No Man’s Sky: A Whole Universe to Explore [PSBlog]

As much as I'm looking forward to this, I don't think we're going to see other player models. Their ships, certainly (although maybe not more than one or two at a time), but not people walking around. I'd actually be a bit surprised if they have humanoid NPCs, I'm kind of expecting the space stations to be essentially a menu where you can do trades once you land.

If it does well, maybe they can license the character creator from a Korean MMO for the sequel. :)

Yeah I suspect you're right. Probably just like dock at a space station and see an image of our ship there with a trading menu. I don't mind that at all, just always dream bigger lol
 
I think this game will be pointless...Exploring countless planets ? For what ? How long will it take to get bored ?
 
What I want to know is will there be some awesome space city for meeting other players and trading. Would be rad if the scale was big enough.

From the interviews I've seen, it sounds like it's possible to run into other players but given how vast the universe is, it's unlikely. But I do like that idea. Certainly as players all converge toward the center of the galaxy we're more likely to run into other players.

I just want a way to hook up with a few friends of my own to go exploring with. Discovering a neat planet solo sounds like a great experience. But so does playing with a buddy or two and exploring a dangerous planet together, or dogfighting enemies as a squad out in space.
 
What I want to know is will there be some awesome space city for meeting other players and trading. Would be rad if the scale was big enough.

I would love this, but from everything I've read it sounds like this will not be the case. From Sean's interviews, he makes it seem like you will hardly ever encounter others due to the size of the world and the space they put between players. I'm not sure if Hello Games is trying to avoid multi-player scope-creep or if they want to keep player-to-player interactions very scarce so they're more meaningful.

I can try and find some quotes that gave me this impression if someone has walked away with a different perspective.

On an unrelated note: I can't believe how much shade people are throwing at this game. There's a difference between not getting your hopes up and acting hostile towards a game because you want to see everything right now. Be patient and judge the game on its full release merits...not during early-stage previews.
 
On an unrelated note: I can't believe how much shade people are throwing at this game. There's a difference between not getting your hopes up and acting hostile towards a game because you want to see everything right now. Be patient and judge the game on its full release merits...not during early-stage previews.
Amen.
 
I think this game will be pointless...Exploring countless planets ? For what ? How long will it take to get bored ?

The "for what" has been answered. You're exploring to find resources, you're finding resources to upgrade your ship, and you're upgrading your ship so you can reach the center of the galaxy, which is the win condition.

How long it takes to get bored depends on how much you have to fight that dinosaur so that you can get at the diamond stash that lets you get that fancy new ship.
 
I think this game will be pointless...Exploring countless planets ? For what ? How long will it take to get bored ?

"Exploring procedurally generated worlds of blocks? For what? how long will it take to get bored?"

Much like Minecraft, No Man's Sky does have a goal/endgame. But it's the freedom to find your own things to do in the world (in this case, universe) that is the primary draw.
 
EDIT: 29/08/14: The developers have fixed it!

I can not trust these devs.

They aren't even bothered to fix the achievements of their latest game.
(As a result, my Steam profile looks kaput since there are 2 no-image icons.)

joedanger2.PNG


http://steamcommunity.com/app/242110/discussions/0/540743757695358190/#p1
 
On an unrelated note: I can't believe how much shade people are throwing at this game. There's a difference between not getting your hopes up and acting hostile towards a game because you want to see everything right now. Be patient and judge the game on its full release merits...not during early-stage previews.

I can't see any reson for giving Hello Games/NMS any special treatment in this regard. If this forum was ok with calling out Molyneux's constant hype and promises bla-bla ahead of game releases then there's no reason for why Hello Games and NMS should be exempt from criticism either. I think the next step for Hello Games should be to either take a break from going to the press with their meaningless theoretical numbers, or rather show us some actual live core gameplay.
 
I can't see any reson for giving Hello Games/NMS any special treatment in this regard. If this forum was ok with calling out Molyneux's constant hype and promises bla-bla ahead of game releases then there's no reason for why Hello Games and NMS should be exempt from criticism either. I think the next step for Hello Games should be to either take a break from going to the press with their meaningless theoretical numbers, or rather show us some actual live core gameplay.

It is just flabbergasting how some people can casually throw out the name Molyneux when they please. If I'm looking at this right, Sean Murray is Sean Murray, and Peter Molyneux is Peter Molyneux, and same goes for Hello Games and Lionhead... so when this game is released and if we have a bunch of promises that are not met (just like Molyneux has a history of doing), then go ahead and make the comparison, but until then, why don't you find something more substantial in your criticisms.

You say they are getting special treatment, yet you essentially call them liars without any proof... they are doing something that is unheard of with the size of the team they have, and if they pull it off it can be something truly special. Is there something wrong if people want to put their trust in these guys? Anyways, I'm sorry if it upsets you that there are people who are genuinely looking forward to this game.
 
I can't see any reson for giving Hello Games/NMS any special treatment in this regard. If this forum was ok with calling out Molyneux's constant hype and promises bla-bla ahead of game releases then there's no reason for why Hello Games and NMS should be exempt from criticism either. I think the next step for Hello Games should be to either take a break from going to the press with their meaningless theoretical numbers, or rather show us some actual live core gameplay.

Molyneux has a history of making games that don't live up to what he hyped them to be. Hello Games doesn't. That's not to say that they shouldn't be criticized, but they aren't comparable to Molyneux.
 
Quick tweet Hello Games and let Sean Murray know you need to be able to do stuff in No Mans Sky!

just pointing out people seem fixated on the procedurally generated aspect, either pro or con, but that isn't going to be the key to whether it is going to work as a game or not. It occupies interviews and discussion as though it is the key.
 
I can't see any reson for giving Hello Games/NMS any special treatment in this regard. If this forum was ok with calling out Molyneux's constant hype and promises bla-bla ahead of game releases then there's no reason for why Hello Games and NMS should be exempt from criticism either. I think the next step for Hello Games should be to either take a break from going to the press with their meaningless theoretical numbers, or rather show us some actual live core gameplay.

Is there a previous release of Hello Games that you felt was hyped up and didn't deliver? My point is that they haven't released No Man's Sky yet, so there's nothing that people can point to and say "they didn't provide what they promised". We're literally going off of a handful of early gameplay videos. I haven't heard of anyone say that Joe Danger or any of their other previous releases didn't deliver in this regard.

In contrast, Molyneux habitually hypes-up gameplay features that either 1) never make it to final product, or 2) are so gimped that it's not close to what he promised initially. But people can't make that judgement until the game releases.
 
would be cool if there were hunting missions were you have to find specific creatures.
Even bounty hunts.

I don't think there are any traditional missions in this game... you are essentially left to your own devices, and if that means you want to go out hunting, you can go and do that, but good luck trying to kill that giant ass dinosaur that is most certainly going to try to crush you lol.
 
From the interviews I've seen, it sounds like it's possible to run into other players but given how vast the universe is, it's unlikely. But I do like that idea. Certainly as players all converge toward the center of the galaxy we're more likely to run into other players.

I just want a way to hook up with a few friends of my own to go exploring with. Discovering a neat planet solo sounds like a great experience. But so does playing with a buddy or two and exploring a dangerous planet together, or dogfighting enemies as a squad out in space.

I heard the multiplayer was going to be somewhat like a mix of Dark Souls/Journey

Kind of random and limited in a few ways

I did hear Murray mention that cooperation will slowly become more frequent and necessary as you get closer to the center of the universe.
 
I wonder how people are going to react to DayZ when it comes out on PS4. Similarly, it's set in a really large open world without any specific goals. You just run around vast plains and forests looking for resources in order to survive. It's not procedurally generated but it is based on satellite data, and is thus, for the most part, not handcrafted. And yet, millions of people have downloaded the game.
 
Has there been any discussion about this game being F2P or anything other than a classic gaming model? So little is known about how the game is played, I was wondering if the subject has been broached.
 
Has there been any discussion about this game being F2P or anything other than a classic gaming model? So little is known about how the game is played, I was wondering if the subject has been broached.

I haven't heard anything about this game being F2P. I can't imagine that model would sit well with the folks at Hello Games. The assumption-- and I believe the correct one-- is that it'll be a "classic gaming model". I wouldn't be surprised if it had a retail disc-release-- in fact they've mentioned discs multiple times e.g. "the galaxy seed is chosen and the put on the disc so everyone gets the same galaxy when they first fire up NMS", etc... but it could've just been phrased that way to explain things easier...
 
I haven't heard anything about this game being F2P. I can't imagine that model would sit well with the folks at Hello Games. The assumption-- and I believe the correct one-- is that it'll be a "classic gaming model". I wouldn't be surprised if it had a retail disc-release-- in fact they've mentioned discs multiple times e.g. "the galaxy seed is chosen and the put on the disc so everyone gets the same galaxy when they first fire up NMS", etc... but it could've just been phrased that way to explain things easier...

That is what I thought, but as you say it is an assumption. Hopefully we're right.
 
I've pointed this out in other NMS threads before, but Sean Murray said in an interview at E3 something like "I'll be upset if we're here at next years E3 and our game isn't done".

I remember that too. Just that if it could still be done and perhaps even launch right at the end of E3 a la TLoU last year.

I will gladly take the game whenever they are satisfied that they are finished with it. Just means filling that procedurally generated pie with as much crow as possible.
 
This game is going to be epic.

Of course I would like to see a dev walk through of sorts but I want it all to be a big surprise as well.
 
I think this game will be pointless...Exploring countless planets ? For what ? How long will it take to get bored ?

Because this game can be played 'more or less' infinitely, it's difficult to quantify 'How long will it take to get bored?'. I'd say if you enjoyed 10 hours but eventually ran out of steam, that would be a decent length of time. Do you really expect the developers to put a life times worth of interest in this game just to appease some gamers? When something is endless, it becomes an experience you either fall out of love with or press on obsessively. Don't Starve is endless but when I eventually stopped playing it, I wouldn't describe that moment as boredom.
 
Oooh, I like this part:

We’ve shown so far creatures that you’ll be familiar with, but we’re thinking now about creatures that look far more alien, and they’re slowly changing the way even we’re perceiving the universe. It’s getting weirder, maybe not so friendly, and surprising us at every turn.

So the quadrupeds (or ungulates :) ) that we've seen from the previews are just examples of life similar to Earth's but they are actually creating crazier alien creatures which I didn't expect they'd do. Of course, it depends on how far they're willing to go with it but I'm glad they're doing something about it.
 
On one of the other threads about NMS there were some photos from inside their offices, one of which had a whiteboard with a list of game systems being crossed off as they were completed.
 
Not necessarily picking on NMS, but the idea of quality over quantity is starting to resonate with me. Anybody who has flown in a plane or done any traveling would tell you that if someone can capture the experience of simulating ONE planet, it would be impressive. I live in Los Angeles, which is drastically different from, say, New York, which is remarkably different from even Santa Barbara. Not to mention the water, the desert towns, the coastal towns, the mountain regions, the eco system in the water...

We haven't even touched on the idea of the various continents and the differences in cities there.

I'm sure NMS will be fun. However I wish somebody would make an 'open world game' with the type of care that Rockstar puts into one GTA game, but utilizing fantasy or Sci Fi settings. It appears that The Witcher 3 will comes the closest to that.

When I'm playing GTA 5 it's almost surreal how it feels when I'm driving from Los Angeles to Santa Monica, to Riverside (I forget the analogous GTA names), to the desert. I really feel like i'm driving to those places with different people that live their lives outside of the programming of the game. The world feels REAL.

I'd be more impressed with NMS with just a few full planets over THOUSANDS.
pretty much my sentiments, but I'm a bit more optimistic about this.

I would love for ND to tackle an open-world game though...
 
From the interviews I've seen, it sounds like it's possible to run into other players but given how vast the universe is, it's unlikely. But I do like that idea. Certainly as players all converge toward the center of the galaxy we're more likely to run into other players.

Part of the reason I'll probably play this game for months/years is the idea that I'll run into someone randomly. That one or two people you run into over a year long period will be such memorable moments.

Even if this game is just flying to and exploring various planets w/ no major gameplay components, I'll be a happy camper. Dunno if I'm even gonna consider this a "game" as much as an "experience"
 
Some of my favorite moments in Elder Scrolls games (since Morrowind) have been exploring. Granted when I get bored of that I move onto missions. Point being that I am stoked for this game and hope it has enough exploring to keep me busy and wandering around.
 
I remember that too. Just that if it could still be done and perhaps even launch right at the end of E3 a la TLoU last year.

I will gladly take the game whenever they are satisfied that they are finished with it. Just means filling that procedurally generated pie with as much crow as possible.

Hello Games have made a point of saying they really don't want to show too much of the game before release. I think they've timed out their info dumps strategically, and don't intend to use next E3 to show more.

I believe they'll go dark for months now, and then show up at the VGX show with a little more info and a release date.
 
Any bets on when someone makes it to the end goal? Early 2017 is my guess

Do we know many details about this yet? From what I've read, players are trying to make their way to the center of the galaxy for some reason. I would be really interested in any details on how this fits into the "billions of planets" piece - seems like it would be difficult to reach a single spot in the galaxy if there is that much ground to cover.
 
I think I am just burnt out on reading stuff about this game. I need to see someone actually sitting down and playing the game before I can resume hype. Everything sounds so theoretical about the game, it's too light on gameplay details.
 
Not necessarily picking on NMS, but the idea of quality over quantity is starting to resonate with me. Anybody who has flown in a plane or done any traveling would tell you that if someone can capture the experience of simulating ONE planet, it would be impressive. I live in Los Angeles, which is drastically different from, say, New York, which is remarkably different from even Santa Barbara. Not to mention the water, the desert towns, the coastal towns, the mountain regions, the eco system in the water...

We haven't even touched on the idea of the various continents and the differences in cities there.

I'm sure NMS will be fun. However I wish somebody would make an 'open world game' with the type of care that Rockstar puts into one GTA game, but utilizing fantasy or Sci Fi settings. It appears that The Witcher 3 will comes the closest to that.

When I'm playing GTA 5 it's almost surreal how it feels when I'm driving from Los Angeles to Santa Monica, to Riverside (I forget the analogous GTA names), to the desert. I really feel like i'm driving to those places with different people that live their lives outside of the programming of the game. The world feels REAL.

I'd be more impressed with NMS with just a few full planets over THOUSANDS.

Even just a few planets or even ONE planet would still requite the same type of procedural generation. Hell, even making an open world the size of Great Britain -- one real island, required procedural generation in 1996 (Elder Scrolls II). In a modern game like ArmA 3 it at the very least requires the world to be based on satellite data. Basically, at those sizes, you can't really completely handcraft a game world. Even GTA V required five years and $250 million.

If you're procedurlly generating one planet it's really just about inputting factors that determine the diversity of wildlife, vegetation, land features, and structures. Those same factors could be used to procedurally generate the entire the universe Hello Games is currently doing for No Man's Sky. I guess you could argue that focusing on just one planet or even a single solar system would let a developer go deeper with the variety, like having more diverse wildlife on one planet, more diverse cities on one planet, and whatnot, but it's still questionable whether or not that same diversity couldn't be applied to billions of planets. Look at, say, Dwarf Fortress. Every time that game procedurally generates a world it generates not only terrain but also an entire history and lore. The real unknown here is "How much variety and diversity can a developer put in a procedurally-generated game world?"

But still, as soon as I started thinking about this I realized it could be pretty interesting if somebody actually made, say, a JRPG-style game where you explore an entire world like classic JRPGs, but the world map is a procedurally-generated 1:1 scale world. Sort of a modern version of Elder Scrolls II I guess. In my mind, something like that would be managed by: 1) Handcrafting quests and human settlements in that world, or possibly handcrafting quests and characters around procedurally-generated human settlements, so players never have to travel too far according to their mode of transportation. 2) Offering players progressively faster modes of transportation like horses, chariots, boats, and eventually a super-fast airship.
 
why don't you find something more substantial in your criticisms.

It is just flabbergasting

you essentially call them liars without any proof

I'm sorry if it upsets you that there are people who are genuinely looking forward to this game

This is a forum, I'm sharing my opinion, it's in context of the game/developer. Since E3 last year I was among the first to put NMS as one of my most anticipated titles in posts on this forum So I have a better suggestion: "Why don't you" give the drama a rest and stop whining ad-hominem style about people having a different opinion than you.
 
From everything I have heard for this game both on this site, trailers, interviews, dev diaries, etc. If this game just happens to fulfill those expectations, this game will be not only GOTY, but already GOTG (game of this gen).

Please don't disappoint like Spore, please for the love of god! :(
 
Hello Games have made a point of saying they really don't want to show too much of the game before release. I think they've timed out their info dumps strategically, and don't intend to use next E3 to show more.

I believe they'll go dark for months now, and then show up at the VGX show with a little more info and a release date.

How can they show too much of the game? If they would show a planet a day it would take billions of years to see them all.

I really hope they can deliver with this game, but it just sounds a bit too much.
 
Man, the negativity and cynicism towards this game can reach astounding levels at time. All you people who think this game sounds pointless, boring and bland must have an astonishing lack of imagination. Or perhaps you just don't understand how the game actually works, which is probably very likely in a lot of cases. Procedural doesn't mean random. Procedural doesn't mean bland. It can, but it all depends on the algorithms used to shape the world. And judging by what we've seen of this game so far, theirs seem pretty damn awesome.

Something people need to realize is that our actual, REAL world is basically procedurally generated. Our planet can hold water in liquid form because of its distance from the sun and some other factors. This water means that life had a chance to evolve here. What plant and animal life exists in different regions depends on climate, the shape of the landscape, etc. The shape of the landscape is created by various processes over time. Etc, etc. Everything is the result of something else, in many "layers" of cause and effect on different scales. What Hello Games are doing is pretty much the same thing, but through a set of complicated mathematical algorithms. For any point in the galaxy they can calculate exactly what should be there, from the planetary type down to the individual plants on that very hill in that very region of the planet. Again, everything is the result of something else, in many "layers" of computation on different scales. The output of one algorithm is fed into the next, and then the next, and so on. In the end you have a "machine" that takes a 3D coordinate as input and spits out what should be at that exact spot. And it will always produce the exact same result given the same input. This is not random, it's procedural.

Now, how good the end result looks of course depends on how good the algorithms are, but we're not talking about some black magic here.

And people who say stuff like they'd rather see 100 interesting planets than a quintillion (or 18) boring ones clearly don't understand all this at all. Why would those 100 be more interesting? They'd still be procedurally generated, there'd just be less of them. Hand-crafting even ONE decently sized planet would be a completely insane task for any dev team, or even all teams that have ever existed put together. This game is about exploring the unknown (literally), and that requires the approach they're taking here. As such, why would they limit themselves to less planets than their system allows? There's simply no point.

Personally, I think discovering and exploring strange, alien worlds for the first time (ever, by anyone) sounds completely amazing. Containing my excitement for this game is difficult.

Do we know many details about this yet? From what I've read, players are trying to make their way to the center of the galaxy for some reason. I would be really interested in any details on how this fits into the "billions of planets" piece - seems like it would be difficult to reach a single spot in the galaxy if there is that much ground to cover.

This is where getting better and better ships comes in. The one you start out with will probably only be powerful enough to take you up to a space station near your starting planet. There you will be able to buy a slightly better one that might allow you to explore all the planets in your solar system without too much effort. Next, after mining enough resources (or doing other things you can make money off), perhaps you'll get your first ship with a hyperdrive. Now you can hop between star systems, but those are still very small distances on the galactic scale. So you keep going. Maybe you can now get a ship that can carry large amounts of cargo over decent distances, and so you'll start making money faster by doing trade runs. Or perhaps you'll get a fighter ship and become a space pirate to make money that way instead. There are many possible "career paths". Anyway, this is the sort of progression you'll be going through, as I've understood it. You'll be able to move across larger and larger distances, and with time the galactic center will be within reach.
 
Probably the same people that think Minecraft is a snooze-fest, they have no desire or imagination. To each his own though, exploratory survival games aren't for everyone.

I much prefer sandbox games where it's an actual open world with no boundaries and I can determine how the game is played and not the game telling me how to play.

Hell in Minecraft, if all you want to do is mine for crap, you can do that, there's literally no quests/objectives. I'm hoping for the same in No Man's Sky.
 
I'm looking forward to this game.

They will eventually reveal more information about the game and when that happens I will judge wether it retains my interest or not.

Just need to be patient is all.
 
Probably the same people that think Minecraft is a snooze-fest, they have no desire or imagination. To each his own though, exploratory survival games aren't for everyone.

I much prefer sandbox games where it's an actual open world with no boundaries and I can determine how the game is played and not the game telling me how to play.

Hell in Minecraft, if all you want to do is mine for crap, you can do that, there's literally no quests/objectives. I'm hoping for the same in No Man's Sky.

The difference is, Minecraft has steadily built up quite a robust crafting/building system that has allowed people to build almost ANYTHING in the game world. It doesn't just survive on the exploration aspect or fighting monsters.

If No Man's Sky wants to have that deep and lasting of an experience, the ship upgrading/resource mining better be equally complex.
 
Probably the same people that think Minecraft is a snooze-fest, they have no desire or imagination. To each his own though, exploratory survival games aren't for everyone.

I much prefer sandbox games where it's an actual open world with no boundaries and I can determine how the game is played and not the game telling me how to play.

Hell in Minecraft, if all you want to do is mine for crap, you can do that, there's literally no quests/objectives. I'm hoping for the same in No Man's Sky.

It will be much like that, they've already said there are no traditional quests. You won't meet an NPC who tells you to bring him 5 of resource X or whatever. There's an overarching goal in reaching the center of the galaxy (although we don't know why yet, as the lore of the game is being kept under wraps), but how you get there is up to you. There will be various "professions" through which you can make money to get bigger and better ships, but that's still just stuff you do because you feel like it. You can be a pirate and attack trade fleets, but you won't be given a quest to do so. You just do it (if you have the ship for it), and things will develop dynamically from there.
 
This is a forum, I'm sharing my opinion, it's in context of the game/developer. Since E3 last year I was among the first to put NMS as one of my most anticipated titles in posts on this forum So I have a better suggestion: "Why don't you" give the drama a rest and stop whining ad-hominem style about people having a different opinion than you.

First off, let me get this straight... since E3 last year??? E3 2013 (June 2013)??? I guess you're right, you must be the first person on this forum (or anywhere for that matter) to put the game on your most anticipated list, because the game wasn't announced until VGX of that year (Dec. 2013), and on top of that Hello Games first time with NMS was at E3 this past June. So, I dunno, maybe that's an outright lie? And even if that statement was true, even though it's not, who cares when you liked the game. Does that somehow give you the right to trash a dev like that? In my opinion, I find it silly that you would make that the basis of your opinion... now if they did ever pull a bait and switch like Molyneux, then yes, you would have free reign in making such comparisons, because there would be truth behind it, but that is not the case.

I'm sorry, but I wasn't the one casting aspersions and spouting hyperbole with that comparison, you were. We all know what it means when someone/something is compared to Peter Molyneux, no need to beat around the bush. I get it is your opinion, but in reality, on what basis can you call these devs out in such a way? What proof do you have that these guys have pulled off such a bait and switch? Instead of just basically calling them liars, without any evidence, why don't you stick to something that is based in reality? Because until the game is in our hands, you can't prove they pulled a "Molyneux".
 
Top Bottom