Planet size issues

[rmooney01]

Hi everyone. I have not gone through every post here, I'm just going to post an opinion/ideas and if it a repeat... I apologize.

I would not change the size of the planet, but if possible maybe change the way it is perceived during planet fall. The actual size is pretty large as it is, but when viewing the horizon during fall is when you get a "real" sense of the size. I don't have any idea how the planets are rendered in the engine, but if it was possible to swap a smoother terrain for the actual detailed terrain as planet fall takes place, the sense of realistic size would be improved. If not swapped, maybe just render a smoother textured sphere around the actual and drop alpha* as you descend until it is gone.

In the future, possible changing the size to near realistic would be nice if enough content could be added to justify the change. Sounds like a lot of work.

*Alpha - meaning the transparency of the object. Zero usually is completely transparent.

Anyway, I love the game as is. Can't wait to get into my first TW.

Rob

[Cargo]

... But gas giants and stars even bigger. Correspondingly, sectors and subsectors increased in size. Stars you can see from hundreds of sectors away ...

- The gas giants' size needs to be increased ...

- The stars also could use a major size increase, as for now they're just tiny light bulbs compared to the very large planets. This results in for example mercury being unrealistically big compared to the nearby sun.

These. The current planets are fine, it's the Gas Giants and Stars that need to be bigger.

[Marvin]

And more gas giants. I've visited a lot of uncharted (and ungated) star systems ... yet haven't seen a single new gas giant. IIRC, they're not supposed to be that scarce. Also, Venus probably shouldn't be the only gaseous planet (not necessarily a giant) with a solid core ... maybe a few of 'em could even be colonized (meaning, proffering a city or two).

[DORN]

I had a strange thought about all this.

I love the wonderful suggestions to make what we now have on planets and their sizes more interesting but...

I got into EM because of the space flight and doing things in space.

I would like to do and see more things in space.

I would like to see quests that could be found as rewards. And the quests would be quite varied and full of interesting stuff.

I would like to see totally different contracts in different systems. Not the same thing everywhere.

I would like to see time limited ownership of super high tech that can never be found in the same place twice . (Own a Godzilla canon for a week and be the terror of the neighborhood and then have to deal with all those you offended when the darn thing gets revoked back to Mt. Olympus.) Get a free day on Earth with a Crystal Carbon Credit Card.

Well... I could go on forever, but you get the idea.


So if I had a say in all this, I would like to see the variety and complexity blossom in space.

Planet sizes are good right now. They feel comfortable.


Hey! Vice is going to do both! LOL.

[Mr.Peanut]

What people do not seem to realize is that making objects bigger in game will not make them feel any bigger, except for travel times. Realistic 3D immensity is not something that translates well to a computer game unless there are extremely high levels of detail to objects. Time making highly detailed objects is less interesting to me than time spent making the game universe itself more dynamic.

[Edited on 4-22-2013 by Mr.Peanut]

[andysonofbob]

What people do not seem to realize is that making objects bigger in game will not make them feel any bigger, except for travel times. Realistic 3D immensity is not something that translates well to a computer game unless there are extremely high levels of detail to objects. Time making highly detailed objects is less ineteresting to me than time spent making the game universe itself more dynamic.

I am not sure about that. For me it is all about curvature of the horizon which influences draw distance when you take into account height clouds are drawn. Larger planets, with an increased cloud ceiling will reduce curvature and hopefully increase draw distances as a result.

[Austin]

I am overall happy with the planet sizes, with a few exceptions. Gas planets should be much bigger IMO and certain planets should be smaller. For example, since I spend a good deal of time in Sol, Mercury and Pluto shouldn't be the same size as the Earth. This is purely for immersion.

[Austin]

And more gas giants. I've visited a lot of uncharted (and ungated) star systems ... yet haven't seen a single new gas giant. IIRC, they're not supposed to be that scarce. Also, Venus probably shouldn't be the only gaseous planet (not necessarily a giant) with a solid core ... maybe a few of 'em could even be colonized (meaning, proffering a city or two).

And... Yea! What Marvin said.

[terminal_case]

I'm relatively new to the Evochron/Arvoch series of games, and even newer to the forums, but the thing I love most about Evochron is its realism and immersion.

I'm probably not the typical EM player (please pardon me if that sounds presumptuous), but I concur with Marvin, especially in his first post. Allow me to posit a hypothetical situation, if I may...

