i had to disable this..got a bug in weapons workbench where instead of weapon names showed "failed to lookup" but still showed the gun..when i disabled this mod it went back to normal..i do have 113 other plugins so maybe conflict like with this mod maybe idk
Is there any chance of splitting the two sides of this mod?
1) I like the planetary renaming. This makes sense and, honestly, should be been done correctly by Bethesda at the start. I approve.
2) While I understand where you are coming from on the others, it's also about a couple centuries forward. There isn't any reason that the stars might have 'local' names, so to speak. As you point out, the designations you are using/pulling are already there in game, so it could stand to reason that astronomers/explorers have already given these systems these names we see. This is further borne out by the fact that - unless you've modded it otherwise - there are human built POIs on most planets and in most systems.
In short, I'd love the planetary renaming without the star renaming - even my reasoning above aside, trying to remember those numbers/designations is a tad bit more difficult (if, perhaps, more realistic) to make use of in the game... especially if you are starting to go crosseyed reading those names on the screen. (Was that HD 321230 I was supposed to go to? Or HD312230? Uh... check, recheck, memory failure, check, recheck, repeat). Even with the built in "show me" feature, I think this might be a step to far for me.
Either way, nice thought here, and thanks for sharing.
agreed on the 2nd point - ironically though, Beth opted for the boring numerical designations for most planets within systems as opposed to giving them unique names which just feels really weird given that there's already like 100+ exoplanets with proper IAU names (and the list is growing fast), so it makes no sense for them to keep their basic designations when they've not only been visited but also have human activity on them.
As an English Teacher professionally, I assure you that is not ironic, just not the best of decisions. Besides, we'll run out of planet names long before we run out of planets, so I'm fine with leaving the 'named' ones more or less alone as is in Vanilla.
Regardless, I find it interesting that the MA has replied to other suggestions and ideas for this mod, but not a word to answer this question. I don't want to come off as sounding like I'm pushing for this over much, but even if the answer is a solid "No" (which, BTW, I would accept - I've done mod authoring before, and I get the drain it can be) having some kind of answer would be nice.
The wait goes on... or is that the beat goes on? Ah, whatever. ;)
The planetary naming system is just as problematic. It is a provisional system established by so called "planet hunters" from the IAU to number astronomical phenomena that may or may not be planets. I has never meant to be a permanent system of naming planets, because it is ordered according to the discovery (mostly the size) of the object, not its position in the planetary system. (The mother star is a, the first discovered candidate is b the second c and so on.) This system will make no sense anymore, once you have catalogued all planets around a star. Of course you have to name them according to their position from the innermost to the outermost object, not the date of discovery. According to this naming convention our own planetary system would be named this way, because this is their order of discovery: Sun - Sol a Earth - Sol b Moon - Sol c Venus - Sol d Mars - Sol e Jupiter - Sol f Saturn - Sol g Mercury - Sol h This would be totally ridiculous. The current exo-planet nomenclature was never intended to be permanent. It's pretty clear that in the Starfield universe where all planetary systems are catalogued, planets are numbered according to their position around their star and moons according to their position around their planet. It is also pretty clear that planets of importance would get a proper name not just a number, just as we gave the planets and moons in our solar system proper names, mostly from Greco-Roman mythology. The mod is unrealistic, while the original names in the game make sense and their numbering will be most likely the real one in the future, once their planetary system is explored.
I think it's worth pointing out that naming planets according to distance from their star won't make sense if there's a planet with an elliptical orbit that brings it closer to its star than another planet (in real life, at least, because every planet and moon in Starfield has a perfectly circular orbit). Real life example is Pluto, which has section of its orbital path closer to the sun than Neptune's. Maybe not a great example because Pluto is a dwarf planet and has a proper name, but I don't know any others.
I also like the planetary renaming, since planets can have many more moons than there are letters e.g. Saturn has 146 moons.
shadriss, didn't mean to deliberately ignore you, just been preoccupied with other things at the moment. i get your point on the star names, and i agree that it may be a tad too hardcore for some people. i can definitely make a version with just the planetary naming scheme, separate from the stars, but i can't speak to how quickly i'll be able to get it out.
others in this thread, in regards to my decision to name the planets by their distances from their star, using letters, despite its contradiction to how exoplanets are named today by their discovery dates, i think it makes sense that we would iron out and make consistent the convention we already have in place. right now, as we are in the midst of discovering new astronomical objects from afar, naming them by their order of discovery of course makes sense because it's relevant. but it's plausible that by 2330, when humanity is finally able to visit foreign objects in person, when we do have complete catalogs of entire systems, that objects, especially in potential newly discovered star systems, would be renamed and reordered for ease of navigation in a convention similar to the one we not only are already familiar with, but that better accommodates the wide variety in how many bodies can be in a system, like Saturn with its 146 moons. When it comes to individual bodies in a system, order of discovery seems less relevant when you can grav jump to and subsequently document any and all of those bodies essentially instantaneously, when physical orientation in a system is more important than discovery dates. Additionally, from my understanding, the naming system provided by the IAU which many exoplanets adhere to right now isn't even a strict rule in itself, it's just a guideline. Ultimately, we're talking about a future we can't know about for sure, and in this case a fictional future. It's just as inconsequential for me to choose letters and roman numerals as it is for Bethesda to choose roman numerals and letters, though letters and roman numerals may be a smidge less arbitrary. : )
No worries - as I said, I get the pain of being a MA with a new release, just thought it interesting that several other ideas were addressed where mine hadn't.
