No Man's Sky devs... What's their secret?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by IcyFlamez96 (1355 posts) -

How is it possible that a game with that kind of scope can be made by 4 people? What do you think their secret is?

There are many possibilities.

-They have some really powerful, but simple and easy to use engine.

-They are actually secretly getting help from more people.

-They are actually really freaking talented devs and hard workers.

-A combination of 1 and 3

-It's not actually nearly as robust as it seems.

What do you guys think?

#2 Posted by Xaero_Gravity (8675 posts) -

I'm guessing the lack of a big name publisher breathing down their necks certainly helps. But at the same time, they probably have a much smaller budget because of that.

#3 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38151 posts) -

I'd say they're just talented and have a very specific idea of what they want. But we haven't seen much of the game so it's hard to tell, the game could be really great on paper and the trailer could look nice but the full game could be a repetitive grind for all we know.

We also don't know how long it's been in development for do we? this could be years in the making

#4 Posted by mems_1224 (45726 posts) -

I'd say they're just talented and have a very specific idea of what they want. But we haven't seen much of the game so it's hard to tell, the game could be really great on paper and the trailer could look nice but the full game could be a repetitive grind for all we know.

We also don't know how long it's been in development for do we? this could be years in the making

Yea, the 4 man team is what worries me. It seems too ambitious for its own good.

#5 Edited by Gue1 (9101 posts) -

graphics are very simple and the planets look barren.

#6 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38151 posts) -

@seanmcloughlin said:

I'd say they're just talented and have a very specific idea of what they want. But we haven't seen much of the game so it's hard to tell, the game could be really great on paper and the trailer could look nice but the full game could be a repetitive grind for all we know.

We also don't know how long it's been in development for do we? this could be years in the making

Yea, the 4 man team is what worries me. It seems too ambitious for its own good.

My worry too. The execution could still leave a lot to be desired and from my experience randomly generated stuff ends up feeling samey pretty quickly

I hope it is everything it seems to be though, it sounds amazing

#7 Posted by blangenakker (2057 posts) -

They're actually bothered to try?

#8 Edited by farrell2k (5105 posts) -

Looks like they have two programmers, a managing director, and a full-time artist. I wouldn't be surprised if the game was being written in C# with Unity. There are plenty of articles about procedural generation at GameDev.

#9 Edited by Netherscourge (16327 posts) -

What exactly do you DO in that game? Just fly around looking at stuff and shooting at asteroids?

#10 Posted by clyde46 (43474 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

graphics are very simple and the planets look barren.

The graphics look great! What ya chatting aboot?

#11 Edited by IcyFlamez96 (1355 posts) -

@Netherscourge: Ain't much know about that yet. A gun is shown in the trailer though, and there are enemies to fight.

#12 Edited by babycakin (1400 posts) -

I didn't even know about this game and now it's more interesting (or worrysome) that it's a 4 man team.

#13 Posted by g0ddyX (3868 posts) -

The scope of the game from the ocean to flying through the atmosphere in real time is pretty huge.
They'll have more than just 4 guys now with all the publicity coming of it.

#14 Edited by crimsonman1245 (4253 posts) -

My completely amateur guess

1.Clear cut vision of what they want to do

2.Chose a great art style rather than trying to make everything super detailed with lots of assets

3.Talented

4.Good tools and understanding how how to use them

5.No big name publisher making them do something stupid like a tacked on multiplayer or a tough looking main character to put on the cover.

And probably lots and lots of coffee.

#15 Posted by stuff238 (610 posts) -

They probably only made one planet that re-generates if you go too far. I bet when you leave the first planet and fly to another one, the old one dies while the new one you land on randomally loads up. Its a trick.

#16 Posted by poomonger613 (1329 posts) -

gremlins...lots of gremlins

#17 Edited by ShepardCommandr (2114 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

graphics are very simple and the planets look barren.

#18 Edited by pelvist (4466 posts) -

Procedural generation.

#19 Posted by hippiesanta (9731 posts) -

No Man's Sky trailer looks ugly ....... don't understand what's the hype around it

ps: Flower .... from That Game Company looks better

#20 Posted by foxhound_fox (86844 posts) -

Uh... procedural content. All they have to do is design a set of parameters for planet creation and their work is done. So instead of needing a team of 1000 to achieve their goals, they can easily do it with four.

Bethesda made Daggerfall over 150,000 km², requiring literally two weeks to cross the land surface, with procedural methods. I'm not sure why you find this so surprising.

#21 Posted by foxhound_fox (86844 posts) -

@Netherscourge: It's simple-mindedness like this that kills hype for games that have less-than revealing teaser trailers. You don't think about the possibilities that these mechanics could allow for? Do you like Call of Duty by chance?

#22 Posted by IcyFlamez96 (1355 posts) -

@hippiesanta: You gotta be pretty dim to not understand why it's being hyped, whether you personally like the look of it or not.

#23 Posted by robokill (1060 posts) -

I've been fooled enough times to know that hype means nothing, this game has an equally good chance at being a flaming turd. Look at all the games on steam that looking freaking amazing in the trailers and turn out to be garbage