Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 155

Thread: Atmospheric Worlds. A Start?

  1. #61
    Originally Posted by avow555 View Post (Source)
    Read the forums regulary and there are plenty of people struggling specifically on planets and around stations.
    Wildlife and fauna now they are easy on hardware.
    Simply put, some folk are going to be upgrading before ELW are going to work for them.
    Did you not read anything I said or just ignored most of it. Because it sure looks like it. There will be no issues rendering earthlikes at the moment. Sure I expect some peoples PC's to struggle on some parts, but that will be people that have very low end machines.

    They would need to upgrade. Considering Horizons runs pretty well on such low end computers is pretty incredible, but they shouldn't expect it run full earthlikes at the highest settings. I expect the minimum specs would need to be a bit higher for that, but it will be perfectly fine for the hardware of today.

    At the moment the minimum specs for Horizons are: Nvidia GTX 470 / ATI 7240HD. This is seven year old hardware and well out of date, but it still runs. I am pretty sure people are running horizons on lesser hardware as well.

    My own PC which isn't cutting edge (my i5 2500k is 6/7 years old and my GPU an AMD Fury is 2 years old) gets over 200 FPS in space and over a 100 on planets and stations on ultra settings when not in VR.

    I see no issues with earthlikes as stated due to the fact that we will not have infinite distance rendering like we do in space or non-atmospheric planets. It could actually be easier on your hardware then what we have now.

  2. #62
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    I see no issues with earthlikes as stated due to the fact that we will not have infinite distance rendering like we do in space or non-atmospheric planets. It could actually be easier on your hardware then what we have now.
    This is actually interesting point. I have played 'Pioneer' now and then (amazing open source effort to recreate Frontier: Elite 2), and some of planets there have ridiculously huge plains with highlands in background. Horizons there are just incredible. My GTX 760 struggles a lot to render that.

    For atmospheric planets tradeoffs are that first, you see atmosphere, you don't see stars or other planets or moons that much. Horizons are more obstructed, again, because of atmosphere, and also because of atmosphere surface has been shaped a lot. While there's more details, there's more stuff hidden from your eyes.

    To be fair though, I expect requirements to be upped for the game when/if we get there.

  3. #63
    I don't think landing on EWL will be that difficult to achieve. I think most people just have way to big expectations.

    I can imagine landing on a high populated EWL (like earth) will be very similar to landing on a Coriolis station or an asteroid base.

    You will get assign a landing corridor, if you leave that you get a warning and then shot down.

    No way they would leave people free roam with spaceships on a highly populated planet. Which would also be highly unrealistic.
    There are flight restrictions and rules.

  4. #64
    Originally Posted by aguettinger View Post (Source)
    I don't think landing on EWL will be that difficult to achieve. I think most people just have way to big expectations.

    I can imagine landing on a high populated EWL (like earth) will be very similar to landing on a Coriolis station or an asteroid base.

    You will get assign a landing corridor, if you leave that you get a warning and then shot down.

    No way they would leave people free roam with spaceships on a highly populated planet. Which would also be highly unrealistic.
    There are flight restrictions and rules.
    When it comes to heavily populated earthlikes, I completely agree with you. What jurisdiction would allow your massive ship with enough firepower to level cities to just fly around anywhere on the planet.
    I suspect we will need to get landing clearance in orbit/orbital cruise, and then get a corridor to travel down. If you deviate from that for too long, you will be destroyed by the planetary defences.

  5. #65
    Originally Posted by Cmdr Eagleboy View Post (Source)
    To be fair though, I expect requirements to be upped for the game when/if we get there.
    Same here, but todays hardware and hardware a few years old should be able to cope.

  6. #66
    Originally Posted by CMDR S. Russell View Post (Source)
    So, a placeholder? Then no.
    Graphics will always be improved upon anyway. If the gameplay is fine (Flight model and such), why keep waiting until the graphics are 'done'? That never happens anyway (see endless 'refactoring' at CIG).

  7. #67
    I actually like NMS's planets, though some of the colors can be a bit "fantasy". NMS runs great on my PS4 Slim, so I'm not sure why we assume such planets would kill hardware if introduced to ED.

    Too bad video games aren't like our ships. I'd transfer the "terrain generator" module from NMS and insert it into that big, empty "landable ELW / atmo" slot in ED. Sure, it's an E-rated module (perhaps C after latest update), but I'll happily take it for now!

    I've bookmarked all my ELW first discoveries so I can visit them again someday when I'm allowed to land on them.

  8. #68
    Originally Posted by Cmdr Eagleboy View Post (Source)
    To be fair though, I expect requirements to be upped for the game when/if we get there.
    They are already being upgraded: OpenGL, DX11, 64b...

  9. #69
    Originally Posted by Vardaugas View Post (Source)
    I rather have them do it properly, step by step, adding more details to the planetary engine and with each detail adding more planets that qualify. Earth like worlds are at the very end of this development with the greatest variety of details required. Half-assing it will not do anyone a favor.
    I still can't believe people actually think we will still get Earthlike worlds to walk around on.

