Return to “Technical”

Post

Re: Nebulae

#16
Flatfingers wrote:How dense should nebulae be, both visually and to sensors?

Should LT include nebulae that -- assuming this is technically feasible -- are so visually dense that you can barely see past your cockpit?

What about being so dense that sensors can't get stable readings (and constant lock-ons) beyond 200-300 meters or so?

Assuming it's not common, would that be an occasionally interesting kind of fun for most people, supporting different tactics as well as stealth play? Or would most players find it annoying to be in a location that interrupts normal play?
i think there should be all densities of nebulae.

i dont think that it would be percieved as interruption of normal gameplay
Post

Re: Nebulae

#17
Cornflakes_91 wrote:i think there should be all densities of nebulae.
Everything ranging from a light fog, to something so thick that unless you have state-of-the-art sensors you might as well be flying blind. ;)
Image
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

Re: Nebulae

#19
Talvieno wrote:Realistic nebulae are boring.
First, the disclaimer: this game looks amazing, and I look forward to playing it when it's finished (or before, if possible!)

That being said--Talvieno is absolutely right in saying that realistic nebulae are boring--at least relatively speaking. The dust comprising nebulae is very, very dispersed. So much so that you wouldn't see the nebula from a spaceship parked inside it. For this reason, I also doubt that there would be much in the way of effects on sensors, or bonuses to cloaking or stealth, or any other bonus or penalty. I only bring this up to give Josh an "out" in case rendering volumetric nebulae becomes too difficult or too expensive.

I also imagine most of you already know this. But just in case some of you didn't, I thought I'd throw it out there. :)

http://www.universetoday.com/99989/in-r ... s-to-hide/
Post

Re: Nebulae

#20
Hey, Philosaur! Welcome to the forums! Hope you stick around, especially with that outlook. :thumbup:

And yep, most of us here know all about what you said, but we're okay with Mr. Parnell's version because they're So Damn PrettyTM. Plus, the "realistic nebulae are boring" thing, too.

He had volumetric dust clouds rendering beautifully a while back (something's changed since then, but he'll get it back up to par), but the nebulae themselves are 2d, and wrapped around the skybox, more or less. Pretty without the processor cost. :)
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: Nebulae

#21
Talvieno wrote:Hey, Philosaur! Welcome to the forums! Hope you stick around, especially with that outlook. :thumbup:

And yep, most of us here know all about what you said, but we're okay with Mr. Parnell's version because they're So Damn PrettyTM. Plus, the "realistic nebulae are boring" thing, too.
Thanks for the warm welcome!

Nebulae are definitely pretty, and definitely add some much-needed terrain, if you will, to the emptiness of space. It's the same reason asteroid belts/fields are similarly hyper-dense in fiction and games--it provides some terrain for viewers and players to latch on to.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron