Subnautica vs No Man's Sky

CoranthCoranth Join Date: 2015-06-02 Member: 205160Members Posts: 719 Advanced user
1. WORLD
Subnautica: Hand-crafted single world, planet 4546-B; no deformable Terrain (though this used to be in, it was removed for optimization purposes), but everything hand-placed, unique Biomes filled with even more unique creatures.

No Man's Sky: Massive universe, something like 18 quintilian planets but it's procedurally generated by an algorithm; lifeforms are also procedurally generated.


2. LIFE
No Man's Sky: Species in No Man's Sky are procedurally-generated, and can be affected by a number of factors such as the player, surrounding area, environment, or location. Plant lifeforms can range from the purple bio-luminescent mushrooms showcased on Sayall, to the green grass and trees of New Ventu, while creatures include both the towering Daplokarus and the small fish-like Ictaloris Alus. All flora and fauna in the game is mathematically generated using a series of algorithms, rather than being individually designed. Fauna can be fed to befriend them. The food needed to befriend an animal varies by species, but is usually easy to obtain on their native planet. Befriended animals have a smiley-face icon. Befriended fauna will occasionally give you gifts of a small amount of a neutral element or point out interesting features. Fauna can also be killed to obtain resources, and can be scanned after they've been killed. Hostile, aggressive fauna that are near the player are indicated by a red paw icon; they will attack and try kill the player when in range.

Subnautica: Species in Subnautica are not procedurally-generated; instead each Biome contains its own distinct flora and fauna. Plant lifeforms can range from the purple bio-luminescent acid mushrooms in the Safe Shallows, to the massive Creepvines of the Kelp Forest, to the odd Ming and Bulbo Trees of the Floating Island, while creatures include both the fearsome Reaper Leviathan and the small Peeper fish. Some fauna - the Stalker - can be fed to befriend them; they will reward you with Scrap that can be turned into Titanium. The animals are not 'deliberately' hostile; it doesn't 'feel' gamey; Stalkers - for example - will go after you, but they'll go after anything they see as prey, and will give up after a while. Bonesharks are highly aggressive and will bang on your Seamoth. The Rabbit Rays are friendly and will (at some point) be able to take things from your hand like the Stalkers. We will be getting a Cutefish pet that we can interact with.

3. MARKETING
No Man's Sky: Epic fail. No Man's Sky was hyped up and then Hello Games didn't deliver. They weren't open with their customers and in the end a lot of things were cut. Failed dreams and broken promises. Feels like an alpha.

Subnautica: Friendly, open community. The developers of the game often chime in with what's going on / what they're doing, etc. We can have some influence on how the game is developed (oxygen tanks fiasco?) and the devs may or may not change things based on what we like or don't. Feedback on bugs and issues can be given from inside the game itself, and there is a HUGE Trello, a board where everything that's being worked on is displayed openly for our perusal. Playtesters from this community frequent the Trello to report bugs and issues. The devs are awesome, friendly, and so open with us it's uber-cool; they even gave us a video tour of where they went on vacation!

The game is in Early Access with two branches - experimental and stable - and if something is going to be cut the Devs clearly explain why (terraforming?) The game - even without story - is playable, though there are of course bugs if you go experimental.


Uhhh... anyone else want to add to this?
Enderguy059Nautical_Nickdargan012yomamaDigliKyman201nitay1998SansTheSkelebroHYBRID1313Gourmet_Guysabin77
«1

Comments

  • angiolettiangioletti malaga Join Date: 2016-08-27 Member: 221757Members Posts: 1
    but none have multiplayer
  • CyionCyion London, ON Join Date: 2016-04-04 Member: 215334Members Posts: 56 Advanced user
    I have both and have more fun playing Subnautica. I find No Man's Sky to be too repetitive, if you see 1 km squared of a planet, you've seen the whole planet. I've put in many hours into both, and I find NMS gets annoying at times and I need to take breaks from it because of the repetition you find in grinding to increase your ship, exosuit, and multi-tool slots.
    nitay1998
  • dealwithitdogdealwithitdog Texas Join Date: 2016-06-09 Member: 218343Members Posts: 814 Advanced user
    Cyion wrote: »
    I have both and have more fun playing Subnautica. I find No Man's Sky to be too repetitive, if you see 1 km squared of a planet, you've seen the whole planet. I've put in many hours into both, and I find NMS gets annoying at times and I need to take breaks from it because of the repetition you find in grinding to increase your ship, exosuit, and multi-tool slots.

