Whatever You Do, Watch This: Hello Games’ No Man’s Sky

By Alec Meer on December 8th, 2013 at 9:30 am.

The Joe Danger studio unexpectedly switches to procedurally-generated, Chris Foss-inspired sci-fi on a grand and beautiful scale.

No words to describe it. Poetry. And from a four-person indie studio too. This has rocketmanned straight to the very top of my Most Wanted list.

Here’s Hello Games’ Sean Murray talking more about this incredible-looking and sounding science fictional endeavour at last night’s VGX:

We shall have more, and first-hand, thoughts on No Man’s Sky very soon indeed.

__________________

« | »

, , , .

137 Comments »

  1. omNOMinator says:

    Oh man did this trailer excite me!

    They’ve gotta make the worlds unique and give us stuff to do for this to be successful as even a mildly interesting social online experience, but if they pull it off this could be fantastic!

    The worlds look beautiful, I wanna get in a ship and exploooore!

    • riordand says:

      my co-worker’s mom makes $75 an hour on the internet. She has been out of a job for 7 months but last month her pay check was $16369 just working on the internet for a few hours. have a peek at this web-site http://www.RING77.com

    • Owly1939hic says:

      My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do,,,,,www.Rush64.com

  2. KDR_11k says:

    Looks amazing, let’s just hope there’s enough depth to each element to actually be fun to play.

  3. RedViv says:

    But can I ride Shai-Hulud?

    • guygodbois00 says:

      On Arakis, most certainly.

    • Turkey says:

      More importantly: Can you drown a baby maker, drink its essence, and change its molecular structure within yourself?

      • Apres Post Modernist says:

        More importantly importantly, if one can drown a baby maker, drink its essence, and change its molecular structure within oneself can the game engine represent time as a singularity rather than as a linear sequence? Because if so… seeing time through the eyes of the Kwisatz Haderach on an Oculus rift…

        • Triplanetary says:

          …is fatal in 63% of cases.

        • Cvnk says:

          *Applauds slowly*

          It’s not often to find people familiar with Dune lore beyond the first book or two.

          • Convolvulus says:

            All of that was from the first book.

          • lebrine says:

            but, wasn’t Duncan Idaho supposed to be the real Kwizatz haderach in the end. after all, he existed in all 6 of the main Dune saga books.
            I won’t spoil the entire storyline for those who haven’t read all the books

            Sorry, big fan of Dune here, it was the first thing that came to mind when I saw the giant worms on a desert planet too, I was like :O. They should make a Dune game now!!!!! Lol

          • Lev Astov says:

            Just finished the God Emperor of Dune, myself and I’m loving the series. I desperately want new Dune games. Something where I just try to survive as a Fremen in the old days.

  4. Sp4rkR4t says:

    If they pull this off and it turns out anywhere near as stunning as the trailer looks I say we do away with the VGX best studio award (actually lets just get rid of the lot) and award it to them permanently based on this game alone.

    • RedViv says:

      Nah, don’t get rid of it. Just have a disclaimer constantly running on a ticker.
      THIS IS A GAMES INDUSTRY SELF-CELEBRATION ACTIVITY. THIS IS A GAMES INDUSTRY SELF-CELEBRATION ACTIVITY. LOOK WE EVEN MAKE UP CATEGORIES SO SOME AAA GAME CAN GET MORE “AWARDS”. THIS IS A GAMES INDUSTRY SELF-CELEBRATION ACTIVITY.

      • AngoraFish says:

        This differs from every other entertainment industry-based award, how?

      • Shuck says:

        Actually, it’s not even that – it’s a fake game industry self-celebration event cooked up by a cable TV channel because they figured that games should have an equivalent to the Academy awards. The first few years it was on, industry people weren’t even invited to attend – it was all actors and musicians. It’s only recently that even an arbitrary collection of games writers has been used to pick the winners.

  5. The Dark One says:

    That kind of scale to the gamespace is reminiscent of Spore and Black & White. I hope this one actually turns out to be fun, though.

    • Hotseflots says:

      You tryin’ to tell me Black & White wasn’t fun?

    • Kollega says:

      Yeah, the game reminded me of Spore too, albeit by colouring rather than scale. The scale reminded me instead of Just Cause 2 (except the draw distance is not as big).

      I wonder if you can change the planets on a whim, like in Spore, or not. If you can, I might well be buying this.

  6. BTAxis says:

    Make this good and put it in the Rift, and you have a convert in me. Unless it’s MMO, then I’m staying the hell away.

