Interiors Vs FDEV's Escape Argument

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

Here's the thing, the Cobra Engine can already do a player in a room (the concourse) in a space station while other players are in their ships in the station.
I know nothing about programming or the Cobra engine but that sounds to me like layers within layers.

In other words: it's doable, it's actually already done, Frontier is just too lazy to do the extra work for ships, exactly like with damage models

 

[khalismur]

[...] the real reason for no interiors - and FDev have even admitted to it. COBRA isn't capable of doing it. They apparently can't get the engine to deal with models inside models - or at least not beyond ship in station...

Sauce for this please!

In other words: it's doable, it's actually already done, Frontier is just too lazy to do the extra work for ships, exactly like with damage models

Imagine having damage models for ships, that's so 2013 yikes. For example, Gta 5/online has detailed localized damage models for all vehicles since launch (over 500 different cars, bikes, motorcycles, boats, planes, etc as of today - all of them have damage models ).

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

Sauce for this please!

Imagine having damage models for ships, that's so 2013 yikes. For example, Gta 5/online has detailed localized damage models for all vehicles since launch (over 500 different cars, bikes, motorcycles, boats, planes, etc as of today - all of them have damage models ).

Go back a lot further. Gta 3 had that on ps2 in 2001. What's that 20 years ago? Git gud fdev

 

[GunnerBill]

It's more simple than that. He claimed that having to go through the entire ship each time you were entering or leaving would get old, fair enough. At the same time, we get to sprint from the ship to concourse each time anyway.

That got old while I was doing it for the first time.

 

[B1rdy]

And yet brabes said himself "the entire game was built from the ground up with ship interiors in mind" so one of those two statements is a bold faced lie.

Why is then that the scaling of ships or parts of them is way off? Maybe FDev has a different understanding of "from the ground up".

@Dartay Here is the example I did not get any response to.

Long story short, if you didn't want to create it as bolt-on feature, you needed to almost completely redisgn basic game mechanics.
Just imagine a current game loop were you are interdicted, the aggressor then shoots out your drives, but now the game requires you to repair the drives manually.

Again, I am not saying it can't be done. All im saying is, FDev has delivered sort of a bare minimum on way easier addons to ED. And they are apparently trying to avoid changing existing systems and rather choose to "bolt-on" new features.
You can dismiss my arguments as much as you like, but the past is telling.

Here's the thing, the Cobra Engine can already do a player in a room (the concourse) in a space station while other players are in their ships in the station.
I know nothing about programming or the Cobra engine but that sounds to me like layers within layers.

At least CIG really had trouble with the physics (in a network environment) (despite the team being 3 to 4 times larger). Players entering other players ships, while others remain on the pad / station.

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

Why is then that the scaling of ships or parts of them is way off? Maybe FDev has a different understanding of "from the ground up".

@Dartay Here is the example I did not get any response to.
Again, I am not saying it can't be done. All im saying is, FDev has delivered sort of a bare minimum on way easier addons to ED. And they are apparently trying to avoid changing existing systems and rather choose to "bolt-on" new features.
You can dismiss my arguments as much as you like, but the past is telling.

At least CIG really had trouble with the physics (in a network environment) (despite the team being 3 to 4 times larger). Players entering other players ships, while others remain on the pad / station.

You know, I'd never thought of that pretty much everything they say does seem to have some alternative meaning to what is typically meant, given the differences between their words and their actions. You may be on to something with that

 

[Kelster87]

At least CIG really had trouble with the physics (in a network environment) (despite the team being 3 to 4 times larger). Players entering other players ships, while others remain on the pad / station.

And now we are getting to the meat of it..

 

[Juniper]

It's such a nonsense excuse, and quite obviously so, because you can easily turn it around and say "Well, what about...?"

Lost all respect for Arthur when he said that. Just say you don't want to do it, and give the middle finger to the millions (?) of players who want ship interiors & who realise how much the game actually needs them.

If they would actually be honest, instead of just pretending to be, that would be better.

 

[Winterdyne]

And now we are getting to the meat of it..

