As someone who has lied to people about my progress on developing games before, the comments from Sean sound exactly what I'd say if I was asked about "x" thing. That isn't damning by itself, of course, but it makes me suspicious when combined with the fact that no one has played this game yet.

First off, the demo he showed was probably in-engine (although that engine is barely formed), but looked like it could have been totally automated (the "player" not being controlled by a human). I'm almost certain those animals scurrying around were put there by hand; not by algorithm. In fact, I'm pretty sure none of what was shown was actually auto-generated, but rather a portrayal of what the game "could be."

I think these guys got an idea for auto-generating their universe, but haven't figured out how to do so at all in any playable game-shaped way yet. All they've given people is the same "it's easy to create this world when it's all generated for you" spiel, talked about laying a perlin map to create random geometry, and assumingly have used random seeds to generate forms of everything else in the game. These are words any novice game dev can spit out, regardless of how true they are. It's easy to do these things on a small scale, but when you're talking about endless planets with their own flora and fauna there is a lot more work that needs to be done.

As I think Jeff pointed out, you need to keep things varied while still keeping them sensible. Notably, making sure Dinosaur 12321 doesn't look too similar to Dinosaur 24532, while still not being an incomprehensible monstrosity. If you look at something like Starbound, for instance, you'll see their variations in randomly-generated monsters are extremely un-varied and extremely boring. Designing and implementing features that get around this is extremely fucking hard, and requires much more man-hours than they'd have you believe. These guys can't realistically auto-generate walking animations for 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc.-legged animals of all different sizes and proportions, each with different bodies, arms, heads, (personalities?), and overall sizes and shapes. That shit is hard, and that's just one piece. Now take that and apply it to the world at large, and you've got a thousand new problems that need solving... by hand, not by algorithm.

Basically, I'm extremely, extremely skeptical of this project. I'm hoping it turns out to be the real deal, but right now I'm really not left with much choice but to think of this guy as a really toned-down Peter Molyneux.

edit: bolded, italicized, and underlined the most important part of the first paragraph for clarification.

I heard it has procedurally generated chemtrails

Dunno, if they can have AI robots playing their game, taking thousands upon thousands of animated gifs for them, doesn't that imply that there is something playable?

I highly doubt that Sony would even allow that game to be shown (let alone shell out significant money to secure its debut), if the game was only in the conceptual stage.

When this game comes out and it turns out to be really fucking cool and fun, a weird group of the internet is going to be really bummed.

Not with that attitude, it won't.

I kinda doubt they would have been on stage at a press conference just based on their word...surely somebody from Sony would have to have seen their stuff in person?

Maybe? I wouldn't know. It's totally possible they could trick Sony into thinking they have something solid the way they seem to be tricking everyone else.

Not sure I'm understanding you correctly. Does this exist? Have they posted those gifs somewhere?

Ah, anecdotal evidence from someone who we're not sure that even is a developer.

Read the next sentence, brother.

Good point... Spore had a similar premise and a huge hype-train behind it, but the reviews were mixed when it finally came out. I've wondered if this might be the same situation.
But I want to believe, I really do!!

As someone who has lied to people about my progress on developing games before, the comments from Sean sound exactly what I'd say if I was asked about "x" thing. That isn't damning by itself, of course, but it makes me suspicious when combined with the fact that no one has played this game yet.

Hmmmmm. Your first sentence is all I needed to hear.

The problem of creating a randomizer that generates 'acceptable' outcomes has been addressed before. I knew a guy who created a computer program that could musically improvise over a set of chords (you know, play Jazz). It acted randomly, but it also learned. The guy who created it told it whether to kill a solo it created or to allow it to inform later solos.

Not saying you're wrong, that's just one element of the game that isn't quite as far-fetched as we may think.

They need to show those robots that are supposedly recording thousands of gifs they talked about on Day 1. Even besides their use as evidence, that just sounds like a fascinating way to handle the problems at hand.

In this video, Sean from Hello Games says he flew around looking for a planet that would have the elements he was looking to show off:

@veektarius: Right, but the problem is scale. There are a thousand (let's say) different variables that need their own randomizers. How long did it take this guy to create this randomizer? How long would it take him to do it for a thousand different variables?

