Some kind of heat shield would make sense (if you ignore the heat of fuel scooping). Maybe they would then make airless rocks accessible to all, both for continuity and to give players a bit of a teaser for the full works.
The Planetary landing and planetside missions discussion Thread
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mexican(mexico) nexus
Some kind of heat shield would make sense (if you ignore the heat of fuel scooping). Maybe they would then make airless rocks accessible to all, both for continuity and to give players a bit of a teaser for the full works.
If we look at newsletter 29, airless worlds should arrive before others, separetely, but it's still part of the expansions.
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=dcbf6b86b4b0c7d1c21b73b1e&id=1824c0b05a#Lifetime Exp
And while i can, there for the 32nd :
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=dcbf6b86b4b0c7d1c21b73b1e&id=ac1081437f#launchand beyond
Last edited:
Using a pure heightfield doesn't cut it due to the need for tunnels/caves/overhangs, but I agree that some of the work is already done.
Last edited:
If you guys haven't seen this already there's a really good interview with Sean Murray of Hello games talking about the No Mans Sky procedural engine.
He's discussing Hello games bespoke engine and tools, but it gives insight into the capabilities and challenges in a modern procedural engines.
No Mans Skys procedural universe is even bigger than EDs.
[video=youtube;h-kifCYToAU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU[/video]
He's discussing Hello games bespoke engine and tools, but it gives insight into the capabilities and challenges in a modern procedural engines.
No Mans Skys procedural universe is even bigger than EDs.
[video=youtube;h-kifCYToAU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU[/video]
Planetary Landings
[video=youtube;yrcEUO7TC28]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrcEUO7TC28[/video]
This video shows how planetary landings could be achieved.
On top of that, the way you can select the stars whilst in actual space is incredible.
I hope Frontier implement something similar to this.
[video=youtube;yrcEUO7TC28]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrcEUO7TC28[/video]
This video shows how planetary landings could be achieved.
On top of that, the way you can select the stars whilst in actual space is incredible.
I hope Frontier implement something similar to this.
I remember seeing this a long time ago, but I was never able to find it again. Thanks for bringing it back up. I've always wanted a game with planetary transitions since I started playing Battlefront II. I do hope FD will implement it in ED. Has there been any progress on this particular game?
+Rep for digging this out!
Yes, this looks pretty good.
The landscapes looking better then all i seen in space engine yet.
If Frontier had it this way and add clouds, vegetation and buildings to it for their Planetary Landing expansion i would be happy about it.
But i think the main thing of this expansion would be implementing things to do and discover on this planets.
Otherwise people only would say again "nice tec demo but nothing to do" and such things. (Ok, they will do it anyway...)
Yes, this looks pretty good.
The landscapes looking better then all i seen in space engine yet.
If Frontier had it this way and add clouds, vegetation and buildings to it for their Planetary Landing expansion i would be happy about it.
But i think the main thing of this expansion would be implementing things to do and discover on this planets.
Otherwise people only would say again "nice tec demo but nothing to do" and such things. (Ok, they will do it anyway...)
I don't see anything that suggests that Infinity has anything other than heightmaps and textures going on. Same with Space Engine and most engines with planetary landings, frankly. No Man's Sky seems to have implemented caves, but I haven't paid enough attention to know if rivers or overhangs are covered and how much detail the planetary generation process goes into (erosion/tectonics/climate).
How realistic are planets in other titles? NMS is built purely for aesthetic value - they want that Chris Foss visual style, regardless of how unrealistic it is. They've really gone for it with the procedural stuff though, so fair play to them - they seem to be the front runners in terms of demonstrated, scalable tech. Infinity looks pretty but again heightmaps - I've seen landscapes that look similar in PC demos that are 4K in size, so I'm not that impressed. Plus, it seems like Half Life 3 might come out before that game. Space Engine isn't a game, and shows little sign of becoming one thus far.
David Braben has been pretty dismissive of the general state of planetary modelling in games, so I expect him to back his words up with results, or it will look like he's "pulled a Molyneux". Talk of this stuff in the context of Elite: Dangerous is probably years too early anyway.
How realistic are planets in other titles? NMS is built purely for aesthetic value - they want that Chris Foss visual style, regardless of how unrealistic it is. They've really gone for it with the procedural stuff though, so fair play to them - they seem to be the front runners in terms of demonstrated, scalable tech. Infinity looks pretty but again heightmaps - I've seen landscapes that look similar in PC demos that are 4K in size, so I'm not that impressed. Plus, it seems like Half Life 3 might come out before that game. Space Engine isn't a game, and shows little sign of becoming one thus far.
David Braben has been pretty dismissive of the general state of planetary modelling in games, so I expect him to back his words up with results, or it will look like he's "pulled a Molyneux". Talk of this stuff in the context of Elite: Dangerous is probably years too early anyway.
Last edited:
I really hope ED sticks with their model, which is very similar to the model implied in the video. The model being, tons of high detail content, but not filled with stuff. Like ED now, tons of stars, realistic, but not customized for gameplay. Not expressing this well...
Anyway, I'd love to land on planets like these, even if they contain only randomly generated terrain. The terrain is merely a backdrop, but a gorgeously detailed, and when it matters, real one. Imagine radioing to your squad mates, "We're over the South Pole now, heading toward Lagrange point of moon." Or, "I'm hiding in the huge storm in the Northern hemisphere." Or, "I've found their ocean base."
Not to mention dog fighting in the clouds of Bespin or between the crags of the Himalayas.
Anyway, I'd love to land on planets like these, even if they contain only randomly generated terrain. The terrain is merely a backdrop, but a gorgeously detailed, and when it matters, real one. Imagine radioing to your squad mates, "We're over the South Pole now, heading toward Lagrange point of moon." Or, "I'm hiding in the huge storm in the Northern hemisphere." Or, "I've found their ocean base."
Not to mention dog fighting in the clouds of Bespin or between the crags of the Himalayas.
Infinity is vapourware. Hell, even the kickstarter is. The kickstarter has been 'coming' since 2012. The video for it is a year late. I've been watching it since about 2007. There has been virtually nothing done. I used to be excited about it, but it slowly died, and now that Elite has been released, it's become a "Don't care" thing.
If they'd done something 5 years ago it would be a different story, but now it's just, to little, many years to late.
If they'd done something 5 years ago it would be a different story, but now it's just, to little, many years to late.
The problem with planetary landings for Elite Dangerous will not be one of detail or verisimiltude, but of rendering speed.
I have complete faith that FD is able to deliver rich, compelling landscapes filled with variety and purpose. The current galaxy sandbox is proof of their capability with both procedural generation and artistic design (I'm not saying it is perfect, but it is darn good).
But the problem for any PG environment, particularly an online game, is rendering all that detail quickly on the fly. All the really good PG planet simulators I've seen so far use pre-rendered assets, or have been fully rendered in detail and recorded, in which case a minute of video probably took several hours to render. The only examples of good on-the-fly rendering I've seen besides Infinity are No Man's Sky (which has only been seen in demo clips) and Space Engine.
Space Engine is very good at what it does, and amazing as a one man project, but even with only height maps, bare rock or other simple flat textures, if you turn the detail level up even the best graphics setup will stutter. Introduce complex assets etc and serious compromises will need to be made so it will work.
I'm not saying this is impossible, but we need to keep our expectations within reason and not dismiss the game when the planetary generation is less than perfect in our eyes. Don't expect fidelity of the level of Outerra:
[video=youtube;iNgWwvSaTZ0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNgWwvSaTZ0[/video]
it's probably impossible for an online game at the current state of technology. Bear in mind also that as desirable as photorealism might be, all we really need is background scenery for gameplay most of the time, and detailed environments in small scale in the immediate area.
However, all that said, I'd be overjoyed if FD pull it off and amaze us
I have complete faith that FD is able to deliver rich, compelling landscapes filled with variety and purpose. The current galaxy sandbox is proof of their capability with both procedural generation and artistic design (I'm not saying it is perfect, but it is darn good).
But the problem for any PG environment, particularly an online game, is rendering all that detail quickly on the fly. All the really good PG planet simulators I've seen so far use pre-rendered assets, or have been fully rendered in detail and recorded, in which case a minute of video probably took several hours to render. The only examples of good on-the-fly rendering I've seen besides Infinity are No Man's Sky (which has only been seen in demo clips) and Space Engine.
Space Engine is very good at what it does, and amazing as a one man project, but even with only height maps, bare rock or other simple flat textures, if you turn the detail level up even the best graphics setup will stutter. Introduce complex assets etc and serious compromises will need to be made so it will work.
I'm not saying this is impossible, but we need to keep our expectations within reason and not dismiss the game when the planetary generation is less than perfect in our eyes. Don't expect fidelity of the level of Outerra:
[video=youtube;iNgWwvSaTZ0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNgWwvSaTZ0[/video]
it's probably impossible for an online game at the current state of technology. Bear in mind also that as desirable as photorealism might be, all we really need is background scenery for gameplay most of the time, and detailed environments in small scale in the immediate area.
However, all that said, I'd be overjoyed if FD pull it off and amaze us
With the outside view, also ?
Last edited:
My only concern with PL is in regards to seamless transition into the atmosphere. Having to drop into a nav target or somesuch whilst the assets are generated would be a serious let-down.
The problem with planetary landing is the explosion of data. If you want to render something the same way for every visitor, that means that even if it uses PG for the initial planet, afterwards it needs to contain all the seed information for that procedural generation when the next visitor comes.
Allowing you to actually interact with the environment would make the amount of data even larger, since now you would also need to track what each commander has done on which planet and add that to the engine whenever the next commander visits that planet.
Adding cities, let alone unique inhabitants would be nearly impossible. So my guess is it will probably be pretty landscapes (without player interaction) with a couple of starports, kind of like we already have a couple of different types of space stations.
Of course, that won't mean it won't look awesome, but I wouldn't be expecting planet after planet with GTA V detailed cities. That's something for Elite: Deadly.
Allowing you to actually interact with the environment would make the amount of data even larger, since now you would also need to track what each commander has done on which planet and add that to the engine whenever the next commander visits that planet.
Adding cities, let alone unique inhabitants would be nearly impossible. So my guess is it will probably be pretty landscapes (without player interaction) with a couple of starports, kind of like we already have a couple of different types of space stations.
Of course, that won't mean it won't look awesome, but I wouldn't be expecting planet after planet with GTA V detailed cities. That's something for Elite: Deadly.
Pretty sure PL will be instanced. Possibly from the planetary body exclusion zone that we hit when we fly too close to planets atm, we'll be able to manually instance ourselves into the atmospheres "exclusion zone" and fly down to the planets surface, at least that's how I see PL functioning. So "kind of" seamless PL