Concerns with traveling in space

[Signals]

I am concerned that there will be no actual space travel. There will be the Grav drive to jump from system to system, but, there will be only the Grav drive to travel from planet to planet. No real space travel within a system. When you are in space, you will always be orbiting a planet or moon. Only 'fast travel' in a system. It would be like landing on a large planet and not being able to walk around. You could only fast travel from POI to POI. The immersion of the vastness of space will be lost and replaced with cut scenes of Grav travel. I understand that thrusters are used in orbit movement and too slow for fast system movement and there isn't a 3rd way of travel (that we know about). I hope I am wrong. Haven't seen any system movement in the video's. Someone easy my concerns and tell me I am wrong.

[Ruin]

Originally posted by Mowglia:

Originally posted by Ruin:

You are trolling... Because including this quote is an appeal to authority, and trying to raise it to the scale of the galaxy is hyperbolic and facetious...

If you're gonna raise to the level of orbiting the galaxy, then you're intentionally being a smartarse, and not actually having a legitimate exchange...

You know as well as I, when people talk about "breaking orbit" they are talking about breaking the effects of a planet's gravitational pull, though I would concede the effects of the system's sun too would be something to consider, though it's not as immediately apparent...

Again, a ship with an adequate source of propulsion and energy, that is capable of travelling in a straight line, has already broken orbit from the sun, so it's a moot point...

But raising it to the scale of orbiting the galaxy is just being facetious, solely for the purpose of wanting to be right, because you know damn'd well we weren't talking on that scale...

Wow dude, talk about denial.

A spacecraft is always in orbit around something. It's a fact. Look it up. Research it.

How is raising it to the scale of the galaxy hyperbolic and facetious? You realise gravity doesn't just stop 100AU from the Sun...?! What an utterly bizarre thing to say.

For our purposes, there are no "straight lines" in space. A spacecraft is always effectively following a curved path around something. No ship is capable of travelling in a "straight line". Not now. Not ever.

It's not a question of wanting to be right so much as simply being right and pointing out the facts. We call this physics. It comes in handy when trying to describe how things work :D

In my defence, I did specify right at the start that most people did find this basic concept very difficult to grasp. For whatever reason, they take exception to it. Star Trek probably has no idea of the damage it's done to public education, lol.

Well if you'll excuse me I'm off to notify NASA that they're all trolls, and then hook up with gravity to let it know that it's been doing it all wrong. Bad gravity! You wanna pray that gravity doesn't listen, because if it does then this galaxy is gonna fly apart at the seams (given all the stars orbit the centre)...

But that's ok, I guess. Because some of these silly little humans, on a tiny little backwater planet they call Earth, really like their straight lines. Orbital motion triggers them. They don't need no gravity because it's hyperbolic and facetious, lol.

And besides, Cpt Kirk has got this. Now HIT IT SCOTTY :p

Yeah, ok dude... Just ignore what I was saying about having sufficient power to overcome the need for curved trajectories, but sure, I'm just in denial... *facepalm*

I should have known better when you literally opened up with your claim you weren't trolling, because that should have been a huge red flag...

So, yeah, I'm done... Not in the mood for smartarse ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ right now...

[Mowglia]

Originally posted by Ruin:

From what I've seen of planets, they are effectively a ball, that you could walk around forever if you want...

That remains to be seen; it's currently a subject of debate.

Originally posted by Ruin:

This, IMO, is the better move because it would otherwise require solar systems to be shrunk down to ridiculously compact, thus unrealistic and "non-immersive" scales, in order to make intersolar travel an enjoyable experience for players, and not simply a case of them sitting there floating in blackness for hours, if not days on end...

No it doesn't; it doesn't have to be shrunk down to the "ridiculously compact" at all. You just need very fast acceleration, a bit like Elite's frameshift, but faster. And before you start shrieking about how we'd be moving faster than the speed of light, let me remind you that current travel in Starfield is already "faster than light". They already went there. So if they're gonna go there for one aspect of space travel, then why not another?

Originally posted by Ruin:

Originally posted by Mowglia:

It's very difficult to quantify this, or even explain it to some gamers. They just don't get it. Yet it makes a huge difference, and many players would want this (myself included).

And sometimes people like you just don't get the other point of view... I understand fully what you're saying... I do...

Yeah, I get it: assuming you mean by "the other point of view" that you just want fast travel between locations "of importance", I get that. It affects immersion though, and like the guy said, it destroys "the magic of the open world". That's not helpful in a game like Starfield, which revolves around exploration and discovery.

Of course sometimes you can have the best of both worlds. Take Skyrim for example, where you could walk or ride to a location, or you could fast travel.

The problem is if you eliminate the "areas in between", then you don't get the best of both worlds. You're simply left with fast travelling between nodes "of importance", which kills immersion.

Originally posted by Ruin:

What you don't understand is that the people calling for this don't actually want a realistic representation of space, they want a shrunken, warped, contracted version, that allows them to fly between planets in minutes, on trips that should take days, weeks, if not months to make under traditional propulsion methods....

Except I do understand this, and that's exactly what we want. If you're looking for realism using traditional propulsion methods, then I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place, lol. That went straight out the window when BGS decided to "fold space" to travel great distances.

Thus, unfortunately, we didn't get what we want. It appears that interplanetary space travel in Starfield is effectively instantaneous.

Originally posted by Ruin:

I don't like how NMS's solar systems feel so small and crowded... It's unrealistic, and thus, breaks my immersion... *shrug*

Same here.

It would have been better to increase the distance between planets so it didn't feel so silly, and then increase the speed you could travel between them so the relative travel times are the same. Then everyone is happy?

Personally, I like the scale Dyson Sphere Program operates at. It feels big enough to be immersive, yet not so small as to completely break immersion.

[Mowglia]

Originally posted by Ruin:

Yeah, ok dude... Just ignore what I was saying about having sufficient power to overcome the need for curved trajectories, but sure, I'm just in denial... *facepalm*

I didn't ignore what you were saying about having sufficient power to overcome the "need" (lol) for curved trajectories; I was simply explaining why this is, in fact, impossible :)

[Mowglia]

Originally posted by kbranst:

Originally posted by Mowglia:

Wow dude, talk about denial.

He's not in denial, he just doesn't think pedantry is relevant and that his point was obvious.

And what point would that be? Perhaps you'd like to explain his "obvious" point? You mean the "obvious" point that spacecraft travel in straight lines in space? :D

I'll be sure to notify NASA that they're not only facetious, hyperbolic trolls, but pedants too.

Of course they're gonna respond with something along the lines of "This is physics lad, suck it up", whereupon I'm just gonna refer them to the pair of you. But if you'd be so kind, please video that conversation and post it on YouTube - I really wanna see it.

Fair dues guys, this has been comedy gold. I never thought I'd see conventionally accepted physics, that humanity uses every day, referred to as facetious, hyperbolic, and pedantic trolling. The pair of you ought to consider going into stand-up, you're wasted on Steam forums.

For posterity, in case anyone was wondering where flat-Earthers come from, or how they could possibly still exist, I'm afraid now you've got your answer, lol.

God help us all. And especially the astronauts.

[Mowglia]

Originally posted by Humble:

Originally posted by Mowglia:

In other words, if you left the Sun to travel to a nearby star, and you really did travel in a "straight line", then you'd miss that star. And be lost in space. Forever =:)

Not forever, I'm sure some point other star incoming toward, but not same star you want to go there, but unless it's possible same star come again in same path, but that would take long, long, long time, better off chase that star than wait for star coming in same place next time. In anycase, I think teleport superpower is better than travel, save lot of time and no need to travel here and there.

Took me a while to decode that, but yeah, you're right. Not forever :)

[Mowglia]

Originally posted by Zunnoab #931:

Originally posted by Ruin:

You are trolling... Because including this quote is an appeal to authority, and trying to raise it to the scale of the galaxy is hyperbolic and facetious...

It's not an appeal to authority it's an appeal to reality.

Thrusting in a straight direction would not result in going in a straight path. It would result in a path determined by the gravity of everything else in the system, and yes at any given time you're still in orbit of something. Saying if your velocity is enough to break out of orbit of a star that you are then orbiting Sagittarius A* (the black hole at the center of the galaxy) isn't being facetious it's accurate.

At such distances the grav drive is likely used in Starfield anyway, but that doesn't charge the fact the "always orbiting something" statement is true. There is no straight line. If you tried that you wouldn't reach your intended destination. You have to account for the orbits and gravity of everything else in the system.

You can't explain this to them using logic, believe me, I tried.

It's nice to know that someone else actually gets it though.

I can't help but wonder why some people have such a hard time understanding this. Is it really because they don't understand rudimentary orbital mechanics? Or does reality horrify them them to such an extent that their only response is denial? Or did Star Trek just ♥♥♥♥ them up beyond repair?

After all, just a few minutes searching online would start to yield enough information that they'd have no rational choice but to accept that this is simply the way things work.

I don't get it, lol.

For a while back there I considered telling them there are only "straight lines" in space, and the only reason they appear "bent" is because gravity (mass) is warping spacetime, but now I just don't dare complicate the issue. They've clearly got enough to think about already.

[Roaming Zombie]

I don't care about the original question but I stand behind Mowglia. He is 100% correct in what he says and also has the most informative and insightful post I have ever seen in this forum. While you could go in a straight line, it is simply something you want to do because then you are fighting against gravity instead of using it.

In space everything goes, round and round and round... You try walking a straight line on a merry go round. Good luck with that.

[Crow]

Originally posted by Al Abaster:

I hope I can skip it.

Me too, if "space gameplay" is about arcade shooting at pirates in orbit, then I'd like to be able to skip that aspect of the game altogether and just teleport from A to B. I want real space travel or not at all.

[supergoyo77]

Originally posted by Crow:

Originally posted by Al Abaster:

I hope I can skip it.

Me too, if "space gameplay" is about arcade shooting at pirates in orbit, then I'd like to be able to skip that aspect of the game altogether and just teleport from A to B. I want real space travel or not at all.

And what is a real space travel? Has any man ever taken a real space trip other than to the moon?
Nobody knows what a real space trip is except in the imagination of filmmakers to take it to the movies, and as the companion says, space does not have straight lines, almost everything, if not everything, is round and goes around.
​

[Daedrius]

How long do you really want to watch space travel? Looks nice, but not very exciting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk65Xj2y2tM

[Crow]

Originally posted by supergoyo77:

And what is a real space travel? Has any man ever taken a real space trip other than to the moon?
Nobody knows what a real space trip is except in the imagination of filmmakers to take it to the movies, and as the companion says, space does not have straight lines, almost everything, if not everything, is round and goes around.
​

I find Elite, NMS and SC space travel to be real enough, mainly because they don't have "obvious" loading screens (technically they do, but they are hidden well enough not to break the immersion), unlike Starfield. If that's good enough for someone, that's fine, but I'd rather skip it altogether and hope it's possible.

[supergoyo77]

Originally posted by Crow:

Originally posted by supergoyo77:

And what is a real space travel? Has any man ever taken a real space trip other than to the moon?
Nobody knows what a real space trip is except in the imagination of filmmakers to take it to the movies, and as the companion says, space does not have straight lines, almost everything, if not everything, is round and goes around.
​

I find Elite, NMS and SC space travel to be real enough, mainly because they don't have "obvious" loading screens (technically they do, but they are hidden well enough not to break the immersion), unlike Starfield. If that's good enough for someone, that's fine, but I'd rather skip it altogether and hope it's possible.

You find it real but that doesn't mean it's real, at most you can travel in a straight line from one planet to another that is "close" that's what I think because in our life cycle we will never know.

[Zunnoab #931]

Originally posted by supergoyo77:

Originally posted by Crow:

I find Elite, NMS and SC space travel to be real enough, mainly because they don't have "obvious" loading screens (technically they do, but they are hidden well enough not to break the immersion), unlike Starfield. If that's good enough for someone, that's fine, but I'd rather skip it altogether and hope it's possible.

You find it real but that doesn't mean it's real, at most you can travel in a straight line from one planet to another that is "close" that's what I think because in our life cycle we will never know.

The thing is planets aren't that close to each other. The "move in a 'straight' line quickly means you aren't orbiting" mentality is so incredibly detached from reality it would mean outright missing the intended destination.

Originally posted by Humble:

Originally posted by Mowglia:

I missed this bit. Define "not as immediately apparent"...

You realise we're actually in orbit around the Sun? Like, right now? Because the Earth is orbiting the Sun, and we're standing on the Earth.

Let me put this a different way (it might help): you can't ever escape a planet's gravitational pull. Jupiter is exerting a gravitational pull on us right now, for example. We can't escape this. We can't "break" this. And that gravitational pull is affecting our motion.

What you're talking about when you say "breaking the effects of a planet's gravitational pull", is merely transferring your orbital motion from one body to another, that has greater relative influence.

In other words, if you left the Sun to travel to a nearby star, and you really did travel in a "straight line", then you'd miss that star. And be lost in space. Forever =:)

Not forever, I'm sure some point other star incoming toward, but not same star you want to go there, but unless it's possible same star come again in same path, but that would take long, long, long time, better off chase that star than wait for star coming in same place next time. In anycase, I think teleport superpower is better than travel, save lot of time and no need to travel here and there.

I wouldn't bet on that. Space is extremely big. Like almost incomprehensibly big. If going fast enough you might end up in orbit around the center of the galaxy with your path influenced by other stars of course but never actually going "near" them in human terms.

No the planets aren't in a straight line but this is a good attempt at showing just how big space is. This is just the solar system and has nothing on the distance between stars:
https://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html

People expecting "exciting" space travel need to scroll through that all the way to understand how nonsensical that is.

Also that pixel map I linked? That icon on the bottom right auto-scrolls at light speed. People who want to fly between planets manually really need to click that and understand how nonsensical it is to expect anything interesting on the journey.

[lnomsim]

There are very few games with direct planet-to-planet flight.
And there is a reason for it.
It would take a lot of time.

KSP has a time warp module, and even with it, traveling between two planets can be quite long.

ED has an FTL engine, and even with it, going from one planet to another can sometimes take hours (most of the time, dozen of minutes)

SC has also an FTL engine, moving between moons is quite fast, but moving between planets takes an average of 10 to 15 minutes if you have a good ship, it can be longer though.

I'm all for immersion and all, but I don't play games to stare at empty space 99% of the time.
We will have enough time to get bored while exploring planets on foot.

[Mowglia]

Originally posted by Zunnoab #931:

This is just the solar system and has nothing on the distance between stars:
https://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html

Holy cow, that's such a great link. I love the little messages that come up :D

Like "here's the first planet": uh...where? Where? WHERE? Oh there it is, so small I can hardly even see it on a huge screen, lol. This really helps put things into perspective.

I got as far as Mercury and had to bail. But I'm coming back for more :p