Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect  (Read 2206 times)

Yunru

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1560
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2021, 04:25:04 PM »

There's also the presumption that the setting shares the same physics as us.

Because the game definitely adheres to physics. We in fact, have a complete picture of what the physics of the game is, unlike our own reality.

The two might not match, but do they need to?

Szasz

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #16 on: December 22, 2021, 04:37:50 PM »

There's also the presumption that the setting shares the same physics as us.

Because the game definitely adheres to physics. We in fact, have a complete picture of what the physics of the game is, unlike our own reality.

The two might not match, but do they need to?
It is more comfortable if they do in games that want to appear realistic, yes. Counter example could be Mario Kart. We do not look for realism in it because it makes no effort building that image (being realistic).
Logged

Baqar79

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #17 on: December 22, 2021, 04:43:14 PM »

Space doesn't have drag. Someone tell Alex please; he should probably fix that.

Bit of an oversight tbh.
Elite Dangerous which has a much more realistic interpretation of Space (well the Galaxy scale and orbital mechanics are reasonably solid) and it can't get away from Space Drag; internally I find it easier to come up with my own explanation for why things are the way they are (I generally explain it as to be a side-effect of the Hyper drive or a Gravity generating system if the ship has one).

Consistency is important and....I know I should of let it go after all these years (Alex shot down this suggestion), but I still really don't like that all White Stars are called "White Dwarfs", which are dead tiny stellar remnants, regardless of whether they are actually normal full size stars or more 'correct' like Achaman in the Magec system.  It has some of the star types and labels them as such (O,G,K,M), but for White Stars (A & F roughly), they are all called White Dwarfs.

Weirdly I'm actually completely fine with the scale of the solar systems, but for some reason this star classification in particular bothers me... :)
« Last Edit: December 22, 2021, 04:44:51 PM by Baqar79 »
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2021, 04:50:07 PM »

This game has ansibles comm relays that violate our current understanding of physics vis a vis speed of communication over light years or time dilation for black holes.  It's a game, realism isn't intention.  Verisimilitude is.  C'est la vie.
Do they violate it or are they beyond our understanding? There's a difference.
No there isn't.  Unless and until a new UNIFIED theory that better explains physics with regard to more of its entirety, doing anything beyond our understanding of physics or violating physics are the same thing.  Stop equivocating (unless it's for rhetorical purposes, that's ok), but please avoid false dichotomies... we're still mostly stuck with general and special relativity, with a side helping of quantum mechanics.  But hey, at least they finally found the Higgs!

This game has ansibles comm relays that violate our current understanding of physics vis a vis speed of communication over light years or time dilation for black holes.  It's a game, realism isn't intention.  Verisimilitude is.  C'est la vie.
The player doesn't go near black holes regularly. However a pulse laser is potentially fired every second.
And I don't get why verisimilitude must exclude realism. That's warped logic.
Not to be a ****, but have you even bothered to google the definition of verisimilitude?  It basically translate to "truth-like," not truth... so it means similar to reality, but not actually reality!  Realism literally requires the real.  I feel like I should have made the "desert of the real" reference for Baudrillard, but Matrix kinda stole that, then maybe Matrix just recently prolly got ruined further (I'll give the movie a chance when it hits streaming services, not gonna pay for that nonsense.  At least Spiderman is doing something new(ish), but didn't run the old thing into the ground!).
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

ANGRYABOUTELVES

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
  • AE ALTADOON GHARTOK PADHOME
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2021, 07:37:45 PM »

Do you have an explanation for the lasersaber-like behaviour of tactical and pd lasers as well?
Combat is not to scale. In-lore, distances between ships are much larger relative to ship size, small ships are much smaller than large ships than they appear, and combat takes place over multiple days and at significant fractions of c. Lasers still move at the speed of light, except for phase-space related non-laser beams like the Phase Lance and Tachyon Lance which activate instantaneously at all points in their path.
Logged

Baqar79

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2021, 10:20:02 PM »

I'm not sure if there have ever been any sizes mentioned on this ships themselves (are the relative sizes between ship classes about right?, or would a frigate appear like a tiny fighter in comparison to something like an Onslaught or Paragon?).  It probably won't be ever elaborated on so imagination can fill in the gaps (much less to pick at when the audience fills in the gaps), but I still would like to know. :)

The other thought about lasers (I'm not complaining or requesting a change just thinking about it a little more) is in a vacuum you aren't going to be seeing them from an overhead view; not much matter for light to scatter from.  Though space isn't completely empty so a solar system (especially closer to the sun) would have a greater concentration of matter then deep space.  From one place I was reading around 3 to 10 particles (protons & electrons) per cm^3 average inside our solar system, while at the Heliopause (where the solar winds from the sun can't hold back the interstellar medium) it drops to 0.002 electrons per cm^3 (not sure what happened to the protons, maybe they lose energy well before reaching the Heliopause because they have more mass?).

I don't know but perhaps the energy is so intense from the laser that the sparse gases that fill the vacuum of space is forming super energetic plasma of some sort which is then giving off light (maybe....I don't know, just making stuff up).
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2021, 10:31:10 PM »

Check out this story. A few friends of mine were studying medicine back when Mortal Kombat 9 came out for consoles. Imagine hearing the consternation at every x-ray attack and finisher "that's not the correct location for that organ". It ruined the game for them and a bit later for me.
I guess there are stuff you simply can't unsee when you know how it works.
See, the trick is to target all those people who don't know how it works.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2021, 10:57:51 PM »

Of course if the ships are travelling at fractional C in combat and the graphics are only representational, then the light speed weapons having travel time is completely accurate. And while the only true maximum speed is C, things get funny with time dilation and its more like a smooth slowing where more thrust gets marginal returns for more speed. Starsector isn't doing this of course, but realism gets pretty weird in those limits.

A game designed to be accurate for fractional C combat would also have absolutely crazy counterintuitive graphical effects happening as you accelerate and turn, like the whole battlespace warping and shifting relative to the velocity vector and ships being stretched out in various dimensions. I'm betting it would either look awesome or make people puke.
Logged

Vanshilar

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2021, 11:08:50 PM »

Check out this story. A few friends of mine were studying medicine back when Mortal Kombat 9 came out for consoles. Imagine hearing the consternation at every x-ray attack and finisher "that's not the correct location for that organ". It ruined the game for them and a bit later for me.
I guess there are stuff you simply can't unsee when you know how it works.

Reminds me of the story of Neil Degrasse Tyson telling James Cameron that "Titanic" would've been better had the stars in the night sky matched the location of the actual stars on that fateful night in the Atlantic Ocean.
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2021, 11:11:45 PM »

Of course if the ships are travelling at fractional C in combat and the graphics are only representational, then the light speed weapons having travel time is completely accurate. And while the only true maximum speed is C, things get funny with time dilation and its more like a smooth slowing where more thrust gets marginal returns for more speed. Starsector isn't doing this of course, but realism gets pretty weird in those limits.

I still for the life of me can't understand why this game doesn't have time dilation for black holes on campaign layer.  Game literally has a x2 setting for faster speed and enough trig for measuring radial distance... what, don't want to penalize player when they follow the bounty fleet into the black hole?
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

Szasz

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #25 on: December 23, 2021, 10:18:46 AM »

Do you have an explanation for the lasersaber-like behaviour of tactical and pd lasers as well?
Combat is not to scale. In-lore, distances between ships are much larger relative to ship size, small ships are much smaller than large ships than they appear, and combat takes place over multiple days and at significant fractions of c. Lasers still move at the speed of light, except for phase-space related non-laser beams like the Phase Lance and Tachyon Lance which activate instantaneously at all points in their path.
Not bad! Thanks.

Spoiler
This game has ansibles comm relays that violate our current understanding of physics vis a vis speed of communication over light years or time dilation for black holes.  It's a game, realism isn't intention.  Verisimilitude is.  C'est la vie.
Do they violate it or are they beyond our understanding? There's a difference.
No there isn't.  Unless and until a new UNIFIED theory that better explains physics with regard to more of its entirety, doing anything beyond our understanding of physics or violating physics are the same thing.  Stop equivocating (unless it's for rhetorical purposes, that's ok), but please avoid false dichotomies... we're still mostly stuck with general and special relativity, with a side helping of quantum mechanics.  But hey, at least they finally found the Higgs!

This game has ansibles comm relays that violate our current understanding of physics vis a vis speed of communication over light years or time dilation for black holes.  It's a game, realism isn't intention.  Verisimilitude is.  C'est la vie.
The player doesn't go near black holes regularly. However a pulse laser is potentially fired every second.
And I don't get why verisimilitude must exclude realism. That's warped logic.
[close]
Not to be a ****, but have you even bothered to google the definition of verisimilitude?  It basically translate to "truth-like," not truth... so it means similar to reality, but not actually reality!  Realism literally requires the real.  I feel like I should have made the "desert of the real" reference for Baudrillard, but Matrix kinda stole that, then maybe Matrix just recently prolly got ruined further (I'll give the movie a chance when it hits streaming services, not gonna pay for that nonsense.  At least Spiderman is doing something new(ish), but didn't run the old thing into the ground!).
Your whole argument is based on an assumption and shouldn't have escalated this far in the first place. Was it proven that being verisimilar is the intention of this or any game? This is not a fact. Mario Kart example.
Other than that lasers in SS are currently not real-like, hence not verisimilar, so touché. This is what I was trying to express. Instead of trying to dox someone for self-interest, focus on the matter at hand.
I always look up unknown words in hope of learning something new but here's a tip: not everyone will, so being plain is in your interest, not anyone else's. Using latin words needlessly may result in one of the following:
 - people misunderstand what you want to say
 - people don't bother to understand you and you get ignored
However, realism was probably not the right word there, I give you that. Would it be realisticism? I dunno, a native tell me.
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #26 on: December 23, 2021, 10:44:44 AM »

Spoiler
This game has ansibles comm relays that violate our current understanding of physics vis a vis speed of communication over light years or time dilation for black holes.  It's a game, realism isn't intention.  Verisimilitude is.  C'est la vie.
Do they violate it or are they beyond our understanding? There's a difference.
No there isn't.  Unless and until a new UNIFIED theory that better explains physics with regard to more of its entirety, doing anything beyond our understanding of physics or violating physics are the same thing.  Stop equivocating (unless it's for rhetorical purposes, that's ok), but please avoid false dichotomies... we're still mostly stuck with general and special relativity, with a side helping of quantum mechanics.  But hey, at least they finally found the Higgs!

