In the various vid's so far, the asteriods are static.
If there is one constant in space, it is that everything is dynamic, everything is moving.
So my suggestion is;
to give every celestial body a rotational and linear/orbital velocity.
the size and mass of the body must be directly correlated to the velocity, i.e. a smaller asteriod moves faster then a bigger one.
Post
Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:05 pm
#2
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
JoshParnell wrote:[...]Also, please note - planets/bodies in solar systems are static! They do not orbit. I have addressed this before, but, basically, my reasoning is that it disrupts the ability of the player to feel as if they "know" the system spatially. I know, i know...say what you will about realism, but, personally, I do not want to have to re-learn the system every time I come back to it!
I am 42.
Post
Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:28 pm
#3
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
Besides, this would make traversing an asteroid belt in anything larger than a very small ship a literal deathtrap, eat oodles of processor power and accomplish very little as far as improving gameplay goes.
As for "realism", you'd be amazed how empty the "real" asteroid belt is. The ones in LT are firmly grounded in the Asteroid Thicket Trope.
(see http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... oidThicket).
And I'll take "decent gameplay" over "realism" any day of the week when it comes to space games. Realism has a nasty tendency to be unfun.
As for "realism", you'd be amazed how empty the "real" asteroid belt is. The ones in LT are firmly grounded in the Asteroid Thicket Trope.
(see http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... oidThicket).
And I'll take "decent gameplay" over "realism" any day of the week when it comes to space games. Realism has a nasty tendency to be unfun.
Hardenberg was my name
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
And Terra was my nation
Deep space is my dwelling place
The stars my destination
Post
Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:22 pm
#4
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
Size or mass would have nothing to do with it's orbiting speed.
Post
Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:47 pm
#5
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
all celestial bodies are static the great coder has spoken.
If I've rambled and gone off topic im sorry but i tend to be long winded as you might notice if you stumble across my other post XD. thanks for reading.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:58 am
#6
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
Then i seem to have to go with the majority on this one.
Anyway, thanks for the insightfull replies.
Looking forward playing this the game.
Anyway, thanks for the insightfull replies.
Looking forward playing this the game.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 8:22 am
#7
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
In the Demo topic
- From JoshJoshParnell wrote:Yes of course, that's how it will be. Some dusty systems, some not. And yes, I'll also do a slider so that you can modulate it globally if you want to scale it down everywhere.Just_Ice_au wrote:I had assumed that the sliders were there for testing purposes during development and that in the finished game, whether or not the system would have dust/fog and how thick it was would be determined on a system to system basis according to the procedural nature of the way the system is generated.
That makes more sense to me than having a button that says "all dust on" somewhere in the graphics menus.
Right, that is how I would do it. I can do it, I'm just scared that it will get out of hand if people start bumping loads of asteroids around. Will need to do a lot of profiling to make sure it doesn't hurt performance too much if I make it available.croxis wrote:A simple solution, which I am sure you thought of already, is to only have collision detection on asteroids, then activate full physics when there is a collision with enough force to make it worthwhile.
"A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
- Arthur C. Clarke
- Arthur C. Clarke
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:28 am
#8
A real and relatively static asteroid field of the density you see in games (or Star Wars =) would clump together. No more asteroid field.
Besides, why should traveling through an asteroid field be anywhere close to "safe"?
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
Only if you're talking about a ridiculously^2 dense asteroid field.Hardenberg wrote:this would make traversing an asteroid belt in anything larger than a very small ship a literal deathtrap
A real and relatively static asteroid field of the density you see in games (or Star Wars =) would clump together. No more asteroid field.
Besides, why should traveling through an asteroid field be anywhere close to "safe"?
There is no "I" in Tea. That would be gross.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:34 pm
#9
Besides, think of it like riding a mountain bike through the woods. You're not dodging trees left and right, but you DO have to do some navigation.
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
Why shouldn't it? In reality, the larger asteroids are several kilometers apart. Space is big, and thus the things in it and the gaps between those things are also big.Gazz wrote:Besides, why should traveling through an asteroid field be anywhere close to "safe"?
Besides, think of it like riding a mountain bike through the woods. You're not dodging trees left and right, but you DO have to do some navigation.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:56 pm
#10
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
That comparison only holds as long as the asteroid field is static, a dynamic asteroid field would be more like riding a bike in a pack of panicking elephants.Grumblesaur wrote:Why shouldn't it? In reality, the larger asteroids are several kilometers apart. Space is big, and thus the things in it and the gaps between those things are also big.Gazz wrote:Besides, why should traveling through an asteroid field be anywhere close to "safe"?
Besides, think of it like riding a mountain bike through the woods. You're not dodging trees left and right, but you DO have to do some navigation.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:12 pm
#11
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
The processing power required to manage a dynamic asteroid field/belt might make systems with large fields (or many small ones, or a system-encompassing one) would probably make such regions of space unplayable due to lag. And even then, no, it wouldn't be like riding a bike in a pack of panicking elephants. It would be more like drifting on an inflatable raft in a lake with some spiky buoys drifting around.