CIG's physics grid interaction issues are mostly due to forgetting it's a game to some extent and crafting it as a world sim - having that seamless transition between physics grids when it can be pretty easily faked by having an animation for the actual transition and empirically setting position in the new grid. Once things are actually set in their new grid / scenegraph node things are pretty stable. Yes, it's a bit janky, but it is a reliable method.

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

It's such a nonsense excuse, and quite obviously so, because you can easily turn it around and say "Well, what about...?"

Lost all respect for Arthur when he said that. Just say you don't want to do it, and give the middle finger to the millions (?) of players who want ship interiors & who realise how much the game actually needs them.

If they would actually be honest, instead of just pretending to be, that would be better.

 

[Alien]

At least CIG really had trouble with the physics (in a network environment) (despite the team being 3 to 4 times larger). Players entering other players ships, while others remain on the pad / station.

Which is why I made another suggestion elsewhere on this forum: You can only walk around inside your ship when it is landed. While in motion, the G forces would kill you.

 

[Iron Golem]

I mean, Braben did quote John F. Kennedy (Which I thought was utterly ridiculous...) "We don't do things because they are easy, we do them because they are hard..." So even if interiors are hard, according to Brabs that would be why he would do them.

Clown world.

 

[CapuchinSeven]

When you land on any planet you can dismiss and recall your ship, that auto pilot feature already exists so why (if you did picked a large ship) could you not have had an option in planning your mission to 'Launch Upon Boarding' .... as soon as you board, the ship auto launches to orbit while you make your way to the bridge

Sooooooo I am not against ship interiors but....

...given the acceleration of ships in normal space and the fact there is no artificial gravity/inertial dampeners* in ED, you'd instantly become a huge mess on the wall when the ship accelerated.

Basically if we get ship interiors and you want to be moving around in them, the ships cannot be moving, at all.

* FD think they are being all "realistic" by not having artificial gravity/inertial dampeners because they think that's too fantasy for them but in a game with this kind of game play it actually creates more science holes than it fixes; by the time you've been through them all you quickly arrive at the point where you realise it makes more sense to have artificial gravity/inertial dampeners than it does to not.

 

[Winterdyne]

Sooooooo I am not against ship interiors but....

...given the acceleration of ships in normal space and the fact there is no artificial gravity/inertial dampeners* in ED, you'd instantly become a huge mess on the wall when the ship accelerated.

Basically if we get ship interiors and you want to be moving around in them, the ships cannot be moving, at all.

* FD think they are being all "realistic" by not having artificial gravity/inertial dampeners because they think that's too fantasy for them but in a game with this kind of game play it actually creates more science holes than it fixes; by the time you've been through them all you quickly arrive at the point where you realise it makes more sense to have artificial gravity/inertial dampeners than it does to not.

And the crew compartment needs to be as close to the centre of rotation as possible. Which it isn't.

It's better in a game to have something technically wrong that feels right than technically right that is impractical or feels wrong.

 

[CapuchinSeven]

And the crew compartment needs to be as close to the centre of rotation as possible. Which it isn't.

It's better in a game to have something technically wrong that feels right than technically right that is impractical or feels wrong.

Yup, they end up having to jump through more impossible hoops to try and explain space travel and g force in ED (magical flight suits and genetic engineering to explain why your brain doesn't smash into your skull, you can't just spin a giant object and shout "gravity on, boom done" etc) than they would if they just said "small scale inertial control is possible but the technology doesn't scale up well".

Frankly, if humans expect to be a space faring species we'll be pretty bad at it if we've not mastered gravity control/creation in 1000 years (assuming it's possible but that's what sci fi is for)

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

I keep saying it. Video games require a degree of suspension of disbelief. We do it for every other game and movie.

Suspension of disbelief, sometimes called willing suspension of disbelief, is the intentional avoidance of critical thinking or logic in examining something unreal or impossible in reality, such as a work of speculative fiction, in order to believe it for the sake of enjoyment. Wikipedia

This would cover our fsds and exclusion zones on things like black holes and such. If we're already doing it......

 

[CapuchinSeven]

I think I've got that right!

Basically, if the ship moves (accelerates) and you're not strapped literally on to it (and floating freely in zero g) the side of the ship will smash into you at extreme speed the second someone boosts (ED ships are very fast) and you'll be dead. You can take this even further and apply the same issue to your brain floating inside your skull.

