upvote
what you want a game where they take into account the expansion of space? are we also going to model the complete breakdown of causality on the otherside of the ftl?
reply
They don't even do orbits of basic solar system objects. Lol.

Eve online has always just pretended to be a space sim.

reply
It helps me to just think of all these games as early 20th century naval warfare sims with a fantasy space theme. We like dreadnoughts and have a hard time with extraterrestrial physics.
reply
To me it seems like the engine (and the mechanics) are focused on being an MMO first and a "simulation" second. From their website "EVE Online is a community-driven spaceship MMORPG where players can play free, choosing their own path from countless options."

There are concepts in the game that would be unlikely in a simulation game but are common in MMO's. Think of fast travel, instance dungeons and more.

One of Eve Online's strengths is that it conforms gameplay to the MMO setting. That is one of the main driving factors in it's design and allows for example for Time dilation, huge battles and continuous universe and economy that it is famous for.

This is different from for example World of Warcraft, in my view that is a RPG first MMO second. That is one of the reasons it has sharding and smaller pvp battles.

reply
Indeed, I would even say that EVE chose to be unsharded/monolithic first, and many of the key design choices flow from that, including the fantasy space setting itself.

The monolithic world needs to be big to spread everyone out. And it's easier to create ten thousand "systems" than it would be to create an immersive terrestrial world with a similar scale. Each EVE system is just a bunch of objects floating in a 3D space that you travel between.

reply
Positioning of things in orbit around a point in space is cheap. The issue was probably how much more complicated it would be to make all the missions if things kept moving around. You could end up with things on opposite sides of a solar system that are currently right next to each other. But to me it takes me out of the game when I see stuff like that in the engine.
reply
Even more accurately, these generation of games are chat rooms with set dressing.
reply
Well, even in Naval battles the environment is not this static - weather playing a major role in many naval campaigns, from hiding your ship in a rain squall to braving freezing waters during the polar night with the arctic convoys.

And of course tide played a major role, with the Germans during the Battle of Jutland racing to get past a sand bang to avoid being stuck at open sea & be mauled even more by the British.

reply
games are about fun, if something only adds realism for no reason it's not good game design to add it
reply
I still think it would be doable if done right. There are so many interesting elements of modern science and hard SF that could be included to introduce interesting game mechanics:

- adding various types of radiators (solid, droplet, etc.), gloving when weapons fire or engines activate, shooting them off prevents system from running

- planets on eccentric orbits with wildly varying surface conditions in mere days as the planet periodically get closer and farther to the star, from frozen solid to metals flowing like water days apart

- aerostat habitats in the atmosphere on gas giants or Venus like worlds, you could fly around but go to low (or get swept by a storm) and you might get crushed

- radiation belts, sun grazing comets or energy harvesting stations very close to a stellar body, can enter for a very limited time until even your shielded systems burn out - and good like with repair space walks!

- tidally locked bodies, where one side is always illuminated and the other one has an eternal night, with perhaps a thin habitable belt where conditions are just right for life, presenting interesting options for story telling and world building

reply
From playing quite a bit of KSP, I'd say an issue is that realistic space travel consists of a lot of waiting to get to the right part of the orbit. You have time dilation for that in SP, but not in MP.
reply
Doing all of that math and tracking them is a huge order. Outer Wilds famously simulates an entire solar system using Unity and they had an issue early in development where bugs would occur more frequently as the player visited the edge of the solar system due to floating point math getting wonky in the engine and the solar system's Sun being 0,0,0 coordinates. Their solution? Make the player coordinate 0,0,0 and everything else moves _around_ the player. That's right, in Outer Wilds, when you jump, the planet you're on is actually moving away from you. But they managed to use this method to simulate newtonian physics pretty well.

And even that solution is only temporary. Its possible to watch the simulation go on so long that planets begin to de-orbit the sun as the math simulation breaks down. For spoiler reasons players don't run into this issue, but it exists.

PS: If you haven't played Outer Wilds and you enjoy exploration/puzzle games go play it. Avoid spoilers if possible.

reply
Fun is of course subjective. Some of us care about realism more than others.
reply
I think we're all aware of that. The post you're responding to essentially made the same point you did, but to someone who thought it appropriate to express their love for realism in a much less mature way.
reply
I bet some do, but not enough for anyone to ever make a commercial game that focuses on hyper-realistic, multiplayer space travel.
reply
It's going to be such a fun game flying 1000 lightyears at a couple hundred meters per second.
reply
That's inaccurate, orbital periods are a thing at least for moons. It's one of those things you'd have to spend a year or two piloting an Orca to notice though.
reply
Are stations and jump gates still fixed in place?
reply
Yes and almost no one cares.
reply
if anything, people DON'T want them to move because it will ruin their bookmarks over time. It is not going to be fun to have to manually update your bookmarks just because a space station got slightly pulled into some nearby planet or whatever.
reply
how would it impact the fun of the game if they weren't?
reply
I mentioned this in another comment, but if they moved you would have to manually update bookmarks to warp to those locations as they drifted, annoying.
reply
Because fairly few players want to update space coordinates of hundreds of objects as a daily chore
reply
You would not need to update any bookmarks. They should be using a coordinate system based on a relative object. Existing bookmarks are already technically relative the largest gravity well. New bookmarks would simply be based on whatever you want like any object. Absolutely no reason to overcomplicate it. Dunno why you're assuming you'd need to update anything.
reply
at no point are you justifying why this would be FUN. it's like you don't even understand what a game is supposed to be
reply
Tactics like being able to have your fleet hiding behind a moon that happens to orbit into the exact right position at the right time is fun to me. Eve Online is already a spreadsheet simulator so I find it about as fun as watching paint dry. Anyway I don't think basic physics is about fun or not fun.
reply
Claiming to appreciate tactics involving realistic orbital maneuvering but also hating spreadsheet simulators is an incredibly strange position.

How does one want a realistic space game but also hate spreadsheets?

reply
I didn't say I hate them. I said I don't find them fun.

Anyway I don't need a spreadsheet to know where a moon is gonna be in N time. A simple visual simulation I can whip up with AI in minutes would do the trick.

reply
So you've never played the game.

Ok, lets try one example, the game has a mechanic where a station has a docking port where all ships exit oriented in a single direction. Many pilots have bookmarks that allow them warp very quickly away because turning around is slow so the bookmark is oriented straight directly away from the exit. How does one deal with that in a solar system if we assume even minimal orbital simulations?. It has 9 planets 33 moons, and only the dumb players warp directly to any particular planet or moon because of course everyone expects that, so they place them in random positions in space.

Are you able to do n-body math in your head?

reply
I played it for years. Shaking my head at this silliness. You just set the bookmark to a 50 meters off the side of whatever station and then the position of the station is basic orbital algebra that takes almost no CPU to calculate. It's dumb you can't just activate the warp to immediately activate for one second in whatever direction. Another reason I stopped playing. Irl you'd warp away in any direction if you're about to get blasted. You wouldn't be wasting time aligning to some random bookmark. This is why I can't take Eve online seriously. Like you actually think that a 25 year old engine is the best design ever for some reason.
reply
How fast can you speed run KSP RP/RO?
reply
> pretended to be a space sim.

When has it ever done that.

Keep in mind, I played like starting year 3

reply
Which ones are not?
reply
Kerbal Space Program at a minimum
reply
I was not aware KSP supported thousands of players on a single grid shooting each other and the calculations associated with it.
reply