Support NeoGAF

[Russ T]

That's your own interpretation of things that aren't in the quote you showed.

I mean they made a game by creating an universe using maths as the basis rendered by voxels .. How the heck are they supposed to explain it without compairing to a real life equivalent ?

Man I been trying to go down this avenue for like an hour. Maybe you'll have more luck, but I wouldn't recommend it.

There is no need for personal attacks. Some confusion has been caused by multiple conversations so I will start over.

In this quote

They claim that in order to simulate green skies they had to redesign the periodic table to create particles that would diffract light at just the right wavelength.

I have cited several sources and explained that diffraction CANNOT CAUSE GREEN SKIES on any planet, in any situation. If you want the science explanation why, please see my posts on the previous page, which include sources.

Sky color is caused by Rayleigh scattering.

Therefore, at the time of the quote, the quote was a lie. They never simulated physics in order to generate sky color.

I hope that makes sense, I am actually just trying to explain optics which I am passionate about.

It wasn't intended to be a personal attack. I apologize! I'm just genuinely trying to understand why you don't understand.

Newtonian physics, okay? Previous to this post, every time I mentioned it, it was ONLY referring to classical mechanics. This is because the other guy was doing the same thing.

So when you tell me you have proof that classical mechanics were NEVER in the game, I question it because you can NOT have that proof unless you have access to every previous builds of the game. It's entirely possible it was there at one point, and taken out for performance reasons. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that WERE the case, especially given how many performance issues the game currently has. I bet they had to cut a lot of desired features!

So that was a miscommunication between us. Oops!

...

Okay, back to sky colors. I understand when you say that is impossible for a sky to be green. I did not know that! That's interesting. Thank you for educating me!

Now, I'd argue that it's possible they tweaked the rules of their universe so that it WOULD allow for green skies. In fact, that's explicitly what Sean says. And we have evidence of that, with the green skies. (...are there green skies in the game?? Non blue at least!)

Is...that more clear? I hope it is. D: I'm really trying here, man. D: it's hard to keep up with ten different people jumping on everything I say without understanding the context. Especially from my phone lol

 

[Kaisos]

I mean they made a game by creating an universe using maths as the basis rendered by voxels .. How the heck are they supposed to explain it without compairing to a real life equivalent ?

Maybe don't claim that your sky is green because you -altered the in-game periodic table-, all while making a faux-cutesy bugs bunny face? There's a limit here.

Like, I know people want to believe that Murray was just in over his head and wasn't coached properly on what to say in interviews, but the quotes I pulled are straight-up lies.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

the whole article is full of blatant lies, really.

There are skyboxes everywhere. What the hell is he on?

Seems Sean is basically as full of shit as any other cynical developer on the planet. Good to know he's not the special guy people made him out to be.

 

[Uthred]

There are skyboxes everywhere. What the hell is he on?

Seems Sean is basically as full of shit as any other cynical developer on the planet. Good to know he's not the special guy people made him out to be.

Well in fariness, in that specific quote he's talking about being on planet, and the planet being surrounded by a skybox, which it isnt in NMS, the solar system is surrounded by a skybox. And you can travel to every star, for certain values of the word travel. So at least half of its true but all together its misleading. Not outright lying though (well that physics thing is probably bollocks or very loose), not that any shades of grey are acceptable here. Only TRUTH or LIES.

 

[Makai]

There are skyboxes everywhere. What the hell is he on?

Seems Sean is basically as full of shit as any other cynical developer on the planet. Good to know he's not the special guy people made him out to be.

i'm guessing it was originally like that but was too much of a performance hog.

 

[SomTervo]

I don't even know what to make of this comment. Not even remotely close to even being in the same galaxy of genres, that aside. I highly doubt this game is better than Black and White.

Sorry for slow reply. 1. I didn't bring up the comparison, and 2. I played a lot of B&W and have definitely had a better time with NMS.

They took a while to process my Steam refund so I tried warping with capture on PC too - yes, no data. You can press a button while on the solar system map to scan for discoveries, which contacts the above server and asks for a list for named solar systems with usernames, but that's all it does.

Also, and unrelated, a GAFfer made a cheat engine, which is cool for PC players, and shows how challenging multiplayer would have been.

That is awesome. Thanks for sharing.

I was so hyped for B&W, was a Bullfrog fan for years and pre-ordered it. Then I got this narrow focused game with very few missions and an AI creature that could have been described as idiotic if I were being kind. I remember watching it launch my populace into the sea despite hours trying to tame it. It was a mess.

Yeah, this. A passing MP feature and some minor smoke-and-mirrors aside, NMS is 90% what they promised it would be.

It's nothing on the level of "plant a seed and it will grow for years in-game" Molyneux

 

[Abelian75]

I feel like that line about tweaking the periodic table to make it possible for there to be green skies has got to be one of the more hilarious lines about video games I've ever read. This game is good shit.

 

[Kaisos]

i'm guessing it was originally like that but was too much of a performance hog.

This quote is from seven months ago.

 

[R_thanatos]

Maybe don't claim that your sky is green because you -altered the in-game periodic table-, all while making a faux-cutesy bugs bunny face? There's a limit here.

Like, I know people want to believe that Murray was just in over his head and wasn't coached properly on what to say in interviews, but the quotes I pulled are straight-up lies.

Wait , so you know why the sky is green on certain planet and red on others ( in the game ? )

Do we know exactly why some spaces are in a certain color and different in others ?
Because the claim that they lied ..and by space i mean universes ... Because if the lie is that on a real ( IRL planet ) things works a certain way , but in NMS planets it works differently ..it falls back to " we can do anything because it's own simulation" that is in the quote.. they MADE their own rules.

If the lie is : " there is a skybox around the universe" , then you guys are again reaching for thing to hate on

 

[Russ T]

This quote is from seven months ago.

Yo in game dev that kind of change could be made SEVEN WEEKS before launch.

EDIT: Hell, in extreme circumstances? Mere DAYS

 

[Uthred]

I feel like that line about tweaking the periodic table to make it possible for there to be green skies has got to be one of the more hilarious lines about video games I've ever read. This game is good shit.

Honestly the comment about the PC version being a PS4 emulator is currently (and will likely remain) the stupidest thing Ive heard someone say about the game

 

[Nickle]

My dad knows a scientist and he says they tweak the periodic table for convenience all the time

 

[Makai]

This quote is from seven months ago.

Games iterate quickly.

 

[UncleSporky]

Okay, back to sky colors. I understand when you say that is impossible for a sky to be green. I did not know that! That's interesting. Thank you for educating me!

Now, I'd argue that it's possible they tweaked the rules of their universe so that it WOULD allow for green skies. In fact, that's explicitly what Sean says. And we have evidence of that, with the green skies. (...are there green skies in the game?? Non blue at least!)

Is...that more clear? I hope it is. D: I'm really trying here, man. D: it's hard to keep up with ten different people jumping on everything I say without understanding the context. Especially from my phone lol

The quote specifically says they messed with diffraction to create green skies. It doesn't simply say they "tweaked the rules of the universe," it says they redesigned the periodic table to create atmospheric particles that would diffract light at just the right wavelength.

But you can't diffract light to change the sky color. Ergo, the quote is bullshit.

 

[Ultrabum]

Okay, back to sky colors. I understand when you say that is impossible for a sky to be green. I did not know that! That's interesting. Thank you for educating me!

Now, I'd argue that it's possible they tweaked the rules of their universe so that it WOULD allow for green skies. In fact, that's explicitly what Sean says. And we have evidence of that, with the green skies. (...are there green skies in the game?? Non blue at least!)

