Starfield! Spaaaaaaace...ladders.

[Notserious80]

Todd just said something in an interview that made me a little disappointed but only because I made an assumption. My assumption was that the planets were going to be actual spheres that the space ship could fly around AND the player could circumnavigate on foot.

However Todd said that these maps have to be "infinite" as part of the explanation as to why procedural map creation had to be used.

DAM! (forehead slap) of course the maps are FLAT game maps. But to give the illusion of an entire world the maps go on forever.
I hope at least maybe they will stealth transport you back to (in front of ) your start point to create the illusion that the planet (the map) is a BALL and not a flat land. But I think that may be asking too much.

Im not that suprised tbh, if they made 1000 "planets" it would be weird if it wasent procedural in some way. Im guessing even Skyrim and Fallout4 is in some ways. They probably have a Landscape generation procedural program or something. Then they go in manually and add/remove shape stuff and add caves/building so on. Its much faster then making every part by hand for sure. Still theres alot of years between there games.

Saw a pretty interesting argument that Bethesta isent really a giant studio, witch kinda explains the long wait between teh games and i kinda was shocked. Though they were bigger tbh.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Todd just said something in an interview that made me a little disappointed but only because I made an assumption. My assumption was that the planets were going to be actual spheres that the space ship could fly around AND the player could circumnavigate on foot.

However Todd said that these maps have to be "infinite" as part of the explanation as to why procedural map creation had to be used.

DAM! (forehead slap) of course the maps are FLAT game maps. But to give the illusion of an entire world the maps go on forever.
I hope at least maybe they will stealth transport you back to (in front of ) your start point to create the illusion that the planet (the map) is a BALL and not a flat land. But I think that may be asking too much.

Weird, in NMS (maybe not the best example but procedural), where planets are sphere. You can make a full turn around in space and on the ground

 

[SpookyFX]

So they are generated on the fly and different between players? Curious how you will navigate between handcrafted locations? Maybe there is 1 per planet only ?

Well, procedural will not necessarily mean different for each player. You can seed a program with a code assigned to the planet that generates hundreds of landscape items but if that same code is used again it will all be the same again.

This is another reason they like using the Old Ass engine of theirs, it can do a few things almost no modern game engines are made to do, which is keep track of hundreds of thousands of in game objects and their state (damage, ownership, elemental effects that are not timed out yet etcetera ) and the xyz positioning and rotation and reduce it all to a 15 to 30mb size code for the save file for Fallout 4. (Oblivion was like 12k save files)

Post automatically merged: Jun 15, 2022

Weird, in NMS (maybe not the best example but procedural), where planets are sphere. You can make a full turn around in space and on the ground

Then maybe, (hopefully) Todd's comment was not as telling as I thought. Could be they are spheres and I just misunderstood that he was trying to say.

Here:

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Then maybe, (hopefully) Todd's comment was not as telling as I thought. Could be they are spheres and I just misunderstood that he was trying to say.

In meantime, if there is no point (nothing interesting to find) to make a full turn of the planets, there is no point to make it infinite or at least "giant".
In NMS, even with random buildings (quite a few different ones), if you don't search a specific "thing" like a very good mining spot or a "good" building place, it's useless (and boring) to make a full turn around, it's just the same landscape (or almost) again and again

Well, procedural will not necessarily mean different for each player. You can seed a program with a code assigned to the planet that generates hundreds of landscape items but if that same code is used again it will all be the same again.

Yes, if it's the same system as Minecraft, NMS or Terraria for example, it's based on a "seed". All players who use the same "seed", will have the exact same map/world generation. In NMS, all the galaxies have a "seed" so each planet is procedurally generated, but generated exactly the same for everyone (the same landscape, the same buidlings at the same place, the same "loot",...)

 

[Didacgomez]

Well, procedural will not necessarily mean different for each player. You can seed a program with a code assigned to the planet that generates hundreds of landscape items but if that same code is used again it will all be the same again.

In meantime, if there is no point (nothing interesting to find) to make a full turn of the planets, there is no point to make it infinite or at least "giant".
In NMS, even with random buildings (quite a few different ones), if you don't search a specific "thing" like a very good mining spot or a "good" building place, it's useless (and boring) to make a full turn around, it's just the same landscape (or almost) again and again

Yes, if it's the same system as Minecraft, NMS or Terraria for example, it's based on a "seed". All players who use the same "seed", will have the exact same map/world generation. In NMS, all the galaxies have a "seed" so each planet is procedurally generated, but generated exactly the same for everyone (the same landscape, the same buidlings at the same place, the same "loot",...)

Yes indeed, fixing seeds will give same results ... guess will be similar to NMS then. From a comment in a interview, seems an indefinite amount of them are just "detours": if you like it build your home there or do some mining for resources (guess random encounters also).

 

[Notserious80]

Yes indeed, fixing seeds will give same results ... guess will be similar to NMS then. From a comment in a interview, seems an indefinite amount of them are just "detours": if you like it build your home there or do some mining for resources (guess random encounters also).

I think sadly people are expecting 1000x skyrims world. Every world have atleast skyrims level of dungeons and so on. I have a feeling there gonna be dissapointed. The way i see it is they generate the planets/moons proceduraly and then go in and add stuff (houses caves space stations whatever) Some planets/moons will probably have nothing on them (or very little), just be like our moon.

Some planets "goldilocks zone" like earth will have more variation in flora/fauna and probably be more populated by life.

Some planets will probably be gas giants and you will be unable too land on them. Perhaps they will have a moon or a space station you can land on. thats 2 planets for 1 there ^^

I think the 1000 planets is just an clever way of boosting the numbers.

But perhaps im totally wrong. they have been working on it for some time tbh and it seems too have been there main focus for a long time (since fallout 4 perhaps)

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Yes indeed, fixing seeds will give same results ... guess will be similar to NMS then. From a comment in a interview, seems an indefinite amount of them are just "detours": if you like it build your home there or do some mining for resources (guess random encounters also).

I suppose it would all depend about "how many" models they have for buildings (for example) and how "flexible" is the procedural generation.
Let's say 100 base building types, each one can have different layout, different enemies, different loot, different little objective, different rewards, different whatever... It could make plenty of possibility and greatly reduce the chance to see the exact same "twice" (something that NMS lacking obviously. Only the color change, or almost...).

 

[GrimReaper801]

I think sadly people are expecting 1000x skyrims world. Every world have atleast skyrims level of dungeons and so on. I have a feeling there gonna be dissapointed.

Oh, that's a given. It'll be the main complaint against the game most likely. Regardless of how incredible a procedural system is, it'll never beat hand made worlds. The game's detractors will use that as proof Bethesda makes poor games, those who expected a thousand incredible worlds will bitch and moan, etc. These days people make it a point to complain.

Then, there are a few of us who will recognize this as Bethesda's signature work. They've been giving us these sandbox playgrounds for you to do your thing, whatever that is, for over 15 years now. I'm not seeing any indication of this changing.

 

[Notserious80]

Oh, that's a given. It'll be the main complaint against the game most likely. Regardless of how incredible a procedural system is, it'll never beat hand made worlds. The game's detractors will use that as proof Bethesda makes poor games, those who expected a thousand incredible worlds will bitch and moan, etc. These days people make it a point to complain.

Then, there are a few of us who will recognize this as Bethesda's signature work. They've been giving us these sandbox playgrounds for you to do your thing, whatever that is, for over 15 years now. I'm not seeing any indication of this changing.

Im still on the fence when it comes too Starfield. But i have some hope, for it too be a good game. When i say procedural i kinda see it as a basic model. they use it generating a world with valleys/hills so on. Then they go in and add houses/caves/whatever But the base is generated by an formula pretty much. Probably with tweakeble settings ofc. So its a mix of procedural for landscapes and minerals so on, then its handcrafted with whatever structures and so on(they might even tweak the landscapes if they feel they want a valley here or whatever).

I dont see it as Valheim with a world seed for exampe. I think every player will get the exact same worlds and so on.

 

[Spockprime]

Todd just said something in an interview that made me a little disappointed but only because I made an assumption. My assumption was that the planets were going to be actual spheres that the space ship could fly around AND the player could circumnavigate on foot.

However Todd said that these maps have to be "infinite" as part of the explanation as to why procedural map creation had to be used.

DAM! (forehead slap) of course the maps are FLAT game maps. But to give the illusion of an entire world the maps go on forever.
I hope at least maybe they will stealth transport you back to (in front of ) your start point to create the illusion that the planet (the map) is a BALL and not a flat land. But I think that may be asking too much.

I didn't catch the procedural map generation comment. Queue up more NMS comparisons. I'm very interested in seeing a preview of how they're doing this.

 

[GrimReaper801]

I dont see it as Valheim with a world seed for exampe. I think every player will get the exact same worlds and so on.

Oh, absolutely. I agree with you there. I doubt it'll be entirely procedural on our end. That would mean every new game is going to be mostly different planets and I doubt that's what they went for. That usually means lack of quality. Most likely the majority of worlds have been generated through procedural systems on their end and then slightly/heavily edited depending on the content they want to put on specific planets but they will definitely be exactly the same across players.

It's what they've been doing for years. Generate the landscape and then modify/add to it. No reason to think they'll do different this time, in fact Todd Howard confirmed it with Starfield and TES6. Bethesda have been crafting open worlds since 1996 with the release of Daggerfall (which was almost entirely procedurally generated), they've only gotten better at it over the years and I expect Starfield to continue this trend.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Then maybe, (hopefully) Todd's comment was not as telling as I thought. Could be they are spheres and I just misunderstood that he was trying to say.

I just take a look on NMS "world", Hello Game managed to generate procedurally a "fair amount" of planets which are all the same, for every players and generated only when players "explore" them...
So achieve a good thing with "only" 1K planets, I think (and hope) it's manageable for Bethesda (not as good as "hand made", but still).

The universe of No Man's Sky comprises 255 unique galaxies (the max value of an 8 bit unsigned integer). In turn, these are composed of:

• 4.2 billion regions (the max value of a 32 bit unsigned integer)
• Each of which contains somewhere in the range of 122 to 580 star systems
• All star systems feature 2-6 planets and moons, and usually a single space station.

There are about 18 quintillion* possibilities (seeds) for planets (the max value of a 64 bit unsigned integer).
*one quintillion > 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000

 

[Didacgomez]

, absolutely. I agree with you there. I doubt it'll be entirely procedural on our end. That would mean every new game is going to be mostly different planets and I doubt that's what they went for. That usually means lack of quality. Most likely the majority of worlds have been generated through procedural systems on their end and then slightly/heavily edited depending on the content they want to put on specific planets but they will definitely be exactly the same across players.

But will not this very expensive in disk size? 1000 maps,size unknown but i imagine they want to avoid the criticism that The Outer Worlds got so they need to be relatively large on their own...also the amount of work to do a "pass" to correct/tune the procedural generation.

 

[Notserious80]

But will not this very expensive in disk size? 1000 maps,size unknown but i imagine they want to avoid the criticism that The Outer Worlds got so they need to be relatively large on their own...also the amount of work to do a "pass" to correct/tune the procedural generation.

Like i said i dont think there will be 1000 landeble worlds. Some will be gas giants for example, i also think there will be moons. Also im guessing there will be some shortcuts taken in textures and so on... Not sure what the new Creation engine 2 is capeble off but im guessing the poor FPS in the gameplay demo is for a reason ^^ its gonna be interesting too se a more deep dive. But if they have worked on this since FO4 came out its been a couple of years. Seem too remember some devs saying Todd wasent really involved in fallout 76 since he was more involved in Starfield even back then so..

 

[Didacgomez]

Like i said i dont think there will be 1000 landeble worlds. Some will be gas giants for example, i also think there will be moons. Also im guessing there will be some shortcuts taken in textures and so on... Not sure what the new Creation engine 2 is capeble off but im guessing the poor FPS in the gameplay demo is for a reason ^^ its gonna be interesting too se a more deep dive. But if they have worked on this since FO4 came out its been a couple of years. Seem too remember some devs saying Todd wasent really involved in fallout 76 since he was more involved in Starfield even back then so..

In my head, they have probably "curated" worlds that will total 16 times fallout 76 map (to keep the tradition,and powers of 2 are fun) but i think they will allow allow landing in the total but those will be mostly automatically generated except some custom "dungeons"-like point of interest-.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Like i said i dont think there will be 1000 landeble worlds. Some will be gas giants for example, i also think there will be moons. Also im guessing there will be some shortcuts taken in textures and so on...

I'm no expert, but I'm quite confident that it's possible to generate "different" buildings in number (at least, "dungeons" to explore) on 1K planets, procedurally. If I take Skyrim as example, there is a bunch to explore, but there are not that many different location's types (if you visit two, three, four or five Dwarven Ruins, the only "real" difference, it's the layout. Which is possible to generate procedurally I think, even if Devs have to make some "manual" adjustments afterwhile).
For me, the "most difficult part" is to make each one "interesting" to explore

 

[Notserious80]

I'm no expert, but I'm quite confident that it's possible to generate "different" buildings in number (at least, "dungeons" to explore) on 1K planets, procedurally. If I take Skyrim as example, there is a bunch to explore, but there are not that many different location's types (if you visit two, three, four or five Dwarven Ruins, the only "real" difference, it's the layout. Which is possible to generate procedurally I think, even if Devs have to make some "manual" adjustments afterwhile).
For me, the "most difficult part" is to make each one "interesting" to explore

Your right, its possible too proceduraly generate it but i dont think they will do that. Atleast not only that. Most caves/dungeons follows a layout in BGS games (Theres allways a locked door/falldown place close too the entrance too get you back out for example). Some dungeons are handcrafted but they tend too use generic textures and so on so they can seem the same.

Also it depends, are all 1000 planets fully exploreble? Thats a huuuuge size im guessing and probably impossible(depends on how big the map is). Seems we wont get too fly into the planets (sounded like a cutsceen takes over). Im really interested too se a deep dive into the tech but im guessing it wont happend for quite some time.

I have no clue how this all work and im purely guessing but if i was too create 1000 worlds in an efficent way i would get some kinda AI too generate the base for that world. Choose a theme based on distans too parent star (depending on type of star ofc). I would use the AI/Algoritm too determine minerals/other materials and so on. As much as possible done automaticaly then use people for the finishing touches/looking over everything. Everything linked too quests would have too be more hands on i guess. Some will probably not be exploreble on foot atleast. If you look at our solar system theres only 8 planets but a lot of moons, 4 planets are totally unlandeble, 1 are deadly instantanious and 1 more is very hot. If they are trying too make it realistic it will probably look like that ingame too.

 

[The_Blacks]

Not sure if I like the infinite, randomly generated planets, I'd prefer not too many planets but very detailed and different from each other

 

[Notserious80]

Not sure if I like the infinite, randomly generated planets, I'd prefer not too many planets but very detailed and different from each other

The little snippets they showed seem too be pretty diverse. We kinda have no clue yet tho so it might become very repetative.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Also it depends, are all 1000 planets fully exploreble? Thats a huuuuge size im guessing and probably impossible(depends on how big the map is). Seems we wont get too fly into the planets (sounded like a cutsceen takes over). Im really interested too se a deep dive into the tech but im guessing it wont happend for quite some time.

It's very possible that all planets won't be all explorable. But it's maybe just me, but why even announce "1000 planets" if at best, there is "only" 250-300 where you're able to land and explore. If it's the case, I can already see the complaints coming

I have no clue how this all work and im purely guessing but if i was too create 1000 worlds in an efficent way i would get some kinda AI too generate the base for that world. Choose a theme based on distans too parent star (depending on type of star ofc). I would use the AI/Algoritm too determine minerals/other materials and so on. As much as possible done automaticaly then use people for the finishing touches/looking over everything. Everything linked too quests would have too be more hands on i guess. Some will probably not be exploreble on foot atleast. If you look at our solar system theres only 8 planets but a lot of moons, 4 planets are totally unlandeble, 1 are deadly instantanious and 1 more is very hot. If they are trying too make it realistic it will probably look like that ingame too.

Yep, that's exactly that the procedural generation (generally). An "Algoritm" use the seed + various paramaters to make "everything" as different as possible. Quests and "make exploration interesting" can't really be generated however (or at least, way less easily I think).
So in my opinion, making 1K planets with 100 different locations is possible (I think), but make each location "interesting" to explore is really not
(that's exactly the problem in NMS, the lack of location diversity to spawn and there is nothing interesting inside anyway. So 18 quintillions of planets, but after 20-30 planets at best, exploring become "boring"...)