Game Discussions Why doesn't Odyssey have Oceans and Clouds?

[thistle]

adding just an animated water layer at a certain height would be no work for FDev at all. A few floating clouds would be a performance thing, but apart from that easy to do for them. They already do both in their other games.

Both features would also make no sense in Elite with its nod to science and realism without adding weather, wind, atmospheric pressure and corresponding flight model, which are a lot of additional work. Now add to that that this has to work with a wide range of parameters, and be processed procedurally at runtime. I'd expect different weather and flight characteristics on Venus or Io than on Earth.
NMS deals with it by just ignoring any restrictions from science and having no flight model, SC by having very few planets where the parameters can be manually set and that all are more or less like some areas of Earth and having a very arcade-style flight model.

Adding rivers to procedural generation at runtime is even harder.

This is the correct answer.

 

[Crook]

They had clouds in an early alpha test - and that was 5 years ago.

 

[Vandaahl]

They had clouds in an early alpha test - and that was 5 years ago.

These clouds are still there, and alpha wasn't 5 years ago.

 

[Vasea Azure]

Why? Because Elite needs more empty sterile dust environments like duuh? ehhh too much quarantine...

 

[Cosmo]

They had clouds in an early alpha test - and that was 5 years ago.

Yep, 5 years ago they already had cloud tech, but they put it on the back burner so we have to wait a couple of years extra.

Both features would also make no sense in Elite with its nod to science and realism without adding weather, wind, atmospheric pressure and corresponding flight model, which are a lot of additional work. Now add to that that this has to work with a wide range of parameters, and be processed procedurally at runtime. I'd expect different weather and flight characteristics on Venus or Io than on Earth.
NMS deals with it by just ignoring any restrictions from science and having no flight model, SC by having very few planets where the parameters can be manually set and that all are more or less like some areas of Earth and having a very arcade-style flight model.

Adding rivers to procedural generation at runtime is even harder.

Right, at this rate we can expect to land on Venus maybe after 5 years lol. They could add some basic oceans to planets with thicker atmospheres. It's not easy, but it makes the worlds more interesting.

I think there's not enough budget to do this for Odyssey so they focused on other features.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Yep, 5 years ago they already had cloud tech, but they put it on the back burner so we have to wait a couple of years extra.



Right, at this rate we can expect to land on Venus maybe after 5 years lol. They could add some basic oceans to planets with thicker atmospheres. It's not easy, but it makes the worlds more interesting.

I think there's not enough budget to do this for Odyssey so they focused on other features.

I don't really think there will be another 5 years. I expect Odyssey to be the last update but that is just my opinion.

 

[Viajero]

I don't really think there will be another 5 years. I expect Odyssey to be the last update but that is just my opinion.

I think that is going to depend on how Elite as a franchise fares commercially for FDEV, if Elite continues yielding good results among FDEV´s portfolio of products, and barring any potential technology limitations, then chances are we may still see more update(s).

 

[Para Handy]

How can it be difficult to develop when NMS and SC have it? Maybe there isn't enough budget for the team to do it. Just hire people from the NMS team.

It's disappointing that we're getting improved, yet barren atmospheric landscapes.

As some people have pointed out Odyssey planets are limited to "tenuous atmospheres" - so oceans and clouds would be impractical. Think Mars.


P.S. No thanks to any of that cartoon NMS nonsense.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

Plus if they were to hire NMS devs they would need to familiarise themselves with the cobra engine.

Yes, like anyone else... so where's the problem?

 

[Vandaahl]

Yes, like anyone else... so where's the problem?

The problem is in the next post from the one you quoted. I speak for myself, but WE don't want THAT.

 

[Banger_uk]

has a person who does 3d rendering it is a whole lot hard to get a water mesh working right. the meshes themselves would be over Quads that means there (1 big square poly that is then spilt many many many times over) and the shaders would of course be layered to make a movement. then you have to do it for all planets!. ask any pro 3d renderer about making the ocean and you get a long list of why they don't fancy doing it.has you then have to animate it. using the x/y/z axis that would make it Time consuming on the engine and your machine.