Splat. Don't even get my started on ramming attacks. Bye bye eye balls.

IF the ship stayed on a straight line with no turns or changes in speed (slower or faster) you'd be fine to float around, not really impossible in ED.

Basically, they have to think up all sorts of magical and mystical ways to get around this (flight suits and so on) that a) wouldn't work so b) also have to break the laws of physics anyway you do just kinda have to wonder why they didn't just say "yup, small scale gravity manipulation".

 

[Stealthie]

sorry if this has already been sugested but....

Arthur said one of the reasons you wouldn't want Interiors is becuase if you were in a hurry retreating from a base you would not want to have to make your way to the bridge through a large ship becuase of the urgent need to 'get out of there'

If he said that, he's got very little imagination when it comes to game design.

Based on the current game-mechanic, there could simply be a list of choices for "where" you board the ship.
Run into the glowy circle, click "Board - Flight Deck" and you're ready to "get out of there".
Alternatively, you might click "Board - Hanger Deck" or "Board - Cargo Deck" etc instead.

More immersively, I'd prefer it if you could ascend a (human-sized) ladder or stairs, enter an elevator and then select a destination from the elevator controls.
Granted, that would take some time, which could be an issue if your ship was being attacked at the time, but meh.

 

[Winterdyne]

You know how Star Citizen gets around the 'it takes time to run through the ship to get away'?

It doesn't. You have a ship that you can jump in the back of quick, and you have a mate fly it. They have ships that are designed specifically for use by multiple crew. They have ships that are totally impractical for a solo player to fly (without a hired AI crew that doesn't currently exist in game). Yes, those several-hundred-dollar ships? You need a good few people to fly. Hella fun when you can all get on, but solo, not so neat.

Or you take a fighter that you can just jump in the cockpit of straight away and not stress.

I don't know why people think it shouldn't be a really bad idea to use a corvette or anaconda as a dropship.

Edit: My corvette is my go-to space ship. For odyssey, I've dropped back to using a Cobra. Far more practical.

 

[Alien]

let me think about this... From a layman's understanding of gravity, it's generated by a planetary body and is bubbled around the planetary body. Anything coming into contact with it will be attracted to that pull of the planetary body's gravity well and be drawn down to the pull of the well (Kersplat!). So far, so good, if you have enough momentum greater than the pull, then the pull doesn't affect you (may deflect your course abit) but you negate its effects ( the whole plus/minus thing).

Zero - g (ie: in space not near to a planetary body) you wouldn't be affected by the engine thrust as it is outside in a non gravity environment, and any maneuvering wouldn't necessarily affect you so you could actually move about on a ship as it was doing somersaults and tripping the light fantastic as the thrust is relative as you are moving at the same speed. Unless you hit part of a gravity well (Star, Planet,Moon, large asteroid....) then it would depend on the strength of the gravity, how close the ship is to the gravity and to the speed the ship is travelling to determine if it is greater than the gravity pull ... everything on the ship (including the pilot) will be travelling at the same speed. So the danger points would be exiting Frameshift drive and appearing ontop of the system star, landing on or taking off from a planetary body... but in 3300AD I would assume the computer astro-navigation tech would be at a level as to know how to manage these situations so as to not cause squishy human blancmange!

Therefore yes you would be advisable to be seated and belted in place for when you pull away initially (take off - think of modern jet airplane and the feeling of the thrust of the engines), but you wouldn't have (and I guess the engines wouldn't allow for...) escape velocity 0 to whatever mph immediately the ship needs, according to the planetary body. You would probably be flying much less than Mach 1, in the beginning until ship systems unlock to allow for orbital flight and supercruise acceleration... Additionally, wouldn't you be travelling away from the ground at an angle initially rather than straight up. The gravity lessens as you rise higher and higher away from the ground; meaning more thrust isn't as oppressive as the gravity lessens, especially high altitude ascent- low orbital flight as it would be initially... as long as you are tanked up with oxygen in the ship to stop hypoxemia... then I don't see the problem.

I think I've got that right!

I was just giving a hand-wavium excuse to make things easier for Frontier from a programming technicality point of view, and to get around the excuse that moving around inside a moving ship would be a programming nightmare.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to be able to say "Well, actually ...."