6 ms·

what you want a game where they take into account the expansion of space? are we also going to model the complete breakdown of causality on the otherside of the

what you want a game where they take into account the expansion of space? are we also going to model the complete breakdown of causality on the otherside of the ftl?

hparadiz 3mo ago
They don't even do orbits of basic solar system objects. Lol. Eve online has always just pretended to be a space sim.
- forgetfreeman 3mo ago
  That's inaccurate, orbital periods are a thing at least for moons. It's one of those things you'd have to spend a year or two piloting an Orca to notice though.
  - hparadiz 3mo ago
    Are stations and jump gates still fixed in place?
    - stackskipton 3mo ago
      Yes and almost no one cares.
      - fl4regun 3mo ago
        if anything, people DON'T want them to move because it will ruin their bookmarks over time. It is not going to be fun to have to manually update your bookmarks just because a space station got slightly pulled into some nearby planet or whatever.
    - snapcaster 3mo ago
      how would it impact the fun of the game if they weren't?
      - fl4regun 3mo ago
        I mentioned this in another comment, but if they moved you would have to manually update bookmarks to warp to those locations as they drifted, annoying.
      - tekla 3mo ago
        Because fairly few players want to update space coordinates of hundreds of objects as a daily chore
        hparadiz 3mo ago
        You would not need to update any bookmarks. They should be using a coordinate system based on a relative object. Existing bookmarks are already technically relative the largest gravity well. New bookmarks would simply be based on whatever you want like any object. Absolutely no reason to overcomplicate it. Dunno why you're assuming you'd need to update anything.
        snapcaster 3mo ago
        at no point are you justifying why this would be FUN. it's like you don't even understand what a game is supposed to be
        hparadiz 3mo ago
        Tactics like being able to have your fleet hiding behind a moon that happens to orbit into the exact right position at the right time is fun to me. Eve Online is already a spreadsheet simulator so I find it about as fun as watching paint dry. Anyway I don't think basic physics is about fun or not fun.
        tekla 3mo ago
        Claiming to appreciate tactics involving realistic orbital maneuvering but also hating spreadsheet simulators is an incredibly strange position. How does one want a realistic space game but also hate spreadsheets?
- snapcaster 3mo ago
  games are about fun, if something only adds realism for no reason it's not good game design to add it
  - dmos62 3mo ago
    Fun is of course subjective. Some of us care about realism more than others.
    - tekla 3mo ago
      It's going to be such a fun game flying 1000 lightyears at a couple hundred meters per second.
    - dxdm 3mo ago
      I think we're all aware of that. The post you're responding to essentially made the same point you did, but to someone who thought it appropriate to express their love for realism in a much less mature way.
    - nkrisc 3mo ago
      I bet some do, but not enough for anyone to ever make a commercial game that focuses on hyper-realistic, multiplayer space travel.
  - m4rtink 3mo ago
    I still think it would be doable if done right. There are so many interesting elements of modern science and hard SF that could be included to introduce interesting game mechanics: - adding various types of radiators (solid, droplet, etc.), gloving when weapons fire or engines activate, shooting them off prevents system from running - planets on eccentric orbits with wildly varying surface conditions in mere days as the planet periodically get closer and farther to the star, from frozen solid to metals flowing like water days apart - aerostat habitats in the atmosphere on gas giants or Venus like worlds, you could fly around but go to low (or get swept by a storm) and you might get crushed - radiation belts, sun grazing comets or energy harvesting stations very close to a stellar body, can enter for a very limited time until even your shielded systems burn out - and good like with repair space walks! - tidally locked bodies, where one side is always illuminated and the other one has an eternal night, with perhaps a thin habitable belt where conditions are just right for life, presenting interesting options for story telling and world building
- dantillberg 3mo ago
  It helps me to just think of all these games as early 20th century naval warfare sims with a fantasy space theme. We like dreadnoughts and have a hard time with extraterrestrial physics.
  - trashb 3mo ago
    To me it seems like the engine (and the mechanics) are focused on being an MMO first and a "simulation" second. From their website "EVE Online is a community-driven spaceship MMORPG where players can play free, choosing their own path from countless options." There are concepts in the game that would be unlikely in a simulation game but are common in MMO's. Think of fast travel, instance dungeons and more. One of Eve Online's strengths is that it conforms gameplay to the MMO setting. That is one of the main driving factors in it's design and allows for example for Time dilation, huge battles and continuous universe and economy that it is famous for. This is different from for example World of Warcraft, in my view that is a RPG first MMO second. That is one of the reasons it has sharding and smaller pvp battles.
    - dantillberg 3mo ago
      Indeed, I would even say that EVE chose to be unsharded/monolithic first, and many of the key design choices flow from that, including the fantasy space setting itself. The monolithic world needs to be big to spread everyone out. And it's easier to create ten thousand "systems" than it would be to create an immersive terrestrial world with a similar scale. Each EVE system is just a bunch of objects floating in a 3D space that you travel between.
      - hparadiz 3mo ago
        Positioning of things in orbit around a point in space is cheap. The issue was probably how much more complicated it would be to make all the missions if things kept moving around. You could end up with things on opposite sides of a solar system that are currently right next to each other. But to me it takes me out of the game when I see stuff like that in the engine.
  - 3mo ago
- tekla 3mo ago
  > pretended to be a space sim. When has it ever done that. Keep in mind, I played like starting year 3
- codezero 3mo ago
  How fast can you speed run KSP RP/RO?

