Wait what? Where's your proof? I'll absolutely believe you if you have proof, but... Also your post wss about sky colors.
Thats good. I'm glad you brought up that you don't know for sure.
It turns out I am pretty good with optics because of my day job. I deal with microscopes and do a lot of work trying to take very high quality images of cells at specific wavelengths. One of the problems we face is light scattering, particularly Raman scattering.
Because of dealing with this I am also very familiar with Rayleigh scattering, which as it turns out is responsible for the color of the sky on Earth.
In fact, refraction of any light will result in the spreading out of all the wavelengths within that light. Refraction is responsible for rainbows .
It is impossible for refraction parameters of an element to make a sky green, because this would require all of the light being refracted to already be green, in which case you would not see the sky, just the star or light source creating the green light.
This is separate from diffraction , which also has nothing to do with the color of the sky and would result mostly in colors the same as the source of the light or spreading the light into all the colors of the spectrum like refraction. This is most frequently seen in soap bubbles which are very colorful due the interference of all the spread out wavelengths of light.
For the same reasons as with refraction, diffraction cannot make a sky green.
So, what I am saying is technically that quote is a lie, and that there is probably no advanced periodic table of elements or light physics being simulated and instead it is just a value in a spreadsheet that corresponds to green (probably 255 RGB style colors).
But you are right in that I cannot know for sure that they did not invent their own rules of physics governing their system and instead simulated that with very advanced set of new equations and fictional periodic elements with different diffraction values.
It emphasizes the point that they built up the game to have these complex systems, which in reality do not exist (at least not in the color of the sky).
As a side note, I still think the game is great and probably worth $60 to many many people. I really loved fable too, but there's no question as to how much was lied about in marketing to try and sell the game.
The proof is in all the linked wiki articles describing Newtonian physics lol.What's really damning is these bits in interviews where they start talking about the game as though it's using real-life physics, like having to "redesign atmospheric particles".
Like, what the hell? That's not how games work. Why did no one call them out on this months ago?
the whole article is full of blatant lies, really.
You're probably right to assume that they took out certain things due to hardware limitations. The problem people are having is that they never explicitly told anyone that a lot of features were being taken out. People had to find out after their $60 was gone.
What's really damning is these bits in interviews where they start talking about the game as though it's using real-life physics, like having to "redesign atmospheric particles".
Like, what the hell? That's not how games work. Why did no one call them out on this months ago?
Did the game ever contain said physics? You can't possibly know. You literally can't unless you dig through all their previous builds.
Looks like this thread is moving along quite well.
the whole article is full of blatant lies, really.
Thats good. I'm glad you brought up that you don't know for sure.
It turns out I am pretty good with optics because of my day job. I deal with microscopes and do a lot of work trying to take very high quality images of cells at specific wavelengths. One of the problems we face is light scattering, particularly Raman scattering.
Because of dealing with this I am also very familiar with Rayleigh scattering, which as it turns out is responsible for the color of the sky on Earth.
In fact, refraction of any light will result in the spreading out of all the wavelengths within that light. Refraction is responsible for rainbows .
It is impossible for refraction parameters of an element to make a sky green, because this would require all of the light being refracted to already be green, in which case you would not see the sky, just the star or light source creating the green light.
This is separate from diffraction , which also has nothing to do with the color of the sky and would result mostly in colors the same as the source of the light or spreading the light into all the colors of the spectrum like refraction. This is most frequently seen in soap bubbles which are very colorful due the interference of all the spread out wavelengths of light.
For the same reasons as with refraction, diffraction cannot make a sky green.
So, what I am saying is technically that quote is a lie, and that there is probably no advanced periodic table of elements or light physics being simulated and instead it is just a value in a spreadsheet that corresponds to green (probably 255 RGB style colors).
But you are right in that I cannot know for sure that they did not invent their own rules of physics governing their system and instead simulated that with very advanced set of new equations and fictional periodic elements with different diffraction values.
It emphasizes the point that they built up the game to have these complex systems, which in reality do not exist (at least not in the color of the sky).
As a side note, I still think the game is great and probably worth $60 to many many people. I really loved fable too, but there's no question as to how much was lied about in marketing to try and sell the game.
