No Man's Sky

F1ngers

Anyone else thinking of just aiming your ship at the middle bit, taping your R2 button and just go? :P:D

Captain Chaos

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

They could also prevent this somewhat realistically by making the inner bulge impenetrable due to high radiation levels.

Yeah by gamma ray bursts coming off stars as they go nova as the super massive blackhole at the centre of the galaxy feeds on them.

Or that's how the game end, you end up inside the blackhole because it will be invisible unless it's feeding.

:pac:

Overheal

F1ngers wrote: »

Anyone else thinking of just aiming your ship at the middle bit, taping your R2 button and just go? :P:D

I've thought about this, since my initial posts.

I don't know that even with what NMS is aiming to accomplish that it will be possible to just 'drift' from one system to another, or to travel between empty sectors of space. From the galactic map it looks like any other space game that is limited to node-based FTL jumps. Which is kinda disappointing, but that is the technical limitation you run into: there is simply not enough computer memory to manage the hugely-sized memory addresses you would need to map player locations and other data: the farther out you are allowed to travel from a point of interest, the more memory that requires by a factor of ^3 if I'm not mistaken. So for logistic reasons there will have to be some threshold or limit that forbids you from traveling too far out into nothing. I suppose they could sophisticatedly build a massive 3D array of cubic sectors all throughout space, in the code, such that the game first tracks your quadrant, region, cluster, sector, position, etc. but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Mickeroo

It will be like Elite where you'll need to refuel so you either find a space station or scoop it from a star. You'll just end up running out of fuel you try to fly out into no mans land or should that be sky....

Maximus Alexander

Overheal wrote: »

I've thought about this, since my initial posts.

I don't know that even with what NMS is aiming to accomplish that it will be possible to just 'drift' from one system to another, or to travel between empty sectors of space. From the galactic map it looks like any other space game that is limited to node-based FTL jumps. Which is kinda disappointing, but that is the technical limitation you run into: there is simply not enough computer memory to manage the hugely-sized memory addresses you would need to map player locations and other data: the farther out you are allowed to travel from a point of interest, the more memory that requires by a factor of ^3 if I'm not mistaken. So for logistic reasons there will have to be some threshold or limit that forbids you from traveling too far out into nothing. I suppose they could sophisticatedly build a massive 3D array of cubic sectors all throughout space, in the code, such that the game first tracks your quadrant, region, cluster, sector, position, etc. but I wouldn't hold my breath.

They won't do this, not because it's not technically feasible, but because it is pointless. The space between stars is incomprehensively vast and equally desolate. It has no gameplay merit whatsoever.

The time, effort and added complexity it would bring to the project would add no value, which is basically the opposite of any sensible design process.

Elite Dangerous designers realised this, for example, and despite letting you travel freely around a star system they make you engage super cruise, so that they can change the scale on the sly and pop you into a different coordinate system. They don't actually bother to simulate the true scale.

Zillah

Overheal wrote: »

I've thought about this, since my initial posts.

I don't know that even with what NMS is aiming to accomplish that it will be possible to just 'drift' from one system to another, or to travel between empty sectors of space. From the galactic map it looks like any other space game that is limited to node-based FTL jumps. Which is kinda disappointing, but that is the technical limitation you run into: there is simply not enough computer memory to manage the hugely-sized memory addresses you would need to map player locations and other data: the farther out you are allowed to travel from a point of interest, the more memory that requires by a factor of ^3 if I'm not mistaken. So for logistic reasons there will have to be some threshold or limit that forbids you from traveling too far out into nothing. I suppose they could sophisticatedly build a massive 3D array of cubic sectors all throughout space, in the code, such that the game first tracks your quadrant, region, cluster, sector, position, etc. but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Why on Earth would you want this?

Wright

Zillah wrote: »

Why on Earth would you want this?

I'd like to drift around a constellation/asteroid field etc. This is indeed a let down, should be an option.

CiDeRmAn

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Yeah by gamma ray bursts coming off stars as they go nova as the super massive blackhole at the centre of the galaxy feeds on them.

Or that's how the game end, you end up inside the blackhole because it will be invisible unless it's feeding.

:pac:

Ah, physics, all good

And the Blackhole will always be visible due to the accretion disc and the radiation across the spectrum pouring from it.
Also, even without that, you'll have Hawking radiation seeping away, as particle/anti particle pairs are separated at the event horizon.
You'll also have gravitational lensing and frame dragging apparent before you get to it as well.

CiDeRmAn

Wright wrote: »

I'd like to drift around a constellation/asteroid field etc. This is indeed a let down, should be an option.

It allows the player to feel like they are in control, even if the thing they want to do is pointless.
Otherwise you are just having your craft appear within a defined space, completing tasks before pressing a button and appearing in another defined space.
You'd just be going from one textured box full of objects and jumping to the next.
If it was a continuous space then you could jump, fly and drift between systems, perhaps building a station in interstellar space and operating from there.
It could load the regions on the fly, no pun intended, as you move from system to system, akin to Skyrim.
In that game, if you walk from place to place there's no loading but if you fast travel you get a loading screen.

I'd like to see multi star systems, binary and trinary systems with interesting gravitational and climate dynamics as a result on the planets and moons within.
Asteroid belts, Trojan objects, Oort clouds to be mined, comets in fact the whole celestial catalogue of bits and bobs, not too much is it?

I want to see what you get when you drop into the atmosphere of a gas giant, Clarkian creatures alive in the infinite cloudscape? Refuelling from the hydrogen there?
Can I upgrade my ship to refuel at the suns photosphere?
A Bussard ramscoop?
So much stuff.

Mickeroo

Wright wrote: »

I'd like to drift around a constellation/asteroid field etc. This is indeed a let down, should be an option.

There's technically no such thing as constellation when it comes to space travel >_< they're just a human construct to help us keep track of which star is which when we're looking at the sky from Earth, in reality the distances between each star is too great to be of any real significance to each other, only time you'll get stars close enough not to need a jump will be binary systems. I'd be very surprised if there's no asteroid fields to mess around in though.

Zillah

Wright wrote: »

I'd like to drift around a constellation/asteroid field etc. This is indeed a let down, should be an option.

What does this even mean? Constellations are composed of stars that are often no closer to each other than they are to us. Movement means nothing in space without a frame of reference, so what you're actually asking for is to stare at the same background image for hours with nothing happening. They could say you're moving at a million miles per hour but without terrain around you it's the same thing as not moving at all.

Asteroid belts occur within solar systems so have nothing to do with the space between stars. In real life asteroids are millions of miles from each other and you'd be lucky to be able to see more than one at a time, but I imagine they'd fudge that and draw them the way they appear in scifi for funzies - which is fine. But your request above literally makes no sense.

Captain Chaos

They have already shown off asteroid fields with them flying through them by shooting holes in them as they go. Not sure if they can be mined for materials though.

Zillah

Another blow to my enthusiasm. It's an old article but I had not heard this before.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/no-mans-sky-gives-players-small-chance-discover-something-incredible/

“Ninety percent of the planets that you visit should be barren, because that’s how it would be in our universe and anything else would feel fake. And then 10-percent of them should have some life, but that life 90-percent of the time should just be some grass and some shrubbery or whatever, you know, some insignificant life. But 10-percent of the time — 10-percent of the 10-percent — it should be real life. But maybe just birds, fish, and things like that, smaller creatures, 90-percent of the time. And 10-percent of the time it should be something a bit more interesting, like four-legged creatures. But that four-legged creature 90-percent of the time should be super boring.” And so on. “People always talk about us being the game with space dinosaurs in it or whatever, right?” Murray continued. “Even those, they will be one in a million—like genuinely one in a million, like 10-percent of 10-percent of 10-percent of 10-percent of 10-percent, right? But even then, even though they’re one in a million, 90-percent of the time they should be a boring version of that. And we save the crazy interesting creatures for not one in a million, but one in a hundred million.

So, it is designed so that the vast majority of planets you visit - maybe all the planets you visit during your playthrough - will be barren or almost barren. Starting to sound like an aspie simulation obsession rather than something made with players in mind.

2Mad2BeMad

Zillah wrote: »

Another blow to my enthusiasm. It's an old article but I had not heard this before.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/no-mans-sky-gives-players-small-chance-discover-something-incredible/


So, it is designed so that the vast majority of planets you visit - maybe all the planets you visit during your playthrough - will be barren or almost barren. Starting to sound like an aspie simulation obsession rather than something made with players in mind.

Never seen that article. Has put me right off it now. Will wait for a few weeks after release.

Basically hes saying 90 percent of planets you visit will have nothing in them.

Taylor365

2Mad2BeMad wrote: »

Never seen that article. Has put me right off it now. Will wait for a few weeks after release.

Basically hes saying 90 percent of planets you visit will have nothing in them.

I don't know...

Answers the question of seeing the same creatures again and again, or the same scenery just a different shade...

Finding life truly is a discovery. You'll visit planet after planet with hope of finding something only for them to be dashed as you fly over the surface to see nothing but dust..or maybe an ocean world....much like real life!

If i found life everywhere i'd be sick of it after a day or 2. Same **** yada yada..

I think this will keep me searching...

Maximus Alexander

Taylor365 wrote: »

I don't know...

Answers the question of seeing the same creatures again and again, or the same scenery just a different shade...

Finding life truly is a discovery. You'll visit planet after planet with hope of finding something only for them to be dashed as you fly over the surface to see nothing but dust..or maybe an ocean world....much like real life!

If i found life everywhere i'd be sick of it after a day or 2. Same **** yada yada..

I think this will keep me searching...

I agree in theory, but I had this with black holes and neutron stars in Elite Dangerous and... well I got sick of searching. :pac:

thorbarry

It all depends really on how interesting the things are you find on the 10%

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Interesting idea but I don't know if I have the time now to devote to trawling through 90 % barren planets. There will definitely come a stage where the online community identifies the key planets and the best way to make money and I think that will just suck the life out of it. Great concept but I'm skeptical about how well it will translate into a game.

Call Me Jimmy

Discovering new species and going to the centre of the universe are the only objectives I can see. Trading/mining, upgrading etc the whole economy and marketplace is only going to be worth anything for those two goals. So if discovering new species is really all to keep you occupied as you travel to the centre of the universe (and planets i suppose but they seem very similar from what i've seen, after 10 or 20 big rocks in different hues I'd say they'll be irrelevant to the player).

So if you dont get a kick out of pressing A and claiming virtual species as your own I can't see why you do anything else. I have doubts about how much variation there will be. I just think the awe will wear off fast for everyone and your left with a game with little or no thought put into it passing it off as ingenuity.

EoinHef

So this thread took a turn,everyone talking about how they want the astro phyaics to be correct but then the fact the planets are going to have realistic amounts of life would put them off?

Never heard that about the plantes before,and i have to say i reckon thats not true,anymore anyway. Watching the first video from ign sean says that the planet they are on,which has plenty of life,is a normal run of the mill planet with nothing special about it. If it was indeed that rare surely he wouldnt be showing it off?

EDIT: Had a look and the 10% life rule does indeed seem to be a thing. Bit misleadimg to always be showing the exceptional planets for all the demos rather than the norm. Not a big deal for me till we can see how it works in reality though. If every planet had all that random life im sure that would be just a boring.

Sarn

I'm in the wait and see camp. It looks interesting but I'm afraid it could get boring fairly quickly once the novelty wears off. Reviews will help me make up my mind. It would be great if there was a nemesis/rival species also working its way to the centre that you would bump up against periodically.

Taylor365

Funny thing about the 10% thing..

Remember e3 he chose a 'random' planet to visit out of the ****ton we saw as he zoomed out.

That had life on it. What a coincidence... :rolleyes:

tok9

The interview is 6 months old.

Wouldn't surprise me if they tried that and realised it wasn't as fun or else they were just misquoted as every video I've seen, there has pretty much always been wildlife.

Zillah

EoinHef wrote: »

EDIT: Had a look and the 10% life rule does indeed seem to be a thing. Bit misleadimg to always be showing the exceptional planets for all the demos rather than the norm. Not a big deal for me till we can see how it works in reality though. If every planet had all that random life im sure that would be just a boring.

10% with life would be fine. But he's saying that it will literally be one in a million that will have anything as fancy as dinosaurs. Like, if you visit one million procedurally generated planets in your playthrough you'll, on average, find one that has space dinos. Realistically you'll probably only visit, what, a couple dozen? Maybe a hundred? He even goes so far as to call most life-bearing planets boring. Boring! He uses the word twice in one paragraph while describing the worlds.

I seriously hope they've backed off those sorts of numbers. Simulation at the expense of player experience is a terrible policy. I do want finding something cool to mean something, but not if it means playing for ten hours before I find it. Or finishing the game, like hundreds of others, without finding it, and later getting to read about the one guy who did.

tok9 wrote: »

The interview is 6 months old.

Wouldn't surprise me if they tried that and realised it wasn't as fun or else they were just misquoted as every video I've seen, there has pretty much always been wildlife.

Just as likely that they tweaked the game to make sure all of the planets were fancy for the demo.

CiDeRmAn

Zillah wrote: »

Another blow to my enthusiasm. It's an old article but I had not heard this before.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/no-mans-sky-gives-players-small-chance-discover-something-incredible/


So, it is designed so that the vast majority of planets you visit - maybe all the planets you visit during your playthrough - will be barren or almost barren. Starting to sound like an aspie simulation obsession rather than something made with players in mind.

Well, it was designed like that.
It may not be so now, certainly you could expect every system should have life bearing planets or moons, with a certain amount of more barren locales wouldn't stop them making some of those host to invaders, bases, mining and the such.
Not sure what Aspergers has to do with it though, unless this is a new derogatory means of addressing people and things.

tok9

I'm not worried about that at all.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

They could make it a bit easier to find life if they have "sweet spots" for life in the universe. Like planets that aren't too close or too far from a star, that maybe you could scan for water from space to give you a hint. Then if it looks good go down and explore. He did say in the video that the barren planets will have more valuable resources so you'll have to still go for a poke around on them to make real money so they won't just be ignored by players. That way you could kind of split your exploration between looking for life or looking for resources.

Wright

Sarn wrote: »

I'm in the wait and see camp.

With the state the industry is in with all their waffle these days, this should be everybody for 99% of games.

Overheal

Hence I'm in no mad rush to buy a PS4 to play this.

Temptamperu

I totally bought my PS4 for this game.