As I said, in reality, asteroids are usually several kilometers apart. Capital ships and larger transports might have difficulty navigating asteroid fields unscathed, but snubcraft, smaller cargo vessels, and scout ships wouldn't have much trouble at all.
As I said, in reality, asteroids are usually several kilometers apart. Capital ships and larger transports might have difficulty navigating asteroid fields unscathed, but snubcraft, smaller cargo vessels, and scout ships wouldn't have much trouble at all.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:27 pm
#12
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
It might be easier to handle asteroids in a mix-type mode in order to get something like that. For an asteroid belt, generate the asteroids dynamically and let them be a small(er) size, and only define larger asteroids from the procedural generation point of view. This way, if you want to try and navigate an asteroid field, smaller ones can appear and disappear without need to worry about each placement within a save file (just define it as a field of randomly spawning/despawning rocks).
A thought that comes to mind is that there's a larger asteroid that serves as a pirate base with auto-turrets destroying the smaller incoming asteroids. If you have a spawner for those (and not worry about each placement in the save file), then it would seem like the base is constantly having to defend itself from the elements. Yet, if you tried to account for each asteroid, then over a long enough period of time, it might be possible for the base to destroy all surrounding asteroids and thus lose the effect.
A thought that comes to mind is that there's a larger asteroid that serves as a pirate base with auto-turrets destroying the smaller incoming asteroids. If you have a spawner for those (and not worry about each placement in the save file), then it would seem like the base is constantly having to defend itself from the elements. Yet, if you tried to account for each asteroid, then over a long enough period of time, it might be possible for the base to destroy all surrounding asteroids and thus lose the effect.
Early Spring - 1055: Well, I made it to Boatmurdered, and my initial impressions can be set forth in three words: What. The. F*ck.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:59 pm
#13
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
Freelancer does something like this, where most of the asteroids in the fields are static, but as you fly through it, little mini-asteroids float around, and appear/disappear from view.
The mini-asteroids were really only for mining, though, so I can imagine that you have in mind to make a larger number of asteroids dynamic.
At any rate, the density of the asteroid fields could be variable. One system might have rocks so tight that you can't fly anything larger than a fighter through, and others might have more wide-open fields.
But if such fields are going to be dynamic, I think fewer asteroids would be better, so as to not wreck people's processors from all the physics and collisions calculations going on.
The mini-asteroids were really only for mining, though, so I can imagine that you have in mind to make a larger number of asteroids dynamic.
At any rate, the density of the asteroid fields could be variable. One system might have rocks so tight that you can't fly anything larger than a fighter through, and others might have more wide-open fields.
But if such fields are going to be dynamic, I think fewer asteroids would be better, so as to not wreck people's processors from all the physics and collisions calculations going on.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:03 pm
#14
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
In film-making we often talk about realism vs believability, and I think this applies here.
Realism is not really needed in fiction as fiction is not real in it self, whats important though is that the viewer (or player) believes in what he sees and accept it,
that's how we suppress our dissbelievs and allow ourselfs to feel like we are "somewhere else".
I could go into more deep filosofy about filmaking and gamemaking, but the bottom line is that you guys talk a bit too much about reality and science.
Creating a great game is about more than what it would look like in reality. It's about making people feel a certain feeling. And if theese dence small
and non-moving asteroids don't cut it, the solution is not to mimick the exact behaviour of real asteriods. I think the soultion is to add a new
element to the illusion to make it more believable, something the engine and gameplay could handle.
What do you think about making every tenth aststeroid rotate slowly, but stay in its position?
I think it would make the fields look more alive and moving. And not very heavy on the engine, or make the fields to hard to navigate.
Realism is not really needed in fiction as fiction is not real in it self, whats important though is that the viewer (or player) believes in what he sees and accept it,
that's how we suppress our dissbelievs and allow ourselfs to feel like we are "somewhere else".
I could go into more deep filosofy about filmaking and gamemaking, but the bottom line is that you guys talk a bit too much about reality and science.
Creating a great game is about more than what it would look like in reality. It's about making people feel a certain feeling. And if theese dence small
and non-moving asteroids don't cut it, the solution is not to mimick the exact behaviour of real asteriods. I think the soultion is to add a new
element to the illusion to make it more believable, something the engine and gameplay could handle.
What do you think about making every tenth aststeroid rotate slowly, but stay in its position?
I think it would make the fields look more alive and moving. And not very heavy on the engine, or make the fields to hard to navigate.
Post
Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:07 pm
#15
Re: Dynamic Asteroids
I think rotation sounds like a reasonable compromise.
But instead of every tenth, maybe the ones within a certain range all rotate slowly, and distant ones appear to be static. That way you don't have this one goofball asteroid spinning around while all the ones around it are static.
But instead of every tenth, maybe the ones within a certain range all rotate slowly, and distant ones appear to be static. That way you don't have this one goofball asteroid spinning around while all the ones around it are static.