Try Subnautica. There's several modes available, one of which keeps every survival aspect except the need to eat or drink. You still have to explore the world for resources and blueprints to build and maintain things, and protect yourself from hostile life forms. The game is also unique in that it takes place almost entirely underwater. It's in the final stages of early access, and worth checking out.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
I aee what you are saying konfess, i agree for the most part. A difference that i see in sandboxes is that eith guile and skill you may be able to do higher level combat and in different order. I dont like themepark because i dont like being railroaded and feel like ive played a million of it before.
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Try Subnautica. There's several modes available, one of which keeps every survival aspect except the need to eat or drink. You still have to explore the world for resources and blueprints to build and maintain things, and protect yourself from hostile life forms. The game is also unique in that it takes place almost entirely underwater. It's in the final stages of early access, and worth checking out.
That actually looks very cool. I might just check it out.
Thanks for the tip.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Perhaps the OP can look at a few more survival games and give us an actual review of the genre?
I wasn't clear with my post, I should have said, what are other people thinking who have played other games in the genre. I played one and I wanted to get other people's thoughts about it who have played more than me. I wasn't reviewing the whole genre, more asking what people thought.
Try Subnautica. There's several modes available, one of which keeps every survival aspect except the need to eat or drink. You still have to explore the world for resources and blueprints to build and maintain things, and protect yourself from hostile life forms. The game is also unique in that it takes place almost entirely underwater. It's in the final stages of early access, and worth checking out.
That actually looks very cool. I might just check it out.
Thanks for the tip.
Subnautica is a fantastic game.
You might want to check out The Forest as well
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
There is one thing that totally sucks about these games (including other genre's) that they share in common:
The AI
I'm looking for immersion and the AI kills it.
I agree that's a big one. Also I find the combat, skills, and progression systems to be pretty mediocre in survival games.
I'd like to add Procedurally Generated worlds to that list. The majority of them become vapid.
Do you have examples?
and can you point to non-survial games in which procedurally generated worlds work well?
I've already stated I don't class survival as a genre.
Hidden in the multiple quotes I replied to @laserit mentioned "not restricted to just one genre".
I'm not a fan of procdurally generated worlds in general when exploring is the main focus. IMHO it's a tool for developers who have no imagination and rely on an algorithm to create it for them.
However they are fantastic in roguelikes where permadeath is present. You die a lot and starting from the beginning means you don't repeat the same dungeons. They're unique.
There is one thing that totally sucks about these games (including other genre's) that they share in common:
The AI
I'm looking for immersion and the AI kills it.
I agree that's a big one. Also I find the combat, skills, and progression systems to be pretty mediocre in survival games.
I'd like to add Procedurally Generated worlds to that list. The majority of them become vapid.
Do you have examples?
and can you point to non-survial games in which procedurally generated worlds work well?
I've already stated I don't class survival as a genre.
Hidden in the multiple quotes I replied to @laserit mentioned "not restricted to just one genre".
I'm not a fan of procdurally generated worlds in general when exploring is the main focus. IMHO it's a tool for developers who have no imagination and rely on an algorithm to create it for them.
However they are fantastic in roguelikes where permadeath is present. You die a lot and starting from the beginning means you don't repeat the same dungeons. They're unique.
1. I dont see where I said genre 2. I dont see how that is material, we are talking about 'survial games' so whatever word you want to call that so that it doesnt get ungrouped from 'survial games' is fine
I can safely say that you are very likely the minority when you say you do not like procedural generation while exploring and here is why.
I have about 1000 hours in 7 days to die and likely about as many hours watching various videos, I can safely say that by a very large margin, procedural generation maps are more popular in that game then Navezgane map which is not procedural generated AND is very rich in content and well done.
I know the majority doesnt make it right, I am just offering perspective is all.
anyway, thanks for your observation.
but please consider if you do not consider survial games as a group then how can you have an opinion about survial games being one way or another when you consider them not a group to begin with?
its like saying 'I dont consider conservatives a group but I dont like how conservatives act' well you cant have both
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
There is one thing that totally sucks about these games (including other genre's) that they share in common:
The AI
I'm looking for immersion and the AI kills it.
I agree that's a big one. Also I find the combat, skills, and progression systems to be pretty mediocre in survival games.
I'd like to add Procedurally Generated worlds to that list. The majority of them become vapid.
Do you have examples?
and can you point to non-survial games in which procedurally generated worlds work well?
can you point to a survial title where procedurally generated world is bad?
I wouldn't use the word "bad"
I would use the word "bland" and the answer is: all of them
'all of them'?
