Denomination consistency lacking?

[Andrew Gaspurr]

Greetings!
I have a thing that's been nagging at me since first I stepped into the Great Unknown that is uninhabited space. Since I tend to plan my exploration routes with my paperback atlas of the sky and various other astronomical sources I am sometimes confused about how FDev integrated the nomenclature of interstellar objects, nebulae for example. FDev does not seem to follow any consistency here.

What I mean is, in the Galaxy Map you can search for "Orion Nebula" but not for its NGC denomination of 1976. The same goes for other examples like Pleiades Nebula (NGC 1435), California Nebula (NGC 1499), Pencil Nebula (NGC 2763) or the Eta Carina Nebula (NGC 3372). To make matters more confusing, you can search various NGC objects by their number only but not by their popular name (eg. NGC 6357 vs. Lobster Nebula or NGC 281 vs. Pacman Nebula). To top this, the Galaxy Map lets you find various Messier objects, but then again only by their Messier denomination, not by their NGC or popular denominations. All in all, the process of locating your next target nebula for exploration is made somewhat awkward by not having a 'locator standard' implemented in the search function. I wonder if that might be changed by giving these objects at least two denominators. Ideally, in my point of view, this could be popular name AND (where applicable) its NGC number. This would make planning so much easier...

Now, this might seem trifle or trivial compared to other topics that are currently debated, but from an Explorer's point of view (who wants to use that little bit of amateur astronomical knowledge he has), it's a big shuffle between the game and various internet sources.

Thanks for reading, fly safe!

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Disclaimer: I did not understand everything you said which is probably due to my brain exploding from revision.

What I think you are saying is not everything is named as it should be which makes it harder to find certain things that exist in real life. To which my answer would be "Thats because its a generated not hand crafted universe (including the names - also procedurally generated). The bits that are correctly named are usually major astrological features handplaced by Devs to make the universe resemble ours even if its not exactly the same."
http://www.polygon.com/2014/12/4/7333709/elite-dangerous-milky-way-stellar-forge-human-cruelty

If I have got the wrong end of the stick ignore this post entirely and carry on people

Edit: that link is there for this paragraph mainly:

Spoiler

Of course, the team at Frontier could be wrong. The Stellar Forge could be flawed, and evidence suggests that it is far from infallible. Occasionally when Braben’s team runs procedural generation for a system with a newly discovered exoplanet the wrong results fall out. There are already tools in place to allow the team at Frontier to override the Stellar Forge and make corrections.
"What I’m actually hoping is that we won’t need to do that very often after launch," Braben said. Given the pace of discovery, he said that his team is confident they can keep up with the one or two exoplanet discoveries a month for the lifetime of the Elite product.
"We’ll just change the name of something that’s there already. We then put that body into its system, in a sort of indestructible way [and run the Stellar Forge again]. We say, no no. This really is here. And then [the Stellar Forge] can still work out what is around it."

 

[markkuk]

The problem is that real-life astronomical objects usually have multiple different names or catalog designations, and the galaxy map searches work only for one of the alternatives. Even worse, the one working alternative is picked in an inconsistent manner forcing you to go through all possibilities.

 

[Andrew Gaspurr]

Well, to put forward another example:

If I want to visit NGC 2068 (because it looks pretty cool on my Astronomy Calendar 2015) I won't find it by typing 'NGC 2068' in the Galaxy Map. Instead, I somehow have to draw the conclusion that NGC 2068 is in fact Messier 78 in the game and thus can only be found by typing 'Messier 78' into the Map's search function. And this is pretty awkward, because I first have to look at some internet or paper source to get this information. It would be easier if either FDev would incorporate the NGC denominations entirely or make locating objects easier by typing more than one denomination; for example popular name and NGC.

That is my concern. Hope that clears it up a bit.

By the way: The problem persits with stars from various Star Catalogues as well. If I want to locate the Wolf-Rayet star of 'EZ Canis Majoris' in the game I have to type its number from the Hoffleit Bright Star catalogue, which is HR 2583. However, EZ CMa also has denominations in the HIP (Hipparcos) and HD (Henry Draper) catalogues. How on earth (no pun intended!) should a gamer know who just wants to find 'his' astronomical jewells he sees on calendars and postcards?

 

[RedWizzard]

What I think you are saying is not everything is named as it should be which makes it harder to find certain things that exist in real life. To which my answer would be "Thats because its a generated not hand crafted universe (including the names - also procedurally generated). The bits that are correctly named are usually major astrological features handplaced by Devs to make the universe resemble ours even if its not exactly the same."

These are real life objects, their names have nothing to do with the "stellar forge" or procedural generation. The names are imported from real life databases or hand entered.

The problem is that real-life astronomical objects usually have multiple different names or catalog designations, and the galaxy map searches work only for one of the alternatives. Even worse, the one working alternative is picked in an inconsistent manner forcing you to go through all possibilities.

That's not true in general. Many systems have multiple names (including both real life designations and made up custom names), and can be found under any of them. E.g. Alpha Centauri can be found as HIP 71683 and HD 128620.

 

[RedWizzard]

If I want to visit NGC 2068 (because it looks pretty cool on my Astronomy Calendar 2015) I won't find it by typing 'NGC 2068' in the Galaxy Map. Instead, I somehow have to draw the conclusion that NGC 2068 is in fact Messier 78 in the game and thus can only be found by typing 'Messier 78' into the Map's search function. And this is pretty awkward, because I first have to look at some internet or paper source to get this information. It would be easier if either FDev would incorporate the NGC denominations entirely or make locating objects easier by typing more than one denomination; for example popular name and NGC.

Unfortunately it seems that nebulae are only recorded with a single name. In fact I don't think they're named as such at all, instead a label is inserted at a particular location and so appears in the galaxy map (note there is no way to select it). You can search for the label by name but apparently they can't have alternate designations. It's probably a design limitation but it shouldn't be hard to fix. I suggest you file a bug.

By the way: The problem persits with stars from various Star Catalogues as well. If I want to locate the Wolf-Rayet star of 'EZ Canis Majoris' in the game I have to type its number from the Hoffleit Bright Star catalogue, which is HR 2583. However, EZ CMa also has denominations in the HIP (Hipparcos) and HD (Henry Draper) catalogues. How on earth (no pun intended!) should a gamer know who just wants to find 'his' astronomical jewells he sees on calendars and postcards?

No, it doesn't really extend to stars. You can search for EZ CMa as "HIP 33165" or "HD 50896" as well as "HR 2583". Unfortunately that one doesn't have it's constellation based name but many do. With stars your best bet is to try the Hipparcos id, most of them are in there. If that doesn't work look for alternate possibilities in Simbad.

Oh, and you menionted the Eta Carina Nebula. Two things annoy me about that one in ED. First, it didn't get a custom model, despite being one of the most distinctive and well known nebulae (the Hubble shots of it are simply stunning). And secondly, the Eta Carinae system, which should be at the centre of the nebula, is 1500 Ly away.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

These are real life objects, their names have nothing to do with the "stellar forge" or procedural generation. The names are imported from real life databases or hand entered.

That's not true in general. Many systems have multiple names (including both real life designations and made up custom names), and can be found under any of them. E.g. Alpha Centauri can be found as HIP 71683 and HD 128620.

skip in to 2 mins 20 sec

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTBvpd3_Vqk

 

[RedWizzard]

skip in to 2 mins 20 sec

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTBvpd3_Vqk

What's your point? Again, we're not talking about procedurally generated systems or names.

 

[Andrew Gaspurr]

No, it doesn't really extend to stars. You can search for EZ CMa as "HIP 33165" or "HD 50896" as well as "HR 2583". Unfortunately that one doesn't have it's constellation based name but many do. With stars your best bet is to try the Hipparcos id, most of them are in there. If that doesn't work look for alternate possibilities in Simbad.

Yes, after checking some other stars you are right. I guess I scribbled down some typos in the middle of my last "POI drive-by" so I'd like to take back my last statement. But one of the things I wanted to point out is that 'Joe Gamer' might just gather a nice title from an astronomical calendar or postcard is left stranded here (at times) when he just wants to go "Wow! I have to explore that thing!", because the "Bacon & Eggs Nebula" (naa, just invented that) is Messier 0815 in the game. How could he know without consulting external sources? Why not make the game accept both?

But then again you are right. Nebulae just seem to be interstellar signposts with coordinates at which FDev placed a nice nebula thing. And yes, after having explored NGC 7822 and having compared real imagery of a number of nebulae with their ingame counterparts I have more than once thought "Hmm... not similar at all..." Another matter to discuss, if one would be inclined to take it to the forums.

Black Holes Ho!

 

[RedWizzard]

Black Holes Ho!

Unfortunately those aren't so easy to find by real life name either :/

 

[Alex Brentnall]

What's your point? Again, we're not talking about procedurally generated systems or names.

Does he not just talk about procedurally generated names?


Edit: I apologise, I've re-watched and done some internet research. Turns out that 95%+ of planet names are procedurally generated. System names on the other hand are defined by their sector yet the numbers behind the sector is procedurally generated.
I was talking cross purposes. Glad its answered now anyway...

 

[RedWizzard]

Does he not just talk about procedurally generated names?


Edit: I apologise, I've re-watched and done some internet research. Turns out that 95%+ of planet names are procedurally generated. System names on the other hand are defined by their sector yet the numbers behind the sector is procedurally generated.
I was talking cross purposes. Glad its answered now anyway...

No problem. Just to clarify, in case anyone is interested...

There are about 144,000 real life objects in ED. The names and locations (and star type when applicable) of these objects in ED are not procedurally generated, they are imported from real life sources (primarily the Hipparcos catalogue). You can generally tell which systems are real life systems: they have catalogue style names containing abbreviations and numbers, e.g. HIP 1234, LFT 123, LP 452-10, 2MASS J04301658+3515419. They also often list alternate designations on the info tab in the galaxy map (and they can be found by those alternate names). The contents of these systems are procedurally generated: the planets, moons, asteroid fields, etc. Known real life exoplanets are populated manually. When these objects are searched in the galaxy map, basically the code will just be looking up the name in an index, and then generate the contents of the system when required.

The other 400 billion systems are entirely procedurally generated. These are entirely procedurally generated, including the name which follows a particular format, e.g. Flyoo Dryiae AN-L a117-0 (excepting a relatively small number of systems in the human inhabited region have been given custom names). Now the procedural generation system needs to be designed with certain constraints in mind: it needs to be able to generate all systems in a given volume of space (you don't want to have to generate the entire galaxy just to find out what systems are within 50 Ly of a particular point), and it needs to be able to locate a system given only it's name. That second constraint requires that name encodes enough information to quickly locate the system (since you can't efficiently index 400 billion systems), and both the "sector" prefix and the rest of the name contribute (you don't want to have to generate even a whole sector's worth of systems to find the one you want). But it's apparent that the name doesn't encode the exact location. So when searching for these systems in the galaxy map, the code will take the name provided, and use it to generate a series of systems which are then searched for the right one. So the process is subtly different for systems that are entirely procedurally generated.

 

[Andrew Gaspurr]

Just to add a little bit from my thoughts: It would be totally cool to search for specific stellar criteria on a very limited basis. For example, I am thinking about typing 'SNR' into the search field which would yield candidates for Supernova Remnants or even 'WR' for Wolf-Rayet type stars. It would make finding suitable exploration targets so much easier...

Well, maybe there'll be an Exploration-related addon in the future, giving us Explorers some love. Who knows?