Is this the only copy that came up? I don't see any proof that this isn't fake (from the PCGamer article). All the label says is "Online", it's probably referring to the name stuff. Do new retail copies of NMS actually look like this? With Pegi 7?
(Usually this field is used for the multiplayer stuff, I think the game has no multiplayer functionality)
[t]http://i.imgur.com/ePIoI1s.png[/t]
PCGamesN posted an extra source though. [url]http://imgur.com/GOJB3p0[/url]
[url]http://www.pcgamesn.com/no-mans-sky/no-mans-sky-age-rating-case-stickers[/url]
This one says (Optional) which kinda confirms what I said?
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZkQjPyG.jpg[/IMG]
I really don't understand why the developer is being so vague about this, (I mean I kinda do, but this is a not so great approach) but I was kinda hoping PCGamer would put some more effort into these articles.
looked up a unboxing video
it's also on the front, look how out of place the shine is
[t]http://jesusfuck.me/di/N1BZ/16-08-11-21-44-53-no-mans-sky-limited-edition-ps4-unboxing-youtub.png[/t]
[editline]11th August 2016[/editline]
[t]http://jesusfuck.me/di/SEAN/16-08-11-21-46-30-no-mans-sky-limited-edition-ps4-unboxing-youtub.png[/t]
[QUOTE=Scratch.;50865867]looked up a unboxing video
it's also on the front, look how out of place the shine is[/QUOTE]
Gamestop is selling their copies with Pegi 7. I guess someone messed up but I was kinda hoping for more proof.
[url]https://www.gamestop.it/PS4/Games/97920[/url]
[editline]11th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Scratch.;50865867]
[t]http://jesusfuck.me/di/SEAN/16-08-11-21-46-30-no-mans-sky-limited-edition-ps4-unboxing-youtub.png[/t][/QUOTE]
Ah, neat. Wonder why they didn't put anything like this in the article.
I wonder why it was dropped to pegi 7 though
I think online interactions increase the PEGI rating by default.
How is the box already so bashed, even tough it's new?
why would you even bother to add multiplayer elements if your chances of actually meeting another player within any given hour is like one in a million, even with a hundred thousand players online or so? i know it's probably been said before but there's a threshold of what's like, sensible and functional within a game and this type of multiplayer content certainly ain't; don't get why they didn't just can it or like, actually add means to make it so that you don't have more chance of winning the lottery than meeting another player.
[editline]11th August 2016[/editline]
they should just like, hide the whole box, logo and all with stickers at this point, might get more sales
[QUOTE=DMGaina;50865990]How is the box already so bashed, even tough it's new?[/QUOTE]
Lazy people handling freight at the loading docks.
Complete multiplayer experience in a game like this would be practically impossible.
[QUOTE=nVidia;50866601]Complete multiplayer experience in a game like this would be practically impossible.[/QUOTE]
how so?
[QUOTE=nVidia;50866601]Complete multiplayer experience in a game like this would be practically impossible.[/QUOTE]
No way man
I'm glad No Man's Sky is finally out. I got so many hours of entertainment out of it and I didn't even have to launch or even buy the game!
Watching Sean Murray dodge questions like Peter Molyneux dodges deadlines has been incredibly entertaining.
All I want to know now is is he just that bad at PR or is he in full panic mode after lying for so long?
[QUOTE=nVidia;50866601]Complete multiplayer experience in a game like this would be practically impossible.[/QUOTE]
why not add coop to the game? you know, like minecraft, terraria, starbound, pretty much any other game like this.
[QUOTE=nVidia;50866601]Complete multiplayer experience in a game like this would be practically impossible.[/QUOTE]
Just add a feature that lets you teleport to your friends- bam problem solved
It would be insanely difficult to network something as massive as No Mans Sky. I could see a system whereby arriving at the planet will check if another player is there, switching to a multiplayer state and then possibly networking movement. But things like networking destruction or ships in outer space would require more servers than it would be worth. It get's even worse when you think about networking all the animals positions or syncing the random events.
I'm not a networking engineer but from what little experience I do have with multiplayer networking in games it isn't practical. They should of just gone out and made it clear multiplayer isn't happening instead of being so vague though.
[QUOTE=KillerLUA;50867185]It would be insanely difficult to network something as massive as No Mans Sky. I could see a system whereby arriving at the planet will check if another player is there, switching to a multiplayer state and then possibly networking movement. But things like networking destruction or ships in outer space would require more servers than it would be worth. It get's even worse when you think about networking all the animals positions or syncing the random events.
