Author Topic: Possible Improvements (Read 7819 times)

Xriqxa · « **on:** May 11, 2014, 06:50:32 AM »

Post what you think US 2 needs to improve on here. I thought maybe you would find that in Questions for GA, but now they're easier to separate.

There's not much IMO, but I think that the Solar Flares need work

WitheHole18 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 11, 2014, 09:19:53 AM »

a cross-section of the planets

or clime simulation on other planet
sorry for the image of the planet is in Italian

Xriqxa · « **Reply #2 on:** May 11, 2014, 09:25:02 AM »

No worries about the other language

This is for improvements on what we already have, this belongs in the suggestions thread.
It's a great idea but may take too long to program. Also I think you mean Climate by clime. Aâ€¢6 has long got that done and I expect it to be even awesomer in Aâ€¢7

WitheHole18 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 11, 2014, 09:27:09 AM »

I think it is also
maybe will put in alpha 8

im4space · « **Reply #4 on:** May 12, 2014, 06:40:09 AM »

It may be possible to add cross sections of planets. One of their latest improvement, to be out in Alpha 7 I believe, is to show a planets components as a percent of iron, rock, water, and gas. It might be simple then to show these four layers in a cross section.

Xriqxa · « **Reply #5 on:** May 12, 2014, 06:45:40 AM »

Maybe. Also I think that planets bouncing should be fixed. Or isit already fixed?

Also will we have a better spectectle view? Like this:

smjjames · « **Reply #6 on:** May 12, 2014, 07:22:14 AM »

Quote from: Xriqxa on May 12, 2014, 06:45:40 AM

Maybe. Also I think that planets bouncing should be fixed. Or isit already fixed?

Also will we have a better spectectle view? Like this:

There is a bounce mode though, but yeah, sometimes when the collision isn't straight on, the object literally just glances or rolls off. They've completely redone the collision system, so we'll just have to see.

As for the image, is that from Space Engine? As awesome as screenshots from that are, I doubt it'll look that spectacular. There might be some artistic view mode developed after main release.

Xriqxa · « **Reply #7 on:** May 12, 2014, 07:29:01 AM »

Quote

As awesome as screenshots from that are, I doubt it'll look that spectacular. There might be some artistic view mode developed after main release.

That's what I was thinking too. I'm not sure where the screenshot is from, I just saw it and said, "will this be US soon?"

That's a little over-expectant of GA, but I think bounce mode should possibly be omitted. Maybe not... It seems a little useless. Maybe have a mass maximum for bouncing objects and a mass minimum for merging objects? Of course there will be a medium that I haven't worked out yet...

Do stellar collisions stop giving off Starsteroids^TM yet?

But so far I'm happy with Aâ€¢7.

smjjames · « **Reply #8 on:** May 12, 2014, 08:12:26 AM »

Those fancy graphics would also be CPU/GPU intensive and Ubox is already CPU intensive.

As for those solid stellar fragments (or starsteroids as you called them), yeah those are odd. The collision system doesn't yet know how to handle the collision between two large gaseous objects as if they were gas rather than solid.

Xriqxa · « **Reply #9 on:** May 16, 2014, 11:57:54 PM »

Since US organises Terrestrial planets, Gas giants and stars into different categories, maybe you can have the command, "If stars collide, do not produce fragments" since collisions also produce flares and glow. Maybe some liquid can spurt out as well? Gas giants, I think we can keep the solid fragments for now.

Xriqxa · « **Reply #10 on:** May 18, 2014, 11:03:29 AM »

Quote from: Xriqxa on May 12, 2014, 07:29:01 AM

Quote
As awesome as screenshots from that are, I doubt it'll look that spectacular. There might be some artistic view mode developed after main release.

That's what I was thinking too. I'm not sure where the screenshot is from, I just saw it and said, "will this be US soon?"

That's a little over-expectant of GA, but I think bounce mode should possibly be omitted. Maybe not... It seems a little useless. Maybe have a mass maximum for bouncing objects and a mass minimum for merging objects? Of course there will be a medium that I haven't worked out yet...

Do stellar collisions stop giving off Starsteroids^TM yet?

But so far I'm happy with Aâ€¢7.

perhaps the medium can be clumping objects, objects that stick together like play doh?

Xriqxa · « **Reply #11 on:** July 14, 2014, 01:32:15 AM »

Not sure if this is a question or suggestion, but why do the asteroids and small planets in US2Aâ€¢8 look so.... cartoonish and fake?

WitheHole18 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 14, 2014, 02:26:11 AM »

Ã¨ uscito alpha 8?

Pinkythefoxxywasp · « **Reply #13 on:** July 14, 2014, 02:55:45 AM »

Quote from: Xriqxa on July 14, 2014, 01:32:15 AM

Not sure if this is a question or suggestion, but why do the asteroids and small planets in US2Aâ€¢8 look so.... cartoonish and fake?

I noticed that myself in the US2 ALPHA 8 stream, the asteroids look rather low res and the planet fragments look even more odd.

But yeah i agree with the asteroids/small planets looking cartoonish, they do need abit more improvement

A . M . O · « **Reply #14 on:** July 14, 2014, 05:42:34 AM »

Quote from: Xriqxa on May 12, 2014, 07:29:01 AM

Quote
As awesome as screenshots from that are, I doubt it'll look that spectacular. There might be some artistic view mode developed after main release.

That's what I was thinking too. I'm not sure where the screenshot is from, I just saw it and said, "will this be US soon?"

That's a little over-expectant of GA, but I think bounce mode should possibly be omitted. Maybe not... It seems a little useless. Maybe have a mass maximum for bouncing objects and a mass minimum for merging objects? Of course there will be a medium that I haven't worked out yet...

Do stellar collisions stop giving off Starsteroids^TM yet?

But so far I'm happy with Aâ€¢7.

what , in universe sandbox 2 , when a star is hit , it launch asteroids?! that needs to be fixed

A . M . O · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2014, 06:06:58 AM »

hmmm...... why the guys of universe sandbox didnt do an TERRAFORMING simulator ? that would be so amazing for me...

DaniheltheMage · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2014, 11:28:46 AM »

I think that the hot asteroids do look kinda cartoonish..

Xriqxa · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2014, 12:50:17 PM »

Quote from: DaniheltheMage on July 14, 2014, 11:28:46 AM

I think that the hot asteroids do look kinda cartoonish..

not those, they are fine.
I'm talking about the rocks he was throwing at planets.

pac0master · « **Reply #18 on:** July 14, 2014, 04:18:16 PM »

I think they should make some change to the Oculus Rift Support.

It is nice that we can play with the rift but it is quite poorly supported. It it kind of awkward to mess around with it.

I have the rift and that was my experience.

WitheHole18 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2014, 01:36:20 AM »

Quote from: pac0master on July 14, 2014, 04:18:16 PM

I think they should make some change to the Oculus Rift Support.

It is nice that we can play with the rift but it is quite poorly supported. It it kind of awkward to mess around with it.

I have the rift and that was my experience.

the asteroid is normal for me

Sarebbe bello anche avere una modalitÃ ''creator'' like the creatur creator of spore,but now the planet is
Custom.

pac0master · « **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2014, 12:29:00 PM »

What?

Universip · « **Reply #21 on:** July 16, 2014, 12:01:34 AM »

I think that if you add water to a planet using the material hose or something, the water would quickly freeze/evaporate depending on the planet, and would stay only if the planet is not too cold/hot. I've seen a video with mars having water added and it didn't freeze, but Mars is too cold to support water.

pac0master · « **Reply #22 on:** July 19, 2014, 01:34:35 PM »

Agreed,

I find it weird to see water on the surface of a planet that has no atmosphere.
I think it would be nice to make a similar one where the water freeze and make a underground ocean

WitheHole18 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 19, 2014, 01:36:20 PM »

good