ENG New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 63 of 69«1261626364656869»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Feedback and Suggestions » General suggestions (Post your suggestions here.)
General suggestions
SpaceEngineerDate: Sunday, 21.08.2016, 12:41 | Message # 931
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4800
Status: Offline
Quote sclarinval ()
SpaceEngineer, I was looking in the FAQ and saw what you said about it not being open source. How come? I think it would be awesome to allow people to play around with it and use it in their own projects. It might also add the opportunity for other people to make awesome additions that they couldn't do currently, maybe it could allow the development to go faster if people from the community were able to help.

Remember Celestia? It is open-source, but community was not very active in it's developing. Making addons - yes. Improving rendering engine, adding new features - no. It still don't have 3D terrain on planets.

Quote Hornblower ()
you can procedurally generate different types of geological regions.

This is what SE already doing. But distribution of regions is random of course, some geologic modelling is required.

Attachments: 4500587.jpg(187Kb)





 
sclarinvalDate: Sunday, 21.08.2016, 16:44 | Message # 932
Astronaut
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 41
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
Remember Celestia? It is open-source, but community was not very active in it's developing. Making addons - yes. Improving rendering engine, adding new features - no. It still don't have 3D terrain on planets.

Hmm, interesting point. But I think SE has a much larger and more dedicated community, with lots of very talented people. Really, what's the harm? If not many people make use of it being open source then oh well, but who knows, some great things might be done by the community that would save you work lots of work and time. currently all that being closed source has done is make it harder for people to make additions.
 
hunterbickel2003Date: Sunday, 21.08.2016, 17:35 | Message # 933
Astronaut
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 43
Status: Offline
Quote
Sorry but hat is totally non realistic. The realism vibe you are talking about would be just a delusion. Buildings in other planets? What architecture do you want? and why that? There existence would depend on function (or they are just a bunch of nonsensical arbitrary ruins, therefore an unrealistic abstract additon) and what are the different functions those buildings have? How you can code those functions and those different architectures?

Also, buildings would imply some sort of intelligent life. Take No Man's Sky. Their creatures are weird and all but probably all are more terrestrial than you think. Creating creatures would be very difficult in current stages of SE, imagine coding for realistic ones (adapted to their enviroment and not arbitrary forms as in No Man's Sky atacched toghether), imaging coding for their behaviour (no one has reached this level yet) and then imagine coding also for intelligent behaviour as to make some kind of realism and sense for those buildings.

This has been asked many many times and there are two reasons this is not possible:
1.- It's absurdly difficult to implement and would always lack realism
2.- Maybe is not so realistic to consider intelligent life, or even life itself something so frequent in the universe (big posibilities are out there but maybe the difficulty of life is even bigger than that number)

By the way this suggestion is not a trivial one. Maybe you are interested in this threads:

About Intelligent Life in SE
About the difficulties of implementing procedural life (read this one carefully because Rattus is a molecular biologist and has taken care of the issue)

sorry, im more of a futuristic explorer (colonys on planets, etc.) than a modern explorer. and the building wont have a purpose, they would be there for exploration and curiosity. once again, sorry about that. though i would still like the creature thing, my imaginiation well is getting dry.
 
HornblowerDate: Monday, 22.08.2016, 20:02 | Message # 934
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 714
Status: Offline
diegofloor, that's already on the to-do list biggrin
 
HornblowerDate: Monday, 22.08.2016, 20:07 | Message # 935
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 714
Status: Offline
SpaceEngineer, I think maybe you sould have more variation in region sizes. Everything feels like it occupies the same amount of space. Going back to the Pluto example, things should have a far greater variety in size. The true nature of the universe is far more random. Here are some examples that show how complex these zones can get



Edited by Hornblower - Monday, 22.08.2016, 20:15
 
hunterbickel2003Date: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 03:41 | Message # 936
Astronaut
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 43
Status: Offline
could there be a person mode on a planet so you can jump and walk on planets with actual gravity?

Added (23.08.2016, 03:41)
---------------------------------------------
also maybe like in other almost infinite space games, how bout the stars, galaxies, star clusters, and planets have seeds procedurally generated and scientifically generated in the name so when you get close, the seed will load in the planets or stars. this could help in adding new things to the game that are too big for it originally.

 
WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 04:08 | Message # 937
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
Quote hunterbickel2003 ()
could there be a person mode on a planet so you can jump and walk on planets with actual gravity?


