why did PD map the stars?

  • Thread starter Thread starter stormbringer
  • 194 comments
  • 12,208 views
I really don't get all the complaints about the stars. It looks cool, and now that they've done it they never have to do it again.

And now that they've done it, they never have to do it again.

And now that they've done it, they never have to do it again?

:lol:
 
Last edited:
Last time I checked, none of the GT6 tracks are in Cornwall. That was my point. I'm not "jaded", I'm not "moaning", I'm just making an observation. It seems you're not allowed to do that here anymore if said observation is of a negative aspect in the game.
 
Why does anything remotely negative posted here get labeled as moaning?

"I hate the stars, they suck, they're not even realistic" = Moaning
"The stars aren't very realistic, here are some examples and reasons why" = An observation

I should have made it clear that I wasn't talking about you guys just in general. There just seemed to be an oddly large uproar over a fairly minor feature. I was actually thinking the other day that it was odd that you could see them even when there were lights on the track.
 
Last time I checked, none of the GT6 tracks are in Cornwall. That was my point. I'm not "jaded", I'm not "moaning", I'm just making an observation. It seems you're not allowed to do that here anymore if said observation is of a negative aspect in the game.

uuuuhhhh? What? Hi, Welcome to GTPlanet.
 
Priorities.

HrFDXlx.jpg
 
It most certainly is.

Like I said, you do not see amazing star constellations let alone distant planets with the naked eye in clear detail. Not with all that light pollution.

The real Daytona will NEVER look like this.

GT6-Astronomy-Trailer.jpg


daytona_night.jpg


Read up on light pollution - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution
PD added too many stars but the sky is never pitch black unless there are clouds covering the sky, if you go outside in real life you won't notice the stars sometimes unless you really pay attention.

In short the sky is never pitch black unless there are clouds covering the stars.
 
PD added too many stars but the sky is never pitch black unless there are clouds covering the sky, if you go outside in real life you won't notice the stars sometimes unless you really pay attention.

In short the sky is never pitch black unless there are clouds covering the stars.

There is a difference between never pitch black and Christmas tree. All Samus was saying is that they are way too bright. Look at the pictures he posted. Now stand in the Daytona infield with the floodlights on. You won't see anything in the sky.
 
To answer the OP's question of why, I say why not? Nobody seems to complain about stars and such on the GTAV forums, so what purpose do they serve while you're wreaking havoc on humanity?
 
It's a very simple thing to map the stars, all you need to do is find the pattern of when the stars appear, which I've found to be the night, and then photograph them.

What annoys many is the fact that PD is making such a fuss about having yet another type of skybox in the game. Since they blow it up it sounds like it distracted them from working on a course maker, better sounds, or whichever of the promised car related featuers they omitted.
 
I should have made it clear that I wasn't talking about you guys just in general. There just seemed to be an oddly large uproar over a fairly minor feature. I was actually thinking the other day that it was odd that you could see them even when there were lights on the track.

If core aspects of the game were fine, nobody would be giving this a second thought but it's very daring for Kaz to say stuff such as "we want to simulate accurately everything around a track, like the sky, and not just the cars themselves so here's a perfect sky" when everyone has been waiting for acceptable sounds for years. Even if they're completely unrelated things, it still feels like you're almost being made fun of.
 
This question wouldn't be asked if this game were completed I'll say that, but to the person that talked about GTA V well that game was completed has crap online, but it was a complete experience not something you'd have to wait until update X.xx to determine if it's going to be completed if ever.
 
Because it was easier to model the entire galaxy than to fix the sounds. :sly:

It looks great but as many of you said, it doesn't look real. Stars are not that visible to the naked eye.
 
Because it was easier to model the entire galaxy than to fix the sounds. :sly:

It looks great but as many of you said, it doesn't look real. Stars are not that visible to the naked eye.

I think if you're in a country/rural area with no bright lights they can be, but in bright cities or large venue's I'll say like Sporting events and such things like that you're right.
 
Well, they've got all the astronomical data they need now, yet there are still absolutely no stars at Twin Ring Motegi at night. (lots of grandstand lights though). The whole track feels really alien.
Anyway, I'm glad they didn't take realistic light pollution into account, as that would make the sky look extremely boring, like it does in most developed parts of the world :(
 
Really? I see lots of "stop complaining" and not much "stop being positive".
Well, not in those words, but any thread/news item with a positive slant seems to swiftly attract a number of that kind of comment. But I veer off topic.

I know I posted early on in this thread, but after almost four months I can say that I still get caught out when catching a glimpse of the starry sky through the windscreen. It engenders a sense of wonder in me similar to when I step outside at night for a smoke - it's a great sight.

I know that the sky is rarely that clear of light pollution in many of these locations, but hey, it sure cheers up a night drive and adds an extra livelyness to the trilight periods too.

All I'm saying is that after four months, I appreciate it more.
 
Because it was easier to model the entire galaxy than to fix the sounds. :sly:

It looks great but as many of you said, it doesn't look real. Stars are not that visible to the naked eye.
Be fair, the two are not comparable in terms of work required. And that isn't true when you say that stars aren't that visible to the eye. I live in a small, coastal town and I get to see the night sky as, if not more clearly on occasion. There are other places where it is far clearer still.

Take out light pollutuion and you'd see it as well - during the big power outages that happened in the US the Police got a number of calls from people 'concerned about all those weird lights in the sky.'
 
Take out light pollutuion and you'd see it as well - during the big power outages that happened in the US the Police got a number of calls from people 'concerned about all those weird lights in the sky.'

Alien invasion :eek:

And doing something precice does not always take a lot of effort. The picture below is a 3D model I made of Earth, it is extremely detailed but in fact it's just an icosphere onto which I placed a picture from NASA. Copy -> Paste -> Done. If I were to draw some random land masses myself it would have taken a lot more time (and it would have looked like crap).


65636_10151505728077423_1311426834_n.jpg
 

Latest Posts

Back