Let us say that planet sizes are increased drastically, as is the size of the galaxy itself. I, for one, would absolutely relish the concept of travelling long distances, and would be content with the time it would take to do so; maybe I'll read a book a bit while I'm landing, or some such thing. That's something someone who is actually flying a spaceship would likely do in such a circumstance--and you know that there would be such circumstances in "real" space travel.

As it is right now, as fun as it is, and as big as everything is already, it still feels like I'm sorta just hopping down the block to the corner store when I go from planet to planet, or when I descend to the surface of a planet.

I know that "gameplay" rather than "feel" was what was supposed to be discussed; but--and this is why I said I'm probably not the typical EM player--for me, the biggest draw in EM and the most relevant gameplay aspect IS the feel of it.

Maybe it's because I don't yet have a large group to play with, and therefore mostly cruise around by myself exploring (which got me killed a bunch by AI, especially early on). I'll admit that I haven't begun the story missions, in part because I had difficulty with the combat, and in part because I now can't recall where I'm supposed to go to start them . The realism of the flight simulation, the enormity of the galaxy, the thrill of exploration, the sheer emptiness of space, and the size of celestial bodies; the promise of these is what drew me to EM in the first place. Those ARE the biggest part of gameplay, for me.

I am not saying that making it bigger would be either simple or easy. Clearly, if things are to be made bigger, they would probably require more content, as Marvin also mentioned earlier in this thread.

I guess to sum up what I'm trying to say, I'll say this. If I had the resources, the time, and the skill required to make the space game of my dreams, it would be realistically large (at least as much as feasible). I absolutely love games that require me to travel immense distances to accomplish something--especially when the view the whole way is as beautiful and (as I discover more and more) content-laden as space is in EM.

Just my two cents on this topic. Obviously you can't please everyone completely, and please don't take this post as suggesting that you try to do so. The game is already magnificent, and I'll continue to play either way, and continue to recommend it to anyone I know who seeks an excellent space sim.

[Edited on 5-7-2013 by terminal_case]

[Edited on 5-7-2013 by terminal_case]

[Austin]

Welcome to the forums terminal_case! I know what you mean when you say it feels like your "just hopping down to the corner store". I good way to work around this feeling is to avoid jumping in system. Just cruise through the sectors from planet to planet, only using your jump drive in autopilot for those really long trips, or when you really do need to get somewhere in a hurry

[Marvin]

Just cruise through the sectors from planet to planet, only using your jump drive in autopilot for those really long trips....

The average time to travel to an uncharted system from the closest gated system is about 16 minutes (real time). And there are literally dozens (if not hundreds) of uncharted systems ... many of which you can learn about from AI mercenaries.

[terminal_case]

Eh, I mostly meant the transition from outside the atmosphere to the planet surface with that metaphor. Probably should have been clearer on that, sorry.

I did not mean at all to belittle the current scale of this game.

Oh, and thanks for the welcome, Austin!

[Edited on 5-8-2013 by terminal_case]

[Maarschalk]

Hi Terminal_case, welcome to the game and forum!......Hope to see you out there some time!.....

[d3drocks]

forgetting the downfalls of making things big, I'll just point out what I like about larger scale planets.

visually, bigger is better. the epicness and feel of "full scale" is just awesome. example: http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/ ... -large.jpg

for the mech combat (and if possible, future planet based endeavors), a larger scale option will expand the game massively. it could add so much potential to gameplay. think of needing to control planets with a clan before you could control the area for example.

another option could also be to just increase the size of sectors to fit more. I realize the whole ship speed situation doesn't get covered by this, but it solves having to require tons of sectors for a single planet for example. should you be able to get things solved (could always add a new "jump engine" or something similar to X3 for example) I'd just like to say that evochron would absolutely be the first game to do this.

[Cheri50000]

Hi, Vice!

I wanted the planets to be the correct size like in real life and plus I want the space craft to get up to more realistic speeds like get the spacecraft up to 299,792.5 kilometers per second instead of 7.9 kilometers per second. I don't mind taking a long descent into the planet's atmosphere. Thanks!

