/sci/ - Science & Math

How realistic do you want it to be?

Random, procedurally generated universes work a lot better for space exploration games than most other genres.

Space is so fucking huge that to simulate things on a realistic scale would result in lots of overflow/underflow in your numeric representations. 64 bits may not be enough. Research arbitrary precision arithmetic.

Dogfights in space would be nothing like Top Gun or Star Wars. Your ships don't need to look aerodynamic unless you're going to work in some atmospheric reentry shit. Look up Independence War 2 and see how it handled its newtonian flight mechanics. The feel and tactics are totally different.

No sound in space. Take note of how Dead Space handled sound when your character was exposed to the vacuum. The only thing you heard was his own breathing and grunts and vibrations with every step.

Your space exploration game, if it's too realistic, will be very lonely and boring because the state of space exploration as it is right now just isn't there. See Orbiter. You'll need one or two enabling hard sci-fi elements like hyperspace or suspended animation or something.

Good luck coming up with "realistic" aliens because we really don't have fucking shit to go on.

>>1533453
> implying we didn't just recently realize that the galaxy is loaded with earth-like planets

>>1533369

>What are some important things to remember while making a realistic space exploration game?

A method to sped up time.

It won't be 100% realistic to the point where it isn't playable. There'll be hyperdrives and planets full of aliens and civilisations and such.

Gameplay is worked out, I'm just wondering if there's any easy mistakes to make that would make you rage if you saw them. (like a black hole gun or something)

>>1533520
Why would a black hole gun make someone rage?

>>1533542
I don't know, it's the first thing that came to mind.
Imagine something that breaks all laws of physics.

every game developer gets this wrong. You should be hearing no sound in space.

>What are some important things to remember while making a realistic space exploration game?
Model it after our own galaxy. There are databases with all the known planets. Something like that would be kinda cool.

>>1533506
Imagine that as a gameplay mechanic. That's what I mean when I say it'd make you rage.

In space, no one can hear you scream... or fap...

>>1533560
That would be cool, but this has to be procedurally generated.

Getting mad at sound in space games an overly nerdy nitpicky thing to get your panties in a twist about.

>>1533578
>overly nerdy nitpicky thing to get your panties in a twist about.
Exactly why I made this thread.

What would it be like to fly through a nebula?
With ship lights on?

>>1533553
I'd imagine small black holes would be pretty good munitions in higher tech levels.

Goes through any and all matter, irradiates it's surroundings and, if you tweak them enough, blows up in a huge burst of gamma radiation where you want it to.

>>1533607
You would be quite invisible. The nebula would probably look the same to all observers. These clouds of gas are often of such size that light takes tens of years to travel from one side of it to the other.

I would like for a space exploration game to have both atmospheric re-entry and landing. I want to gaze into a foreign sky to see the many interesting things that could happen in one that won't happen on earth; multiple suns in the sky, many moons, or, if you're on a moon, a large planet looming over you, taking up the entire sky almost.

>>1533625
But how would you store them or shoot one at someone?

Unless you shoot something that creates one at their ship?

The big problem with realistic (newtonian physics) space sims is that space is FUCKING HUGE AND EMPTY and shit is REALLY FAR APART AND TINY. Also once you accelerate you keep on going. If you really want to get some arbitrary place and stop, you have to turn around and accelerate in the other direction at the halfway point (assuming you're not using complex gravity assists all over the place).

Do you have an old Atari ST or an Amiga perchance? Check out Mercenary III: The Dion Crisis if you can. It features space travel with relativistic time dilation.

fuck this, I'm gonna read some Heinlein, play some α Centauri and maybe fap

>>1533633
I mean how would a nebula look from inside it?
I imagine it would be dark, and if you turn the ship lights on how far would you be able to see, and would you see anything?

>>1533647
Again, these objects are on a scale that is pretty hard for humans to imagine. This isn't like using your headlights on earth on a foggy day.

The first thing that you have to consider is that these giant clouds of gas and dust are the birthplaces of stars. The inside of the nebula would probably be a bright and spectacular place. You would not be able to see outside, beyond the bounds of the cloud, but everything within it could be brilliantly visible.

Now if you were to turn on your lights, I would venture to say that you may illuminate a tiny smattering of what little matter is in your immediate vicinity. From the perspective inside the ship, things would probably look no different, as the ship and everything around it is already being bathed in the light of a million young stars.

>>1533716
>my face when we don't live inside a nebula

>>1533716
Nebulae are transparent. you can see stars right through them. That means if you're in one, you can see out in all directions.

>>1533767
Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking. I suppose I'm more apt to think of the brilliant, very dense and almost billowing clouds of gas and dust that we often see in false-color images.

It does look prettier that way, though.

>>1533556
It depends. If you're in a ship, and a ship relatively near you explodes, you'll probably hear it. The outflow of gas from the exploded ship essentially carries the explosive sound with it. The impacting gas against the hull would transfer the sound to the interior of the ship.

>>1533369
Captain Kirk will get laid every episode, the female will not be human

Frontier: Elite

catgirls

You could probably do something like you can only hear the hum of the engines and the rattle of the less well built parts...
also, you hear collisions with objects.
other then that, there'd be no sound unless in atmosphere or something explodes and the shockwave shakes the ship or something...

>>1533767
It's nighttime. You can easily see into the light windows of a house, the family looks like they're preparing dinner.

Now, you're in the house. You look outside, what do you see? Black. It's too bright, you're eyes can't adjust to seeing out in the night from indoors.

Nebula is the same way. All the light from those stars is bouncing around inside the nebula. You'll be able to look out through it, but the view is going to be dim. You've got bright gas in the way, the other stars in the universe are not going to be easy to make out.

>>1533865
So what you're telling me is that these extremely sophisticated spaceships have such a primitive control scheme that they completely ignore a major human sense?

Considering that hearing is the only direction-finding sense that can pick up on things that aren't straight ahead, I would design my captain's chair to have surround sound linked to the collision radar. Because a sound indicating a distant thing off yonder is a better alert than words.

>>1533905
What exactly would you hear? No sound would be transmitted through space and you have a shitton of sensors showing you where anything ship-like is. I doubt that the navy ship captains hear anything outside the room they are in.

>>1533926
>What exactly would you hear?
Deck speakers interpreting position information into sound.
>you have a shitton of sensors showing you where anything ship-like is.
Yeah, but they have to communicate this to me efficiently and sensibly. No sense having a huge sensor suite if it can't communicate.

Thoughts on surround sound to indicate approaches and close shots? Clearly more information would be needed, but this is just notification.