No Man’s Sky


#21

If they found 100 artists and gave one planet to each of them, I am sure results would look, feel and be more appealing than by random procedural thing. You can’t beat human creativity.


#22

Just feel like procedural generation isn’t really ready for the prime time until significantly more engineering problems are solved for it.

I’d have preferred 7 planets that had been more handcrafted than unlimited PG ones.


#23

I agree for the most part about procedural generation.

Though for me it is interesting to see the possibilities, and that is what drives me a bit to explore. Of course things will be similar, I’ve seen personally some creatures that are similar, plants as well. I’ve seen other people playing and essentially seeing the same creature but is considered different in the game.

As a programmer, I feel I have extra enjoyment of the PG. What I am wanting to see, how close a planet could be to earth, at least one biome of earth. Or other known planets/moons.

I feel that the only way to make PG work in an artistic sense is to use a neural network of some sort, teaching it what planets look like and what to expect. Basically you’d create every possible variation you’d want to see, training the neural net, then letting it run. You’d further train it, approving and rejecting various iterations.

If anything I think No Man’s Sky has shown PG can be used for more mainstream games, so we may see more of it, but hopefully learning from the faults of No Man’s Sky.


#24

#25

this trend of hiring women to read a script over a trailer is really not my thing


#26

Does it worth now?


#27


#28

I bought it but am waiting on a patch or two to dive in.


#29

A patch for?


#30




#31

#32

I get the feeling there’s no ‘aim’ in this game - yes you can spend hours building a pretty base but then what?


#33



#34

https://nomanssky.gamepedia.com/Atlas_Interface