Destructible asteroids are a must
- Thread starter MxM
- Start date
and the difference is...
The difference is that the changes to that asteroid is not sent over the network to a server. It all happens in "single player" on the players computer. So no server needs to keep track of all the states of the objects in the environment.
What year are we in, 1985? This can easily happen, including your space-station idea. Don't limit your mind, it's best to push or you will end up happy with mediocrity.
Changes made a player A won't be visible to player B, there's no transparent persistence. So, it's very different thing from what we want to achieve here -- have an impact on the universe.
Having been walloped several times now by asteroids in the Alpha, let me tell you that the Asteroid Fields are big enough without more being created! Its not like in say, EVE, where there are maybe 20 - 30 roids in a field, the E D fields are huge with thousands of independently spinning and travelling rocks of all shapes and sizes.
Ok.. lets get some stuff out of the way here...
1) No Man's sky is singleplayer with multiplayer meta data in the sense that your action will get "imported" into others games, so destruction of asteroids is fine, because only you will witness the destruction, in other players games that won't have happened and since you will never meet it makes no difference...
2) Starcitizen is a CLIENT/SERVER based network model (meaning they track stuff server side) and a MUCH smaller gaming area, so they can get away with tracking such stuff.
3) E
is PEER2PEER meaning that the clients meet in instances, where the CLIENTS track what happens, the server won't know you blew up 1 or 2 asteroids, it only negotiates the sessions players partake in. They are simulating the entire galaxy, so trying to track every single asteroid or anything else for that matter except the players would just be crazy.
Requiring E to be able to track all this would require a crazy server park for which E would need to demands some form of subscription based service in order for it to be maintained, besides having to alter the network model to client/server based.. do you really want that? seriously?
1) No Man's sky is singleplayer with multiplayer meta data in the sense that your action will get "imported" into others games, so destruction of asteroids is fine, because only you will witness the destruction, in other players games that won't have happened and since you will never meet it makes no difference...
2) Starcitizen is a CLIENT/SERVER based network model (meaning they track stuff server side) and a MUCH smaller gaming area, so they can get away with tracking such stuff.
3) E
is PEER2PEER meaning that the clients meet in instances, where the CLIENTS track what happens, the server won't know you blew up 1 or 2 asteroids, it only negotiates the sessions players partake in. They are simulating the entire galaxy, so trying to track every single asteroid or anything else for that matter except the players would just be crazy.Requiring E
to be able to track all this would require a crazy server park for which E would need to demands some form of subscription based service in order for it to be maintained, besides having to alter the network model to client/server based.. do you really want that? seriously?
Last edited:
This is just.... kinda silly. Asteroid storms don't exist. ED is grounded in realism when it comes to astronomical bodies.
No Man's Sky is another cartoony looking game. No attempt at realism. And that's fine, it looks fantastic, I'll buy it and have fun, but it's not the same style as ED. I don't want Elite copying everything every other space game has just because it "looks cool".
Being able to break of chunks of an asteroid that you could then hoover up to sell the ore contained therein sounds good. But if you don't allow for the asteroid to shrink in size as it is depleted then you have an infinite resource and that would be bad. So you could either have the asteroid have some calculated resource points that can be exhausted which isn't great either. Or have the asteroid just vanish, or explode when it is depleted. Or you could have it procedurally break up as its resources are extracted and consumed until it finally vanishes.
I don't know how much work the last option would be but it would perhaps be the better option. And give a viable option for a player in a large cargo ship and a mining laser to make some easy money, and a viable target for pirate players or NPCs to prey upon.
I don't know how much work the last option would be but it would perhaps be the better option. And give a viable option for a player in a large cargo ship and a mining laser to make some easy money, and a viable target for pirate players or NPCs to prey upon.
I guess you want a boring game then, because space ships flying in a loop shooting lasers is certainly grounded in realism. Frontier should just remove space ships then, sounds effects, the fiery explosions, almost everything in the alpha.
really?
"No Man’s Sky – A new Sci-fi MMO announced at VGX Awards"
http://www.mmocast.com/news/no-mans-sky-scifi-mmo-announced-vgx-awards/
still don´t see the difference
You've misunderstood it... its is multiplayer but not in the sense of players meeting other players kind of multiplayer. Your actions are "transmitted" to other players games like spore did it, but you wont actually "meet" other players.
Calling it a MMO is wrong... more akin to SMO (single player massivly online)
techreport.com said:
Last edited:
That's actually why this is harder in a peer-to-peer game like ED than a client/server game like SC. Imagine a player fractures an asteroid that hits another that hits another, like a kind of astronomical domino rally. In a client/server game, the server can decree the precise moment when the first asteroid blew up, and calculate trajectories and stuff based on that. But in a peer-to-peer game, two clients that disagree by 0.1 seconds could end up seeing totally different patterns towards the end of the chain reaction.
You might like to read the original mining proposal and the revised mining proposal - the discussions went into this issue at some depth.
All comparisons to other games aside (be honest: it's a moot point if it is possible in this or that game) I feel it should be possible and could be game enhancing.
Possibly why:
- Leave it to the instance for rocks to break up. Just us some other poster said.
Fun why:
- It would look cool to see those giant boulders crash into eachother. Come on ... All the nay sayers must be able to admit THAT?
- It should have the same effect as mining, you slowly deplete the instance of resources. It is up to the universe generator to add new stuff for another instance or not.
- Shooting an asteroid can get you small amounts of ore out of an asteroid fast while mining an asteroid will get you bigger amounts at a slower rate. (If that isn't game balancing then I don't know what is). Again: depletion is related to the instance and the universe generator.
- Shooting an asteroid to have it crack up shouldn't be easy. Not with 2 pew pews anyway. So if you are hiding from someone it should take them quite a volley of missiles before it gets them the desired result. But small buts may fly of.
- Might be most important point: CANON!!! What did we all do in OOLITE and the FFE's etc etc? We went into asteroid fields and shot them to smithereens! Before we even were able to mine them properly.
So .. I am in favour of destructible ateroids!
Possibly why:
- Leave it to the instance for rocks to break up. Just us some other poster said.
Fun why:
- It would look cool to see those giant boulders crash into eachother. Come on ... All the nay sayers must be able to admit THAT?
- It should have the same effect as mining, you slowly deplete the instance of resources. It is up to the universe generator to add new stuff for another instance or not.
- Shooting an asteroid can get you small amounts of ore out of an asteroid fast while mining an asteroid will get you bigger amounts at a slower rate. (If that isn't game balancing then I don't know what is). Again: depletion is related to the instance and the universe generator.
- Shooting an asteroid to have it crack up shouldn't be easy. Not with 2 pew pews anyway. So if you are hiding from someone it should take them quite a volley of missiles before it gets them the desired result. But small buts may fly of.
- Might be most important point: CANON!!! What did we all do in OOLITE and the FFE's etc etc? We went into asteroid fields and shot them to smithereens! Before we even were able to mine them properly.
So .. I am in favour of destructible ateroids!
Reading this interview with the developer helps.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/12/09/first-look-no-mans-sky/
And you would need to be rigged with mining equipment, not military class weaponry. Becoming an asteroid miner should be something you would need to plan for, not just be a pirate lurking about in an asteroid field for the unwary that got bored and decided to kill a bit of time by going ore hunting instead!