So you think the random generation of Civilization is better than the random world generation in 7 days to die?
really? I see the random generation of 7 days to die to be considerably better than a random map generator. by a HUGE margin.
case in point, different terrains, cities, pre-fabs, biospheres, loot vs. a map? reallly? I dont think you are looking at this very objectively
I think Civ's random worlds are bland too. But as you asked, they do work well.
The problem with procedural generation as it stands today, is that it's too generic.
IMHO
so my second question you answered incorrectly then.
I asked you which survial games you consider to be 'not done well' and you responded by saying 'i dont consider them 'not done well' but I do consider them bland'
so I would like if you please not answer the question with a answer that is applied to a different question.
so now you position is that procedural generation is 'done well' in both 'types of game' and both are rather 'bland'. ok I will write you down as having that position. I do however think your bias is extreeme
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
but please consider if you do not consider survial games as a group then how can you have an opinion about survial games being one way or another when you consider them not a group to begin with?
its like saying 'I dont consider conservatives a group but I dont like how conservatives act' well you cant have both
Because it doesn't help me when I'm deciding to buy a game. A survival game can be literally anything. An FPS, an RPG, a Sandbox, a Themepark, Turn based, etc.
Just telling me it's a survival game tells me nothing other than I may have to keep an eye on a starvation bar/thirst meter.
If the main aim of survival games is to survive for as long as possible then that sort of includes most games I've played since the mid 80's.
but please consider if you do not consider survial games as a group then how can you have an opinion about survial games being one way or another when you consider them not a group to begin with?
its like saying 'I dont consider conservatives a group but I dont like how conservatives act' well you cant have both
Because it doesn't help me when I'm deciding to buy a game. A survival game can be literally anything. An FPS, an RPG, a Sandbox, a Themepark, Turn based, etc.
Just telling me it's a survival game tells me nothing other than I may have to keep an eye on a starvation bar/thirst meter.
If the main aim of survival games is to survive for as long as possible then that sort of includes most games I've played since the mid 80's.
but here is the problem
you are making an assertion about aspects of survial games and yet you dont want to consider them a group. Maybe I am reading the conversation wrong here is what I read:
I agree that's a big one. Also I find the combat, skills, and progression systems to be pretty mediocre in survival games.
I am sorry but I very honestly do not know what that means, can you please explain it?
See, they never put Star Wars information in his database or general gaming information.
How about you, can you explain what it means?
I assume it was just a personal jab on me but I could be wrong and I completely dont get it if it was so maybe explaining would help in the possible insult?
or maybe answer my question regarding 'attack' and 'defend' there is that option as well.
Now I must step out for lunch, The Deer Garden awaits.
I think the evolution is far more along then people realize. I agree there is room for growth but when you compare what features exist in non-survial games and compare them to the feature list of a survial game its fairly clear (at least to me) that survial games have a lot more.
There is one thing that totally sucks about these games (including other genre's) that they share in common:
The AI
I'm looking for immersion and the AI kills it.
well I know when I played EQ2 there really wasnt any AI basically speaking. Mobs where in one location usually followed a path. At least roaming mobs is a normal thing now in survial games unlike other genres that i am aware of anyway.
AI always seems like an afterthought. We need some kind of technological break through.
Dev 1; “We need to offer more innovation and better game tech. Players have started seeing through our simplistic design.”
Dev 2: “But that’s hard, expensive, and will take months. It’s really beyond our capabilities. And...we’ll make less money!”
Dev 1: “Well, what about a new sparkle pony in the store? Better yet, add it to a RNG box. It will distract most players enough so they won’t notice we’ve not really improved the game and we’ll make tons of cash.”
Dev 2: “Great idea! We can have it done in three days. Alert marketing.”
I said I would not use the word "bad" I would use "bland"
For me:
Procedural generation in a survival game will not increase longevity. The entertainment value of the game play will define the longevity.
Why?
Because I have not yet witnessed a procedural generated world that wasn't "bland" "generic" and "repetitive"
Why?
Because currently (to the best of my knowledge) we are not capable of programming *imagination*
When a computer can have an *imagination* procedural worlds and procedural content might not be so bland and repetitive.
I love the premise of the survival genre. I don't want procedural generated worlds, I want big believable worlds.
The entertainment value of the game play and the AI will define the longevity. Repetitiveness will not help the longevity and will hurt the entertainment value.
I said I would not use the word "bad" I would use "bland"
For me:
Procedural generation in a survival game will not increase longevity. The entertainment value of the game play will define the longevity.
Why?
Because I have not yet witnessed a procedural generated world that wasn't "bland" "generic" and "repetitive"
Why?
Because currently (to the best of my knowledge) we are not capable of programming *imagination*
When a computer can have an *imagination* procedural worlds and procedural content might not be so bland and repetitive.
I love the premise of the survival genre. I don't want procedural generated worlds, I want big believable worlds.
