• TRAILER: No Man's Sky
    54 replies, posted
Sorry but this all sounds great but they're promising way too much, in the end this will just a be a disappointment. Get hype if you want but don't cry when it comes out and is a total let down.
[URL="http://indiestatik.com/2013/12/08/procedural-generation/"]Interesting article about the procedural generation trend, in response to this game specifically.[/URL]
Interesting article, indeed. I agree entirely with its closing remarks. Namely: [quote=That article]It’s a good idea to remain skeptical until we’ve heard more about how the technology behind the game works.[/quote] For all we know, what all we saw in the video is literally the extent of the truly unique content in the game. And while it would certainly be fun for a while, the claims that the game makes of "every atom being procedural" and "every planet being unique" would certainly fall flat if that were the case. As the article suggests, I am going to reserve any judgments until I see some actual gameplay footage. Which is to say "until the game comes out" basically.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;43136039]Sorry but this all sounds great but they're promising way too much, in the end this will just a be a disappointment. Get hype if you want but don't cry when it comes out and is a total let down.[/QUOTE] Yeah shit like this happens all the time. Not to say I hope im proven wrong completely because it would be fucking awesome, but right now it reminds me of like the Ouya type shit. Everyone was so hyped, haters were shunned, in the end it was a piece of shit.
I really hope it doesn't turn out to be one of those games with a great concept, but terrible mechanics that ruin the experience.
interview! [video=youtube;9NWpdyQXzHw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NWpdyQXzHw[/video]
[QUOTE=KlaseR;43142110]interview! [video=youtube;9NWpdyQXzHw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NWpdyQXzHw[/video][/QUOTE] does raise a good question on how much disk space it takes up, and over time.
[QUOTE=paul simon;43131261]Love the music in the trailer! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHXy42nKY4U[/media][/QUOTE] thought i recognized it, been listening to a lot of 65days recently
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43130740]Yeah and look where that ended - zero content, zero gameplay and canned?[/QUOTE] God I am still sore about this game. They eventually decided to just market their engine out to other companies then focus on the game... and they say they have a kickstarter on the way. Which they have been saying since August. However there have been some recent video postings on their youtube channel that show some activity behind the scenes. You know what's great though? It seems that we are going to be spoilt with all these space games coming out and I LOVE IT 1. Star Citizen 2. Starbound 3. Space Engineers 4. KSP (even though it is mostly finished) 5. And now this.
[QUOTE=Ithon;43142367]does raise a good question on how much disk space it takes up, and over time.[/QUOTE] From what I could gather from his somewhat vague responses, the entire game is built upon persistent random-number generators, and persistent seeds. Which is to say that every object of significance will have a static seed (say, for example, the coordinates in the galactic map), and when you run that same seed through all of the equations used in generation, it will always generate the same thing. If this is case, then I imagine that disk usage would be fairly small - because the galactic map will (probably) never change, nothing that the systems generate naturally would have to be saved. No planet data, or atmospheres, or ocean locations and sizes, or tree locations and types, etc. All of that would be determined simply with the seed. If that were the case, then I would imagine that the only thing that would be saved on "disk" would be a differences file - things that were added or removed post-generation. EG if you plant a new tree, just that new tree is saved. Likewise, if you chop down a tree, then the loss of that tree is saved. The reason I put disk in quotes there is because, by the sounds of it, the game world will probably be centralized on servers the developers provide in some way (I refuse to say "the game will be hosted on the cloud"). I would imagine that each client copy of the game will have all of the generation equations stored, for drawing the world on the client's screen, because having to network all of that data would be hugely wasteful (and it hasn't really been done on such a scale; the new SimCity claimed to do this, but we all saw how much of a farce that was). Then if there any discrepancies between the client and the server, I would imagine either some rudimentary checks would be done, or the client would just have to deal with drawing a world that the server doesn't agree with - and whatever the server says is true, is true. If this is the model they use, then I would imagine all the differences would be written to the server. Of course, even the relatively small size of difference files can get quite large (especially for a whole massively-multiplayer universe), but one of the assumptions made for dedicated servers is a large amount of hard-disk space, so that isn't an issue. The only bottleneck then becomes sending the differences to clients, which could be handled through something like procedural streaming - as the player enters an area, send the differences that are most immediate to the player's view, and then just silently send the rest of them over. Of course, all of this is just speculation. This is just from what I was able to gather from that interview, combined with my own personal experience and thoughts on how such a system would work.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;43142681]From what I could gather from his somewhat vague responses, the entire game is built upon persistent random-number generators, and persistent seeds. Which is to say that every object of significance will have a static seed (say, for example, the coordinates in the galactic map), and when you run that same seed through all of the equations used in generation, it will always generate the same thing. If this is case, then I imagine that disk usage would be fairly small - because the galactic map will (probably) never change, nothing that the systems generate naturally would have to be saved. No planet data, or atmospheres, or ocean locations and sizes, or tree locations and types, etc. All of that would be determined simply with the seed. If that were the case, then I would imagine that the only thing that would be saved on "disk" would be a differences file - things that were added or removed post-generation. EG if you plant a new tree, just that new tree is saved. Likewise, if you chop down a tree, then the loss of that tree is saved. The reason I put disk in quotes there is because, by the sounds of it, the game world will probably be centralized on servers the developers provide in some way (I refuse to say "the game will be hosted on the cloud"). I would imagine that each client copy of the game will have all of the generation equations stored, for drawing the world on the client's screen, because having to network all of that data would be hugely wasteful (and it hasn't really been done on such a scale; the new SimCity claimed to do this, but we all saw how much of a farce that was). Then if there any discrepancies between the client and the server, I would imagine either some rudimentary checks would be done, or the client would just have to deal with drawing a world that the server doesn't agree with - and whatever the server says is true, is true. If this is the model they use, then I would imagine all the differences would be written to the server. Of course, even the relatively small size of difference files can get quite large (especially for a whole massively-multiplayer universe), but one of the assumptions made for dedicated servers is a large amount of hard-disk space, so that isn't an issue. The only bottleneck then becomes sending the differences to clients, which could be handled through something like procedural streaming - as the player enters an area, send the differences that are most immediate to the player's view, and then just silently send the rest of them over. Of course, all of this is just speculation. This is just from what I was able to gather from that interview, combined with my own personal experience and thoughts on how such a system would work.[/QUOTE] Could be treated more or less like the world generation in Starbound where each sector or coordinate is a seed in itself. Visit that sector, it would build off that seed on the fly with no need of an external server. Any changes to the world would be saved client-side or server-side if in multiplayer. [editline]11th December 2013[/editline] The primary reason of tying seeds to coordinates is to generate the same planets at the same coordinates across different sessions minus any changes you've made personally.