    That and the ending of NMS literally just resets your game.
  • CoranthCoranth Join Date: 2015-06-02 Member: 205160Members Posts: 719 Advanced user
    edited September 2016
    That and the ending of NMS literally just resets your game.

    Oh my god I know; I saw that on Youtube! What a crock! Subnautica will actually have an ending, and we know what's involved in it. One other thing I can add is the near-instant fixing of show-stopper bugs by the Devs. Once Subnautica crashed with an Access Violation at a certain place. I told the Devs about the problem and emailed the logs, and roughly a day or so later they put out a fix!

    Top class!
  • LonnehartLonnehart Guam Join Date: 2016-06-20 Member: 218816Members Posts: 345 Advanced user
    edited September 2016
    I guess I'll add in my two peepers.

    No Man's Sky is nothing but a planet hopping romp. You land, scan, take off, occasionally upgrade yoru ship, rinse and repeat. Even worse is how the science is off. Every planet you set foot on is a one biome world, and when you explore enough of those (especially because survival is easy) the game becomes boring...

    Subnautica is only one planet, but it has quite a few biomes to explore. It makes you learn to survive the planet first (listening and watching the wildlife so you know which are dangerous or edible), with exploration being the reward for setting yourself up well. And while you don't get to pilot a space ship, you get the awesome Cyclops...

    Oh... and unlike No Man's Sky, where the developers were all secretive about their game then charging the AAA price for it, the devs for Subnautica put their game out for others to try while still developing it, and they do listen to players (makes me remember the mess that was Starwars Galaxies, where the devs banned players for speaking out against their game)... And all this for $20 (U.S.). :)
  • EnglishInfidelEnglishInfidel Canada Join Date: 2016-07-04 Member: 219533Members Posts: 676 Advanced user
    The thing that gets me about No Man's Sky is that so many people were excited by the hype and then let down.

    I remember seeing it so long ago and they were promising so much, but even what they promised didn't seem that different from other games. Even if they delivered all they promised it still wouldn't have been as good as a heavily modded X3.

    Okay so you could land on planets, but they looked boring and lifeless, despite being full of alien life.
    I don't know, it always felt like the only thing it had was the procedural generation gimmick, and I was really surprised so many people thought it looked exciting. I felt like it was lots of console gamers who'd never experienced a game with the scope and depth of the X series, who didn't realise that relatively little-known games were breaking new ground on the PC every year, and the boundaries they thought were in place had actually been pushed back a couple of miles while they were playing with their game pads.

    I'm not trying to be PC master race either, just saying how it felt to me.
    yomama
  • LT_WeirdoLT_Weirdo norway Join Date: 2016-08-31 Member: 221923Members Posts: 4
    how is this even a question?
    i know it has nothing to do with the quality of NMS but when devs have to lie and scam you into buying a game, chances are it's not good. also can someone tell me why they sell NMS at 60 bucks, meanwhile subnautica can be across the board a better game at one third the price?
    add on top of that, NMS is a "complete" game while subnautica is early access, like srsly why is this even a question ^^
  • Enderguy059Enderguy059 Australia Join Date: 2015-10-15 Member: 208486Members Posts: 626 Advanced user
    edited September 2016
    Threatening predators.

    NMS:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qrUkSPO4Uk

    I.E. Cookiecutter critters who have short attention spans, look ridiculous, ignore you when being shot, fall to less than a clip and will only attack when you get close.

    SN:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZOwy72_3RM

    I.E. Among other smaller creatures, a f*&king massive eel-shark that can tear your subs to shreds, give you nightmares and paranoia even when you're experienced with circumventing them, are practically invincible, and when they're pissed? THEY WILL HUNT YOU DOWN!!!.
    Politics are... pretty terrible.
    I mean, they always seem to get people into fights and encourage irrational behaviour.
    I'm fine with making a compromise and sticking to the middle road, thanks.
    RezcaHYBRID1313Gourmet_Guy
  • Nautical_NickNautical_Nick Australia Join Date: 2016-06-12 Member: 218444Members Posts: 804 Advanced user
    I like NMS and SN both. Yes, NMS does lack in variety and experience that SN makes up for but NMS does deserve credit where its due. It has literally 18 QUINTILIAN planets that are all procedurally generated with different weather patterns and creatures. Also @Enderguy059, In the last 3 seconds of the SN video these were my thoughts:
    Oh no his seamoth broke near a REAPER!
    Than You Know You're screwed
    #SAVETHEROCKPUNCHER
    Theorist, 2nd in Command of the PH/SP Warper Forces, Gamer!
  • LonnehartLonnehart Guam Join Date: 2016-06-20 Member: 218816Members Posts: 345 Advanced user
    edited September 2016
    I have yet to see anything in No Man's Sky that's on par with the Reaper Leviathan. Let's put it this way... the thing scares me even when I'm in CREATIVE mode...

    Thank you, Unknown Words Entertainment. You gave us a moster more terrifying than Mass Effect's Reapers or Resident Evil's mutant monstrosities...
    DagothUrRezcaGourmet_Guy
  • SidchickenSidchicken Plumbing the subnautican depths Join Date: 2016-02-16 Member: 213125Members Posts: 1,005 Advanced user
    LT_Weirdo wrote: »
    can someone tell me why they sell NMS at 60 bucks, meanwhile subnautica can be across the board a better game at one third the price?

    I'll just refer you to the post I made 3 above yours, which sums up why I feel this is so.
    “In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”
    ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands, Hoogezand Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue Posts: 15,780 Advanced user
    Meanwhile back in 2010, great now I'm sad. Good job peeps!!!

    Guardian of the "magic cookiejar" AdminModerator

    Existence Unknown

    Retired forum Admin, I mostly used a flamethrower tank for disputes... Mostly
    Retired EUPT Deputy | Moral Support | Squad 5 Blue
    102 1HP Skulk escapes and counting | Play the Latest Version of Booster Z-Frame
    YouTube NS2 Playlists: Unusual Selection | NS2 Stuff | NS2PT | NS2 Tuts

  • RequiemfangRequiemfang Join Date: 2015-02-22 Member: 201492Members Posts: 629 Advanced user
    Kouji_San wrote: »
    Meanwhile back in 2010, great now I'm sad. Good job peeps!!!

    God I remember that game... I haven't checked on it in a while but I since gave up on it ever seeing the light of day.
    Kouji_San
  • FathomFathom Earth Join Date: 2016-07-01 Member: 219405Members Posts: 614 Advanced user
    No Man's Sky is the epitome of a Stochastic Scam™, where they multiply variable tables with each other until they have a huge number to wave around with while doing absolutely no aimed design with it. Games that try to boast with huge numbers of 'unique' monsters, weapons or character builds are trying to fool you.

    What's more disheartening that garbage like this being produced is that people haven't wizened up and still buy content deprived games hyped up to be the new sliced bread. By doing that, they proof to publishers and developers they don't need to create games with compelling game design but instead can rely on hype and pre-orders to make a profit.

    And that's the difference between No Man's Sky and Subnautica: Unknownworlds is focusing on game design, not hype. They are adding content, not promising it. They are transparent in their work, not trying to obfuscate failures, make excuses or straight up censor criticism.
    Enderguy059
  • TetrapodTetrapod Wastelands of California Join Date: 2016-08-04 Member: 220973Members Posts: 32 Fully active user
    I really believe procedural content has a place as long as you put depth into it; that is if you have a creature it not only has random parts but a random persona with an AI that meshes with that persona and that it interacts with the biome it "lives" in.
    Currently I see games where procendural is used as disassociated parts; monster, plants and land. In the real world the environment influences the plants and the animals. The plant isn't growing on that by chance, it's evolved to grow in that weather, that amount of light and that type of terrain. The animal that eats it has evolved the ability to locate it and consume it as well is survive in the conditions that plants grows in. The same follows with predators (technically the plant/herbivore is predator/prey).

    This isn't to say this isn't done correct in Subnautica as well as other games but when a human places something in the environment there's some extra thought; conscious or not behind it.

    Of course with games you need only have the illusion that it fits that it belongs there. You can cheat by making it aggresive that people less about why its there and more along the lines of "Uhhh yikes, that *thing* is there!" like say a Reaper Leviathin or a Fallout Deathclaw. Neither really makes sense but they're intimidating so you stop worrying about function.