This is a very commonly asked about feature. Try a forum search for "surface walk" to find previous discussion about it. smile

Quote hunterbickel2003 ()
how bout the stars, galaxies, star clusters, and planets have seeds procedurally generated and scientifically generated in the name so when you get close, the seed will load in the planets or stars.


I'm not sure what you're asking here. All objects are generated procedurally with the intent of being as scientifically accurate as possible. All objects load when you get close.





 
hunterbickel2003Date: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 13:26 | Message # 938
Astronaut
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 43
Status: Offline
Quote
I'm not sure what you're asking here. All objects are generated procedurally with the intent of being as scientifically accurate as possible. All objects load when you get close.
im trying to say is that maybe wjem you get into a star cluster, instead of having billion of planets that are super small that you can't see them. how bout in other games like no mans sky or starbound, the names will have a scientific and procedural code generated in them so computers can generate stuff better.

Added (23.08.2016, 13:26)
---------------------------------------------
and things that couldnt be added before could be added i think.

 
WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 20:56 | Message # 939
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
Quote hunterbickel2003 ()
im trying to say is that maybe wjem you get into a star cluster, instead of having billion of planets that are super small that you can't see them.


That's reality. smile Planets are very small relative the distance between stars. You can see the planets by flying to them or selecting the star system and hitting F2 to bring up the solar system browser. Assuming the star system has planets (not all of them do).

No Man's Sky is not a realistic depiction of the universe -- it is not motivated by scientific accuracy.





 
hunterbickel2003Date: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 22:13 | Message # 940
Astronaut
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 43
Status: Offline
well i thought it was a good idea and way to add new stuff.

Added (23.08.2016, 22:13)
---------------------------------------------
but can space engine support 3d procedurally generated creatures on the info screen instead of the planet?

Edited by hunterbickel2003 - Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 22:09
 
CanleskisDate: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 22:34 | Message # 941
Space Pilot
Group: Users
France
Messages: 117
Status: Offline
Quote hunterbickel2003 ()
but can space engine support 3d procedurally generated creatures on the info screen instead of the planet?


not yet.
 
WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 22:43 | Message # 942
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
Procedural creatures are not a part of Space Engine yet. It is on the list of things to do, but are not labelled as priority or even certain if possible, since a believable generation system (not just randomly slapping models together independently of the environment) would take a huge amount of work for not as much benefit, and development is focused on other aspects of the engine and gameplay.




 
hunterbickel2003Date: Tuesday, 23.08.2016, 23:17 | Message # 943
Astronaut
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 43
Status: Offline
oh ok.
 
TheCosmicEngineerDate: Saturday, 27.08.2016, 21:13 | Message # 944
Observer
Group: Newbies
Spain
Messages: 4
Status: Offline
I've been exploring in wikipedia and I found these types of hypothetical stars that are not confirmed yet to exist or have existed. But I cant stop imagine how well they would look like in Space Engine. Could you add one or all them in the future? biggrin

Quasi-star: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-star

Quark star: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark_star

Preon and Boson star: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_star#Preon_stars

Dark star: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_star_(Newtonian_mechanics)

Q star: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_star
 
StyraxDate: Saturday, 27.08.2016, 22:15 | Message # 945
Observer
Group: Newbies
Netherlands
Messages: 1
Status: Offline
Is it possible to report temperature of the lighted and dark sides for planets/moons/asteroids/comets/etc. without enough atmosphere separately? For a planet/moon with enough atmosphere, we can simply assume that winds have already make the temperature homogeneous all over the planets/moon. But for those without so much atmosphere, I think it would be more relevant to report the temperature in the light and shadows separately. For example, the temperature of Mercury is about 100K in the night and 700K in the daylight. This is a huge difference. The estimation of the lighted side is easy. As for the dark side, I guess the temperature should be a function of the length of a solar day. If the solar day is long enough, the dark side of the planet/moon/etc. will finally lose all the heat it gets during the day and reaches the CMB temperature.

Certainly, it would be even better if SE could report the max and min temperature for planets/moons with enough atmosphere. In this case, we have to take the atmosphere into consideration and set some coefficient to describe the rate of atmospheric heat transfer. I am not quite sure whether there is a simple equation to do this... But anyway, for the planets/moons/asteroids/comets without much atmosphere, I guess it should not be very difficult to report the extreme temperatures in addition to the average temperature...


Edited by Styrax - Saturday, 27.08.2016, 22:48
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Feedback and Suggestions » General suggestions (Post your suggestions here.)
Page 63 of 69«1261626364656869»
Search: