This should be fine. There certainly won’t be any major issues.
No, I haven’t changed anything since the original release.
I don’t plan on making any updates unless bugs are found.
The constant overhead per planet per frame is quite low. 80 planets should be fine providing that they aren’t all very close to each other. It would be fairly straightforward to further optimise the overhead if it was a problem. Bear in mind, that the asset does not support rotation of planets.
Yes, removing the existing system is easy. I don’t know how difficult it will be to install yours though.
Why do you not plan to add anything further? There is still a lot that could be implemented.Z
Also why does rotation of planets not work? if the chunks are a child of the planet and all positions and calculated locally then it should be just fine?
hello and thanks for your quick answer the tweaking I want to is just checking as I told you how your asset react even if you give three level of definition I need to make test with different FPS but thank you again for your proposal but do not waste your time building another demo as I said your asset seems awesome nevertheless I have been already disappointed by assets I have bought after testing a demo or watching a video to find out the assets do not work as it was supposed to which I have seen triple A game or professional softwares cheaper than yours asset proposing a trial version. to be able to test that’s what I’m asking. So I asked I simply to know what I buy and do not waste our time with support or complain .
Making planets rotate isn’t quite as simple as that. For a start, chunks can’t be childed to planets because of floating point inaccuracy. I’m sure it’s doable though.