    • cafeoh says:

      I think that, “everybody is in the same, persistent, universe” means it’s gonna be a mmo.

      Gotta admit, this could really screw things up.

      • pakoito says:

        It was geoff pushing that statement, because he needs his games well tagged and classified into genres for dorito awards.

        The universe seems to be persistent in the sense that is generated by the same seed. It can be as vast as they want, even infinite, players may start in different points of it, but if they reach the same coordinate, the same planet would be there. It needn’t be to be multiplayer, just some connectivity that tells you “this planet was discovered by player XXX” like in the trailer.

    • Wurstwaffel says:

      I agree. All I could think was “Please don’t be an MMO”. That’s just a real bummer. MMOs just didn’t turn out to be what we had imagined.

    • Ender7 says:

      Seriously, I want this game, but if it has MMO, or some other mandatory social internet stuff I will sadly mark it off my list.

  7. onsamyj says:

    But what do you do in game? Is it Minecraft in space? Is it Elite? What the hell is that game about?!

    • VelvetFistIronGlove says:

      Well, you shoot. I gathered that much.

      But yeah. Really pretty visuals, but I’ve no idea what the game is about.

      • LionsPhil says:

        My thoughts exactly.

        • CookPassBabtridge says:

          Fourthed. The space combat looks like its fairly fleshed out, but its very vague about what you will do on the planets. His response about it being a hostile universe seems to cover the “why am I fighting?” question – stuff attacks you because it feels like it, so I guess maybe its a survival thing? Totally not hot on the MMO part either. Apart from the fact I really dislike online play, how is a 4 man team going to be able to stave off the inevitable shit-wave of hacking and griefing that ruins the likes of DayZ?

          Beautiful world, love his non-dystopian ‘maybe the future isn’t shit’ take on the sci-fi. Would love to see how the two can be blended. How about a few more utopias eh? Or are we really that jaded as a species that the only future we can imagine is a robot wearing a boot that’s stamping on a human face forever (whilst selling it DLC?)

          • GameCat says:

            If game is placed in Utopia then there aren’t any enemies to shoot here, therefore why even bother to play it?

            Disclaimer: It’s sarcasm/irony.

          • CookPassBabtridge says:

            Two words: The Orgasmotron

      • Jexiah8bit says:

        My thoughts were that it is a simulation game, possibly one where you take jobs or contracts and/or explore the stars on your own free will, challenging the horizon with your gun and ship. Perhaps there will be an economy as well like some sort of mythical X game that actually works. It may even be a kind of Destiny/X/Skyrim combo.

  8. Shazbut says:

    Looks as promising as promising can be

  9. cHeal says:

    If it’s procedurally generated, how can it be persistent?

    Looks interesting.

    • onsamyj says:

      Easy. Say, you flying in space. You see a star. Game (and you) only knows that it is a star. You get closer, game rolls a die, and it’s a M-class star (or whatever). Closer, dice, it has 8 planets. Closer, dice, one habitable. Closer, dice, 80% of surface is water… Etc. And while game doing it, it writes everything down, so next time you, or anyone else, get to that star system , it’ gonna be M-class, 8 planets, one habitable with 80% of surface is water.

      Basically, instead of creating content by hand, they implement rules by which game create everything by itself.

      • neolith says:

        No, actually that is exactly how persistent content does not work.

        See, the roll of a die holds an uncertain outcome. So when you get close to that star, your die might roll something very different than my die. Both results could be used for content generation, but with very different outcome.
        To make the world persistent in that case, you would have to save all the rolls and look them up once they are needed again. In a game of such a scale, this would be madness in terms of data management.

        So what you do for a persistent yet randomly generated world is that you rely on formula, whose outcome is uncertain overall but always the same for a given point.

        A simple example would be randomly generated terrain based upon a heightmap that takes its values from something like a perlin noise map. When you walk over the terrain, you cannot say for sure where you’ll encounter hills and valleys, but since the data they are based on come from a formula they’ll be exactly the same for every user.

        If you are interested in this kind of content generation, look up Shamus’ ‘Project Frontier’ at his site: http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale
        He generated a persistent world and documented his progress with lots of information. It’s a really good read.

        • onsamyj says:

          I understand what you’re saying, but It can roll “die” once (“seed” for Minecraft world), or every time when you need something new, for my example of “procedurally generated but persistent” it doesn’t matter. Simpler example would be MMO: loot is random, but when it goes to player, it stays in world, and you can trade, sell or gift it.

          • neolith says:

            Yes, you can roll dice every time you need something new. But as I wrote before, you’d have to save it every single time for everyone else. That is not something you’d want to do in an endless world. The less you have to save the better. Idealy you’d only have to save the changes that players might make to the world after creation.

            IMHO loot is not a good example. Yes, it is random in a sense that every time you slay a mob something appears randomly. And you can keep the loot, it is saved somewhere. But that has nothing to do with the persistence of the world itself. Other users don’t have to encounter the same loot you did and they don’t have to see your loot from changes made to the world.

          • Winterblood says:

            Neolith is correct – the only reason to save procgen data is if the user is allowed to modify it , as in Minecraft – but have you checked the SIZE of your Minecraft saves? You do not want to do that for an entire universe :)

          • RedWurm says:

            That may be true, but I didn’t see much evidence in the trailer of users being able to do much modification of the planet in the way you can with minecraft. Now, unrestricted exploring in a constant universe with a huge number of users can add up if each individual part of it is randomly generated, but that doesn’t need to be the case. Maybe access to new areas has some sort of time or resource requirement, maybe whole systems are generated when the first person encounters a part of one, maybe systems with no traffic eventually get “lost”.

            Incidentally, a bit of rough maths tells me that, using a 32-bit value like the minecraft manual seeds, it would take a million users, each discovering a planet every five minutes, about a day to generate a gigabyte of seed data. Of course, if you start to knock any of those values down a bit, that time changes dramatically. Say there are only 1000 planets discovered every 5 minutes, that’s about a gigabyte every 3 years, which doesn’t seem too dramatic.

          • neolith says:

            @RedWurm:
            You are looking at it the wrong way. Content does not get created randomly, it is created quasi-randomly. That means that it looks random, but in fact isn’t. If It were, it would have to be saved. But in terms of creating content procedurally, saving is bad, because if you do it right, it is not needed.

            It is a bit like calculating Pi. You and I can both do it, there is an algorithm we can use. Neither of us knows what the next unknown digit is until we actually calculate it. It seems like a random digit is picked everytime we do the calculation. But it actually isn’t. It is predetermined by the algorithm that we both use. And therefore it is the same for both of us. The ‘random’ digit also doesn’t have to be saved for other people to see it, it can be recalculated each and every time again and again. It’ll always be the same.

            Systems, as you mentioned, would never have to get lost, as their content is in the algorithm. They’ll always be there, always looking exaclty the same, every time they are calculated.

            (I know that mathematically this is a bad example as storing the data of Pi’s digits is actually easier than recalculating it once you reach a certain length, but it is easy to understand.)

            So, calculating Pi is like generating content without a seed. The outcome is always the same.

            Seed is not data that is generated. Seed is an element that is inserted into the creation algorithm that modifies the outcome (hence the name). You don’t need to save seed for each part of the content created.

            Let’s say we want to use the earlier example of calculating Pi’s digits as a form of content creation, but this time with seed. We could use it if both you and I would want digits that are persistent, quasi-random, but different. You calculate the digits of 1xPi and I calculate the digits of 2xPi. Same algorithm, different seeds, different outcome, each one reproducable.

            Changing seed is needed in games like Minecraft, where you want each user to be able to create a different world. In No Man’s Sky you’d ultimately not need different seeds as all users are to experience the same content.

    • RedViv says:

      It’s just saved once generated.

    • AngoraFish says:

      Procedurally generated is not different for everyone. Think Minecraft, where everyone arrives at the same spawn and exists in the same universe, however if you happen to explore beyond the current procedurally generated terrain the computer generates new terrain as you go for the new section that you are entering. This new terrain, as well, is the same for everyone who might walk this way in the future. All procedural generation means is that map and level designers aren’t placing each tree, ocean and asteroid, it’s done instead with an algorithm.

      • cHeal says:

        And only once presumably? Once it is generated, it is persistent?

      • Winterblood says:

        Procedural != random.
        It means the universe is generated by a repeatable procedure. That will usually involve pseudo-random numbers – ie. numbers that LOOK random but are repeatable. For any given seed, you will get the same universe every time and can recreate any part of it as needed.
        Looks like they DO store who the first person to discover each galaxy/star-system/planet/region is though…

        • The First Door says:

          What they said! In fact, the reason procedural content works so well is because computers are unable to generate ‘truly’ random numbers and most random number generators require a seed.

        • WrenBoy says:

          I dont understand why people get so fussy about this.

          Computer programs are only able to generate pseudorandom numbers so in the context of computing a random number generator is a pseudorandom number generator and random numbers are pseudorandom numbers.

          Why do people lose their shit when someone says random?