Cheers,
Vincent

[Thalium]

Hi Guys

the planet scales in this game really bug me from a distance lets say 15k away the planets look great and really big but the closer you get the smaller they really are. example i landed on a huge planet, got in my walker and did a lap of the planet in my walker in about 2 mins... Even if u just hover on a planet 1500 off the deck you can see the planet edges. i just think if a huge planet bigger than earth scould take more than 2 mins to run round.. is there a way to scale it up so what u see at distance is what u get when ya down there..

another example

when your on the planet and look up you can clearly see the space station clear as day.. and from where u are looking up it looks like its 500 feet away even tho u have just come through the atmosphere 500k to the deck of the planet, the space station scould not be visiable surely. the only thing wrong with EM is the distance/scale issue... even tho your on a planet it dosnt feel like you are cause most times you can see space, the rings, rocks floating in space clear as day from the soil lol... after a decent down of about 500k distance to be able to still see stuff in orbit really lets the game down...

any way to change this plz ?

[DynamicRanger]

I like the planet scale the way it is. I'd like to see more variation from planet to planet (size, gravity, atmospheric type/density) and more settlements/infrastructure on the surface. I'd like inhabited planets to have at least three cities connected by rail or road systems... bigger, more sprawling cities, too, perhaps procedurally generated from interlocking "tiles". But when it comes to planet size, I think we're at the sweet spot now: big enough for practical purposes, but not too big to integrate into a smooth play session. It may be unrealistic, but the planets lend the game a very distinct character... sure Evochron's universe is a bit smaller than the real one, but you can go anywhere and do practically anything you want in it.

[Thalium]

hi again

seeing as i started this thread would like to say ty for all the intrest.. but i still think players are missing the point..
vice said makeing the planets bigger would mean a planet takeing many sectors.. good! if u layed a grid of sectors over saturn it would fill 1000`s of sectors.. i tested this earlier i was on a planet 754k from a station in orbit i look up and it looks like its 40 feet away.. the planets have clouds and weather systems from space but you land on the planet look up again and all u can see is stars lol its 500k from orbit to the ground such a huge distance yet it feels nothing. if i look out my window now i cant see space can i ? also i see another player comment about seeing the horizion while landed which i think is true, you land on a small moon or a HUGE planet its the same no differance at all.. like i said b4 i laped a huge planet in my walker in a few mins but from space it looks like it would take weeks to manualy run round it.. this game is epic but the planet issue i.e size and the fact there is no reason to land on them. And after u have a few billion in the bank(few days of tradeing) max ranks in both chiv and mil, a nice map log of places to see, which i have all, what do i do now ?

In this game we are at war with vonari ya ? i fly to there home world, land on it... and nothing there. why no citys, animal life, stuff to do. if ya in a ship or walker its the same, mine or leave. but why mine when most players are multi billionairs with no chance of ever spending it..

i mean just think to be able to land on a planet and not have to leave for ages, walker missions, other stuff to mine, player bases etc would be epic, we travel 1000s of miles in space to play, why not do the same with planets ?? the space side of this game is done imo so great. but ild love to see someone to go to town on the planets

i just think that so much effort has gone in to this game in terms of realism, HUGE size, etc then to leave the planets like this..


please dont hate me vice im not knocking your game because it is a work of art, the planet issue is the only thing wrong with it but change it or not i will still play

[DaveK]

hi again

seeing as i started this thread would like to say ty for all the intrest.. but i still think players are missing the point..
vice said makeing the planets bigger would mean a planet takeing many sectors.. good! if u layed a grid of sectors over saturn it would fill 1000`s of sectors..

I guess it all depends on whether you want to spend ages travelling around Sapphire (where you start) and never getting much further. If a planet occupies thousand of sectors then the system would occupy billions, if not trillions of sectors. Landing would take ages . . . . finding things on the planet in a TW would take ages . . . .travelling to the next planet would take ages of ages . . . heavens knows how long it would take to get to the gate . . . . oh, but we have jump drives - we can get to the next planet/gate/city in a single jump.

Hmm, I think I'm missing something here - either it would take too long to get anywhere or you could jump from place to place, so all Vice's work in making everywhere in Evochron accessible by flying there would be wasted . . .and yes, there are people who for the fun of it have flown between systems (weeks real time) rather than using jump drives!

differences in sizes and hence different gravity . . . . yes!

more surface detail and more/bigger cities or outposts or mining facilyies etc etc etc (now we have TW's to take advantage of it) . . . yes!!

but realistic planet and system and star sizes . . . play with a simulator, cos I don't think you can have realistic scales and a game like EM in the same package.

