The more procedural space games pop out the clearer it becomes. They just can’t do it. Infinity has several years head start in the tech of actually making a truly seamless experience.
6 Likes
It’s difficult to do that large of scale because of the float precision.
It’s probably faking it, using different scales up close compared to far away, and using multiple cameras for different scales, which makes for a weird transition.
Not sure if that’s what’s going on here, or if it’s just really bad LoD transitions. But the scale looks way off, too.
I think I read someone talking about it and mentioning how the procedural engine operates different planet-side than it does space-side. Or rather, maybe, there are two separate engines at work here which visually look identical but mathematically operate differently.
Confirmation 
1 Like
cough up that design document 
They changed their mind.
No Man’s Sky release date has been set for June 2016.
I genuinely can’t see anything interesting beyond pretty colours and shooting chicken walkers. The best word I can find for the planetary transitions is “fudged”.
It will be an amazing success of course but after seeing what Infinity is capable of there is just no way to trump it.
2 Likes
I will enjoy the exploration and uncovering the ambiguous mystery. I love those games. All that space sim / crafting / selling wumbojumbo is feature creep in my opinion.
Pretty much any space sim can have pretty much all of my money at the moment. Except Star Citizen, you’ve already had your lot.
4 Likes
I really don’t get why people keep throwing so much money at that.
To me it seems games like NMS, I:B, E:D are much more interesting because of their more space sized game worlds and seamless planetary landings. But I guess for many that just doesn’t matter as much.
Yeah. I don’t get it.
It looks like it’ll be just as boring as Spore, just in first person.
All the fudging they do with bad LOD transitions makes the planetary gen look terrible, too. 
E:D doesn’t feel big to me except for the sloooowwwww travel times that add nothing to the game. It’s full of loading screens.
Star Citizen is supposed to have procedurally generated planets and seamless transitions from space to planets, no?
Star Citizen appeals to me quite a bit except for their plans for the economy.
Some people are going to have stuff worth tens of thousands of dollars in that game, and eventually the servers will go down, or they’ll lose access to their account, or something.
Simple answer: No.
you are misinformed.
It was one of their stretch goals that they reached… 50 or 60mil, I think.
The stretch goal was for a procedural generation R&D team.
The problem is that their landing zones, that they have spent lots and lots of development on, is not compatible with a fully free form planet where you can land anywhere. IF they ever do something it will most likely be similar to previous Mass Effect games where you get a cutscene while a planetary environment is generated for you to explore. It will still be a closed off (and separate) map though.
People expecting seamless travel down to the surface with manual control in Star Citizen are going to be disappointed.
1 Like
some procedural generation for asteroid, terrain and buildings but no seamless transition and not planets, simply limited maps like you find in almost every shooter.
Yes, Star Citizen has never promised fully seamless planetary landings. They might try eventually, but not at release.
Yeah, I guess they don’t say there would be seamless transitions. But they do say whole continents with procedural cities.
I wouldn’t try to read between the lines too much until they start showing prototypes.