What did you do in Empyrion today?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Slam Jones, Oct 17, 2015.

  1. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,760
    Likes Received:
    5,966
    Unity is quite a b*tch...

    Tried installing the latest version, made a cool 3rd person controller and small test level, and then as it was nagging me each time I was starting the Unity Hub I finally yielded to the "new Hub update available - restart and install " death trap...

    The Hub v3.0 interface did not show me any of my projects, and just asked me to log in. I logged in, it opened my profile page on the Unity website, but still the same "please log in" screen in the Unity Hub, and no access to my projects. Started the editor directly without the HUB, then tried to access the store but "You need the Hub to access the store". Googled for a solution, found that I could use a version prior to 19.4 to access the store from the editor. Installed an older version, tried to connect : "You need the Hub..."

    I tried opening my last project in the old editor, it gave me a few warnings but opened it anyway. I tried fixing some broken scripts, and when I hit "rebuild" Unity opened like 25 versions of the Editor, and did the same with the Hub. Had to reboot. Launched the latest version of the Editor, tried to load my project : corrupted. F*ck Unity. Uninstalled everything, then reinstalled just the BlockModelsandHeadProps project version to see if my Empyrion prefabs were ok. No problem. Enough of Unity for now.

    Last night I spent 4 hours making a base game in Godot. Clicked on the bad icon (add script) and it just erased my code in the "main" and broke all links...

    F*ck Godot too...
    .
     
    #23801
    Peter Conway likes this.
  2. Peter Conway

    Peter Conway Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2022
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    69
    I feel for ya... been there but without talent to understand, but I can fury with the best of em!
     
    #23802
    Kassonnade likes this.
  3. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,760
    Likes Received:
    5,966
    Honestly, I think the "best of them" simply avoid working with garbage... ^^

    When I started my "learning" journey in "coding" I asked myself many questions : what do I want to do? What tools are there to achieve this? What do the "pros" think about these tools? And what is a "pro" to start with?

    This led me to deeper questions : what is a programming language, its components, its "mechanic" ? This lead me to also look at hardware related to "run the code" as far back as the first transistors, the first "logical circuits" and old "furniture" that made computers when this all started (heck, I even did some "assembly" tutorials).What's an address? A pointer? What is "casting"? And very often, the crucial "base" topics are just superficially addressed in "high level programming" so the newcomers can spit out some programs quickly else they will give up. They will then produce lots of redundant functions without even knowing it, because these are all hidden behind the language's "keywords" that are only, in reality, abstractions of the underlying C/C++ code below. Thus, some guy will learn cool Python/Mono/Lua-derived shortcuts, which will render code unreadable for someone not familiar with it, and in the end it achieves nothing more than the original version. It still requires an additional line of code in the compiler to translate that "new stuff" into the original, before processing it into machine language.

    Learning is easy, when the teaching is well done. It's all very simple, and what makes this complex is the fact that some people iterated through the "easy basics" in millions of ways, then made "new languages" each with a complete jargon/ syntax, with new strange rules and formats (indentation = big joke = sell more mouse because mousewheel abuse...). This abstraction tends to produce bloated code where threads get lost in unnecessary intricate routes and hierarchy to perform simple tasks. It sure looks "easier" for beginners, but when trying to make more complex applications where performance is crucial, that "ease of use" quickly vanishes, as well as the "performance"...

    There's a reason why big operating systems (and ... game engines!!) are all based on C/C++ although it's quite old : it allows far more control on what the code structure looks like, and how it will operate. Longer to write, but that's the only "con" I see up to now.
    .
     
    #23803
    Last edited: May 1, 2022
    Peter Conway likes this.
  4. Robot Shark

    Robot Shark Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,101
    Likes Received:
    5,841
    Playing through the storyline with the small CV today...

    20220501170832_1.jpg
     
    #23804
    Last edited: May 2, 2022
  5. Robot Shark

    Robot Shark Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,101
    Likes Received:
    5,841
    Today I decided to continue my experiment of removing the side hangar from some of my smaller builds while keeping the rest of the functionality. I think it turned out well but I am going to continue tweaking them.

    The originals are on the left, the revisions are on the right.

    20220502092305_1.jpg
     
    #23805
  6. Robot Shark

    Robot Shark Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,101
    Likes Received:
    5,841
    I was playing on the Arid starter and found something very convenient.

    The nightclub within jetpack distance from the distillery.

    20220509090120_1.jpg
     
    #23806
  7. Neal

    Neal Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    I stubled across an old Star Trek RPG Book i had laying around for decades and was immediately hooked.

    I just love the simple shapes and clean surfaces. Matt Jeffries designs are just amazing.
    Anyways i'm inspired to create some classic Star Trek ships from the timeline of these RPG/Strategy games (i hate current day Trek and i struggle to like Star Trek without being reminded of this crap you see everywhere these days :confused: ).

    Anyways:

    NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-16-53.png
    NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-16-53.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-22-51.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-23-03.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-30-19.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-30-27.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-30-33.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-30-43.png NewGame_0-220504-1839_2022-05-12_12-30-48.png
    I guess it got a little bit out hand, because the ship is almost 1:1 (it's 194 meters long :D ).

    I know it's completely against current trend of how to create a starship, but i don't care. These are the ships i love to build and i find them the most visually pleasing tbh.
     
    #23807
  8. Peter Conway

    Peter Conway Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2022
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    69
    Against the trend... pff, with the exception of 90% nobody cares, to quote the esteemed Cmdr William T Spock "the desires of the few outweigh the needs of the many"
    So yeah, make it so... the few can enjoy it and go where no MAN has gone before.
     
    #23808
    Neal and Kassonnade like this.
  9. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,760
    Likes Received:
    5,966
    Look at how different we, puny little humans, envision the "future" and "starships", and what most witnesses of genuine UFOs described. We tend to put zillion details, antennas, bumps and crevices and platings and whatnot, to make the ships look "complex". And the real life extra-terrestrials" (or our close neighbours we never noticed until now) on the contrary seem to favor simple shapes (saucers, triangles, tubes) with very few visible features, no flight control surfaces, no protuding antennas, no bolts and pipes : just an exterior "shell", and even the interior seems to be quite bland and devoid of superfluous details.

    When we compare an actual smartphone to an old classical home phone with the numbers dial, or even the more recent "push button" phones, we can see the real trend : the sophistication is not about the looks, but about the capabilities. Smartphones are just a basic rectangle, but sleek and shiny, with very few and discrete buttons.
     
    #23809
    Neal likes this.
  10. akimzav

    akimzav Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2021
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    54
    I humbly disagree. A lot of good-looking things in the past had very simple designs -- the dial phone you mentioned is literally a box with a dial, and a tube sitting on it. Yet, depending on the design, those phones looked sleek, minimalist, detailed, pompous, cheap, luxurious, modern, futuristic, robust, or simple.

    So I think there really is the "functionality" part, and the "decoration" part. The display, dial, wire jack, volume controls, thrusters, propellers, cannons, muzzle breaks, antennas, or covering all of that for better aerodynamics -- that is for functionality to decide. On the contrary, colors, fonts, checkering, rgb lights, glass inserts, casing curves, the placement of some parts -- these are the deco parts.

    Me -- I favor the looks of things that are so functional, that their capability and design ingenuity is obvious to even a uninformed person. Like rockets, or jet fighters, or battleships, or even huge industrial complexes, or supercomputers. There, the most beautiful aspect is that everything is for something. Nothing extra, nothing missing. Everything that has a place, has a purpose, and for every envisaged purpose, there is a part.

    I guess that makes me a minimalist, like @Neal. I fail to understand the mainstream design trend to overdetail the ships with blocks or design features that bear no purpose in context of the game.
     
    #23810
    Neal likes this.
  11. Neal

    Neal Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    100% agreed.

    Each to his own, but sometimes i think it's a shame that so many Workshop designs are buried under tons of Turrets and greebles that make it difficult to reckognize even a general shape. But on the other hand everyones taste is different of course.
    Don't get me wrong, i'm not completely against greebles, they 100% have their purpose when used in a strategical manner.
    What i'm trying to say is, that i guess that a lot of people forget when to stop adding details on their ships, or forget to zoom out now and then and look at their designs from various distances and angles.

    To me a few simple shapes arranged in the right way (it's not easy, don't get me wrong, i was struggeling with that for months*) can create 100 times superior designs (In my personaly opinion), than just building a box and slapping some antennas on it.
    Again, please don't get me wrong i'm not trying to degrade anyones creations or anyones personal taste, i'm just trying to explain where i'm coming from and what i try to archieve.
    In the end, everyone needs to find the kind of design to their own liking, of course.

    * I seriously look up to people who are able to come up with various differnt types of designs like Gun shaped battleships or modular Freighters for example.
    In the last three months i was trying to come up with a new design for a explorer type of Fraction, basically an in-game Starfleet (Diplomats and Explorers) faction, just for my own headcannon.
    I made literary HUNDREDS of different designs, avoiding the classic Saucer/Engineering/Nacelle formula, but it never really felt right, or it was too close to Star Trek or it looked really shitty. Eventually i came to the conclusion that it is completely pointless to reinvent the wheel, since the best designs (to me) have already been invented.

    Btw sorry for the ramble, i couldn't find the spoiler function.
     
    #23811
    akimzav and Germanicus like this.
  12. Germanicus

    Germanicus Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    5,881
    Likes Received:
    9,261
    @Neal
    Spoiler is to be found here ->
    unknown_2022.05.13-06.46 (2).png
     
    #23812
    Neal likes this.
  13. Neal

    Neal Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    2,945
    #23813
    Germanicus likes this.
  14. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,760
    Likes Received:
    5,966
    That was not my point to say old stuff looked bad.

    My point was : to match the functionality of a smartphone, an old dial or button phone would need to have a calculator, a camera, a tape recorder, a file cabinet and whatnot attached to it, and it would still not be "portable". Because we know what we know today and not the future, we extrapolate our present to a time where technology may have evolved so much that design ways of our present time are just irrelevant to that future.

    The tendency to put lots of greebles/ antennas/ turrets is like what was done with the Batmobile compared to regular cars of that time. Or like the cars in the Fallout series, that try to look like spacecrafts with obviously useless deco - well, "deco" is used for "deco" but that's not a "functionality" like brakes and engine...

    And honestly, even in Star Trek there were extrapolations from that time that didn't fully render into the future of the series : if the teleporter existed, why not simply "deconstruct" enemy ships in place with the teleporter, or just use the same precision and remote manipulation tech to just fry some parts of the opponent's computer? At that point, the whole idea of weapons is ridiculous.
     
    #23814
    Neal and akimzav like this.
  15. zertali

    zertali Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    After a significant hiatus from EGS, I decided to hop into Creative and update some of my older ships. Starting with one of my personal favorites, the X-11 Cargo Ship. Being substantially modified when compared to the original, this will be the Mk2 of the X-11 and uploaded as a new ship rather than updating the existing one on the workshop.

    Available Here: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2807698790

    upload_2022-5-13_17-16-40.png

    upload_2022-5-13_17-16-52.png

    upload_2022-5-13_17-19-11.png

    upload_2022-5-13_17-19-40.png

    upload_2022-5-13_17-18-29.png

    upload_2022-5-13_17-18-12.png
     
    #23815
  16. Germanicus

    Germanicus Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    5,881
    Likes Received:
    9,261

    Very pretty, but you may consider to remove those Deco Blocks over the Trusters one day if the 5 Block Rule ever goes live.
     
    #23816
  17. Robot Shark

    Robot Shark Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,101
    Likes Received:
    5,841
    Actually...

    20220513231523_1.jpg
     
    #23817
  18. Germanicus

    Germanicus Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2018
    Messages:
    5,881
    Likes Received:
    9,261
    AFAIK only ONE cover is accepted and thats not a Deco Block:NewWink:
     
    #23818
  19. Robot Shark

    Robot Shark Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2016
    Messages:
    2,101
    Likes Received:
    5,841
    That block surprised me as well when I noticed the text on it.
    Previously I thought it was just the two shutter window blocks.

    But, those two vents and the two non-airtight shutter window blocks all say that they will not obstruct thrusters in their description.

    I just wish the devs would add the Walkway Slope block the the list as it looks like a thruster could pass through it.
     
    #23819
    Peter Conway likes this.
  20. Fractalite

    Fractalite Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2016
    Messages:
    4,868
    Likes Received:
    9,724
    It is at this point that I would use glass:


    20220514203032_1.jpg

    but for this build I am not allowed.

    Still, it is fun.
     
    #23820
    Robot Shark likes this.

Share This Page