Is...that more clear? I hope it is. D: I'm really trying here, man. D: it's hard to keep up with ten different people jumping on everything I say without understanding the context. Especially from my phone lol

Do you have proof the game at one point didn't have those things? Maybe the Newtonian physics was too much for performance, so they ended up taking it out. Not really a lie, just a change of plans.

This is why you people screaming "lie" over and over again is so absurd. I hope you're going to start doing that with literally every developer who changes their plans without filling you in at all times to at least be consistent.

This is what I am saying. I have proof, backed up by scientific facts that there was never any diffraction simulation in the game in order to determine sky color.

It is a lie, not something that was changed during development, but a lie the second it was said.

Any assumptions you make based on this fact are up to you.

As a side note, I never said it was impossible for a sky to be green, it is entirely possible, but it will not be due to altering a periodic table and diffraction or refraction properties of elements.

 

[Russ T]

This is what I am saying. I have proof, backed up by scientific facts that there was never any diffraction simulation in the game in order to determine sky color.

It is a lie, not something that was changed during development, but a lie the second it was said.

Any assumptions you make based on this fact are up to you.

As a side note, I never said it was impossible for a sky to be green, it is entirely possible, but it will not be due to altering a periodic table and diffraction, refraction properties of elements.

You ignored the first half of my post. I know this because of the second thing you quoted there.

You also do not have proof.

I'm done trying with you, my dude. It's clear you're not extending me the same respect I am you.

 

[SomTervo]

What's really damning is these bits in interviews where they start talking about the game as though it's using real-life physics, like having to "redesign atmospheric particles".

Like, what the hell? That's not how games work. Why did no one call them out on this months ago?

Yeah, it's just crazy. Like, the way the game works now, it's fine. You don't really miss any of this stuff. It wouldn't make a big difference.

But he went into such depth, and so specifically - it makes the wound far more raw than it would have been had he said nothing. At least mention that it's been scaled back a lot - arguably that would kill their PR but nowadays honestly is literally the best PR policy. The internet forgives pre-emptive honesty about failures - they don't forgive lies.

PS I think some games do work like that?

 

[tuxfool]

i'm guessing it was originally like that but was too much of a performance hog.

I very much doubt it. The top level galaxy map has to exist on a separate coordinate space to the system level space.

I don't think there is a way to translate a coordinate system that has enough precision that it works at human level distances, like move 1cm in xyz to the size of an entire galaxy.

A 64bit coordinate system has enough precision such that you can represent a star system but anything larger would just lose precision (if you're using floating point).

 

[SomTervo]

If there's no algorithm, how are the planets generated?

En garde!

You're the best

Just a theory here, I haven't had time to catch up on the previous ~100 pages but people have said no data is sent to the server regarding player position. Have they tested this when on the same planet as another player? It seems like an obvious optimisation to me not to bother sending location to the server unless there is another player in the vicinity. Again, just an idea, maybe someone has done this and I missed it.

Also worth testing, yeah

The whole "the only way to find out what you look like is to meet another player" is still such an unequivocal statement I find it hard to believe there's no MP function of some kind

lmao but isnt the game using skyboxes

The planets don't, they just have skies, that you can fly through. And you can select any star you see in the sky using the Galaxy Map and fly to it. But yeah, you can't do that 'organically' like without going to the Galaxy Map first.

 

[Iva Demilcol]

Well in fariness, in that specific quote he's talking about being on planet, and the planet being surrounded by a skybox, which it isnt in NMS, the solar system is surrounded by a skybox. And you can travel to every star, for certain values of the word travel. So at least half of its true but all together its misleading. Not outright lying though (well that physics thing is probably bollocks or very loose), not that any shades of grey are acceptable here. Only TRUTH or LIES.

You're actually missing the point here... This thread happened because devs (Murray in this case) haven't even acknowledge the direct questions regarding one feature in NMS. People have said it over and over again: if they can't do something, well... They can't. And no amount of comments will bring that feature back, but if you know you can't do something why then would you keep mentioning it even during the day of release and keep misleading people that thought that the feature is still there?

