The only criticism I have, is that the size difference between large rocks and dust are too abrupt, I imagine there are all sizes in between, from house sized to pebble sized to dust. Maybe an effect like it is used for snow in some games could render the smaller sizes inbetween.
Yes, I had the same problem with those rings, no size transition. This is why the previous one looked better in a way, even if it was less realistic: there was no discontinuity between the smallest and the largest rocks.
That said, popping didn’t bother me much, as it is obviously a problem that will be solved at some point when LoD is more advanced (not to trivialize it, of course, simply you can’t ship a game without it).
I think “criticism” is to be understood as the short form of “negative criticism” here.
I believe INS’s interest is in “cinematic style battles”, which are those fights you see in almost any science fiction movie involving space combat; two capital fleets blasting away at each other while the fighters dogfight in close proximity. No rocks are involved, large or small.
Note that, strictly speaking, the ring video was of a planetary ring, not asteroids. Asteroids orbit the sun.
[quote=“ChrisHandley, post:178, topic:582”]
I suspect a lot of the criticism was people trying to justify their disappointment at how boring & small your asteroids looked.[/quote]
Part of that was using the wrong presentation. Players see that video and don’t see prospective gameplay. Why am I here with my ship? Staying a bit farther off and just showing rings as a visual would have been far better. Interacting with a field of dust would be astounding if the engine could present a ship collecting ring dust the way a filter-feeding whale does - which would require their particle engine, which is not yet available.
[quote=“ChrisHandley, post:178, topic:582”]
I still maintain that you have focus too much on graphics tech, which has delayed the game far too long. The graphics engine can always be improved after the game is released, but you can’t release a game with bad gameplay.[/quote]
I’ll ignore the fact that planetary rings aren’t made of asteroids, since JB was kind enough to be pedantic for me, and move right on to the fact that we have no idea how big or small the rocks in the latest ring video are. There’s no ship in the scene to make comparisons to. It’s entirely possible that the density of large rocks is just lower. Also, and I’m going to be stupid nerdy here, there’s very little actual dog fighting in the asteroid field in Star Wars. There’s maybe 4 seconds of it until they reach the large asteroid/dwarf planet. Most of the combat takes place in the canyons thereon.
So, in order to have dog fights like in Star Wars, Battlescape needs canyons.
Using Saturn as the default model for rings… While there’s a continuous distribution, yes, the density of ring particles decreases exponentially with size, and the parameters of this exponential function are different in different parts of the rings. So, finding a house sized boulder every 100,000 km is perfectly reasonable in most regions of a realistic ring system. But there are also regions where very large rocks are uncharacteristically common.
[quote=“JB47394, post:183, topic:582”]
Part of that was using the wrong presentation. Players see that video and don’t see prospective gameplay. Why am I here with my ship?[/quote]
Pretty much this, yes. The rings were pretty, and I appreciate them for what they are. I even really liked the last video. It’s just… Nothing really happened.
like @Kichae said, using Saturn as a example of rings, their really isn’t any transition in size between rocks. their are transitions between each ring. ie, the closer to the planet the smaller they get. however this isn’t even constant. as much of Saturns rings are mostly dust with a few larger rocks tossed in.
then, you have to take into consideration of how old the solar system is. the older it is, the smaller and thinner the rings will be(if any at all). where as a newer solar system would have more larger rocks.
they are composed of 99.9 percent pure water ice with a smattering of impurities that may include tholins or silicates. The main rings are primarily composed of particles ranging in size from 1 centimetre to 10 meters.
Color is used to represent information about ring particle sizes based on the measured effects of the three radio signals. Shades of red indicate regions where there is a lack of particles less than 5 centimeters (about 2 inches) in diameter. Green and blue shades indicate regions where there are particles of sizes smaller than 5 centimeters (2 inches) and 1 centimeter (less than one third of an inch), respectively.
In other words, red has stuff larger than 5 centimeters, green has stuff smaller than 5 centimeters and blue has stuff smaller than 1 centimeter.
The primary composition of the rings is water ice; it is quite pure and predominantly crystalline, to the sensitivity level of the measurements
That paper has a bucketload of detailed technical information about the rings. Of particular interest is table 15.1, which spells out particle sizes per ring. The largest objects across the rings seem to have about a 5 meter radius. If I understood the bits I read correctly, figure 15.5 shows how the vast majority of particles are small. As you increase particle radius by 10^1, you decrease the particle population by 10^4. It seems that the great bulk of the mass of the rings is in small particles (as you increase particle radius by 10^1, you increase volume by 10^3).
Yeah, that’s the paper I’ve been working from. Note that that power law (not exponential, as I incorrectly said above) decrease in densities is region specific, with some regions having a relative over abundance of larger particles. This means the global densities actually over-estimate how many large particles you’d find in other regions.
very informative post! Also noteworthy in the article:
Note the gradual increase in shades of green towards the outer edge of
ring A. It indicates gradual increase in the abundance of 5-centimeter
(2-inch) and smaller particles. Note also the blue shades in the
vicinity of the Keeler gap (the narrow dark band near the edge of ring
A). They indicate increased abundance of even smaller particles of
diameter less than a centimeter. Frequent collisions between large ring
particles in this dynamically active region likely fragment the larger
particles into more numerous smaller ones.
If I read the article and the technical paper correctely, I think it says that the particle sizes in the specific rings regions have upper und lower size limits, and between those two limits, the particle sizes vary somewhat uniformly.