I'm not a networking engineer but from what little experience I do have with multiplayer networking in games it isn't practical. They should of just gone out and made it clear multiplayer isn't happening instead of being so vague though.[/QUOTE]
Like going a full persistent, dedicated, multiplayer experience, is obviously beyond the scope of the project, but just p2p for people for are in the same system, with a reasonable player-cap seems very doable.
There is some ai, events and destruction but nothing hugely impossible, it would be very comparable to what Dark Souls does in many ways.
[QUOTE=KillerLUA;50867185]It would be insanely difficult to network something as massive as No Mans Sky. I could see a system whereby arriving at the planet will check if another player is there, switching to a multiplayer state and then possibly networking movement. But things like networking destruction or ships in outer space would require more servers than it would be worth. It get's even worse when you think about networking all the animals positions or syncing the random events.
I'm not a networking engineer but from what little experience I do have with multiplayer networking in games it isn't practical. They should of just gone out and made it clear multiplayer isn't happening instead of being so vague though.[/QUOTE]
The way it has been described so far has pointed to MP being P2P based, so it'd probably be a case of just syncing up to one player's game. The hardest part would most likely be matching players together properly but even that could be initiated by the player by making some calls to a server every so often to ask if anyone is on the same planet or something.
[QUOTE=Naught;50866925]why not add coop to the game? you know, like minecraft, terraria, starbound, pretty much any other game like this.[/QUOTE]
That would be doable.
But think about this, if you have 18 quintillion planets and each of them potentially modofiable, carving tunnels etc. How much data would the servers have to store to keep up with all of the changes done in the entire universe?
So the only real way i see multiplayer happening is a kind of a local instance lobby with few friends.
Doesn't online play only mean that you are "connected to their servers"?
I don't know much about console labels and definitions. Shouldn't it say "multiplayer" if you can actually interact with other people?
[QUOTE=nVidia;50871303]That would be doable.
But think about this, if you have 18 quintillion planets and each of them potentially modofiable, carving tunnels etc. How much data would the servers have to store to keep up with all of the changes done in the entire universe?
So the only real way i see multiplayer happening is a kind of a local instance lobby with few friends.[/QUOTE]
99.9% of them would be unmodified and therefore would store no data besides an RNG seed. Then, you just store the changes from the RNG seed on top of the seed, and it's all quite small for the foreseeable future. Could introduce "natural disasters" like suns exploding that could be an excuse for wiping changes on old planets that haven't been touched in a while.
[QUOTE=Downsider;50871627]99.9% of them would be unmodified and therefore would store no data besides an RNG seed. Then, you just store the changes from the RNG seed on top of the seed, and it's all quite small for the foreseeable future.[/QUOTE]
Every plant you harvest is registered as a permanent change and retained in your local save. The change data is not likely to be [I]that[/I] small, especially looking forward to what the fuck that'd be like a year from now. Keeping your changes on your own local storage is a sensible and practical solution, but storing [I]everyone's[/I] changes on the cloud quickly becomes impractical unless under 3000 people are playing this game after two months.
On the other hand, syncing changes between two clients who are co-op buddying it up in their own little isolated lobby, that's totally a practical thing to do. Two clients isn't that much worse than one, it's just when you make the jump from that to "all clients" that the numbers stop making any sense.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50872954]Every plant you harvest is registered as a permanent change and retained in your local save. The change data is not likely to be [I]that[/I] small, especially looking forward to what the fuck that'd be like a year from now. Keeping your changes on your own local storage is a sensible and practical solution, but storing [I]everyone's[/I] changes on the cloud quickly becomes impractical unless under 3000 people are playing this game after two months.
On the other hand, syncing changes between two clients who are co-op buddying it up in their own little isolated lobby, that's totally a practical thing to do. Two clients isn't that much worse than one, it's just when you make the jump from that to "all clients" that the numbers stop making any sense.[/QUOTE]
Both are totally practical, especially if you read my entire post instead of only quoting half of it? No single planet would ever be more populated than a Minecraft server. Is hosting a Minecraft server impossible?
[QUOTE=Downsider;50877041]Both are totally practical, especially if you read my entire post instead of only quoting half of it? No single planet would ever be more populated than a Minecraft server. Is hosting a Minecraft server impossible?[/QUOTE]
Is Mojang hosting every Minecraft server ever on the same server farm?
Are we thinking of the same thing? As I understand it, what's being proposed is every player's delta changes being sent to and maintained on NMS cloud servers so any other player, if they land on that planet, sees that you've carved every Heridium column into a boner, rather than seeing a pure generated terrain. And if that's the case, that's an immense amount of data that will mostly never be requested again by anyone, at least in the current size of galaxies and the lack of support for searching star systems by name, and that's why it's not practical.
If the universe was many times smaller, or had navigation functions more similar to Elite: Dangerous' galaxy map, it'd be much more useful a feature.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
