So regarding the possibly scripted E3 2015 demo, it looks like they definitely had prepared triggers/events/models for it, but maybe he did pick the planet at random. Or maybe the planet wasn't randomly picked either, who knows.
I could see the planet generation being ready but not the walker spawning or stuff like that, leading to the prepared assets.
I dunno, it just seems really weird to me that someone would be so obviously proud of their game but also feel the need to lie about it.
I'd like to assume that any reasonable person, after the anger and disappointment has worn off, in no way thinks the devs intentionally and maliciously lied.
However, it's quite clear that for a very large number of people, the product being peddled, and the product on the shelf, are drastically misleading. To the point where some think they're almost two completely different things.
I don't like the "It's your fault for getting hyped/you don't understand game development/stuff they said a year ago doesn't count". Because to me, that comes off as almost passive aggressive victim blaming. I understand the logic behind it, but it doesn't really fly today. Because if you want to take this stance, then we take it to the natural conclusion.
If we're not supposed to believe or trust anything that we saw during that debut trailer... then what the fuck was the point of that debut trailer? Or any information given out in the 3 years since?
The "It's your fault" narrative only works if we live in a world where product advertisement only occurs after the product is out. Which honestly would probably be an extremely healthy thing to do for the industry. You don't talk your game or push preorders or do any manner of "hype building" until your game is gold and already pressing discs. That world clearly is not going to happen any time soon though. It's still partly the consumer's fault for getting overhyped and preordering. But companies can share in that blame for stoking that hype in the first place, and not trying to mitigate it if they know it's getting out of hand.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
0
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
Eh, I think if you're enjoying the game without bothering with the Atlas/centre goals, keep at it.
Completing those will not increase your enjoyment.
The opposite in fact it seems.
Largely sure but I've seen the ending and it just makes me wanna reach it that much more quicker. I seem to be in the minority when it cmoes to a lot of stuff surrounding this game, though
The Atlas ending?
where literally nothing happens? Seriously... A dialogue choice and then nothing.
Or the centre?
where it just busts up your shit and sends you to another galaxy. Just NG+ with no changes?
I'm not being a smart ass. Is there something else I'm missing about either of those?
Eh, I think if you're enjoying the game without bothering with the Atlas/centre goals, keep at it.
Completing those will not increase your enjoyment.
The opposite in fact it seems.
Largely sure but I've seen the ending and it just makes me wanna reach it that much more quicker. I seem to be in the minority when it cmoes to a lot of stuff surrounding this game, though
The Atlas ending?
where literally nothing happens? Seriously... A dialogue choice and then nothing.
Or the centre?
where it just busts up your shit and sends you to another galaxy. Just NG+ with no changes?
I'm not being a smart ass. Is there something else I'm missing about either of those?
I thought they were one and the same, my bad. I mean the centre thing. It's about discovery after all.
Starting over anew in another Galaxy fills me with glee, even if it's all but a name change.
+1
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
Eh, I think if you're enjoying the game without bothering with the Atlas/centre goals, keep at it.
Completing those will not increase your enjoyment.
The opposite in fact it seems.
Largely sure but I've seen the ending and it just makes me wanna reach it that much more quicker. I seem to be in the minority when it cmoes to a lot of stuff surrounding this game, though
The Atlas ending?
where literally nothing happens? Seriously... A dialogue choice and then nothing.
Or the centre?
where it just busts up your shit and sends you to another galaxy. Just NG+ with no changes?
I'm not being a smart ass. Is there something else I'm missing about either of those?
I thought they were one and the same, my bad. I mean the centre thing. It's about discovery after all.
Starting over anew in another Galaxy fills me with glee, even if it's all but a name change.
For me, it kinda feels like when
you read a book or watch a movie, and at the end it turns out it was all just a dream.
Eh, I think if you're enjoying the game without bothering with the Atlas/centre goals, keep at it.
Completing those will not increase your enjoyment.
The opposite in fact it seems.
Largely sure but I've seen the ending and it just makes me wanna reach it that much more quicker. I seem to be in the minority when it cmoes to a lot of stuff surrounding this game, though
The Atlas ending?
where literally nothing happens? Seriously... A dialogue choice and then nothing.
Or the centre?
where it just busts up your shit and sends you to another galaxy. Just NG+ with no changes?
I'm not being a smart ass. Is there something else I'm missing about either of those?
I thought they were one and the same, my bad. I mean the centre thing. It's about discovery after all.
Starting over anew in another Galaxy fills me with glee, even if it's all but a name change.
For me, it kinda feels like when
you read a book or watch a movie, and at the end it turns out it was all just a dream.
Man that just reminds me of all the people who said they were never going to get in their ship at all and would just hunker down and "live" on the planet, like it would be a whole meaningful other way to play the game.
Have there been any diaries of people trying to play this way post-release? How long someone was able to last?
Man that just reminds me of all the people who said they were never going to get in their ship at all and would just hunker down and "live" on the planet, like it would be a whole meaningful other way to play the game.
Have there been any diaries of people trying to play this way post-release? How long someone was able to last?
9 days. :redface:
+5
Options
MichaelLCIn what furnace was thy brain?ChicagoRegistered Userregular
So about the multitool bug. I had a 10 slot, took the 9 slot offered by a friend, then at the next starbase was offered a 12 slot.
I then reloaded, and stripped out all the upgrades from the 9er. Now the Gek offered me a 11 slot.
So it's definitely looking at what you're trading, and seems to be bugged out sometimes.
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
I'd like to assume that any reasonable person, after the anger and disappointment has worn off, in no way thinks the devs intentionally and maliciously lied.
However, it's quite clear that for a very large number of people, the product being peddled, and the product on the shelf, are drastically misleading. To the point where some think they're almost two completely different things.
I don't like the "It's your fault for getting hyped/you don't understand game development/stuff they said a year ago doesn't count". Because to me, that comes off as almost passive aggressive victim blaming. I understand the logic behind it, but it doesn't really fly today. Because if you want to take this stance, then we take it to the natural conclusion.
If we're not supposed to believe or trust anything that we saw during that debut trailer... then what the fuck was the point of that debut trailer? Or any information given out in the 3 years since?
The "It's your fault" narrative only works if we live in a world where product advertisement only occurs after the product is out. Which honestly would probably be an extremely healthy thing to do for the industry. You don't talk your game or push preorders or do any manner of "hype building" until your game is gold and already pressing discs. That world clearly is not going to happen any time soon though. It's still partly the consumer's fault for getting overhyped and preordering. But companies can share in that blame for stoking that hype in the first place, and not trying to mitigate it if they know it's getting out of hand.
Eh, the game looks to me like it released pretty much exactly with the content that was shown before release: a shitload of randomly-made content without much actual depth. Which is the same reason I didn't buy it, because the devs never showed anything that goes beyond what a whole category of Early Access indie games already do, albeit on a larger scale. I just watched the debut trailer a few minutes ago, and it looks like a solid cross-section of the game to me.
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible replacement for proper content development.
It sucks that so many people are unhappy with the game, but there was literally nothing keeping people from waiting a week or two after the game released to see what was actually in it. I was really considering getting it myself, but it was pretty obvious to me from gameplay footage from players that I wasn't going to get much out of it. This is not 1995, where the only two ways to actually see the game without buying it is through a magazine or having a friend who buys it.
I've maxxed out my Exosuit, multitool and ship, and have basically gotten all the upgrades I wanted (My ship literally has every upgrade in the game! Wish it was one with a target lead in it. Oh well.)
I have just about every blueprint except for one exosuit one (which STILL hasn't dropped yet) and the Atlas Pass v2 (I have v3 so that doesn't matter too much)
I've completely mastered Vy'keen, know a ton of Gek and need to bone up in my Korvax.
I've completed the on-foot exploration, alien colonist encounter, words collected, most units accrued, sentinels destroyed and planet zoology scanned milestones. (Thank god on that scan one. 10 times I had to do that stupid "Where is this last species?!?!" dance!)
Currently idling to get past the "extreme environments" milestone bug. (Had 12.4 days, so that's like three and a half hours. Still got another hour to go.)
Basically all I have left is to get the last three milestones (ships destroyed, extreme survival and space exploration), find those last two blueprints and complete the remaining two languages. After that I'll finish up the Atlas and Center of the universe quests and consider this done!
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible design focus.
I sure hope it doesn't mark any sort of turning point against procedural generation.
Some of the best, most lasting games in recent memory rely on it. Every roguelike. Rogue Legacy, Spelunky, Binding of Isaac. And not just as a tool, as a critical part of placing every element of the game. Many of them wield it really well.
