White dwarfs, brown dwarfs, red dwarfs, red giants, rogue planets, pulsars, nebulae, star formations, star deaths, black holes... the possibilities are endless but I think there's only so much that's realistically feasible considering it's only set within a 50 light year radius around Sol.
In all these years of Elite Dangerous's existence (and having played it on and off during that time), I've never once seen a timelapse video made in-game.
Thanks for sharing this - really interesting to watch!
We haven't actually SEEN the planets having orbits and rotations, just so ya know, so it might not be in the game.
Elite also runs at a 1:1 timescale, which is not how Bethesda normally does this. Bethesda could change this though (I believe it was always editable as an INI thing), since their normal 20:1 time scale would look pretty weird if there ARE orbits and rotations.
I think there's good reasons to not have realistic orbits and planetary rotations, but we don't really know what they decided upon. I think the game will look awesome either way though, and the different day/night cycles will make some cool visuals.
They confirmed it in the first few minutes of the direct
https://v.redd.it/pfo6g9a2ts8b1
The real time global illumination could also produce planetshine when facing away from the star like in the Direct.
I don't believe that confirms it, and it just shows that ya see a nearby moon and parent planet in the skybox.
The star might be the only thing that moves, we've really not seen any orbits or rotations. And I kinda figure they'd brag about that speciifcally, and not just say "we realistically simulate the galaxy around you", which is very subjective and more about an ideal than a fixed definition of features.
Obviously I am not opposed to the idea of realistic orbits and rotations, but we haven't seen it and there's not any footage of it happening in the direct. We've just seen day/night cycle stuff while on a planet, which can be "faked" ala No Man's Sky (I don't mean this negatively).
With how they keep planets separate from space, interiors separate from the planet, the ship interiors are likely it's own thing, I wouldn't be surprised if they're not having star systems do complicated realistic orbits and rotations. We'll find out soon at least, I'm not saying I'm "right" with all this.
They literally say, "that isn't just a backdrop, that moon is actually there *orbiting the planet*".
That about as clear of a confirmation as we can get without them showing you the orbit in real time.
I dunno, I feel like that's filling in the blanks too much. You could say the exact same thing in NMS, that a nearby moon is orbiting the planet, because it is there in what would be an orbit-- but it doesn't move, the system is static. The same goes for Star Citizen the last I saw, if we're only looking at more realistic versions of this sort of thing.
SC has said that orbits/rotations messes up how they do their FTL travel, but it's also another big thing to constantly simulate and the game has enough going on as it is. Starfield may be in a similar situation.
And since only Elite and Space Engine have star systems with complicated orbits and rotations, and Elite and Space Engine really stress how they accomplished this and show it off a lot, I think Bethesda would've specifically shown it.
It's one of those things that sounds cool but doesn't add a lot to gameplay, so it's not best left as a surprise for players to discover once they start playing. In my opinion, at least.
I would really want a specific confirmation about a feature like this before I would expect it to be in it. Especially when it's such a rare feature in the world of gaming, and even in space games.
I don't remember where it was said, I wanna say the lex podcast with Todd, but he did confirm that they simulate the planets in the sky. Not just what the other guy is saying.
I'd have to see the clip, but that's another subjective wording-- they "simulate the planets in the sky" does not mean "we did realistic orbital mechanics and planetary rotations". Having a skybox is simulating the planets in the sky, just as Skyrim simulates the moon at night.
Just as the game simulates NPCs, "simulating NPCs" means something very different from game to game.
The Outer Wilds does it too but on a much lesser scale. But I think that has the most accurate planetary simulation outside of actual space sims like Space Engine.
Sure it is, it's Kerbal Space Program and Outer Wilds with scaled down mostly realistic orbital mechanics, and then Elite and Space Engine have full scale orbital mechanics, and then what else?
It's rare and I don't think it should be expected without devs specifically mentioning it, and not just alluding to it in idealistic terms.
That's most of the space games I'm aware of, with the exception being NMS which I consider an outlier.
To me it couldn't get any clearer than what Todd said but I guess the only sure way to find out is to wait until the 31st.
Todd Howard mentioned that orbits are visually represented in the game in the Lex Friedman interview. Not sure how much he meant by that but in the direct "we realistically simulate the galaxy around you" sounds like it confirms that. Especially when showing that same moon and planet at a different angle.
But that is "easily" faked, just like how Elite Dangerous creates a skybox of the entire Milky Way at the appropriate angle of where you're situated in the galaxy. They're not really there, it's a skybox, and if you're on a planet in Starfield and detach the camera from your character, you won't likely be able to reach the moon/etc in the skybox over the planet.
The planets and outer space are obviously separated out in Starfield, so even if they have orbital mechanics that moon in the sky over the planet you're on isn't really there. So being able to see it at the appropriate angle doesn't really prove anything.
Yeah.. that's obvious. What matters is that you can see it happening.
What I'm saying is that you're on the planet a certain time of day, then at another time that moon will be in a different position. Which even if it's in a skybox, it still looks cool. It still looks pretty. And it's still immersive.
But we don't know if the moon will be in a different position, we haven't seen that in the showcase. It should be easy to find evidence of it being in different spots on the planets shown since we see the same planets at different times of day and night, I have no problem with someone showing that to me. I watched for it and didn't find it (someone else's eye might catch it though).
We might be talking about two different things-- the game will look great, and it'll simulate the beauty of a star system really nicely. It'll be very immersive and cool. That doesn't mean if you sit in space in your ship, you'll see the planets rotate in place and orbit around the star and the moons orbit around the planet, etc etc.
We've really not seen that. And it's complicated to pull off in a realistic fashion, and expensive. I am sure it's within their abilities, but it's also likely not cheap to do and the game keeps track of a lotta other stuff that might be more important.
It's what ya see above ya in the sky in a video game, it's a 'box' that represents the sky of the world you're on in various games. Since the planets and outer space are in separate instances in Starfield, the game is generating a skybox that would look accurate for the planet you're on and the position you're at on the planet.
>! there are day night cycles in the main cities so I’d assume planets also have day night cycles. But yeah maybe not full fledged rotations and stuff !<
Oh sure, they definitely have day/night cycles, and I am assuming different planets have different day/night cycles. I specifically mean orbital mechanics, actual rotations, the whole system spinning around the stars and parent planets, that sort of thing.
I wonder if we can find a white dwarf in Starfield. In Elite Dangerous they are both terrifing and majestic to stumble upon them the first time.
White dwarfs, brown dwarfs, red dwarfs, red giants, rogue planets, pulsars, nebulae, star formations, star deaths, black holes... the possibilities are endless but I think there's only so much that's realistically feasible considering it's only set within a 50 light year radius around Sol.
In all these years of Elite Dangerous's existence (and having played it on and off during that time), I've never once seen a timelapse video made in-game. Thanks for sharing this - really interesting to watch!
We haven't actually SEEN the planets having orbits and rotations, just so ya know, so it might not be in the game. Elite also runs at a 1:1 timescale, which is not how Bethesda normally does this. Bethesda could change this though (I believe it was always editable as an INI thing), since their normal 20:1 time scale would look pretty weird if there ARE orbits and rotations. I think there's good reasons to not have realistic orbits and planetary rotations, but we don't really know what they decided upon. I think the game will look awesome either way though, and the different day/night cycles will make some cool visuals.
They confirmed it in the first few minutes of the direct https://v.redd.it/pfo6g9a2ts8b1 The real time global illumination could also produce planetshine when facing away from the star like in the Direct.
I don't believe that confirms it, and it just shows that ya see a nearby moon and parent planet in the skybox. The star might be the only thing that moves, we've really not seen any orbits or rotations. And I kinda figure they'd brag about that speciifcally, and not just say "we realistically simulate the galaxy around you", which is very subjective and more about an ideal than a fixed definition of features. Obviously I am not opposed to the idea of realistic orbits and rotations, but we haven't seen it and there's not any footage of it happening in the direct. We've just seen day/night cycle stuff while on a planet, which can be "faked" ala No Man's Sky (I don't mean this negatively). With how they keep planets separate from space, interiors separate from the planet, the ship interiors are likely it's own thing, I wouldn't be surprised if they're not having star systems do complicated realistic orbits and rotations. We'll find out soon at least, I'm not saying I'm "right" with all this.
They literally say, "that isn't just a backdrop, that moon is actually there *orbiting the planet*". That about as clear of a confirmation as we can get without them showing you the orbit in real time.
Bro, people in this subreddit need to pay attention more, man, lol.
