Why Planets Should Spin
One of the most exciting opportunities for Space Engineers 2 is the chance to make planetary environments feel more alive and immersive. A major step toward that goal would be giving planets axial rotation. Currently, planets in the original game are static, which limits both realism and gameplay variety.
1. Realism & Immersion
Planets in real space rotate. Seeing the sun rise and set as a result of planetary spin, instead of a fixed skybox, would make the universe feel dynamic. It would deepen immersion by giving each world its own sense of time and rhythm.
2. Day/Night Cycles
Rotating planets would naturally create day and night cycles. This would make solar power management more strategic, as engineers would need to adapt their bases and ships to changing light conditions. Nighttime could also add atmosphere, encouraging the use of lighting systems and making exploration feel different depending on the time of day.
3. Gameplay Depth
Rotation introduces new design challenges and opportunities. For example:
- Bases near the equator would experience regular, balanced cycles.
- Bases near the poles might have long days or nights, affecting power and survival strategies.
- Navigation and timing could matter more when planning expeditions or attacks.
4. Technical Benefits
Unlike orbiting planets (which could break physics grids and require massive reworks), spinning planets are simpler to implement. The world can remain fixed while just the sky, lighting, and atmosphere are rotated around the player. This allows developers to simulate planetary spin without destabilizing ships, bases, or voxel interactions.
5. Long-Term Potential
Adding rotation lays the groundwork for more advanced systems in the future, such as seasonal changes, dynamic weather tied to latitude, or even tidal effects on oceans if water is introduced.
I like this feedback
The transit of the stars would be seen on planet, but seen in space they would be fixed.
The transit of the stars would be seen on planet, but seen in space they would be fixed.
I'm sure I remember in SE1 the mention of rotating planets being "too complex" for the "average player". No it isn't. Players handle Kerbal Space Program and Astroneer, two totally opposites in terms of complexity, just fine. Players of space oriented games know what they are getting in to. It's part of the appeal of this kind of game. 100+ we should absolutely have rotating planets. Orbits should be feasible, too, but let's start the conversation with rotation first.
I'm sure I remember in SE1 the mention of rotating planets being "too complex" for the "average player". No it isn't. Players handle Kerbal Space Program and Astroneer, two totally opposites in terms of complexity, just fine. Players of space oriented games know what they are getting in to. It's part of the appeal of this kind of game. 100+ we should absolutely have rotating planets. Orbits should be feasible, too, but let's start the conversation with rotation first.
If moving planets *do* get added into the game, I'd like to have planets take different orbit times based on their distance from the star.
If moving planets *do* get added into the game, I'd like to have planets take different orbit times based on their distance from the star.
It's actually rather disorienting to have the sun rotate around the player in space with the skybox in se 1, because I can't use it as a reference point. But I know I should be able to instinctively because the sun doesn't move so just keep the sun to my right or left and ill be going in the right direction but it's rotating around me and its a very easy reference point to spot so it's just what i want to use. And rotating planets/ meteors would fix that.
It's actually rather disorienting to have the sun rotate around the player in space with the skybox in se 1, because I can't use it as a reference point. But I know I should be able to instinctively because the sun doesn't move so just keep the sun to my right or left and ill be going in the right direction but it's rotating around me and its a very easy reference point to spot so it's just what i want to use. And rotating planets/ meteors would fix that.
1. Realism & Immersion
-Always a good thing.
2. Day/Night Cycles ... 3. Gameplay Depth
-Moving the sun about the skybox already does this. The only change in consideration would be in adjusting target coordinates/flight time for attacks that involve moving between a planet and space.
4. Technical Benefits
-Probably the biggest issue here, moving that much voxel at all would be a major problem even if it was just spinning in place. It would probably be more efficient to find a way to instance the planets and spin a picture in an instance-transition than it would be to actually move the voxel.
5. Long-Term Potential
-These are already not particularly hard to do without spinning a massive ball of voxel.
So, it is a cool idea, but barring some instance-shenanigans I doubt it would be practical.
1. Realism & Immersion
-Always a good thing.
2. Day/Night Cycles ... 3. Gameplay Depth
-Moving the sun about the skybox already does this. The only change in consideration would be in adjusting target coordinates/flight time for attacks that involve moving between a planet and space.
4. Technical Benefits
-Probably the biggest issue here, moving that much voxel at all would be a major problem even if it was just spinning in place. It would probably be more efficient to find a way to instance the planets and spin a picture in an instance-transition than it would be to actually move the voxel.
5. Long-Term Potential
-These are already not particularly hard to do without spinning a massive ball of voxel.
So, it is a cool idea, but barring some instance-shenanigans I doubt it would be practical.
Replies have been locked on this page!