The procedural generation itself wasn't even the problem here, it was the lack of other non-procedural elements that would've made it a more complete and interesting package.
Imagine if it was literally Minecraft in space, treated like a single massive server (in reality pocket servers around each player), where you could actually meet up with anyone at any time anywhere, talk to them, shoot them, build bases with them.
The center of the galaxy would already be super populated and have some impressive megastructures going on. There would be planets with massive bridges connecting them. Dyson spheres. Player-made ringworlds.
Well, at this point if a planet has no fauna, it doesn't register that as a zoology milestone tick. So you're lucky, I guess? I'm guessing that was fixed in the patch.
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
0
Options
MortiousThe Nightmare BeginsMove to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
I'd like to assume that any reasonable person, after the anger and disappointment has worn off, in no way thinks the devs intentionally and maliciously lied.
However, it's quite clear that for a very large number of people, the product being peddled, and the product on the shelf, are drastically misleading. To the point where some think they're almost two completely different things.
I don't like the "It's your fault for getting hyped/you don't understand game development/stuff they said a year ago doesn't count". Because to me, that comes off as almost passive aggressive victim blaming. I understand the logic behind it, but it doesn't really fly today. Because if you want to take this stance, then we take it to the natural conclusion.
If we're not supposed to believe or trust anything that we saw during that debut trailer... then what the fuck was the point of that debut trailer? Or any information given out in the 3 years since?
The "It's your fault" narrative only works if we live in a world where product advertisement only occurs after the product is out. Which honestly would probably be an extremely healthy thing to do for the industry. You don't talk your game or push preorders or do any manner of "hype building" until your game is gold and already pressing discs. That world clearly is not going to happen any time soon though. It's still partly the consumer's fault for getting overhyped and preordering. But companies can share in that blame for stoking that hype in the first place, and not trying to mitigate it if they know it's getting out of hand.
Eh, the game looks to me like it released pretty much exactly with the content that was shown before release: a shitload of randomly-made content without much actual depth. Which is the same reason I didn't buy it, because the devs never showed anything that goes beyond what a whole category of Early Access indie games already do, albeit on a larger scale. I just watched the debut trailer a few minutes ago, and it looks like a solid cross-section of the game to me.
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible replacement for proper content development.
It sucks that so many people are unhappy with the game, but there was literally nothing keeping people from waiting a week or two after the game released to see what was actually in it. I was really considering getting it myself, but it was pretty obvious to me from gameplay footage from players that I wasn't going to get much out of it. This is not 1995, where the only two ways to actually see the game without buying it is through a magazine or having a friend who buys it.
That's half the thing I use twitch for (the other half is dota).
Just going through a couple of random channels watching people play the game gives me a pretty good impression if I'm going to like it or not.
I'd like to assume that any reasonable person, after the anger and disappointment has worn off, in no way thinks the devs intentionally and maliciously lied.
However, it's quite clear that for a very large number of people, the product being peddled, and the product on the shelf, are drastically misleading. To the point where some think they're almost two completely different things.
I don't like the "It's your fault for getting hyped/you don't understand game development/stuff they said a year ago doesn't count". Because to me, that comes off as almost passive aggressive victim blaming. I understand the logic behind it, but it doesn't really fly today. Because if you want to take this stance, then we take it to the natural conclusion.
If we're not supposed to believe or trust anything that we saw during that debut trailer... then what the fuck was the point of that debut trailer? Or any information given out in the 3 years since?
The "It's your fault" narrative only works if we live in a world where product advertisement only occurs after the product is out. Which honestly would probably be an extremely healthy thing to do for the industry. You don't talk your game or push preorders or do any manner of "hype building" until your game is gold and already pressing discs. That world clearly is not going to happen any time soon though. It's still partly the consumer's fault for getting overhyped and preordering. But companies can share in that blame for stoking that hype in the first place, and not trying to mitigate it if they know it's getting out of hand.
Eh, the game looks to me like it released pretty much exactly with the content that was shown before release: a shitload of randomly-made content without much actual depth. Which is the same reason I didn't buy it, because the devs never showed anything that goes beyond what a whole category of Early Access indie games already do, albeit on a larger scale. I just watched the debut trailer a few minutes ago, and it looks like a solid cross-section of the game to me.
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible replacement for proper content development.
It sucks that so many people are unhappy with the game, but there was literally nothing keeping people from waiting a week or two after the game released to see what was actually in it. I was really considering getting it myself, but it was pretty obvious to me from gameplay footage from players that I wasn't going to get much out of it. This is not 1995, where the only two ways to actually see the game without buying it is through a magazine or having a friend who buys it.
That's half the thing I use twitch for (the other half is dota).
Just going through a couple of random channels watching people play the game gives me a pretty good impression if I'm going to like it or not.
But then I have to listen to Twitch Personalities. *shudder*
watching a few twitch streams before a game I'm on the fence about is something I do all the time, just seeing some raw uncut gameplay for an hour or so ususally lets me know enough to see if i'd like a game or not.
That's why i watched some of the leaked gameplay streams of nms before buying it.
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible design focus.
I sure hope it doesn't mark any sort of turning point against procedural generation.
Some of the best, most lasting games in recent memory rely on it. Every roguelike. Rogue Legacy, Spelunky, Binding of Isaac. And not just as a tool, as a critical part of placing every element of the game. Many of them wield it really well.
The procedural generation itself wasn't even the problem here, it was the lack of other non-procedural elements that would've made it a more complete and interesting package.
Imagine if it was literally Minecraft in space, treated like a single massive server (in reality pocket servers around each player), where you could actually meet up with anyone at any time anywhere, talk to them, shoot them, build bases with them.
The center of the galaxy would already be super populated and have some impressive megastructures going on. There would be planets with massive bridges connecting them. Dyson spheres. Player-made ringworlds.
That sounds... like a large amount of data. Like, if I'm looking at this correctly, the maximum (theoretical?) Minecraft world size is about 60 million blocks wide.
That would be roughly... 9 planets.
You could maybe manage it by only storing the changes players make, and slowly reverting old changes, but I think NMS*Minecraft is a ways off still.
(I could be totally off on all this, I ain't kept up with the latest frogramming.)
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible design focus.
I sure hope it doesn't mark any sort of turning point against procedural generation.
Some of the best, most lasting games in recent memory rely on it. Every roguelike. Rogue Legacy, Spelunky, Binding of Isaac. And not just as a tool, as a critical part of placing every element of the game. Many of them wield it really well.
The procedural generation itself wasn't even the problem here, it was the lack of other non-procedural elements that would've made it a more complete and interesting package.
Imagine if it was literally Minecraft in space, treated like a single massive server (in reality pocket servers around each player), where you could actually meet up with anyone at any time anywhere, talk to them, shoot them, build bases with them.
The center of the galaxy would already be super populated and have some impressive megastructures going on. There would be planets with massive bridges connecting them. Dyson spheres. Player-made ringworlds.
Oh, absolutely, I love procedural generation as a tool. With the right rules, it is a fantastic and irreplaceable way to build environments. However, those environments are just a basic skeleton that the rest of the game needs to be built on.
The game I always keep in mind with procedural generation is Dwarf Fortress. The game builds a whole world brand-new, complete with unique erosion-driven geography and personal histories for insane numbers of NPCs. But that system is entirely in support of the the actual gameplay, rather than the core feature. As a result, the development can focus on incredibly detailed things, because there's no need to waste effort on filling a whole world with convincing atmosphere.
But both devs and players need to figure out how procedural generation should be properly applied. The former so that they can use it properly as the tool it is in order to save them a lot of time and effort, and the latter so they can stop expecting that tool to be some sort of magical quality wand.
That sounds... like a large amount of data. Like, if I'm looking at this correctly, the maximum (theoretical?) Minecraft world size is about 60 million blocks wide.
That would be roughly... 9 planets.
You could maybe manage it by only storing the changes players make, and slowly reverting old changes, but I think NMS*Minecraft is a ways off still.
(I could be totally off on all this, I ain't kept up with the latest frogramming.)
Well I said every player a server, it's not like the entire galaxy is one giant server with all data stored completely, but whatever makes it feel the closest to something like that. You could treat it like a player isn't connected to any particular server while in space, and spins up an instance/downloads a planet's modifications when they get close enough to see what might be on a planet, though this would put a cap on how far you can build from a planet, no building on asteroids etc.
Minecraft save files bloat because it saves everything within viewing distance everywhere you go. You wouldn't need to do that, you could automatically discard most minor changes that are (for example) consistent with patterns of mining for fuel.
