Subnautica Build 39 Released - Subnautica
System
Join Date: 2013-01-29 Member: 182599Members, Super Administrators, Reinforced - Diamond
Join Date: 2013-01-29 Member: 182599Members, Super Administrators, Reinforced - Diamond
Subnautica Build 39 Released - Subnautica
Making games really is not that hard when compared to diving 128m down on a single breath. Since number 20, Subnautica builds have had names. This week’s build, 39, is called ‘Molchanov,’...
Comments
I stopped reading there!
Just kidding Hugh I'm sorry
I stoped reading there!......No?
I'll be going
Reason why I ask is I can spawn it in, and all I hear is a ping but the creature isn't there.
Hi.
Okay for some reason this was my fault. I didn't realize they were so small. I just started another game, and entered "spawn bleeder", and it did spawn, I heard the ping, then once I pulled back slightly I finally saw him off in the distance. He is a ugly little guy.
I have noticed that he doesn't do much at the moment. I spawned fifteen of them in one area, and tried to get them to suck on, but nothing. I also noticed that this little guy doesn't attach itself to other creatures. One more thing what is they natural habitat (outside of being underwater), caves?
Thanks for the reply. Sorry about false reporting there I thought they would be far bigger.... Cheers!
While the delivery is a little bit... off, I do agree with him about co-op. The only thing that I have been thinking while watching/playing/hearing about subnautica gameplay is "wouldn't this be the best with co-op". Seriously, as the game develops and we see more of it, the more I want to explore that world with a friend, or 2 friends or 3. I'm sure a lot of people agree with me.
Adding multiplayer support would be huge undertaking that would require us to devote substantial (certainly the majority of) engineering resources for a significant proportion of the game's entire development timeframe. It would probably require the cancellation of not just one, but several other components. Perhaps Subnautica would still be fun without submarines. But would it be fun without submarines, creatures, and terraforming, and more? What would be left behind once multiplayer had finished gobbling up time, money, and talent?
There are many amazing single player games. There are many amazing multiplayer games. Not every game has to have single player, and not every game needs to have multiplayer. If adding multiplayer means removing much of the experience that makes Subnautica unique, fun, and engaging, then adding multiplayer doesn't seem to be a good decision.
I'm sure it will take a couple of years ( or maybe not) to get a final, but who says it will stop there?
Also, I am wondering if you will allow for Mods?
Reason for my asking this is that modders out there may very well find a way to craft a frontend client or a go between. I have seen this for a couple of games out there that never supported multiplayer, and work pretty well.
Cheers.
I support this decision, competitive online games can be fun, but I've always had more fun in singleplayer games.
Fair enough, you guys are probably already have most of the timeframe of development laid out or something based on the way you are budgeting resources so heavily but still, I wasn't talking about competitive multiplayer, its literally just singleplayer with someone able to drop into your world.
I would actually like to hear about how it could be done from an engineering standpoint. I really do understand that it would be a significant path that takes resources and would potentially cut other features. To build a framework, a menu, potentially new animations for 3rd person view etc yeah, its a lot of work. However, look at Fable, Saints Row or look at any of the Lego games! Those are purely singleplayer games that give you the option of playing with a friend, its done well, but its not intrusive. Its additive.
People saying here that there are a lack of singleplayer games you are right, however, co-op doesn't stop that. There is an argument here that there aren't enough good co-op games out there as well.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that your response makes me slightly disappointed because I don't want to see a game with such potential that comes out half finished with the promise of more features coming after launch.
I've even gone to the extent of playing the game with another earliest access buyer over mumble to experience the game together. But as you can imagine it's not the same as being in the game.
Don't get me wrong - I am a very big fan of single player games that are strictly single player only. Each of these sp games usually involve an experience that is unique to the player. But the game mechanics in subnautica - exploration, crafting, survival - all of these key design features lend themselves to a shared experience. This is a seriously good looking game, even in this early phase of development - how awesome it would be to share these experiences with just one other person.
As sebb said above, there are a multitude of games that have done coop over the years correctly in an additive manner. I don't think anyone here is strictly looking for a multiplayer mode - that would be unfeasible. However, in my mind a limited coop mode would not compromise the values of the single player experience that subnautica is trying to achieve. The idea behind such a coop mode would not be to slice and dice the ocean together or a have competitive mode to see who can build the biggest submarine the fastest - it would be a mode to facilitate shared experiences, a means for people to interact and share the joy of playing your game together.
I can't speak for what is possible in unity and what is possible in terms of coding, but can a peer to peer experience (without dedicated servers) be achieved in the engine, and how much effort would it require?
Also another idea - if a 2nd diver/human character is not desired from a design point of view - what if as a compromise the 2nd coop player inhabited a mechanical device? like a small robot orb/spectator entity that follows the diver around? In this manner, you could kill two birds with one stone.
That's kind of the point to our stance: we're *not* promising multiplayer. If co-op is an essential feature to you, then please do NOT buy the game or recommend it to friends. We've seen other Early Access projects crash and burn, leaving disappointed and rightfully angry paying customers. We don't want to put ourselves - or any customer - in this position.
Anything's possible in the future, so I'd recommend signing up for our mailing list and/or following the game on Steam. But until multiplayer's actually in there, assume it is not and do not buy.
What Steve and Hugh, and I guess me, now, are trying to convey is that there is so much else that is absolutely essential to add to the game, before multiplayer, so we're just trying to be up front that you should not expect it to happen - for release, or possibly at all. Would we be sad if it didn't make it in. Probably a bit. But I can say we'd be happier having a single player game that has a world filled with lots of interesting creatures and plantlife which can be interacted with, in a variety of different fun ways, over an emptier world with not much to do or interact with that you can explore with a friend.