4 ms·

It more or less reminds me of that Rick and Morty episode. They were playing an asteroid shooting. > Morty: it's boring. crank up the realism slider to max >

It more or less reminds me of that Rick and Morty episode. They were playing an asteroid shooting. > Morty: it's boring. crank up the realism slider to max > Rick: why does it get even more empty? Wait, I got it... because the universe is empty. At the end, I think there is little point in simulating the vastness of the universe in a video game (even just a fraction of it).

latexr 23d ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR1uLHmxmcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR1uLHmxmcg
estebank 23d ago
I don't think that simulating the vastness of the universe is ever going to be fun, but approximating a theme park ride that evokes the vastness of the universe can be breathtaking, like Outer Wilds was. (The gameplay is confined to a single solar system, but it certainly makes you feel both the a sense of adventure, and the vastness of space-time.)
trashb 23d ago
"I have never thought to myself that realism is fun" - Gabe Newell
- TylerE 23d ago
  True realism is often interesting though, which provides more long term engagement than fleeting shallow fun. Look at some of the hard core 3rd party addons for flight sims, for instance, which are so realistic they actually ship licensed versions of the real aircraft training manuals and checklists - because every switch and procedure works.
  - djeastm 23d ago
    It's interesting for a niche audience (and I'm one of them). But that's a small minority of gamers (and $$$).
  - NBJack 23d ago
    True realism at the right place and time. Fly out of SeaTac or Chicago O'Hare in most flight sims at sunrise, and you'll get a richly detailed airport, realistic traffic, realistic surrounding terrain, etc. with hopefully jaw-dropping views. Pick a random airport at a random time with an obscure name or location in the US Midwest, and they all start to look the same (even with detailed, realistic geography): a mostly flat expanse with some hills, and either just the local city lights (if that) or a dull mid-day sun. To be fair, those checklists are also largely there for so many pilots and those in training whom want to get the experience.
    - TylerE 23d ago
      You haven’t seen either of the last two MSFS releases have you? They’re using high res satellite imagery of the entire globe. Even small towns are shockingly detailed.
  - trashb 11d ago
    > which provides more long term engagement than fleeting shallow fun. That is your opinion. Also let's not kid ourselves, No Mans Sky is not a realistic game (you can visit other planets). The full quote is more nuanced, it describes the idea that for game design you need to be able to explain why something is included in a design (design with intent) "realistic" without further explanation in this context can read like "because we always did it like this". Which is not sufficient. "You'd have these conversations where you'd be sitting in a design review and somebody [would] say, 'That's not realistic.' And you're like, 'Okay, what does that have? Explain to me why that's interesting.' Because in the real world, I have to write up lists of stuff I have to go to the grocery store to buy. And I have never thought to myself that realism is fun. I go play games to have fun." Half-Life 25th Anniversary Documentary (Valve, November 2023). Surely there are games that make grocery shopping fun. But they probably don't focus on the realism of grocery shopping, rather they might focus on things that can make the experience fun. Otherwise you might as well just go grocery shopping instead of playing the game. Simulations that take off often allow you to experience things that you might otherwise not be able to do (flying a airplane, driving a racecar). In that case the fun is in obtaining the unobtainable or without risks (crashing).
ByThyGrace 23d ago
There are levels to this. The NMS day/night cycle is geocentric. It's a sandbox game yet when it comes to its "space" premise everything is thrown out the window. Dogfights carry no difficulty or skill. Flying around a system is pretty much pointless other than to stumble upon quests (100% RNG). Most of the fun you'll get at planet surface.
- dwaltrip 23d ago
  > Dogfights carry no difficulty or skill. You've been hanging out with Claude too much :)
flir 23d ago
That's the problem every Elite after the first one had. The first one was dogfighting in space, all the others were so. much. space.
- Waterluvian 23d ago
  I think the first major issue I had with Elite Dangerous is that there’s, I think, three orders of magnitude of flying around. Which really disconnects me from the feel of it all.
  - Sander_Marechal 22d ago
    Yep, there's regular flying for dogfighting, mining, landing, etc. Then there's supercruise for getting around a star system, and FSD jump (basically a loading screen) for going between systems.
pbhjpbhj 23d ago
On that last point, when I first played Dyson Sphere Program (DSP), I left the starting planet without enough resources and didn't understand the inter-planetary warp drive system .. I just drifted out into space and couldn't get back with the fuel I had left. It was almost scary; the vastness of the space was so apparent, it was very immersive to me. Early game you don't have enough resources to travel quickly through the solar system you start in, nevermind between systems, it takes time. It gives a real impression of scale and wonder imo. You have to plan taking the scale into account - and it's nowhere near realistic. They got a good balance there.
- newsoftheday 22d ago
  I wasn't aware of this space game, not sure how I missed it, thank you for mentioning it, might just have to try it now. Although it might be too heavy into simulation for me.
- kuschku 22d ago
  I actually managed to travel from one star system to another in DSP without warp, they happened to be just close enough that a full inventory of fuel was just barely enough to make the trip.