 

[Vandaahl]

has a person who does 3d rendering it is a whole lot hard to get a water mesh working right. the meshes themselves would be over Quads that means there (1 big square poly that is then spilt many many many times over) and the shaders would of course be layered to make a movement. ask any pro 3d renderer about making the ocean and you get a long list of why they don't fancy doing it.has you then have to animate it. using the x/y/z axis that would make it Time consuming on the engine and your machine.

Its even besides the point. Planets with thin atmospheres are targeted first. If they had not done that, they would have had to come up (knowing FD) with a plausible weather system based on the size and mass of the planet, distance to the star, axis inclination, availability of moons, binary (or more) companions and what not. So thin atmosphere planets. Oceans can't exist on planets with thin atmospheres, or it would be a planet with a thick atmosphere, or they would have evaporated.

How can it be difficult to develop...

It's not easy, but it makes the worlds more interesting.

I really have no idea what you are trying to discuss here. The OP is thoroughly founded on "Duh, how hard can it be?", and now it is not easy?

After 5 years, if you still can't see the conceptual differences between NMS and ED, and keep comparing the 2 with each other (which is your prerogative), you might draw the conclusion you will always be disappointed in what ED will become.

NMS doesn't give a crap about walking hamburgers on 6 legs, so why should it take evaporation into account? It just is there because it looks nice. I'm soooo glad FD took a different route.

 

[Juniper]

Its even besides the point. Planets with thin atmospheres are targeted first. If they had not done that, they would have had to come up (knowing FD) with a plausible weather system based on the size and mass of the planet, distance to the star, axis inclination, availability of moons, binary (or more) companions and what not. So thin atmosphere planets. Oceans can't exist on planets with thin atmospheres, or it would be a planet with a thick atmosphere, or they would have evaporated.

So, in other words (knowing FD), minimum viable product.

Exciting. Can't wait.

 

[Vandaahl]

So, in other words (knowing FD), minimum viable product.

Exciting. Can't wait.

If you think a max viable product should have planets full of oceans, then NMS is that way

 

[eqinox]

Rendering oceans may be easy, but generating planets with global features, erosion and rivers is no easy task. I suppose having truly alien worlds brings its own issues. Not sure what the ambition level would be though.

Volumetric clouds in FS2020 is nothing short of magic, but generating a realistic planet scale weather with clouds is something I don’t know if any other game has pulled off successfully. Rendering volumetric clouds is a different challenge with many good examples in different games.

I don’t think we should expect anything groundbreaking from FDev in terms of technology on these, but would love to be proven wrong. Tech shown for Odyssey is still impressive though.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

The problem is in the next post from the one you quoted. I speak for myself, but WE don't want THAT.

That's not a problem too because the engines are different so you can't have nms geaphics in ED
P.s. how many of you are yourself?

 

[Danieros]

As some people have pointed out Odyssey planets are limited to "tenuous atmospheres" - so oceans and clouds would be impractical. Think Mars.


P.S. No thanks to any of that cartoon NMS nonsense.

That's a very good point. Liquid water is literally a "habitable zone" requirement. Part of that is the range at which stellar radiation is at a reasonable strength to let a planet's atmosphere be thick enough. By these standards it feels very unlikely the thin atmospheres we're getting could even support liquid water, and along with that, clouds.

 

[Riverside]

That's a very good point. Liquid water is literally a "habitable zone" requirement. Part of that is how stellar radiation is too powerful/too weak to let a planet's atmosphere get just at the right point. By these standards it feels very unlikely the thin atmospheres we're getting could even support liquid water, and along with that, clouds.

There are other liquids

 

[FlyingBrickyard]

Thats ok im sure they'll cope without your 30 quid.

I'm sure they will as well.

But they're not entitled to my money or enthusiasm just because they push out another product. It is, after-all, "just business" - and they've got to offer me something I feel is of sufficient value before I'll pay them for it.

So far I've not seen anything on offer that would do that at the presumed price. I very much hope they can do so, but they haven't yet.

 

[FlyingBrickyard]

No one said they were entitled to your money/enthusiasm.

It was certainly your implication.

Regardless, we'll see what they end up offering at what price, and how well executed it is. At that point most of us will make the decision we feel is appropriate.