kinda sit there and enjoy the view.
As eve's graphics and dynamics progress into the future we must look at new ways to keep eve visually stunning.
Turn out the lights!!! While stars and a coold bg provide a lot ot look at, what if we were to take the star's illumination out of the equation. Let ships and the area be illuminated by their own lights. could be interesting could be fun with cloaky vessels.
RL BG - those burnt out stars are called brown dwarves, they retain the gravity of a star but emit no light. EG, dark matter. this would allow the game to keep within its bg.
Option B woudl be, we have several nebula like clouds in ded space areas, plexes, and on some gates in teh metropolis/heimatar region. instead of bright yellow colours make them dark greys and blacks , kinda like the old erebus DD.
I love bright colours as much as the next person but there is a lot to play with here, lets ditch the bright suns and nebulas an see if we can make a darker spookier place.
EvE has a long history of good and evil, let the evil rise again.
|
Ti'anla
Minmatar NOVA Innovations Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 08:13:00 -
[2]
Nice thought though this seems... I don't think a global redo of EVE's visual style is the way to go, or a good idea.
Rather, maybe we should be pushing for some reason to operate in deep space under certain circumstances, far away from a sun's light. That'd be cool /and/ it'd implement your idea.
Though a compromise might be to increase stellar realism a little, and make the suns actually become faint as you move into the outer reaches of a solar system, how much so depending on their size.
|
Bevil Smyth
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 14:52:00 -
[3]
getting darker the further away you are from the sun would be ace.
also why dont ships engines cast light on the ships themselves? it just looks wierd. ============================ 2003 and still alive! |
Ti'anla
Minmatar NOVA Innovations Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 15:20:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Ti''anla on 12/01/2010 15:20:09 They do o.o For what I've seen. It's more a flaw in how the game handles lighting that makes it look otherwise.
From what I can tell, the light source is a 'dot' just outside the engine, and thus only lights its immediate area - and engine baffles prevent that light from spreading. I'm almost certain I saw my Probe's engines lighting the inside of their housings between the points where they were too bright to see or too faint to notice.
The fix for this, while possible by making the engines themselves a light source, might be pretty taxing compared to what we currently have.
|
Gecko O'Bac
Achmed-Terrorist IUS PRIMAE N0CTIS
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 15:45:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Ti'anla Edited by: Ti''anla on 12/01/2010 15:20:09 They do o.o For what I've seen. It's more a flaw in how the game handles lighting that makes it look otherwise.
From what I can tell, the light source is a 'dot' just outside the engine, and thus only lights its immediate area - and engine baffles prevent that light from spreading. I'm almost certain I saw my Probe's engines lighting the inside of their housings between the points where they were too bright to see or too faint to notice.
The fix for this, while possible by making the engines themselves a light source, might be pretty taxing compared to what we currently have.
Actually that's not a bug. Or at least, that's how lights in a vacuum is supposed to work. Since there's no diffraction due to particles, the light only hits targets directly illuminated (IE: you can draw a straight uninterrupted line from the source to the point you want to illuminate).
That said, while reducing the overall luminosity of the scenes would be much more realistic, it would also prove quite boring after a while since the "real" space is pretty much completely black, with the stars (even the system's own star) barely illuminating anything 'cept for the surface of planets. In truth, cloaking in space wouldn't need any "visual cloak" like it does in eve. Barely suppressing high energy EM and thermal emissions would render a ship completely invisibile in space, since direct eye contact is negligible in such a wide theater with so little background light to contrast a target with. Painting a ship black would render it invisible at any distance higher than a couple of hundreds of meters.
|
Obsidian Hawk
Free Galactic Enterprises FREGE
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 18:22:00 -
[6]
to the previous posts -
The engines should cause some partial illumination of the ship, we have some sort of fuel that emits particles right?
But ok black could get boring but luminosity based on distance could work. If you know ur math about the inverse ration luminosity could be based off of distance, but we would have to use Earth as an example.
EX Earth luminosity = 1 Because we are 1 AU from the sun.
Luminosity = 1 / Distance in AU from a star.
1 L = 1 / 1 AU
Mars
.75 = 1 / 1.5 AU
Jupiter
.33 L = 1 / 3 AU
so on and so forth. After a while the luminosity L approaches 0 but never 0, so you will always have some of the stars luminosity on your ship and planets.
I do see what you guys are saying a lot of planets could become black, but maybe set a low point cut off for them. say 10%? Ships though would have no low point cut off. (though i think we could just mess with the planets graphics to account for that)
We could also take into account some planets in eve (Magma) produce their own light, which could be reflected off of moons and therefore add more luminosity to the planets.
Ok, yeah this really sounds super complex, but this is EvE who is to say it woudl be simple?
------
Fake edit - another possible solution would be to change some of the models to more accureatly reflect their distance from the star. Say a gate was 65 AU from the star, it should have a darker more black textures than the shiny gunmetal grey.
Thoughts, ideas? |
Rhedyn
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 19:54:00 -
[7]
Well, much like sounds (of which there are none in space...), what we perceive via the interface an interpretation through all sorts of sensors and things to help us, as pilots, understand what is happening around us. While space may be a "black void" to the human visual spectrum, it's filled with energy above and below what human eyes can see. Much like looking through nightvision goggles, we're seeing an enhanced view of what is out there.
|
Ti'anla
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 20:11:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Gecko O'Bac Actually that's not a bug. Or at least, that's how lights in a vacuum is supposed to work. Since there's no diffraction due to particles, the light only hits targets directly illuminated (IE: you can draw a straight uninterrupted line from the source to the point you want to illuminate).
That said, while reducing the overall luminosity of the scenes would be much more realistic, it would also prove quite boring after a while since the "real" space is pretty much completely black, with the stars (even the system's own star) barely illuminating anything 'cept for the surface of planets. In truth, cloaking in space wouldn't need any "visual cloak" like it does in eve. Barely suppressing high energy EM and thermal emissions would render a ship completely invisibile in space, since direct eye contact is negligible in such a wide theater with so little background light to contrast a target with. Painting a ship black would render it invisible at any distance higher than a couple of hundreds of meters.
*headshakes* My argument was the problem is the light source is a pixel behind the engines rather than the whole flame. No, not a bug, but still a realism break.
That aside, though, and risking getting onto a very dangerous subject, do you have any idea how hard it is to achieve a cloak in space? Covering up thermal emissions is almost completely impossible, as even if you managed to achieve that, you'd cook the contents of the ship alive - and then cook them some more trying to cool it down. Thermodynamics and all that. Which is probably why EVE only mentions the visual part and quietly has done with the matter for the sake of fun.
|
Drakarin
Gallente The Abyssmal Spire Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2010.01.12 20:29:00 -
[9]
Indeed a problem I currently have is that the stars inside the solar systems we visit are WAY too bright, when you get beyond 2 AU (that's 300 MILLION KM) the star should be a little brighter than ordinary ones, yes, but when you're 10 AU and beyond... it's reaching close to the point of Neptune orbit. the sun ain't that bright that far away.
|
Obsidian Hawk
Free Galactic Enterprises FREGE
|
Posted - 2010.01.13 04:17:00 -
[10]
o/ to my allies in INDY
but yes, this is a problem, the starts are much too bight that far out, I could see that being ok in a system wtih like red giants, but not normal systems.
But also, we dont know how they set up the solar systems and how the lighting really works. It could be, that the models for stars are just too big and need to be shrunk say 33% Just some numbers out there.
Wish we could sit down and talk with the devs about it, I would like to know more personally how they did it. |
|
Ai Mei
|
Posted - 2010.01.13 21:16:00 -
[11]
The problem with the proposed method is that 1/x where X is the amount of AU from the star would be those that are < 1 au would be exponentially brighter.
A cut off for total luminosity would have to be set too as 1 being the highest.
Although for those being > than 1 AU away from a star the forumula of 1/ (.5X) would be better for luminosity as planets will not get as dark as fast.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |