Is There a Structure Emerging?

[periurban]

New to the forum, so forgive me if this is already old hat.

I was thinking about the designations and codes on the Atlas passes, the apparently staggered delivery, and the fact that certain prominent members of the community have yet to get theirs.

This looks to me like structure, something happening. I know from my time developing board and card games, and from my process re-engineering days that when you see structures like this they indicate something happening elsewhere, and you need to dig deeper (or just wait!)

If you are up for a bit of speculation I might suggest that perhaps we are seeing the beginnings of an attempt to differentiate the community, perhaps for the purpose of running several puzzles at once, maybe in competition? Perhaps the universe of NMS is about to become a bit more interesting.

I believe there are real issues with multiplayer in the NMS engine. I truly believe it is naive to expect player avatars moving over the surfaces of planets. It’s not impossible, but from the tech talks I’ve seen the guys give I would imagine it would require a huge amount of investment to get the engine to do that much work.

But how about HG takes advantage of the hard core community (you guys - I don’t count myself yet) to create factions or guilds who compete gently to discover and describe the universe? There would be no PvP or even PmP, but there would be a sense of belonging to a collective effort.

BUT, if this idea is correct then it means resetting the universe to get a fresh and equal start, which would explain the references to that kind of thing in the first part of WT.

Does that sound crazy? I’m just speculating here on what HG can do that doesn’t involve a near impossible overhaul of the engine.

I’d love to know what you think.

[frozenbullet7]

First off I would like to say… Welcome to the Forum @periurban ! This sounds like a very interesting theory. To put other characters in your world would present a lot of problems, specifically Trolling players and maybe rendering discrepancies from player to player not to mention lag and I agree the designations and their differences are puzzling. I could see multiplayer in NMS evolving into something like factions or guilds as you describe and perhaps giving us the opportunity to give out or own missions? Create a trading opportunity or a combination of both for example, get me x amount of Liquid Glass for X amount of credits or items. I really have to agree with you that the designations seem to have significance . The questions, participation, time playing NMS may all factor in to our specific Classes. I am interested in how a competition environment would work. Thanks for opening up this topic, interested in the responses of others.

[Polyphemus]

I tend to agree with much of what you say. Have a look at the latest memo from Waking Titan (this is probably a higher resolution than you’ve seen before). You need to click on it to enlarge it.

The first censored word in the main text is clearly “support”. The second is unclear at the start, but appears to be “ge?? support”.

So far, we’re not organised into ge?? support groups, nor do we have personnel coordinators. But it’s clearly something that’s coming.

I suspect that, at least in the first instance, this will relate to the ARG, rather than the game. But in the future, who can tell?

[sheralmyst]

could that be peer support groups?

[Polyphemus]

I believe you’ve got it!

[sheralmyst]

…

[Polyphemus]

Thanks to @sheralmyst, the censored text now appears to read “As always, don’t hesitate to reach out to your personnel coordinator if you are in need of support. We are also in the process of organising peer support groups for this purpose.”

We already know from Alice & Smith that our CSD designations are intended to mix us into communities that would not normally group together.

There is indeed a pattern emerging.

[Mad-Hatter]

My impression was the same.
Tinfoil speculation incoming:
It feels as if we will be separated by our designations & emailed instructions or puzzle pieces that differ from the other designations. (Perhaps it is via this email we no-Atlas-Pass-peasants will recieve our non-physical, digital pass too)
We will then need to interact with others of the same designation to put our puzzles together. Perhaps we will simply need to access a website to enter a similar code puzzle-piece similar to the one that revealed a picture in the earlier WT or maybe we will actually need to solve things by working together.
I could imagine us being expected to sift through pictures of wind chimes and bells identifying who sent what so that something attached to them can be allocated to form a new clue.

I’m expecting this to drag on too. The amount of work involved to coordinate and tie stuff together must be masive. Looking forward to it.

[Dolnor]

I think it says “gear support”. You can plainly see the ge and the next letter looks like a deformed a. The letter after looks like a mangled r. Hopefully it is gear support because may involve real-life items! -)

TQQdles™

[DevilinPixy]

Just to verify, it does say ‘peer support’, as I have personally asked Cougar, who received the document, to take a good close look at it for me right after the live drop in NY.

The new memo, shows us two new abbreviations, WR and CR, which are both clearly separated from the others we know to be referencing the websites left. Reason for them being separated could be new websites of course, but it would not amaze me if they have a different meaning. The top right part appears to be set up like a table, making it a left and a right side, almost indicating these new abbreviations to go together with ‘Under Preparation’ and ‘On Schedule’. Only thing I can thus far conclude from this, is they will only be explained once preparation has finished and scheduled for whatever comes next. I’d like to speculate on possible other meanings for these shorts.

I’d love to speculate how the ARG is going to tie in with the next No Man’s Sky content update. It appears very clear that we as Citizen Scientists are being categorized, based on skills and preferences. The Atlas foundation reached out to us for help, while Emily is doing the hard work, based on our collective data. We started out as a single solving group, with in my opinion somewhat poor results. The Atlas foundation decided on a way to improve our efforts, resulting in the designations we received. This way, more accurate and focused research should improve the results required. Collecting our data and categorising us, was a first step, the CSD was born. The next step is currently ongoing, finalizing the assignment, making it official and most of all, identifiable, the Atlas passes.

There is a lot to speculate about these designations, as the Atlas foundation has never been clear about their specific meaning, although in general we understand. Such a mass scale printing and distribution, is another thing. I am sure it will not help us figure out the specific meaning of our designations, but the collected data perfectly shows how big of an effort it is. It does however clearly show two designations currently missing. Either this is the result of how batches have been printed last, to be sent out later, or there is more weight to them for whatever reason. We can only guess and considering the world wide distribution, we have to be patient for a couple of weeks at least. I personally believe they will eventually arrive, but may very well be tied into the ARG in some way.

So how does this all tie in with No Man’s Sky and the update to come? Well, … obviously lots of discussion about possible multiplayer in a wide variety of ways. Yes, I think it may very well be hints to multiplayer, but in my opinion not in a way most expect multiplayer to be. I find a more ‘classic’ implementation of multiplayer highly unlikely. The game has so far not been made for this and would require a complete overhaul to even make this possible. Not to mention all the possible implications that come with it. Worlds would have to become persistent for a big part and would require syncing with every client connected. This would have a huge impact on performance, not even considering implications with the backend like Steam p2p and PS4. I won’t go into details, but trust me, it is not an easy task to accomplish full blown multiplayer, if at all possible or worth the risk of such a massive change.

If there is some sort of multiplayer planned, it would be quite different from what most expect or want it to be. Sure enough some things can be ‘synced’ and some improvements can be made here and there. I think, and many will likely agree, that NMS doesn’t mind being ‘different’ and I would not be amazed to see a creative alternative way of implementing multiplayer. Something that fits the lore, as it has so far shown as well. Orbs for players make perfect sense in a way. I think this is where the ARG comes in as well, preparing us for whatever comes next, possibly an interesting form of multiplayer or something matching being a Citizen Scientist with a variety of designations.

Edit/addition:
Just speculating, but I can imagine discoveries, tasks, quests, or even a market/trade to tie in with our CSD designations or coop/multiplayer within NMS. Not to say we would be stuck with a ‘designation’ in game, but more like a choice depending on play style and preferences. Such implementation does not necessarily require syncing clients with performance impact. It would allow to expand on player interaction, only by additional data being stored.

[Mad-Hatter]

@DevilinPixy

Orbs for players make perfect sense in a way

@DevilinPixy
Totally agree. From a code point of view, do you think it will be possible to see other’s ships given the current platform?

[Polyphemus]

Interesting that CR as in the printer command “carriage return” was one of the results from the Google infinity mirrors page.

[DevilinPixy]

Let me be clear in saying that nothing is impossible. I have just not seen any indication of plans for full blown multiplayer with server client-side synced persistent worlds. Sure they can make a choice to do this for some things, like they have done with player position being shown as an orb. The same is possible to do with a player’s ship. It’s just that the more you wish to sync, the more of an impact it will have. This will additionally start to create further expectations as well, due to the fact so many are screaming out loud for wanting it to become full-blown.

I understand those wishes though, don’t get me wrong, and I would love to see it as well. I just don’t think it is feasible to expect considering the limitations, changes required, and performance impact. With a game that is heavily PCG, it makes it even more complicated. I even understand the wish for PvP, although I am personally not a big fan of it and should be optional. Implementing PvP in itself involves a lot of required changes, making it unlikely to be implemented. I can see NMS stick with easier to accomplish ways.

So my answer is yes, but in my opinion unlikely. It would be more likely to see them adding our ships to a database, to then be able to view them, maybe even trade or customise.

[Mad-Hatter]

Interesting.
I was envisioning ghostly glowy holograpgic type ships instead of a different coloured orb. Not interactive in any way but just enough to see what our guest is piloting. Sort of increasing things visually but not by a lot in the way a full textured ship would appear.