This game has ansibles comm relays that violate our current understanding of physics vis a vis speed of communication over light years or time dilation for black holes.  It's a game, realism isn't intention.  Verisimilitude is.  C'est la vie.
The player doesn't go near black holes regularly. However a pulse laser is potentially fired every second.
And I don't get why verisimilitude must exclude realism. That's warped logic.
[close]
Not to be a ****, but have you even bothered to google the definition of verisimilitude?  It basically translate to "truth-like," not truth... so it means similar to reality, but not actually reality!  Realism literally requires the real.  I feel like I should have made the "desert of the real" reference for Baudrillard, but Matrix kinda stole that, then maybe Matrix just recently prolly got ruined further (I'll give the movie a chance when it hits streaming services, not gonna pay for that nonsense.  At least Spiderman is doing something new(ish), but didn't run the old thing into the ground!).
Your whole argument is based on an assumption and shouldn't have escalated this far in the first place. Was it proven that being verisimilar is the intention of this or any game? This is not a fact. Mario Kart example.

Look, maybe you're ESL (if so, then you get a pass), or like 12 maybe (less of a pass, but still a pass).  But since you failed to elaborate upon your Mario Kart example, Mario kart actually has significant verisimilitude, it has literal physics (pretty good system too, but that is arguably required since it's basically a racing game).  But yes, it also has shells and stuff.  And yes, of course my argument is based on certain assumptions, since you keep failing to elaborate (I guess in an attempt to appear inscrutable, unless you ESL or 12), but you just end up sounding ignorant... either cogently present your side or sit down and shut up.  But finally your last post is starting to do the former!

Other than that lasers in SS are currently not real-like, hence not verisimilar, so touché. This is what I was trying to express. Instead of trying to dox someone for self-interest, focus on the matter at hand.

Dox?  Did I post your home address on the public internet, and/or try to convince one of your haters to SWAT you?  This is rising to some defamatory level BS, but again, thanks for putting words in my mouth.  And I am focussed on the matter at hand, I'm just beginning to think you keep changing the matter when someone points out flaws in your logic to avoid admitting they right and maybe you ain't.

I always look up unknown words in hope of learning something new but here's a tip: not everyone will, so being plain is in your interest, not anyone else's. Using latin words needlessly may result in one of the following:
 - people misunderstand what you want to say
 - people don't bother to understand you and you get ignored
However, realism was probably not the right word there, I give you that. Would it be realisticism? I dunno, a native tell me.

Verisimilitude is an English word with a Latin root.  And if you're incapable of looking up a word you don't know in the dictionary, clearly this argument is moot because I was under the impression that both sides bothered to actually self-improve (and that English was your first language, so you not relying on a translated dictionary).  But based on the wording of "a native tell me" I'm beginning to suspect the root of this issue is mistranslation, and the fact that everyone on this forum has to assume everyone else speaks English decently, since it is literally in English.  Look, if you ESL, just open with that so peeps know English isn't your first language.  The point I've been trying to make is that realism/realistic means exactly like reality vs. verisimilitude means similar to reality.  So realism is Saving Private Ryan, Gladiator or The Maltese Falcon, while verisimilitude is Game of Thrones, Noah, or the MCU... but sci-fi usually isn't perfectly realistic since it's usually set in the future (and/or set in present but with differences)!  But doesn't have to be sci-fi, magical realism is another genre.
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #27 on: December 23, 2021, 11:04:03 AM »

@slowperson, please respect other forum users more and don't bait of insult them. As this is the second time in days please consider this an official warning.
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #28 on: December 23, 2021, 11:44:35 AM »

@slowperson, please respect other forum users more and don't bait of insult them. As this is the second time in days please consider this an official warning.

Most of your warning is entirely justified, but being accused of doxxing is arguably an allegation of criminal activity.  To be fair, I don't think this is what they were referring to (if only because I now suspect maybe English isn't their first language, so therefore they are likely misusing the word), but a possible accusation of criminal activity without further clarification is an outrageous heightening of tensions, and therefore untenable.
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

JaronK

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Re: be a good game instead of scientifically incorrect
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2021, 11:29:28 PM »

Better version of Tactical Laser for me: have it instantly go to full range, but it's thinner at first.  It takes a short time to go to full thickness... and thus full damage.  So basically over the first half second or so, the damage ramps up from 0-100%.

Balance wise it's quite similar, but it now makes sense.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3