The rest of the things that have popped up regarding other missing features are the result of people analyzing everything that has been said because the devs didn't want to address the questions regarding the MP in NMS.

 

[Kaisos]

Yo in game dev that kind of change could be made SEVEN WEEKS before launch.

EDIT: Hell, in extreme circumstances? Mere DAYS

Games iterate quickly.

This game has been in development for years. I'm sorry if I think a change as significant as whether or not it's going to be able to run a mostly-accurate simulation of Newtonian physics is something that you could see coming more than seven months before release.

 

[Abelian75]

This is what I am saying. I have proof, backed up by scientific facts that there was never any diffraction simulation in the game in order to determine sky color.

It is a lie, not something that was changed during development, but a lie the second it was said.

Any assumptions you make based on this fact are up to you.

As a side note, I never said it was impossible for a sky to be green, it is entirely possible, but it will not be due to altering a periodic table and diffraction or refraction properties of elements.

While this is all (100% legitimately) very interesting, I think the easier way to establish that the quote is bullshit is that it would just be absolutely ridiculous to set the sky color that way. If you had *any* interest in ever valuing aesthetics over realism even the tiniest amount, obviously you would just set the sky colors to whatever you wanted to. I mean, come *on*. It's either the dumbest development decision ever, or a hilariously obvious lie. Either way, goddamn hilarious. Fantastic stuff.

Anyway, those committed to believing it's true are obviously going to keep believing it. The rest of us can just share a minute laughing at the absurdity of it. Heh.

 

[Russ T]

This game has been in development for years. I'm sorry if I think a change as significant as whether or not it's going to be able to run a mostly-accurate simulation of Newtonian physics is something that you could see coming more than seven months before release.

I promise you it happens all the time. I've seen it firsthand.

 

[Kaisos]

I promise you it happens all the time. I've seen it firsthand.

Do you believe that the entire game, as it is, was hurriedly (re)constructed within seven months?

 

[SomTervo]

This game has been in development for years. I'm sorry if I think a change as significant as whether or not it's going to be able to run a mostly-accurate simulation of Newtonian physics is something that you could see coming more than seven months before release.

Seriously, you'd be surprised. It's often impossible to see huge flaws in a game's design until within a year of release, sometimes months, because you literally can't see how the whole picture looks (especially tech side) until near the end of development.

I don't think it's unrealistic that in the last few months they realised the PS4 was struggling or that their system wasn't quite all together, and they start slicing corners away like No Man's Business. It could be that one year ago the game was very different indeed, much more 'sim-like'.

There's also the playtesting angle. It's infuriating in the game that you can't crash into planets or oceans or dock in stations manually - but I have no doubt that they streamlined this stuff because most of their playtesters would end up busting their ship and being stranded for hours and getting frustrated, so they totally built in a safety net all the time.

Game dev is complicated.

Do you believe that the entire game, as it is, was hurriedly (re)constructed within seven months?

That literally happens, man. I've seen it happen within three months. (Not saying it happened with NMS.)

The Last of Us was apparently barely playable (as in completely not fun and flawed in design) just four months or so before release. They had to redesign levels, mechanics, encounters, gameplay systems. Not total re-write but substantial work. Apparently Uncharted 2 didn't even run on a PS3 a few months before release.

It's an absurd workflow, TBH.

 

[Russ T]

Do you believe that the entire game, as it is, was hurriedly (re)constructed within seven months?

Nope!

 

[Ultrabum]

You ignored the first half of my post. I know this because of the second thing you quoted there.

You also do not have proof.

I'm done trying with you, my dude. It's clear you're not extending me the same respect I am you.

Man I been trying to go down this avenue for like an hour. Maybe you'll have more luck, but I wouldn't recommend it.



It wasn't intended to be a personal attack. I apologize! I'm just genuinely trying to understand why you don't understand.

