Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 11. December 2016, 23:17:26 »some mods (SCP, for example) use a different set of space textures on the station map - those will not get updated.
Posted by: Adamski
« on: 11. December 2016, 23:07:57 »Hey I'm having slight trouble with this mod.
When on Chesabeake Bay Station the mod doesnt seem to be woring and I don't know why. I've seen people have a view of the earth but all I get are the original space textures. Its not a huge issue as it works fine once on the the von braun. I'm more just wondering why it's not working
When on Chesabeake Bay Station the mod doesnt seem to be woring and I don't know why. I've seen people have a view of the earth but all I get are the original space textures. Its not a huge issue as it works fine once on the the von braun. I'm more just wondering why it's not working
Posted by: Jackson Richie
« on: 05. September 2016, 21:19:45 »I'm not sure if this mod will work on Windows 10. If anyone has their machine running windows 10 with this mod, please let me know in the comments if it's working for you and how to install it step by step.
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 19. October 2014, 08:42:42 »it needs more priority than SHTUP, which also contains a set of space textures. in your case, maximum.
as for the priority, just remember the prison rule - who is on top, is the boss.
as for the priority, just remember the prison rule - who is on top, is the boss.
Posted by: remyabel
« on: 18. October 2014, 23:34:40 »give it max priority.
Thanks. Can you explain why it needs max priority?
Edit: OK, after a while it occurred to me that my mod load order is in fact backwards, and this priority thing is still confusing me.
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 18. October 2014, 22:22:55 »give it max priority.
Posted by: remyabel
« on: 18. October 2014, 22:08:52 »I can't seem to get this mod to work. Fresh install with SSTool 5.1, I've tried this with ADaOB on and off. Other mods work fine, and I remember this working in the past, so I have no idea what I did wrong. I've attached what it looks like and the load order. As a side note, I've been trying to get the Earth textures to work as well. The only combination that seems to work is STATION.MIS with the space png + earth download (it displays the hi-res earth, but not the Vurt's hi res space pictures). The space png + earth download doesn't seem to work with ADaOB.
[low_res.png expired]
[load_order.png expired]
[low_res.png expired]
[load_order.png expired]
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 04. August 2013, 19:31:50 »I wouldn't worry too much about it.
And I definitely wouldn't say "I will stop posting" in vain when ZB is around. Because he will remind you. haha
And I definitely wouldn't say "I will stop posting" in vain when ZB is around. Because he will remind you. haha
Posted by: Join2
« on: 04. August 2013, 16:58:34 »I will stop posting. I'll be back when I am truly ready for intelligent discussion, or when I start development of SCP: Rain Man edition 
It appears I cannot read posts properly without my brain failing me. And no, I didn't misinterpret that particular phrase, I misinterpreted the whole fucking post
Whilst I may fail at the simple task of reading, it seems, that doesn't mean I am not a very good "design perfectionist". Try my mod if you havent lost all confidence in me....I wouldn't blame you if so. Sure, it's just common human error really, but that's the third time now, right?
Fucking facepalm.
It appears I cannot read posts properly without my brain failing me. And no, I didn't misinterpret that particular phrase, I misinterpreted the whole fucking post
Whilst I may fail at the simple task of reading, it seems, that doesn't mean I am not a very good "design perfectionist". Try my mod if you havent lost all confidence in me....I wouldn't blame you if so. Sure, it's just common human error really, but that's the third time now, right?
Fucking facepalm.
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 04. August 2013, 11:34:31 »You may be misinterpreting the phrase "realistically depict". ZB is talking about believable movie props there. You're talking about scientific accurateness.
Posted by: Join2
« on: 04. August 2013, 10:26:50 »You're taking this out of context. I was simply saying an astronomer could and did give accurate depictions.
You say this as if Sci-Fi gave the accurate depictions way back when, not the astronomers.
The reason those movies did space as nothing more than twinkling lights on a black sheet is because that's all they had the means to realistically depict while moving spaceship models around in front of it. Technology has finally caught up with what the covers of scifi novels have been showing for decades.
You say this as if Sci-Fi gave the accurate depictions way back when, not the astronomers.
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 04. August 2013, 02:20:28 »Oh, that must be why artists ceased to exist when photography was invented. How silly of me to have not realized that until just now when you pointed out that there's no reason for them to exist.
Posted by: Join2
« on: 04. August 2013, 02:09:36 »Well, the people who dedicated their life with their telescope aimed at the sky/space and religiously studying the subject could have given a fairly accurate depiction, no? Especially when that knowledge is accumulated through documentation.
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 04. August 2013, 01:22:36 »What about them.
Posted by: Join2
« on: 04. August 2013, 00:22:18 »The reason those movies did space as nothing more than twinkling lights on a black sheet is because that's all they had the means to realistically depict while moving spaceship models around in front of it. Technology has finally caught up with what the covers of scifi novels have been showing for decades.
Huh, what about the
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 03. August 2013, 20:36:03 »Restrictions spurn creativity though. In the old practical effects days you had to spend a lot of time and devotion on creating believable space that made the audience go "Whoaa! How did they do that?!". See for example near the end of this page, how the textures on the planets in Alien were created. Now any effect is possible and none leaves an impression anymore.
Freeing artists of their restrictions is the fastest way to get a load of crap. Therefore I demand that vurt repaints each
space texture in oil on canvas. And it should be the only way to pay for medicine for his ill mother. Also his roof should be leaking and he'll have to get by on coffee, cigarettes and absinthe. It's the only way to get real art in here, 'fraid pal.
Freeing artists of their restrictions is the fastest way to get a load of crap. Therefore I demand that vurt repaints each
space texture in oil on canvas. And it should be the only way to pay for medicine for his ill mother. Also his roof should be leaking and he'll have to get by on coffee, cigarettes and absinthe. It's the only way to get real art in here, 'fraid pal.
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 03. August 2013, 19:03:55 »The reason those movies did space as nothing more than twinkling lights on a black sheet is because that's all they had the means to realistically depict while moving spaceship models around in front of it. Technology has finally caught up with what the covers of scifi novels have been showing for decades.
Posted by: Silver83
« on: 03. August 2013, 18:08:31 »Great every time!
Regarding "nowadays". Just compare old space movies like Alien, 2001, 2012, Star Wars IV-VI, Silent Running or old games like X-Wing, the first Wing Commanders with modern interpretations. I miss this cold, empty and "boring" style. (Yes, I know there are parts of our universe where there there's more going on but I hope you know what I mean)
Regarding "nowadays". Just compare old space movies like Alien, 2001, 2012, Star Wars IV-VI, Silent Running or old games like X-Wing, the first Wing Commanders with modern interpretations. I miss this cold, empty and "boring" style. (Yes, I know there are parts of our universe where there there's more going on but I hope you know what I mean)
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 02. August 2013, 21:24:05 »Look at this for 30 sec then look at Van Gogh's "Starry Night" above
[starrynightlife.gif expired]
[starrynightlife.gif expired]
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 02. August 2013, 18:25:52 »it actually does look quite interesting, but not in the light spectrum the naked eye is able to capture.
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 02. August 2013, 17:36:43 »Nowadays?Why does everybody think nowadays that space has to look interesting. Nebulars, pulsars, colors....
Posted by: Silver83
« on: 02. August 2013, 17:31:58 »Why does everybody think nowadays that space has to look interesting. Nebulars, pulsars, colors....
Imo the black, endless space with a few white spots is far more frightening than our typical nebular of the week. Think of Alien (the first one). In space no one can hear you scream...perfect sentence for a black, cold and unfriendly place. Just my opinion though.
Imo the black, endless space with a few white spots is far more frightening than our typical nebular of the week. Think of Alien (the first one). In space no one can hear you scream...perfect sentence for a black, cold and unfriendly place. Just my opinion though.
Posted by: Join2
« on: 02. August 2013, 11:55:01 »Before the big vein in my head bursts, let me say that if you want something pretty that's fine but if you want authentic, you can't just pick some random shit from NASA and put it in the game. Space from Tau Ceti, as I've explicitly illustrated earlier in this thread, is not THAT spectacular. No bursting nebulae or pulsars or asteroid fields dancing around like collossal chocolate chips. It looks exactly the same as every clear night on Earth from a rural location.
