Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pardon my ignorance, but what are UVs?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV_mapping Though daredevildave may have meant environment mapping instead.
Thanks!
Spaceship Generator
121–130 of 132 posts
Re: Spaceship Generator
#122I love that the ships look more like "skyscrapers in space" then airplane like spaceships we usually see in tv shows/movies. This is most likely (according to multiple hard scifi authors) a much more realistic depiction of how spaceships are going to look like. Example given: The Expanse - "Flip and Burn" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4EiW1bHwsQ
To me, "skyscrapers in space" feels like an attempt to capture the majesty of World War I and II battleships. Which is to say, not much better justified than the aerodynamic spaceship. I don't see why a hard-SF spaceship really needs to be big when it would still be quite fragile (given the energy of an orbital-velocity collision).
That is, unless you design your future weapons and FTL drive principles so they really do reward "bigger is better" (I'm on to you, David Weber.)
Re: Spaceship Generator
#123Sadly it doesn't seem to generate UVs for the models. But using the cube projection in Blender seems to do an OK job. Add a skybox and a couple of simple particle effects in PlayCanvas. And we have some WebGL spaceships :-) https://playcanv.as/p/kZtPZpnH/
Genuine question - why are UVs always a huge issue? Isn't it trivial to generate a UV from the actual 3D model? Or do you mean that they just don't give you an image that actually fits the model?
Re: Spaceship Generator
#124Thing is, /r/proceduralgeneration is running a monthly challenge for exactly this right now but I haven't seen it listed as entry yet. Check out the previous entries, some of them are neat (others less so).
It's the top link on the challenge thread, isn't it?
Re: Spaceship Generator
#125Sadly it doesn't seem to generate UVs for the models. But using the cube projection in Blender seems to do an OK job. Add a skybox and a couple of simple particle effects in PlayCanvas. And we have some WebGL spaceships :-) https://playcanv.as/p/kZtPZpnH/
Genuine question - why are UVs always a huge issue? Isn't it trivial to generate a UV from the actual 3D model? Or do you mean that they just don't give you an image that actually fits the model?
It's trivial to generate "some" UVs. However, in this case there is a texture with a lighting pattern as part of the generator. Ideally the model would be unwrapped so that the correct areas of the texture correspond to the correct area of the model.
In the case of an artist working from scratch the skill is generating UVs that allow the artist to easily paint the texture and provide an even area for each part of the model. Otherwise some areas will be stretched and blurry.
Re: Spaceship Generator
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Demoscene is awesome but I see one off generation as a type of compression. What I have in mind is games where procedurally generated families of things are supposed to be interesting and worth exploring and discovering. I find those underwhelming.
The point of procedural generation is to have designs that are not designed by a designer so they can surprise us in unusual ways.
The point is to create lots of useful content, it doesn't have to be intended or not designed.
Procedural generation can be entirely predictable. Also, if it doesn't fit the eyes of the designer (who could also be the programmer) then the algorithm or parameters will be changed until they do. In that way, most procedurally-generated content is designed.
Re: Spaceship Generator
#127Very cute, although the ships look samish (would probably be interesting to start with different base templates etc. Still, it's only a few steps away from "random British 1970s SF book cover".
Do you have a link to the book cover generator? Or is that a metaphor?
Also reminds me of Peter Elson, though his designs are more curved. A few smoothing or relaxation passes might achieve something similar.
http://www.peterelson.co.uk/gallery/category.php?pageNum_pro...
Re: Spaceship Generator
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
See Mistake 6 at http://www.dedoimedo.com/physics/sci-fi-mistakes.html Mistake 7 also hints about the possible shape when there are no preferred orientations. Also interesting http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/a8140/what-... http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/11/24/spaceship_design/
Since you linked these pages, you and others also might find this interesting: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/misconceptions.... In my opinion Atomic Rocket contains the most accurate discussion of hard science fiction I've ever encountered.
I just spent the last 6 hours reading a fraction of the pages on that site. Thanks for the link!
Re: Spaceship Generator
#129I love that the ships look more like "skyscrapers in space" then airplane like spaceships we usually see in tv shows/movies. This is most likely (according to multiple hard scifi authors) a much more realistic depiction of how spaceships are going to look like. Example given: The Expanse - "Flip and Burn" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4EiW1bHwsQ
It'd be more realistic as well! As space is a vacuum we don't need to apply aerodynamics to the ships and they can be any which design!
You still have the problem that heat from the sun accumulates differently in each part of your ship causing stress on the hull.