Newtonian physics, okay? Previous to this post, every time I mentioned it, it was ONLY referring to classical mechanics. This is because the other guy was doing the same thing.

So when you tell me you have proof that classical mechanics were NEVER in the game, I question it because you can NOT have that proof unless you have access to every previous builds of the game. It's entirely possible it was there at one point, and taken out for performance reasons. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that WERE the case, especially given how many performance issues the game currently has. I bet they had to cut a lot of desired features!

So that was a miscommunication between us. Oops!

...

Okay, back to sky colors. I understand when you say that is impossible for a sky to be green. I did not know that! That's interesting. Thank you for educating me!

Now, I'd argue that it's possible they tweaked the rules of their universe so that it WOULD allow for green skies. In fact, that's explicitly what Sean says. And we have evidence of that, with the green skies. (...are there green skies in the game?? Non blue at least!)

Is...that more clear? I hope it is. D: I'm really trying here, man. D: it's hard to keep up with ten different people jumping on everything I say without understanding the context. Especially from my phone lol

I shortened the quote to save space.

I am confused why you are so angry, and so I have re-read this post. In the top half you talk about classical mechanics. This is irrelevant to the green sky quote because they deal with a different branch of physics.

I never mentioned weather or not classical mechanics are in the game, I don't know.

You also say that I cannot know without the build of the game. I can know, because I know how diffraction works. Diffraction cannot make a sky green. Therefore, any simulation of diffraction cannot create a green sky, and diffraction was never simulated at any time during the creation of the game (in regards to sky color, maybe in some other area it was).

They claimed to simulate diffraction. They clearly did not, and made no attempt to because it is impossible for diffraction to do the thing they claimed it was simulated to do.

Without considering anything they have said about classical mechanics.

They said they simulated diffraction, and they did not.

Edit: Perhaps in an early build of the game there was a complex algorithm to determine sky color, but it was cut due to time or whatever. That is not what they claimed, they claimed they simulated diffraction to determine sky color. This statement is as wrong as 2+2=5. It is literally false.

 

[Outrun]

This thread is simply surreal.

Wow.

 

[Vena]

Totally irrelevant to the discussion but boy do those last few lines rub me the wrong way as a physicist.

 

[Ultrabum]

Totally irrelevant to the discussion but boy do those last few lines rub me the wrong way as a physicist.

I probably should have showed the quote again, thanks for posting this.

 

[Kaisos]

I don't think it's unrealistic that in the last few months they realised the PS4 was struggling or that their system wasn't quite all together, and they start slicing corners away like No Man's Business. It could be that one year ago the game was very different indeed, much more 'sim-like'.

See, my issue is that the sim as they presented it in that interview is logistically impossible (particularly the part about the ecosystems and the vast, infinite emptiness) which is what every detractor had been saying about the game for years?

Like this quote. Is any of this actually in the game? Did they actually manage to deliver on any of their promises? I refuse to believe that they weren't aware at any point before that interview that they were horribly misrepresenting the final product.

The Last of Us was apparently barely playable (as in completely not fun and flawed in design) just four months or so before release. They had to redesign levels, mechanics, encounters, gameplay systems. Not total re-write but substantial work. Apparently Uncharted 2 didn't even run on a PS3 a few months before release.

How in the hell is anyone working in the game industry still alive?

 

[SomTervo]

Totally irrelevant to the discussion but boy do those last few lines rub me the wrong way as a physicist.

At least he hedges it with "it's our universe"

Not that this helps in any way

See, my issue is that the sim as they presented it in that interview is logistically impossible (particularly the part about the ecosystems and the vast, infinite emptiness) which is what every detractor had been saying about the game for years?

Like this quote. Is any of this actually in the game? Did they actually manage to deliver on any of their promises? I refuse to believe that they weren't aware at any point before that interview that they were horribly misrepresenting the final product.

No, totally man, I'm with you on that. There are a bunch of things which they categorically said are in the game that aren't. In this thread I'm just spitballing the potential reasons for that.

In terms of that specific quote - I have seen animals group together and then happen upon another group and then they all frolic together and then a predator comes and they all scatter. It doesn't happen often (probably seen it 3-4 times in about 30 hours) but there is some sort of system there. I've seen nothing suggesting favourite objects.

How in the hell is anyone working in the game industry still alive?

As far as I can tell they run on fumes most of the time. Seems like that in most software companies, too. I know lots of app developers who have a ridiculous working life.

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

Holy shit! Someone datamined the music for the multiplayer menu.

 

[Vena]

At least he hedges it with "it's our universe"

Not that this helps in any way

Weird use of "our". Their universe is still largely a copy of the basic principles of our universe... well without most of the basic principles asides, and they have done very little "simulating" of any kind.

Did we ever conclude if they've even done any sort of celestial body moment of intertia/momentum calculations/modeling for rotations and heliocentric orbits?

 

[Nickle]

Holy shit! Someone datamined the music for the multiplayer menu.

HIGH QUALITY RIP

 

[Russ T]

I shortened the quote to save space.

I am confused why you are so angry, and so I have re-read this post. In the top half you talk about classical mechanics. This is irrelevant to the green sky quote because they deal with a different branch of physics.

I never mentioned weather or not classical mechanics are in the game, I don't know.

You also say that I cannot know without the build of the game. I can know, because I know how diffraction works. Diffraction cannot make a sky green. Therefore, any simulation of diffraction cannot create a green sky, and diffraction was never simulated at any time during the creation of the game (in regards to sky color, maybe in some other area it was).

They claimed to simulate diffraction. They clearly did not, and made no attempt to because it is impossible for diffraction to do the thing they claimed it was simulated to do.

Without considering anything they have said about classical mechanics.

They said they simulated diffraction, and they did not.

I'm not angry. I'm frustrated! I don't know how to be more clear! I tried and tried! It feels like it's intentional at this point. ): I'll try again!!!

You quoted me talking about Newtonian physics AGAIN, after the SECOND time I told you that when I said Newtonian physics I was talking about CLASSICAL MECHANICS.

So, you responding to my post about Newtonian physics with stuff about sky colors confused me every time. Do you understand this?

...

Um okay back to sky colors again lol

Is it unreasonable to thin maybe they meant they changed the rules of diffraction to calculate sky colors? Maybe that's what they meant when they said they changed the periodic table, but they wanted to explain it more simply. Obviously if that wad the intention, it completely failed, but not everything works out perfectly!

Or maybe even they just used the wrong words and didn't mean to say diffraction! Arabs obviously no scientist. Could've been an honest mistake.

...





Okay all this over a dumb miscommunication haha I'm gonna go crazy ahhhhhh

 

[SomTervo]

Holy shit! Someone datamined the music for the multiplayer menu.

so

so






so good

 

[Uthred]

Like this quote. Is any of this actually in the game? Did they actually manage to deliver on any of their promises? I refuse to believe that they weren't aware at any point before that interview that they were horribly misrepresenting the final product.

People have talked about observing animals with unique behaviour and interacting with one another, not sure if that covers it. The hyperbole doesnt really help, they fairly obviously have delivered on quite a few if not a majority of their "promises" about the game.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Holy shit! Someone datamined the music for the multiplayer menu.

Lmao, I didn't notice the "No Man's Buy," that should have tipped me off immediately.

 

[R_thanatos]

See, my issue is that the sim as they presented it in that interview is logistically impossible (particularly the part about the ecosystems and the vast, infinite emptiness) which is what every detractor had been saying about the game for years?

Like this quote. Is any of this actually in the game? Did they actually manage to deliver on any of their promises? I refuse to believe that they weren't aware at any point before that interview that they were horribly misrepresenting the final product.

Wait , so you talking that way and didn't even look at the game features ?

Creatures have friends and ennemies, Some are prey , other are predators ..it's in the game , including their favorite food that you can give them to and they will sometimes point you toward something intresting on the terrain if there is any.

I really like how you're ready to burn them alive ...

 

[Vena]

Um okay back to sky colors again lol

Is it unreasonable to thin maybe they meant they changed the rules of diffraction to calculate sky colors? Maybe that's what they meant when they said they changed the periodic table, but they wanted to explain it more simply. Obviously if that wad the intention, it completely failed, but not everything works out perfectly!

Or maybe even they just used the wrong words and didn't mean to say diffraction! Arabs obviously no scientist. Could've been an honest mistake.

I mean, frankly, at this point it looks more like they try to throw out scientific buzzwords without actually having even the most basic understanding of the principles behind their words. At least that's what I gather from the last few pages of quotes, and those pertaining to physics.

 

[Russ T]

I mean, frankly, at this point it looks more like they try to throw out scientific buzzwords without actually having even the most basic understanding of the principles behind their words. At least that's what I gather from the last few pages of quotes, and those pertaining to physics.

Also possible lmao

 

[SomTervo]

Weird use of "our". Their universe is still largely a copy of the basic principles of our universe...

Contrary to a lot of Sean Murray's quotes, it is really not. "Our" is definitely truer than most of what he said in these quotes.

Did we ever conclude if they've even done any sort of celestial body moment of intertia/momentum calculations/modeling for rotations and heliocentric orbits?

Bear in mind that in gameplay and 'experience' terms the star systems in the game are fantastic and exactly what they need to be.

The short answer to your question is: yes we concluded, and no they don't. Planets don't orbit each other. They are all static. The sun is a skybox you can't reach (not that it looks like that, it looks epic and amazing). The planets rotate, but they toned the rotation down to nothing after playtesters were getting confused about leaving atmo at the same position they arrived and the system being in a different configuration. The weirdest thing is that the planets still have day/night cycles - they're just a preset 10-15 minute sort of thing. So you look at the sky and see another planet hanging there (and it looks brilliant) and then the sun goes down and the planet isn't moving in the sky...

It's a completely arbitrary and limited system.

But you know what? I could not give a fuck. The game is great to play and the simulation looks and functions brilliantly even if it is completely unrealistic and very simplistic. The on-planet stuff is where the algorithms really shine.

NB: It is, of course, still totally bullshit that Sean said all of this deep-detail simulation would be in the game and it's not

Lmao, I didn't notice the "No Man's Buy," that should have tipped me off immediately.

I noticed it after his head came bobbing up. Too good

 

[Ultrabum]

I'm not angry. I'm frustrated! I don't know how to be more clear! I tried and tried! It feels like it's intentional at this point. ): I'll try again!!!

You quoted me talking about Newtonian physics AGAIN, after the SECOND time I told you that when I said Newtonian physics I was talking about CLASSICAL MECHANICS.

So, you responding to my post about Newtonian physics with stuff about sky colors confused me every time. Do you understand this?

...

Um okay back to sky colors again lol

Is it unreasonable to thin maybe they meant they changed the rules of diffraction to calculate sky colors? Maybe that's what they meant when they said they changed the periodic table, but they wanted to explain it more simply. Obviously if that wad the intention, it completely failed, but not everything works out perfectly!

Or maybe even they just used the wrong words and didn't mean to say diffraction! Arabs obviously no scientist. Could've been an honest mistake.

...





Okay all this over a dumb miscommunication haha I'm gonna go crazy ahhhhhh

I don't know or care if Newtonian physics or classical mechanics or any science is in the game. It is irrelevant, all of my claims are based on the single quote, and not the final game or any other part of the game.


You are right, it could have been an honest mistake, but I find that highly unlikely.

You other responses are just moving the goal posts. We will never know what he meant.

But thanks to science, we know he lied. Plain and simple. Maybe he didn't intend to lie, but he still did. And I think people should be held accountable for things they did, even if they didn't intend to do them.

In this case, I think he should suffer the punishment of being criticized by me on a message board, muahahhahahahaah!~

I think he made a really good game, and lied in order to sell more copies. I think most developers do this, and as a consumer I am aware of this and take it into account. I think he deserves all the success and money he is currently getting and I hope he continues to make games.

 

[Tyrant Rave]

I haven't been following this game but one of my friends told me he just went to Gamestop to try and return the game (he isn't really enjoying it) and one of the employees told him there was multiplayer he just "hadn't found it yet" lol

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

I haven't been following this game but one of my friends told me he just went to Gamestop to try and return the game (he isn't really enjoying it) and one of the employees told him there was multiplayer he just "hadn't found it yet" lol

i mean, there's 18 godzillian planets, and just as many galaxies. i'm sure there's a multiverse with multiplayer

 

[SomTervo]

I haven't been following this game but one of my friends told me he just went to Gamestop to try and return the game (he isn't really enjoying it) and one of the employees told him there was multiplayer he just "hadn't found it yet" lol

Time to necro the 'most ridiculous thing a game store employee has ever said to you' thread

 

[Krappadizzle]

This thread is amazing. The excuses people will come up with are awesome. Best thread on Gaf in a long time.

 

[travisbickle]

I very much doubt it. The top level galaxy map has to exist on a separate coordinate space to the system level space.

I don't think there is a way to translate a coordinate system that has enough precision that it works at human level distances, like move 1cm in xyz to the size of an entire galaxy.

A 64bit coordinate system has enough precision such that you can represent a star system but anything larger would just lose precision (if you're using floating point).

Are you sure?

When I was playing the other day, walking around a planet, the game bugged and it was like the star map was in my face. I assumed they translate a little part of the star map and sit it at a distance from the player.

But I don't know? I would like to know what does use a more traditional method, i.e. Faked, but that should be easy for PC guys to work out.

 

[Russ T]

At the end of the day I'm disappointed with a lot of this game, and I haven't even played it yet. However, I still fully expect to enjoy it, as it sounds right up my alley. I hope it's enhanced through future updates. I'm concerned said updates might not be as cool as they could be because tinkering with the generation algorithm will change the universe, and they probably want to avoid that... Myself, I'm okay with resetting it for everyone from time to time, but well that's just me.

I, too, really want an answer to the question about multiplayer. That was absolutely one of the biggest Rad Things he ever talked about. I love the idea!!! Please please please PLEASE end up just being a bug or sever issues or SOMETHING!

But fuck do I hate witch hunts, and fuck do I hate this idea that if a developer didn't deliver on everything they ever talked about them they're basically Molyneux. This is why so many devs doubt talk about their work. ):

I don't know or care if Newtonian physics or classical mechanics or any science is in the game. It is irrelevant, all of my claims are based on the single quote, and not the final game or any other part of the game.


You are right, it could have been an honest mistake, but I find that highly unlikely.

You other responses are just moving the goal posts. We will never know what he meant.

But thanks to science, we know he lied. Plain and simple. Maybe he didn't intend to lie, but he still did. And I think people should be held accountable for things they did, even if they didn't intend to do them.

In this case, I think he should suffer the punishment of being criticized by me on a message board, muahahhahahahaah!~

I think he made a really good game, and lied in order to sell more copies. I think most developers do this, and as a consumer I am aware of this and take it into account. I think he deserves all the success and money he is currently getting and I hope he continues to make games.

You're still not getting my point about the miscommunication lmao, but whatever let's move past it. It's not important.

I get where you're coming from, but I absolutely DO NOT AGREE that, based on the things you said, that was a lie. None of your explanations actually contradict the IDEA of what he said, only the nitpicky details, which can easily be explained away. It's still entirely possible (and I believe probable, since it's not a complicated thing to do) the procedural generation algorithm does, in fact, do some calculations based on atmospheric composition to determine sky colors!

But probably best to just agree to disagree at this point.