I was wondering if the game would feature real science, would it be science fiction or non-fiction?
In another space game, 0x10c, which is being made by "notch" the guy who created minecraft, he tries to keep it all real science by making everything function as they would in space. In space you wouldn't hear lasers firing or asteroids exploding.
So would this game be real or not?
by the way im new
Post
Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:28 pm
#2
Re: Real Science?
Hey ice! For the most part, science fictionicee66 wrote:I was wondering if the game would feature real science, would it be science fiction or non-fiction?
In another space game, 0x10c, which is being made by "notch" the guy who created minecraft, he tries to keep it all real science by making everything function as they would in space. In space you wouldn't hear lasers firing or asteroids exploding.
So would this game be real or not?
by the way im new
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right.” ~ Henry Ford
Post
Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:41 pm
#3
Re: Real Science?
^good to know! I can't imagine playing in the quiet vacuum of space.
In Josh we trust.
Post
Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:07 am
#4
I'm guessing that the game physics wont be procedurally generated and could therefore be opened up for modding?
Re: Real Science?
So we aren't getting proper Newtonian physics?JoshParnell wrote: Hey ice! For the most part, science fiction
I'm guessing that the game physics wont be procedurally generated and could therefore be opened up for modding?
Post
Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:56 am
#5
Re: Real Science?
Physics would not lend itself to procedural generation ? Physics is full of fixed things and immovable laws until you go to the Quantum and then it's just plain bonkers. So I am guessing you are right. Of course gravity is based on Mass and distance from it and the mass quantities could be procedurally generated as the densities for planets and stars can defer.
Last edited by Jason S on Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post
Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:58 am
#6
Re: Real Science?
If it was real science, real future-tech space combat, the ships would probably be millions of miles from each other, and weaponry would automatically target and fire using computers... but that would be no fun, right?
The sort of space combat you see in games such as these more closely represents WWII dog-fighting. Nothing wrong with that... makes it fun... but you can't expect it to be anything like "real science".
I can imagine that, to some degree, Newtonian mechanics is used. A better question is to what level Newtonian mechanics is used, i.e. what level of detail - what constitutes a rigid body.
It is practically impossible to 100% model true Newtonian mechanics, and always will be. Any game claiming to do this is making an invalid claim, technically speaking. Rather, the question should be what assumptions/approximations are they making when performing their calculations.
The sort of space combat you see in games such as these more closely represents WWII dog-fighting. Nothing wrong with that... makes it fun... but you can't expect it to be anything like "real science".
I can imagine that, to some degree, Newtonian mechanics is used. A better question is to what level Newtonian mechanics is used, i.e. what level of detail - what constitutes a rigid body.
It is practically impossible to 100% model true Newtonian mechanics, and always will be. Any game claiming to do this is making an invalid claim, technically speaking. Rather, the question should be what assumptions/approximations are they making when performing their calculations.
Post
Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:14 am
#8
Big distances means incomming attacks with unguided munitions can be detected long before arriving and a small manouver thrustor changing your direction of travel guarantees they will miss wide.
3 million miles would take 32 seconds to cross even if you could fire rounds at half the speed of light!!!
Re: Real Science?
Probably not millions of miles unless we are talking about homing munition like missiles.terrordactyl wrote:If it was real science, real future-tech space combat, the ships would probably be millions of miles from each other, and weaponry would automatically target and fire using computers... but that would be no fun, right?
Big distances means incomming attacks with unguided munitions can be detected long before arriving and a small manouver thrustor changing your direction of travel guarantees they will miss wide.
3 million miles would take 32 seconds to cross even if you could fire rounds at half the speed of light!!!
Post
Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:16 am
#9
And in fact there was a kickstarter for a game that was going to do realistic space combat called Torchships, it didn't get funded though.
Re: Real Science?
While game play takes precedence over realism things like "submarines in space" (there being a set up and down, continuous thrust for a steady velocity, and to some extent sound effects) really irks me.terrordactyl wrote:If it was real science, real future-tech space combat, the ships would probably be millions of miles from each other, and weaponry would automatically target and fire using computers... but that would be no fun, right?
The sort of space combat you see in games such as these more closely represents WWII dog-fighting. Nothing wrong with that... makes it fun... but you can't expect it to be anything like "real science".
I can imagine that, to some degree, Newtonian mechanics is used. A better question is to what level Newtonian mechanics is used, i.e. what level of detail - what constitutes a rigid body.
It is practically impossible to 100% model true Newtonian mechanics, and always will be. Any game claiming to do this is making an invalid claim, technically speaking. Rather, the question should be what assumptions/approximations are they making when performing their calculations.
And in fact there was a kickstarter for a game that was going to do realistic space combat called Torchships, it didn't get funded though.
Post
Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:17 am
#10
Re: Real Science?
I think a vague justification for this... along the lines of the computer interpreting input commands, and sending processed signals to each of the thrusters, was given in the Star Citizen pitch...
Anyway, thanks for mentioning TorchShips - hadn't heard about that one! Looks interesting. I'm sure a bit of polish would have seen that funded.
Anyway, thanks for mentioning TorchShips - hadn't heard about that one! Looks interesting. I'm sure a bit of polish would have seen that funded.