      • fish99 says:

        Just a minor side note – Minecraft doesn’t work like that. The bit of the world you can see when you start a world is not the same for everyone, it’s procedurally generated based on a seeded random sequence just like the bits of the world that get generated when you move outside that area are. Also two players using the same seed – the whole world will be identical, not just the starting area.

    • DrollRemark says:

      Procedurally generated isn’t the same as random. A lot of people seem to confuse the two terms, now that they’ve both become buzzwords for certain games to tout, but all that ‘procedurally generated’ means is that the makers haven’t sat down and designed every single planet that the player explores, but have instead written a chunk of code (the procedure) that generates it for them.

      That code could include random elements, it could be generated from a single random seed, or it could be entirely pre-determined. Randomness is an entirely separate component.

      • mwoody says:

        Procedurally generated and randomly generated mean the EXACT same thing, because computers – and, indeed, the universe itself – are incapable of generating random numbers. What we consider “random” are results that come from input too complex for a human to predict. In that light, all random numbers are, in truth, pseudo-random numbers based on a seed value, and that value is then used to iterate terrain or other variables ad infinitum.

        The term “procedurally generated” is just a buzzword made up to sell video games because it sounded better – and, to be fair, is more accurate – than “random.” In terms of software, the two are completely synonymous.

        • The_Sleeve says:

          Procedural content generation doesn’t have to be random at all. It’s only random if the programmer makes it so. Below are two examples, one of non-randomized procedural content generation and one of randomized procedural content generation.

          Let’s say I want to make a level in a game that consists of 100 circles, with one circle on every point in a 10×10 grid. Sure, I could manually place 100 circles on the exact coordinates that I want, and then save the level in my level editor. But that takes time. It’s much faster to write a line of code that says ” for (x = 0; x < 9; x++) { for (y = 0; y < 9; y++) { generateCircle(x, y) }} ". See, I've just written a procedure that generates 100 circles on the points of the 10×10 grid. There's nothing random about it – the circles will appear in the same place every time I run this code. So, "procedural" simply means that you're writing code to do something for you instead of doing it manually.

          Now, if I wanted to introduce an element of randomness, I would need to use a (quasi) random number generator somewhere in my code. I could rewrite my previous code to read " for (i = 0; i < 99; i++) { generateCircle(rand(0,9), rand(0,9) }} ". This time, I'll get 100 circles again, but they will each be placed at a random point on my 10×10 grid. This is randomized procedural generation.

          So, as you can see, procedural content generation is only randomized if the programmer includes random number generation in the algorithm. Hope that makes sense.

          • WrenBoy says:

            With that definition every single game written in a procedural language uses procedural generation. I dont think that is what people mean when they say procedural generation.

          • neolith says:

            @WrenBoy:

            Procedural programming languages are not at all linked to procedural content creation.

            In the case of programming languages, ‘procedural’ refers to the subroutines/functions/methods that the language makes use of – in the case of content creation it describes the process of calculating data from an algorithm instead of loading data a human pre-assembled.

            Let’s say I want to create an island for a game.
            I can fire up an editor, build the island, places assets like palms and rocks, paint some cliffs in different textures and when I’m finished I save my island so that my game can load the file when needed. This is not procedural content creation.

            Or I can write an algorithm that calculates the shape of the island, the placement of the trees, rocks and cliff textures. It builds the island based upon code, takes the art assets and distributes them according to my formula. The island doesn’t have to be saved as the computer can always re-generate the exact same island the same way. This is procedural content creation.

          • WrenBoy says:

            I know that procedural generation has nothing to do with procedural languages. That was my entire point actually.

            In your example you created a procedure to draw circles and then you used this procedure. This is how circles are drawn in any procedural language I think you will find. If you thought anything more interesting was happening in your example you are mistaken. You may not realise it but you are essentially saying that the way any procedural language would be used to draw to the screen would be an example of procedural generation.

    • Uncompetative says:

      @cHeal

      “If it’s procedurally generated, how can it be persistent?”

      The same numerical seed value is used to create an entire Universe, algorithmically deriving copious amounts of content which will appear to be consistent for an unlimited number of observers – e.g. seed = 42. Players may then start the game at a randomized location (derived from their PC’s system clock, or IP address – the latter option being a useful solution to problems of localization as you could use a geolocation database to ensure that all your French players found themselves in a French speaking galaxy, etc.), or one selected from a list of interesting starting points (which would be more sensible from the point of game balance – e.g. Lave in Elite was picked for a reason).

      Note: that games like Minecraft and Dwarf Fortress also offer the opportunity to procedurally generate unique maps through the deliberately inconsistent use of a randomized seed. Were this seed shared with others, they could see the same initial map.

      However, any iterative algorithm can be turned “inside out” into a functional one: so rather than fill up finite storage with the details of some synthetic ‘milieu’ the programmer creates a function that renders what an observer can see given their current orientation and position as inputs (with the 42 “baked in” to the function’s sophisticated algorithm) with some measure of memoization used to cache the recently requested results of subfunctions to stop the whole game running like a slideshow.

      Finally, persistence can be added provided that one is willing to compromise a little and rely on human nature. Our minds have a tendency to forget trivial details (like the pattern of bullet holes we have made in some wall), ensuring that that zone is marked as having undergone a battle at some point only requires setting one bit of storage and the player will be hard pressed to determine which bullet holes they sprayed into the environment when it is procedurally battle damaged should they visit later on. Furthermore, a queue can be created which supplements this, so that a player could write their name in bullets and it would persist until they gradually eroded it from below as they reused their finite FIFO resource elsewhere – then on exiting the zone later visits would show their name overlaid on battle damage due to that conflict bit being set when they last left provided they hadn’t shot a whole load of stuff since. A procedural generator can also heal damaged environments over time with trees gradually growing back damaged branches and grasses growing back after being scorched. As a result the battlezone could have the storage of its conflict bit freed up if sufficient time passed for its civilisation to patch things up to their former pristine glory. Even simpler would be to throw away all but large scale irreparable changes on exiting that star system, although it may be worth keeping track of your NPC entanglements and their last known location separately so that they don’t just act like they’ve never met you before should you cross paths with them again. Another interesting dodge allows the contents of a container to apparently be replenished by whoever was using it to store valuables – one immediately thinks of a Skyrim type game here, but its application is not genre specific – from the player’s perspective a dungeon is entered and a chest is looted and remains empty until a subsequent foray reveals its new contents, however all the game does is use a spacetime based function to render different contents for that procedurally located chest at different periods in time (so it may start out holding a turnip for the first four hours and then a second later switch to holding a silver dagger, only you never see the switch as opening the chest prevents any functional transition of its ascribed value), then as with the bullets a FIFO queue is used to remember the contents of recently opened chests (it can’t remember all of them as it has to find storage for a whole Universe of containers which would be impossible) and this same mechanism allows the game to track which items you collected from where at what timestamp even if you later traded them in order to ensure that a dagger once collected is not only gone for you, but for others too. On looking in a chest the game needs to ask what items the player has had pass through their inventory in order to then subtract these items from the places they were found. Items could be left lying out in the open as well, but that puts a greater computational burden on the game as everthing that can be picked up within the player’s field of view has to be conditionally eliminated if it passed through their inventory. Dropped items (or those deliberately placed inside containers) eventually need to be forgotten about and deemed “stolen” by the player when they leave it too long before they return to the area to look for them. Certain exceptions are possible such as remembering the contents of a lock box on the back of your current vehicle and permanently recording upgrades to your spacecraft and spacesuit

      I appreciate all the people here who dislike griefing, but I feel that a game like this can support cooperative play on a massive scale without people having their gleaming civilisations glassed from orbit by some rampaging nerk. All that is required is that a player’s changes to their world(s) are shared with the wider community in a read-only manner. In that way visiting a star system would be rather like going to a website – indeed, players could host their modifications on a web page of their own creation and then publish their version of a given in-game location by uploading its url to some central server with password protection preventing unauthorised changes to the original, but still permitting the creator (and their close friends) to continue with their creation. Other destructively minded players would be free to obliterate their work and it would only be tracked through their FIFO history as being gone for them. Indeed, there is a potential for a Multiverse of supplementary User Content Generation which would treat multiple versions of the same procedurally generated base planet each uniquely modified by one player (and their friends) as inhabiting a set of parallel universes. UCG would need to leverage a phased object forge (like in Halo Reach), but with each of the prefabs defined as part of a community-driven procedurally generated library with user manipulable parameters, e.g. players would be able to give NPCs the right appearance for their role through the use of a character creator, or an ever expanding cast list of prefabricated ‘extras’ which they could shave, dress and coiffeur to their specifications

      I’ve been working on a similar game to this (an intergalactic MMORTSFPSRPG) for the last couple of decades, so feel free to ask me any technical or design questions you may have as I may well have the answer.

    • voorsk says:

      As many have said, procedural is not the same as random – it means generating a huge world from a tiny code.

      Elite is the most well known example of procedurally generated content, I think, although you can also see it in Minecraft or terrain generators. If you use the same seed every time you start a fresh world, it’ll create the exact same world.

      It’s merely a way of creating massive amounts of content with very little work.

  10. 0positivo says:

    wow, this came out of nowhere

    Is this the reinassance of the space genre? Cause you know, I’m totally for it

    • GameCat says:

      Space sims are new zombie games, I’m saying this since few last months.
      At least this one is clearly distinguishable from others and looks awesome, but I’m afraid it will die under weight of exceptations and hype. I hope I’m wrong with this one.

  11. daphne says:

    More procedural space sims can only be a best thing. Limit Theory, Elite Dangerous, and now this…

  12. BooleanBob says:

    I wonder what happens if you take a photo of this game and run it through instagram

  13. zipdrive says:

    “content unavailable” for some reason.

  14. JustAPigeon says:

    Holy shit. Brilliant trailer.

    My expectations are far too high now.

  15. dorobo says:

    with oculus rift?

  16. coldvvvave says:

    I thought music sounded familiar from the first seconds. Then I realized it’s 65 Days of Static. Song is called Debutante if anyone is interested. Nice choice.

  17. Tunips says:

    Proteus->Noctis->Freespace->GalCiv?
    I’m in.

  18. CookPassBabtridge says:

    Ahhhh this has prodded a semi-recalled upcoming game memory that is now irking me.

    There was a recent trailer where one scene showed the player walking along a beach, and discovering a ship floating on it, which you could then get in. I am pretty sure it wasn’t this game… any ideas what it was?

  19. Viroso says:

    This will be like the new fad because consoles can finally handle this sort of stuff.

  20. Stardreamer says:

    Please oh cruel and fickle Gods of Gaming let this be a single-player title. Just let me get lost inside this without having to suffer the outside world. I’ll tolerate any other horror of modern gaming if you’ll give me that.

    Also at the very top of my watch list. Feels like I’ve been waiting all my life for something like this.

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      Sorry to burst the bubble but the guy said it will be online. As far as I can tell you will have your own planet. My immediate thought was “Oh good, so I can create this lovely ecosystem only for some dick with a trollface decal on his ship’s hull to come along and bomb my farm” (assuming this is going to be 4x-ey, which it totally may not).

      Guess I will have to prioritise building anti-air before the Bunny Rabbit breeding station.

      • Stardreamer says:

        Damn it all to blistering hell! Well, that was a fun hour’s fantasising while it lasted. >:(

        Maybe I’ll make an account just to skulk around on my own world pointedly ignoring everyone, sculpting forests until the words “Go away” are visible from space.

        • CookPassBabtridge says:

          Lol awesome, now i hope the game comes out just so you can do it. However might I recommend “GTFO” as it requires less cultivating time?

    • JiminyJickers says:

      Yeah definitely. I don’t mind games with multiplayer but I want single player to be the primary focus.

  21. Chaz says:

    Oh wow! That just looks amazing!

    • JiminyJickers says:

      Yeah definitely looking amazing. I’m really hoping it will turn out well. Even if it is just exploration with some shooty bits I will enjoy it.

  22. Jomini says:

    Couldn’t they come up with something more alien than sharks and giant snakes?

    • Universal Quitter says:

      Actually, it’s very hard for most humans to conceive of entirely alien things. We usually need some kind of framework for our imaginations to build off of.

      Giant snake and space shark are exactly the kinds of aliens that a human being would come up with.

  23. The First Door says:

    So… that does look rather incredible! Especially since it’s from the study which man Joe Danger which (to put it politely) I didn’t really enjoy.

    I agree that this rather deserves to be kept an eye on.

  24. Felixader says:

    What astounds me is that it is 2013 and GT.com STILL has the shitiest videoplayer to go around!

    On the Trailer: this looks really nice and i get a “classic” vibe from the music. I hope it really turns out as good as it looks in this. In the End we will have this trailer and the idea what could have been. ^_^

  25. Didden says:

    This. Looks. Awesome. Reminds me a lot of Midwinter in that open explorer sort of way – but without the 1 fps graphics of the Amiga ;-)

  26. Shadowcat says:

    Reminds me of The Precursors.

  27. Shadowcat says:

    Also: bonus points for including Sand Worms :)

  28. karthink says:

    Is it coming to PC, though? I’m assuming it is since it’s on RPS, but I can’t find an official confirmation except the silly “next-gen”.

    • pilouuuu says:

      PC is the real next gen. The toy boxes can’t even play most games on 1080p and 60 fps.

      • karthink says:

        I don’t much care for the term. Doesn’t answer my question, though.

        • Riley Lungmus says:

          Being a PC site, yes it’s coming to PC.

          I was also under the impression that ‘Generation’ never applied to computers.

          • karthink says:

            I’m trying to find the source. The creators haven’t confirmed it besides saying it’s for “next gen”, and RPS didn’t link to a confirmation either.

    • stblr says:

      Came here to ask this. That trailer really tickles my cockles but with VGX being primarily a console-centric affair I didn’t want to get my hopes up too far.

  29. The Sombrero Kid says:

    When I saw this it was the first time i’d been gobsmacked by a game trailer since Dishonoured.

  30. cherbert says:

    Worst presenters ever. Thanks for constantly interrupting him with stupid arse comments about them just being 4 people. Now we don’t know if its multiplayer or not because of that stupid twat presenter.

    • Frank says:

      Yeah, I like Joel McHale from his work in Community, but this would’ve been far better/more informative if he’d kept quiet.

      • colossalstrikepackage says:

        I can understand Joel not being a good interviewer – but that other guy (who cut off the game dev at a critical point) really should have known better. Simply terrible interviewing – interrupting just to hear your own voice (and make an repeat an inane comment) has got to be the worst possible reason to do so.

        Here’s hoping that RPS can get to the bottom of the mmo/not question.

    • Hmm-Hmm. says:

      Yeah, that was cringeworthy to watch. They gave the dev some time on their show, so I suppose they have heard about this ‘indie’ thing.

  31. sonofsanta says:

    Honest to god: I got goosebumps.

  32. Simbosan says:

    I would love to watch the video on my little Nexus, lying in bed on Sunday afternoon with a cup of tea and a biscuit. But no, you switched to some new video player, so maybe later eh?

    Why the switch I wonder, advertising? It certainly isn’t improved functionality.

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      Yup same problem on my android phone

      Also GET UP it’s nearly 2 o clock :)

    • Don Reba says:

      It’s the player GTX uses for its videos. Among other problems, it breaks when I use Full Screen.

    • Shadowcat says:

      I presume that was just the source they had for this particular video, rather than some policy change.

      The video failed to load at all on my PC, but I went to youtube and found it there (posted by Hello Games).

  33. Guppo_26 says:

    This kind of looked like the Freelancer sequal I’ve been waiting for my entire life. Seemlessly flying in and out of atmospheres, exploration, space battles with fighters and carriers alike, and it looks quite impressive as well. This has me hyped, and that’s not something that I say often.

  34. Stevostin says:

    Very nice smart/art direction although very rough 3D (well, it should work on old computers). Annoying trailer with fast cuts. The bif “xxx has discovered …” sounds very annoying. Hopefully they’ll keep it single player.

  35. pilouuuu says:

    That gives me some Roger Dean, Dune vibes. This looks like my dream game if they do it right and I think this is what real next-gen should be all about.

  36. Stevostin says:

    Watching it back… I am sorry, I can’t share the vibe. It sure looks interesting but the art direction can’t hide the fact that the 3D is so badly dated. Anyway, I am certainly to amazed by Space Engine to have even a remote feeling of “planets” here. I mean, look at this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj-VcZY_nwE

    Sure it’s not a game, sure there is no shark variant, but this *feel* like other planet, other space. More than anything you get a strong appreciation of scales, and that alone is amazing.

    I am most certainly missing the point, I guess. I’ll follow this with interest like anyone, but I am not amazed.

    • CookPassBabtridge says:

      Good Lord. Its like a never ending toy box of infinite exploration. First I explored the orbit of a small red planet, until its gravity sucked me in and forced me to fly along its valleys and mountains, streaking over its bizarre colour-clashing lakes and wondering what kind of fish might be found below. Then increasing my speed to escape velocity, watching the stars slowly become brighter as the atmosphere leached away … and then accelerating up to three times the speed of light, I traveled to a Binary Star – two blue giants, hanging like a pair of freezing baubles in near-empty space. Then I saw a nebula. At first I thought it was just a background JPEG – but I pushed my speed up to a thousand times the speed of light, and the body of it opened up like a cloud and swallowed me. I was sitting inside a stellar nursery, out of place – sentient life wouldn’t evolve here for millions of years…

      But surely, surely that galaxy over there isn’t real? Surely THATS just a backdrop, downloaded from NASA? Let’s see … Ten thousand times the speed of light. A hundred thousand times the speed of light. Stars are streaking past me now, like a storm, and my graphics card sounds like a wind tunnel. And finally, I’ll be blowed if I’m not pulling up on the golden flank of a full blown galaxy, orbiting god knows how many suns and black holes, complete with still-forming clouds of matter and planets, and gradually opening up to welcome me.

