Tenuous Atmospheres: How Will They Work...?

Let's see when they reveal examples of the new planets. At the very least we are looking at a range of different depths of atmosphere, they won't all be the same. It looks like there's different strengths of atmosphere in the images they've already released, the trailer looks weaker from space than the one in the overclockers image.

I'm also curious as to whether or not there will be flight model changes beyond visuals. Weather is a particular favorite request for me - the white outs on Star Citizen are impressive, even if they don't affect flight physics, simply because visual impacts are themselves gameplay.

On the ground, wind, dust, and other visual effects are welcome. Anything more (slowing your flight with jet pack, throwing you around like an SRV hitting a tiny rock, etc) is difficult to develop and resource intensive. Very cool, but very difficult, too.

We shall see, either way.
 
Imagine Odyssey ends up being mind-blowing in how awesome it is ☺

Also, I really enjoyed the original post you put some effort in to that, thank you!!
 
I wish they'd hit out with one of the promised developer diaries.

I hope that's something they plan on doing every few weeks between now and Odyssey, and not a couple of fluff pieces released a few days before launch.

There's enough unanswered questions floating around about the update that they could answer one major thing a week between now and then, and we'd still be discovering new things on release day.
 
I’m not at all convinced that FD’s ‘tenuous’ will be the same as astronomical ‘tenuous atmospheres‘.

nice to hear that some have such faith

but i don’t

as ever, hope i’m wrong
 
Say what you want about skyboxes, but I actually like a nice blue sky - it makes planets feel surprisingly different to me. It must be some biological thing.

BlueSky1.jpg


BlueSky2.jpg


BlueSky3.jpg


BlueSky4.jpg


Once the city on this planet is on the day side, I'll grab some pictures from it as well. In the meantime, I've got to try this in VR :D
 
Last edited:
In order to avoid disappointment I'm assuming that we'll get a new selection of rocky and icy bodies to land on, which only differ from the existing rocky and icy bodies by the color of the skyboxes.

There will also be some more inanimate objects to shoot mats off.

Anything more detailed or in-depth will be a pleasant surprise.

So much this. It's all I'm expecting really, which is a shame but oh well.
 
If you look in the way the journals report planets, non-landable planets are already sorted by atmosphere: "thin", "normal" and "thick". It seems to me that if they're talking about giving us "tenuous atmospheres", then it's the ones currently labelled "thin" that will be added with Odyssey.

In Sol system, the only world with a "thin" atmosphere is Pluto. Titan and Venus are "thick". Io, Earth and Mars are "normal".
 
If you look in the way the journals report planets, non-landable planets are already sorted by atmosphere: "thin", "normal" and "thick". It seems to me that if they're talking about giving us "tenuous atmospheres", then it's the ones currently labelled "thin" that will be added with Odyssey.

In Sol system, the only world with a "thin" atmosphere is Pluto. Titan and Venus are "thick". Io, Earth and Mars are "normal".


Nice one, didn’t realise that! Does sound like safe bet :)

Do you mean the journal API then? Or in-game?

I can see an example output of scan data includes this in the journal:

"Atmosphere":"thin neon rich atmosphere"


I wonder if it could be scraped in any interesting ways? Or if one of the community sites already hosts that info? Could see which currently inaccessible planet types are included in 'thin' maybe?
 
Last edited:
Yes, that. You don't see the "thick" and "thin" in-game, only in the journals and places that report what the journals say (like EDD and EDSM).

I've labelled as "normal" any atmosphere description that doesn't have either "thick" or "thin" in it; this may or may not be an accurate assumption. And because Earth-like atmospheres are "normal" by this definition, it therefore would mean we won't get Earth-likes in this first iteration of atmospheric landables.
 
As others have observed, in the Sol system the bodies that have what astronomers might call a "tenuous" atmosphere mostly are landable and are classified as airless in-game. And that makes sense, all those geologically active bodies with geysers and such like would certainly have those extremely thin atmospheres made up of the vapor component of whatever is in those jets. All of those bodies would have the sort of black sky and at most local haze that we see on landable bodies today.

In game, there are planets that are described as "tenuous" atmosphere in the system map, which I think is how it represents atmospheres with less than 0.01 atm surface pressure. This is actually reasonably thick by astronomical standards - thicker than what Mars has today. Those bodies would have blue (or other colors!) skies, clouds, dust storms, aurorae and other weather-like phenomena. However, despite what The Martian might suggest, those worlds will usually not have an atmosphere dense enough for wind to be perceptible, nor to produce precipitation or storms. They would however often be thick enough to produce noticeable reentry heating effects at high speed, so there's the possibility of interesting approach effects.
 
Although tenuous doesn't have a fixed definition in science, it's often used, as OP said, to refer to the slightly elevated levels of free atoms and molecules around bodies like the Moon and Mercury. These "atmospheres" are thicker than open space but still about as good a vacuum as we can create in a lab, and essentially are vacuum for most aerodynamic purposes.