    You've seen the difficulty SC are having haven't you, with silly money and staffing they still can't do it.

    It's stupid to think FD could do it as an expansion pack when SC can't do it as the main part of their game!

    The money, time and tech needed to do it would be too much. Especially for an expansion pack, how much could they charge? £20, £30? At what price does it stop being an expansion pack?

  10. #70
    Originally Posted by Old Duck View Post (Source)
    I actually like NMS's planets, though some of the colors can be a bit "fantasy". NMS runs great on my PS4 Slim, so I'm not sure why we assume such planets would kill hardware if introduced to ED.

    Too bad video games aren't like our ships. I'd transfer the "terrain generator" module from NMS and insert it into that big, empty "landable ELW / atmo" slot in ED. Sure, it's an E-rated module (perhaps C after latest update), but I'll happily take it for now!
    I don't mind NMS either. The art direction isn't right for ED though. It would look odd. Also NMS cannot do rivers and other complex terrain. I am hoping that FDev manage to get around these issues. Pretty sure they can.

  11. #71
    Originally Posted by Old Duck View Post (Source)
    I actually like NMS's planets, though some of the colors can be a bit "fantasy". NMS runs great on my PS4 Slim, so I'm not sure why we assume such planets would kill hardware if introduced to ED.

    Too bad video games aren't like our ships. I'd transfer the terrain generator module from NMS and insert it into that big, empty landable ELW / atmo slot in ED. Sure, it's an E-rated module (perhaps C after latest update), but I'll take it for now!
    NMS has a very short draw distance, ED renders much, much further. The terrain generator from ED is also much better than NMSs (if you care about 'hard' scifi). NMS planets dont really care how 'big' they are, or the mass, or gravity, plate tectonics, distance from the star etc. EDs generation is much harder on hardware than NMS.

    The planet generation isn;'t the issue. Sure, they'll need atmo effects such as erosion, but the main thing are new things: atmo flight models for example. Non-atmo already has gravity impact the flight model greatly, now we need to combine that with atmo pressure and such. Not an easy task, but a task NMS completely skips: all planets are 1G, all have the same flight model, and planet generation seems mroe random than PG. WHich is fine, as NMS doesnt pretend to be a hard scifi space explo game. But it would not fit into ED at all.

    Btw, noticed how some atmo planets have the surface seemingly being PG'ed already to some extent? Used to be PG 2d textures...

  12. #72
    Originally Posted by Soon(TM) View Post (Source)
    I still can't believe people actually think we will still get Earthlike worlds to walk around on.

    You've seen the difficulty SC are having haven't you, with silly money and staffing they still can't do it.

    It's stupid to think FD could do it as an expansion pack when SC can't do it as the main part of their game!
    ED is not SC. SC struggle to do barran non-atmospheric planets, infact it struggles to do anything at the moment, probably more to do with the games engine they are using which isn't really suited for it.

    I do expect earthlikes, though not for sometime. And i am talking years down the line here.

  13. #73
    Originally Posted by sleutelbos View Post (Source)
    NMS has a very short draw distance, ED renders much, much further. The terrain generator from ED is also much better than NMSs (if you care about 'hard' scifi). NMS planets dont really care how 'big' they are, or the mass, or gravity, plate tectonics, distance from the star etc. EDs generation is much harder on hardware than NMS.
    While this is true, the draw distance will not be as high while you are on the ground on earthlike planets due to foliage, terrain and atmosphere. You basically won't need the infinity rendering that we have at the moment in space and non atmospherics.

    But as to barren atmospherics, I can't see there being many issues apart from what you have already stated, which will be mainly flight model related.

  14. #74
    Originally Posted by sleutelbos View Post (Source)
    Btw, noticed how some atmo planets have the surface seemingly being PG'ed already to some extent? Used to be PG 2d textures...
    Atmosphere planets went from just textures, to having actual surface visible with mountains, clouds had depth added with that shader thingy (I don't know it's called). Also clouds moved in alpha, but I will guess they figured out that would be awesome, but costing a lot of CPU time for no good reason at the moment.

  15. #75
    Originally Posted by Soon(TM) View Post (Source)
    I still can't believe people actually think we will still get Earthlike worlds to walk around on.

    You've seen the difficulty SC are having haven't you, with silly money and staffing they still can't do it.

    It's stupid to think FD could do it as an expansion pack when SC can't do it as the main part of their game!

    The money, time and tech needed to do it would be too much. Especially for an expansion pack, how much could they charge? £20, £30? At what price does it stop being an expansion pack?
    Maybe it's because they simply don't know how?
    It can be done, it's not something that will melt your PC.

    Now if we talk about worlds with areas with full vegetation it's "just" a matter of rendering it it different resolutions as you descend down.




Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast