For the love of God, please change this. Just do it. Do it. Do it now!

[nexxo]

1. Change the ship exhaust flames. I mean, sparks?! SPARKS?!?! Do these ships run on coal or something?!

They are supposed to have advanced, 30th century tech propulsion systems. The kind of rockets that kicks a ship into supercruise at multiples of C. They should look like this:

[video=youtube_share;QBRqG9lSChw]https://youtu.be/QBRqG9lSChw[/video]


2. Running lights. They are very easy to add, and add dynamism and realism to the ship's appearance. Done to correct scale, they help convey the relative sizes of different ships.

3. Sun lens flare. Suns are bright. Since monitors cannot give you sunburn, visual effects are required to convey that brightness, and like it or not, lens flare is the way to do that.

Seriously, many aspects of the game look really good, but the art direction really drops the ball on some pretty important details. I know that ED strives for its own distinctive look, but sparks. I mean, I don't even.

 

[Lupus Exmachina]

The propulsion system from Eve really looks a lot better and more realistic then what we currently have, I would be glad if they would implement that
As for the brightness of stars, it could be argued that our ships canopy scales down the brightness. Still there could be more effects like lens flare for immersion, as long as you can easily switch it off in graphics options. +rep

 

[Braandlin]

1. Change the ship exhaust flames. I mean, sparks?! SPARKS?!?! Do these ships run on coal or something?!
They are supposed to have advanced, 30th century tech propulsion systems. The kind of rockets that kicks a ship into supercruise at multiples of C. They should look like this:

You understand a rocket is a means of providing forward propulsion by burning a propellant and exhausting the resultant gases. So you call them rockets and yet you complain about them appearing to burn?

'Rockets' your word by the way are pretty much 1940's technology.

The thrusters maneuver you in real space. It is the FSD drive that envelops your ship, folds space and shoves you into supercruise. So the thrusters are NOT driving you to c+ speeds at all.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

No, the EVE effect is absolutely irrealistic in space. Those waves in the after burners happen because there is air outside the engine. In the void the behaviour would be completely different.

 

[Braandlin]

No, the EVE effect is absolutely irrealistic in space. Those waves in the after burners happen because there is air outside the engine. In the void the behaviour would be completely different.

Well said.

Also those eve engines clearly ARE rockets using exhaust gases to provide propulsion. .

 

[Jaylem]

No, the EVE effect is absolutely irrealistic in space. Those waves in the after burners happen because there is air outside the engine. In the void the behaviour would be completely different.

Aye, agree here! Physics says no to this one

however one of the things I do strongly agree on with OP was the light detail on the stars, any detail is good detail for me! and those lens flares do look quite beautiful!

 

[metatheurgist]

3. Sun lens flare. Suns are bright. Since monitors cannot give you sunburn, visual effects are required to convey that brightness, and like it or not, lens flare is the way to do that.

Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. Lensflare only happens with (bad 70s) cameras. Your eyes are not cameras.

 

[torbach]

flaring seems to be reserved for neutron/white dwarves at the moment

But we are talking about the canopy/ Cam suite giving the flares, yes?

you don't get bokeh with the human eye.. you can't look at stars without protection/vast distance... so if your eye is seeing any 'flaring' (e.g. over-exposure) that's means your retina is being fried.
Now if the canopy breaks and you don't have a helmet? <shrug>

 

[MK Regular]

....
Now if the canopy breaks and you don't have a helmet? <shrug>

You become legally required to change your Holo-Me's eyes to cybernetic ones.

 

[nexxo]

You understand a rocket is a means of providing forward propulsion by burning a propellant and exhausting the resultant gases. So you call them rockets and yet you complain about them appearing to burn?

'Rockets' your word by the way are pretty much 1940's technology.

The thrusters maneuver you in real space. It is the FSD drive that envelops your ship, folds space and shoves you into supercruise. So the thrusters are NOT driving you to c+ speeds at all.

Sorry, should I have said ion propulsion thrusters? Semantics. But you are supporting my point: rockets are 1940's technology. So are sparks.

No, the EVE effect is absolutely irrealistic in space. Those waves in the after burners happen because there is air outside the engine. In the void the behaviour would be completely different.

No, those waves happen because there is a jet of hot exhaust fumes, the refractory index of which is different than that of the surrounding vacuum (which has none). Also within the jet there are layers of gas with different temperatures, resulting in that optical effect.

So in a void you'd see the same. Proof:

[video=youtube_share;FEom0G30Gic]https://youtu.be/FEom0G30Gic[/video]

Note how you can see definite optical distortion at the exhaust of this SpaceX Dragon launch vehicle on several occasions.

