• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ent|ty

  1. They do have names, the ones that you just gave them, and I think that's all that needs to happen. The more imagination required by this game or any other is better than having to define, label and explain everything. After all, the core of 'discovery' is just that, not being spoon-fed or hand-held when exploring Astroneer, especially for the first time.
  2. Core game is all that matters. Then it can be extended to include anything the imagination comes up with.. Until then, if chicken meat keeps dropping from deers and bears... one has to wonder if game cores are being worked on at all
  3. Yes, but it's just faster to uproot them with the terrain gun.
  4. Better solution, promotes problem solving and alternate solutions when someone makes a mistake, and doesn't just hand things to the player.
  5. Notice how he got 'assaulted' at 0:34, then he cuts away to 'deal with business' and returns to cutting the planet in half, lol. Also, wouldn't it be impossible to cut a planet in half? Wouldn't the gravity constantly be forcing the two halfs together, pretty much constantly collapsing any digs?
  6. Sure, as long as they serve a purpose for discovery, are relatively unique and serve the gameplay, it's all good.
  7. This always seems like a good idea, but in practice has large impacts on how the terrain will generate, and some items can take away from the uniqueness of landscape. It also removes incentive for players to make their own landmarks, maybe refining sandbox tools for them would yield more gameplay options, as well as keep the land generation more unique. Players familiar with Rust may notice that with more addition of premade buildings and assets to the game, including caverns, that even with different seeds on different servers, many landscapes start looking too familiar, since these assets must always flatten out the terrain or affect it somehow in order to fit in properly. With large areas like airports, not only is the immediate land generation effected, but large swaths around it as well to accommodate a seamless landscape. Over time the land starts looking more and more generic, with the same mountain, cliff, rock formations, rivers, bridges, towers, factories, houses, etc and the generation becomes bland. Also as a side effect, even in Rust, player influence on the land is further limited, as buildings and infrastructure used to be created by players themselves - built, maintained and fought over, but now is served with static assets. The same effect befell Minecraft with the addition of villages and temples.. the land procgen was also affected to cater to these buildings, and players that would have normally built villages and pyramids and temples themselves, no longer had to. But most of all, seeing Stonehenge like structures are neat the first time, but seeing them 10 times on a planet is going to elicit boredom. No Man's Sky, for example, had the same repeating 'alien' building(s) on each planet. Neat to discover the first time, the next 30 times, especially when they were identical, lead to boredom. When I visit a new planet for the first time, or replay Astroneer, I want to see the most variance in landscape possible. In early Minecraft (1.52 - 1.73 or so), the procgen was so interesting, it sparked the imagination, now 1.0 and onward most consider it to be quite bland and boring. Long response, sorry, but adding premade assets has a huge impact on games, so had to elaborate.
  8. When I find dynamite, I just throw it away. The amount of area that it can open up, even buried is not worth the time to even use it. I can clear more area with the terrain gun faster than the benefits from dynamite currently.
  9. If an Astroneer can dig himself down to the core of a planet, using only a terraforming gun, he is like a God already and where's the challenge. I hope the final release makes this action almost impossible without expensive tools, very dangerous to do so, or outright impossible. Or just leave it in and go "Meh, its Astroneer" It really screws up my sense of belief in the scale of things, and I believe the majesty of planets are lost, when I can dig to the core relatively easily. Example: The Moon. Clearly it is too small, and feels more like an asteroid.
  10. The stronger the core of the game the better. Then if modders want to add PVP or even Technic/Tekkit style machine addons, it can be done at that point. If the core is solid and sound, and the API made available, the game could be extended from there. As a developer, why spend the extra time on adding weapons, targeting systems, and everything that entails PVP, when you could make just as much money releasing the game as a simple but efficient gameplay core, and let the community extend it? Profit wise, its a pretty smart move, though a bit sketchy, depending on who you talk to
  11. Since this would fall under CORE gameplay, the sooner they sift through the rocks that are NOT disappearing once dislodged, the better. Having loose rocks sitting under ground, buried or not must be using up a lot of memory over time, especially when they appear to have colliders on them, probably calculating and using up game resources even though you cant see them.
  12. It's easy. It just means that you have to stick closer to your home, and make more trips back and forth that you normally wouldn't make. It's also an easy challenge to beat when you find a couple Titaniums and can make oxygen canisters to extend your running range. Personally, I didn't find it any more fun, as it didn't really stop me from progressing - it just added tedium in the form of time as it made me run back and forth. Without the extended oxygen tanks, I just drilled down very close to my base (as caverns are everywhere), and quickly got what I needed anyway. A rover truck is basically SMELTER (2 compound?), VEHICLE BAY (4 ALuminum), then either 4 compound+ for rover, additional 4 ALuminum for truck. Other than getting the Resin to build your base, once you know what you need ahead of time, very easy to get to the truck (Actually easier to build the shuttle and leave).
