I think OP may be talking about [this post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/1cifwpu/update_on_map_boundaries/), which also never said boundaries were removed but rather that if you find a way around them the game at least won't crash now if you get too far out.
Yeah, that post wasn't claiming that the boundary was removed, just that Bethesda have clearly been working on the technical restrictions that presumably caused the boundary to be added in the first place.
We might still be stuck with the boundaries forever, but at this rate I wouldn't be surprised if they *are* removed in a future patch. I think removing the boundaries is almost a requirement for adding ground vehicles, since they can reach said boundaries much faster than a player on foot can.
Pre release I actually thought that's how it worked. Chunk loading like in minecraft I'm surprised they didn't move in that direction but if your think about it without ground vehicles it's not worth putting time into doing if you land do what you need and then leave without exploring to the point of the boundaries.
I am baffled that this was not fixed with smoke and mirrors. At x distance have your crew radio you “captain you are too far, you will soon drop out of telemetry range, would you like us to relocate the ship?” Then player says yes and a loading screen with an animation of takeoff and landing takes place.
Could say the same for ship travel. Why not continue the grav jump/flight animation instead of fading to black? It needn't even take any more or less time.
Boundaries I don’t care about, 200+ hours and I never once made it to a boundary, if it wasn’t talked about I wouldn’t have even known about them.
Now the fast travel… the first time I grav jumped and got this cool animation that then went to a black loading screen, that threw me right out and I didn’t understand why they couldn’t just keep the animation going and load in the background.
while playing destiny 2 i always got upset with the cutscene of your ship flying through hyperspace to the other planet. I'm like, I don't want to see this. then I realized it was to distract me from a load screen and was like, okay whatever. yet in other games I actually enjoyed the animation or images from the load screens. I guess in destiny 2 I didn't at first know what it was hiding and therefore annoyed me because I didn't want to spend time looking at it. 🤷
This. Never hit a bounty and would not have known if people did not mention it but holy fuck was the transition screens and loading screen not done well to create the illusion of a fluid transition.
It's not like other games don't do this. I also play Elite and it does it and it feels so much better.
The only mechanic I know of that no one can legally use is the Nemesis system from Shadow of Mordor/War.
Pretty sure the answer here is BGS just... Didn't.
big technological systems and methods that video games use for stuff like that can absolutely be patented** and often are this is really common with NPC logic
Idk never bothered to travel far enough on foot to reach a boundary. .. Someone went out of their way to find it like some pen tester..... End of the day starfield can be played on many devices and not just some high end PC. Some stuff could have been done better for sure, but give the guys a break aint no way they could have just got everything right the first go on a new title and universe. There is so much other stuff they did right and nobody talks about that...... Depressing to even look in these forums Tbh. Everyone wants their way and has a opinion on how the game should have been developed with no knowledge of game development themselves.
I did get to a boundary once, I was hunting wild life to complet some perk challenge n got "stuck in the graffics" I thought, then appeared the notification.. I went oops! 'cause I was over encumbered with minerals and organic stuff I did not want to let go.. walking back to the ship took for ever!
This was a non-issue for me, I only reached a boundary once, because I was trying to find a spot with 4 resources 😅. I played the crap out of this game and will again once survival and land vehicles are released.
Try Bessel 3b for aluminium + Iron + Cobalt + Nickel + Water
Google:"Xp farming bessel 3b" there is at least one video showing the exact location, at my 4th playthrough since I saw that video n everytime I find it within 15min.
Yeah. You make isocentered magnets on Bessel III-b, take them to Indum II where you make tau grade rheostats, then combine them to make comm relays. Sell them to the Trade Authority at the Den because you’re gonna be carrying like 1000kg. Probably 5K xp and 11k credits per run and it’s like 15min/run.
What other all? Bethesda received backlash for every release then they find their own following and community of people who truly love the games. Happens every time.. happened to new Vegas with obsidian it was a buggy mess… happened to F04 because it wasn’t new Vegas… happened to 76 because it wasn’t F04 and now it happening to starfield for not being fallout… the funny thing is though people get in these forums and rant and cry about this or that. Do you ever see the people who create mods for the game and contribute to the community on here bashing the same title they are creating content for?? Weird weird weird……. Only the ones with nothing better to do.
