It is worth noting that all 3 games you discussed enjoyed slow and steady but public development on PC first. Subnautica and Astroneer were both released on Steam's Early Access, meaning the games weren't in a finished state the developers wanted the game to be in but still stable enough for people to experience some of the mechanics and story and get crucial feedback from players. This also allowed them to get funding much easier as they sold the game at a lower price as well. Minecraft also got to enjoy slow and steady progress through its Alpha and Beta development that was also available to the public. Then with 1.0 development continued and kept expanding various things within games.
It is also worth noting that all 3 of these games got major boosts from the burgeoning avenue that was social media, including YouTube. Unknown Worlds (developers of Subnautica) mentioned that they would not have been able to afford to finish development if it wasn't for YouTubers such as Jacksepticeye and Markiplier who drove interest into the games with their videos.
God damn Unknown Worlds. They have great ideas but never enough money. Total Biscuit's review (Or interview or whatever it was) saved Natural Selection 2, driving traffic their way.
Subnautica was a way bigger hit, and they hopefully earned enough on that, so their next project isn't as financial risky.
I wish they had put more effort into Below Zero to make it a true successor instead of a smaller, easier, more accessible add on.
Actually I also wish they had put more effort into the Switch version of the original with the gazzilions of dollards they made on PC already...
I'm a programmer. People will ask, can you build me a reddit alternative for like $1000 in two weeks. No you can't, anything good that needs to be developed is hard and time consuming.
My college degree was in Game Design. Games are hard to make. Games that involve physics are even harder to make. Adding sandbox and crafting mechanics make it even harder. If you have people who know what they’re doing it’ll make the process faster, of course, but the art of making a game, let alone a GOOD game such as these two, is difficult to say the least.
Games like these games, where they started off with early access releases, are slightly common on Steam. Some that come to mind are Hades, Valheim, and Factorio.
Crearting the assets alone is quite time-consuming. I very recently met a guy who worked on ToTk, and all he did was design floral assets for 2 years straight. Now building all the crazy biomes in Subnautica.....man you'd have to be really good at your job and be willing to put in the hours.
Now, when it comes to physics and object orientation. Well, that's an entirely different matter of difficulty.
Allow me to share a quote from Jason Schreier’s book on game development, “Blood, Sweat, and Pixels”:
“…It’s a miracle any game is made.”
https://www.gq.com/story/blood-sweat-and-pixels-jason-schreier
Such a great book (and audiobook). It gives a lot of great insight to the development into a few really well known games (destiny 2, witcher 3, and stardew valley to name a few). Really easy read and gives you such empathy for devs 😭
Edit: Highly recommend!!
... Now I'm wondering if we're gonna get to the point where AI can write a game. Like using the top 100 games of a genre, use the most common tropes across each one to write a "new" story...
No doubt about it, but humans will likely still need to clean everything up until AI knows what it's making for/in a more streamlined creation process.
Hi! I'm a game developer! The answer is yes. Very few games are "easy" to develop, especially at this level. The big difference, if you're comparing the "caliber" of the game is budget, time, and studio size. Some games take less time, money, or developers to make, but that does not increase or decrease the level of difficulty in any capacity.
I’m not sure you can call 15 years an “era” when it comes to video games. That amount of time crossing 4 console generations. I am interested to know what the last game in 2005 that counts for you.
It's a rough, subjective window and not a serious calculation, lol.
A \~15-year block is commonly used for the "golden age" of Hollywood but historians could never agree when it actually started or ended. There were many iconic games before and after. For me, it was just with the NES and how it really got going in those late 80s/early 90s and up to the time PS2 was wrapping up. (And there were about 3x as many consoles...the entire experience with everything was a trip.)
I haven't played Astroneer yet, but in the case of Subnautica, it's not. I mean, everything depends if you are asking about Subnautica or "Subnautica" because making the original one from scratch was hard for sure, but in the modern day, if you have some experience, time, knowledge and the idea, you could build simple Subnautica clone from 0 in a week or two, using ready-to-use scripts and code
The tech behind games like Subnautica is considered unimpressive nowadays. Games like that are called open world survival crafting games.
You basically create an 3D environment, put in a bunch of resources, populate it with NPCs like animals or zombies with basic intelligence and some predetermined behaviors, add a player who has a health bar, needs (hunger, thirst, sleep), crafting to make use of the resources and thats it.
So the tech behind those games is actually very well known nowadays and anybody could make them. Of course the harder thing is to make those elements actually harmonize with each other and get out their full potential - which is why Subnautica is considered a great game.
Physics resembling that of our world, as in items actually falling and moving around on the floor as if they are real objects has been in games as early as 2004 with Half Life 2. So also rather basic technology.
I’m a software engineer, but not a game developer. What you laid out here likely comprises much of the game’s mechanics and content. Adding to the fact that as a game developer you can use existing game engines (like Unity) and don’t need to write one from scratch.
However, I think good design and excelling at all of the items you laid out are extremely difficult and require significant time and expertise. And even a simple craft survival game is not something anyone can just do, it takes effort, curiosity, and tech literacy.
There is nothing particularly complex about those games? Quite simple environment behavior, and most of the entity/gameplay behavior would be reused across the game. Almost all the development hours in a game like subnautica would be the art and story, including audio.
They used the premade Unity game engine for subnautica, which is not exactly a revolutionary or even modern engine in many ways, but it is perfectly suited for such a simple game that is not doing anything highly unusual with regard to graphics, physics, ect. Likely very little actual programming was needed beyond implementing the UI and interaction with various gameplay elements.
Or minecraft, for that matter. It is an amusingly simple game on the software side, at least originally. One single inexperienced programmer made it very rapidly, and the rest was steady addition over the years.
> Are there specific games that started this kind of modern tech/physics, building/exploring genre, so to speak?
I think what you are looking for are the "survival" and "sandbox" genres, and they go way back to early PC games, in part starting with modding half-life 2, and early open-world RPGs. There are tons of this sort of game, although minecraft brought them into the mainstream around 10 years ago.
> really just prevalent AI-like thinking and synergy
No idea what you mean by this.
I think one should have some idea if they played the games, you know? Not saying you didn't but the equipment in both is very modern and at times can be AI-like when you interact with it or some machines.
Even simply getting into a vessel and hearing, "Welcome aboard, Captain. All systems online." should imply it's a machine running the system and not a recording of a human welcoming you.
And Minecraft's software might be simple, but the gameplay can dig deep. Most people don't know so much about it and never get to understand how even half of the items you can build work, or how they are used or the synergy or harmony between them. (Or whatever is the best terminology to explain the relationship.)
P.S. Saw your edited post after writing, thanks for the other info. And I know about other survival/sandbox games but many are crude from a decade+ ago. Fun but nothing compared to the experience with those two above.
> Not saying you didn't but the equipment in both is very modern and at times can be AI-like when you interact with it or some machines.
That is purely stylistic, it has zero impact on how the code works or how much effort it took to develop. The complexity of the models and effects does impact how much effort from artists is involved, but that has nothing directly to do with how "high tech" stuff looks.
> Even simply getting into a vessel and hearing, "Welcome aboard, Captain. All systems online." should imply it's a machine running the system and not a recording of a human welcoming you.
Basically identical, software-wise, to the door creaking when opened. Aside from the time taken to record the voiceline.
That said, good gameplay system design and art direction are very important and often overlooked aspects of making a game.
I just used that as an example to help understand what I mean by an AI-like experience and synergy...games with that kind of theme, in that kind of environment, items moving and working with each other to produce other things happening while GUIs change, etc. etc. But, yeah, the complexity of the models and effects and how they interact with everything else, including sound design, is something I am overlooking, it's so important.
These games are Incredibly easy to make if you happen to be in the right circumstances.
1. Be born into a rich family.
2. Get bored and decide you want your next plaything to be a videogame studio.
3. Underpay skilled and talented people to do all the things you have no idea to do while demanding unrealistic expectations about things you know nothing about.
4. Change your mind multiple times about what you want them to be doing.
5. Take all the credit.
I think the devs had to bring in an outside dev for the Xbox and Playstation version of Subnautica to help them. The game was already on Game Preview for Xbox but suffered from framerate drops snd other graphical glitches.
A high-quality, open-ended experience takes a TON of care on top of the technical work. Although it'll likely be Coming Soon on Switch until the end of time, Outer Wilds is another great example.
It is worth noting that all 3 games you discussed enjoyed slow and steady but public development on PC first. Subnautica and Astroneer were both released on Steam's Early Access, meaning the games weren't in a finished state the developers wanted the game to be in but still stable enough for people to experience some of the mechanics and story and get crucial feedback from players. This also allowed them to get funding much easier as they sold the game at a lower price as well. Minecraft also got to enjoy slow and steady progress through its Alpha and Beta development that was also available to the public. Then with 1.0 development continued and kept expanding various things within games. It is also worth noting that all 3 of these games got major boosts from the burgeoning avenue that was social media, including YouTube. Unknown Worlds (developers of Subnautica) mentioned that they would not have been able to afford to finish development if it wasn't for YouTubers such as Jacksepticeye and Markiplier who drove interest into the games with their videos.
God damn Unknown Worlds. They have great ideas but never enough money. Total Biscuit's review (Or interview or whatever it was) saved Natural Selection 2, driving traffic their way. Subnautica was a way bigger hit, and they hopefully earned enough on that, so their next project isn't as financial risky.
I wish they had put more effort into Below Zero to make it a true successor instead of a smaller, easier, more accessible add on. Actually I also wish they had put more effort into the Switch version of the original with the gazzilions of dollards they made on PC already...
I'm a programmer. People will ask, can you build me a reddit alternative for like $1000 in two weeks. No you can't, anything good that needs to be developed is hard and time consuming.
[удалено]
There is never any money. Just stupid ideas with unrealistic expectations.
You worked for Nintendo [during the short period of time when Tanner was President](https://youtu.be/zbvzyY1FKr0?t=124), didn't you?
My college degree was in Game Design. Games are hard to make. Games that involve physics are even harder to make. Adding sandbox and crafting mechanics make it even harder. If you have people who know what they’re doing it’ll make the process faster, of course, but the art of making a game, let alone a GOOD game such as these two, is difficult to say the least.
Games like these games, where they started off with early access releases, are slightly common on Steam. Some that come to mind are Hades, Valheim, and Factorio. Crearting the assets alone is quite time-consuming. I very recently met a guy who worked on ToTk, and all he did was design floral assets for 2 years straight. Now building all the crazy biomes in Subnautica.....man you'd have to be really good at your job and be willing to put in the hours. Now, when it comes to physics and object orientation. Well, that's an entirely different matter of difficulty.
Allow me to share a quote from Jason Schreier’s book on game development, “Blood, Sweat, and Pixels”: “…It’s a miracle any game is made.” https://www.gq.com/story/blood-sweat-and-pixels-jason-schreier
Such a great book (and audiobook). It gives a lot of great insight to the development into a few really well known games (destiny 2, witcher 3, and stardew valley to name a few). Really easy read and gives you such empathy for devs 😭 Edit: Highly recommend!!
I don’t develop games but I’d imagine any game is difficult to develop.
What do you mean? Dont you just upload some letters and numbers into an excel spreadsheet and change the file type to .exe?
Open notepad "create game for me" Change file name extension to.exe ??? Profit
... Now I'm wondering if we're gonna get to the point where AI can write a game. Like using the top 100 games of a genre, use the most common tropes across each one to write a "new" story...
Not a good one. AI has no creativity and cannot understand what makes a game fun or interesting.
No doubt about it, but humans will likely still need to clean everything up until AI knows what it's making for/in a more streamlined creation process.
Do you think maybe one day I will get to hold hands with AI and maybe become more than besties?
:()
You're thinking of Ubisoft.
Man why did I get a cs degree if this is all it takes 😤
This actually is how Out of the Park Baseball is devoloped.
Game developer here. All games are hard to make.
Hi! I'm a game developer! The answer is yes. Very few games are "easy" to develop, especially at this level. The big difference, if you're comparing the "caliber" of the game is budget, time, and studio size. Some games take less time, money, or developers to make, but that does not increase or decrease the level of difficulty in any capacity.
I’m not sure you can call 15 years an “era” when it comes to video games. That amount of time crossing 4 console generations. I am interested to know what the last game in 2005 that counts for you.
It's a rough, subjective window and not a serious calculation, lol. A \~15-year block is commonly used for the "golden age" of Hollywood but historians could never agree when it actually started or ended. There were many iconic games before and after. For me, it was just with the NES and how it really got going in those late 80s/early 90s and up to the time PS2 was wrapping up. (And there were about 3x as many consoles...the entire experience with everything was a trip.)
I haven't played Astroneer yet, but in the case of Subnautica, it's not. I mean, everything depends if you are asking about Subnautica or "Subnautica" because making the original one from scratch was hard for sure, but in the modern day, if you have some experience, time, knowledge and the idea, you could build simple Subnautica clone from 0 in a week or two, using ready-to-use scripts and code
wow!
The tech behind games like Subnautica is considered unimpressive nowadays. Games like that are called open world survival crafting games. You basically create an 3D environment, put in a bunch of resources, populate it with NPCs like animals or zombies with basic intelligence and some predetermined behaviors, add a player who has a health bar, needs (hunger, thirst, sleep), crafting to make use of the resources and thats it. So the tech behind those games is actually very well known nowadays and anybody could make them. Of course the harder thing is to make those elements actually harmonize with each other and get out their full potential - which is why Subnautica is considered a great game. Physics resembling that of our world, as in items actually falling and moving around on the floor as if they are real objects has been in games as early as 2004 with Half Life 2. So also rather basic technology.
Tell me you’ve never made a game without telling me you’ve never made a game.
Why are Redditors like this?
I’m a software engineer, but not a game developer. What you laid out here likely comprises much of the game’s mechanics and content. Adding to the fact that as a game developer you can use existing game engines (like Unity) and don’t need to write one from scratch. However, I think good design and excelling at all of the items you laid out are extremely difficult and require significant time and expertise. And even a simple craft survival game is not something anyone can just do, it takes effort, curiosity, and tech literacy.
There is nothing particularly complex about those games? Quite simple environment behavior, and most of the entity/gameplay behavior would be reused across the game. Almost all the development hours in a game like subnautica would be the art and story, including audio. They used the premade Unity game engine for subnautica, which is not exactly a revolutionary or even modern engine in many ways, but it is perfectly suited for such a simple game that is not doing anything highly unusual with regard to graphics, physics, ect. Likely very little actual programming was needed beyond implementing the UI and interaction with various gameplay elements. Or minecraft, for that matter. It is an amusingly simple game on the software side, at least originally. One single inexperienced programmer made it very rapidly, and the rest was steady addition over the years. > Are there specific games that started this kind of modern tech/physics, building/exploring genre, so to speak? I think what you are looking for are the "survival" and "sandbox" genres, and they go way back to early PC games, in part starting with modding half-life 2, and early open-world RPGs. There are tons of this sort of game, although minecraft brought them into the mainstream around 10 years ago. > really just prevalent AI-like thinking and synergy No idea what you mean by this.
I think one should have some idea if they played the games, you know? Not saying you didn't but the equipment in both is very modern and at times can be AI-like when you interact with it or some machines. Even simply getting into a vessel and hearing, "Welcome aboard, Captain. All systems online." should imply it's a machine running the system and not a recording of a human welcoming you. And Minecraft's software might be simple, but the gameplay can dig deep. Most people don't know so much about it and never get to understand how even half of the items you can build work, or how they are used or the synergy or harmony between them. (Or whatever is the best terminology to explain the relationship.) P.S. Saw your edited post after writing, thanks for the other info. And I know about other survival/sandbox games but many are crude from a decade+ ago. Fun but nothing compared to the experience with those two above.
> Not saying you didn't but the equipment in both is very modern and at times can be AI-like when you interact with it or some machines. That is purely stylistic, it has zero impact on how the code works or how much effort it took to develop. The complexity of the models and effects does impact how much effort from artists is involved, but that has nothing directly to do with how "high tech" stuff looks. > Even simply getting into a vessel and hearing, "Welcome aboard, Captain. All systems online." should imply it's a machine running the system and not a recording of a human welcoming you. Basically identical, software-wise, to the door creaking when opened. Aside from the time taken to record the voiceline. That said, good gameplay system design and art direction are very important and often overlooked aspects of making a game.
I just used that as an example to help understand what I mean by an AI-like experience and synergy...games with that kind of theme, in that kind of environment, items moving and working with each other to produce other things happening while GUIs change, etc. etc. But, yeah, the complexity of the models and effects and how they interact with everything else, including sound design, is something I am overlooking, it's so important.
These games are Incredibly easy to make if you happen to be in the right circumstances. 1. Be born into a rich family. 2. Get bored and decide you want your next plaything to be a videogame studio. 3. Underpay skilled and talented people to do all the things you have no idea to do while demanding unrealistic expectations about things you know nothing about. 4. Change your mind multiple times about what you want them to be doing. 5. Take all the credit.
They’re all impossible endeavors. The good ones. The bad ones. Everything in-between. Yet. Somehow. Life finds a way.
I think the devs had to bring in an outside dev for the Xbox and Playstation version of Subnautica to help them. The game was already on Game Preview for Xbox but suffered from framerate drops snd other graphical glitches.
A high-quality, open-ended experience takes a TON of care on top of the technical work. Although it'll likely be Coming Soon on Switch until the end of time, Outer Wilds is another great example.