There are also bodies which are not enveloped in an atmosphere per se, but outgassing, volcanism, and electrostatically elevated matter periodically cause temporary pockets or plumes of "stuff" to be present near the surface. We've actually got planets with this level of "tenuous atmosphere" in the game (excluding the Europa-style plumes and the Moon -- the latter blocked because cities, not because atmosphere). You can see it in the faint haze and seasonal "crater fog" you get on some planets. We're still talking hundredths or thousandths of a bar at best. There's no need to model the effects of this on ships at the normal-space speeds we travel at near planets.

These may get upgraded, but, with the fact they already exist, I think the tenuous atmospheres of Odyssey have to then be those up to roughly modern-day Mars level. Which is about 1% Earth atmospheric pressure. Those without complex weather systems and large bodies of liquids. Maybe some light wind and dust plumes. Some wispy, scattered clouds perhaps.

I'd be disappointed if there wasn't some effect on the flight model at those pressures. Perhaps small, pseudo-aerodynamic craft like Eagles, Cobras and Vipers will have an advantage down there.
Over the last year or so, I have done some digging into the exospheres on landable planets that exist currently in the game, and the cutoff appears to be right at 99.99 pascals, or roughly 1/5 of real life Mars.
 
Let's be real here, amount of work that went into currently landable planets, some surface organics, volcanisms and etc. To think about it, it's pretty impressive and I'd imagine quite hard work put into it. And not only landing, but most of the stuff they added. So, literally half the job's done. A bit of flora added, other surfaces, atmo effects, like rain, snow fog, storm, dust storm? That would be very impressive.

If they really gonna slack off on content for Odyssey, it would really break our hearts...
 
I wouldn't read too much into the word tenuous at this point anyway. Perhaps it is originally taken from some scientific terminology in their use of it, but I'm not convinced its implementation will be held to that as a standard. In fact, I doubt it.
 
Nice OP mate! Very good approach


"an atmosphere so thin that its few atoms or molecules are unlikely to collide with one another"
...
(winds, dust storms etc). The trailer's use of sky colouration is perhaps suggestive that FDev's definition of 'tenuous' could extend that far.
I think the 2 things are contraddictory that's why I don't believe that the official FDEV wording "tenuous" has the same meaning as the scientific term.
In this respect we can already land on scientific tenuous atmospheric planets in the game and the ones that are not accessible are locked for other reasons (lore and lack of consistency - Moon).
I believe that "tenuous" or "thin" atmosphere for FDEV is more a description about the features included.

Referring to the trailer I believe that TENUOUS means:
  • colored sky
  • without weather effects (clouds, rain, wind)
  • absence of water and liquids
  • incapable of sustaining life.
In fact in the trailer we see the blu sky but all the rest is missing. The only sand that we see moving is affected by the ship thrusters so definitely not a natural effect.

the Moon is also permit locked already due to high population
The strange thing is that we can't land on the moon but it's not permit locked. In the system map there's no reference to the permit and there's no red circle around it. To me the moon is one of the greatest mistery of the Horizons season.

Amplified effects for existing fumeroles
This would be a great improvement. As I already said yesterday in another thread, ED features are currently designed in "boxes". You can only see and interact with stuff when you open the box (POI's). This is a big immersion breaker and it really needs to go. Fumaroles and volcanic eruptions visible from space would add a great level of immersion: just imagine the same effect seen from space (little and insignificant) and from the surface (huge, scary and dangerous).

the white outs on Star Citizen are impressive, even if they don't affect flight physics
They do, even if very little. Two days ago I was approaching a base on one of the Microtech moon and the ship nose was constantly drifting left following the lateral wind direction.
Anything more (slowing your flight with jet pack, throwing you around like an SRV hitting a tiny rock, etc) is difficult to develop and resource intensive.
That's not true. These things are already in the game if you think about it.
Inside Thargoid attacked stations there are explosions that push your ship around. This is not very different from a wind gust.
 
I'm also curious as to whether or not there will be flight model changes beyond visuals. Weather is a particular favorite request for me - the white outs on Star Citizen are impressive, even if they don't affect flight physics, simply because visual impacts are themselves gameplay.

On the ground, wind, dust, and other visual effects are welcome. Anything more (slowing your flight with jet pack, throwing you around like an SRV hitting a tiny rock, etc) is difficult to develop and resource intensive. Very cool, but very difficult, too.

We shall see, either way.

A jetpack will be the same as having one SRV thruster on your character (i.e. from a game engine perspective its modular). Although ships seem to interact with planet surface meshes oddly (landing legs don't meet the ground) SRVs are much better at physical interaction (i.e. the collision mesh is per polygon rather than some proxy shape).

Simple weather like wind is 'just' vector maths (soming from someone who struggles with it in home made games) or some sort of emitter (depending on game engine / what you want to do).

The most difficult part is actually the visual side of things. Cloud formations have to be identical in space as well as on the ground and across instances, volumetric (i.e. 2D 'billboards' behave oddly at close range so problems mitigated) and possibly computationally expensive to sculpt them artistically- or, establish rules to make them more realistic in formation (which is going down the sim route and challenging).

JPE / PC has weather effects (PC has proc gen clouds I think) but applying that in ED will be an increased challenge.
 
Back
Top Bottom