I keep finding cool star systems and nebulae, but thanks to the rapidfire updates, they keep disappearing or changing. I'm thinking, why not have SpaceEngine save star systems you travel to in a catalogue so that we don't have to deal with this?

fxmodels wrote:

Source of the post Why is there an apparent mag -13 Blue Hypergiant near the Solar System in SE??

What is the name of the star?

When you click on Continue in the main menu and it switches to the loading screen, if you have contextual music playing turned on, SE will start playing a song and after a few seconds switch to a different song matching the context of the scene. Why can't the menu music just continue into the loading screen until enough of the scene has loaded to determine what music should play?

Suggestion: Introduce a validity period of orbits for space probes!
NOBODY has published orbital data for the Voyager probes. However, this orbit data refers only to the current data.
It should be possible to create separate orbital data for the journey to Jupiter, Saturn and so on, which have only a certain period of validity.
 
Of course it would be good if there was something like ephemeris data for the Voyager probes. But if there is a corresponding space probe ephemeris file, I would not know where to find it.

JackDole wrote:

Of course it would be good if there was something like ephemeris data for the Voyager probes. But if there is a corresponding space probe ephemeris file, I would not know where to find it.

SpaceEngine would need to be able to parse SPICE kernels like Celestia can.

PlutonianEmpire wrote:

Suggestion: Undo all of the dumbing down of the settings and features, as countless others has observed in this very thread since 0.990 came out. A paid version is supposed to be an improved version, not the other way around, and most certainly should not be a partially-improved-at-the-expense-of-other-features version.

I like the new settings. Much easier to switch between being able to see and having a nice photorealistic image.

Zoliparia wrote:

Could you make auto horizon on planets slightly faster? It currently takes nearly 8 seconds before the camera has finished turning, and during those 8 seconds I have to wait, and there's no way to speed it up. I know this could be seen as nitpicking but on the other hand I don't think it would take very long to do something about this. Thanks.

Usually, it should take only 1.5 seconds, according to the config files. If you want to change the settings, edit the config file:
C:\program files (x86)\steam\steamapps\common\SpaceEngine\config\main-user.cfg
To the best of my knowledge, it's controlled by the same setting that controls how long it takes the camera to center on an object:

Hope this helps!

Zoliparia wrote:

Source of the post Could you make auto horizon on planets slightly faster? It currently takes nearly 8 seconds before the camera has finished turning, and during those 8 seconds I have to wait, and there's no way to speed it up. I know this could be seen as nitpicking but on the other hand I don't think it would take very long to do something about this. Thanks.

If this really takes so long, probably something is wrong with your settings (or with your computer).
For me, it takes a maximum of two seconds. (Estimated, I did not stop the time.)
Maybe you should post your se.log. (It's in the 'system' directory of SpaceEngine.)

Can we have some kind of action (saved file) that simulates collisions of objects (like two planets colliding) or two stars passing close enough to dislodge each other's planets or causing a mass extinction event like an asteroid colliding with a planet?

Thinking of that because of the recent news of a planetary collision being observed recently that created a moon (much like how our moon was created.)

Hi there, i am really loving the new version!! Really overall just stellar, very many positive things to say.
However, there ARE just 2 issues i have a problem with. 

The first one is about liquid on planets, that many "lacustrine" planets only have very thin rivers, and sometimes really no lakes at all.It is often a setup for disappointment, unfortunately.
I also haven't found a single "marine" planet since release.  The Earth is probably not a common planet, but i think it'd be nice to not have oceans be THAT rare. I think some that would be considered "marine" are now grouped under the very wildly varying "lacustrine" tag.

The second one, is that planetary nebula have much too small render distance. At about 300 lightyears or so they just stop existing and are not visible with markers either, even if they are very bright when you get close. This makes them super hard to find, and i actually didn't know they were even in the game until today. 
They are also very lovely, so it makes me sad to not have more clouds of beautiful gas in the sky.

Other than that, excellent release, well worth the wait. Also love the well selected addition of music.  

aiki wrote:

Source of the post Really overall just stellar

Pun intended?

aiki wrote:

I also haven't found a single "marine" planet since release. 

Try search - Shift+F3.
Although I do think that when I search for non-arid planets, lacustrine and superoceanic worlds appear more often.

aiki wrote:

The second one, is that planetary nebula have much too small render distance. At about 300 lightyears or so they just stop existing and are not visible with markers either, even if they are very bright when you get close. This makes them super hard to find, and i actually didn't know they were even in the game until today.

Try settings - F4 → "Camera" on the left → "Nebulae" on the right.
Turning up magnitudes will make corresponding objects visible from farther distances, which means there wil be more of them on screen. This will eat more power and memory, and can even crash the program. Change it slowly, keep an eye on where it starts to lag and stop there.

There is something important and abundant in the universe missing in space engine. It's newborn solar system! A newborn star with lot of debris surrounding it with small sized newborn planets.

I suggest having many stages of solar system, each one representing a different solar system age. 

stage 0: Unborn star. No star formed yet but the dust are getting compact, making some light as debris crush into one another. It's forming a spiral, a solar system shape with no planet and star.
stage 1: Newborn star. There are lot of compact dust surrounding the newborn star, it's the earliest stage of a solar system. No planets, only dust/debris and a small star, (or big one for some rare case).
stage 2: Baby star. A star with dust and planets. This solar system has both mixed: Dust/Debris and planet surrounding the star. There we see planets being form, hot liquid small planets with lot of debris surrounding it.
stage 3: Young star. Looks like a normal solar system but with lot of debris remaining.
stage 4: Normal solar system. Already in space engine.
stage 5: Old solar system, this is already in space engine with supergiant stars.
stage 6: Dead star. Can be found in Nebulas, where planets float in space or orbit the remnant of the supernovae (blackhole, neutron star, ect.). This already exist in space engine.

supreme_marshal wrote:

Source of the post There is something important and abundant in the universe missing in space engine. It's newborn solar system!

Space Engine needs to develope a good ray-tracing algorithm to make this realistic enought since protoplanetary disks are extremely complex objects that shadow themselves in different regions and oclude light in complex ways. Also Space Engine needs for its algorithms to be millisecond-quick to make the user experience everything in real time, so this is probably a long way until we get to see those.
But even then,SpaceEngineer has been working on that (even if it didn't made to the last release) with a lot of progress by now