The idea of being able to generate virtually endless variations of a particular lifeform from just one template. Or being able to create species of which no individual is exactly the same. It is mindbogglingly awesome I think.
Well from my understanding, that
is procedural generation. It all depends on how much detail they want to put into it. To set rule sets within rule sets within rule sets to define (and at the same time free up) the minutest detail.
That is the beauty of procedural generation and honestly, more game developers should be using it. Particularly RPGs with their non-interactive NPCs. Imagine being able to meet characters in a game that never look exactly the same, even to the point that the PG ruleset is setup in a way that each character has a distinct look from each other and don't just have "a slightly bigger nose" or "slightly farther apart eyes" from a previous character you met. Even to the details that when you meet a NPC family that a subset of rules defines what a "family" is and the common characteristics that carries between them. Completely being generated by the PG ruleset.
Imagine landing on a planet and not only discovering a rich biotope with many new species, but also observing that every individual in those species differs from its fellows.
Indeed it is very cool, and I hope that FD have a treat for us with planetary landings. Keeping in mind that I don't imagine a large number of planets will have atmospheres conducive to what we recognise as "life" if we are to keep it scientifically accurate (who knows science changes every day, I believe it is 8.8 Billion potentially inhabitable planets like earth last time I checked?). But still, on the planets that do... we could really have something. I've been following NMS for a while (what little info existed when HG first presented their project) and they definitely don't seem like dummies when it comes to how they are implementing their PG.
It is... just... wow.
If Elite D can do that...
I just wish David Braben would tell us more about their PG.
I agree, it would be fun to know in more detail how they implement their PG and how in the future expansions they will take advantage of it. David Braben did a TED talk on how procedural generation is art, if done right. I definitely think that this is forefront in the mind of Frontier devs while they have crafted this game. We have to remember that this is David's baby that he has been giving metaphorical birth to for a while. He has plans that don't need to be upset or toned down by some publisher saying it is "not marketable" (which is what they did when David and Ian first presented Elite and were going and thus far I am pleased with the slow but steady gradual progression of things.
As a side comment regarding NMS, there seems to be a lot of misinformation regarding the premise and goals of the game. Not just here in the forum, but from articles from generic and more well recognised online gaming sites, etc.. This is probably Hello Games' fault for staying mostly quiet about what they were doing (maybe they didn't know fully themselves yet). If you only read the few interviews made with Hello Games regarding NMS, the premise becomes much clearer as to what they are trying to accomplish. I think most people at E3 got a gooey eyed at it because they have not seen something like this with such graphical fidelity to the minutest detail. As I said above, David's TED talk regarding procedural generation as art (when done right) definitely points to what Hello Games appear to be achieving with their vision for No Man's Sky. It is hard not to root for them even if people somehow see them as a "threat" or a "cheap copy" to E: D. Which I personally don't, as the style and focus is different. Besides, there aren't enough types of (quality) Sci-Fi space flight sim inadequate genre defining games for me anyway.
I say bring 'em on and about time.
