accurate physics?

sharnrock · December 2013

Different wavelengths of light penetrate water to different depths. Will the ocean floor change colors based on depth? For the really deep parts are we going to need tons of lights on the exterior or the ship? Just curious. I think it would be cool to see transitions like this as I'm tooling around.

Paajtor · December 2013

Thermal layers are a must, imo.

SteveRock · December 2013

Yes, but this will be driven by artistic and gameplay needs, not physics.

Deco · December 2013

The majority of views in the game will probably be false-colour, which makes sense for futuristic technology.

This wouldn't actually be simulated, but can be explained by active (sonar, illumination) and passive (thermal, pressure, radioactivity) sensors which are much more accurate than today's tech' and computers that use solvers to produce sexy-looking images for viewscreens.

My personal favourite "fake futuristic tech explanation" is: launching low-energy particles like neutrinos or munos (or tachyons? :P) into the depths and observing the returning particles from their decay.

coolitic · December 2013

I would like some decent physics that affect gameplay, but not as much as kerbal space program obviously.

SteveRock · December 2013

coolitic wrote: »

I would like some decent physics that affect gameplay, but not as much as kerbal space program obviously.

Your sub will probably be simulated as a constrained rigid body, so it can get knocked around some by currents and what not. But we've decided to ignore buoyancy for now, as it's a constant pain in the ass.

Tzudro · December 2013

While it would be nice to have to figure out how to navigate the extreme depths, there's a reason we haven't been down that far.

I say forget realistic physics (for the most part) and make it fun and beautiful.

I don't want to get to a point where suddenly my vessel starts sending.me warnings that if I go any deeper, my vessel will be crushed under the pressure because I haven't played enough to beef up my submarine beast enough. Maybe they could have areas where this is true, but for those of us with limited time to play/explore, I don't want to be hindered because I haven't sunk 200 hours into it yet.

I want my mind to be blown by the majesty and wonder of exploring a new (or ancient, depending on your point of view) world. I want to see unrealistic, seemingly impossible sights and creatures. I'd love to see zones where not only the creatures are bioluminescent, but the sand or stone on the bottom is bioluminescent.

Imagine exploring the kelp forest during the "day", taking samples and whatnot while there's natural light. Then you log out. When you log back in later, it's night but the kelp "fruit" is glowing brightly, creating a ghostly forest with gently shifting shadows that now has unusual ocean creatures flitting in and out of the light as they hunt, breed, live and die.

Now obviously this is rather difficult to accomplish. The time and graphical requirements for that idea are outrageous. But if we get even half that (knowing Unknown Worlds though, we'll probably get more), it will be amazing.

SteveRock · January 2014

I think we want some challenge, as we believe it makes exploration more rewarding. But we don't want it to feel grindy, for sure.

Tzudro · January 2014

SteveRock wrote: »

I think we want some challenge, as we believe it makes exploration more rewarding. But we don't want it to feel grindy, for sure.

Less of a walk, more of a hike, less than climbing Everest. Sounds excellent.

OnosFactory · January 2014

"My personal favourite "fake futuristic tech explanation" is: launching low-energy particles like neutrinos or munos (or tachyons? :P) into the depths and observing the returning particles from their decay. "

Muon - low energy? What!?! (A Muon is 230 times more massive than an Electron). Neutrino + Observe in same sentence? Good luck! Return Particle ? Oh right - *fake* futuristic explanation!

SteveRock · January 2014

Tzudro wrote: »

SteveRock wrote: »

I think we want some challenge, as we believe it makes exploration more rewarding. But we don't want it to feel grindy, for sure.

Less of a walk, more of a hike, less than climbing Everest. Sounds excellent.

Ideally we'd pace things out so that by the end, you're ready to go to Everest, but I think you got the general spirit.

Davil · January 2014

Just from the perspective of an actual submariner, realistic anything should probably be left out. Maybe after 10 years of it the magic is gone for me, but there is no light to see anything underwater. In reality at about 650ft or so there is no more light period. Real sonar isn't going to tell you much about how things look aside from a rough idea of how deep you are and where other things are, but it's more like a dot at a time than a whole picture. The person who mentioned thermal layers is actually on the right track of about the only realistic physics part that would be fun. Driving into different temperatures of water makes a large difference in terms of buoyancy so that would be something to keep the player on their toes. Then again if you had control of a super futuristic submarine you would assume that important basic issues like ballasting would be handled automatically by a computer.

accurate physics?

Comments