We’re not specifically saving clouds/vegetation for some future update. We don’t have the resources to do either of them at the moment, nor do we want to significantly delay the KS launch to add them in.
While I think trees (unless there are only dead planets on the system) and especially clouds would be very important for the ambiance to have in the final version of the game, and should at least be a stretch goal, I doubt many would have you delay the campaign’s launch to implement them before it.
As long as you clearly display that this is pre-alpha footage and about how you expect things to look better, people will see it as “omg so much potential” instead of “those glassy plastic planets look bad”.
2 Likes
If you make it clear for people that you can and want to include clouds and trees in the final game should you just get the required funding, and then just place it as a stretch goal (no matter how ridiculous a sum needed, just put it there high up in the stratosphere if needed), you will kinda leave it for the paying customers to decide with their wallet if they want to give you these resources you are currently lacking to include clouds and vegetation.
I don’t understand why you would consider dropping it as a stretch goal altogether. I mean this decision could seriously deny you a ton load of $. These are exactly the kind of never before seen features with which you can sell the high end funding level to the customers.
Personally I would put an extra amount of money just for the sole purpose of helping you to reach that particular stretch goal.
And if you don’t reach that stretch goal, then fine. No clouds nor trees in I:B. But at least consider defining the level of funding that would make it possible and then just brutally hang that carrot above the paying customers and see what happens.
Edit: And of course explain why it will cost as much as it will cost to include them.
2 Likes
I’d have to agree. The superlative stretch goal ought to go over as well as it possibly could, if it had some no-BS demonstration (even just a simplified infographic) of why trees/clouds/etc are so borderline unfeasible.
I’m done discussing the clouds and trees issue. We have, and most likely will continue discussing them as possible stretch goals.
1 Like
Especially if future screenshots include the experimental clouds… 
1 Like
For me your work is perfect, congratulations.
Main reason of disappointment with the video is because the screen-shots deviate a lot from the video.
The screenshots include clouds, lighting effects, even buildings.
Are the screenshots post-processed somehow, because if they are screenshots why can’t they be in the video footage (its the same engine I presume) ?
No, they are not.
Why can’t the buildings, clouds, lighting effects not be in the video? It would certainly improve it a lot.
Clouds only look decent when you’re on the planet surface or in space, flying through them, not so much.
As I have previously mentioned, the buildings are low quality background horizon assets only, flying close/over them is not an option.
I’m not sure what lighting effects you are referring to.
I made a screenshot of the video, to show that in my opinion the lighting does look a lot different in the video than in the screenshots.
Both are from the same engine ofc, there are no lighting differences other than the location of the direct light (the sun), and the camera location on the planet surface.
When Dan takes screenshots, I am sure he moves the camera around to get the best possible scenic images. Not every location on a planet is going to look like some scenic sunset image…
1 Like
I understand. I think using a good starting point for next video would definitely improve the wow-factor.
I would also recommend adding a landing on another planet (at a nice ending viewpoint 
).
Gene is correct.
When taking screenshots in engine I have the following criteria.
- UnEdited
- Minimal variation in star colour or atmospheric scattering (if any)
- Visually appealing composition
- Colour and depth value. (the clouds add a lot of this, which is why I post the experimental clouds at all.
When you see the experimental clouds (which only look good from the surface btw) see them as a teaser of what could be in the future, rather than an existing feature of the engine. As long as we’re still alive I’m sure it will be on the “To-Do” list.
2 Likes
This approach of showing purely what you have already, plus a bit of teasing, should be absolutely perfect for the Kickstarter (which I assume this is all building towards).
Those of us who have been here a while sometimes expect “Time Waited = More Things Finished”, but the reality is quite different: “Time Waited = More Fine Tuning in Preparation for Investment + Hype”. We (as fans) know in our hearts that everything we want depends on how much funding is collected, so I personally am quite happy to sit here and applaud what has been achieved so far on limited resources.
In my opinion, the whole debate on how awesome clouds/scenery would be in the final game is kind of irrelevant in this thread, which is more about teasing what I-Novae has managed to create.
1 Like
I doubt that someone working on something like Infinity wouldn’t want to recreate (eventually anyway) something simultaneously so awesome and plausible as e.g. the cloudscape scenes in Avatar and Prometheus, or from books like McAuley’s Quiet War:
http://unlikelyworlds.blogspot.com/2012/11/operation-deep-sounding.html
It’s about that time of the week again… 
… Unless you think by posting that video, @ 30 fps and 106 seconds long, you gave us 3180 screenshots, enough to last us another 60 years. 
10 Likes
Oh dear, you poor souls…
To ensure you don’t starve to death (again), for you, some pics. This week it’s planetary rings at extreme angles, with the added interest of variable star colours. Starting with a reddish yellow star, followed by a blue giant star, and then finishing off with a star somewhere in the middle.
17 Likes
Wonderful pictures @Hutchings, just a quick question, how do you see anything on the dark side of the planet with no ambient light?