Astronomical mistakes in Starbound background graphics

Watching the latest Tiy's stream on youtube I noticed two mistakes in background graphics.

1. Stars are rotating in the sky, while planets are in place. Earth is rotating, that's why nightly sky appears to rotate. Planets that are not rotating along with the stars must have geostationary orbit. This moment on youtube.

2. Background planets lighting is independent from the Sun (the current star). If current star is the main light source in this star system, then all objects (including planets in the sky) must be lightened from the side of the star (and have shadow on the other side).
Also, during the night you can see other planes are lightened from "upper side". That contradicts the fact that the planet where you reside currently is not lightened from the same side (it's night!). This moment on youtube.

 

Don't forget the wildly misplaced clouds from the outer orbit view.

 

Well, it is a game so it doesn't have to be *completely* accurate, but that's just my opinion.

 

That there, is a moon actually. But yeah it should also rotate nonetheless.

 

You know, because seeing other planets from the surface is realistic (I'm not complaining about that feature, it fall firmly under rule of cool so I'm okay with it, it's just complaining about realism of something otherwise completely unrealistic...)

 

Actually its not too unrealistic, it would be possible to see a planet like that from the surface of the Earth if the planet was large or close enough.

I draw issue with it nonetheless, its pretty and all but I'm going to mod it out.

 

I think you should read up man That's like saying that seeing the moon from earth is unrealistic.

IN FACT, you can see some of the planets of our solar system with the naked eye at night.

A source if you don't believe me!

 

To be fair you can't see them with any real detail.

 

No but that's just because they're so far away and yada yada, so exactly as you said; if they're the right size and close enough it wouldn't be unrealistic to see them.

EDIT: Also here's a good example of what Kuroda and I are talking about: http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...her-planets-were-as-close-as-the-moon/277247/

(In this case the planets are replaced with our moon. But it's only logical that if, say Jupiter were 3 times the size it would be 3 times bigger on the night sky.

 

I concede the point here, gentlemen. It is true that planets this close would be visible to naked eye with detail. My point more referred to the way they are visible in Starbound (which should be a rare occurence at best), but it is my own fault for phrasing it the way I did.

 

I do completely agree with you, and like I said, while pretty, it isn't a feature of the background that I wanna keep in the game (modding hurray), especially now that I've had some inconsistencies pointed out to me.

 

That's true, but at the same time I'm not sure if that would really be possible either. Meaning, those planets have a lot stronger gravitational pull than the moon would. If they were actually that close together wouldn't they be crashing into each other and such?

Also, I should add that by that scale, many of the planets in Starbound take on a Jupiter-sized space in the sky. >_>

 

I think its the kind of feature that needs to be reworked such that it only really appears on Moons. So you can only see the planet you're orbiting.

 

This is not an attack or stab at the OP, I like that people are bringing some scientific principal to the game.

Now that we have that out of the way, It really doesn't bother me either way. If it changes cool, if not, cool.

 

Perhaps a nice toggle would satisfy both sides of the argument:
-Realistic skies -> You only see the celestial bodies you are orbiting
-Cool skies -> You see every celestial body in the system.

 

I don't think the Starbound Universe has the exact same physics as ours so I can let stuff like this slide

 

Nobody is really arguing against the feature We were merely discussing the realism of it

 

1. The camera is centred on the ship which is orbiting the planet. The planet is merely moving on its journey around that solar systems star. As such it looks like it is the stars that are moving, when in actuality if you made the camera stationary you would see the ship and planet slide out of view whilst the stars remain in the same place.

2. The lighting.. yes fair enough.

 

is a game,not a space simulator (try Kerbal Space Program if you want that one ).
complain for things like this dont make any sense (for me),maybe in the universe of starbound 2 plus 2 is equal 5,and things like this can happen.

i like to imagine it is so,like a fantasy sci-fi.

''captain,we're under attack!! is a dragon''
''but we are in space!! ''
''yes captain...is normal here (i always forget that the captain come from another dimension ''.

 

Physical laws can be different from our's, but they have to be consistent. I have noticed these two mistakes because they looked very weird for me. For example, when you place a light source in a game, you expect it to lighten the room where you currently are. If occasionally the room appears to be lightened from outside, it can be definitely considered as a bug. So how can the lighting behave differently in this case and the case with planet's lighting?

I agree with the point that states that this is a minor issue and in basically it's ok if it would not be fixed in the game. But things like this strike the eye and create the impression of crudity.