RUS New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 2 of 6«123456»
Forum » SpaceEngine » General Discussions » Now that we've seen "No man's sky"
Now that we've seen "No man's sky"
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Wednesday, 04.05.2016, 12:34 | Message # 16
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote HarbingerDawn ()
The total number of objects in SE is something like 1022 or 1024


Maybe for stars, for planets the amount of objects is much greater than 1024.

A rough calculation in a galaxy gave me around 1040 planets, but a few surveys have varied between 1030 and 1045. Regardless of all of this it is far greater than NMS.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
MixaDate: Wednesday, 04.05.2016, 21:48 | Message # 17
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Messages: 37
Status: Offline
http://marian42.github.io/proceduralart/

I just can't get enough of this procedural art.

NMS's procedural generation works in favors of art. Hello Games said that they are trying to code it so that each planet has certain color mathing assets, wich means less variety. They are certainly not there for realism, but I give them pros for making almost living universe, that we can play with. I just need to see how will the game do.

BTW, my PC is a potato even for SE ( not that much, but it's still slow ), and I won't be able to play NMS, whatsoever. :(

I can't wait untill SE introduces procedural rocks and plants. When that day comes, I'm saying goodbye to my real life.
 
albedoDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 17:11 | Message # 18
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 1
Status: Offline
Hello to all, I am new here.

A few months ago, I was able to walk on the worlds of the game Rodina. The first thing I did was to walk around the entire circumference of an asteroid. Took me an hour or so. That was cool. Now, I know that Space Engine has yet to implement walking though you can glide at any speed above the surface. You can walk in No Man's Sky. Also, giving credit where credit is due, you can walk on the worlds of the game Noctis IV. The ability to walk on the surface of a planet - is something very satisfying. Perhaps that's just the hiker in me. I see myself, probably playing more NMS than SE simply because I can walk and interact with the environment. I hope those possibilities will eventually be implemented in Space Engine because the landscapes in SE are breathtaking.





Intel i5-4590 Quad-Core 3.3 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 1TB HDD,
Nvidia GTX 970, Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO,
1920x1080p screen, Windows 7, Fractal Node 304
 
expandoDate: Monday, 20.06.2016, 14:07 | Message # 19
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Australia
Messages: 87
Status: Offline
"The ability to walk on the surface of a planet - is something very satisfying."

I don't know about that, I have walked Apollo astronauts on the Moon in Orbiter and a number of Kerbals on planets in KSP. It's pretty boring.





"Religion is regarded by the common people as true - by the wise as false - and by the rulers as useful."
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
 
HornblowerDate: Monday, 20.06.2016, 14:17 | Message # 20
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 709
Status: Offline
Quote expando ()
I don't know about that, I have walked Apollo astronauts on the Moon in Orbiter and a number of Kerbals on planets in KSP. It's pretty boring.

But the moon and KSP planets don't have beautiful scenery or life like No Man's Sky
 
IanBrettCooperDate: Sunday, 26.06.2016, 12:23 | Message # 21
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
Quote werdnaforever ()
SE is hard science fiction. NMS is science fantasy.


Aren't they both really science fantasy, since both games permit faster than light travel?
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Sunday, 26.06.2016, 17:41 | Message # 22
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote IanBrettCooper ()
Aren't they both really science fantasy, since both games permit faster than light travel?


Yes and no. It all comes down to the method of how you achieve FTL. In NMS they call it a warp drive but it looks more like your standard scifi hyperdrive tunnel effect. SE has currently switched over to Alcubierre drive which is technically not FTL travel and works within general relativity.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
NantesDate: Monday, 27.06.2016, 14:06 | Message # 23
Observer
Group: Newbies
Brazil
Messages: 7
Status: Offline
Quote expando ()
I don't know about that, I have walked Apollo astronauts on the Moon in Orbiter and a number of Kerbals on planets in KSP. It's pretty boring.


That's unfair to compare. Moon surface is very desolate without significant landmarks, I would be bored within minutes of walking there as well. But NMS planets will be ripe with interesting geological features, resources to collect, monoliths which teach you more about alien languages and culture, alien buildings with aliens in them, and many, many secrets. Check out these screenshots and also this video of gameplay, which showcases the things I mentioned. But at the same time:

Quote Salvo ()
(For scales, and for life appearence, it's too much earth-like... but for that, i'm not even, since I've never been on an exoplanet)


Not all of them! Many planets in NMS will be without any life and desolate wastelands.


Edited by Nantes - Monday, 27.06.2016, 14:07
 
AlienartDate: Monday, 04.07.2016, 19:09 | Message # 24
Space Tourist
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 38
Status: Offline
I never thought of SE as a game. It's closer to a fractal image explorer or a "sandbox" to me, but with very real science as its main focus. I might look into NMS, but exploring SE seems like it would take several thousand lifetimes. That's plenty for me.

Either way, SE and NMS have convinced me of one solution to Fermi's Paradox. Sufficiently advanced aliens wouldn't bother exploring the universe and visiting Earth if they can easily make their own multiple universes in quantum computer networks.


Edited by Alienart - Monday, 04.07.2016, 19:10
 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Monday, 04.07.2016, 22:08 | Message # 25
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
Quote Alienart ()
but exploring SE seems like it would take several thousand lifetimes.


There are more stars and planets in SE than there are years left in the life of the universe and the same applies to NMS.





Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
CantonaDate: Tuesday, 19.07.2016, 22:19 | Message # 26
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 2
Status: Offline
I was excited when I first heard about No Man's Sky, but then I discovered SE and what it offers and now I'm not even sure I will play NMS. Especially since SE is (seemingly to me, anyway) so grounded in realism.

Edit: Typo


Edited by Cantona - Tuesday, 19.07.2016, 22:19
 
IanBrettCooperDate: Tuesday, 19.07.2016, 22:46 | Message # 27
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
I'm a big fan of realism, but my current computer won't play Space Engine sad . But even if I could run it, I'd still play NMS more often, because it has populated planets with alien races, animals and conflict between factions. Space Engine, for me, would be a simulation I'd boot up occasionally whenever I was in the mood to explore our galaxy, but No Man's Sky promises to give more of a sci-fi space opera experience. Both games have their attractions, but I see more playability for me in NMS, if it even comes anywhere close to fulfilling its promise.

Edited by IanBrettCooper - Tuesday, 19.07.2016, 22:47
 
HornblowerDate: Wednesday, 20.07.2016, 02:20 | Message # 28
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 709
Status: Offline
Quote IanBrettCooper ()
I'm a big fan of realism

What do you mean by that? NMS is not that realistic
 
IanBrettCooperDate: Wednesday, 20.07.2016, 07:25 | Message # 29
Observer
Group: Newbies
United States
Messages: 5
Status: Offline
I didn't say it was. The full sentence was "I'm a big fan of realism, but my current computer won't play Space Engine sad ."

Clearly, that sentence has to do with Space Engine, not No Man's Sky.

And anyone who knows my modding history can vouch for my being a realism fan. Under the name "Beery" I've made realism mods for Red Baron 2, the Silent Hunter series, B-17 The Mighty Eighth, the Battleground series, Starstrider, etc., some of which were positively reviewed in computer gaming magazines.

But I'm also a fan of science fiction, which is where my interest in No Man's Sky comes from.


Edited by IanBrettCooper - Wednesday, 20.07.2016, 07:27
 
cyBerrDate: Saturday, 23.07.2016, 16:03 | Message # 30
Observer
Group: Users
Australia
Messages: 16
Status: Offline
Quote HarbingerDawn ()
The total number of objects in SE is something like 1022 or 1024.


Sometimes size/quantity is beyond boasting rights.

From an article about NMS at nowloading.co : . . . if one person spent 1 second on each of these planets, it would take them 585 billion years to see them all.

1 year is made up of approx 31,000,000 seconds, so this ''immortal'' would have to spend every single second doing this.





Acer Aspire V3 laptop
Intel 17 2.4GHz
4Gb RAM
nVidia GT 640M @Gb VRAM
(Using LOD2 - load time <1min)


Edited by cyBerr - Saturday, 23.07.2016, 16:09
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » General Discussions » Now that we've seen "No man's sky"
Page 2 of 6«123456»
Search: