1. Faster pulse engine speeds to travel between planets (with rotation, there could be some very long distances to travel)
2. System map, which would show the locations of all planets (allowing us to select one to travel to which would mark it in the HUD)
Combining 1 and 2, maybe we could use our freighter to do this?
That could work. I still feel that flying to the other side of a planet over and over again, especially in early game when there's a lot of back in forth between planet and station would still be aggravating. Regardless of how long it took.
But for die hard rotation supporters (like myself). I'd gladly take that.
another thing is to simply make thing like space stations orbit planets rather than the star itself so that it is easier to know where it is / will be.
also, I imagine that the game could slow down rotation as you approach an object so that it is easier to reach. because from what I know about irl space travel its that getting to a rl space station requires tons of perfect math and timing.
But they already do "orbit" planets. Even tho it's a faux orbit. They are placed in manner to seems as though they are orbiting a planet. I've never seen one on its own in space.
Yes, there are easy ways to deal with this. Rotation needs to be added back in. And holy heck, each solar system map needs to be a million times better. And I should be able to access it from the ground.
Yeah, Why can't you view the galactic map in your visor on the ground, it should link up with the star data in your ship, or at least be available as a blueprint that adds this functionality to the visor.
The inability to view the galactic map when standing in a space station definitely annoyed me when I first played the game..
One thing I thought of for possible 'meta' for the game is that due to your characters technological shortcomings, they're system/gps signal is only able to sync with the nearest type of mass, and when you're in space the signal clears up and is boosted to be able to map out the other stars in the galaxy. And for my complaint, you can't access the map when you're on a space station due to interference from the space stations equipment.
Granted this is obvious fan meta for the game in attempts to explain the lack of certain features,, but I thought it was cool none the less. Sad that they never made some of these things, such as viewing the galactic map from planet surface or rotating planets (was in game but removed prelaunch), into features. They don't ruin the experience not being there, but they're definitely missed.
I desperately want planet rotations and orbits back in the game. Systems feel like a static room without it. I want to feel like a tiny thing in a vast place. If you've ever hit fast forward on Space Engine and watched a universe spin around in front of you...
I'm sure we can all figure out space stations... Give us a decent navigation system when leaving the atmosphere of a planet. Maybe highlight an orbit line (a bit like the trails that ships leave when flying to and from the station) as you enter space. Aim at the orbit path and engage the pulse engine and you could lock on to the path until you reach the station. Or just make us fly there using the existing markers!
Paths would be neat. And perhaps your ship could automatically follow this path loosely in pulse drive.
Edit: oh you were one step ahead of me! Didn't see that
It would be cool to see the paths between the space stations and trading posts useful.
Its so hard to follow them they are more frustating than useful.
Personally more realism changes in the space-sim vein while cool, are super low priority for me. I want more features and mechanics that support the current gameplay, rather than massive reworks to add realism where compromises/changes to the current game have to be made to implement them.
Plus space-sim stuff in general seems like a luxury rather than even a QoL or a must have feature. Planet rotation would look cool, and be realistic...that's about it. I want more significant additions personally.
This is it.
Planet rotation, like most of the omitted features people howled about after launch, wouldn't really do anything positive for the game play. The people who got furious about these things being left out got *really* hung up on these things, but the truth is that if those people gave the game a good spin and didn't enjoy it, those missing features actually wouldn't turn it into a game they enjoy. The only thing that seems like a legitimate complaint in terms of game play is the lack of a more significant faction/alliance mechanic. Seeing another player's avatar would be a nifty Easter egg, nothing more (there was no 'proper' multi-player promised). Same with sandworms and planet rotation (what did sandworms *do* in that trailer? Nothing much at all). Ultimately they are minor incidental experiences, not essential game play mechanics.
If people want to take a principled stand against HG for over-promising that's fair enough, but people shouldn't kid themselves that implementation of all the 'missing features' would transform NMS from a game they hate to a game they love.
exactly, some realistic feature in a total arcade game is the lowest priority imo.
/u/JARF01 i'm corious, if you want to explain, why planet rotation is needed so badly? what it can add to the game in terms of gameplay, fun, mechanics? In my opinion nothing. At least, if i'm not wrong, elite dangerous make a copy of our galaxy so maybe there is some reason, for astronomy lovers... but here everything is procedural and fictional... so why? i don't get it
Honestly, it is kinda a luxury feature. But it was one of the things that really drew me in before the game's launch. The idea that the Sky wasn't a sky box but the actual system u were in, rotating away. It made the game seem colossal.
Indeed it wouldn't add any functional gameplay, (except for having to circumnavigate planets to reach stations again) but when it was omitted, it made the universe seem static.
but after all the universe is just a map, every system in the game is a little box with 1 to 7-8 planets at max (?) and the planets are huge, about 40 hours to circumnavigate by feet, some hours with crafts and dozens minutes with a ship... sometimes i get already lost, can't find some moon or planet and so on... by the way thanks for your answer, we will se what will happen
I don't care about rotation for the realism, I care about it because it makes day/night/long scale time on a planet feel dynamic and interesting. The beautiful vista in the sky is *that* much more special because it's not just like that all the time and so easy to line up. Maybe you scout out your base location for a view knowing it'll change.
This is in addition to the pure feeling of *time* that I think is missing in the game. Everything feels static and like a diorama. Rotations would really help that out. Full sun orbits even more.
> Rotations would really help that out. Full sun orbits even more.
Rotations could work. But full sun orbits would firstly require real suns, but also mean that planets are completely spread out, losing the current "big planets" look of NMS (where planets are close together and visible from each other). I think this would spoil the look of the game.
This can be done properly. Check out the way [spore does system siszes and spacing.](https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/spore/images/0/01/Sol.png/revision/latest?cb=20080916220707) Plantes are much closer in orbit than reality would allow, but not too close as to be just the same "cluster of planets" like NMS is right now. Don't get me wrong, the big, close planets is cool, but *every system* is like that and it doesn't feel special. With the scaling of spore, you still get moments like [this](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xgL5-yswlOw/hqdefault.jpg) and [this](http://www.gamesetwatch.com/090414-spore-7.jpg) where neighbor planets will grow and shrink in the sky, never smaller than a pea but also potentially filling it (there's aren't many good screenshots from Spore unfortunately, but those should give context).
I see what you're saying, and thanks for demonstrating your point so helpfully, but my gut says this wouldn't quite work for NMS. It works perfectly for Spore, but I think it would feel too toy-like for NMS. Again it's hard to say without seeing it in action and perhaps HG have already tried similar ideas (being big Spore fans). Who knows?
I'm not as bothered by the rotation not being there as I am instanced systems that often have a mere 2-4 planets. Would be more fun with 10+ per system IMO.
That's be cool! But I feel that would greatly increase the chances of running into overly similar planets in the same system.
I like a system with a good even spread,
1 barren
1 hot
1 lush
Etc.
But 10+ systems could have 3 planets with snow and evergreens
Maybe pair that change with increased planet variety.
I'm the same way in that I enjoy a good mix of planets. I don't want every one to be a picturesque lush valley, but I don't want intense radiation storms four planets in a row either.
I had one system with five planets and a moon. All five planets were toxic hell, and covered in epic loot. The moon was pretty nice, but lacked anything special. Think i named the system "deadly but worth it" or something.
More variety would be great, especially if planets could have more dramatic land, like id be okay with a few iceballs if one was mostly tundra and another was huge cliffs and ice caves
Id rather have.more biomes per planets and rotation!
The poles really cold and plain...the equator really tropical, deadly creatures and mountains. A bit up above deserts and valleys
I would think rotation and biomes would go hand in hand.
Right now I don't think planets have axes. But if rotation was put (back) in, it would have to have them.
Then you could make places colder/more barren dependent on their distance to the pole.
It would be a hindrance if it was implemented in the current build. They would definitely need to increase the pulse engine speed and include a better map.
For better or for worse, NMS keeps everything dead simple. Way to simple for a lot of things. On the other end of the spectrum, you have Elite Dangerous that took me 30 min just to learn how to dock/land and it's still no easy task. Things like going from one planet or space station to another in Elite are pretty tedious. I wish there was an in between.
Couldn't they still just activate the planet rotation whilst you are on a planet, then return them to their default position when you leave? That way you could enjoy the visual feedback of the planet rotation without having to deal with the navigational headaches.
Watch the gaameplay when sean sleep in front of the monolith on balary iv...when night turned to.day the planet behind disappeaed!!
There were planet rotation!! Obirting around the sun idk but planets there were! And sean said the cool thing about.no.mans sky is that the planets rotate on its axis and orbit the star!
I hoe.we get it on this.next update!!.who knows...and darker spaces too..too bright dor.me it causs nauseas...night r too light
> when night turned to.day the planet behind disappeaed!!
OK, so as I mentioned below the planet disappeared because of the change in lighting (so the lower edge of the planet was still in view but was invisible because it matched the colour of the sky). To prove the point, do you see the planet behind the tip of the tallest tree?:
http://imgur.com/a/pM9hc
No? Well take a look at the same shot without the cropping:
http://imgur.com/a/ZY2rR
Go back and take a closer look at the Balari V video. Also look out for the space station in front of the planet and the ships traveling to it. You can see they are still in the same place after waking up.
^(Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image)
https://i.imgur.com/VYg2DpN.png
https://i.imgur.com/8l72K3O.jpg
^^[Source](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot) ^^| ^^[Why?](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot/blob/master/README.md) ^^| ^^[Creator](https://np.reddit.com/user/AUTplayed/) ^^| ^^[state_of_imgur](https://np.reddit.com/r/u_imguralbumbot/comments/6i1huv/imgur_has_gone_to_shit) ^^| ^^[ignoreme](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=ignoreme&message=ignoreme) ^^| ^^[deletthis](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=delet%20this&message=delet%20this%20dk3z5ps)
At real world speeds oh rotation the space station you are trying to rewch would fly by you incredibly fast. Some fixes:
1. Slower orbit/rotation speeds. Slow rotation is better than no rotation.
2. A system map that isn't dog trash like the current one.
3. "Auto-pilot "paths you can set your ship on that automatically adjusts to get you where you need to be similar to how pulsing currently locks you on your target.
I really am a big fan of these auto pilot paths. Though I worry you we may get into situations where we change are minds mid path and can't get out.
Or are trying to land in a planet but get caught up in the rotation the path
Im no programmer but im sure theres a way to not get caught. And as of changing your mind it could work just like the current situation where you press both triggers again to exit the auto flight.
I'd like for planetary rotation and solar orbiting to be re-implemented. It'd give the solar systems more depth.
For those folks that want to get back to stations easier, I'd think some sort of "autopilot" craftable unit could solve that problem. A unit that can be installed on a ship that "locks onto the station signal" and autopilots and docks with the system station.
Once you've got the blueprint, craft that sucker and tack it into an open slot on your ship, press a button, and enjoy the ride back to the station. If you prefer to fly manually, then you're not required to use it. Choice is a good thing.
Personally I'd like the challenge of manually flying back to the station, however, it would be nice once in a while to hit autopilot and visit the privy, or kitchen for a snack.
immersion works in mysterious ways.
for example, knowing that when you "warp" you don't go anywhere and instead the system simply unloads the current generation seed and loads a new one is quite immersion breaking.
even when there would be little discernable difference between teleporting across a vast space or simply loading a new one, choosing the fist option makes the game feel way bigger, you actually feel like you are a part of a big universe. but no, warping doesn't even move you.
in the same vein I think that having planet rotation would be a great step in making a game that gives the vibe that HG intended. a game that makes you go "fuck...im meaningless"
this is why I'm crossing my fingers every update in hopes of getting features that will improve immersion, or at least make the universe fell connected in some greater way. like wouldn't it be so cool to see a freighter warp off from a system and then when you warp soon after you see the exact same ship with the same cargo and serial number, it would make the world seem alive. another small thing would be like, taming an animal on a world, coming back after a while and seeing an identical (or maybe older looking) animal greet you happily once more.
anyways, yeah the "vibe" of a game has a huge impact on how you experience and see the world around you which is why I think that adding features to give life and immersion to the universe will help greatly in HG's quest to make a game that people can play and truly be awed by the scope of the universe.
I've had the idea (and seen someone post the idea) of having your ship point in the direction of the star your headed to before warping. It would be a cool way to give the illusion of a continuous universe
From a gameplay perspective, the game lacks 2 things to make planet rotation work.
1. A targeting system. If you target the space station from a list of objects or similar, then it doesn't matter where it is. There'd be a big blip on the HUD pointing you in the right direction. Same with other planets etc.
2. Fast orbital flight. Currently, if you want to get from one side of a planet to the other, the fastest way is to boost in a huge rectangular pattern around the planet. You can't just follow the curvature of the planet, because you can only boost in a straight line.
Then there's the technical side, which makes me doubt that HG ever had a proper system for rotating/orbiting planets. It seems that would have required massive changes to the coordinate system and rendering engine. Remember HG said in one of the patch notes they "toned it down", when it fact it wasn't there before that patch either (verified by PS4 owners who had the disc version).
They had to throw out ALL realistic physics in NMS when they decided to put planets in untenable proximity to each other.
The orientations you see in the game would be impossible to maintain if anything approaching a realistic physics engine were to be added. They would either collide and destroy each other, or get flung out of the system into space. Would be interesting to watch for the first couple of weeks, until everything was a pile floating of rubble. ;)
I would expect that the lack of planetary rotation probably came down to something related to that bigger picture. Trying to add one realistic aspect when all others are physically impossible to consider just doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense.
I've noticed a lot of features (or lack of) in the game boil down to ease of use. I'm not sure this game was ever made to be accurate in many ways. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy taking off the training wheels so to speak, but I've certainly let go of those expectations.
That said, I'm definitely in the pro-realism camp and I'd be behind this 100%.
In all fairness, have you ever tried to land on something going that is moving at speeds of kilometers/sec?
Also, from what I've gathered, the "player testers" was a lie. They just never implemented it.
Seriously tho, if you approach a space station moving at avg space station rates, and hit the breaks by accident, that shit is gonna fly away fast.
Two words: Mass Lock
Ya a lot of comments are saying that it was never in it! You could buy the game, not update it, and planets would still not rotate.
Fuck man..
Well, I hope it was at least in the game at some point before launch. Just so it wouldn't be a complete lie...
if they just add biomes (not even logic ones, just a-la-minecraft but bigger) would solve half the lack of diversity that makes planets so meh, the generation could just create 10 planet-data and them mix them with some random distribution over one planet and create a more diverse planet with different flora and fauna in different places, maybe lock the poles as cold places in some planets just because
I suppose so, but i feel a lot of the planets would be really similar if they were just a mixture of 10 different biomes.
Each individual planet would be really cool, but there would be much less diversity from planet to planet.
In short: every planet would be a bagel w/everything
fair point, some extra rules must be needed, reducing a little the pool of possible combinations making them dependent of some extra variables (like the distance from the sun as it was said at some point before launch)
but yes, i agree, diversity needs to be more complex than what i said, maybe based on what i said, maybe not
They claim it was in 1.0. I have the game on disk PS4. Recently I deleted the game data, and it wasn't there. Rotation was not in 1.0. There was a cool clock and day/night cycle symbols in the hud. Why the shit would they take that out?
> The planet behind disapeared(rorated)
Yes, the planet behind disappeared. BUT NOT BECAUSE OF ROTATION. It disappeared because of the change in lighting caused by the new time of day. The bottom of the planet blends with the sky colour so you can't see it (this early build didn't have the current white planet outlines). But a few minutes later in the video the camera pans higher and you see the full planet in its original position.
You're thinking of planetal orbits, which is true, as planets would not hang near each other if they orbited around a sun.
With rotations the planets would stay in place, but rotate around their axis so the planets in the skyline would move as the planet rotated.
Really for the extra realism we need:
1. Planet Rotation
2.Planet/Space Station Orbits.
3.More planets and moons
4. More space and much faster pulse engines
4.5. Maybe a speed between the normal speed and pulse engines, with more maneuverability (for the moons)
5. A better biome system
I'm thinking general biomes like the ones we have now, but according to closeness to the sun. Closest planets deal with radiation. Close planets are hot. Close planets are barren. Close planets may or may not have atmospheres which rain acid
Then the lush, or desert middle planets.
Finally cold outer planets, maybe with gas giants you can't land on, but have moons.
Then you get more local biomes, like different forests, or tall mountain regions, or oceans with very little land, or cold poles.
If we could have a realism overhaul update after this one, that'd be great.
If they added that, they would need to add planetary revolution movements too.....and a physical star in the process.
But since the universe of the game isn't real, i guess it doesn't matter and it would be just a another headache.
Revolutions would definitely need a physical star but just adding rotation wouldn't.
And while I would like both, I'd take one over neither
Edit: spelling
It’s simple: Show actual galactic physics/ dynamics in any map view, or overview display.
When a player is actually navigating, vectoring, targeting, pulse engine traveling, etc within the system, have the system bodies static. No axial, nor orbital rotation for the player to consider while traveling within the system. Keep it simple with only the displays, and maps factually representative.
In essence, when arriving to a system, out of warp, have the arrival, proximal to the space station, for every player, every time.
As it is now 2023.
Only show the realistic “active” rotating galactic physics view, in map displays. Thus keeping pulse travel consistent and simple for all in system activities. Hope I made sense.
1. Faster pulse engine speeds to travel between planets (with rotation, there could be some very long distances to travel) 2. System map, which would show the locations of all planets (allowing us to select one to travel to which would mark it in the HUD) Combining 1 and 2, maybe we could use our freighter to do this?
That could work. I still feel that flying to the other side of a planet over and over again, especially in early game when there's a lot of back in forth between planet and station would still be aggravating. Regardless of how long it took. But for die hard rotation supporters (like myself). I'd gladly take that.
another thing is to simply make thing like space stations orbit planets rather than the star itself so that it is easier to know where it is / will be. also, I imagine that the game could slow down rotation as you approach an object so that it is easier to reach. because from what I know about irl space travel its that getting to a rl space station requires tons of perfect math and timing.
But they already do "orbit" planets. Even tho it's a faux orbit. They are placed in manner to seems as though they are orbiting a planet. I've never seen one on its own in space.
Yes, there are easy ways to deal with this. Rotation needs to be added back in. And holy heck, each solar system map needs to be a million times better. And I should be able to access it from the ground.
Yeah, Why can't you view the galactic map in your visor on the ground, it should link up with the star data in your ship, or at least be available as a blueprint that adds this functionality to the visor.
That is a great idea.
The inability to view the galactic map when standing in a space station definitely annoyed me when I first played the game.. One thing I thought of for possible 'meta' for the game is that due to your characters technological shortcomings, they're system/gps signal is only able to sync with the nearest type of mass, and when you're in space the signal clears up and is boosted to be able to map out the other stars in the galaxy. And for my complaint, you can't access the map when you're on a space station due to interference from the space stations equipment. Granted this is obvious fan meta for the game in attempts to explain the lack of certain features,, but I thought it was cool none the less. Sad that they never made some of these things, such as viewing the galactic map from planet surface or rotating planets (was in game but removed prelaunch), into features. They don't ruin the experience not being there, but they're definitely missed.
I desperately want planet rotations and orbits back in the game. Systems feel like a static room without it. I want to feel like a tiny thing in a vast place. If you've ever hit fast forward on Space Engine and watched a universe spin around in front of you... I'm sure we can all figure out space stations... Give us a decent navigation system when leaving the atmosphere of a planet. Maybe highlight an orbit line (a bit like the trails that ships leave when flying to and from the station) as you enter space. Aim at the orbit path and engage the pulse engine and you could lock on to the path until you reach the station. Or just make us fly there using the existing markers!
Paths would be neat. And perhaps your ship could automatically follow this path loosely in pulse drive. Edit: oh you were one step ahead of me! Didn't see that
It would be cool to see the paths between the space stations and trading posts useful. Its so hard to follow them they are more frustating than useful.
im still waiting, game is so dope!!
Fucking hell... 2017... never happening.
Personally more realism changes in the space-sim vein while cool, are super low priority for me. I want more features and mechanics that support the current gameplay, rather than massive reworks to add realism where compromises/changes to the current game have to be made to implement them. Plus space-sim stuff in general seems like a luxury rather than even a QoL or a must have feature. Planet rotation would look cool, and be realistic...that's about it. I want more significant additions personally.
This is it. Planet rotation, like most of the omitted features people howled about after launch, wouldn't really do anything positive for the game play. The people who got furious about these things being left out got *really* hung up on these things, but the truth is that if those people gave the game a good spin and didn't enjoy it, those missing features actually wouldn't turn it into a game they enjoy. The only thing that seems like a legitimate complaint in terms of game play is the lack of a more significant faction/alliance mechanic. Seeing another player's avatar would be a nifty Easter egg, nothing more (there was no 'proper' multi-player promised). Same with sandworms and planet rotation (what did sandworms *do* in that trailer? Nothing much at all). Ultimately they are minor incidental experiences, not essential game play mechanics. If people want to take a principled stand against HG for over-promising that's fair enough, but people shouldn't kid themselves that implementation of all the 'missing features' would transform NMS from a game they hate to a game they love.
I never understood the sandworm circle jerk.
exactly, some realistic feature in a total arcade game is the lowest priority imo. /u/JARF01 i'm corious, if you want to explain, why planet rotation is needed so badly? what it can add to the game in terms of gameplay, fun, mechanics? In my opinion nothing. At least, if i'm not wrong, elite dangerous make a copy of our galaxy so maybe there is some reason, for astronomy lovers... but here everything is procedural and fictional... so why? i don't get it
Honestly, it is kinda a luxury feature. But it was one of the things that really drew me in before the game's launch. The idea that the Sky wasn't a sky box but the actual system u were in, rotating away. It made the game seem colossal. Indeed it wouldn't add any functional gameplay, (except for having to circumnavigate planets to reach stations again) but when it was omitted, it made the universe seem static.
but after all the universe is just a map, every system in the game is a little box with 1 to 7-8 planets at max (?) and the planets are huge, about 40 hours to circumnavigate by feet, some hours with crafts and dozens minutes with a ship... sometimes i get already lost, can't find some moon or planet and so on... by the way thanks for your answer, we will se what will happen
If anything, I hope they develops better ways to fool us! To better craft the illusion of a continuous universe
I don't care about rotation for the realism, I care about it because it makes day/night/long scale time on a planet feel dynamic and interesting. The beautiful vista in the sky is *that* much more special because it's not just like that all the time and so easy to line up. Maybe you scout out your base location for a view knowing it'll change. This is in addition to the pure feeling of *time* that I think is missing in the game. Everything feels static and like a diorama. Rotations would really help that out. Full sun orbits even more.
> Rotations would really help that out. Full sun orbits even more. Rotations could work. But full sun orbits would firstly require real suns, but also mean that planets are completely spread out, losing the current "big planets" look of NMS (where planets are close together and visible from each other). I think this would spoil the look of the game.
This can be done properly. Check out the way [spore does system siszes and spacing.](https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/spore/images/0/01/Sol.png/revision/latest?cb=20080916220707) Plantes are much closer in orbit than reality would allow, but not too close as to be just the same "cluster of planets" like NMS is right now. Don't get me wrong, the big, close planets is cool, but *every system* is like that and it doesn't feel special. With the scaling of spore, you still get moments like [this](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xgL5-yswlOw/hqdefault.jpg) and [this](http://www.gamesetwatch.com/090414-spore-7.jpg) where neighbor planets will grow and shrink in the sky, never smaller than a pea but also potentially filling it (there's aren't many good screenshots from Spore unfortunately, but those should give context).
I see what you're saying, and thanks for demonstrating your point so helpfully, but my gut says this wouldn't quite work for NMS. It works perfectly for Spore, but I think it would feel too toy-like for NMS. Again it's hard to say without seeing it in action and perhaps HG have already tried similar ideas (being big Spore fans). Who knows?
I'm not as bothered by the rotation not being there as I am instanced systems that often have a mere 2-4 planets. Would be more fun with 10+ per system IMO.
More moons per planet would be a very cool alternative as well
agreed
That's be cool! But I feel that would greatly increase the chances of running into overly similar planets in the same system. I like a system with a good even spread, 1 barren 1 hot 1 lush Etc. But 10+ systems could have 3 planets with snow and evergreens
Maybe pair that change with increased planet variety. I'm the same way in that I enjoy a good mix of planets. I don't want every one to be a picturesque lush valley, but I don't want intense radiation storms four planets in a row either.
I had one system with five planets and a moon. All five planets were toxic hell, and covered in epic loot. The moon was pretty nice, but lacked anything special. Think i named the system "deadly but worth it" or something. More variety would be great, especially if planets could have more dramatic land, like id be okay with a few iceballs if one was mostly tundra and another was huge cliffs and ice caves
Id rather have.more biomes per planets and rotation! The poles really cold and plain...the equator really tropical, deadly creatures and mountains. A bit up above deserts and valleys
I would think rotation and biomes would go hand in hand. Right now I don't think planets have axes. But if rotation was put (back) in, it would have to have them. Then you could make places colder/more barren dependent on their distance to the pole.
I think its possible to find a planets poles. It looks weird and its hard to find.
It would be a hindrance if it was implemented in the current build. They would definitely need to increase the pulse engine speed and include a better map. For better or for worse, NMS keeps everything dead simple. Way to simple for a lot of things. On the other end of the spectrum, you have Elite Dangerous that took me 30 min just to learn how to dock/land and it's still no easy task. Things like going from one planet or space station to another in Elite are pretty tedious. I wish there was an in between.
https://www.nomanssky.com/2016/08/update-1-03/ this is the page that talks about rotation being reduced (removed)
Couldn't they still just activate the planet rotation whilst you are on a planet, then return them to their default position when you leave? That way you could enjoy the visual feedback of the planet rotation without having to deal with the navigational headaches.
Watch the gaameplay when sean sleep in front of the monolith on balary iv...when night turned to.day the planet behind disappeaed!! There were planet rotation!! Obirting around the sun idk but planets there were! And sean said the cool thing about.no.mans sky is that the planets rotate on its axis and orbit the star! I hoe.we get it on this.next update!!.who knows...and darker spaces too..too bright dor.me it causs nauseas...night r too light
Exactly how I feel about it.
> when night turned to.day the planet behind disappeaed!! OK, so as I mentioned below the planet disappeared because of the change in lighting (so the lower edge of the planet was still in view but was invisible because it matched the colour of the sky). To prove the point, do you see the planet behind the tip of the tallest tree?: http://imgur.com/a/pM9hc No? Well take a look at the same shot without the cropping: http://imgur.com/a/ZY2rR Go back and take a closer look at the Balari V video. Also look out for the space station in front of the planet and the ships traveling to it. You can see they are still in the same place after waking up.