The entertainment value of the game play and the AI will define the longevity. Repetitiveness will not help the longevity and will hurt the entertainment value.
here is where I see you are very biased. Follow this history
I asked: 'and can you point to non-survial games in which procedurally generated worlds work well?
You responded with Civilization
Then I asked: can you point to a survial title where procedurally generated world is bad?
in which you responded:
I wouldn't use the word "bad"
I would use the word "bland" and the answer is: all of them
That would mean you think all surival procedurally generated worlds are 'bland' but others are not.
Similar to how immodium replied to a direct quote specifically regarding bad aspects in survial titles with 'porely generated worlds' but in his mind he was not refering to survial games but all games.
I think less flame wars would start if we paused and tried to be a little more accurate in areas that it counts to ones core point
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Thanks for the tip.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I agree that's a big one. Also I find the combat, skills, and progression systems to be pretty mediocre in survival games.
Just winding you up, take no notice.
You might want to check out The Forest as well
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
and can you point to non-survial games in which procedurally generated worlds work well?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I would use the word "bland" and the answer is: all of them
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
So you think the random generation of Civilization is better than the random world generation in 7 days to die?
really? I see the random generation of 7 days to die to be considerably better than a random map generator. by a HUGE margin.
case in point, different terrains, cities, pre-fabs, biospheres, loot vs. a map? reallly? I dont think you are looking at this very objectively
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Hidden in the multiple quotes I replied to @laserit mentioned "not restricted to just one genre".
I'm not a fan of procdurally generated worlds in general when exploring is the main focus. IMHO it's a tool for developers who have no imagination and rely on an algorithm to create it for them.
However they are fantastic in roguelikes where permadeath is present. You die a lot and starting from the beginning means you don't repeat the same dungeons. They're unique.
2. I dont see how that is material, we are talking about 'survial games' so whatever word you want to call that so that it doesnt get ungrouped from 'survial games' is fine
I can safely say that you are very likely the minority when you say you do not like procedural generation while exploring and here is why.
I have about 1000 hours in 7 days to die and likely about as many hours watching various videos, I can safely say that by a very large margin, procedural generation maps are more popular in that game then Navezgane map which is not procedural generated AND is very rich in content and well done.
I know the majority doesnt make it right, I am just offering perspective is all.
anyway, thanks for your observation.
but please consider if you do not consider survial games as a group then how can you have an opinion about survial games being one way or another when you consider them not a group to begin with?
its like saying 'I dont consider conservatives a group but I dont like how conservatives act' well you cant have both
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The problem with procedural generation as it stands today, is that it's too generic.
IMHO
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
are you aware that you answered the same question in different ways depending on if the subject was survial vs non-survial?
in the case of non-survial you answered the question very literally most likely knowing it was misleading.
in the case of survival you answered a question that I didnt even ask based on your own stick literalism.
would that be biased?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Just telling me it's a survival game tells me nothing other than I may have to keep an eye on a starvation bar/thirst meter.
If the main aim of survival games is to survive for as long as possible then that sort of includes most games I've played since the mid 80's.
you are making an assertion about aspects of survial games and yet you dont want to consider them a group. Maybe I am reading the conversation wrong here is what I read:
I'd like to add Procedurally Generated worlds to that list. The majority of them become vapid.
Read more at http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/469510/thoughts-on-the-prospects-of-the-survival-genre/p5#pvjIjTDTKUsjmRUX.99
The conversation flow suggests 'procedural generated world' in survial games because the person you responded to was talking about survival games.
is that just a communication misunderstanding?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
My view on procedural generation has nothing to do with survival.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
~~ postlarval ~~
Dev 2: “But that’s hard, expensive, and will take months. It’s really beyond our capabilities. And...we’ll make less money!”
Dev 1: “Well, what about a new sparkle pony in the store? Better yet, add it to a RNG box. It will distract most players enough so they won’t notice we’ve not really improved the game and we’ll make tons of cash.”
Dev 2: “Great idea! We can have it done in three days. Alert marketing.”
~~ postlarval ~~
For me:
Procedural generation in a survival game will not increase longevity. The entertainment value of the game play will define the longevity.
Why?
Because I have not yet witnessed a procedural generated world that wasn't "bland" "generic" and "repetitive"
Why?
Because currently (to the best of my knowledge) we are not capable of programming *imagination*
When a computer can have an *imagination* procedural worlds and procedural content might not be so bland and repetitive.
I love the premise of the survival genre. I don't want procedural generated worlds, I want big believable worlds.
The entertainment value of the game play and the AI will define the longevity. Repetitiveness will not help the longevity and will hurt the entertainment value.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I think less flame wars would start if we paused and tried to be a little more accurate in areas that it counts to ones core point
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me