Aye, agree here! Physics says no to this one

however one of the things I do strongly agree on with OP was the light detail on the stars, any detail is good detail for me! and those lens flares do look quite beautiful!

Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. Lensflare only happens with (bad 70s) cameras. Your eyes are not cameras.

That is beside the point. The point is that your monitor has limitations, so to generate a visceral impression of brightness, optical tricks have to be resorted to. Lens flares is one of them. Just like close to the star the rest of the star field being blacked out is an optical trick to convey the relative brightness of the star.

It is not a matter of creating a realistic depiction. It is a matter of creating the impression of a realistic depiction. You have to almost feel the heat of that sun. You have to almost instinctively want to squint. That is why it is called art direction.

Else we wouldn't have those pretty nebula either, BTW.

 

[Painter602]

Do we expect simple developments of early third millennium technology still to be in use in the mid fourth millennium?

I have no idea what technology will be in use by the time ED becomes "current", any more than I'd expect William the Conquorer or his knights (c 1066 CE) to have predicted the appearance of a WWI bi-plane (c 1914-18 CE).

 

[Whipley]

Please no more lens flare... It's the hallmark of style over substance.

I'd love to see more practical effects added to stars: heat spiking radiation flares that you have to dodge as you're scooping, for example.

 

[m0rl0ck]

Please no more lens flare... It's the hallmark of style over substance.

I'd love to see more practical effects added to stars: heat spiking radiation flares that you have to dodge as you're scooping, for example.

Yeah lens flare is a way overused and not particularly pleasing effect.

 

[Braandlin]

Please no more lens flare... It's the hallmark of style over substance.

I think the words "style over substance" pretty much sums up the OPs original requests - and the words belligerent or petulant pretty much sum up his tone.

 

[[VR] Frank_G]

Please no more lens flare... It's the hallmark of style over substance.

I'd love to see more practical effects added to stars: heat spiking radiation flares that you have to dodge as you're scooping, for example.

This here please! Have some rep.

 

[Braandlin]

Sorry, should I have said ion propulsion thrusters? Semantics. But you are supporting my point: rockets are 1940's technology. So are sparks.

NOT REMOTELY supporting your argument. You asked for effects like those on EVE which are clearly burnt propellent engines - in fact they are a cartoon version.

No, those waves happen because there is a jet of "hot exhaust fumes", the refractory index of which is different than that of the surrounding vacuum (which has none). Also within the jet there are layers of gas with different temperatures, resulting in that optical effect.

So in a void you'd see the same. Proof:

Yes, it's proof that you can get a distortion effect due to "hot exhaust gases". So you clearly think that the space ships DO have rocket engines??

You realise you aren't even being coherent in your argument?

"Don't make these engines have sparks - it makes them look like old rocket engine technology - please make them look more like old rocket technology"

...

 

[nexxo]

I think the words "style over substance" pretty much sums up the OPs original requests - and the words belligerent or petulant pretty much sum up his tone.

Big hugs back. Actually, it was more of a Big Arnie "Do eet! Do eet naaw!" kind of thing.

And game world building is about both style and substance. It has to look and feel right as well as function right.

NOT REMOTELY supporting your argument. You asked for effects like those on EVE which are clearly burnt propellent engines - in fact they are a cartoon version.

And engines that throw out sparks are what?

ED is full of cartoon interpretations, so to speak. Of space flight. Of spaceships. Of the flight model (check out Rogue System for a non-cartoon, hard-core approach to it). Neutron stars and black holes are cartoon versions. PowerPlay and its characters are a cartoon interpretation of interstellar politics. You can buy custom colours for your ship exhaust jets and lasers: cartoon.

Nothing wrong with that, as long as it conveys the desired impression of living in that universe.

Yes, it's proof that you can get a distortion effect due to "hot exhaust gases". So you clearly think that the space ships DO have rocket engines??

I think that they are meant to have ion thrusters of some sort. In which case they should look like ion thrusters. But we all know that the ED ships essentially run on handwavium, so it doesn't matter, as long as it looks right. And sparks do not look right.

You realise you aren't even being coherent in your argument?

"Don't make these engines have sparks - it makes them look like old rocket engine technology - please make them look more like old rocket technology"

...

Actually: it makes them look like they run on gunpowder. Really old rocket technology. At least make them look like more contemporary rocket technology. Or ion drives. Or anything, frankly, that just creates an impression of something incredibly powerful and technologically advanced. Not sparks.