Waiting is fine. We have time. Just have to remember to keep checking back on this one for the option. Thanks for your time.
hey, sorry to disappoint, but it's not likely i'll get to adding that version you asked for; don't wanna string you along. significant stuff has been happening in my personal life and working on mods just isn't as important to me at the moment. especially this mod, which isn't as much of a passion-driven creative outlet as my other mods are, and is frankly just repetitive and boring to work on. that's not to say i'll never ever come back to this mod, but really don't get your hopes up. if you're so inclined, you can edit what i've already done to your own personal liking using xTranslator. you just have to open the .STRINGS file and search and replace whichever entries you want.
you’re welcome, im glad you like it! Putting them both on one line will exceed the bounds of the info card they’re placed on in the UI, and I don’t know if putting a line break in their names will work. But I will try.
Bonjour, je suis du Canada de la province de Québec je m'appel Luc et j'aime votre idée pour l'astronomie de nommé les nom des étoiles pars le vraie nom, dans le jeux j'ai remarquer le nom de Sirius dans la constellation du grand chien, mais je ne vois pas les nom des étoiles d'Orion, j'aurais aimer les voir, je suis un fan de l'astronomie, merci a l'avance de votre réponse.
Salut Luc, je suis content que tu aimes le mod! Les étoiles d'Orion n'existent malheureusement pas dans le jeu. Ils se trouvent à des centaines d’années-lumière et le jeu ne s’étend généralement qu’à environ 50 années-lumière de la Terre. Veuillez également pardonner mon utilisation de Google Translate en cas de problème.
I'd actually planned on doing this one day just for fun, glad someone else did the heavy lifting
In case you didn't know, Bethesda actually did include the actual star names in the game. In "Starfield - Misc.ba2" there are a number of CSV files relating to the layout of stars and planets (making changes to the files doesn't do anything, so they may be part of an original mapping system that was later discarded). One of these CSV files has a column that shows what the real star name is.
thank you for this!! i didn't know about the csv file, and looking at it now, it has data for stars that don't have their Gliese ID listed in the game, so this helps a lot!
I was trying to use them for creating new stars, but as far as I can tell they don't do anything. My guess is they are leftovers from development. Still, they provide some interesting insights into what Bethesda originally planned before saying "screw it, procedural everything, and we'll just read all the LCTN records when we start a new game."
Gliese ID, so THAT is what that entry in the Star record is! I've been trying to track that backwards to figure out if it has any impact on star creation/placement. Thanks, now I know I can ignore it if I need to lol
Is that where they are getting the DNAM - ID from? That's the value that connects systems together, tells planets which star they belong to, etc. That would explain why the IDs are all over the place, in no logical order.
Agreed. Also, having so many Henry Draper designations is a bit monotonous. Consider using alternative designations from Luyten (L, LP, LHS, LTT, LFT, NLTT), Wolf, Ross, Yale Bright Star (HR), and other catalogues, for greater variety. For example, from the second sample image:
HD 116443 > Struve 1740 B, LTT 13890 HD 122742 > HR 5273, LTT 14110 HD 126053 > HR 5384, LHS 2907 HD 135204 > LHS 393, LTT 6073 HD 137763 > LTT 6180 HD 137778 > LTT 6181 HD 152391 > LHS 426, LTT 14990, V2292 Ophiuchi HD 153631 > LTT 6798 HD 158614 > HR 6516, LTT 6959
Additionally, there are many dimmer stars that have proper names. Ran (Epsilon Eridani), Keid (Omicron 2 Eridani), Alsafi (Sigma Draconis), and Achird (Eta Cassiopeiae) are among those closest to Earth, but the International Astronomical Union has approved hundreds of proper names for more distant and/or obscure stars.
Edit: Celebrai is a typo that's been present in the vanilla game since release. It should be Cebelrai (Beta Ophiuci).
You may already be aware of it, but SIMBAD is an excellent resource for this sort of project. You can query the service directly from the website or, if you're handy with Python, use the astroquery package to automate batch queries.
36 comments
edit: having difficulties. will do when i can!
1) I like the planetary renaming. This makes sense and, honestly, should be been done correctly by Bethesda at the start. I approve.
2) While I understand where you are coming from on the others, it's also about a couple centuries forward. There isn't any reason that the stars might have 'local' names, so to speak. As you point out, the designations you are using/pulling are already there in game, so it could stand to reason that astronomers/explorers have already given these systems these names we see. This is further borne out by the fact that - unless you've modded it otherwise - there are human built POIs on most planets and in most systems.