Wish there was a way to play with with random seeds in a singleplayer gamemode... Which would actually be much more interesting, at least for me it would be.
[QUOTE=Incoming.;43143949]Wish there was a way to play with with random seeds in a singleplayer gamemode... Which would actually be much more interesting, at least for me it would be.[/QUOTE] Ideally, and I don't know why more games don't do this, there would be an option to make a singleplayer world in addition to play the massively-multiplayer game. As I said above, chances are that the client would have all of the generation algorithms, so there is literally no reason to not allow a singleplayer game. The only "issue" is that, obviously, the entire universe would be saved on the client's disk, but with the universe being persistently generated, only a diff file would be needed. And by the sound of it, getting to new celestial bodies (planets, stars, stations, what have you) isn't a trivial task, and so the difference files should be fairly short. Then, with a singleplayer world, you should be able to modify the seeds, weights, probabilities, noise, constants, and basically everything else involved in the world generation at your leisure. Then when you play online, those get reset to the defaults for generating a synchronized world with the server. Hell, even the ability to host small-scale servers, such as a more standard "dedicated / local" system like Source games use, would be cool. Then you can choose to connect to the "official" game universe, or to a modified game universe, hosted by a third party. When you connect, the server sends you all of the parameters it uses in universe generation, and so you could have custom universes to play with just you and your friends, or your clan, or what have you. Really, none of this should be all that difficult, if the team were even semi-diligent in their design and didn't hard-code everything. And I would certainly like to see it.
[QUOTE=paindoc;43142482]God I am still sore about this game. They eventually decided to just market their engine out to other companies then focus on the game... and they say they have a kickstarter on the way. Which they have been saying since August.[/QUOTE] it is a real shame for so long I defended its vapourware status that in the end I just gave up and accepted we're never going to see it
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43146126]it is a real shame for so long I defended its vapourware status that in the end I just gave up and accepted we're never going to see it[/QUOTE] They took on a massive undertaking, its not surprising for devs new to gaming development(Or even veterans) have feature creep explode in their face.
[QUOTE=Incoming.;43120444]I can't believe it, but games I was only dreaming of two years ago might be coming true. It's like EVE Online in first person. It better not be another blunder.[/QUOTE] I'm glad I actually watched the video because hearing "eve online in first person" was a huge turn off
Imagining this on Occulus Rift have me a mega-boner
[QUOTE=mini me;43148490]Imagining this on Occulus Rift have me a mega-boner[/QUOTE] Seriously, the excess of space games we have been seeing lately is making me really want to buy one of those
[QUOTE=paindoc;43153218]Seriously, the excess of space games we have been seeing lately is making me really want to buy one of those[/QUOTE] I'm gunna buy me one when they finally release the consumer model, it will be a lot more polished then, I hope.
I think the question would be, are their assets that allow randomization diverse enough to give you unique planets? That's a lot harder then pre rendering a bunch of planets as is.
[QUOTE=mchapra;43156988]I think the question would be, are their assets that allow randomization diverse enough to give you unique planets? That's a lot harder then pre rendering a bunch of planets as is.[/QUOTE] Look up terrain generation. You don't need assets for that. And what do you mean by "pre-rendering" planets?
[QUOTE=paul simon;43157723]Look up terrain generation. You don't need assets for that. And what do you mean by "pre-rendering" planets?[/QUOTE] Poor wording on my part. I mean placing a bunch of pre-designed planets. I assume you need assets for stuff such as animals.
[QUOTE=mchapra;43168246]I assume you need assets for stuff such as animals.[/QUOTE] They could do it like Scribblenauts. Just make parts that stick together.
[QUOTE=ColossalSoft;43168417]They could do it like Scribblenauts. Just make parts that stick together.[/QUOTE] Yeah but how many parts would you be willing to make for "true" uniqueness?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.