  13. What's your problem? I'd prefer them to work on core gameplay (like fixing rocks that are in the game NOW), rather than models of rocketships (as seen in their recent podcast). I was agreeing with you, and adding on my own comment.
  14. Yep the space station and non-priority models can wait a bit, in preference of getting the rocks (that are actually in gameplay and affecting it) CORE GAMEPLAY, all sorted. Ahhhh, the forever litany of typical complaints on dev forums "Work on the CORE GAMEPLAY before adding banana hats!"
  15. Because the gamer base in general wants PVP. It seems as though it doesn't matter what a game intends to start out as, the addition of PVP has been proven to improve net sales. Personally, I've had years and years of FPS and PVP, in games that did them well, so it gets old when every new game that comes out starts with PVP, even if it's just a default game engine landform with guns added - people will buy it and play it. Pathetic, but true; we seem to like games that allow us to kill each other. Or worse seeing EA games start with one genre in mind, only to add PVP later to it to bump sales. Even the mighty Minecraft had to add PVP, and as a result, the useless Enchanting to boost weapons and armor to serve it - and with the worst combat ever, yet players lapped it up and sales increased tenfold. In the end, it will be System Era that will have to decide - because the general sentiment is to add everything from other games into a new game, so that everything ends up being generic.
  16. Martin likes to argue both sides of an argument, beware. I prefer to debate with someone who actually holds a position, so that either they can convince me with new information or a view I didn't consider, and I them. Martin is not sincere in his conversations, so because of this, I unfortunately cannot engage with him.
  17. I assume all the resources are easily available, with low requirements for ingredients to build things, for testing purposes only. The recipes and such are not so much important right now, as is making sure everything is plugging together and operating, without having to go through long actions to find out if it works or not.
  18. That's the norm. Many just state and repeat their position but do not support them with any reasoning, examples or thought. They also respond before reading the thread in it's entirety, or respond to one key phrase in a response that is irrelevant to the conversation. This is why I had to leave this convo as well, because they're going to do this for the next 2 years until release. Do as I did, and just post your thoughts and specific suggestions in the suggestion forum instead. Then it's specifically for the devs, and you don't need to discuss your views, validate or even do any of this 'debating' about it.
  19. Once again, it is up to me to temper all of this kind of thing, and make myself unpopular with fellow Astroneers (and dev worshipers) in the process. Who likes the guy who follows the worship and praise with a dose of cynicism? Such is my burden to bear, but I'd only post this because I do want Astroneer to reach the potential it has. In Early Access, each of us is not a customer, we are an investor. Without us, these games don't get made. That's why they went Early Access. They're not doing me a favour, they don't need my gratitude, they don't even need my feedback. How about we all keep this professional? We're investors, all we care about is seeing progress and results. Anything an investor wants to do to help, free of charge, they're free to do - this includes sharing their IP, their creativity, their time testing the game, their time making and promoting gameplay videos, and their feedback. Should I say again, all 'free of charge'? The worst thing for people to do is be praising and thanking and saying stuff is 'amazing', when no, it is not. It has plenty of time to be amazing, and may be amazing when completed. Yes, I am frequently triggered by words, because I am aware of their proper use and impact, therefore I react to them as people should. This game has great potential. Yes. Potential. The challenge for the developers will be to reach that potential. The way some forum members have talked, the game could be released as 1.0 tomorrow, and the team at Astroneer could start their next project. So what is 'finished' anyway? Who says it's finished? When will System Era consider it finished? What's to keep SE from languishing in EA for 4 years like so many other titles in my Games Library? This game is not amazing. It's fun, it has a good start,it has potential, but to be amazing, it's going to have to be finished first before we start dropping words like that. My praise and accolades will be given when this title is completed, and when it is completed in a reasonable amount of time. My support will be in this manner, for I am neither a worshiper or follower - I'll tell you straight up about how I feel and will call developers out when they start to lose sight of their goals. Posters can do what they like, thank who they like, praise who they like - don't get me wrong. But I'll be here to give the balance, and I hope others will join me, at least in the manner of giving the devs the straight goods. Well, you shouldn't feel successful. You've just started. Just because a few vocal people are pleased and already lavishing praise and worship, it doesn't make it so. In fact, as you may know, many of these forums are filled with worshipers and praisers and easily pleased players, and of indeterminate age and experience.. What one player finds fun at a younger age, someone may not as they mature, or even at an older age. When this happens too much, without any qualification behind who is saying you're 'amazing', you have to be careful how you soak it up. Success is not if someone thinks you're awesome or amazing. Success is completing the game and making a profit. Let's not pretend here. You have my initial investment, you no longer need or require to hear anything from me or anyone else. Anything feedback, suggestions or IP you get from me or anyone else is all a bonus. Hopefully you can surprise us by being different from all the other EA devs out there, who either listen TOO much to players or TOO little, and sometimes from one side only - the praising side. That's a great attitude to have, hopefully that will extend to those of us who contribute to these forums the most constructive way we know how, but not necessarily in a prostrate position before you while doing so. "hey guys, love your game! Its amazing! Best ever! I'm addicted! but umm..." Yes, this all seems like superficial because every dev says this. 1, 2, 3, 4 years into EA when they're mad people like me are calling them out, that is the true test. I wasn't even going to invest in Astroneer at all, I am so fed up with EA. This is my last. I have about 10 titles in my library languishing in EA, and frankly it gets old after awhile reading the excuses, watching the fanbois defend them, and the endless praise from same that actually gimps the developers, and does not light the fire under their feet that they need to complete their projects. We're investors, and after 1.0, customers, and perhaps repeat customers. So far I have purchased 3 Minecraft accounts for myself (original, 'second camera', and extra account for helpers/friends) and 2 others for family members. Then, and only then, may I post praising you for the job well done, the sincere handshakes, the congratulations and the accolades, and with that my loyalty and promotion. I'm just one gamer though, so my opinion means nothing compared to the masses you will deal with in the next couple of years.
  20. TLDR: If one does not want to use maps, simply do not use the shortcut key "M", voila no map for you. Disclaimer: I don't care if a map is in the game or not in the game, I will do fine. I am more for advocating interesting gameplay and challenges, rather than excluding something from the game. For the devs: Include mapping technology, but make it interesting, to please most players. Humans have been making and using maps as long as they needed to mark their way home while exploring and expanding their territory. Be it crude maps of the coast as they sailed along it, sometimes reaching out into the great beyond - some to catastrophe, others to discovering new lands. How can it be implemented in Astroneer to keep the reasonable assumption that a space-faring individual would have mapping technology, yet balance it with the wonder and fear of venturing out into the unknown? Though I will not give any specifics (that's your job ), but mapping like anything else can be tiered from simple direction finding (default compass) to researching and building advanced modular pieces that could increase the functionality (and protect) and range of said item. Level 1: Basic Compass Level 2: Map 'pings' like a radar slowly giving a visual clue as to surrounding terrains, but 'fog (of war)' remains. Level 3: Pings can be faster, much like fps, gives updates faster, starts to push 'fog (of war)' reveals in the radius Level 4: Clarity of mapping becomes more efficient, as images 'pinged' become more detailed, even revealing actual color of terrain and landmarks. Level 5: Extends range or opens up functionality, such as ability to create landmarks, or records previously placed beacons, or reveals plant life locations, mineral deposits. Perhaps at level 5, the mapping unit simply is no longer portable, as it requires a dedicated platform and more power to operate at this level. Of course for those who don't want to access the feature, they would not need to even see what the map is doing, so avoiding the use of "M" key would give them the non-map gameplay they would desire. As with the spirit of 'giveth yet taketh away' that I like to promote in gameplay, the map unit can have problems. Perhaps on Terran there is little adversity, but on other planets the map unit may not work as well, as intended, or simply not at all. Higher level mapping units require more backpack power. Higher level mapping units require rare mineral to focus transmissions for map clarity. Storms and other environmental events corrupt, disrupt or disable mapping. These challenges can be overcome with emergent technologies/modules not yet discussed, or in the more difficult planets - simply not able to be used. Difficulty of exploration can be scaled along with every other technology Astroneer decides to include, so this same thought process could be applied to anything, really. The balance will have to be struck between the assumption that the Astroneer has this level of tech to include mapping by default, and that of the challenge and fear of the unknown, so that at times, he will be forced to go outside his comfort zone, and the known radius of his map. The ability to get lost will always exist, especially at lower levels, but also at higher levels if suddenly the Astroneer is caught in a storm or other event that renders the map unit inoperable, leaving him stranded. Rather than an either/or proposition, no map vs map, it would be better time spent creating an innovative way to appeal to most players, rather than endless debate.
  21. I appreciate the suggestion, but that kind of thing I've done to death already. I'll probably just have to leave Astroneer for awhile until it's fleshed out more.
  22. These models are far more impressive.
  23. I've said my peace on this, I've provided multiple examples, pulling from many games, including even "Darkest Dungeon" which isn't even a survival game, yet utilizes food in a very interesting way. Of course all of this is ignored.. so those who care to learn other points of view will review these examples, and those that won't.. oh well. I'm done. Enjoy 'debating' this topic for the next 2 years.
  24. Unreal.. now potions are a 'hunger mechanic'. This is what we deal with nowadays.
  25. Best way to support the devs is to shut our mouths, pretty much.