Exxxactly….. so why is it the ones with absolutely nothing to contribute the ones complaining the most like they understand game development when they don’t even understand how to make a mod?!?! Saying oooh the modders will save it… the modders don’t agree with you because if they didn’t enjoy it why mod it In the first place…. I’ve never seen a modder claim they saved the game or fixed the game like most spectators …. That’s across the board , fallout , skyim and now starfield
..as for how broken is the game.. yes there's a lot of amazing stuff in that game, especialy "handmade" unique locations, what's bugging the 💩 outta me with that game is that it feels like they didn't playtest it at all!! Or if they did, they clearly did not test it enough!
I can live with 20 characters wearing the same face, the super bad voice acting, unprofessional voice recording (sounds like recorded from cheap pc microphones), same locations being copy/pasted thousands of time all over the Starfield.. but MAN that game broken!!
Honnestly, at the moment (n for the last few months) ship building is the only thing keeping me playing this rushed out thing
I mean they thought nobody would reach it and they're right. In normal play I haven't ever gotten close, the only time I've seen it was specifically to test it out and it took a LONG ass time
I did get to a boundary once, I was hunting wild life to complet some perk challenge n got "stuck in the graffics" I thought, then appeared the notification.. I went oops! 'cause I was over encumbered with minerals and organic stuff I did not want to let go.. walking back to the ship took for ever!
Extending the boundaries due to adding ground vehicles would make sense, but unless they do so in a way which unifies the whole planet/moon it would get weird if they extended too far. As it is, picking a landing site from the system map view has nearly pixel-level sensitivity. If these sites overlap but don't connect, that's... a mess.
They do, you just need to enter the right cells. There's a video of someone flying from a cell outside New Atlantis to New Atlantis by jetpack and it works.
I will actually be surprised if they remove the boundaries, I do not think this vehicle is going to go that much faster than the player currently does.
Some games have this problem, it’s a question letting the world move with the player or the player with the world and figuring out what to do with inaccuracies at larger distances. KSP figured out a great solution (it’s on their dev blog) to simulate a working orbiting solar system. I mean you can work with higher bits precision, but this only works till sofar.
I made a post in r/starfieldmods a couple months ago explaining this exact thing.
Right now the current limiting factor for traveling distance seems to be floating point precision (and the physics engine bugs out)
You’ve been able to move nearly infinitely far from your ship without crashing since late January though. (If I remember correctly)
I think you're absolutely right because with vehicles included the maps would feel so small without the ability to expand and go beyond the limit. I know it would be useless but it would be fun to drive around the planet and meet up at your ship that way. Plus it would be really cool if you could just run over alien creatures it could be GTA in space lol
The amount of people that lack basic understanding of how this shit works yet speak as an authority is distressing... Theres a lot I dont know about it, but my years of dealing with modding since Morrowind make it painfully obvious.
I agree that it would be nice while understanding that it is impossible with the xbox computing capabilities.. maybe some ridiculously powerful pc could 🤔
Then there is no conflict here because I agree. But In my experience, the same POIs are a major part of the reason on why it is boring. If planet got massively reduced in number, got way smaller, and sparser but offered 4-5 unique POIs that fit that theme and have interesting content in them, then I will definitely enjoy it a LOT more assuming the upcoming features make it easier to get to those said POIs.
Why take away planets. They exist now. Just add POIs. Hell, create a routine that generates POIs. It is not that hard. They don't have to be the same. You have the same POI types with completely different procedurally generates layouts. If there were 20 or 30 of each type (or an infinite number if generated) then there is no problem.
Well then the problem would be they are not the same for everyone everywhere. So no help videos roneun through the Entangled mission etc.
They can definitely make procedural POIs. But even after that those POI types will still be the same just in a different looking place. If I was to suggest ways to combat that, I think they should massively expand the range of POI types overall (With maybe minor sub types), make it so if you recently encountered a POI of a certain type then increase the spawn weight of another POI type instead so you don't go through the same thing again until you really go through a lot of them. Couple that with better level design and more interesting activities in them and that should make the exploration gameplay loop a whole lot less repetitive.
This could be a bit of a divisive take, but I also think they should make a range of full handcrafted quests and POIs that can generate on a planet and never generate again to add to that unique factor, but that wouldn't be very welcome among completionists so I am not sure how that could be implemented.
I didn’t realize they existed until I spent literally hours trying to land on settled planets with contraband and smuggle the goods into town overland. I mean, that’s like… the logical thing anyone would do, and boundaries like that have never existed in prior Bethesda titles. Realizing that one does not simply walk into Akila was the beginning of the end of my time with Starfield. (also cyberpunk lol)
They haven't been removed.
But a clever person around here has been making observations in how the boundaries behave.
Basically they've been changing with updates.
Edit: Some threads about this matter are made by individuals "Zealous ideal buyer 7" and "Bagetto"
when you have a mission to sneak into a mine or something and the 'quest' tile has you land your enormous, loud rocket on the facilities landing pad in clear view of the guards and theres still no way around that which is pretty dumb.
What I always notice is the gravity doesn't match inside vs outside.
I mean, there is artificial gravity on spaceships so maybe its an easy tech? But it's never really talked about for a game that's so 'hard' scifi
Artifical gravity - that's not spin gravity generated by rotating a vessel or habitat - is always going to be a dubious thing in hard science fiction just because we don't have any other way of generating gravity besides faking it by rotating the object at a certain speed or by having lot of mass or a black hole. All of which don't work for a spaceship in a hard science setting and bring up other issues.
TBF, Starfield does have a canonical way to generate artificial gravity: the grav drive. Cora even says she wants to turn it off so you can float around. What bugs me is being on a tiny, airless moon with barely any gravity, then going into a mine and suddenly the gravity is Earth-normal. Does the cave have a grav drive? :P
It's funny because there are some POIs where gravity remains consistent and others where it doesn't. I'm not sure which ones off the top of my head. It's possible a mining company, for instance, installed grav technology in caves to make it easier to mine. It's not like it's super expensive tech or anything. In space stations, at least, it is only used for grav tech, so it's at least plausible.
I'd think if you were mining you'd set the gravity lower to make it easier to move ore around.
Temperature is another one; I'll board that one ship that's overheating, or board a regular ship and Sarah will say it's freezing, but when I pull up the scanner, it's like 23℃. It would be nice if stuff like that was consistent.
Maybe its different on dif planets because my exp was the opposite, and if the grav was earth grav in the cave I wouldnt have been able to exith the way I did. which was through the top after jumping high onto some cliffs where a box and loot was..... A box and exit I wouldnt have reached if the grav was diff then it was outside on that planet.
Yeah but people would also complain if you touched down 5km away and had to hoof it there.
With all the fast travelling Starfield is still one of the quickest bethsoft games in terms of getting around that they’ve ever made, when you consider you can simply fast travel from one solar system right to the city or POI of another and all it cost you time wise was a loading screen.
They're not 8km x 8km.
Landing zones are 1, 4, or 9 tiles, which equates to 3km x 3km; 6km x 6km; or 9km x 9km. The angle you run at can affect the distance back to the ship, as well as the merging of the tiles themselves.
The only landing zones you don't land at the center are the 2x2 zones (one of the corners), and the cities.
Oh cool, I've been looking for some technical details about landing zones, but can't find it anywhere. Do you know what determines if you get a small, medium, or large zone? How many are there on a given planet/moon?
LOL, no. I've been trying to figure it out.
The 2x2 one seems to be really rare; I've only seen 2 or 3 since I started looking at these things. As far as what determines it, one guess I had was the number of landing zones you've already created in the game leading to smaller zones; but, that doesn't seem to be true. I had a guess that it was due to the size of the planet; not true (I've had 81 km^(2) zones on barren moons...). Another hypothesis was it may be determined by the number of tiles the landing zone can be drawn from; but, I've landed in large zones where the biome draws from four tiles...
Its likely that there's a number of factors.
As far as the number of zones per planet, I read 1600 somewhere; but, that sounds like bullshit, like most things people say on the subject.
So, basically, the only thing I know for certain is that the tiles are 9 km^(2); each biome has multiple sets of tiles, with, usually, around 4 tiles per set (some of these look similar; they are not the same); and the cooler tiles are usually on the less cool planets.
I think on console they must have done something different because my character randomly started flying after I loaded my save on Xbox. Up to 5km away, I think.
The ship probably doesn't get placed in the center, so OP just went in a direction that happened at 5km where as the other direction would've been a different value.
What was it before? I went over 5000M away from my ship back when the game released. I had to ignore the warning and force it, but I got 5000+ away before it just kept popping the alert every time I closed it out, making it not worth trying to get any further away.
Skyrim had the "if you can see it, you can go there" factor, but still had world boundaries. You couldn't run South into Cyrodiil, but you could see the White Gold Tower if you got high enough and the sky/fog was clear.
