Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager gets mini-site and Twitch SessionBuzz Aldrin: Ask Me Anything (AMA) on redditDeal of the week Fantasy Kommander: Eukarion WarsSpace Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Little OT, but interesting

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> Little OT, but interesting Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Little OT, but interesting - 11/6/2013 12:59:28 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7168
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
And something I didn't know.

I decided to do some research on our own galaxy and discovered just how many stars there are in the Milky Way...400 billion or so. Never realized just how big the galaxy really is...and it certainly makes our in game 1400 star galaxies seem tiny in comparison.

Now, could you imagine how much processing power we'd need to play the game if we had that many stars in game?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Post #: 1
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/6/2013 4:29:19 AM   
Lucian

 

Posts: 202
Joined: 12/1/2012
Status: offline
Not to mention the fact that it would be totally unplayable in real-time with 7,000,000 messages going off per second. Its the exact same problem that this game has with a large (1400) number of star systems but taken to an extreme.

With large maps, you often have 2 to 5 messages per second going off and its simply impossible to personally address them all at once in real time (RT). That's why I think that this game's dogged insistence on RT at all costs is its greatest weakness. I often miss battles that I would have loved to direct because I simply cant observe 2 or more places at once in a RT game. So I am forced to play with less stars, just so I don't get overwhelmed with messages, even though I don't really want to.

IMO Distant Worlds would have been vastly improved by switching to some sort of turn-based tactical mode when combat occurs. Then you wouldn't miss any battles and even a realistic 400 billion star galaxy would be theoretically possible, although the game would probably take several billion years to actually play, but at least the design wouldn't break like it currently does with 1400 stars.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 2
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/6/2013 5:38:48 AM   
CyclopsSlayer


Posts: 485
Joined: 2/11/2012
Status: offline
I will try to find the reference, but iirc one show was talking about a single Radio Telescope facility gathering 4+ Petabytes a year.

One general article I recall...
cf: Astronomy and Big Data

(in reply to Lucian)
Post #: 3
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/6/2013 10:15:13 AM   
Icemania


Posts: 1566
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
And further consider that 22% of sunlike stars in the Milky Way are orbited by potentially habitable, Earth-size worlds

(in reply to CyclopsSlayer)
Post #: 4
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/6/2013 11:18:49 AM   
Osito


Posts: 663
Joined: 5/9/2013
Status: offline
As I understand it, Elite Dangerous, intends to provide an entire galaxy's worth of stars (i.e. around 400 billion) with many of them (well, perhaps a few hundred or thousand) located in the correct relative position in space. Completely different gameplay from DW, but I still think it will be fascinating to see how it works out.

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 5
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/6/2013 11:04:00 PM   
CyclopsSlayer


Posts: 485
Joined: 2/11/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osito

As I understand it, Elite Dangerous, intends to provide an entire galaxy's worth of stars (i.e. around 400 billion) with many of them (well, perhaps a few hundred or thousand) located in the correct relative position in space. Completely different gameplay from DW, but I still think it will be fascinating to see how it works out.

The original Elite, back in the dark ages, used procedural generation, and managed to have 256 Stars in 8 galaxies to explore, all crammed onto a single side of a 5.25 Floppy. 99% of which you never saw... :)
BTW, the Apple][ Floppy had a character file on the flip side, Elite rating and decked out ship and wallet.

I somewhat dread the database that they will need to track all the potential systems, resources, politics, interactions for Elite: Dangerous... makes me shudder both in horror and anticipation.

(in reply to Osito)
Post #: 6
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 1:01:05 AM   
Lucian

 

Posts: 202
Joined: 12/1/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CyclopsSlayer

I somewhat dread the database that they will need to track all the potential systems, resources, politics, interactions for Elite: Dangerous... makes me shudder both in horror and anticipation.


One possible way to manage it would be to only procedurally generate system data for the systems you actually visit, plus of course the hard-coded ones in the game.

So until you actually go to one, they'll just be hundreds of billions of points of light in the galaxy. Traveling to one will procedurally flesh it out and add it to the database.

(in reply to CyclopsSlayer)
Post #: 7
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 3:10:29 AM   
adecoy95


Posts: 409
Joined: 3/26/2010
Status: offline
While all 400 billion would be ridiculous, i still think it would be neat if a less complex game took auroras idea of a discover as you explore approach to randomly generating systems (and even massive empires) into their game, you could end up having massive sprawling star trek sized empires, but there is still the chance that just the next anomaly over there is a dominion level empire you just haven't found yet

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 8
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 6:50:35 AM   
Canute

 

Posts: 603
Joined: 4/30/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

As I understand it, Elite Dangerous, intends to provide an entire galaxy's worth of stars (i.e. around 400 billion)

Do you know how much of dataspace you would need to create for this ? Let's say you just need 1 byte for 1 star, thats still 400 billion byte thats around 372 Giga Byte. That's to much data for a game.
99.9% of the galaxy are very uninteresting for the player, the Devs probaly pick serveral hotspot (Homeworlds,Colonies,Mining station/planets, other bases) for the game.


(in reply to adecoy95)
Post #: 9
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 1:57:13 PM   
Osito


Posts: 663
Joined: 5/9/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canute

quote:

As I understand it, Elite Dangerous, intends to provide an entire galaxy's worth of stars (i.e. around 400 billion)

Do you know how much of dataspace you would need to create for this ? Let's say you just need 1 byte for 1 star, thats still 400 billion byte thats around 372 Giga Byte. That's to much data for a game.
99.9% of the galaxy are very uninteresting for the player, the Devs probaly pick serveral hotspot (Homeworlds,Colonies,Mining station/planets, other bases) for the game.




Indeed, I do know that. But, as others have mentioned, they intend to do it with procedural generation, which will avoid the need to store the data of more than a core number of worlds. They say there will be around 400 billion star systems to visit (apart from certain zones of the galaxy which will be deliberately closed off), should anyone have the time on their hands to do it; a certain amount of reincarnation will probably also be necessary to do them all. Whether or not the developers can deliver on this galaxy size, I don't know. We'll see.

(in reply to Canute)
Post #: 10
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 3:15:02 PM   
CyclopsSlayer


Posts: 485
Joined: 2/11/2012
Status: offline
Even with procedural generation, you will still need a permanent record for every star once it has been visited.

Sure, you can seed a stars base data as a single compressed long byte, but once that seed is expanded you'll need to track who, what, where, how much etc...
A Database will choke over 10 Billion Records, much less 400 Billion.

(in reply to Osito)
Post #: 11
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 3:29:57 PM   
Osito


Posts: 663
Joined: 5/9/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CyclopsSlayer

Even with procedural generation, you will still need a permanent record for every star once it has been visited.

Sure, you can seed a stars base data as a single compressed long byte, but once that seed is expanded you'll need to track who, what, where, how much etc...
A Database will choke over 10 Billion Records, much less 400 Billion.


In principle I don't think you would necessarily need a permanent record for every star, but I'd certainly agree it would be better to have one for gameplay reasons. But, in reality, who is going to visit 10 billion star systems? I doubt many gamers would get beyond a few thousand. Even a few million should be "doable" in database terms.

They do plan on having multiplayer, though, and I'm not sure how many players might be in each game. Even then, I don't know whether the players could get beyond the database limits.

Anyway, I don't want to end up as some kind of Elite Dangerous Warrior. I was really just intending to report what the developers said they were hoping to achieve. I do have my doubts about whether they will achieve it. In fact, they originally said they planned a release date of March 2014 (which I thought ambitious) and they're now talking in terms of an extended beta somewhat beyond March 2014.

I do agree with Canute that 99.9% (probably more) of the galaxy would be uninteresting for most players, including me. But it's kind of nice to know it's there ...


(in reply to CyclopsSlayer)
Post #: 12
RE: Little OT, but interesting - 11/7/2013 11:50:50 PM   
CyclopsSlayer


Posts: 485
Joined: 2/11/2012
Status: offline
Well, personally in EVE I have visited over half the systems. A Jump Clone and a Stealth EWAR Cruiser took me many places I wasn't supposed to be, LOL.
True only like 5-6,000 personally out of like 10-12k total iirc.

The thing is if Elite:D was a single player game I would agree 100%, mostly uninteresting and they will be avoided. Problem is, say they get 100K players, and only 100 go Scout happy, how many stars can they add to the records, ... each, ... daily. And at launch you can be sure there will be a surge beyond belief as players each try to carve out their own personal/clan/guild space, every rock gets turned over and poked at.

(in reply to Osito)
Post #: 13
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> Little OT, but interesting Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.104