nms

No Man’s Sky: Documentary And More

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)

As we eagerly await the drop of No Man’s Sky (OK, I am, but considering my hobbies it’s not surprising), I noticed a thread on reddit discussing the desire for a documentary on the game. I wanted to address this and more.

In short, as I expect NMS to be successful, and certainly groundbreaking even if flawed, and yes, it’s one we should know more about.

But a documentary is just the start of what we should see.

Yes, We Need a Documentary: The game itself has an impressive history, and it’d be great to see it documented. A good documentary should go beyond just the history, but also to the influences and impact – from 70’s concept art to he modern hype. There’s a great story to tell here if done right (and Hello Games could probably make more money selling one).

Management Interview: I deeply treasure the development interviews I read in Game Informer, as I learned a lot from them that I use to this day. I want to see an in-depth discussion in Game Informer if not a professional management magazine on just how Hello Games pulled this off.

Artbook: There’s tempting concept art we’ve seen, so let’s load it all into one book, have interviews with the artists, and sell it. Yes, again more money for Hello Games, but also the artistic insights that could be gained would be impressive. Plus, great coffee table or gift book.

Procedural Lessons: After making NMS, Hello Games teams could probably teach classes in procedural generation. So, do it! Imagine what people could learn with such folks as instructors.

Fandom Study: I’m expecting a huge impact from the game – not Minecraft level, but still intense. I’ve seen the hype, seen fans creating artworks and even role-playing. I’d love to see the fans studied respectfully if it is indeed the hit I expect. Great for general or academia.

So that’s what I want to see come out of NMS documentarianism (there’s a word). Things that will teach us something.

What do you want to see?

– Steve

No Man’s Sky: Failure To Come Together

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)

Sorry this is late.  Busy few weeks, but now I’m back to my pre-release analysis of No Man’s Sky.  After all I love games and i love procedural generation.

We’re counting down to No Man’s Sky’s release in August.  We’re approaching the big release, and once again I’m seeing posts on the Internet asking if it will succeed or fail.  This is not unusual, but it’s time for another round of them apparently.

I’ve speculated on this possible failure before, but often concern’s about NMS focus on this component or that.  From the possible sameness of worlds to uninteresting space travel, there’s concerns about some elements, of the game.  These concerns are legitimate, but often they miss what No Man’s Sky Is about.  There’s a larger picture here for concern.

No Man’s Sky is a game about synergy, as is fairly obvious when you step back and look at the game.  Characters mine to get resources to craft new items to let their spacecraft travel farther.  Their adventures may require them to fight enemies with spacecraft that they hijacked by developing rare hacking chips, chips whose blueprints were found exploring a ruined building.  A strange technology, found in an alien ruin, may let someone survive on a toxic world.  No Man’s Sky is all about things coming together.

This is not surprising as video games are about synergy.  Good controls bring a character to live.  Clever mechanics entice the mind that learns them and influences the game experience.  Music and graphics work together to set the mood.  Good games depend on pieces working in harmony.

For No Man’s Sky, it’s even more dependent on the synergy – that’s really it’s selling point.  Where procedural worlds and exploration and crafting and all come together, the game offers a whole of an experience.  It’s not a game with clear boundaries, which is the point – it’s a supposed seamless exploration experience.  It just happens to be a very big one based on some very, very smart use of math.

This synergy is also where it can fail.

Because No Man’s Sky relies on the parts of the game coming together, there’s several possible modes of failure that can occur.

Poor Synergy: One way the game can fail is if the different parts don’t support each other properly.  Perhaps the ability to acquire resources makes the crafting parts too hard – or too easy.  Straightforward planetary exploration might contrast with hyperkinetic space combat, creating tone shifts that are hard for players to adapt to.  If the parts of the game don’t come together correctly, the game suffers because the synergy of the promise is gone – even if the parts are good.  This may be the biggest synergy risk of NMS because a dev and even a testing team would be unlikely to catch it due to being used to the product.

The Flaw: Another way I can see NMS fail is if one part of the game is done so poorly that drags the rest of the game down.  Planetary exploration is an area I’ve worried about, and if it is poorly done or dull, that diminishes the thrill of the rest of the game.  Truly egregious resource gathering could be another fun-killer as the rest of the game depends on that.  One poor part of the game could drag the rest down – the synergy backfires when one part fails really hard.

The Drudge: NMS also has to make sure that its individual components are good enough to support the game, because though one bad component might drag the game down, so can many mediocre ones.  The game may not fail on its many fronts, but if too many are uninspired or uninteresting, the synergy of them makes the game not good, but dreadfully mediocre.  The synergy of game component’s can be a double-edged swords when many are just uninspired.  I think people may be more forgiving of a game with one big flaw and ambition than one that just kind of plots.

Though I’m sure that Hello Games has thought of this, it’s worth considering for analyzing the game once it’s out, and for analyzing future games of its type.  Synergy is the strength of the gaming art.

It’s also a place where failure can happen, even if the parts are right or mostly right.

– Steve

No Man’s Sky: Behind The Curtain

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)

As we wait for No Man’s Sky (and due to the recent delay, wait more than we thought), I wanted to explore just what No Man’s Sky is about and what it means for the final game.

It’s obvious I’m a big booster of the game.  I even feel that everyhing NMS promises is likely due to what they’re doing and how it’s approached.  I consdier a delay completely understandable and probably a good thing.

So now I’d like to take a look behind the curtain of No Man’s Sky and make a shocking statement – none of the gameplay is particuarly innovative.

Shocking?  Amazing?  Clickbait?  No, actually the gameplay for NMS has been done before, which is both why it will succeed and why it will probably be good.

The Parts of The Journey

So, let’s look at what No Man’s Sky promises.  A quick examination and you’ll realize that it’s almost all be done before.

A Galaxy To Travel: Seen this since the old Elite days, it was there in Captain Blood, it exist today in Elite: Dangerous, Starbound, and more.  The quality of planets may vary, but no, nothing unusual here.  Speaking of planets, NMS promises . . .

Procedural Worlds: Sure Minecraft brought the idea of a huge procedural 3D world, but since then it’s kind of become standard.  It seems every ten games out there promises a planet-sized world or giant sandbox.  NMS just promises more, though what’s appearing is really all math.  On those worlds you’ll experience . . .

Encountering Life And Recording It And The World: Though we’ve seen that with, say, Pokemon snap and most games that let you name things and places.  Yes, it’s nice, but exploration has been a part of games for awhile.  Though while you find new ways to name creatures, you’ll be engaged in . . .

A Survival Sim:  NMS offers you a chance to mine resources and avoid nasty critters in an environment that’s temporarily modifiable (yes, theres some promise of permanent, but it doesn’t sound like every grenade scar remains).  We’ve seen this before in many game forms, and though the procedural nasties and environments are nice, it’s still something other’s have done.  Of course while survive, you’ll be busy . . .

Crafting Items: I do not have to explain how we’ve seen crafting games before.  So let’s move on to when you get tired and get offplanet via . . .

Spaceflight: Yes, No Man’s Sky lets you take off of planets, fly through virtual solar systems, and so forth.  Again, we’ve seen that since back in the day of Eon or Starglider.  Sure there’s space combat, which we’ve also seen.  Of course to have those ships you need . . .

Supplies And Trade: Space trading games have been around for decades as well.  NMS sounds like it has a relatively simple mine-and-trade, make-and-trade, and get-credits-and-trade game.  Nothing much new, though some of your interactions will involve . . .

Alien Races: NMS is going to have various races and factions.  You’ll interact with individuals and do things that affect reputations with various factions.  In turn, that’ll affect how they treat you.  It’s neat, and the language system is nice (though you may see similar mechanics, such as the ones in Out there), but again, we’ve seen it before.

So, No Man’s Sky, when you look at the parts, has been done before.  In fact, it’s kind of been done to death in separate pieces.

Which is why the game will not only work, but probably be amazing.

The Greater Sum Of Familiar Parts

So the fact that NMS has a lot of standard gameplay elements is a good thing.

First, it means that they can be done.  There’s precedent, research, examples, and more for the creators at Hello Games to draw on to make the game work.  There’s math and there’s code and there’s a sense of history to know what to do and what not to do.

Secondly it means Hello Games is using familiar mechanics which means the game will (probably) be quite playabe.  The game’s familiarity is going to make its wide, procedural universe, accessible to people.

Third, it means the game will proably be well polished because it builds on familiar ideas.

It’s great NMS is made of so many common parts, because all these common parts can be done well and in a playable manner.  That means the combination . . .

. . . the combinaion will probably be amazing.

Take all these familiar mechanics and ideas.  Polish and organize them.  Now link them together coherently in a universe made from procedural algorithms so you experience effective gameplay in an infinite set of worlds.  Now give it that unique 70’s sci-fi cover look.

That’s the magic.  No Man’s Sky is both evolutionary and revolutionary, building on familiar parts, but tying them together in a way that hasn’t been done yet.  It’s not the components, it’s the combination, all these popular elements tied together tightly to give you a galaxy, a universe.

Nothing Special Is Amazing

So, no, NMS rally doesn’t push the boundaries of games so much as it has many mechanics merged together to create the experience of exploring the universe.  That means it can succeed, that means’ it’ll be accessible – and that means that it’s probably going to be pretty amazing.

What’s behind the CUrtain? Not The Wizard of Oz working a con-job, but more a group of actors putting on a show.  We look behind the curtain and see “yeah, these folks are doin a pretty good job.”

Now we can enjoy the show in Agust.

– Steve