Well obviously it would be specific shit from NASA, not random....
Posted by: RocketMan
« on: 02. August 2013, 00:32:12 »Before the big vein in my head bursts, let me say that if you want something pretty that's fine but if you want authentic, you can't just pick some random shit from NASA and put it in the game. Space from Tau Ceti, as I've explicitly illustrated earlier in this thread, is not THAT spectacular. No bursting nebulae or pulsars or asteroid fields dancing around like collossal chocolate chips. It looks exactly the same as every clear night on Earth from a rural location. Sometimes subtlety carries with it a certain beauty.
Posted by: Join2
« on: 31. July 2013, 20:22:05 »you know what I would like to see at the station map? an authentic, fully dynamic space with blinking stars and everything, plus earth that would fully rotate after 24 ingame hours.
crazy? well, it's not like I have any real plans for the next 50 years or so..
You have my full support....textually
Seriously though, some borrowed NASA images would satisfy me perfectly.
I also oppose a fantastical style. Give me cold realism in this case. Easier and more believable.
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 31. July 2013, 17:27:23 »I believe a neutron pulsar would blink even when viewed from outer space. anyway, it's a nice effect, together with small nebulas slowly spinning etc - remember, we are talking about a "movie style" space, all pretty and carrying sounds. silent, frozen and empty darkness may be realistic, but most people are not looking for that when opening a game - if you want to see a gray, shitty reality, all you have to do is look out the window.
we also need to generate the resources, and that will be tough.
we also need to generate the resources, and that will be tough.
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 31. July 2013, 16:40:46 »Stars in space don't blink. That's an artifact of atmospheric distortion.
The rotating Earth we can do though. Just need an animated skybox with 99 frames and a really low frame rate.
The rotating Earth we can do though. Just need an animated skybox with 99 frames and a really low frame rate.
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 31. July 2013, 15:19:11 »you know what I would like to see at the station map? an authentic, fully dynamic space with blinking stars and everything, plus earth that would fully rotate after 24 ingame hours.
crazy? well, it's not like I have any real plans for the next 50 years or so..
crazy? well, it's not like I have any real plans for the next 50 years or so..
Posted by: Join2
« on: 31. July 2013, 13:58:29 »
Real space textures!
Would be great if they varied also, two or three. Example: first half of the game is a normal anomaly-free space, just stars or whatever, which can also be used for the space station at the beginning of the game along with the earth tex. Later on the Von Braun/Rickenbacker ends up in Vurt's current nebula texture or something different borrowed off of NASA.
I've requested this before I think, but it would be great.
Posted by: Kolya
« on: 31. July 2013, 11:22:02 »Yes, there is something like copyright, but NASA specifically disclaims it. They're good people, these spacefarers.
NASA still images; audio files; video; and computer files used in the rendition of 3-dimensional models, such as texture maps and polygon data in any format, generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video, audio, and data files used for the rendition of 3-dimensional models for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits, computer graphical simulations and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.
Posted by: vurt
« on: 31. July 2013, 04:04:17 »You can't just take someones photos and turn them into textures and then spread it, there's something called "copyright". The textures were made in a program called Spacescape.
However, if i ever go to space i will bring my Canon 500D with me, i promise
However, if i ever go to space i will bring my Canon 500D with me, i promise
Posted by: someone
« on: 31. July 2013, 01:40:58 »what about source material? is it photoshop or is it Real space shots from NASA ?
if its not real, can you do it too plz?
if its not real, can you do it too plz?
Posted by: akumaKAERU
« on: 22. March 2013, 02:37:42 »Sorry Marvin. I probably did not explain myself properly and have not provided a screenshot (which I intend to do now that I know how to take them ingame).
It is possible that I'm using an older computer with an older Intel graphics chip and the game is not rendering as clearly as it should. I was assuming that I had to replace the "glass" texture used in the windows to see more clearly.
It is possible that I'm using an older computer with an older Intel graphics chip and the game is not rendering as clearly as it should. I was assuming that I had to replace the "glass" texture used in the windows to see more clearly.
Posted by: Marvin
« on: 21. March 2013, 08:04:15 »All windows have a blueish tint. DDS is not some magical file format, you know, just open it with IrfanView (for example).