what you want a game where they take into account the expansion of space? are we also going to model the complete breakdown of causality on the otherside of the ftl?

hparadiz 3mo ago

They don't even do orbits of basic solar system objects. Lol. Eve online has always just pretended to be a space sim.

forgetfreeman 3mo ago
That's inaccurate, orbital periods are a thing at least for moons. It's one of those things you'd have to spend a year or two piloting an Orca to notice though.
- hparadiz 3mo ago
  Are stations and jump gates still fixed in place?
  - stackskipton 3mo ago
    Yes and almost no one cares.
    - fl4regun 3mo ago
      if anything, people DON'T want them to move because it will ruin their bookmarks over time. It is not going to be fun to have to manually update your bookmarks just because a space station got slightly pulled into some nearby planet or whatever.
  - snapcaster 3mo ago
    how would it impact the fun of the game if they weren't?
    - fl4regun 3mo ago
      I mentioned this in another comment, but if they moved you would have to manually update bookmarks to warp to those locations as they drifted, annoying.
    - tekla 3mo ago
      Because fairly few players want to update space coordinates of hundreds of objects as a daily chore
      - hparadiz 3mo ago
        You would not need to update any bookmarks. They should be using a coordinate system based on a relative object. Existing bookmarks are already technically relative the largest gravity well. New bookmarks would simply be based on whatever you want like any object. Absolutely no reason to overcomplicate it. Dunno why you're assuming you'd need to update anything.
        snapcaster 3mo ago
        at no point are you justifying why this would be FUN. it's like you don't even understand what a game is supposed to be
        hparadiz 3mo ago
        Tactics like being able to have your fleet hiding behind a moon that happens to orbit into the exact right position at the right time is fun to me. Eve Online is already a spreadsheet simulator so I find it about as fun as watching paint dry. Anyway I don't think basic physics is about fun or not fun.
        tekla 3mo ago
        Claiming to appreciate tactics involving realistic orbital maneuvering but also hating spreadsheet simulators is an incredibly strange position. How does one want a realistic space game but also hate spreadsheets?
snapcaster 3mo ago
games are about fun, if something only adds realism for no reason it's not good game design to add it
- dmos62 3mo ago
  Fun is of course subjective. Some of us care about realism more than others.
  - tekla 3mo ago
    It's going to be such a fun game flying 1000 lightyears at a couple hundred meters per second.
  - dxdm 3mo ago
    I think we're all aware of that. The post you're responding to essentially made the same point you did, but to someone who thought it appropriate to express their love for realism in a much less mature way.
  - nkrisc 3mo ago
    I bet some do, but not enough for anyone to ever make a commercial game that focuses on hyper-realistic, multiplayer space travel.
- m4rtink 3mo ago
  I still think it would be doable if done right. There are so many interesting elements of modern science and hard SF that could be included to introduce interesting game mechanics: - adding various types of radiators (solid, droplet, etc.), gloving when weapons fire or engines activate, shooting them off prevents system from running - planets on eccentric orbits with wildly varying surface conditions in mere days as the planet periodically get closer and farther to the star, from frozen solid to metals flowing like water days apart - aerostat habitats in the atmosphere on gas giants or Venus like worlds, you could fly around but go to low (or get swept by a storm) and you might get crushed - radiation belts, sun grazing comets or energy harvesting stations very close to a stellar body, can enter for a very limited time until even your shielded systems burn out - and good like with repair space walks! - tidally locked bodies, where one side is always illuminated and the other one has an eternal night, with perhaps a thin habitable belt where conditions are just right for life, presenting interesting options for story telling and world building
dantillberg 3mo ago
It helps me to just think of all these games as early 20th century naval warfare sims with a fantasy space theme. We like dreadnoughts and have a hard time with extraterrestrial physics.
- trashb 3mo ago
  To me it seems like the engine (and the mechanics) are focused on being an MMO first and a "simulation" second. From their website "EVE Online is a community-driven spaceship MMORPG where players can play free, choosing their own path from countless options." There are concepts in the game that would be unlikely in a simulation game but are common in MMO's. Think of fast travel, instance dungeons and more. One of Eve Online's strengths is that it conforms gameplay to the MMO setting. That is one of the main driving factors in it's design and allows for example for Time dilation, huge battles and continuous universe and economy that it is famous for. This is different from for example World of Warcraft, in my view that is a RPG first MMO second. That is one of the reasons it has sharding and smaller pvp battles.
  - dantillberg 3mo ago
    Indeed, I would even say that EVE chose to be unsharded/monolithic first, and many of the key design choices flow from that, including the fantasy space setting itself. The monolithic world needs to be big to spread everyone out. And it's easier to create ten thousand "systems" than it would be to create an immersive terrestrial world with a similar scale. Each EVE system is just a bunch of objects floating in a 3D space that you travel between.
    - hparadiz 3mo ago
      Positioning of things in orbit around a point in space is cheap. The issue was probably how much more complicated it would be to make all the missions if things kept moving around. You could end up with things on opposite sides of a solar system that are currently right next to each other. But to me it takes me out of the game when I see stuff like that in the engine.
- 3mo ago
tekla 3mo ago
> pretended to be a space sim. When has it ever done that. Keep in mind, I played like starting year 3
codezero 3mo ago
How fast can you speed run KSP RP/RO?