In short, I'd love the planetary renaming without the star renaming - even my reasoning above aside, trying to remember those numbers/designations is a tad bit more difficult (if, perhaps, more realistic) to make use of in the game... especially if you are starting to go crosseyed reading those names on the screen. (Was that HD 321230 I was supposed to go to? Or HD312230? Uh... check, recheck, memory failure, check, recheck, repeat). Even with the built in "show me" feature, I think this might be a step to far for me.
Either way, nice thought here, and thanks for sharing.
Regardless, I find it interesting that the MA has replied to other suggestions and ideas for this mod, but not a word to answer this question. I don't want to come off as sounding like I'm pushing for this over much, but even if the answer is a solid "No" (which, BTW, I would accept - I've done mod authoring before, and I get the drain it can be) having some kind of answer would be nice.
The wait goes on... or is that the beat goes on? Ah, whatever. ;)
It is a provisional system established by so called "planet hunters" from the IAU to number astronomical phenomena that may or may not be planets. I has never meant to be a permanent system of naming planets, because it is ordered according to the discovery (mostly the size) of the object, not its position in the planetary system. (The mother star is a, the first discovered candidate is b the second c and so on.) This system will make no sense anymore, once you have catalogued all planets around a star. Of course you have to name them according to their position from the innermost to the outermost object, not the date of discovery.
According to this naming convention our own planetary system would be named this way, because this is their order of discovery:
Sun - Sol a
Earth - Sol b
Moon - Sol c
Venus - Sol d
Mars - Sol e
Jupiter - Sol f
Saturn - Sol g
Mercury - Sol h
This would be totally ridiculous. The current exo-planet nomenclature was never intended to be permanent. It's pretty clear that in the Starfield universe where all planetary systems are catalogued, planets are numbered according to their position around their star and moons according to their position around their planet. It is also pretty clear that planets of importance would get a proper name not just a number, just as we gave the planets and moons in our solar system proper names, mostly from Greco-Roman mythology.
The mod is unrealistic, while the original names in the game make sense and their numbering will be most likely the real one in the future, once their planetary system is explored.
I also like the planetary renaming, since planets can have many more moons than there are letters e.g. Saturn has 146 moons.
Source: wikipedia
others in this thread, in regards to my decision to name the planets by their distances from their star, using letters, despite its contradiction to how exoplanets are named today by their discovery dates, i think it makes sense that we would iron out and make consistent the convention we already have in place. right now, as we are in the midst of discovering new astronomical objects from afar, naming them by their order of discovery of course makes sense because it's relevant. but it's plausible that by 2330, when humanity is finally able to visit foreign objects in person, when we do have complete catalogs of entire systems, that objects, especially in potential newly discovered star systems, would be renamed and reordered for ease of navigation in a convention similar to the one we not only are already familiar with, but that better accommodates the wide variety in how many bodies can be in a system, like Saturn with its 146 moons. When it comes to individual bodies in a system, order of discovery seems less relevant when you can grav jump to and subsequently document any and all of those bodies essentially instantaneously, when physical orientation in a system is more important than discovery dates. Additionally, from my understanding, the naming system provided by the IAU which many exoplanets adhere to right now isn't even a strict rule in itself, it's just a guideline. Ultimately, we're talking about a future we can't know about for sure, and in this case a fictional future. It's just as inconsequential for me to choose letters and roman numerals as it is for Bethesda to choose roman numerals and letters, though letters and roman numerals may be a smidge less arbitrary. : )
Waiting is fine. We have time. Just have to remember to keep checking back on this one for the option. Thanks for your time.
i really wanted this
BUT can i ask please, can you make both names available ?
like "beth name (real name)"
i wish you best of luck
it means so much
In case you didn't know, Bethesda actually did include the actual star names in the game. In "Starfield - Misc.ba2" there are a number of CSV files relating to the layout of stars and planets (making changes to the files doesn't do anything, so they may be part of an original mapping system that was later discarded). One of these CSV files has a column that shows what the real star name is.
HD 116443 > Struve 1740 B, LTT 13890
HD 122742 > HR 5273, LTT 14110
HD 126053 > HR 5384, LHS 2907
HD 135204 > LHS 393, LTT 6073
HD 137763 > LTT 6180
HD 137778 > LTT 6181
HD 152391 > LHS 426, LTT 14990, V2292 Ophiuchi
HD 153631 > LTT 6798
HD 158614 > HR 6516, LTT 6959
Additionally, there are many dimmer stars that have proper names. Ran (Epsilon Eridani), Keid (Omicron 2 Eridani), Alsafi (Sigma Draconis), and Achird (Eta Cassiopeiae) are among those closest to Earth, but the International Astronomical Union has approved hundreds of proper names for more distant and/or obscure stars.
Edit: Celebrai is a typo that's been present in the vanilla game since release. It should be Cebelrai (Beta Ophiuci).