I think all gas giants need a thin atmosphere add the reflects the planetary colors. that way they don't look so.. blah. Everything else in the game is breathtaking which just exaggerates the bland, flat pastels of most gas giants. Am I the only one thinking this?
The flat pastels of gas giants
- Thread starter CMDR Xyhod
- Start date
FDEV doesn't model the terrain and characteristics of planets we can't land on, probably because that would be a waste of resources better used elsewhere. What you are looking at is basically a bitmap, it's a pity because they could look better and one day I hope they do, but unlandable planets essentially aren't modelled and aren't being worked on so I doubt that will change any time soon.
I understand that, its a simple inclusion, or default casting if you will I am suggesting. They are still drawn as a 3DM model
No that's not how it works, it's a 3d mesh with a 2d bitmap overlaid, putting an atmosphere on that would look so much worse than what we already see, to have atmosphere you are going to have to model the atmosphere, and since gas giants are mostly gas (as implied by the name) it will require a full modeling of the planet, because, you know, atmosphere is gas.
lol... I have designed skins I do understand. I think maybe I am not being clear. hmm I will think on how to word this for you, but simply put I would put a thin atmo that amplified the skins colors using something similar to a inverted mirror effect, rather than used its own base. This would give it volume and depth, which they are poorly lacking.
I don't disagree that gas giants come out looking a bit bland compared to other sorts of bodies, but I don't think an atmosphere effect is the solution. Look at photos from Voyager, Cassini, etc - the limbs of Jupiter and Saturn are knife edge sharp. While there is a semitransparent haze layer there, you're talking about a layer tens of km tall on a body 100k+ km across. Even at the edge of the exclusion zone, you're tens of thousands of km away from the limb. It's not currently possible to get close enough to see that kind of thing.
The right solution here is to make the ones that should be visually interesting more interesting - richer color and more detailed cloud turbulence patterns, for instance. And second, to just keep in mind that several classes of gas giant are fundamentally boring to look at (lots of them would be featureless pale blue or grey balls) and go admire the interesting ones instead.
The right solution here is to make the ones that should be visually interesting more interesting - richer color and more detailed cloud turbulence patterns, for instance. And second, to just keep in mind that several classes of gas giant are fundamentally boring to look at (lots of them would be featureless pale blue or grey balls) and go admire the interesting ones instead.
I completely agree, and understand what you are saying. I am not trying to suggest they need to be flamboyant, they just need.. a touch of depth to ... I don't know how to put it. its not that they are "wrong" in comparison to the reality of things. They create a contrast by association.. that is dull by comparison. Perhaps what I am suggesting is in the end an attempt to compensate for the depth that games cant simply provide compared to the reality of it. I don't mean to suggest to create a fog around the body, but rather to give its appearance volume. It's a tough measure. They are so prevalent that ... hmm.
so we are discussing a non reflective but refractive "surface".. I think that is the key to what I am getting to. Just a skin alone makes it look very flat, so it stands out.
I'd like to expound on that.. I feel like in the end.. and compared to others, they simply don't have life. ah an interesting question that beyond science fiction we can't really answer to my knowledge. lightening, flashes of light.. things that give presence. Anything to give it breath, without going to the extreme, which I'm sure is a constant debate if there is any discussion about this.
Unfortunately I suspect we are stuck with it for now, and I do say unfortunately because you are correct, gas giants in reality display a lot more variation, massive moving storms, impressive lightening effects have been identified on Jupiter and Saturn, but just like the non-landable atmospheric planets we have, which are indeed the same, and pretty lifeless compared to the landable atmospheric planets, that's not going to change until they do a major update of the planet modeling, it's a major job because players here expect it to be done properly. It will, I expect, be a DLC, hopefully with gas giant mining and floating bases and etc.
Totally understood and agreed. Perceptually total agreement. So you understand I see the dilemma. I'm sure variant masks have been suggested and it didn't work... at the end of the day we humans love to see change that just isnt there in the real world. I could spend my life looking at clouds on Jupiter and die of wishful thinking... on the otherhand I got to see the last shift of the eye and had the experience and knowledge to enjoy it. its an amazing thing to whiteness a small measure of man, but to witeness just a bit of the creation of life. That's a gift true.
Properly animated gas giants with dynamic cloud patterns and a touch of lightning or aurora effects would be amazing.
But I suspect you're right, unlikely to get an overhaul that major until such time as they make gas giants into modeled environments you can fly into, which ironically is an even larger job.
its not that hard on this, honestly.
I want to speak loudly both for us as a people and for fdev, but I can't do either. I see, or at least think I understand where they are heading, but I am but a man.
I'd like to see a deadhead face on Jupiter
Unfortunately that's just fluff.
Pretty much like asking for "proper" black holes. Where "proper" is the black hole image popularized by Interstellar, the movie.
While i would like to see better rendered gas giants or black holes, there is no purpose in that - it's just fluff, and my reality anchor is pretty much solid and i'm well aware it won't happen anytime soon, if ever.
I mean, while there is a slight chance we will get to land on planets with proper atmospheres (including elw, waterworlds and maybe ammonia worlds) there is no way to interact in any way with a gas giant (*)
*(except maybe a lower exclusion zone so the upper layers of their atmosphere would be accessible - but, well, even this is nothing more than just wishful thinking and i have no hopes they will get there at the rate content is coming to ED. I mean, took them 7 years for basic on-foot landings on planets with really thin atmospheres.
And IMO one of the reasons for that is the fact that they modeled the galaxy on a scientific base but there is little science to base your work on when we transition from galactic macro level to the planetary micro level and the amount of work to make it happen and not look as ridiculous as Spore/NMS is quite enormous)
Pretty much like asking for "proper" black holes. Where "proper" is the black hole image popularized by Interstellar, the movie.
While i would like to see better rendered gas giants or black holes, there is no purpose in that - it's just fluff, and my reality anchor is pretty much solid and i'm well aware it won't happen anytime soon, if ever.
I mean, while there is a slight chance we will get to land on planets with proper atmospheres (including elw, waterworlds and maybe ammonia worlds) there is no way to interact in any way with a gas giant (*)
*(except maybe a lower exclusion zone so the upper layers of their atmosphere would be accessible - but, well, even this is nothing more than just wishful thinking and i have no hopes they will get there at the rate content is coming to ED. I mean, took them 7 years for basic on-foot landings on planets with really thin atmospheres.
And IMO one of the reasons for that is the fact that they modeled the galaxy on a scientific base but there is little science to base your work on when we transition from galactic macro level to the planetary micro level and the amount of work to make it happen and not look as ridiculous as Spore/NMS is quite enormous)
Better rendered gas giants, together with flyable upper atmosphere "layer" and an exploration ship-launched vessel could be quite a nice addition to the game.
Just sayin'.
I don't know what went wrong with the gas giants because I find that the other unlandable planets look really beautiful and it's also just textures.
Maybe it's the lack of more details. They often really appear not as big as they actually are whereas the other unlandables give me the best impression of their real size among all planets.
Maybe it's the lack of more details. They often really appear not as big as they actually are whereas the other unlandables give me the best impression of their real size among all planets.
![[VR] Bulbulunufus](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/261/261245.jpg?1671230473){kind=avatar}
I mean, some better, more detailed and realistic looking, but still static, bitmaps would be a start.
This is a NASA pic of Saturn, something that gives us a look like this would be great. I agree with OP that gas giants could do with a refresh and I have always thought they were a little underwhelming, not terrible by any measure, but not amazing either, though they look great when viewed on semi-atmospheric planets in Odyssey. Some movement would be good too, like you see with stars, though I imagine that does open the door to a lot more resources to achieve.
Hi
I was honestly a little bit surprised when ED was launched and found out the reverse of this to be true. There might have been other players that found this to be a little bit odd at the time, it's that far back now I can't remember if anything was said on the Forums?
I wonder why there was a switch from Gas Giants to stars, was it too much work to do it in depth as some of you posters suggest?...if so I generally understand the reasoning.
Hi
I seem to remember back in the kickstarter phase David Braben describing (and showing with a short video) what it would be like flying down through an 'atmosphere', but I think that was mainly gesturing to an earth like planets atmosphere, and not a gas giant?...there were 'clouds' involved anyway.
While you say 'players here' I personally get (or got) the impression it is also (or was) David Braben's wish that features we're discussing here would be 'done properly'.
Gas giant mining sounds interesting, especially as there are various forms of Gas Giants currently in game, which leads to the thought that there would be numerous ways to gather a plethora of individual elements or materials, even some biological aspects to flesh out the 'trading' mechanic features, even some more involving missions too.
Can't get my head around to understand why we can't store excess fuel when scooping stars though, it is hydrogen gas we're scooping?...., maybe because hydrogen (fuel) is such a cheap commodity FD decided it wasn't worth the input to elaborate on this feature. 
Anyway, don't mind me, just throwing some thoughts around.
Jack
It's a bit ironic that in the original FE 2 game you scooped fuel from gas giants, and as far as I know you couldn't do the same thing with suns / stars.Better rendered gas giants, together with flyable upper atmosphere "layer" and an exploration ship-launched vessel could be quite a nice addition to the game.
Just sayin'.
I was honestly a little bit surprised when ED was launched and found out the reverse of this to be true. There might have been other players that found this to be a little bit odd at the time, it's that far back now I can't remember if anything was said on the Forums?
I wonder why there was a switch from Gas Giants to stars, was it too much work to do it in depth as some of you posters suggest?...if so I generally understand the reasoning.
Hi
I seem to remember back in the kickstarter phase David Braben describing (and showing with a short video) what it would be like flying down through an 'atmosphere', but I think that was mainly gesturing to an earth like planets atmosphere, and not a gas giant?...there were 'clouds' involved anyway.
While you say 'players here' I personally get (or got) the impression it is also (or was) David Braben's wish that features we're discussing here would be 'done properly'.
Gas giant mining sounds interesting, especially as there are various forms of Gas Giants currently in game, which leads to the thought that there would be numerous ways to gather a plethora of individual elements or materials, even some biological aspects to flesh out the 'trading' mechanic features, even some more involving missions too.
Can't get my head around to understand why we can't store excess fuel when scooping stars though, it is hydrogen gas we're scooping?....
, maybe because hydrogen (fuel) is such a cheap commodity FD decided it wasn't worth the input to elaborate on this feature. Anyway, don't mind me, just throwing some thoughts around.
Jack
Hi
It's a bit ironic that in the original FE 2 game you scooped fuel from gas giants, and as far as I know you couldn't do the same thing with suns / stars.
I was honestly a little bit surprised when ED was launched and found out the reverse of this to be true. There might have been other players that found this to be a little bit odd at the time, it's that far back now I can't remember if anything was said on the Forums?
I wonder why there was a switch from Gas Giants to stars, was it too much work to do it in depth as some of you posters suggest?...if so I generally understand the reasoning.
It's how you refueled in the original Elite. IIRC that it was like that in the Frontier: Elite II as well.