From videos No Mans Sky appears excellent, full of life and variety, but we won't be really sure how things play out until it's out I guess. The fact that everything looks like a recognisable dinosaur to me suggests that the algorithms for adjusting forms probably won't be all that flexible or powerful. It might be like Spore- swappable horn parts, attachments, patterns and textures. Make things fatter or skinnier. I'm not betting we'll see truly 'unique' kinds of creatures that get thrown up by the power of proceduralism there, but I'd love to be proven wrong.
I agree, and I'm only going by developer videos I've seen detailing the technology of the engine they've built, and how they intend to use it to provide a game world. Now, i'm not saying if and when, No Man's Sky comes out, it will be perfect and above criticism. (Nor am I saying this about Star Citizen, which I'm actually quite sceptical about and not a fan of their unfoussed direction.) What I am saying is, that even if they give us endless permutations of some recogniseable dinosaur type creatures, complete with animations of them wondering around chewing leaves on wild and diverse landscapes, it will still be (pardon the pun) light years ahead of anything Elite has shown.
I really want to see what DB and FD do with it though. DB speaks so passionately about procedural generation that what we have now in ED can't be what he means. The smaller outposts are the best examples of creating variety out of component parts, for the most part those work well. But I'm disappointed that an Orbis station is the same on the inside as a Coriolis station or an Ocellus. If each station type had its own interior, things would feel better, but there needs to be more variation than that still... and I'm sure all the different possibilities have all been covered in depth on the forum as well as over at FD. But we're stuck with what we've got. As you say it makes for a terrible reference.
Indeed, No Man's Sky is a project you can look at and say, wow, that's an impressive example of innovation in gaming technology today; because they're showing us something we've not seen done before, in that way or on that scale, and it looks fun. If it isn't perfect, or is incomplete, then it's easier to forgive because the potential isn't a pie in the sky, it's right in front of you. They're a small group of people actually demonstrating their vision rather than waxing lyrical about one.
Can you say that about Elite: Dangerous? No, in all honesty you cannot. Yes, the graphics are lovely, but nothing that ahead of other engines of today, such as Space Engine or Rogue System even, and so that's were the amazement ends. If a game like X2/X3 from the middle of the last decade, from a smaller less funded studio; and a game like
Evochron Mercenary, a one-man project; and their own predecessors of the nineties, FE2 and FFE; can blow Elite's doors off in depth of gameplay and engagement, even by now, then frankly its an embarrassing endictment of their Kickstarter promises.
I was hoping to see Powerplay and 1.3 as a major move to address that issue for my enjoyment in the coming year ahead. It hasn't done that at all. It's the same grinding and timesink nonsense as we already have. So loyal and respectful old fans may always seek to make excuses for them by saying, "it's coming, it's young, be patient", but that accomodation won't help bring that to their attention while there is still time.
I think what will help dramatically would be providing the chance to alter things on planet surfaces. Imagine a pristine, untouched Earthlike which becomes progressively colonised. Sending people down there with resources and things to carry out the process. Imagine flying down at the beginning and landing among small settlements, but coming back 6 months later and there are buildings everywhere. In a year you might see a metropolis. That's one way to create diversity from a limited set of assets- variation based on time.
Well, of course, it sounds wonderful, but you're describing something from your imagination, which is probably how many backers envisaged the game would be starting to look by now. Because that's just another version of what David Braben describes numerous times in his Gold Rush pitch, isn't it?
(See this video for example, and also the question he's asked about it after the speech.)
Of what would happen after someone would discover a mining resource. Decide whether keep it to themselves, and the risk of being followed and discovered by another player, or sell it to one faction or their rival, or to both, and then risk being hunted by them in revenge? That then others would come, an outpost would be built, taking months to slowly take shape in front of you...
But, if they haven't even come close to the first step in delivering that by now, and have instead given us Powerplay, then really, I can't see the planetside version happening anytime in the next two or three years, and then only as an expansion. That's fine, but my worry is it still won't be as sophisticated as the way he described it, with sophisticated, emergent and unpredictable gameplay. And if it doesn't have that, I won't be buying it, no matter how good the graphics are.
Well, okay, maybe I will.
...but only in a 75% off Steam sale long after it's weekly deal.
