Looking at some of the first footage of people actually playing the game for long sessions, I'm reminded very strongly of a little (primarily mobile focused) game called "Out There." In that game, you start in a simple spaceship, with only the most basic tools, and you're a huge distance from your eventual goal. You fill up your spaceship's slots (different numbers and arrangements of squares for different ship designs) with tools and elemental resources that you can use to help you on your way; you fill your ship's engines with fuel, craft new modules out of raw resources, and explore planets and other things, occasionally stumbling upon special artifacts, events, and aliens which you interact with via a simple multiple-choice system after getting a little bit of story through a couple of paragraphs of text.

Has anyone else noticed this resemblance? Is it more than just skin deep? I've noticed that No Man's Sky at least seems more forgiving, as making the wrong choices in Out There would just leave you adrift in space forever or suffocating to death, with no way to replenish your resources; otherwise the loop seems strikingly similar. NMS obviously has a bigger universe, and it's three dimensional and visually much more complicated, but the actual game looks almost the same. Am I crazy?

There is another post on this subject:

http://www.giantbomb.com/no-man-s-sky/3030-44656/forums/i-didnt-expect-the-out-there-influence-on-this-gam-1800511/

The fact is that neither of these games are particularly unique. They're games about traveling across space, so they share the same elements that comprise the stories of space travel we've told for decades: looking for scraps with which to repair your ship, fueling your ship with stellar resources, running into alien life and strange artifacts from dead civilizations, exploring planets, and trying to survive on the way towards a destination you aren't sure you will make it to, and at which you aren't sure with what you'll be rewarded (if anything at all).

Additionally, they are both survival games, so they share the typical traits of inventory management, random encounters, and threat assessment. The resemblance is 'more than just skin deep' because it necessarily will be if they are both survival games that take place in a midecentury sci-fi concept of space. Take these games out of space and put them in a post-apocalyptic world filled with zombies, and immediately there are a hundred other games against which they are comparable.

If there's anything to draw from this observation, it's that there aren't a whole lot of survival games that take place in sci-fi space yet, probably because the scope of space is daunting for the sorts of teams that make survival games (read: small ones). Hopefully these games show that space isn't all that scary to develop for if you think of interesting ways to present it! Without FTL, would we even have Out There?

@kcin: I think it's a fair comparison to make, since the two games at least drew from similar inspirations in deciding to have you learn alien languages one word at a time, make elements the crafting material instead of like "rock", "wood", etc. Starbound and Starforge and others are often just doing Minecraft in space, and have nothing like the feel of Out There and No Man's Sky. Those two games are kinda in a class all their own in terms of the style and tone of space survival they're going for.

@bisonhero: I agree, it is a fair comparison to make, this comparison just feels particularly weighty right now because they are the first (of likely many) to do this sort of gameplay model in a midcentury sci-fi aesthetic. Otherwise, they are not entirely dissimilar from other survival games, just replace the wastelands with open space, and uninhabited towns with planets. I'm not trying to diminish either of them, I just don't think there's as much significance to this comparison as has been implied by, perhaps, the other thread I mentioned - that one directly influenced the other. If anything, this use of the survival model was an inevitability, if you ask me. I'm just as happy as anyone else that it went in this direction, of course!

@kcin: @bisonhero: I don't know. Calling a comparison between a text based roguelike survival game and a first person space exploration survival game fair seems a bit of a stretch. They might share the same premise, but the way the player interacts with the mechanics and ideas is completely different.

@gaff: Those who are drawing the comparison are citing similarities in mechanics scaffolding, like how there is an inventory, and how you have materials you can do things with (namely to your ship); couple this with the aesthetic, and they are seeing a similarity. Although I understand why the comparison is being made, I'm with you - I don't think the comparison holds a whole lot of water. The main thing I'm saying is that the comparison is only being made because they are the only games that use this aesthetic with these gameplay elements. Otherwise, they are just as much like other games (perhaps more so) as they are like each other.

I understand the game has been in development for a long and it may be a coincidence but these games are so much alike. The inventory is exactly the same. The style of writing is the same, the style of the planets is similar. The whole learn a language one word at a time is the same.

I like and will continue to play both games. But they share so many similar game mechanics.

What other games are you saying Out There is influenced by?