      That thing is amazing, and made me feel utterly tiny. Worth the 600 Meg download at any rate. Will have to get the hi res packs too.

  37. Riley Lungmus says:

    But you can’t take the Sky from me…

  38. Zenicetus says:

    I like the 1950′s-’60′s book cover vibe of the art direction, especially in that top image in the article. The 3D work on the ships in the space battle and the cockpit look a bit basic, but the overall art direction is very nice.

    On the other hand, if this isn’t a singleplayer game, then I have zero interest in it. Murray ducked the question in the interview, but it sounds like it’s an MMO. I hope that’s made more clear with the next RPS feature on this.

    Guys, I know you’re a four person studio, but please find the money to hire an AI programmer and a good sci-fi writer, so this doesn’t have to rely on other people in the same game I’m playing. Maybe not even a writer, if the procedurally-generated universe is interesting enough, but that’s a tall order. Having to co-inhabit a universe filled with trolls and griefers is not not what made the classic space games fun.

  39. jankenbattle says:

    Reminds me a lot of Noctis, super evocative. The only multiplayer element to it was coming across planets or systems that other players had discovered, catalogued and named. It was simple and beautiful!

    Hopefully this is in the same spirit, and with the same very limited multiplayer.

  40. Pecisk says:

    I am little put of by color palette also how simplistic game mechanics look. Maybe that’s good :) Overall good presentation, but as I will get this from “Elite: Dangerous”, and “player owned planets” isn’t my thing, good luck :)

    Also two questions – what “next gen” means here, and release date. Didn’t heard any of it. I think XR showed their beautiful trailers 3 years before release :)

  41. SkittleDiddler says:

    For a 4-man indie studio, they sure do seem to have the marketing budget of a AAA-funded team.

  42. JimDiGritz says:

    Shame that this game is apparently only in low res. Would have been nice in at least 1080p

  43. Tams80 says:

    It looks great.

    However, those autoplaying videos are not (I think this is a VGX thing), especially when there are two of them. Not that I can stand VGX and that interview was hard to watch.

  44. richtaur says:

    They had me at giant sandworms.

  45. wz says:

    What things would you like to know about this game?

    My list:

    - Multiplayer? MMO, single player with coop, single player focus with drop in multiplayer (Evochron. Any chance of a single player version?

    - Consoles? Commenter Pecenik thinks so. So does googling no man’s sky and consoles.

    - Modding? Modding is likely where the true power of this game might lie – the team is small and MMO’s are large undertakings. Multiplayer exploits usually mean no modding.

    Other things:

    - Seamless or instanced flight?

    - How large are the worlds. Diameter in km please. Procedural games designed for weaker consoles or weaker PC systems will not be able to generate details on many scales as fast as a PC.

    - CPU or GPU used mainly for procedural generation?

    - Info on depth of systems for procedural plants and animals.

    - Are they planning to kickstart it or just looking for a publisher?

    - Will there be longer videos/more media? If simply recording in game action it should be quick enough, unless they’ve only done one world so far.

    - Galaxy or galaxies plural? Video seems to indicate galaxies. Extending size of procedural universes arbitrarily isn’t too hard.

    For the curious, Noctis might well have been the first game to have procedural planets and flora/fauna. Ad astra also had very simple procedural animals.

    Space engine, Pioneer and Space Way are worth checking out while we wait for a single player procedural game to be finished.

    Console MMO or not, it’s nice to see a more interesting direction.

  46. cylentstorm says:

    Holy crap–my inner space geek just collided with my outer one and…um…I soiled myself. If the end product plays like the trailer looks/sounds, then Hello Games will have earned one free Any Favor–No Questions Asked ticket from yours, truly. Seriously.

  47. Deviija says:

    GASP! Oh my glorious goodness. If this game turns out to be anything like the trailer, I will shed tears of space and planetary exploration joy. It’s one thing my inner spacegeek loves — and why I’m looking forward to games like Limit Theory and Starbound and Elite etc. Trying to temper my excite.

  48. The Random One says:

    Well I’d love to watch it, but as Gametrailers’ player seems to hate me as much as I hate it, I can only watch the calling card before the actual footage.

  49. DiGi says:

    Well, Outerra looks amazing http://www.outerra.com/wgallery.html – and without exotic alien look.

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>