latexr 23d ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR1uLHmxmcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR1uLHmxmcg

estebank 23d ago

I don't think that simulating the vastness of the universe is ever going to be fun, but approximating a theme park ride that evokes the vastness of the universe can be breathtaking, like Outer Wilds was. (The gameplay is confined to a single solar system, but it certainly makes you feel both the a sense of adventure, and the vastness of space-time.)

trashb 23d ago

"I have never thought to myself that realism is fun" - Gabe Newell

TylerE 23d ago
True realism is often interesting though, which provides more long term engagement than fleeting shallow fun. Look at some of the hard core 3rd party addons for flight sims, for instance, which are so realistic they actually ship licensed versions of the real aircraft training manuals and checklists - because every switch and procedure works.
- djeastm 23d ago
  It's interesting for a niche audience (and I'm one of them). But that's a small minority of gamers (and $$$).
- NBJack 23d ago
  True realism at the right place and time. Fly out of SeaTac or Chicago O'Hare in most flight sims at sunrise, and you'll get a richly detailed airport, realistic traffic, realistic surrounding terrain, etc. with hopefully jaw-dropping views. Pick a random airport at a random time with an obscure name or location in the US Midwest, and they all start to look the same (even with detailed, realistic geography): a mostly flat expanse with some hills, and either just the local city lights (if that) or a dull mid-day sun. To be fair, those checklists are also largely there for so many pilots and those in training whom want to get the experience.
  - TylerE 23d ago
    You haven’t seen either of the last two MSFS releases have you? They’re using high res satellite imagery of the entire globe. Even small towns are shockingly detailed.
- trashb 11d ago
  > which provides more long term engagement than fleeting shallow fun. That is your opinion. Also let's not kid ourselves, No Mans Sky is not a realistic game (you can visit other planets). The full quote is more nuanced, it describes the idea that for game design you need to be able to explain why something is included in a design (design with intent) "realistic" without further explanation in this context can read like "because we always did it like this". Which is not sufficient. "You'd have these conversations where you'd be sitting in a design review and somebody [would] say, 'That's not realistic.' And you're like, 'Okay, what does that have? Explain to me why that's interesting.' Because in the real world, I have to write up lists of stuff I have to go to the grocery store to buy. And I have never thought to myself that realism is fun. I go play games to have fun." Half-Life 25th Anniversary Documentary (Valve, November 2023). Surely there are games that make grocery shopping fun. But they probably don't focus on the realism of grocery shopping, rather they might focus on things that can make the experience fun. Otherwise you might as well just go grocery shopping instead of playing the game. Simulations that take off often allow you to experience things that you might otherwise not be able to do (flying a airplane, driving a racecar). In that case the fun is in obtaining the unobtainable or without risks (crashing).

ByThyGrace 23d ago

There are levels to this. The NMS day/night cycle is geocentric. It's a sandbox game yet when it comes to its "space" premise everything is thrown out the window. Dogfights carry no difficulty or skill. Flying around a system is pretty much pointless other than to stumble upon quests (100% RNG). Most of the fun you'll get at planet surface.

dwaltrip 23d ago
> Dogfights carry no difficulty or skill. You've been hanging out with Claude too much :)

flir 23d ago

That's the problem every Elite after the first one had. The first one was dogfighting in space, all the others were so. much. space.

Waterluvian 23d ago
I think the first major issue I had with Elite Dangerous is that there’s, I think, three orders of magnitude of flying around. Which really disconnects me from the feel of it all.
- Sander_Marechal 22d ago
  Yep, there's regular flying for dogfighting, mining, landing, etc. Then there's supercruise for getting around a star system, and FSD jump (basically a loading screen) for going between systems.

pbhjpbhj 23d ago

On that last point, when I first played Dyson Sphere Program (DSP), I left the starting planet without enough resources and didn't understand the inter-planetary warp drive system .. I just drifted out into space and couldn't get back with the fuel I had left. It was almost scary; the vastness of the space was so apparent, it was very immersive to me. Early game you don't have enough resources to travel quickly through the solar system you start in, nevermind between systems, it takes time. It gives a real impression of scale and wonder imo. You have to plan taking the scale into account - and it's nowhere near realistic. They got a good balance there.

newsoftheday 22d ago
I wasn't aware of this space game, not sure how I missed it, thank you for mentioning it, might just have to try it now. Although it might be too heavy into simulation for me.
kuschku 22d ago
I actually managed to travel from one star system to another in DSP without warp, they happened to be just close enough that a full inventory of fuel was just barely enough to make the trip.