Posted by: akumaKAERU
« on: 21. March 2013, 06:56:02 »Great space Vurt!
What glass texture do I need to use to see them clearly ingame? When I use the mod I can see the space but it's heavily obscured by the glass...
What glass texture do I need to use to see them clearly ingame? When I use the mod I can see the space but it's heavily obscured by the glass...
Posted by: carlos
« on: 24. February 2013, 07:34:23 »It works, thanks a lot, you reply very fast, thank again for help a noob player...
PD: Space looks cool now. Nice work
PD: Space looks cool now. Nice work
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 24. February 2013, 01:10:52 »run the ss2tool, and patch your game with it. extract the the space textures archive into the DataPermMods folder. done.
Posted by: carlos
« on: 24. February 2013, 01:03:40 »i dont speak english, and i dont understand it so much. but i need help, Wich programs do i need to run this space mod?, i just have sstools and the game System shock 2. how can i install this mod?
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 09. January 2013, 21:35:43 »is it only me, or do some stars and other objects (in the dds version) look a bit sharper (sort of cardboard cutout look) than they really should be? hmm, might be just the old x1950 not supporting some smoothing feature, will investigate.
//ok, so it definitely looks a bit off on the x1950. will try some more modern card and see whether it goes away.
//nope, looks the same on dx10+ class hw as well.
//ok, so it definitely looks a bit off on the x1950. will try some more modern card and see whether it goes away.
//nope, looks the same on dx10+ class hw as well.
Posted by: RocketMan
« on: 28. September 2012, 23:48:33 »That's one hell of an image...
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 28. September 2012, 08:51:46 »in case those textures will be used to make a "realistic" tau ceti hires space (would be awesome, btw), the same thing could be done for the earth space on station.mis - uploading and linking the earth image I've used before I lose it (again).
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6HbtMBk0pYzM0lpaTZpeXFWZ0k (hires, 16MB 7zipped)
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6HbtMBk0pYzM0lpaTZpeXFWZ0k (hires, 16MB 7zipped)
Posted by: krist2
« on: 28. September 2012, 08:19:37 »thanks alot for the update 
Posted by: vurt
« on: 28. September 2012, 07:32:55 »Nice, i'll take a look
Posted by: RocketMan
« on: 28. September 2012, 04:17:29 »A little late but here are some screens I took for you. The software isn't set up properly to take skybox shots... it uses a cylindrical camera system, so I had one bitch of a time figuring out the view angles from altitude and azimuth to 90 degree spherical rots. The angles are not perfect and the seams are not perfect but give or take about 10%, these are the "actual" real views from Tau Ceti. This is EXACTLY what you would see if you were there. There's a bit of a "fish eye" effect going on so although the images are rectangular the distortion from the center of the image outward is spherical, making the seams abruptly change angle at the borders. I made the view such that the vantage point is in high orbit around Tau Ceti V. The red dot in "North" is the sun. I would recommend pasting over both the sun and the planet with better resolution suns and planets from internet images but to keep the proportions the same. You'd also have to jazz it up in terms of colour and HDR stuff if it's too bland as is. The modest resolution, I'm afraid, could not be helped but with stars you don't lose much as they're only dots.
Oh and for those wondering, that fuzzy band in the background of 4 of the images is not a nebula. It's the milky way viewed from our vantage point, inside of it.
Oh and for those wondering, that fuzzy band in the background of 4 of the images is not a nebula. It's the milky way viewed from our vantage point, inside of it.
Posted by: ZylonBane
« on: 27. September 2012, 22:48:19 »I still wish the nebulas didn't look so obviously fractal.
Posted by: unn_atropos
« on: 27. September 2012, 22:47:53 »Always wondered if this is a reference to THX 1138
Posted by: vurt
« on: 27. September 2012, 22:04:57 »They're modified, most of all it has more stars.
Posted by: voodoo47
« on: 27. September 2012, 21:43:43 »are they modified/improved in any way or it's just the new format?
Posted by: Cabron
« on: 27. September 2012, 21:38:31 »Oh my soo nice Vurt I didnt know you also did stuff for SS2...so happy and hope to see more from you
Loading...