    Kinda like why FPS monsters get away with existing. Aggresive threats and energy gives you less time to think about the surroundings so devs can cheat since hey exploration isn't the goal so much. Kinda of like a painting, you can blur out the background since the creature is the subject matter.
  • stateofpsychosisstateofpsychosis Canada Join Date: 2016-09-06 Member: 222112Members Posts: 51 Fully active user
    I like subnautica better. I was really excited about No Man's Sky but I got bored really fast after getting so far into it. It's ironic that you can make a game with that many planets in it and it end up being completely boring because of the repetitive gameplay. Maybe that's just my experience though. You know what all of these types of games would benefit from though? letting people mod stuff. You can never get bored with it if users themselves become the content creators because then there are no limits. When GTA killed the mods, I stopped playing it entirely for example.
    Jool
  • OsydiusOsydius France Join Date: 2015-09-19 Member: 208031Members Posts: 56 Fully active user
    edited September 2016
    I feel people are being way too harsh on NMS. The only real issue with the game is that people clearly overhyped it, which can only lead to disappointment, and the price is too high, which is however probably justified by the fact that it came out on hard format.

    Yes there are missing features but most of them are trivial (like landing on asteroid, radio chatter, etc.). Some people also expected things that we knew since long ago would not be there at launch (multiplayer). Sure, there are valid complaints (ship classes, faction wars,, etc) but it's not like most of them could not have been forseen (it's an indie game after all).

    Like the lack of planet variation for instance. That was clearly to be expected. The game is procedurally generated. That means that sand planets or ice planets, while they exist, are an extreme situation, and that the vast majority of the 18 quintillions planets are not going to be one of those extremes, but something in between. By definition too, procedural generation means you can be unlucky and get 5 planets in a row which are fairly identical, or be lucky and, like me, get 5 planets in a row which are each unique.

    And it's not true when they say that going on more difficult planets is not rewarding so why bother. I for instance found a planet with very hostile sentries and very harsh climate, but where I could find "Gravitino Ball" lying all around. I made 500K in 30 min. And with this climate, there are very few animals leaving there, meaning it's easier to scan them all and get a bonus 200K.

    On combat, it was clear from the beginning that it would be pretty crappy, because that game has not been designed as a FPS or a flight simulator. Yes, fighting and flying are part of it but even from the look of the gameplay videos from way back, it was clear it was going to be secondary. Look at how Star Citizen is struggling to do the same with 100 million $ budget and hundreds of people.

    Maybe it's because I watched a lot of Sean Murray's interviews but I feel like the final product is very close to what I had in mind. As soon as I saw the first interview and gameplay, I thought "Ok, this is going to be like "Out There" but in 3D", and that's exactly what it is (so kuddos to me I guess).

    Sure, it's going to get boring after a while but aren't all solo games the same ? I've seen players complain even though they had +40 hours of gameplay clocked in... it hardly seems fair.

    Bottom line is: if this game had popped up suddenly on Steam for 20$, it would instantly have become the game of the year. but because of the hype and people expecting way more of it than possible for a 15 people team, some executive saw this as an opportunity to make big bucks and decided to increase marketing, thus increasing the hype, and jack the price up to meet expectation even though it was impossible to live up to people's dream. Everybody should have seen this coming (and many did).

    The only good news is that the small team of Hello Games is now loaded and will be able to improve the game like crazy. I'm betting you that one year from now, while you're cruising space in a freight ship with your VR googles on, you'll be glad you bought it.

    DrownedOutCoranth
  • TetrapodTetrapod Wastelands of California Join Date: 2016-08-04 Member: 220973Members Posts: 32 Fully active user
    ...and I'll wait until its $20 and loaded with all those features. :)
    RezcaGourmet_Guy
  • HerugrimHerugrim The Poconos Join Date: 2016-08-15 Member: 221402Members Posts: 127 Advanced user
    I was hoping No Man's Sky was Subnautica in space, but I didn't like the way Sean Murray did interviews, he tried very hard to say and show nothing so figured there was nothing to it and I was right.

    Which is a shame because if the game was cheaper even with its flaws I would have bought it and probably enjoyed it at least a little, but the game is not worth the money.
  • TenebrousNovaTenebrousNova England Join Date: 2015-12-23 Member: 210206Members Posts: 641 Advanced user
    You know that a game has problems when Steam has to post a little disclaimer notice about refunds on the store page.
    Rezca
  • yomamayomama On the freeway Join Date: 2016-04-17 Member: 215861Members Posts: 302 Advanced user
    You know...my son was jazzed about NMS months ago, so I went and watched a trailer, video or something and had the same thought people have expressed here after actually playing: under the thin veneer of "wow, look at that" it suffers from being shallow and repetitive. Great, another cave/water/jungle world.