When players place a couple dozen blocks though, then you save that chunk.
You could also do something like give all players an allotment of 10 planets they can save, plus whichever one they are currently on temporarily. Players get to manage this manually and choose which ones to keep or discard. Maybe they can warp between all the ones they save too, so they can go back and remind themselves why they wanted to save a particular planet's data.
And then you sell additional planet saves for real money to pay for the hosting.
That sounds... like a large amount of data. Like, if I'm looking at this correctly, the maximum (theoretical?) Minecraft world size is about 60 million blocks wide.
That would be roughly... 9 planets.
You could maybe manage it by only storing the changes players make, and slowly reverting old changes, but I think NMS*Minecraft is a ways off still.
(I could be totally off on all this, I ain't kept up with the latest frogramming.)
Well I said every player a server, it's not like the entire galaxy is one giant server with all data stored completely, but whatever makes it feel the closest to something like that. You could treat it like a player isn't connected to any particular server while in space, and spins up an instance/downloads a planet's modifications when they get close enough to see what might be on a planet, though this would put a cap on how far you can build from a planet, no building on asteroids etc.
Minecraft save files bloat because it saves everything within viewing distance everywhere you go. You wouldn't need to do that, you could automatically discard most minor changes that are (for example) consistent with patterns of mining for fuel.
When players place a couple dozen blocks though, then you save that chunk.
You could also do something like give all players an allotment of 10 planets they can save, plus whichever one they are currently on temporarily. Players get to manage this manually and choose which ones to keep or discard. Maybe they can warp between all the ones they save too, so they can go back and remind themselves why they wanted to save a particular planet's data.
And then you sell additional planet saves for real money to pay for the hosting.
This assumes all players are online for others to download from, otherwise you'd run into synchronization issues unless you want players to reload if they want to join someone's server and at that point space is basically a giant interactive server list where most of them are a laggy mess if you can join them and it's all getting very ugly.
You'd have to follow the EverQuest Landmark model of plots rather than planets for any centralized server, I think, since even 1 planet would be an absurd amount of data.
Anyway I need to take the puppy back inside, I was about to warp to a new system in my sick new ship.
I'd like to assume that any reasonable person, after the anger and disappointment has worn off, in no way thinks the devs intentionally and maliciously lied.
However, it's quite clear that for a very large number of people, the product being peddled, and the product on the shelf, are drastically misleading. To the point where some think they're almost two completely different things.
I don't like the "It's your fault for getting hyped/you don't understand game development/stuff they said a year ago doesn't count". Because to me, that comes off as almost passive aggressive victim blaming. I understand the logic behind it, but it doesn't really fly today. Because if you want to take this stance, then we take it to the natural conclusion.
If we're not supposed to believe or trust anything that we saw during that debut trailer... then what the fuck was the point of that debut trailer? Or any information given out in the 3 years since?
The "It's your fault" narrative only works if we live in a world where product advertisement only occurs after the product is out. Which honestly would probably be an extremely healthy thing to do for the industry. You don't talk your game or push preorders or do any manner of "hype building" until your game is gold and already pressing discs. That world clearly is not going to happen any time soon though. It's still partly the consumer's fault for getting overhyped and preordering. But companies can share in that blame for stoking that hype in the first place, and not trying to mitigate it if they know it's getting out of hand.
Eh, the game looks to me like it released pretty much exactly with the content that was shown before release: a shitload of randomly-made content without much actual depth. Which is the same reason I didn't buy it, because the devs never showed anything that goes beyond what a whole category of Early Access indie games already do, albeit on a larger scale. I just watched the debut trailer a few minutes ago, and it looks like a solid cross-section of the game to me.
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible replacement for proper content development.
It sucks that so many people are unhappy with the game, but there was literally nothing keeping people from waiting a week or two after the game released to see what was actually in it. I was really considering getting it myself, but it was pretty obvious to me from gameplay footage from players that I wasn't going to get much out of it. This is not 1995, where the only two ways to actually see the game without buying it is through a magazine or having a friend who buys it.
That's half the thing I use twitch for (the other half is dota).
Just going through a couple of random channels watching people play the game gives me a pretty good impression if I'm going to like it or not.
But then I have to listen to Twitch Personalities. *shudder*
Don't do the top popular channels.
A lot of the them are just random people streaming games. It makes great background noise and gives you a feel for the games.
SurfpossumA nonentitytrying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered Userregular
edited August 2016
I lied about warping to the next system. I saw patches of blue on a planet as I was heading out, and found a desert world with huge lakes and schools of fish and these bizarre hollow square rock formations.
This also marks my fifth (or maybe fourth?) planet with all species scanned. Another 300k in the bank, aw yiss.
That sounds... like a large amount of data. Like, if I'm looking at this correctly, the maximum (theoretical?) Minecraft world size is about 60 million blocks wide.
That would be roughly... 9 planets.
You could maybe manage it by only storing the changes players make, and slowly reverting old changes, but I think NMS*Minecraft is a ways off still.
(I could be totally off on all this, I ain't kept up with the latest frogramming.)
Well I said every player a server, it's not like the entire galaxy is one giant server with all data stored completely, but whatever makes it feel the closest to something like that. You could treat it like a player isn't connected to any particular server while in space, and spins up an instance/downloads a planet's modifications when they get close enough to see what might be on a planet, though this would put a cap on how far you can build from a planet, no building on asteroids etc.
Minecraft save files bloat because it saves everything within viewing distance everywhere you go. You wouldn't need to do that, you could automatically discard most minor changes that are (for example) consistent with patterns of mining for fuel.
When players place a couple dozen blocks though, then you save that chunk.
You could also do something like give all players an allotment of 10 planets they can save, plus whichever one they are currently on temporarily. Players get to manage this manually and choose which ones to keep or discard. Maybe they can warp between all the ones they save too, so they can go back and remind themselves why they wanted to save a particular planet's data.
And then you sell additional planet saves for real money to pay for the hosting.
This assumes all players are online for others to download from, otherwise you'd run into synchronization issues unless you want players to reload if they want to join someone's server and at that point space is basically a giant interactive server list where most of them are a laggy mess if you can join them and it's all getting very ugly.
You'd have to follow the EverQuest Landmark model of plots rather than planets for any centralized server, I think, since even 1 planet would be an absurd amount of data.
Anyway I need to take the puppy back inside, I was about to warp to a new system in my sick new ship.
I hope you're streaming this all to twitch or something, so you can download the broadcasts, splice them together, and then speed the whole thing up and set it to some optimistic synth-heavy indie tune.
I'm just going to say about the whole multi-tool thing. My first was upgraded by a monolith to 10 and I never found anything bigger, soon as I went down to 9 it must of reset the bug as I've since then managed to get to 20 slots quite easily.
Easiest way, if hasn't already been mentioned is finding a shelter building with a landing pad attached as there always a multi-tool there.
0
Options
BethrynUnhappiness is MandatoryRegistered Userregular
If you want a couple of good Twitch streams for NMS, I would recommend GeekAndGamerGirl and Wyld; both Aussies, both chill, both fun to watch (though I think GGG might be done with NMS now).
So I'm on a barren planet full of void cubes and every time I pick one three sentinels attack.
Void cubes appear in lines between places, instead of killing sentinels I'm now running and collecting like some glorified checkpoint run and grabbing as many as I can before they lose sight of me.
Making my own fun here on such a barren wasteland.
So I'm on a barren planet full of void cubes and every time I pick one three sentinels attack.
Void cubes appear in lines between places, instead of killing sentinels I'm now running and collecting like some glorified checkpoint run and grabbing as many as I can before they lose sight of me.
Making my own fun here on such a barren wasteland.
Haha! I was doing that just prior to hitting this planet. I decided to make some fun by running as faraway from my ship as possible and seeing what goodies I can find. I've picked up 2 brand new blueprints I never had before! No idea if it's linked to being away from the ship or not but I'lll take it!
0
Options
MichaelLCIn what furnace was thy brain?ChicagoRegistered Userregular
Once you get your 1v1 Atlas pass, be sure to check the other door in the hanger on space stations.
There's been a exosuit upgrade machine behind it the last three times.
0
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
Once you get your 1v1 Atlas pass, be sure to check the other door in the hanger on space stations.
There's been a exosuit upgrade machine behind it the last three times.
So I switched back to Planet Vortex Cold as i figured the Radiation riddled planet want extreme enough to warrant the trophy for survivor dropping. Turns out there's no extreme moniker for this planet either
Oh well, at least it's far more lucrative and makes for some great atmospheric moments like this one I had just now, during a storm. https://youtu.be/fOLp0ol3dfY
Posts
Gotta get them sales.
However, it's quite clear that for a very large number of people, the product being peddled, and the product on the shelf, are drastically misleading. To the point where some think they're almost two completely different things.
I don't like the "It's your fault for getting hyped/you don't understand game development/stuff they said a year ago doesn't count". Because to me, that comes off as almost passive aggressive victim blaming. I understand the logic behind it, but it doesn't really fly today. Because if you want to take this stance, then we take it to the natural conclusion.
If we're not supposed to believe or trust anything that we saw during that debut trailer... then what the fuck was the point of that debut trailer? Or any information given out in the 3 years since?
The "It's your fault" narrative only works if we live in a world where product advertisement only occurs after the product is out. Which honestly would probably be an extremely healthy thing to do for the industry. You don't talk your game or push preorders or do any manner of "hype building" until your game is gold and already pressing discs. That world clearly is not going to happen any time soon though. It's still partly the consumer's fault for getting overhyped and preordering. But companies can share in that blame for stoking that hype in the first place, and not trying to mitigate it if they know it's getting out of hand.
The Atlas ending?
Or the centre?
I'm not being a smart ass. Is there something else I'm missing about either of those?
I thought they were one and the same, my bad. I mean the centre thing. It's about discovery after all.
For me, it kinda feels like when
But I liked Inception...
Have there been any diaries of people trying to play this way post-release? How long someone was able to last?
9 days. :redface:
I then reloaded, and stripped out all the upgrades from the 9er. Now the Gek offered me a 11 slot.
So it's definitely looking at what you're trading, and seems to be bugged out sometimes.
Eh, the game looks to me like it released pretty much exactly with the content that was shown before release: a shitload of randomly-made content without much actual depth. Which is the same reason I didn't buy it, because the devs never showed anything that goes beyond what a whole category of Early Access indie games already do, albeit on a larger scale. I just watched the debut trailer a few minutes ago, and it looks like a solid cross-section of the game to me.
My personal hope is that all this disappointment makes "procedurally generated" a warning phrase to the general gaming community, because I've yet to see anything use that approach as a major cornerstone of development to make content more than a half-inch deep. It's a good tool, it's a terrible replacement for proper content development.
It sucks that so many people are unhappy with the game, but there was literally nothing keeping people from waiting a week or two after the game released to see what was actually in it. I was really considering getting it myself, but it was pretty obvious to me from gameplay footage from players that I wasn't going to get much out of it. This is not 1995, where the only two ways to actually see the game without buying it is through a magazine or having a friend who buys it.
I've maxxed out my Exosuit, multitool and ship, and have basically gotten all the upgrades I wanted (My ship literally has every upgrade in the game! Wish it was one with a target lead in it. Oh well.)
I have just about every blueprint except for one exosuit one (which STILL hasn't dropped yet) and the Atlas Pass v2 (I have v3 so that doesn't matter too much)
I've completely mastered Vy'keen, know a ton of Gek and need to bone up in my Korvax.
I've completed the on-foot exploration, alien colonist encounter, words collected, most units accrued, sentinels destroyed and planet zoology scanned milestones. (Thank god on that scan one. 10 times I had to do that stupid "Where is this last species?!?!" dance!)
Currently idling to get past the "extreme environments" milestone bug. (Had 12.4 days, so that's like three and a half hours. Still got another hour to go.)
Basically all I have left is to get the last three milestones (ships destroyed, extreme survival and space exploration), find those last two blueprints and complete the remaining two languages. After that I'll finish up the Atlas and Center of the universe quests and consider this done!
I sure hope it doesn't mark any sort of turning point against procedural generation.
Some of the best, most lasting games in recent memory rely on it. Every roguelike. Rogue Legacy, Spelunky, Binding of Isaac. And not just as a tool, as a critical part of placing every element of the game. Many of them wield it really well.
The procedural generation itself wasn't even the problem here, it was the lack of other non-procedural elements that would've made it a more complete and interesting package.
Imagine if it was literally Minecraft in space, treated like a single massive server (in reality pocket servers around each player), where you could actually meet up with anyone at any time anywhere, talk to them, shoot them, build bases with them.
The center of the galaxy would already be super populated and have some impressive megastructures going on. There would be planets with massive bridges connecting them. Dyson spheres. Player-made ringworlds.
9 out of those 10 planets had no fauna.
Well, at this point if a planet has no fauna, it doesn't register that as a zoology milestone tick. So you're lucky, I guess? I'm guessing that was fixed in the patch.
That's half the thing I use twitch for (the other half is dota).
Just going through a couple of random channels watching people play the game gives me a pretty good impression if I'm going to like it or not.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
But then I have to listen to Twitch Personalities. *shudder*
That's why i watched some of the leaked gameplay streams of nms before buying it.
Yup.
I got at least 20 19-slotters offered to me while I held a 20-slot. I decide to go down the 19-slot, the very next dude offers me a 21-slot.
That would be roughly... 9 planets.
You could maybe manage it by only storing the changes players make, and slowly reverting old changes, but I think NMS*Minecraft is a ways off still.
(I could be totally off on all this, I ain't kept up with the latest frogramming.)
Oh, absolutely, I love procedural generation as a tool. With the right rules, it is a fantastic and irreplaceable way to build environments. However, those environments are just a basic skeleton that the rest of the game needs to be built on.
The game I always keep in mind with procedural generation is Dwarf Fortress. The game builds a whole world brand-new, complete with unique erosion-driven geography and personal histories for insane numbers of NPCs. But that system is entirely in support of the the actual gameplay, rather than the core feature. As a result, the development can focus on incredibly detailed things, because there's no need to waste effort on filling a whole world with convincing atmosphere.
But both devs and players need to figure out how procedural generation should be properly applied. The former so that they can use it properly as the tool it is in order to save them a lot of time and effort, and the latter so they can stop expecting that tool to be some sort of magical quality wand.
Well I said every player a server, it's not like the entire galaxy is one giant server with all data stored completely, but whatever makes it feel the closest to something like that. You could treat it like a player isn't connected to any particular server while in space, and spins up an instance/downloads a planet's modifications when they get close enough to see what might be on a planet, though this would put a cap on how far you can build from a planet, no building on asteroids etc.
Minecraft save files bloat because it saves everything within viewing distance everywhere you go. You wouldn't need to do that, you could automatically discard most minor changes that are (for example) consistent with patterns of mining for fuel.
When players place a couple dozen blocks though, then you save that chunk.
You could also do something like give all players an allotment of 10 planets they can save, plus whichever one they are currently on temporarily. Players get to manage this manually and choose which ones to keep or discard. Maybe they can warp between all the ones they save too, so they can go back and remind themselves why they wanted to save a particular planet's data.
And then you sell additional planet saves for real money to pay for the hosting.
You'd have to follow the EverQuest Landmark model of plots rather than planets for any centralized server, I think, since even 1 planet would be an absurd amount of data.
Anyway I need to take the puppy back inside, I was about to warp to a new system in my sick new ship.
It was orbiting this other cold planet, which was far less interesting, and I ended up naming Space Alaska:
The system was also home to Space Arizona, Space New Mexico, and the Hellmoon.
Don't do the top popular channels.
A lot of the them are just random people streaming games. It makes great background noise and gives you a feel for the games.
In my case, killing my interest in NMS.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
This also marks my fifth (or maybe fourth?) planet with all species scanned. Another 300k in the bank, aw yiss.
Judge me by my size, do you?
I was going to make a joke about how hellmoon was redundant, but I couldn't decide whether Arizona or New Mexico was more fitting of the slam.
Hellmoon was basically black rock, wind storms, and freaky eldrich mineral growths. I should have grabbed a pic, but I didn't because I'm lazy.
Easiest way, if hasn't already been mentioned is finding a shelter building with a landing pad attached as there always a multi-tool there.
Void cubes appear in lines between places, instead of killing sentinels I'm now running and collecting like some glorified checkpoint run and grabbing as many as I can before they lose sight of me.
Making my own fun here on such a barren wasteland.
Haha! I was doing that just prior to hitting this planet. I decided to make some fun by running as faraway from my ship as possible and seeing what goodies I can find. I've picked up 2 brand new blueprints I never had before! No idea if it's linked to being away from the ship or not but I'lll take it!
There's been a exosuit upgrade machine behind it the last three times.
Always is
Oh well, at least it's far more lucrative and makes for some great atmospheric moments like this one I had just now, during a storm.
SPOOPY!