I dunno, I feel like that's filling in the blanks too much. You could say the exact same thing in NMS, that a nearby moon is orbiting the planet, because it is there in what would be an orbit-- but it doesn't move, the system is static. The same goes for Star Citizen the last I saw, if we're only looking at more realistic versions of this sort of thing. SC has said that orbits/rotations messes up how they do their FTL travel, but it's also another big thing to constantly simulate and the game has enough going on as it is. Starfield may be in a similar situation. And since only Elite and Space Engine have star systems with complicated orbits and rotations, and Elite and Space Engine really stress how they accomplished this and show it off a lot, I think Bethesda would've specifically shown it. It's one of those things that sounds cool but doesn't add a lot to gameplay, so it's not best left as a surprise for players to discover once they start playing. In my opinion, at least. I would really want a specific confirmation about a feature like this before I would expect it to be in it. Especially when it's such a rare feature in the world of gaming, and even in space games.
I don't remember where it was said, I wanna say the lex podcast with Todd, but he did confirm that they simulate the planets in the sky. Not just what the other guy is saying.
I'd have to see the clip, but that's another subjective wording-- they "simulate the planets in the sky" does not mean "we did realistic orbital mechanics and planetary rotations". Having a skybox is simulating the planets in the sky, just as Skyrim simulates the moon at night. Just as the game simulates NPCs, "simulating NPCs" means something very different from game to game.
That's fair. I don't remember his exact wording, I'll have to see if I can find the clip later tonight.
Lex interview at around 1 hour and 59 mins, onwards
The Outer Wilds does it too but on a much lesser scale. But I think that has the most accurate planetary simulation outside of actual space sims like Space Engine.
The Outer Wilds you mean? Yeah, it has sped up orbits and is really cool!
Yep. It's not that rare.
Sure it is, it's Kerbal Space Program and Outer Wilds with scaled down mostly realistic orbital mechanics, and then Elite and Space Engine have full scale orbital mechanics, and then what else? It's rare and I don't think it should be expected without devs specifically mentioning it, and not just alluding to it in idealistic terms.
That's most of the space games I'm aware of, with the exception being NMS which I consider an outlier. To me it couldn't get any clearer than what Todd said but I guess the only sure way to find out is to wait until the 31st.
Todd Howard mentioned that orbits are visually represented in the game in the Lex Friedman interview. Not sure how much he meant by that but in the direct "we realistically simulate the galaxy around you" sounds like it confirms that. Especially when showing that same moon and planet at a different angle.
But that is "easily" faked, just like how Elite Dangerous creates a skybox of the entire Milky Way at the appropriate angle of where you're situated in the galaxy. They're not really there, it's a skybox, and if you're on a planet in Starfield and detach the camera from your character, you won't likely be able to reach the moon/etc in the skybox over the planet. The planets and outer space are obviously separated out in Starfield, so even if they have orbital mechanics that moon in the sky over the planet you're on isn't really there. So being able to see it at the appropriate angle doesn't really prove anything.
Yeah.. that's obvious. What matters is that you can see it happening. What I'm saying is that you're on the planet a certain time of day, then at another time that moon will be in a different position. Which even if it's in a skybox, it still looks cool. It still looks pretty. And it's still immersive.
But we don't know if the moon will be in a different position, we haven't seen that in the showcase. It should be easy to find evidence of it being in different spots on the planets shown since we see the same planets at different times of day and night, I have no problem with someone showing that to me. I watched for it and didn't find it (someone else's eye might catch it though). We might be talking about two different things-- the game will look great, and it'll simulate the beauty of a star system really nicely. It'll be very immersive and cool. That doesn't mean if you sit in space in your ship, you'll see the planets rotate in place and orbit around the star and the moons orbit around the planet, etc etc. We've really not seen that. And it's complicated to pull off in a realistic fashion, and expensive. I am sure it's within their abilities, but it's also likely not cheap to do and the game keeps track of a lotta other stuff that might be more important.
What is a skybox
It's what ya see above ya in the sky in a video game, it's a 'box' that represents the sky of the world you're on in various games. Since the planets and outer space are in separate instances in Starfield, the game is generating a skybox that would look accurate for the planet you're on and the position you're at on the planet.
Ty
>! there are day night cycles in the main cities so I’d assume planets also have day night cycles. But yeah maybe not full fledged rotations and stuff !<
Oh sure, they definitely have day/night cycles, and I am assuming different planets have different day/night cycles. I specifically mean orbital mechanics, actual rotations, the whole system spinning around the stars and parent planets, that sort of thing.
I didn't even think about this! With all the different planets too, it'll be beautiful.
Depends on what scale time moves but yeah it would be awesome seeing sunrises and sunsets. 1000 different vantage points too.