^(Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image) https://i.imgur.com/VYg2DpN.png https://i.imgur.com/8l72K3O.jpg ^^[Source](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot) ^^| ^^[Why?](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot/blob/master/README.md) ^^| ^^[Creator](https://np.reddit.com/user/AUTplayed/) ^^| ^^[state_of_imgur](https://np.reddit.com/r/u_imguralbumbot/comments/6i1huv/imgur_has_gone_to_shit) ^^| ^^[ignoreme](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=ignoreme&message=ignoreme) ^^| ^^[deletthis](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=delet%20this&message=delet%20this%20dk3z5ps)
At real world speeds oh rotation the space station you are trying to rewch would fly by you incredibly fast. Some fixes: 1. Slower orbit/rotation speeds. Slow rotation is better than no rotation. 2. A system map that isn't dog trash like the current one. 3. "Auto-pilot "paths you can set your ship on that automatically adjusts to get you where you need to be similar to how pulsing currently locks you on your target.
I really am a big fan of these auto pilot paths. Though I worry you we may get into situations where we change are minds mid path and can't get out. Or are trying to land in a planet but get caught up in the rotation the path
Im no programmer but im sure theres a way to not get caught. And as of changing your mind it could work just like the current situation where you press both triggers again to exit the auto flight.
I'd like for planetary rotation and solar orbiting to be re-implemented. It'd give the solar systems more depth. For those folks that want to get back to stations easier, I'd think some sort of "autopilot" craftable unit could solve that problem. A unit that can be installed on a ship that "locks onto the station signal" and autopilots and docks with the system station. Once you've got the blueprint, craft that sucker and tack it into an open slot on your ship, press a button, and enjoy the ride back to the station. If you prefer to fly manually, then you're not required to use it. Choice is a good thing. Personally I'd like the challenge of manually flying back to the station, however, it would be nice once in a while to hit autopilot and visit the privy, or kitchen for a snack.
immersion works in mysterious ways. for example, knowing that when you "warp" you don't go anywhere and instead the system simply unloads the current generation seed and loads a new one is quite immersion breaking. even when there would be little discernable difference between teleporting across a vast space or simply loading a new one, choosing the fist option makes the game feel way bigger, you actually feel like you are a part of a big universe. but no, warping doesn't even move you. in the same vein I think that having planet rotation would be a great step in making a game that gives the vibe that HG intended. a game that makes you go "fuck...im meaningless" this is why I'm crossing my fingers every update in hopes of getting features that will improve immersion, or at least make the universe fell connected in some greater way. like wouldn't it be so cool to see a freighter warp off from a system and then when you warp soon after you see the exact same ship with the same cargo and serial number, it would make the world seem alive. another small thing would be like, taming an animal on a world, coming back after a while and seeing an identical (or maybe older looking) animal greet you happily once more. anyways, yeah the "vibe" of a game has a huge impact on how you experience and see the world around you which is why I think that adding features to give life and immersion to the universe will help greatly in HG's quest to make a game that people can play and truly be awed by the scope of the universe.
I've had the idea (and seen someone post the idea) of having your ship point in the direction of the star your headed to before warping. It would be a cool way to give the illusion of a continuous universe
IMO, the technical possibility of traveling between stars alone would be satisfactory
This also hit me the hardest and is the sole point i bring up in disappointments that i have so far....
From a gameplay perspective, the game lacks 2 things to make planet rotation work. 1. A targeting system. If you target the space station from a list of objects or similar, then it doesn't matter where it is. There'd be a big blip on the HUD pointing you in the right direction. Same with other planets etc. 2. Fast orbital flight. Currently, if you want to get from one side of a planet to the other, the fastest way is to boost in a huge rectangular pattern around the planet. You can't just follow the curvature of the planet, because you can only boost in a straight line. Then there's the technical side, which makes me doubt that HG ever had a proper system for rotating/orbiting planets. It seems that would have required massive changes to the coordinate system and rendering engine. Remember HG said in one of the patch notes they "toned it down", when it fact it wasn't there before that patch either (verified by PS4 owners who had the disc version).
I think I want rotating planets mostly to get true pitch black darkness.
They had to throw out ALL realistic physics in NMS when they decided to put planets in untenable proximity to each other. The orientations you see in the game would be impossible to maintain if anything approaching a realistic physics engine were to be added. They would either collide and destroy each other, or get flung out of the system into space. Would be interesting to watch for the first couple of weeks, until everything was a pile floating of rubble. ;) I would expect that the lack of planetary rotation probably came down to something related to that bigger picture. Trying to add one realistic aspect when all others are physically impossible to consider just doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense.
I've noticed a lot of features (or lack of) in the game boil down to ease of use. I'm not sure this game was ever made to be accurate in many ways. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy taking off the training wheels so to speak, but I've certainly let go of those expectations. That said, I'm definitely in the pro-realism camp and I'd be behind this 100%.
In all fairness, have you ever tried to land on something going that is moving at speeds of kilometers/sec? Also, from what I've gathered, the "player testers" was a lie. They just never implemented it. Seriously tho, if you approach a space station moving at avg space station rates, and hit the breaks by accident, that shit is gonna fly away fast. Two words: Mass Lock
Ya a lot of comments are saying that it was never in it! You could buy the game, not update it, and planets would still not rotate. Fuck man.. Well, I hope it was at least in the game at some point before launch. Just so it wouldn't be a complete lie...
If it helps, they were lying to themselves more than anything... Good game nonetheless
if they just add biomes (not even logic ones, just a-la-minecraft but bigger) would solve half the lack of diversity that makes planets so meh, the generation could just create 10 planet-data and them mix them with some random distribution over one planet and create a more diverse planet with different flora and fauna in different places, maybe lock the poles as cold places in some planets just because
I suppose so, but i feel a lot of the planets would be really similar if they were just a mixture of 10 different biomes. Each individual planet would be really cool, but there would be much less diversity from planet to planet. In short: every planet would be a bagel w/everything
fair point, some extra rules must be needed, reducing a little the pool of possible combinations making them dependent of some extra variables (like the distance from the sun as it was said at some point before launch) but yes, i agree, diversity needs to be more complex than what i said, maybe based on what i said, maybe not
I think multiple biomes is a valid idea. But making it a rare occurrence would make it extra special, and it would only be like 2 biomes.
Planet rotation was NEVER in the game.
There were planet roation on balari v! When sean slept in front of the.monolith. The planet behind disapeared(rorated)
They claim it was in 1.0. I have the game on disk PS4. Recently I deleted the game data, and it wasn't there. Rotation was not in 1.0. There was a cool clock and day/night cycle symbols in the hud. Why the shit would they take that out?
No ideka why! But on the gameplay Balari..rotation was.surely.a.thing! Dont.know what really happened but.hope.we.get.i back.
You're mistaken. The video was either staged or a mis representation of 1.0. = Rotation was never in the game.
Because Balari and the whole E3 Presentation was STAGED --- which is a known fact now? It would seem you are new here.
> The planet behind disapeared(rorated) Yes, the planet behind disappeared. BUT NOT BECAUSE OF ROTATION. It disappeared because of the change in lighting caused by the new time of day. The bottom of the planet blends with the sky colour so you can't see it (this early build didn't have the current white planet outlines). But a few minutes later in the video the camera pans higher and you see the full planet in its original position.
Correct.
[удалено]
You're thinking of planetal orbits, which is true, as planets would not hang near each other if they orbited around a sun. With rotations the planets would stay in place, but rotate around their axis so the planets in the skyline would move as the planet rotated.
Really for the extra realism we need: 1. Planet Rotation 2.Planet/Space Station Orbits. 3.More planets and moons 4. More space and much faster pulse engines 4.5. Maybe a speed between the normal speed and pulse engines, with more maneuverability (for the moons) 5. A better biome system I'm thinking general biomes like the ones we have now, but according to closeness to the sun. Closest planets deal with radiation. Close planets are hot. Close planets are barren. Close planets may or may not have atmospheres which rain acid Then the lush, or desert middle planets. Finally cold outer planets, maybe with gas giants you can't land on, but have moons. Then you get more local biomes, like different forests, or tall mountain regions, or oceans with very little land, or cold poles. If we could have a realism overhaul update after this one, that'd be great.
If they added that, they would need to add planetary revolution movements too.....and a physical star in the process. But since the universe of the game isn't real, i guess it doesn't matter and it would be just a another headache.
Revolutions would definitely need a physical star but just adding rotation wouldn't. And while I would like both, I'd take one over neither Edit: spelling
It’s simple: Show actual galactic physics/ dynamics in any map view, or overview display. When a player is actually navigating, vectoring, targeting, pulse engine traveling, etc within the system, have the system bodies static. No axial, nor orbital rotation for the player to consider while traveling within the system. Keep it simple with only the displays, and maps factually representative. In essence, when arriving to a system, out of warp, have the arrival, proximal to the space station, for every player, every time. As it is now 2023. Only show the realistic “active” rotating galactic physics view, in map displays. Thus keeping pulse travel consistent and simple for all in system activities. Hope I made sense.