Game Informer: 30 minute 'BTS' video of No Man's Sky

Amazing tech demonstration....The way they set up the engine to allow for different variants of a creature model is insane....He just clicks a button and there are hundreds of variations that they can choose from and scale up/down.....
 
GhaleonEB said:
I was glad he alluded to some really strange creatures. They're showing "dinosaurs" and four legged animals for demos, but he strongly hinted at some really weird stuff, from bugs to giant creatures. It got me hopeful we'll land on some planets and get chased off by some really freaky critters.
Click to expand...

This is what gets me excited about this game- the thought that I might run into something a human imagination would never think of or script in a game. From odd geology to strange life forms, I am willing to put up with some generic gameplay if every once and awhile I might encounter something really fantastic. I really want to have to flee for my life from a mob of 30 ft tall spiders or the like.
 
TheYanger said:
Why? I mean, procedurally generated locations have still never proven to be interesting. Shit, how much did people hate the generic shitty planets in Mass Effect 1,and those were undoubtedly procedurally generated THEN run over with a comb to put some structures and points of interest in it.

The game might be amazing, it's certainly a cool piece of tech, but it's VERY hard to imagine particularly interesting gameplay.
Click to expand...



Then you remember that Spelunky and Binding of Isaac exists :)
 
thomasmahler said:
Well, they've been SAYING all these kinda things about mining, crafting, building, police chases, trading, etc. - but you've never SEEN any of that. There are no videos of actual gameplay. So let's hope they're showing something soon. Right now, this feels very Molyneux to me.
Click to expand...

Your original complaint was they did not know what kind of game they are making, when they have described it in some detail. Now you want to see it. Understandable, but again this has nothing to do with the subject at hand, which is the technology behind the game. The game is likely close to a year out; I would not expect really detailed information about the gameplay systems to come out before now. Over the next months and quarters we should see a great deal more.

Please stop derailing the thread, which is about the technology behind the world generation.
 
TheYanger said:
Why? I mean, procedurally generated locations have still never proven to be interesting. Shit, how much did people hate the generic shitty planets in Mass Effect 1,and those were undoubtedly procedurally generated THEN run over with a comb to put some structures and points of interest in it.

The game might be amazing, it's certainly a cool piece of tech, but it's VERY hard to imagine particularly interesting gameplay.
Click to expand...

The gameplay is like minecraft in some sort and do what humans always have been doing for centuries..explore.

Just fucking explore what else needs to be done hm? Story? On rails QTE? That is left to other games if you want to.

This is a massive universe nothing compared to a game like mass effect at all.
 
gmdtqq.gif


Yes.
 
That was a fantastic video. The explanation specifically about how they are creating the game worlds and generation of each and every pixel for what will end up being millions of worlds. I assume then that the x, y, z locations for each pixel (at least for the topography and vegetation) will be stored somewhere then after it's created? He kind of hit on the fact that it's the algorithm running in the background generating everything, but to recreate the same stuff wouldn't you need to call back to what was originally generated at those exact points?

The game still looks great and I'm glad we did get this glimpse. We never really get to see this kind of stuff till after a game comes out either in a documentary or at some keynote or presentation. Plus, he was hitting pretty hard on Ubi and the work they do. Loved it.
 
Thanks for posting this. Sean Murray seems to be such a genuine guy and it's so inspiring listening to him and seeing his passion for this project.

Day 1 for me!
 
daveo42 said:
That was a fantastic video. The explanation specifically about how they are creating the game worlds and generation of each and every pixel for what will end up being millions of worlds. I assume then that the x, y, z locations for each pixel (at least for the topography and vegetation) will be stored somewhere then after it's created? He kind of hit on the fact that it's the algorithm running in the background generating everything, but to recreate the same stuff wouldn't you need to call back to what was originally generated at those exact points?

The game still looks great and I'm glad we did get this glimpse. We never really get to see this kind of stuff till after a game comes out either in a documentary or at some keynote or presentation. Plus, he was hitting pretty hard on Ubi and the work they do. Loved it.
Click to expand...

This sort of explains the bolded question.