I don't blame you guys for reading that and thinking I'm nuts, as I'm aware of how totally useless anecdotal evidence is. That's what this line is for:

That isn't damning by itself, of course, but it makes me suspicious when combined with the fact that no one has played this game yet.

Seeing the way Sean kind of sputters and looks to his feet whenever the questions come on strong makes me worry about the legitimacy of the project, and you should keep reading, because what follows isn't just gibberish but a couple short paragraphs of me explaining myself in a normal manner.

@development: You're oversimplifying the mechanism, because it's not done on a per-variable basis. It is instead done using statistical inference, saying "this is like that in a euclidean sense, and when I did that, dinosaur head 4441 got a 'no'. Furthermore, Dinosaur heads 4000-5000 are similar enough to 4441 that they are probably also no." I can't give you an estimate in terms of man hours, but machine learning makes this and other similar problems a lot easier than your layman expects. Though as a professed, occasionally-dishonest game developer, you may be less lay than I am giving you credit for.

@development:

I think you're just jelly. I mean I guess every game developer in the world is probably pretty jelly right now. Hell - I'm pretty jelly, and computer sciences could as well be the black arts of devil's magic to me. Stings, doesn't it?

You might be right of course, and it's all smoke and mirrors, but that doesn't make you any less of a dick for trampling on our hopes and dreams. You monster! Put on your Dunce Cap and sit facing the corner of the room.

@development It's entirely possible Sean is just a horrible public speaker. Speaking as someone who gets bad nerves even ordering food from someone, he could totally just be fidgety and awkward. I don't really see how being a poor presenter necessarily equals the game not existing. I think it's totally fair to be cautious of anything that talks this big but, I mean, habeas corpus, they're showing it to people all this week. Hopefully that can alleviate some fears.

Didn't Broshida and Broyes say they've seen it hands on last night?

He talked about it during the day 1 wrap-up, how one of the ways they're testing their algorithms is by having AI play their game and take animated gifs of the various planets so they can comb through them quickly to look for problems. There's no proof, but it seems like a really really specific lie to tell. Is that something you would say if you were lying about your game's development?

He did the same thing when he was on stage at Sony and all he had to do was read a script. It seems more like he's just not completely comfortable with public speaking and being the focus of attention. I'm not saying this game is real but I think you're reading way too much into thing to reach the conclusion you want to reach.

@development said:

Yeah, we just don't know, man. Like, who's to say that the moon isn't actually hollow or full of lizardmen? How can we honestly know that for certain?

It is totally possible that Sony would just put a game on stage that they haven't seen for themselves. After all, there's so few games to choose from, they'll take anything they can get! It isn't like this production of their cost a lot of money and involved a ton of people that carefully planned and oversaw each and every element of the show or anything.

They would have a vested interest in saying their most ambitious, if not biggest, Indie Get is totally on track to sell. Plus, if @development is right, the lie could potentially be so far deep that even they've been fooled.
It would be super difficult, but there is a nonzero chance that is the case.

No I think they said the exact opposite.

Man, just because it's a wild theory doesn't mean his fear is necessarily unwarranted. A very large number of similar projects have either failed to deliver on promises or simply disappeared into the aether. It's certainly far more possible than Smash Brothers being anything close to a video game.

@development:

Seeing the way Sean kind of sputters and looks to his feet whenever the questions come on strong makes me worry about the legitimacy of the project, and you should keep reading, because what follows isn't just gibberish but a couple short paragraphs of me explaining myself in a normal manner.

It never occurred to you that Sean might be shy and uncomfortable with public speaking?

@gaff said:

No, he's uncomfortable because he is lying. Obviously.

have they talked about the multiplayer aspect of the game? Is there one?

I don't think YOU exist.

Well, naturally, you are. I mean, this is the internet, and on the internet the person you are talking to knows nothing about the thing they're talking about; certainly not as much as yourself. I'm not offended; it's just depressing; it showcases how futile so many conversations are on the internet and why so little is actually ever accomplished when one anonymous person directly engages another.

But, um, back on topic: My problem with what you said is you need to gameplay test these things. Yes, you can have one algorithm that governs many aspects of the game, but you still need to test each piece out to make sure they aren't too boring or too crazy, for example. If all they're doing is creating small, medium, big, and boss-type-creatures, world-types, world-sizes, landscapes, and landscape sizes, then, sure, that's something that can be done. Maybe I'm just hoping for too much here, but it seems they're making people think they've got much more up their sleeve than the things I've listed. When the game evnentually comes out I imagine it'll disappoint more people than it won't.

I will remain super skeptical until we find out what any kind of objective within the game is.

Wait. Avoiding eye contact and sputtering could indicate a guilty conscience. For instance sabotaging The Last Guardian so that No Man's Sky could take the limelight in the Sony press conference. Obviously.

I guess I'd care whatever it's a pretty tech-demo or a game, if it would be the only interesting game in the distance and if it would be a Kickstarter project that I had funded.

I heard it was minecraft in space. And got super fucking disappointed. I really hope it's not. :(

So when they say "console debut", does that mean it's a PS4 exclusive or a time exclusive?

I'm just excited to jump into my spaceship and seamlessly fly up, through the atmosphere, and into space, then fly to the next planet, through its atmosphere, and land. If that part works and the game doesn't crash, I'm fucking sold. I don't care if the planets have dinosaurs with two legs and flamingo heads.

It's also the only thing in video games in a long time that has got me close to dropping my jaw. Practically everything else looks like a slightly different spin on something we've seen before. Some stuff looked like it would be good, yes, but No Man's Sky stood out. I don't think Sony would have shared their stage unless Hello Games had something solid to show, especially with a project as ambitious as this.

Are your concerns reasonable? They sound so. And I have no doubt that this game will have issues. I also have no doubt that this game will start to repeat itself eventually. Still, I'm really excited to see more of this game.

It's always good to be super skeptical of anything unless you see it playing on a device you know isn't directly from the publisher/developer. (The Destiny Alpha, for example, vs the stage shows)
That said, nothing wrong with being excited by the idea.

@somberowl: It means it is already out on PC, or it will be out on PC first.

Guys what if Sean Murray is actually Satan and No Man's Sky is just an elaborate mechanism by which he'll steal all our souls.

I understand being skeptical especially after this E3 when we've seen the likes of Rainbow Six and Mass Effect only in conceptual or "pre-alpha" phases.

I find it hard to believe that so many people have talked about and spent time thinking about No Man's Sky and yet no one has "seen through the cracks" that you propose. Sure a lot of enthusiasm and hype is associated with this game but I doubt it's all smoke and mirrors.

Notice they also don't announce a release date nor do they show a live demo. So they aren't running around lying, they're being open about their game as it's being developed.

Yep. Hell, I'd be fine even if there were only like 10 various types of life. I've put like a thousand hours into Minecraft.

There is no objective, so in the same way as Minecraft, you create your own.

@scampbell said:

At least in Minecraft you can literally create things.

This game could be very cool, but I'm really curious how it's going to turn out. They're certainly hyping this game up.

@development: does it matter?

It's not like any of us are going have any sort of interaction with this game until it's out anyway. If it sucks or it's vaporware I won't buy it. Pretty simple.

Yes, but unlike Ass Effect 3 they don't have to pander to angry people, put in bad story-lines, record cringe-worthy dialogue, boring quests, make ugly character models and can focus 100% on technical aspects.

I believe 100% in his 10-man team. Let AAA bloated jade you, not this.

@sterling said:

beautiful

My only worries about this game are that it will be an infinite, boring space with nothing to do and no incentives or challenges and about just how much variation these planets are really going to be able to have. Is it just mammals and dinosaurs of different colors and sizes on each planet or will we see more bizarre alien life like flying jellyfish or rock creatures on some planets?

Looks pretty cool, can't wait to play it.

guys what if this is actually the greatest game ever made and these dudes are geniuses and once we get to combine this with vr we'll never play anything else ever again guys