No Man's Sky announced - Hello Games (VGX)

Deimo5 said:
Rev3 interview gives some more details
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NWpdyQXzHw
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. I think they make it clearer in the video, they'll basically choose the seed for the procedural universe and every player will have the same one, so if 50 players visit a planet at the same coordinates, they'll all find that one, same planet although without some small changes you might've made to it, but if one player makes drastic changes to the planet in some way, those changes will be updated for every player.

Since the galaxy will be so big, all of these details won't be a problem. It's very much like a "season" of Mirrormoon EP, when a player visits a planet, he can name it and that name will be visible to all other players and will serve as a pointer that the planet has been visited by someone already. It's just that in Mirrormoon, 50 to a 100 players could probably go through all the planets in the given "season" in a few days whereas there'll be considerably more planets in No Man's Sky.
 
"Even that has multiplayer!"

It's also developed in the main developer's spare time mostly as a hobby and as such does not have problems with running into deadlines or running out of budget. It's a completely different situation when people are doing this as their day job.
 
Deimo5 said:
Rev3 interview gives some more details
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NWpdyQXzHw
Click to expand...
Wow. This game is ambitious as fuck.

I wonder what will happen if you destroy certain element in the universe. Will others miss it? Will it be destroyed for others as well?

I don't know how expansive or destructable the universe is but it'll be freaking awesome to see one player's action affecting everyone in the game.

Would we come to a point where the game will need a universe reboot? Not sure how that'll work.

I'm so excited about this game and I don't even know what it is besides exploration, and that's good enough for me!
 
This is maybe the first truly next gen game I have seen. I imagined next gen games to be more like this, new experiences on a totally new scale.

So far next genration means only more polygons, better textures and physics on shirts.

These guys could really deliver on a next gen dream.
 
One of the things that is really exciting to me is how they discussed the planets that are really different then what we expect. They went for.the planets they did in the trailer because its kind of what we expect life to be, but as we get deeper into the universe there will be some very different types of worlds.

Makes me wonder if there will be gas giants, or planets covered completely by water (we know we can go underwater) maybe a planet with no sunlight. Im way to excited for this game.......
 
ReaperXL07 said:
One of the things that is really exciting to me is how they discussed the planets that are really different then what we expect. They went for.the planets they did in the trailer because its kind of what we expect life to be, but as we get deeper into the universe there will be some very different types of worlds.

Makes me wonder if there will be gas giants, or planets covered completely by water (we know we can go underwater) maybe a planet with no sunlight. Im way to excited for this game.......
Click to expand...

The fact that they said "Players finding planets that are inhabitable" makes it seem like what you're saying will happen.

I wonder how things will work, like gravity or oxygen or whatnot. I'm excited! Im sure their game will have certain set of rules regarding this.
 
shagg_187 said:
The fact that they said "Players finding planets that are inhabitable" makes it seem like what you're saying will happen.

I wonder how things will work, like gravity or oxygen or whatnot. I'm excited! Im sure their game will have certain set of rules regarding this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, still allot of questions, and I would not be surprised if they are still figuring it out themselves.

It will be interesting though as a planet of water might not be uninhabitable though, it would just be a situation where evolution would happen in a way that life would adapt. We see those giant sandworms in the desert, maybe we will get some fish people, or giant alien shark whales.

There is also cleary at least one race of intelligent life in the game as there has to be someone inside those star destroyers, so I dont think its impossible that we will come across settlements, or space stations either.

Im really excited to see more, but I fear its going to be awhile before that happens. Kind of like when Sony/Tequila Works announced Rime, we got that first trailer and have not heard anything since.
 
Teknopathetic said:
"Even that has multiplayer!"

It's also developed in the main developer's spare time mostly as a hobby and as such does not have problems with running into deadlines or running out of budget. It's a completely different situation when people are doing this as their day job.
Click to expand...

It was a tongue in cheek comment.
 
FunkyLounge said:
This is maybe the first truly next gen game I have seen. I imagined next gen games to be more like this, new experiences on a totally new scale.

So far next genration means only more polygons, better textures and physics on shirts.

These guys could really deliver on a next gen dream.
Click to expand...

That is the way I am seeing it. Don't get me wrong, there are lots of flashy, big-budget titles I am looking forward to. But in terms of concept alone, this blows everything else away for me. I'll be happy if they even touch on half of what they are trying to do.
 
Have this vision of visiting planets that require specific equipment to explore. Harsh environments but possibly have the most interesting things to find (minerals or even ancient alien structures). Requires a certain amount of prep to explore these places. I'd love it if it were like this.
 
shagg_187 said:
Wow. This game is ambitious as fuck.

I wonder what will happen if you destroy certain element in the universe. Will others miss it? Will it be destroyed for others as well?
Click to expand...

It's unclear what's destructible and what's not. We see an asteroid being blown up in the trailer but that doesn't necessarily mean everything is fair game for destruction.

In the Rev3 interview they said that 'important things' you do will persist. I don't know if blowing up a random asteroid is classed as important.

Still questions there.
 
gofreak said:
It's unclear what's destructible and what's not. We see an asteroid being blown up in the trailer but that doesn't necessarily mean everything is fair game for destruction.

In the Rev3 interview they said that 'important things' you do will persist. I don't know if blowing up a random asteroid is classed as important.

Still questions there.
Click to expand...

Well I do remember in one of the interviews I read they mentioned that you could potentially wipe out a species if you were too kill too many of them. It would also be possible to drain a planet of all of its natural resources. Im actually kind of curious if this will require a net connection as it sounds like this system could play a significant factor in the game.
 
ReaperXL07 said:
Well I do remember in one of the interviews I read they mentioned that you could potentially wipe out a species if you were too kill too many of them. It would also be possible to drain a planet of all of its natural resources. Im actually kind of curious if this will require a net connection as it sounds like this system could play a significant factor in the game.
Click to expand...

I suppose wiping out a species would be pretty important :)

But that raises some design questions. Does that mean that some things in the game could end up being played by only one person? Let's say there is some procedurally generated dungeon with some stuff going on, and let's say I am the first to go to that planet, and let's say I destroy all the NPCs in the dungeon or whatever, and render it basically unplayable for anyone else... I guess if I can do that, Hello Games is happy enough that there will be so many planets with so many dungeons, that some can be 'disposable' or one time only attractions? Or will planets be instanced for each player? Wiping out a species, that level of 'effect' on a planet, suggests not...

I think the game could be playable offline, but in that mode basically the universe would be to yourself. You'd be the first to discover everything, the only one to explore anything, in your own little local copy of the universe. I'm not sure if they're planning an offline mode but it's feasible.
 
Teknopathetic said:
"Even that has multiplayer!"

It's also developed in the main developer's spare time mostly as a hobby and as such does not have problems with running into deadlines or running out of budget. It's a completely different situation when people are doing this as their day job.
Click to expand...

The more I read/see about this game the more I think not having seamless multiplayer integration may be a good design choice. Player cooperation sounds like it is limited to persistence of certain elements as well as sharing information in a public bulletin board style. This prevents players from teaming up and forming groups or armies, which would shift the balance of power against the environment in their favor. One of the core concepts I'm getting from interviews is that the developers want to maintain the feel of a Metroid style game, and being alone and weak on the frontier is a big part of that. Haven't played the Souls games, but from what I hear they share this goal as well.
 
Something Sean Murray said really hit home with me. When he was talking about how most games make you feel like you are on a ride in someone else's movie or that everything is too scripted and is like a moveable camera on rails. In other words, everything beneath the surface is so fake and becomes predictable. Now, these experiences no doubt have their place and I am excited for many of them as we speak. But at the same time, he is so right and that is what makes what they are doing all the more appealing.

I want freedom to create my experience by finding things that are unique to me and the choices I have made. Let me just be another frontiersman who can and will screw up in order to learn and press onward, instead of the hero that saves the galaxy in some scripted tale. Applying a rouguelike/survival/resource management experience into a procedurally generated universe is a winning formula to achieve this in ultimate form if I have ever seen one. I just hope like hell they can deliver, because we really do need this kind of game for 'next-gen' to actually feel that way.
 
After watching the Rev3 games interview with one of the developers, I'm officially excited.

I'm not sure if anyone else has pondered about all the possible experiences this game can offer as much as I have, but theres one scenario in particular that I hope is possible.

If you're the first to discover a planet you can choose to upload it and make it available for anyone to navigate or just jump to it, but what if you chose not to?

What if you you're randomly flying through space and come upon an odd collection of space hazards(black holes, asteroid fields etc...). Most players decide not to pay any mind, but not you. Curiosity has gotten the better of you. You decide to try to navigate through these hazards and fail multiple times until finally you make it through. Your reward is a gem of a discovery, an amazing planet that is unique in the wonder it instills in you. You see that there is one other play there and he request that you not make this planet known to anyone. That only those who can champion the gauntlet it took to get here deserve to experience this place. Eventually more explorers will join in your discovery and agree to your terms, and that this planet's existence will slowly spread to others, and is known as a place only the brave venture to, or some asshole will just upload it as soon as he finds it.
 
BlueTsunami said:
Have this vision of visiting planets that require specific equipment to explore. Harsh environments but possibly have the most interesting things to find (minerals or even ancient alien structures). Requires a certain amount of prep to explore these places. I'd love it if it were like this.
Click to expand...

Make it mod-friendly and Goat knows what might happen. ;D
 
BlueTsunami said:
Have this vision of visiting planets that require specific equipment to explore. Harsh environments but possibly have the most interesting things to find (minerals or even ancient alien structures). Requires a certain amount of prep to explore these places. I'd love it if it were like this.
Click to expand...

I was thinking exactly this. Mass Effect 1 did this, with you unable to explore some planets on foot due to the environment.
 
Noks415 said:
After watching the Rev3 games interview with one of the developers, I'm officially excited.

I'm not sure if anyone else has pondered about all the possible experiences this game can offer as much as I have, but theres one scenario in particular that I hope is possible.

If you're the first to discover a planet you can choose to upload it and make it available for anyone to navigate or just jump to it, but what if you chose not to?

What if you you're randomly flying through space and come upon an odd collection of space hazards(black holes, asteroid fields etc...). Most players decide not to pay any mind, but not you. Curiosity has gotten the better of you. You decide to try to navigate through these hazards and fail multiple times until finally you make it through. Your reward is a gem of a discovery, an amazing planet that is unique in the wonder it instills in you. You see that there is one other play there and he request that you not make this planet known to anyone. That only those who can champion the gauntlet it took to get here deserve to experience this place. Eventually more explorers will join in your discovery and agree to your terms, and that this planet's existence will slowly spread to others, and is known as a place only the brave venture to, or some asshole will just upload it as soon as he finds it.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a nice idea, to create a sort of legend around a specific location in the galaxy but as you said, you can't really have control over other people's actions and I'm not so sure things will work that way in the end.

I think a lot of the exploration balance will come from the actual number of stars and systems, their relative distances and the way your ship uses and refills its interplanetary drive. If you'll need a week to traverse, say 20 planets on your way to the center, that automatically transforms the way people play the game since their global goal would be getting to that center. And if every player is so spread out that they'll need A LOT of time until they find each other (spatially) so that would prolong the game time significantly, but it would need to be filled with reasonable tasks to do.

The devs mentioned that the nearer you are to the center, the more difficult the game will get and that you won't be able to survive as easily by yourself and that the multiplayer aspect will help you in this. Perhaps it'll be all about sharing the found resources, creating mini clusters of explored and marked planets with lots of resources that become relatively safe havens to the veteran frontiersmen.

Roshin said:
Make it mod-friendly and Goat knows what might happen. ;D
Click to expand...

DICKS IN SPACE!
 
I'd be fine with it being single-player, but the extinction/elimination of resources of animals seems a REALLY weird choice to me. It's unique sure, but it does not sound like it would affect gameplay in a positive manner.

It's unique in a Curiosity: What's inside the box way, and that's not necessarily a good thing.

Extinction is feasible? People could grief, and/or it can be an annoyance even if it's a unique/emotional experience to see say, green birds gone.

Extinction is not very feasible? Then why even have it, if it's an all-or-nothing thing as suggested?
 
I love that this trailer doesn't revolve around combat. It looks like one small piece of a larger game.

Great music, vibrant worlds, and the promise of vast space exploration. If the final game is even half as cool as it's reveal, count me in.
 
Someone needs to hire the designer of this game and give them unlimited cash.

Dude has some serious passion, he is what the gaming industry needs. Passionate guys with great ideas.

I hope this game does well.
 
oatmeal said:
Someone needs to hire the designer of this game and give them unlimited cash.

Dude has some serious passion, he is what the gaming industry needs. Passionate guys with great ideas.
Click to expand...

The game is only being made by 4 people.

Sony already funded their first game (Joe Danger).
 
legacyzero said:
PC for sure. But It seems Sony is already on the CASE. I look foward seeing/hearing A LOT more about this game at E3.
Click to expand...

You're right.

Shahid teased it before it was shown too. Good to know it will probably be PS4 bound, and for a game like this I wonder if there could even be crossplay between the two platforms? There is no direct contact with other players.
 
http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2013/50/1386611368-no-mans-sky-3.jpg
Click to expand...

See that alien craft by the light? The same one thats in the trailer after the ship takes off and heads to outer space.

I want to be able to fly into them.
 
So it's procedural...but the universe is persistent. I think I get it. Are people actually playing together or is it more like just on a discovery level, things are linked?
 
Blizzard said:
I'd be fine with it being single-player, but the extinction/elimination of resources of animals seems a REALLY weird choice to me. It's unique sure, but it does not sound like it would affect gameplay in a positive manner.

It's unique in a Curiosity: What's inside the box way, and that's not necessarily a good thing.

Extinction is feasible? People could grief, and/or it can be an annoyance even if it's a unique/emotional experience to see say, green birds gone.

Extinction is not very feasible? Then why even have it, if it's an all-or-nothing thing as suggested?
Click to expand...

I like it. A true tangible demonstration of what humanity could do to another species if they do the wrong thing. Irreparable damage to a universe. Extermination of a species, wiping out of a planet's atmosphere from resource mining, etc.

Who knows how in depth this stuff will be. Kudos for the ambition to do it. Maximizing the possibilities of procedural generation is key to accomplishing this as there's no way a hand crafted universe could exist on this scale. Let the "Maths" do it for you!
 
So the map layout mimics our view of the universe? Or should i say galaxy. We know its general makeup but its planetary systems for various star ayatems are still unknown. And these planets don't really come into existence until we see them which comes down to the procedural aspect. So.damn.awesome.

If this is getting a PC release, I hope they're also considering supporting the Oculus Rift.
 
Even after the Rev3 interview, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my brain around this game, or rather, what my perception of the SCOPE of this game will be. If the universe is procedural, but the planets are persistent across all players- and the way Sean Murray said that no one player would be able to put a dent into charting the game's universe alone- just how big is this universe? Because just a few thousand people all starting from random points and uploading information about what they find after a few hours of gameplay is a HUGE amount of data that someone who buys the game on day 14 will have presented to them. If there's a risk of players "running out" of uncharted planets, systems, objects, phenomena, etc., what use do those procedural systems have after everyone's found everything? If you buy the game a month after release, will the player base have already exhausted what the game can do? Will your exploring experience amount to nothing but visiting known planets with all the materials you need to "beat" the game?

That is, unless the game is unfathomably huge. And if it's as big as I think it would have to be to avoid a potential "end game," my mind is kinda exploding.

EDIT: Unless they pull a New Game+ String Theory Multiverse twist and you ride the Black Hole Express to a completely new universe, and blow this sucker wide open with hundreds of layers of procedurally generated universes and endless exploration. :whoa:
 
The universe is the same for all players, so it doesn't matter who discovers a planet first, all the data they're uploading is "planet #12483475398437945 discovered by player X" everything else about planet #12483475398437945 can be generated at runtime on the player's side. As for "running out" it's just not going to happen. There's something in the order of ten billion planets in the Milky Way. Assuming the game goes very very well and sells 10 million copies. That means every player would have to visit a thousand planets, and not visit any that are already charted, for them to "run out". And the NMS galaxy might be much larger than ours. *And* the planets themselves should be pretty large, with islands, oceans, mountains, settlements etc. to discover.
 
Crispy75 said:
The universe is the same for all players, so it doesn't matter who discovers a planet first, all the data they're uploading is "planet #12483475398437945 discovered by player X" everything else about planet #12483475398437945 can be generated at runtime on the player's side. As for "running out" it's just not going to happen. There's something in the order of ten billion planets in the Milky Way. Assuming the game goes very very well and sells 10 million copies. That means every player would have to visit a thousand planets, and not visit any that are already charted, for them to "run out". And the NMS galaxy might be much larger than ours. *And* the planets themselves should be pretty large, with islands, oceans, mountains, settlements etc. to discover.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "generated at runtime on the player's side?" Because the persistence of the universe and the "if one player finds a tree, you can visit that planet and will see the same tree" stuff goes against total randomization IF the planet has been charted and uploaded to the servers. My takeaway from the explanation is that whatever set of variables a player finds on planet X is uploaded for everyone in exactly the same fashion, but was wholly unique to whoever found and decided to share it first.

As for the Milky Way numbers, I understand how enormous the universe is in real life, but I'm having a tough time visualizing that coming from a game. Like, if there's persistence, there has to be a "videogamey" limit.....right? And the planets can't actually be full sized planets......right? Are......are these thoughts what next-gen feels like?
 
Whether or not the game will actually come to Xbox One is still unknown (as is for other platforms as well). But, it seems at least as though MS would like for it to be on their platform, and has perhaps discussed with Hello Games about that possibility.

Hello Games's procedurally generated space exploration game No Man Sky has yet to be announced for a console. Microsoft's ID@Xbox program director Chris Charla would very much like this to stop being the case, pretty please.

"I would be super-psyched if they want to bring that game to Xbox," he told me in London yesterday. Is Microsoft talking to the developer about it, then? Alas, Charla was unwilling to say more, though he did grin at me in what I choose to call a quietly promising way. Make of that piece of incendiary journalistic speculation what you will.
Click to expand...

This is the kind of game that I hope is on as many platforms (that can run it) as possible. I know there's still a lot of unknown about it, but the fact that the devs are inspired by Asimov and Clarke is all I really need to be excited.

Source: ID@Xbox boss "super-psyched" to put No Man's Sky on Xbox One
 
Everyone's galaxy is built from the same seed, it will look the same landscape for each player. Elite's galaxy was done with the same principle 30 years ago.
 
apologies if this has been discussed, but i got the sense from the showing, the lack of platforms, and the size of the team, that this isnt even so much of a game at this point. i have the feeling that this will ultimately end up as vaporware - its like so many early gen announced projects that never see the light of day
 
Net_Wrecker said:
Even after the Rev3 interview, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my brain around this game, or rather, what my perception of the SCOPE of this game will be. If the universe is procedural, but the planets are persistent across all players- and the way Sean Murray said that no one player would be able to put a dent into charting the game's universe alone- just how big is this universe? Because just a few thousand people all starting from random points and uploading information about what they find after a few hours of gameplay is a HUGE amount of data that someone who buys the game on day 14 will have presented to them.
Click to expand...

It won't be presented to the player as such. It's recorded server side, but the required data for an entire solar system or planet will probably just be one number, to start with anyway. That seed data would get pulled down on demand as the player traverses the galaxy, and fed into the functions that generate the world or whatever.

Net_Wrecker said:
What do you mean "generated at runtime on the player's side?" Because the persistence of the universe and the "if one player finds a tree, you can visit that planet and will see the same tree" stuff goes against total randomization IF the planet has been charted and uploaded to the servers.
Click to expand...

It's a seeded randomness. If a planet has a number assigned to it, that number is fed into the 'random' procedures as a seed to generate the planet, the tree distribution or whatever. So that way, if a tree is somewhere for you, it'll be somewhere for me too. Just by virtue of both our games generating that planet from the same seed number. One number. It's not as if as someone charts a planet and finds trees, individual tree locations and characteristics are being uploaded and recorded... this all falls out of functions seeded by just one number for that planet. Or something close to that anyway.

Outside of that procedural content, there might be some changes made to a planet or solar system by a player that need to be recorded and served to other players. And those things might be stored differently or require more data. But the initial fundamentals of a planet or solar system or whatever probably all boil down to one number, or a relatively small set of numbers.

As for planets that are to scale, that's pretty easy depending on things like how the terrain system works etc. It's certainly very easy to make a giant sphere that is to scale with a real planet, at least once you get around numerical precision issues :) The harder part would be more how to make a planet of such scale interesting. Perhaps some planets just won't be anyway.
 
Net_Wrecker said:
What do you mean "generated at runtime on the player's side?" Because the persistence of the universe and the "if one player finds a tree, you can visit that planet and will see the same tree" stuff goes against total randomization IF the planet has been charted and uploaded to the servers. My takeaway from the explanation is that whatever set of variables a player finds on planet X is uploaded for everyone in exactly the same fashion, but was wholly unique to whoever found and decided to share it first.
Click to expand...
You're confusing "procedural" with random. Take Pi for example. Given an arbitrary digit from pi, it is impossible to predict what the next digit will be. It appears to be totally random. But, if you and I calculate Pi to the 40,000th digit, we will both get the same digit. In NMS (as in all procedurally generated worlds), all the complexity unfolds via utterly deterministic rules. Given the same input ("40,000th digit of pi", "3rd planet of the star at location 43283984,3482739,4678"), the calculation always gives exactly the same result. The same distribution of land, the same atmosphere, the same lifeforms, the same tree species, the same location and orientation of the tree. At no point is a truly random number generator used.
As for the Milky Way numbers, I understand how enormous the universe is in real life, but I'm having a tough time visualizing that coming from a game. Like, if there's persistence, there has to be a "videogamey" limit.....right? And the planets can't actually be full sized planets......right? Are......are these thoughts what next-gen feels like?
Click to expand...
With procedural generation, the only limits are those set by the programmers. Minecraft's worldgen can create landscapes 9 million times as large as Earth's, and that's just because coordinates are represented as 32 bit integers.

All the persistence that needs to be stored is the *differences* made by the player. And that's no greater challenge than for any other game (and depends entirely on what sorts of permanent persistent change the player is allowed to make)
 
Given the very short distance from ground to space shown in the trailer, I suspect that planets are scaled down from real life. Kerbal Space Program has 1/10th scale planets, and they still seem huge.
 
"Randomization" was perhaps the wrong word choice for that statement, but nonetheless, I've been sufficiently schooled in what NMS is attempting to do here. Excited to see how it all comes together in practice.
 
Crispy75 said:
Given the very short distance from ground to space shown in the trailer, I suspect that planets are scaled down from real life. Kerbal Space Program has 1/10th scale planets, and they still seem huge.
Click to expand...

I wondered about that too. It was a very brief transition. I thought maybe it was edited for brevity, but who knows...
 
Given the very short distance from ground to space shown in the trailer, I suspect that planets are scaled down from real life. Kerbal Space Program has 1/10th scale planets, and they still seem huge.
Click to expand...

One might expect that the planets would vary in size.
 
op_ivy said:
apologies if this has been discussed, but i got the sense from the showing, the lack of platforms, and the size of the team, that this isnt even so much of a game at this point. i have the feeling that this will ultimately end up as vaporware - its like so many early gen announced projects that never see the light of day
Click to expand...

People who've seen it have said that it's pretty far along. The trailer specifically only really showed "familiar" things in order to keep the sense of wonder in discovery intact, apparently.
 
gofreak said:
I wondered about that too. It was a very brief transition. I thought maybe it was edited for brevity, but who knows...
Click to expand...

There was obviously an edit in there that I assumed was for brevity, but it'll be hard to tell given the ship was in clouds where the cut happened.
 
Secret Owl said:
I love that this trailer doesn't revolve around combat. It looks like one small piece of a larger game.

Great music, vibrant worlds, and the promise of vast space exploration. If the final game is even half as cool as it's reveal, count me in.
Click to expand...

I just hope I can do capital ship battles. If I can do that I'm happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

No Man's Sky: Relics (New update)
35
2K
Trogdor1123 replied
No Mans Sky Nintendo Switch 2 Edition Trailer (Free Upgrade)
37
574
Holammer replied
No Man's Sky Aquarius Update
38
3K
cyberheater replied
Ambrosia Sky - Official Announcement Trailer
Trailer Indie 
0
74
IbizaPocholo replied
Hello Neighbor 3 announced
News Trailer 
3
975
lh032 replied
Top Bottom