As Murray says, In essence a world was generated with very specific parameters that return the exact same result through complicated algorithms.
 
daveo42 said:
That was a fantastic video. The explanation specifically about how they are creating the game worlds and generation of each and every pixel for what will end up being millions of worlds. I assume then that the x, y, z locations for each pixel (at least for the topography and vegetation) will be stored somewhere then after it's created? He kind of hit on the fact that it's the algorithm running in the background generating everything, but to recreate the same stuff wouldn't you need to call back to what was originally generated at those exact points?

The game still looks great and I'm glad we did get this glimpse. We never really get to see this kind of stuff till after a game comes out either in a documentary or at some keynote or presentation. Plus, he was hitting pretty hard on Ubi and the work they do. Loved it.
Click to expand...

He said the final game will have one universe stored on a central server.
 
I can answer why most developers don't just go full procedurally generated. Because its fully procedurally generated... it works really well for that game, but you lose a lot of the artistry when you give it up for computers to do it on their own.

There has always been engines in place that do procedural textures, shaders, models, environments ect. It is just difficult to get it to work right when you are going for a very particular look and playstyle.
 
daveo42 said:
That was a fantastic video. The explanation specifically about how they are creating the game worlds and generation of each and every pixel for what will end up being millions of worlds. I assume then that the x, y, z locations for each pixel (at least for the topography and vegetation) will be stored somewhere then after it's created? He kind of hit on the fact that it's the algorithm running in the background generating everything, but to recreate the same stuff wouldn't you need to call back to what was originally generated at those exact points?

The game still looks great and I'm glad we did get this glimpse. We never really get to see this kind of stuff till after a game comes out either in a documentary or at some keynote or presentation. Plus, he was hitting pretty hard on Ubi and the work they do. Loved it.
Click to expand...

You only need the input seed values in order to always return the same result. On a basic level it's kind of like how two factor authentication works. There are two separate devices running the same algorithm from the same seed information.

And whoever said it's like Spelunky and Binding of Isaac...no, it's not. The universe isn't changing or anything, it's the same for everyone. If anything this seems like a really cool generation tool for developers but it's not the same as having a random game every time you start it up (I suppose you can just fly to a different planet but that's not quite the same thing).

At the end of the day, my point is: Given that as a player I'm going to be playing in location X, I'd prefer that location X be handcrafted, it will simply be superior in all ways. The only time procedural generation is better is when you're unable to make enough content to make your game work. He even mentions Mass Effect in the video, but I don't think having this tech procedurally generating a galaxy would add that much to Mass Effect, you'd probably explore a bit for fun and then just get back to playing the actual crafted levels that make sense. That said, it certainly doesn't hurt to have all of this layered underneath the basic Mass Effect gameplay, but I find it hard to believe that it would be compelling enough to just run around doing the procedural stuff instead.

I think there is a lot to be said for procedurally generating a lot of content, and then ALSO having the handcrafted stuff on top of it in that way. Like, if you could play Assassin's Creed in Paris, but then you also had a generated entire planet outside of Paris if you REALLY wanted to run around, I think that'd be a nice addition. I also think the vast majority of players would see the difference in content quality and would finish the Paris stuff and never touch the lower quality procedural stuff. Even in Minecraft, if someone made a 'perfect' Minecraft world (I dunno what that would entail, but an extremely inviting and compelling progression with just the right level of challenge, etc. Using all the tricks actual designers use when making real FPS maps, platformer stages, everything, to keep you looking for more) it would also be better than the procedural ones, but at least with that type of game you're getting something new every time and it's a huge part of the gameplay. Procedurally generating it once before the game ships, and procedurally generating it on the fly on the user's machine (but always to the same specifications) is only different from a tech point of view and how much storage space it takes up.
 
I never said it was like Spelunky and BoI. I implied that those two show that a game with procedurally generated worlds can feature incredibly compelling gameplay.
 
Watching the video now, great stuff. I hope they can pull back the fogging and increase the view distance some more though.
 
Alienous said:
This sort of explains the bolded question.

As Murray says, In essence a world was generated with very specific parameters that return the exact same result through complicated algorithms.
Click to expand...

TheYanger said:
You only need the input seed values in order to always return the same result. On a basic level it's kind of like how two factor authentication works. There are two separate devices running the same algorithm from the same seed information.

And whoever said it's like Spelunky and Binding of Isaac...no, it's not. The universe isn't changing or anything, it's the same for everyone. If anything this seems like a really cool generation tool for developers but it's not the same as having a random game every time you start it up (I suppose you can just fly to a different planet but that's not quite the same thing).

At the end of the day, my point is: Given that as a player I'm going to be playing in location X, I'd prefer that location X be handcrafted, it will simply be superior in all ways. The only time procedural generation is better is when you're unable to make enough content to make your game work. He even mentions Mass Effect in the video, but I don't think having this tech procedurally generating a galaxy would add that much to Mass Effect, you'd probably explore a bit for fun and then just get back to playing the actual crafted levels that make sense. That said, it certainly doesn't hurt to have all of this layered underneath the basic Mass Effect gameplay, but I find it hard to believe that it would be compelling enough to just run around doing the procedural stuff instead.
Click to expand...

Thanks guys. That's more of the explanation I was looking for.
 
On my phone, so catching up a page at a time…

SolidSnakex said:
He keeps referring to it loading of disc, so will this be a retail game? It sorta seems like it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps he's saying, "disk." ;)


Tuck said:
Draw distance is unfortunately really bad. Would love if the game loaded more at once so you could see off into the distance. Maybe its different on different planets?
Click to expand...
He mentions that things start to get hazy when they're about a kilometer away from you. He also says if you find a high enough mountain, you can actually see the curvature of the planet. He also says the entire planet you're on has already been generated, though distant features are done at a low level of detail. That sounds like a reasonable draw distance to me.


bearythebear said:
So how much space does a "seed" take? I know that it's just numbers and equations, but when you got so many people playing the game, it must be quite large.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's the formulae which are lengthy and complex. Sean said they just use the player's current xyz position as the seed.


Derpyduck said:
When it's popping in he clearly says that this is the same speed as the players ship. So unless something changes, the world drawing in right in front of you is going to exist.
Click to expand...
No, what he said was that he was using the debug camera to fly far faster than the player would ever be able to travel, so he could illustrate the on-the-fly generation of the environment.

At "normal" speeds, you can sometimes see the details on distant mountains taking an instant to fill in, so if that's what you're talking about, I'd say you're being awfully nit-picky. :p
 
Every thread people are questioning where the "game" is, yet everybody loves the he'll out of all the "push stick forward to watch a story" "games" we get? Smh.

We've already be told a lot about the gameplay. If you need a carrot and sense of progressIon then you can mine resources, hunt animals, fight of factions either on the ground or in space, run trade routes, take up bounties, and similar stuff to earn money to upgrade your suit and ship to make it to the center of the galaxy.

Our if you are like me you can get enough enjoyment from simply roaming around planets and caves and stuff not knowing what you'll find and what you may get attacked by.

Mashing said:
So do the planets only have a single biome?
Click to expand...
It appears so, and if so it's a rather annoying trend that a lot of sci-fi's are guilty of.
 
Seventy_X_Seven said:
Every thread people are questioning where the "game" is, yet everybody loves the he'll out of all the "push stick forward to watch a story" "games" we get? Smh.
Click to expand...

What? People bitch about those CONSTANTLY. We can barely have an Order thread on GAF without it convulsing into chaos. Don't try to make shit up to fit your bullshit.
 
These guys are legitimate geniuses. What they're talking about is beyond impressive. I don't know if it works out as a finished game but the concept is breathtaking. They have my money on day one.

As I understand it the game has no "assets" per se which is why there is no loading. At a super simplified level, it is an empirical function that returns something at a certain location in a "universe" that will be locked prior to release. That something is a solar system, planet, or even a rock at different "resolutions". The function picks from endless variations of prototype somethings they give it.
 
TheYanger said:
At the end of the day, my point is: Given that as a player I'm going to be playing in location X, I'd prefer that location X be handcrafted, it will simply be superior in all ways. The only time procedural generation is better is when you're unable to make enough content to make your game work. He even mentions Mass Effect in the video, but I don't think having this tech procedurally generating a galaxy would add that much to Mass Effect, you'd probably explore a bit for fun and then just get back to playing the actual crafted levels that make sense. That said, it certainly doesn't hurt to have all of this layered underneath the basic Mass Effect gameplay, but I find it hard to believe that it would be compelling enough to just run around doing the procedural stuff instead.
Click to expand...

I think this is just because Procedural Generation hasn't advanced far enough yet.

This game can already generate species of animals. Now what about generating behaviors and motivators? What about generating evolution of single cell organisms all the way up to intelligent life? Generating entire civilizations complete with different structures, political systems, philosophies? Generating their entire histories, inventions, wars.

Basically Dwarf Fortress on a galactic scale.

As soon as this can be figured out, I think it's going to be tough for games like Mass Effect to be hand crafted to be as interesting as the same type of game with an unlimited amount of unexplored content.

The one thing that will continue to be challenging to generate will be well written and compelling dialog and characters. That will probably come in time though.

I can't wait till more developers get on board with procedural generation. It's much more exciting to me than the narrative driven gameplay we have seen lately.
 
Wow, that's almost Turok level fog.. And there's no way to fix this? From what I understand from the video they simply need faster hardware to clear it up? Does that mean the PC version will have less fog?

Anyway, the NMS universe looks disappointingly gimmicky and compromised. There isn't much science in sci-fi left really. Pure "arcade"-like exploration I guess it's fine by itself if that's what people wanted, it wasn't quite what I was hoping for.
 
Man, I love what these guys are doing. Sean Murray exudes passion for this project. Wish I got into math when I was young. If I saw this video when I was 12 or something, I would've tried a lot harder to excel in it.
 
daveo42 said:
That was a fantastic video. The explanation specifically about how they are creating the game worlds and generation of each and every pixel for what will end up being millions of worlds. I assume then that the x, y, z locations for each pixel (at least for the topography and vegetation) will be stored somewhere then after it's created? He kind of hit on the fact that it's the algorithm running in the background generating everything, but to recreate the same stuff wouldn't you need to call back to what was originally generated at those exact points?
Click to expand...


Yes and no, the main thing is knowing where the planets are, there will be a routine that determines where each nearby planet is, and what its radius is, and other data, and that will be fed into the generation process too, but none of this is stored permanently either, just temporarily for nearby planets.
So to find the height of land at a particular place, they might just be able to pass in xyz coordinates on the flat spherical surface, and it returns a value which can be used as a height offset.
 
bj00rn_ said:
Wow, that's almost Turok level fog.. And there's no way to fix this? From what I understand from the video they simply need faster hardware to clear it up? Does that mean the PC version will have less fog?

Anyway, the NMS universe looks disappointingly gimmicky and compromised. There isn't much science in sci-fi left really. Pure "arcade"-like exploration I guess it's fine by itself if that's what people wanted, it wasn't quite what I was hoping for.
Click to expand...

I would imagine the draw distance will be significantly farther on PCs.
 
bj00rn_ said:
Wow, that's almost Turok level fog.. And there's no way to fix this? From what I understand from the video they simply need faster hardware to clear it up? Does that mean the PC version will have less fog?

Anyway, the NMS universe looks disappointingly gimmicky and compromised. There isn't much science in sci-fi left really. Pure "arcade"-like exploration I guess it's fine by itself if that's what people wanted, it wasn't quite what I was hoping for.
Click to expand...

What were you hoping for?

jond76 said:
"that's only possible with these crazy, multicore, next Gen machines".

I'm guessing its coming to Xbox too.
Click to expand...

He was definitely referring to the Wii U.
 
That was great and has just made me more hyped especially after seeing just a few of the variations of creatures and ships. I can see myself just shoving this on when I'm bored even if I finish it, just to explore and see new things.

The complaints about "yeah, but there isn't any game!" are a bit silly. We already know the objective, get to the centre of the galaxy/universe. We will go to planets and get resources use resources to upgrade our guy and ship to get more efficient at gathering (or attacking pirates/space cops/space stations etc) to get even cooler ships and gear and go to the centre to win. Why we're doing that doesn't really matter. This is a game where the journey is better than the destination. Will it have some story? Maybe. Maybe we're the last of our species trying to get to the centre of our galaxy to make a wish on the dragon balls to revive our home-world Galifray and become time lords. Would that make the game better?
 
Chev said:
No, really, they have, as I said you're just a youtube search away from dozens of them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2dyiitk6EY

If you really think researchers in the procedural generation field don't make visual representations of their stuff you're either a time traveller from the early 80s or completely missing the point of the field. And that's not even counting the research papers from actual game developers
Click to expand...

Nice one, thanks.
 
bj00rn_ said:
Wow, that's almost Turok level fog.. And there's no way to fix this? From what I understand from the video they simply need faster hardware to clear it up? Does that mean the PC version will have less fog?

Anyway, the NMS universe looks disappointingly gimmicky and compromised. There isn't much science in sci-fi left really. Pure "arcade"-like exploration I guess it's fine by itself if that's what people wanted, it wasn't quite what I was hoping for.
Click to expand...

Go play Dangerous or Star Citizen then.
 
Looks amazing, always has and for such a small team to try to reach for the stars... then make them. Crazy. If nothing else they will have inspired others and created a new boundary in gaming to explore. The ship variation part blew my mind, I can understand manipulating skeletal frames and poly points to create organic shapes (as he says like clay, just need the point coordinates to build it out). But with a ship it seems more amazing to me for some reason. Would be nice if you had some kind of control over picking the ship yourself. Or you have to find the base ship, trade for it and then get like 5 variations to pick from.

Some of the design decisions are off-putting in terms of the gameplay but hell if they can get this working with the Rift or Morpheus I will be happy to just walk around.


The central server stuff is worrying me though, is he saying this is an online game? As before it was more a case of reporting back your position, discoveries and such. Whereas now it seemed more the like it's required to be online to pull down world data. Don't online only me bro.
 
GhaleonEB said:
I was glad he alluded to some really strange creatures. They're showing "dinosaurs" and four legged animals for demos, but he strongly hinted at some really weird stuff, from bugs to giant creatures. It got me hopeful we'll land on some planets and get chased off by some really freaky critters.
Click to expand...

My dream (nightmare) would be to visit a seemingly nice planet and fly around in my ship only to crash into a massive, dinosaur size wasp/moth hybrid, crash into the planet and see a sky full of all those nopes.
 
I really appreciate Sean Murray & Hello Games' ambition, but I can't help but worry the game will be barren as far as gameplay goes. It's obviously too early to say but I hope I'm wrong.

Regardless, I'm glad someone out there is making a game like this. We need more stuff like No Mans Sky.
 
I like that he said they wanted to make a good sci fi game first, then make it procedurally generated second. The tech supporting the gameplay gives me hopes of this being more than an exploration game.

I am truly amazed by the tech though. If it still ends up being an exploration game, it looks like its still going to be amazing.
 
Mutombo said:
I like that he said they wanted to make a good sci fi game first, then make it procedurally generated second. The tech supporting the gameplay gives me hopes of this being more than an exploration game.

I am truly amazed by the tech though. If it still ends up being an exploration game, it looks like its still going to be amazing.
Click to expand...

The way I'm looking at it is even if the game part is sub par (repetitive, grindy, too short, too long, whatever) then I still think I'll enjoy the exploration, discovery and sharing of video and pictures enough to justify the cost of the game. Like, even though I'm all minecrafted out I still hop on it from time to time in creative mode to fly around and see what random world is made (and sometimes with mods that add more variety). It's still fun to just unwind a bit and explore and see what you'll find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

No Man's Sky: Voyagers Update Announced
News  2 3
108
3K
naguanatak replied
No Man's Sky - Breach Update Trailer | PS5, PS4, PS VR2 and PSV2 Games
Trailer 
33
164
Scary_Larry replied
30 Minutes of Mid/Late 90's Video Game Commercials
9
249
MMaRsu replied
No Man's Sky: Relics (New update)
36
3K
peull replied
No Mans Sky Nintendo Switch 2 Edition Trailer (Free Upgrade)
37
2K
Holammer replied
Top Bottom