Did they happen to mention planets rotating? Planets orbiting their local star? Gravity effects? Coming to terms with the fact that spaceships aren’t submarines? There is no up and down in space?
So sure. Pretty picture. But it’s been 20 years. They can do much better.
Mr Epeen 
Planets are in fact rotating around their axis! And have been, for as long as I remember.
Orbits around stars and moons would be a big change for the gameplay. Bookmarks, would they be static to the sun, static relative to the closest celestial or would they orbit around the sun or celestial? And jump gates, what would their path be around the planets? Can structures anchored on the same grid aligned towards those gates still stay aligned?
I’d love to see such a change by the way, but I think it would be a lot of work.
I can live with that. We fly and fight in 3D space, solar systems have celestials and anomalies in 3D space, systems are above and below other systems on the ingame map. For all means we’re playing a 3D game in a 3D universe - the only thing that is strange is how our camera pretends there’s an up and down and how our ships and stations graphicall move so that the upside is also up on our cameras. It’s a bit weird indeed, but is for gameplay reasons: it would be really disorienting to fly around and a lot harder to coordinate directions with fleet members if there was no reference plane and no notion of up and down.
But again, I wouldn’t mind if CCP changed that as well.
It is considered as both an asteroid and technically a dwarf planet as the largest object in the asteroid belt making up nearly a third of its mass. Even so, it remains the smallest known dwarf planet at 950 km across, roughly the size of Texas. A day on Ceres lasts a little over 9 Earth-hours, while it takes 4.6 Earth-years to travel around the sun.
wait, so you’re saying that uranium can’t be made by smooshing other elements together? Are you aware of how elements denser than hydrogen are even made? hint; lots of smooshing.
The horror, the horrooooooooooooor… NOOOOOOOOOOOO the pain!!!
It may be cuz we need it to live… lol
2004 already! I didn’t know EVE had rotating planets pretty much from the start. Nice.
We had planetary flight in 2004 as well, or at least ccp showcased a video then.
That might be a good reason to call oxygen ‘noble’, but the name noble gas is already used for another set of gases which are known for their very low chemical reactivity: Noble gas - Wikipedia
Oxygen is known for a very high chemical reactivity (think how it creates rust) and is a good example of a gas that definitely is not noble.
PI has a few of these really weird incorrect production lines like this. Xuixien’s example of uranium is another one.
I was being sarcastic
Good post and facts about celestial structures. I think of the asteroid in question as more of a mound than a asteroid that has been designed by the locals for aesthetic purposes like a monument such as the Pyramids of Giza.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
