-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Polygon: No Man's Sky- the developers built space probes to explore it for them
- Thread starter todahawk
- Start date
That doesn't explain at all why they need to make a "space probe". Can't they just push calculate with the algorithm, store the numbers and make tweaks from there? Saying space probe is really unnecessary and sensational. All they had to say was that they were tweaking their algorithm, BOOM done. I get the feeling they are doing the same thing with a lot of the things in the game. Completely exaggerating it in order to sell it.
Hawaii Jeff
Member
Veritigo_X
Member
They aren't Cypher from the Matrix. It's really hard to get an idea of what something will look like just by looking at a stream of numbers.
It's actually more than that. That's rounded down. it's 2 to the 64th power, or
18,446,744,073,709,551,616 planets.
Not trying to quibble, just striving for accuracy.
You keep harping on "space probe". Only Polygon said "space probe" on the title of the article, and it's a completely harmless analogy nevertheless.
And no, they can't just "store the numbers". The point of the analogy is precisely because they want to see the visual output of the algorithm, so what they coded as a "debugging" tool is a simple way to run the procedures multiple times and capture visible snippets of the output.
Which, since the output is visual representations of different planets no one has ever seen, is very fucking similar to a "digital space probe".
So devs can't freely talk about the game and say whatever they want know?
You are not forced to read their interviews.
I'll make fun of the promises of exploring a 1:1 scale procedurally generated universe every time it's brought up as a selling point or something to get hyped up about. It could be 1/100,000th the size without changing anything about the actual experience of playing it, so it's an irrelevant metric.
They can then use the numbers to generate an image of the planets. Also, I have a hard time believing that they are going to sit there looking at thousands and thousands of pictures. They are looking at numbers to see that they don't interfere with each other and don't go too far out of bounds.
It might seem like I'm being too picky about the space probe thing, but they've done the same thing so far. They are intentionally vague about the details of the game and say "it's like real life!!". We all know that there is no way you are going to be able to do the same things that you could do if you were actually on a planet. It's a game and we need the details of what you can and can't do.
These kinds of games have come and gone many times before. It's the same song and dance every time. This one is no different.
I wonder how many of these "probes" they've made.
I doubt they even make pictures about the planets, let alone gifs. How much space that would take up?
A small, lower quality and shorter gif. Takes about 600 kbyte average. That's roughly 11.068.046.444.225.730.969.600 kbytes. Thats 10.307.921.510.400 terabytes lol
You literally just made this up.
You don't need to and shouldn't observe all the output. You only need a sample.
A normal distribution is a continuous function, and theoretically can assume more values than the full amount of planets that will be in No Man's Sky.
How are we able to analyze, work with, and use the Normal Distribution?
Where have they said specifically the stuff you can do in the game? They've been harping on and on about it being this open universe where you can do anything, but they haven't given any details or shown the stuff that you can do.
I really have a hard time believing this game is somehow going to be different from the many procedurally generated focused games that came before. Maybe if there is actually some substance there, they should release a 30 minute gameplay video. It's no like that is going to spoil anything.
Veritigo_X
Member
No, they are looking at the images to make sure the planets "look" good. I don't know how you can figure out if a planet looks good without, you know, looking at it. The point of the probe is that it is automated like literally every debug process is done in software development. It saves some poor guy sitting at a computer all day generating planets and taking screenshots of it. Is the press making a big deal out of this? Yes, very much so. But you can't really fault the developers for talking about a cool debug process to other developers at a developer's conference.
I'd argue in a game revolving around exploration it is a very relevant metric. In Elite: Dangerous explorers get a tag when they discover a planet (similar to NMS). At the moment each player could discover some ridiculous number of planets and still leave a bunch for new players to discover. Having more planets means there's a bigger chance of discovering a planet with your name on it. While that might not be important to everyone, it's a nice reminder that you can still discover something new.
As for the crazy number of planets that NMS has, if the algorithm can do it why not? They'd be putting an arbitrary cap on it if they reduced the number.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=154621579&postcount=58
Point to me where they have been harping on and on about how you can do anything and that "it's just like real life".
So then where is the gameplay video?
What you're saying is that they are going to sit there and look at every single planet to make sure it looks good?
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
What the hell? A digital space probe? Why even have such a thing?
Why not just write a program that randomly captures images of places in the universe? Why create a physical object?
Why not just write a program that randomly captures images of places in the universe? Why create a physical object?
Veritigo_X
Member
Not every planet since that will be impossible. It just a snapshot of a smaller subset of every planet.
Procedural algorithms can be really finicky. The smallest change to code could potentially have a bigger effect. A snapshot of a bunch of different planets will give the developers a good idea that they didn't completely screw up all their pretty planets.
That's literally what this is.
Unless you were kidding... I've been slow today.
Can we please parse these two issues here?
Issue 1: They have not said the game is a huge universe where "you can do anything." This is just made up by you. They have consistently spoke about the limitations and have detailed at great length the specifics of what you can do in the universe.
Issue 2: This game is an open world procedurally generated title which will still have some of the limitations that games like that have; ergo less hand crafted challenges and certainly no hand crafted dungeons. They have a core goal and story, to get to the center of the universe and discover what is going on, and you get into space battles and robot wars and all sorts on the way through. But the core of the game will be resource gathering and exploration and combat, and all of that is going to be in procedurally generated environments. Which may feel "soulless" to some who require their hand crafted levels.
I think there's a time and place for both styles of design and that certainly it's OK to think this game is not for you. I just wish people would stop inflating what Hello Games have said. They have made very specific claims, none of them particularly extraordinary and have demonstrated many of the features in video form already. The only thing left is to wonder if they will make those features they've included any fun, and whether or not they are claiming features are in the game which are not. There is no proof Hello Games does that though.
Icyflamez96
Member
Sean may have said "you can do anything" or something like it, but in the sense that it's largely directionless and you aren't forced on a certain path.
They may have not literally said "You can do anything", but they have been talking about how you can do this and that without actually showing much. It's a bunch of talk without anything to back it up so far. I mean the game is supposed to come out this year and we haven't seen any uncut gameplay.
If it's just meant to be a sandbox where you are supposed to make you're own fun, that's fine, but they should just come out and say that. It's not just people who are inflating what Hello Games is doing. They are guilty of it themselves.
Icyflamez96
Member
edit: nvm lol
They haven't gone into too much detail with what you can do. It's similar to how Peter Molyneux does with some of his games and says "You can do this and this will happen." It turns out to be all talk and nothing to back it up with when the game actually comes out. They are empty promises or extremely inflated.
Veritigo_X
Member
NMS is inspired by games that are currently out and have been for a number of years. Look up Elite and Frontier: Elite II or even the newer Elite: Dangerous if you want an idea of what you do.
Icyflamez96
Member
Look at Amirox's post on this page
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1004071&page=2
NMS isn't even much like those games in terms of what you do tbh (Well I only know about Elite Dangerous) so that's not really a good way to help someone figure out NMS I'd think
Veritigo_X
Member
NMS isn't even much like those games in terms of what you do tbh (Well I only know about Elite Dangerous) so that's not really a good way to help someone figure out NMS I'd think
It gives you a good understanding of the space trading genre (which NMS is a part of). Sean Murray has said Elite was a big inspiration to NMS.
More_Badass
Member
This is the problem right here. People expect Rockstar-style walkthrough videos and 20 minute previews
I'm glad the devs aren't doing this. Keep the game mysterious. They've talked in depth about the game and what you do. I'd rather not see an hour's worth of gameplay
From the GameInformer interview...
To be fair to you, I agree that we haven't seen an unedited gameplay clip yet. They've essentially shown us a highlights reel of gameplay. Even the lengthy cave-big monster-ship-space-fleet-dogfight-second planet clip was one that they admitted to searching for.
That said, I don't think the marketing for Elder Scroll games included footage of people sifting through their menus and putting buckets on heads or the Baldur's Gate series with you waiting to gather your party before venturing forth and pausing repeatedly in battles. Or Drake looking all around for treasure. Those features were enormous parts of the gameplay experiences though and they remain fantastic games.
The point being, I'm not sure that your expectation of a lengthy unedited gameplay video is fair.
You keep being so "delightfully vague" on purpose because it allows you to pretend to nail them down without actually doing so.
Once again, not only have they made very specific claims counter to "you can do everything", but they have shown lots of it and discussed lots of it too. Check the post I linked to. It not only demonstrates in data what they've discussed about the features and the limitations therein, but showcases images from various different trailers which showcase demonstrations of many of these features.
Now unless this is your first rodeo, you'd know that the amount of information we have for a game announced a little over a year ago is actually incredible. Most AAA games don't have these many videos and this much information out in the ether this far in advance from release, because things change in development and that's a dangerous thing to do. Because then what happens is exactly what you keep pretending they're doing: lots of overpromising and underdelivering. Instead, they've opted to show way more than they should, and they've discussed an astronomical amount of details about it.
To put it into context, the last big media dump was in the middle of December 2014, so about 3 months ago.
At that time we got two different gameplay videos (one at the Videogame Awards and one at PSX 2014) plus an entire hour concert about the music of No Man's Sky along with a whole host of media obligations, interviews and even magazine pieces around that time. How many other games do you know announced only one year prior and still have probably well over a year development more to go where you get that much information in a go? Not many. It's a rarity.
It boggles my mind people keep acting like Hello Games is keeping us in the dark at this point. It's OK to not like the concept. I don't know why people can't just admit they don't like the concept without forging all these other mystical bullshit stories about them and their claims. It's all here.
It CAN be a sandbox where you CAN make your own fun. But it's ALSO a sandbox where you can decide to follow the storyline and reach the center of the universe, if you so choose. It's a game where you can decide to never fight or to engage in combat all the time. It's a game where you can choose to just explore forever. You can choose to join some faction over another, and that'll have repercussions. You can choose to enter a portal that might lead to a secret. You can choose to upgrade your equipment. There's a whole host of things you can do, and like any sandbox any of it can be the "point."
I'm not sure why people keep acting like they don't get what sandbox games are. Even the most Grand Theft Auto-y sandbox game still has objectives and hand designed challenges, which No Man's Sky has as well. But the "benefit" of sandbox game design is that it's flexible enough to be whatever else you want it to be too, within the constraints of whatever rules the game has. NMS has its own rules you have to stick by, but outside of that you can make the game be what you want. However, it's OK to not be the aimless wandering type - and for those folk you follow the story to the center of the universe. Sean Murray claims doing just the main objectives will take approximately 40 hours or more, so there's meat there:
Sean Murray said:
All in all, it's totally OK to think this concept is shit or to hate sandbox games. But this is distinct from them overpromising. It's distinct from them saying you can "do anything", which they have not come close to implying. And it's distinct from us being in the dark about the game, which is not close to being true. We know a shitload.
gunslikewhoa
Member
18 quintillion.
killer rin
Member
Well, all they need to do is make 18 quintillion probes which travel at like 500x regular speed and go to each planet. You could have all of them mapped in a day
Still. This sounds really cool. I wonder how fun it would be to play though.
Scoot McNairy
Member
We will get bored after 4, maybe 5 planets.
This is the problem with procedural design. You don't get The Last of Us using procedural design, dog.
This is the problem with procedural design. You don't get The Last of Us using procedural design, dog.
You will get bored. Other people will be perfectly fine, just like with the other five billion incredible procedurally generated products out there that people adore. And how quickly one gets bored is heavily dependent on the nature of the randomizing algorithm involved and how complex it is and how many variables can therefore be expected to come from the engine.
So far Hello Games has claimed they have yet to see even one planet similar to another, and that they still have yet to see a planet with the same creatures yet. Of course, cloning is always a big problem with procedurally generated games, and how big of a problem it is relates directly to how complicated the randomizing algorithm is. Since it's a cornerstone of this game, I suspect they've done a lot to make it special... but you'll never know until you play.
There are specific objectives of course in this game, but the "joy of exploration" is not to be understated as a goal here. People who love exploration will necessarily be more likely to enjoy what this has to offer, if they think the exploration itself is a reward.
Categorical statement with obvious counterexamples in every NMS thread. Come on, at least try to make a decent argument.
This is pretty much the only part of your post I disagree with you on. I think this thing is a lot closer to being done than you do.
Game wasn't announced at the beginning of the dev cycle with some sort of CGI placeholder trailer. Game was announced with like 1.5 to 2 years of dev done already with a clip video of Sean Murray actually playing the game.
The Hermit
Member
I am still hyped about this game but the more I hear about it the more it sounds like this:
More_Badass
Member
You're comparing a space exploration game with a focus on exploration and discovery to a narrative-driven horror/action post-apocalyptic game
Two different things. Two different goals. Two different appeals
Look at Amirox's post on this page
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1004071&page=2
NMS isn't even much like those games in terms of what you do tbh (Well I only know about Elite Dangerous) so that's not really a good way to help someone figure out NMS I'd think
Its VERY similar to the original Elite and Elite II: Frontier in both the basic gameplay and focus on sandbox exploration. Probably moreso than Dangerous in fact.
This is pretty much the only part of your post I disagree with you on. I think this thing is a lot closer to being done than you do.
Game wasn't announced at the beginning of the dev cycle with some sort of CGI placeholder trailer. Game was announced with like 1.5 to 2 years of dev done already with a clip video of Sean Murray actually playing the game.
I wasn't suggesting the game wasn't being worked on prior to its announcement. Almost every game announced has had some decent period of time worked on prior to it actually being revealed to the public.
But from their own words, the game is at best going to release at the end of this year - but given the problems with their office flooding and how small their team is, would you be surprised if it slipped out? It happens for most big indie projects. I bet we'll see it early 2016.
So no matter what context we put it in, the amount of information we have about No Man's Sky giving the timescales, the size of the team involved, and the amount of development time left is quite remarkable.
Just compare it to THE ORDER. We had the game announced in 2013, and they showed pretty much the same demo for 80% of the entire dev cycle. We finally started getting some different things in the last 8 months of development, and still they limited what they showed on stage. Of course the game was in development for five years when they finally did release, so much of the time spent development was before they announced in 2013. And still we got the limited information we did get in magazines and videos. Relative to that, we practically have a Bible's worth of information from No Man's Sky.
Wasn't Sean Murray saying he'd be disappointed if it wasn't out before E3 or am I misremembering that? That may or may not have been before the flood, but I think 2016 is further out than I'd expect.
Icyflamez96
Member
Sean confirmed 2015
He also said they internally have the exact release date set, but they haven't revealed it yet.
He also said they internally have the exact release date set, but they haven't revealed it yet.
Tell that to Notch.
Scoot McNairy
Member
You know what would make me feel more confident in believing in the complexity of the algorithm's and designs in this game?
If there were more than four people making it.
I mean, seriously, they've got a guy doing sound, a programmer, an artist, and a modeller. If they had 100 artists, all of whom were spending day in and day out designing things for the game, designing new 'seeds', looking at the designs which were being borne out of the seeds and working on concepts to make them more visually appealing, I'd be a fan. Let's get 10 guys making the organic stuff, sure. But how about another 10 making buildings and vehicles. Another 10 working on building lighting + weather + effects + systems which are gonna make that scene in 2001 look normal. Another 10 working on lifeforms. And another 20 working on the physics engine, so that some planets have crazy gravity or make you move in slow motion or mess around with mass/momentum. Make it so that you don't know what the fuck is gonna be on the next planet, it could be a funky hell disco or it could be a giant ballpark or a futuristic megapolis or a prison world or an iceworld with a train that just goes round and round and round. As it is, every planet is a barren lifeless moon.
Icyflamez96
Member
They're bigger than 4 now.
Buggy Loop
Member
Totally not 1:1 scale though, they went with style over real metrics so that you get planets orbiting really close to each other just for the looks. Sean wasnt ok with that originally but artistically, it matches his sci-fi vision he has, so the team went ahead with this condensed galaxy.
Of course it could be 1/100 000th the size and still, you would probably need a lifetime if not even thousands of years to explore its content, but thats not the point of these procedural games, its the best way to simulate what the first interstellar travellers will feel, an immense feeling of not knowing where to go since there's so many possibilities and being really ridiculously small (in just 1 galaxy). Elite Dangerous portrays that quite well, everytime i open the galaxy map to plan a route for trading or finding a hunting ground,, even if i could only explore 0.008% of its content, its still mind blowing.
Similar threads
- Poll