Game has huge potential - but am I the only one who feels I am wasting my time?

I don't think giant space rocks close by each other are as severe as a working gas ecosystem with landable islands. Also I edited my post
and added more, respond to that please.

The quality of gas planet islands would go down the drain if you did not specialise the generation to produce more "gassy" looking terrain instead of a shoddy asteroid field knock off.

 

One requires the law of gravity to cease working. The other can exists with the laws in physics intact. So, you're right; giant space rocks close by each other are not as severe as a working gas ecosystem: they're far, far worse.

Which is what would be required for any other biome you added. Or are you saying that the magma, forest, and ice worlds all use the same graphics?

 

Wooh this started off so well but is now you trying to undermine instead of prove you're points. Undermining is good and all but unless you actually debate my points and make good counters nothing good is coming out of this. Take a page out of D-16s book.


Ask anyone and they would think nothing of landing on asteroids as it is a genre staple and actually looks very feasible unlike landing on gas. So it is far far worse as you have to factor in human thought on the two scenarios.


You're the one who proposed lazily changing a couple settings in asteroid generation to make islands not me. You even said "change the asteroid color".

The reason those three biomes you mentioned would use similar settings is because in the game world they are different only in appearance and only have a couple defining features. More unique biomes require more unique appearances and items. Something you don't seem to grasp.


EDIT:

You did have some good ideas though and I personally want you to post those in suggestions. Maybe if your "plan" is labeled in more detail I would be more inclined to agree.

 

I think everyone knows there are many different TYPES of world - but honestly? It all feels like a reskin of the same world. They all FEEL the same, is I think what the OP was saying.

 

Imagine getting to college: "Remember all that stuff you learned about physics in high school? Well, some kid just broke a few laws, so we need to re-teach you."

On-topic: I'm not sure how different planets could truly be... it probably has a core, it's hopefully round, and it doesn't break the laws of physics all the time...
It's not like it would be realistic for a planet to be made out of metal but that would be cool...

Also, many of your complaints are being addressed already...

 

i've made good counters to all your points. The problem is, you don't bother to read them. For instance:

See? No one here has said "let's land on gas." This is what we call a strawman. What has been suggested is a biosphere floating in a gas giant that we can land on.

Your human thought did not come out of nowhere. It came from poor science as depicted in entertainment mediums.

Second example:

In this one, you're actually fabricating a quote. I can do the same. Remember when you said "Gas Giant biomes are a great idea! I was a fool to think otherwise!" I quoted you as saying it, so it obviously must be true.

No, you see, I said "reskin." Not "change the asteroid color." In other words: create whole new art for the world. If you think that's "lazy," then that means we should have a few dozen extra biomes easy.

Actually, I grasp it just fine, unlike your grasp of quotations. This is why my proposal for a gas giant biome isn't simply different graphics, but involves an entirely new mechanic (high-winds pushing players) that is, when you look at it, an integral part of navigating the planet (the islands are far apart and you need a tech to be able to ride the wind to them; failure is death).

But apparently, this is too samey-same for you. I'd really like to know what planet you've been to in game that functions this way. Can you give me coordinates?

I'd really like for blocks to behave differently in this biome as well (everything except gas giant blocks act like fine sand and fall without support), but that's probably a bridge too far.

 

As I stated before, think game engine capabilities and "immersion". I don't need to tell you "winds" are most likely impossible for the engine other than a graphic that pushes you (to my knowledge, but I know the engine can't really detail environments focuses on weather to make up for it) . Also remember that many people never find a tech even up to sector X, the glider tech would have to be craftable. Then we have the Alpha sector Gas "island" issues. I'm not really refuting you as it's tiring when you disregard/ignore/make out of context quotes.

If you want, reply with an actual argument and I'll discuss further. While you did make one in the quote it's muddled (or you're having a bad day?) by you focusing on me in some apparant important details. That's fine if you're countering but it's excessive and makes me feel like you will act this way for the whole debate.

As I said before, post these ideas on the suggestions sub forum and let the community improve and show reactions.

 

Considering that pushing is the important part, and we already have a windstorm graphic, then if what you say is true the engine is perfectly capable of doing it. Frankly, I'd be surprised if the engine couldn't do something Megaman was doing back on the NES.

The progression the devs are talking about involves unlocking technologies that allow the exploration of new planets. This would fit perfectly with that, craftable or not.

Considering that there will be no Alpha sector in later itterations, I don't see how this is an issue. Currently, it would be no worse than Alpha sector asteroid belts.

It's extremely difficult when someone makes quotes up out of whole cloth.

Please.

 

Did anybody try like uhm....pvp ? Maybe on the official servers?

 

Chucklefush hosts no official servers.

 

Then what the heck are those on their official website hmmm...the ones that cost like 1$ per slot?

 

Servers hosted by Multiplay. They are the official server provider.

Offical as in the one Chucklefush promotes.

 

^ aha! Right on then!

 

Hi Cyberspy. I'm the Multiplay community manager!

We're the official server provider because we work directly with the developers on the networking side of the game, we provide website hosting, we did their rcon protocol and we're in direct communication with them constantly to help out and improve parts of the game players don't see but remain extremely important to the multiplayer connectivity and administration of servers.

 

"here is science"

"but most people have uneducated opinions so your reliance on fact is irrelevant and we should instead cater to dummies"

LOL

 

they contracted out the netplay? wow, i did not know.

 

Hmm, what you're describing is outsourcing. That's not really what I intended to say and I apologise if it comes across that way.

We're directly involved with helping identify/diagnose faults and helping build administrative server tools for the game. The game devs are still very much responsible for the netplay - we simply built the remote communication tools that are used to administrate servers from outside a game. Explaining this to players is a little complex as for the most part the only people that see any of those things are developers or very knowledgeable server administrators. It's probably better to describe it as cooperation fostered because we love the game at Multiplay and believe in the team at Chucklefish.

 

this is similar to how i feel too. The procedural generation sounds much better in theory than in practice here. Its gotten to the point where i wish they would just design more creatures by hand to spice things up.

I agree that planet generation feels like a pallette swap, They all have the same resources, "trees" and wild life more or less. They need to add more wild cards to generation. Seeing a cool looking generated enemy instantly loses its luster when it comes after you with another gravity slam.


These are issues that CF says they are working on though. So i'll wait and see. I hope they understand that its BEHAVIOR that makes an experience unique, not just reskins. Also, they need to take a cue from ARPG loot tables. There needs to be rare and exciting elements aadded to procedural generation. there should be rare abilities, ores, biomes, parts, etc. This helps make things feel new, it helps us ignore the common traits (like a slash) as we keep an eye out for rare abilities (like multiply and explode). This applies to planet generation too. Biomes should have a rare chance of spawning something completely weird and gameplay changing.

 

I will only feel like I have wasted my time if, after my hiatus, I turn starbound back on and everything is gone. A lot of games take stuff out or make them harder to find later, so a lot of this ho-hum stuff we're finding will feel better for having later, possibly. Then again some games really have no direction and just keep adding stuff without making any of it rare and ruin the whole atmosphere with watered down stuff. We'll have to wait and see if it's a waste of time, and that's only a decision each individual can make. If the game is a flop upon release, which I earnestly hope it is not, then it will have been a big waste of time.

 

Tentacle/Magma/Volcanic/Savanna/Jungle/Arid

Maybe play the game for more then 2-3 hours before jumping to conclusion. Or better yet Google it instead of posting your ignorance as a thread.

Do everyone a solid and report your own thread and tell the Mods posting this was silly and you know better now.