[Vice]

please dont hate me vice im not knocking your game because it is a work of art, the planet issue is the only thing wrong with it but change it or not i will still play

That's what this thread (and others like it) are all about. You are welcome to express your opinion (stated as such) on this matter. This has been one of the most difficult development objectives to 'get right' for a major portion of the player base. It'll always be too big, too small, or just right for some. But it's good to explore the reasoning behind such opinions. And one thing I've really been after in this thread was to narrow down how gameplay would improve or get worse based on such a change (beyond just a sense of 'scale'). If you've followed Evochron for long, you know that this specific design aspect has already changed many times over the years, generally always having resulted in growing the planets larger. That may continue, but we'll see. I'm still collecting feedback and reviewing a number of factors in an effort to determine what, if anything, will be done next (whether in an update or in a new game).

On a similar note, I may be posting additional questions in the not too distant future regarding some other design elements.

[Marvin]

Part of the problem is that not everyone has the patience for playing in a realistic (in size) universe. Personally, I got all day (and night, and day, and night, and ....)

[Maj. Tom]

"What is this, a universe for ants? It has to be at least.... three times the size!"


Based on other comments I have read-

1.a Actually I agree that the visible curvature makes it seem underwhelming.

1.b Gas giants should be really huge.

2. The plants vegetation make it worse- they seem relatively way too huge for the planet. If the plants where even 1/10th the size, they would make the player's altitude seem more appropriate. As it is, it's hard to believe you're cruising at 3,000 m up when you see blades of grass within arm's reach..

3. Textures- splosives mentioned higher texture rings. I think this would be largely helpful. If one is worried about the technical demands on less powerful systems- could this not be scaled via graphics settings?

4. Smaller terrain walkers- although I haven't had the chance to use one yet, making them smaller would certainly help make everything else look bigger.

5. I like andysonofbob's suggestion to increase atmospheric flight speed. It's hard to believe a futuristic spacecraft can barely handle the atmospheric speeds that some modern fighter jets can.


In conclusion- looking forward to the future of EM either way! Thanks for your hard work.

[Vice]

For anyone posting in this thread, please remember to keep in mind the purpose it is set out for in your answers... namely, the 'why' question in relation to gameplay. Many have already stated the 'what's' and 'should be's' with the many varying opinions on both sides of the issue, but the goal of this thread is to tie it all into what it means for gameplay, either good or bad in your opinion (and specific examples are a plus).

I would also appreciate input from anyone completing the example task I listed in the opening post, namely flying at a speed relative to what would make for much larger planets (which would indeed be the equivalent of flying faster than is currently available relative to the estimated target size planets could be increased in size to, which would likely be at least 4 or 5 entire sectors across compared to existing scaling, then answering the questions listed.

[-splosives-]

You want to know why planet scaling should or could be changed?

Then we must ask ourselves first if it would give any extra gameplay options. I think the answer is no. If a planet is bigger, but just as empty as the smaller ones, then the gameplay won't get any better out of it.
Does the gameplay get any worse? Maybe! I actually can't say. But I do have my concerns regarding maximum speeds compared to bigger planets.

Why do people land on planets in the first place? In evochron, planetary landing is entirely optional, and there is actually little gained from doing this. I would even say the cost of fuel makes it very unprofitable. The only reason I can imagine is to get some materials that aren't available in asteroids, but then again, those materials are fairly useless anyway.

Yet, still people like to land on planets and fly in atmosphere. Why? Because it's awesome! Just being able to land on a planet is good enough for most people, and that's why they accept the fact that you actually can't do much on them.

So why change the size of planets and stars? because you could make it look more realistic. You can make the planetary landing even more visually engaging, encouraging players to do so even more than before. I think lots of people that play this game dream about going into space and looking at earth from afar. This game offers just a little bit of satisfaction to those people. By making Evochron more like it would be in real life, you could make that satisfaction even greater for them.

For me personally, I think the biggest concern regarding realism in evochron right now is the size of stars and gas giants, like I said earlier.

[Marvin]

I only know of one program where the planets are "to scale" and, although it works (as far as game play), one of the reasons it works is because every ship is equpped with cruise control (autopilot) and terrain following. The main drawback is that the terrain, as seen from space, is not accurately reflected in what you encounter after going planetside.