Views : 204,332
Genre: Gaming
Date of upload: Jun 14, 2023 ^^
Rating : 4.909 (146/6,258 LTDR)
RYD date created : 2024-05-13T16:57:03.809488Z
See in json
Top Comments of this video!! :3
Some thoughts on Starfield and why we got 1000 planets, how that fits into astronomy and just science and the differences between NMS and this. Also a breakdown of some data we got from developers in the past as well as interviews with Bethesda.
Also in no way do I think the aliens are procedural. What I assume is some randomization on top of their core constructs to allow for coloring and possibly decals and such But who knows.
Sincerely hope you like it
www.patreon.com/AngryCentaurGaming
72 |
I didn't expect much when the first few bits of footage/screens came up. Heck I chose to ignore it mostly for years, not looking into leaks or what ever. Not wanting to get hyped, but hell I'm hyped now. I love space games and to walk around is such a dream. Yet here they even let you build your own ships and explore. I really hope they manage to deliver and that you are truelly free in how you go about it.
20 |
I been hearing people complaining about the "1,000 planets" and calling it No Man's sky, but after opening Stellaris and looking at what 50-100-200 star systems looks like, that actually looks super manageable. those amounts of systems assuming each system has 5-10 planets and whether or not they count moons as "planets". Like if you've seen the Fallout 4 or Skyrim maps with all locations unlocked, you've already seen a more populated map than Starfield's starmap
29 |
Yeah, the first thing I thought of when they mentioned the procedural generation was Daggerfall.
I definitely think it comes down to the words being used. Saying you have a 100 solar systems doesn't sound as grand as saying you have 1000 planets, even if every solar system has 10 planets in it. There's also the factor that not all planets are going to offer much more than good visuals and minerals to mine up for crafting and profit, which also reduces the amount of work that goes into generating them. Also these things aren't just generated all at once, they happen as you actively explore and discover them and then their seed information gets filed away for later. So really it's not that huge of an undertaking as people might think to have a pile of handcrafted stuff, and then machine generation working together to make 1000 planets, it just sounds really massive based on how they're choosing to present it. Big numbers generate big expectations and hype.
33 |
All the attention to detail has got me so hyped. At 6:13 you can the "star-system map," which appears to show the gravitational strength of each celestial body as it warps spacetime around itself. Also, look at those solar flares! (I'll give it a 99% chance that solar storms will be a BIG problem on some planets!)
59 |
I was thinking; it could still be the case that certain random encounters occur on specific planets, but they are generated around you so you can stumble upon them. This way players could still have those discussions about that special weapon or ship they found on certain planet, but it may just take longer to discover for other people; essentially, each planet is equivalent to a cave in Skyrim, and most of what you find there can only be found there.
15 |
This is such an awesome video you give a detailed breakdown of what Procedural Generation is as a oncept, do a great job covering what Daggerfall is and how Procedural Generation is a core aspect of it , and then utilize what we know about Starfield to apply that knowledg. It takes real skill to tie all that information together in a cohesive manner.
|
As someone who has been studying procedural generation for more than 20 years, it's always funny to see how term change to cope with the expectations. Pcg was cool when computer couldn't store a lot then we got CD and hand made was better, so pcg was rebranded tool, so people feel like a human are doing a thing, then indie, especially minecraft, then it was cool again and trivial tool became pcg again, then pcg was abused by bad designers and now we find an excuse to make a difference between random and procedural... none of these definitions are accurate, that's painful semantic contortions to cope with saving artistic face. All pcg are designed, the true differences are in how well you design the procedure, random is just a tool in the procedure, if not well handled it produce crap, but any aspect of the procedure would do. If anything the main thing people omit when talking pcg is intention, pcg is coding a system of intention into a procedure to realize that intention. Applied to human organizations, it's call standard or style, a coding standard is a set of rules and procedures, a style sheet in art is a set of rules and standard. Pcg basically encode a theory of production, if the theory is crap, then the result is crap, random or not.
9 |
I wanted to clarify one bit, seeds. Its not a recipe, its just a number, and always a number. If you ever enter a seed on Minecraft or velheim it will be converted to a number it can use. One thing to consider with random numbers on computers. they aren't random. To really simplify it it creates a table of random values and just spits them out one after another. Normally this means it appears random and everyone is happy. But what if you want to be able to get the same random number sequence every time. Well that is where seeds come in. with a seed you are telling it to always start at a particular position on the table. this causes it to always generate the exact same random pattern. in most cases it wont matter that it is a table. it really only matters when someone is trying to get the same random numbers in the same order every time. which is what we want when we do procedural generation.
A fun bit of trivia but also becomes a really big headache when I need real random numbers. that's where they start talking to physical devices to read a decay rate or time or some other random value. I've worked on casino games or dice rolls for RPGs and that table makes it predictable and has to be worked around.
1 |
@lgd6619
11 months ago
This is the first time in a while that I am genuinely excited for a new game, I really hope they can pull this off
482 |