Ultimate space simulation software

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 17
 
RamjetExhaust
Observer
Observer
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Feb 2018
Location: Murica

General 0.9.9.0 Discussion

12 Feb 2018 16:47

I'm rather excited for 990, which I'm sure everybody else is.
19:1, "The Heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim his handiwork"
 
Huntingknight
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Location: Ohio, United States

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

21 Feb 2018 14:02

Are ALL nebulae planned on being changed to volumetric models, or are there just going to be a bunch of new models for procedural space? As far as I could tell from the test videos, none of the nebulae being shown were real ones, but I could be wrong. So are nebulae such as Orion, Barnard's Loop, Eagle, etc nebulas going to be changed to volumetric in 0.9.9.0, or are changing all current models to volumetric more of a long term project and likely be finished for final release?
 
User avatar
ARBB
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 72
Joined: 04 Aug 2016
Location: Doom.
Contact:

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

21 Feb 2018 14:11

Huntingknight wrote:
Are ALL nebulae planned on being changed to volumetric models, or are there just going to be a bunch of new models for procedural space? As far as I could tell from the test videos, none of the nebulae being shown were real ones, but I could be wrong. So are nebulae such as Orion, Barnard's Loop, Eagle, etc nebulas going to be changed to volumetric in 0.9.9.0, or are changing all current models to volumetric more of a long term project and likely be finished for final release?


As far as I know, the only nebulaes that are volumetric are procedural ones, since we don't have a math equation describing the models for the real ones.
S M OO T H RºCªMBºLºNE
 
Huntingknight
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Location: Ohio, United States

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

22 Feb 2018 04:07

ARBB wrote:
Huntingknight wrote:
Are ALL nebulae planned on being changed to volumetric models, or are there just going to be a bunch of new models for procedural space? As far as I could tell from the test videos, none of the nebulae being shown were real ones, but I could be wrong. So are nebulae such as Orion, Barnard's Loop, Eagle, etc nebulas going to be changed to volumetric in 0.9.9.0, or are changing all current models to volumetric more of a long term project and likely be finished for final release?


As far as I know, the only nebulaes that are volumetric are procedural ones, since we don't have a math equation describing the models for the real ones.

Yeah I kind of figured he would have to build them all one-by-one, which does not seem like a fun job hahahah. Although, I did see some hourglass-like and cone-like nebulas in some of the videos. So maybe some can easily be replaced? I dunno. Maybe there is a way to contact various scientific organizations or agencies like NASA and ESA on 3D nebula and galaxy models. For example, the Orion nebula has been made into a 3D model for visualization. I realize there is no link on that webpage to the actual model, but there may be a way to contact the people who made it for the model.
 
User avatar
Mosfet
World Builder
World Builder
Posts: 1020
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Location: Italy

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

22 Feb 2018 08:15

Bambusman is the expert here, but making a volumetric M42 for example is *really* hard. but yeah nebulae having clearly a rotation or reflection plane symmetry could be the first ones to be emulated with volumetric techniques. An hybrid approach is more probable in the near future, as in using both volumetric and raster methods for the same object, but it's still work in progress and, if ever,  it needs huge optimization.
About the 3d models from those agencies, they use huge amounts of computational power to calculate those numerical data, while volumetric models need something like a parametric 3d function to approximate the real shape for our poor computers.
There are techniques involving fractal algorithms in order to match somehow real images with mathematical functions, used mainly to search new high quality audio-video compression mechanisms. Add a third dimension and I guess we are talking about frontier informatics :)
"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so". Douglas N. Adams
My mods | My specs: Asus x555ub - cpu i5-6200u, ram 4gb, gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram | IRC freenode.net canale ##SpaceEngineITA
 
User avatar
spaceguy
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 189
Joined: 30 Dec 2016

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

22 Feb 2018 11:05

Huntingknight wrote:
Source of the post For example, the Orion nebula has been made into a 3D model for visualization.

Isn't this model kinda trash since the nebula certainly isn't as flat as depicted?
 
