It wouldnt just be gradients. There would be a level of limitations placed on the noise to prevent weird stuff. Im not really sure how to explain it
I paid for a Space Sim, not a buggy mess with immersion killing pop up menus.
- Thread starter Trailstorm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- state-of-the-game
Don't hold your breath.OK, you lost me after Funfact!
I'm not a programmer but I kinda followed what you said, maybe FD is hiring, you could get in and save us all!
Just curious: How were planets generated in Horizons? I don't know if they were scientifically accurate but the planetary surface looked quite nice to me. Also, I assume that the lighting takes into account the chemical composition of the atmosphere (in Odyssey) in addition to the distance and tilt of the planet, type of star and so on which must have been the case with Horizons?
Look, I am not a car mechanic but I understand the concept of a motor. If my blue car is broken and I tell the mechanic that changing the colour to red might fix it, it's probably bad advice.
Not sure.
Yes it does. Angle of the star on the horizon, atmo composition etc... all of that is taken into account. You can have green sunset and the like.
The developers did a great job with the new skies in Odyssey. I've seen some spectacular sunsets. Haven't found a green sky yet. I remember seeing a screenshot of gas giant floating in the emerald green sky of its satellite.
Having said that, I prefer the planetary surfaces in Horizons. I wonder if they could create a Frankenstein version -- a Horissey -- of the two planet-rendering systems...
No argument, the atmo is amazingly done. If everything else was of the same quality, it would have been an amazing DLC.
The issue is the planet themselves. Just did a bunch of screenshot at Deciat, to see if anything changed anything there (they mentioned the hand made settlement like the engineer's in the patch).
This is the result :
Look, I am not a car mechanic but I understand the concept of a motor. If my blue car is broken and I tell the mechanic that changing the colour to red might fix it, it's probably bad advice.
Ah yes and when you bring your car in for engine work and the mechanic proceeds to take your money and use it to attach a spoiler you'll just keep quiet right?
Actually we asked them to attach a spoiler (there is no way to improve planetery tech without changing it). Now we are complaining that the car isn't as fast anymore and the mechanic tells us that it performs better in turns now. Nothing of this is related to the orignal discussion though (if you give bad advice, don't be surprised when people call it bad advice).
I don't know. I actually like the fact that we fry when being on hot surfaces. And I also like the fact that temperatures change between day and night cycle. Sounds quite realistic to me.
For me Elite has always been as much 'emulator' as it is simulator. The real simulation goes on in your head, filling the blanks, theory crafting around technologies that only a 33rd century mind would fully understand. I don't buy into the idea it's getting too arcade personally - no more than it ever was anyway - because it's still open world, still open ended.
The key to enjoying imo is not being too literal all the time. I was in a base yesterday with a commander who, while we were in a lab, accidentally threw a grenade which landed at his feet and killed him. Out the corner of my eye though it looked like he'd tampered with compressed gas in the lab and it blew up is his face. Not fully accurate it turns out but would have made sense in that room and the grenade DID detonate a cannister, so that's what happened. So - imo - don't be too literal all the time. Imagine the game is NOT trying to infantilise you and tell you what's going on at all times and the game is full of stuff like this.
I personally don’t get the feeling that the game is too Arcady. I know it’s not a full simulation either. I mean come on, if it was a full sim it would take us months IRL to travel between planets, never mind traveling to the next system. Also, we would have to do a lot more micro management of our ships. We would probably spend more time with spreadsheets, manuals, modding and tweaking our ships than actually flying them.
This is not MS Flightsim. I like MS Flightsim but after awhile I also find it boring. There are other simulators like Kerbal (I forgot the other one where you can fly in WW2). But these don’t seem to have galaxy spanning exploration, trade and combat.
The other problem is that ED is multiplayer. And peer-to-peer multiplayer to boot. All planet generation and all assets have to look the same to all players that visit that location. I don’t know if planets are generated by the galaxy forge when you are the 1st person to visit the system or if it’s generated by a players system in 1st visit and then uploaded to the galaxy server for other commanders.
This is not MS Flightsim. I like MS Flightsim but after awhile I also find it boring. There are other simulators like Kerbal (I forgot the other one where you can fly in WW2). But these don’t seem to have galaxy spanning exploration, trade and combat.
The other problem is that ED is multiplayer. And peer-to-peer multiplayer to boot. All planet generation and all assets have to look the same to all players that visit that location. I don’t know if planets are generated by the galaxy forge when you are the 1st person to visit the system or if it’s generated by a players system in 1st visit and then uploaded to the galaxy server for other commanders.
– Elite Dangerous community, 2021
NMS plant generation may have been based on a PHDs superformula - pretty sure there was a court case that fell apart, so you're both wrong
Did 'No Man's Sky' Steal A Scientist's Superformula?
Company claims the game uses a patented equation developed by a Belgian biologist.
www.forbes.com
Not sure what that has to do with their planet geberation? It's completely separate from their flora/fauna PG?NMS plant generation may have been based on a PHDs superformula - pretty sure there was a court case that fell apart, so you're both wrong
Did 'No Man's Sky' Steal A Scientist's Superformula?
Company claims the game uses a patented equation developed by a Belgian biologist.
NMS plant generation may have been based on a PHDs superformula - pretty sure there was a court case that fell apart, so you're both wrong
Did 'No Man's Sky' Steal A Scientist's Superformula?
Company claims the game uses a patented equation developed by a Belgian biologist.
I meant I don't need a PhD to agree. I'm in no way capable of designing procedural planet generation.
If you're concerned about technical details, don't worry, I'm a graphics programmer and have written a terrain renderer some years ago. I'm fascinated by terrain generation techniques, especially planetary or large scale terrain.
So by limitations, do you mean you would be mixing the noise generation with other procedural techniques, ensuring that the "rolling hills" created by e.g. Perlin noise don't over power more prominent features?
Edit: I saw your video, my concern would be that a planet generated entirely using that technique might look quite repetitious. You would need to mix in other forms of generation to mimic natural planet formation to create features like rivers and volcanoes and so on.
Last edited: