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

This game has huge potential and I really like what I've seen so far, including the art style and scope of the game. The big problem with these types of games is usually the lack of things to do (i.e. gameplay depth). In order for the massive and beautiful universe they're creating to be compelling, there needs to be a substantial amount of stuff to do in that universe.


  • What motivation will players be given to explore the universe?
  • What motivation will players be given to engage in combat with one another?
  • Is there a game objective or system of progression?
  • Can you create items, structures or alter the landscape?
  • I can land on a planet, but what can I do on that planet that makes it worthwhile?
The potential for this type of game is massive, but there needs to be a sharp focused on creating compelling and meaningful activities to do within the scope of the game.
 
This looks very good...very impressive from a small team.
Totally has stoner game written all over it :)

I haven't tried Joe Danger, any one have impressions from that?
 
I haven't tried Joe Danger, any one have impressions from that?

I personally loved it. But I think many were disappointed because they wanted or expected it to be the PS3's answer to Trials. The problem is that the developers never set out for it to be that. They always described it as a cross between Sonic and Excitebike. And that's exactly what it is. It's slower than Trials because it relies a lot more on platforming and collecting. There's a demo available on PSN so you should definitely give it a try.
 
It'd be cool if this concept was blown up to a fully realized F2P MMO. Lots of cooperation between players, maybe have star systems or galactic zones where PvP is possible, allowing stuff like piracy. Throw in a galactic threat that people need to fend off. Carrot would be crafting and economy the stick, exploration.
Ultima Online, in space!
 
It'd be cool if this concept was blown up to a fully realized F2P MMO. Lots of cooperation between players, maybe have star systems or galactic zones where PvP is possible, allowing stuff like piracy. Throw in a galactic threat that people need to fend off. Carrot would be crafting and economy the stick, exploration.
Ultima Online, in space!

I was loving everything you said ....... EXCEPT F2P!!!!

Please! No more of that talk ...... OK? ;)

Seriously, F2P would ruin this IMO.
 
I was loving everything you said ....... EXCEPT F2P!!!!

Please! No more of that talk ...... OK? ;)

Seriously, F2P would ruin this IMO.

F2P seems like the only model that would work for a new MMO but I'd be willing to pay a subscription for something like this.
 
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?

It's procedural but persistent in the same sense as Minecraft. If I give you my random seed number and we both walk east for 10 kilometers, we will both see the exact same mountain there.

Perlin noise is just one example of a function that can give you that kind of procedural persistence.

This game has me very excited! I love procedural generation when it's done well!
 
I personally loved it. But I think many were disappointed because they wanted or expected it to be the PS3's answer to Trials. The problem is that the developers never set out for it to be that. They always described it as a cross between Sonic and Excitebike. And that's exactly what it is. It's slower than Trials because it relies a lot more on platforming and collecting. There's a demo available on PSN so you should definitely give it a try.

This. I think if it had come out before Trials it would have got more attention. Trials is physics based, Joe Danger is totally not. Joe Danger sure looks good though and has that Sega/Nintendo vibe to it.
 
This game has huge potential and I really like what I've seen so far, including the art style and scope of the game. The big problem with these types of games is usually the lack of things to do (i.e. gameplay depth). In order for the massive and beautiful universe they're creating to be compelling, there needs to be a substantial amount of stuff to do in that universe.


  • What motivation will players be given to explore the universe?
  • What motivation will players be given to engage in combat with one another?
  • Is there a game objective or system of progression?
  • Can you create items, structures or alter the landscape?
  • I can land on a planet, but what can I do on that planet that makes it worthwhile?
The potential for this type of game is massive, but there needs to be a sharp focused on creating compelling and meaningful activities to do within the scope of the game.

Well there's only 4 dudes and 1 of the dudes is completely dedicated to the "gameplay" part. So unless he's a slacker compared to the "procedural math guy" and the "art assets guy" and the...I forget what that other guy does...it should have some sort of gameplay created.
 
what was the name of the project that one russian guy was developing that is very similar to this? where you'll have to find earth with the universe size of the milky way?
 
This game has huge potential and I really like what I've seen so far, including the art style and scope of the game. The big problem with these types of games is usually the lack of things to do (i.e. gameplay depth). In order for the massive and beautiful universe they're creating to be compelling, there needs to be a substantial amount of stuff to do in that universe.


  • What motivation will players be given to explore the universe?
  • What motivation will players be given to engage in combat with one another?
  • Is there a game objective or system of progression?
  • Can you create items, structures or alter the landscape?
  • I can land on a planet, but what can I do on that planet that makes it worthwhile?
The potential for this type of game is massive, but there needs to be a sharp focused on creating compelling and meaningful activities to do within the scope of the game.

Sums up my thoughts pretty well
 
Guildford to Cheshire is a manageable commute right? These guys at Hello Games need to have a meeting with the SCE's Worldwide Studios Stereoscopic 3D team.
 
This game has huge potential and I really like what I've seen so far, including the art style and scope of the game. The big problem with these types of games is usually the lack of things to do (i.e. gameplay depth). In order for the massive and beautiful universe they're creating to be compelling, there needs to be a substantial amount of stuff to do in that universe.


  • What motivation will players be given to explore the universe?
  • What motivation will players be given to engage in combat with one another?
  • Is there a game objective or system of progression?
  • Can you create items, structures or alter the landscape?
  • I can land on a planet, but what can I do on that planet that makes it worthwhile?
The potential for this type of game is massive, but there needs to be a sharp focused on creating compelling and meaningful activities to do within the scope of the game.

Nothing against you, I completely agree with your post, but this exact same sentiment has been stated at least 50 times in this thread. Hopefully we'll have answers soon.


Well there's only 4 dudes and 1 of the dudes is completely dedicated to the "gameplay" part. So unless he's a slacker compared to the "procedural math guy" and the "art assets guy" and the...I forget what that other guy does...it should have some sort of gameplay created.

It's actually 3 dudes and 1 lady. Reading their twitter accounts and seeing their surprise at the reception of the trailer is great, makes me really happy for them. Must be one of the best feelings ever to see something you've worked so hard on get this kind of praise and attention and I really hope they can pull this thing off. I know I'm in for a long wait as I'm going to be eating up every little piece of new info that comes out during this game's development.
 
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?

Procedural generation isn't completely random; it'll have to obey rules, a coordination system of a sort to ensure that everything isn't ontop of one another.

Basically, the procedural generator has to place content the developers have made. They could place it manually, but it'd take a lot longer to do so. So, they'll automate it. But in order to maintain some sort of order, the procedural generation system would need to obey certain rules; like the minimum and maximum amount of distance a planet can be in relation to other planets.

To prevent randomization, they will probably lock the randomization into a coordination system as well, and then just ship the retail copy with a set number of coordinates; like, the first planet is z0, x0, y0, and the following planets will have to place themselves while also obeying the minimum and maximum distances from each other.
 
This game has huge potential and I really like what I've seen so far, including the art style and scope of the game. The big problem with these types of games is usually the lack of things to do (i.e. gameplay depth). In order for the massive and beautiful universe they're creating to be compelling, there needs to be a substantial amount of stuff to do in that universe.


  • What motivation will players be given to explore the universe?
  • What motivation will players be given to engage in combat with one another?
  • Is there a game objective or system of progression?
  • Can you create items, structures or alter the landscape?
  • I can land on a planet, but what can I do on that planet that makes it worthwhile?
The potential for this type of game is massive, but there needs to be a sharp focused on creating compelling and meaningful activities to do within the scope of the game.

Agree completely. That is what I was concerned about after reading some of their interviews.
 
I like to explore for the sake of exploring - I hope they don't tie in too many "systems" to it, though I realise I'm probably in the minority.
 
(drools)

Anyone know any platform and distribution info on this yet?

PC for sure, but likely coming to PS4, as Shahid and Boyes were already on the task according to their comments on Twitter. Well, Shadid's anyway.

It's definitely coming to the PS4 going by hints from Shahid.

Iz27WAa.png


B5OCXrz.png


OHOayWE.png


I think Sony XDev is also teasing that as well.

WqCUUqU.png
 
I would really love if they were going to handle the planetary exploration like a survival simulator, rather than a "just walk around and watch different panoramas".
It's essentially the only approach that I think would keep a game based on procedural generation interesting on the long run.
 
Looks like an awesome game, hope there are missions and shit on the different planets instead of just flying around a looking at stuff.
 
This is the problem.

The game is excellent. It's not trials and it wasn't trying to be at all

Everyone should stop with the comparisons

It's closer to Gripshift then Trials, although Gripshift did have Trials like leaderboards. But yeah Joe Danger is awesome. The Platformer-Racer hybrid isn't being supported enough.
 
I would really love if they were going to handle the planetary exploration like a survival simulator, rather than a "just walk around and watch different panoramas".
It's essentially the only approach that I think would keep a game based on procedural generation interesting on the long run.

That's exactly the vibe I got from reading the interviews. It seems there will definitely be a semi-rougelike aspect to the game where you will explore for resources (and something else, I hope), power up your ship and try to get to another planet. The thing is, you could get shot or crash for some other reason and start fixing or rebuilding your ship (since you can't really die, just loose your ship and everything in it). The thing is, this is just a small and specific situation and there would have to be a lot more to do, to avoid getting dull too fast.

I'd love to see some exploration and orientation mechanics like in Miasmata (triangulate your position, orient yourself by landmarks or stars), have tasks to discover monuments, take photos, chart the galaxy, send probes to scout the planet, analyze the chemical structure of objects (some of these mechanics are nicely working already in Take on Mars), use elaborate devices to distract dangerous animals or hunt them, dig for resources and minerals and who knows what else.

It would be awesome if, on certain planets, you'd need to be careful how you land, avoid deadly storms, so you'd need to land quite far away from a valuable resource spot and then traverse the rest of the way on foot, while trying to survive the hazardous environment and deadly flora and fauna.

These types of situations would be incredible in a game like this. Although I get the feeling they won't go too deep in the survival mechanics (like adding hunger, heat or radiation poisoning), but one can hope. :)
 
So... possibly a silly thing, but... does anyone else read the current Image comic Prophet? Did anyone else get a bit of a chill thinking about the possible similarities?

If I can name my character in NMS... it shall be Hiyonhoiagn.

The worlds, characters and general craziness that those guys on Prophet think up has me so excited for games like this and this game in particular. So much potential, as has been stated to death, to create worlds with amazing stories or designs, gaps in which we can jam our own ideas of history. I really couldn't be more excited.
 
So... possibly a silly thing, but... does anyone else read the current Image comic Prophet? Did anyone else get a bit of a chill thinking about the possible similarities?

If I can name my character in NMS... it shall be Hiyonhoiagn.

The worlds, characters and general craziness that those guys on Prophet think up has me so excited for games like this and this game in particular. So much potential, as has been stated to death, to create worlds with amazing stories or designs, gaps in which we can jam our own ideas of history. I really couldn't be more excited.

Yeah, Prophet is pretty great though I've only read a few issues so far. They both share the same sources of influence from French and mostly European sci-fi comic book authors like Jean Giraud (Moebius) and the like. You should take a look at Moebius' Incal and Jodorowsky's Metabarons and Technopriests if you haven't already.
 
Oh I am an avid Moebius fan! I absolutely agree. That is my kind of science fiction. Nausicaa as well, which was influenced by Moebius' work. It is that kind of awe, the awe I felt reading Nausicaa or seeing Arzach, that this gorgeous trailer has given me. I love it.
 
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?

Basically: procedural isn't random. It's driven on pseudorandom generators but those, given the same input, the same "seed", will always produce the same result (so whenever a game offers you actual random levels it's really randomizing the seeds too, usually simply by deriving it from something that constantly changes, like the date and time). So it is quite feasible to design your procedural algorithms so they rely on a single, simple seed for the whole universe. That is, in fact, how the original Elite worked, on a much smaller scale, or how the Midwinter games could offer much bigger territories than current sandboxes.

That's also how you can get around memory/scale limits: since the same seed always gives the same result, if you can generate everything you need fast enough, you only need to store the seeds, which are very compact (can be a single number). It's just like how Streaming works for something like GTA, except instead of loading more detailed "chunks" from disk as you get closer, you generate them, and then when you leave you just save a list of changes the player made that are worht remembering so you can reapply them next time you need that chunk.

Usually a balance has to be struck between size and speed so everything gets made in time, and also because it's not just that the system isn't random, it can be driven, so by determining the kind of seeds you need to have control you can generate things that go your way. For example in the midwinter games the world was seeded by a basic map that was like 200x100 pixels and would be expanded into the hundred-thousand-square-kilometers world, or in Spore the seed for the creatures was a rough skeleton over which the player had control.

There is a videogamey limit but it can be stretched very, very far through making the whole thing very heirarchical in structure. eg imagine dividing your galaxy in 1000 kilometer cubes. The "seed" for each cube will be the coordinates, since they're unique to each cube, so there not even a need to store them. With 32 bits per coordinate (standard for integer numbers) that gives a whopping 64 billions of billions of billions unique 1000-kilometer cubes that take no room outside of ram (the seed is implicitly the coordinates), and in ram the worst case is having to store eight of those generated cubes at a time (because you're stading right at their eight common corners). That's a lot! If only 1% of them have a single unique star system, that's already a lot to explore.

So yeah, the numbers boggle the mind, though of course a procedural generator's output will easily feel samey if not carefully designed.
 
Here's the linked tweet:

1xODjH5.png


I presume the loss is limited to 'hard' assets - that their software is backed up somewhere safe etc. Still crappy.
 
Here's the linked tweet:

1xODjH5.png


I presume the loss is limited to 'hard' assets - that their software is backed up somewhere safe etc. Still crappy.

Just saw this. That really sucks, and yeah you're most probably right. Hope everyone's alright there more importantly.
 
The hard drives are probably fine. They will need to buy new machines.

As far as backups, I hope they had an elevated NAS unit with their software repositories in it at least.

It's not easy to keep everything backed up when you have shitty bandwidth available. When everyone has 1Gbps fiber, this will hopefully change!
 
Top Bottom