User avatar
Mosfet
World Builder
World Builder
Posts: 1020
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Location: Italy

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

22 Feb 2018 12:36

Being NASA/ESA, I really hope they make at least large use of educated guesses (and observational data) :P
"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so". Douglas N. Adams
My mods | My specs: Asus x555ub - cpu i5-6200u, ram 4gb, gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram | IRC freenode.net canale ##SpaceEngineITA
 
User avatar
spaceguy
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 189
Joined: 30 Dec 2016

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

22 Feb 2018 17:08

Mosfet wrote:
Being NASA/ESA, I really hope they make at least large use of educated guesses (and observational data) :P

Eh, I'm more inclined to believe that this was the best they could achieve with current technology. The best sims I've seen of turbulent star formation are not even close to 2D what NASA/ESA depicted. Honestly though, I always thought of the Orion nebula's shape similar to that of a clam (albeit drastically more bulbous and diffuse).  :) 
 
Huntingknight
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Location: Ohio, United States

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

22 Feb 2018 19:01

I have seen similar models that are less quality, probably because of how large their files can get. I am sure the 3D NASA/ESA models are still better than what is currently in SE. Also, having a rough model would make it way easier to build "by hand" if he ever plans on making volumetrics for known nebulae
 
User avatar
SpaceEngineer
Author of SpaceEngine
Author of SpaceEngine
Posts: 685
Joined: 17 May 2016
Location: Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

02 Mar 2018 12:53

OVERVIEW discussion has been moved here.
 
User avatar
Solaris_
Observer
Observer
Posts: 17
Joined: 03 Nov 2016
Location: China

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

06 Mar 2018 00:53

Will 0.9.9.0 still be free? Somebody told me that we have to buy it................
I'm always ready to see news,regardless what is it.
 
User avatar
spaceguy
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 189
Joined: 30 Dec 2016

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

06 Mar 2018 20:13

Solaris_ wrote:
Will 0.9.9.0 still be free? Somebody told me that we have to buy it................

The planetarium would always be free, but extra features like spacecrafts would have to be bought in the Steam version I'm assuming.
 
User avatar
Solaris_
Observer
Observer
Posts: 17
Joined: 03 Nov 2016
Location: China

Work progress 0.9.8.1 = 0.9.9.0

07 Mar 2018 01:24

spaceguy wrote:
Solaris_ wrote:
Will 0.9.9.0 still be free? Somebody told me that we have to buy it................

The planetarium would always be free, but extra features like spacecrafts would have to be bought in the Steam version I'm assuming.

I hope it could be...........
I'm always ready to see news,regardless what is it.
 
User avatar
SpacePioneer
Observer
Observer
Posts: 14
Joined: 12 May 2017
Contact:

General 0.9.9.0 Discussion

11 Mar 2018 00:07

TheRedstoneHive wrote:
RadioActiveLobster wrote:
I know that there had been a small group of testers who got to test out Space Engine on STEAM. I'm not one of them to my great disappointment.

Any plans for 0.9.9.0 to see a larger release and perhaps some sort of STEAM Early Access or will it still be closed on STEAM?

Not everyone gets Beta/Early access, If everyone had it, there would be almost no point in having beta testers. Please be Patient.

But see for a very long time EVERYONE was beta tester, essentially. Why that couldn't have remained the same, I'm not sure. The more people you have testing the more highly obscure bugs you can weed out and step on. While I do understand that having people report bugs that aren't really bugs, such as the limited resolution of solar system planet textures, is quite annoying, I feel like it would be worth it to make the most stable release possible so when the final big update available to the public is released its not required that the developer go back and fix old bugs that were just never found. and I doubt many people would care if the features were incomplete as long as they aren't treated like they are complete, or in the same vein, I'm sure some people wouldn't mind playing a somewhat unstable release, since they will know it's not stable. Just make it clear in the place you download it that this version is not complete and may have serious bugs. I don't see why such a limited crowd of testers is beneficial whatsoever.
Search the skies for a new home
As the old one burns
In ashen skies and firey night
The void my only savior
I, am the lone, space pioneer.
 
Madakronic
Observer
Observer
Posts: 1
Joined: 27 May 2017

General 0.9.9.0 Discussion

12 Mar 2018 04:40

Intresting point. I agree too. I wonder what the reason actually is for such a small pool of teaters. I have Oculus Rift, I'd love to give feedback on its functionality in the app. If you donate, perhaps that should give you access to closed builds.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 17

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Typbürste and 0 guests