[DevilinPixy]

I don’t intend to stop anyone from wishing. I have my wishes as well, but I can understand the complications that come with it. Having just coordinates synced with an animated sphere showing, is of course easier than showing an actual person, which would then require additional orientation added, and higher accuracy, for example. There are many ways to consider and I am sure HG does so and no doubt will we see improvements over time. I am sure Sean has a dream, same as we all do, and we should all chase them. So I sure hope to one day see all our wishes come true.

[DarthTrethon]

Now I’m fine with universe resets as we’ve seen before but would not be OK if forced to throw away my current save and progress in terms of owned tech, units, ships and so on. Planets i can move, bases I can rebuild, those things I’m generally fine with.

Now in terms of what larger system all these passes and ARG may be leading to I’m not sure…you probably have a far better idea than I would since you’ve worked on stuff like tabletop games and such. The only thing I really hope here is that they don’t take a ham handed approach to try to force multiplayer and cooperation. I don’t like when too much progress is locked behind doing stuff with others and hope they keep things the way they have been where with sufficient know-how everyone can do everything by themselves.

I’ve played this game a lot…PSN tracked me at over 785 hours in 2017 alone, with undoubtedly a few hundred in 2016 and absolutely love the current formula for the game. Sharing coordinates or simply exploring via portals is fun but by no means critical to finding anything.

The ARG is awesome and looking forward to future updates in this fashion as well as doing puzzles for a few bits of early info like screenshots and art of what’s coming. My hopes for the game going forward are three main things: freighter revamp(more tech, allow them to have 48 slots again, and far larger docking bays so my extremely long exotic ship doesn’t have a giant fin half clipping into the ceiling), space station revamp(they’re all mostly identical on the inside, more varied layouts, more functionalities spread between them, etc.) and in-game atlas pass functionality revamp(the passes don’t do very much in game, I’d like to see them unlock more meaningful stuff like story quests, possibly more elite and rewarding quests, possibly even ships and tech and so on, give them weight, make them feel more Elite the higher pass level you have).

[MasaqDJ]

The 4th race. The travellers. We are all travellers, no? Wild speculation, not even sure if this is currently possible with games current engine - instead of allowing us to ‘customise’ our appearance to other players. How about a procedurally generated traveller, unique to you. Other people can see you, but as its run through the PCG process, it would be a PCG unique traveller iteration. Taking it a stage further, you could even PCG unique bonuses or skills the same as the PCG ship or multi tool bonuses. Each player has a unique traveller player model with its own unique skills and statistics. Obviously this would lean on the PCG side of things quite heavily. The reason I think this may be possible is that HG used their own engine for the game, so have full access to the source code. Sean himself virtually built the engine in his spare time anyway, so if anyone knows what’s possible, he does. Plus with Innes McKendrick’s PCG skills, is this possible? Maybe. This is how I would like to see player models implemented, as for full on PvP? Not so sure if the game hardware (PS4) can handle that kind of extra load. This is just my take on things, I would love to hear your thoughts.

[DarthTrethon]

The game runs fine and fairly smooth on PS4 as is…I’ve heard and seen more issues with the game being a power sink on PC…plus given the game’s full release was about a year and a half ago they can’t exactly change the systems requirements or even lock content behind higher specifications. They can’t just turn and tell a bunch of people who bought the game at full price day one or even collectors’ editions that “ok y’all can no longer play this game until you upgrade or get a better PC than the specifications we told you you’d need when you bought the game”. But even assuming that power of any hardware was a non-issue there’s still serious questions about whether the game’s engine can handle full on multiplayer and all the other things people want…I think it’s not likely at all that it can and I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect them to add this stuff.

[kerdorin]

@periurban

If you are up for a bit of speculation I might suggest that perhaps we are seeing the beginnings of an attempt to differentiate the community, perhaps for the purpose of running several puzzles at once, maybe in competition?

Hi and welcome
the exact words of Anashel (A&S member) are:
“not to divide, but groupe different profile that would not normally group. In part.”

so i don’t thing it’s a question of competition or to “differentiate” CSD members. Well, the “in part” at the end shows us that’s not the only point of these designations, there is, one more time, something more we have to discover.
Right now, we only know there are 8 different designations (% are from Project Plutchik rounded up/down))
16-A (38%)
L-15 (27%)
G-19 (10%)
HG-16 (9%)
WT-01 (7%)
AWK (4%)
PB-16 (4%)
PT-16 (1%)

With 10.000 Atlas V4 we’d have 3800 16-A and only 100 PT-16 so it’s hard to imagine a “competition” or such things

[Waldo3000]

It’s interesting that the Project Plutchik link above for the CSD designations does not seem to match the percentages of Atlas Pass 4’s actually shipped. According to this spreadsheet, no one has received any PB-16 or PT16, for example.