    Another comparison...SN will run on my old Toshiba with integrated graphics. NMS probably won't, and I'm not willing to spend $60 rolling THOSE dice.
  • TarkannenTarkannen North Carolina Join Date: 2016-08-15 Member: 221304Members Posts: 669 Advanced user
    edited September 2016
    Comparing the two games reminds me in a way of Final Fantasy XI vs XIV. XI is over 14 years old while XIV is at most, 5 years old. They are both MMO games, but XIV is the newer of the two, with slicker graphics, better mechanics and more modern RPG conveniences. XI's maps are spread out over multiple zones that have to be loaded every time you change areas. XIV's original 1.0 had only 8 zones but they were massive to travel; you could run in one direction for 20 minutes before reaching a wall or obstruction. The problem with this was that map design and layout was dull and repetitive; while XI maps were smaller they were more interesting and unique. XIV's 1.0 launch and lifespan did not fare well, when they relaunched it a year later to 2.0, they dropped some of the newer ideas and adhered to the older and arguably better loved gameplay design of XI.

    No Man's Sky is not a bad game itself, but I think its developers reached too far and caused alot of grief with their playerbase. To me Subnautica is honest with its approach: A simple game that's fun and immersive, and lives up to most people's expectations that the development team of UWE have put forth so far.
    Sidchicken wrote: »
    I'd bet that Subnautica will not be $20 when it's done... and IMO it shouldn't be. With new games typically retailing at $60 these days, there's no reason for the devs to sell cheap for a quality product they've put all this time and effort into. We all got it at $20, but we have to deal with all the bugs during the development process, and we provide the devs with essentially free playtesting, while also helping to fund the development with that $20. So it's a win-win - we get an awesome game cheap, they get the funds and the feedback. But when it's all done and polished, I expect the game will be at least $40, and if it's only $40, then I think it'd be a great bargain.

    I've wondered about this myself, a game this polished and fun (in pre-release no less!) won't retail for $20 for sure. I kinda hope that players who bought into early access can get a small discount when the game launches, or some kind of bonus content for supporting the game. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely buying it regardless when it launches, as it has been a wonderful experience and money well spent.

    P.S. I know there's a Cutefish pet bonus coming for Early Access players. :p
    Like my avatar? She's Jane, she's cute and she's awesome! She comes from the webcomic Nerf NOW!! created by Jo Pereira, and you should go check it out right NOW!!
    Rezca
  • Monk429Monk429 Join Date: 2015-12-30 Member: 210626Members Posts: 7 Fully active user
    edited September 2016
    My issue with NMS mostly has to do with the relative safety of it all. There are no moments where you think, "Oh crud, I've gotten myself into a situation where there is only one, very risky way to survive"...you know, like blacking out as you race back to the Cyclops when 1000m deep. The screen goes dark and you just hope that you hit the hatch in time.

    Whereas in NMS you can't crash your ship no matter how much of a doofus you are when speeding over the terrain.
    yomama
  • CoranthCoranth Join Date: 2015-06-02 Member: 205160Members Posts: 719 Advanced user
    edited September 2016
    Tarkannen wrote: »
    Sidchicken wrote: »
    I'd bet that Subnautica will not be $20 when it's done... and IMO it shouldn't be. With new games typically retailing at $60 these days, there's no reason for the devs to sell cheap for a quality product they've put all this time and effort into. We all got it at $20, but we have to deal with all the bugs during the development process, and we provide the devs with essentially free playtesting, while also helping to fund the development with that $20. So it's a win-win - we get an awesome game cheap, they get the funds and the feedback. But when it's all done and polished, I expect the game will be at least $40, and if it's only $40, then I think it'd be a great bargain.

    I've wondered about this myself, a game this polished and fun (in pre-release no less!) won't retail for $20 for sure. I kinda hope that players who bought into early access can get a small discount when the game launches, or some kind of bonus content for supporting the game. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely buying it regardless when it launches, as it has been a wonderful experience and money well spent.

    P.S. I know there's a Cutefish pet bonus coming for Early Access players, but that's not really what I'm talking about.

    If you got it in Early Access you don't need to "re-buy" the Game when it releases; you have it; it's yours forever, and that's a steal!
    yomamaRezcasubnauticambrianGourmet_Guy
Sign In or Register to comment.