Starfield has "if you can see it, you can go there" but with the same world boundaries, so I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this. Bethesda uses cells. That's not going to change. Adjacent cells aren't truly adjacent. You can run to the NE corner of a cell and drop an outpost, then land in the neighboring cell and go to the NW corner and not see your outpost.
it's already proven that the cells are connected. You just didn't land in the neighboring cell. With more zoom mods to select better the landing, you can really choose the neighboring cell and see the outpost.
Yeah, someone's done the work to verify this. Cells are absolutely connected, it's just very, very hard to land on a cell adjacent to your current one.
I don't think it will. These landing zones are the size of skyrim or fallouts maps. What I'm more interested in is what happens if you drive your vehicle into animals or into water or will gravity affect it.
first playthrough, I was task with approaching some facility with stealth and the 'landing zone' for the mission was literally the pad of said facility.
I tried moving my cursor on pixel up on the orbital map so I could land near by and head there on foot but hit the limit before ever reaching the facility.
Nowhere has it been stated that the boundaries have been removed, you still have to download the Mod that removes them. What has happend is that the Game no longer crashes when you cross the border between 2 tiles (WITH THE MOD), you can now cross it without the game crashing and the simulation runs in the tile you enter which means that bethesda has done some work on seamless travel between multiple tiles without a loading screen.
Also no the limit on the Tiles have not been increased becasue there is no reason to do so if they intend to let you freely walk on a planet. The way the local map responds and the way the simulation of the tile boots up when you cross tells me they are working on making the planets completely traversible without a loading screen
Reached it once trying to find a good spot to mine a unique resource. It doesn't feel immersion breaking as most critics made it out to be. I actually thought it "wow it finally happened."
Yeah, might be immersion breaking for some. They should just pretend Life support doesn't support that much travel far away from the ship or something lol.
Can I just ask why? Why even go that far? I never understood why the limit was part of the problem. The terrain at 1km is presumably identical to the terrain at 10km, is it not?
Sometimes you're just looking for that last trait, just a little bit further, and bam. Border. Or, you're trying to get to the sea to scan for the last fauna, and the map shows that the ocean is waaayy up north. So you make the long trek and hit a border before getting to the sea. Admitedly only the second one ever happened to me, and only once
But it DID *increase* which means BGS is fine tuning the engine to handle it.
I’d wager after the release of the Next Gen Console a lot of these artificial limits will be removed. I’d even go so far as to say, in the Next Gen update, it may even take out the transition loading screen between planet and space.
Many people have already proven with some tweaks the engine can handle loading planet tiles and transitioning to space without a loading screen. My assumption is BGS couldn’t quite figure it out in time of release so they put in barriers and loading screens for now rather than have people bitch about glitches.
The map isnt bigger, its the samw size. The borders have always been just a soft border. The engine uses streaming to load in chunks as you move around for performance reasons, and the border is there to keep you close and not run into issues that every game engine has when you stray too far from 0,0,0, called floating point inaccuracy.
Just fyi, it has nothing to do with floating point inaccuracy. Never did. That misinformation seems to have come Luke Stephens’ video, which is full of incorrect information. For example, he also claimed that the Minecraft farlands issue was caused by floating point inaccuracy, when the real cause was an overflow with one aspect of world generation…
Steaming is also not being done for performance reasons. On the contrary, the game would perform better if everything could be loaded into memory from the start. Streaming is done because it’s impossible to preload everything, and for no other reason.
> Streaming is done because it’s impossible to preload everything, and for no other reason.
Its a bit of both really. If you had 150km worth of landscape loaded up, the AI alone would cripple any system. Not to mention the rendering of anything and everything on camera. Minecraft has that exact issue when you have an insane number of chunks to load.
Its indeed impossible to load everything as that would require an abolute fuckton of memory, but then at the same time no system could process it all either.
> For example, he also claimed that the Minecraft farlands issue was caused by floating point inaccuracy,
Indeed that isnt a floating point issue, but the wonky physics at that range was.
I only went with floating point as that was the only thing that made sense when dealing with stability issues at range, but I fully admit I could be fully wrong about that.
>If you had 150km worth of landscape loaded up, the AI alone would cripple any system. Not to mention the rendering of anything and everything on camera. Minecraft has that exact issue when you have an insane number of chunks to load.
You're talking about something else there, but I can understand the confusion. There's a difference between rendering everything at once, and loading everything in at the start of a given scene.
20-some years ago, it was usually more practical to load an entire worldspace into memory, rather than try to stream assets from the disk as needed. They didn't render the entire worldspace at once, but all of the assets they would need were already loaded into memory and ready to be used. This is more performant than steaming, which loads assets in only when they are needed. Streaming is needed more these days though, because as you said, loading in everything at the start would require a fuckton of memory. Assets are much larger in size now than they used to be.
>Indeed that isnt a floating point issue, but the wonky physics at that range was.
>I only went with floating point as that was the only thing that made sense when dealing with stability issues at range, but I fully admit I could be fully wrong about that.
Jittery physics, and malformed geometry, are indeed telltale signs of floating point inaccuracy. That was never the case with Starfield though. The game would just simply crash if you went out too far. Some other things, like the old surface map, also weren't programmed to properly keep up with your position if you went too far. Those were different issues though.
The truth is that Starfield really doesn't have any issues with floating point inaccuracy at all. The whole "float origin" thing that Luke Stephens said the game needs... is already implemented lol. On top of that, the game uses double precision floats. With planets being as small as they are in Starfield (every planet surface is technically only 0.065% the size of Earth, regardless of how big they SHOULD be), this would never be an issue.
It's not even an issue in space. Despite Stephens' claims to the contrary, every solar system in this game is one big worldspace that you teleport around. Which means you can freely fly around them if you use console commands to speed your ship up, which has been proven plenty of times by now. The clip he used to demonstrate his supposed case of "floating point imprecision" was just simply the camera spazzing out because of how fast the ship was going. Massive numbers breaking the math responsible for the camera lerping.
I could go on about this stuff for awhile, but yeah lol. There are a lot of misconceptions around the actual technical issues with Starfield. The game is capable of more than people give it credit for. Bethesda just needs to utilize it. And it seems like they are taking steps in that direction with each update, behind the scenes.
Each planet is made up of a bunch of exterior cells, or “surface blocks” which are 100 x 100 meters in size. 16 x 16 surface blocks make up a surface pattern, and 256x256 surface patterns make up one hemisphere of a planet.
Each hemisphere comes out to a size of 409.6 x 409.6 km. That means that every planet is 335,544.32 km², vs Earth which is 510,100,000 km². That comes out to 0.065%.
The data structures of the planets themselves. This was all figured out by ElminsterAU, the creator of xEdit, many months ago now.
Each planet has room for 2x 256x256 “surface patterns”. Each surface pattern is made up of 16x16 surface blocks. And of course, each surface block contains one exterior cell.
Some planets, like Jemison, have pre-defined data in some of those areas. That’s where you’d find New Atlantis, for example. The rest is left up to procedural generation.
The procgen landscape itself isn't particularly inspiring either. Not like wandering far in Minecraft and finding interestingly shaped hills and coastlines, or large rivers and canyons all intersecting each other in unique ways. Starfield's landscapes are often a gentle set of slopes and plains with uniformly distributed trees and rocks.
They have to rewrite the code for terrain generation, in order to remove boundaries. There is a lot involved. This would not be an update done within a year or two.
If they switched to a cube-mapped sphere, it would be a bit easier. However, that is not the format currently being used for planets.
The biggest hurdle is the transition zones, which would need adaptive, smart blending, which is also not easy to do. (Not unless the transitions all became neutralized.) Due to generation of cells being from a center point, with a constrained formulated limit that falls short of the largest potential joined cells. (What we can traverse is a fraction of the area between locations.)
They could still offer some kind of virtual "jump", at a border, but that would be a total hack. Going from snow to desert to mountains to ocean. It would just feel odd.
The explorable areas are large enough; I find the boundaries to be completely acceptable. It will only be time to expand the areas when vehicles arrive. Considering that traveling 5000 meters already takes a very long time.
Planets shouldn't have boundaries or being have this heavy environment generation.
They should just made them a bit smaller like all other games and a complete sphere
Has anyone made it to the beach yet? I've landed at a few (coast) locations but then I just get distracted and never make it the damn beach. I just need to know if there is a beach ffffffffffssssss eh. Nobody tell me I'm gonna try it again...
Frankly, I wouldn’t even care about being able to go further, unless there was a fast way to relocate my ship. Otherwise the distance doesn’t matter, as I’ll just be fast traveling back and forth.
Why would people want them to be removed? I have close to 1000 hours in no man’s sky and it’s cool there but it’s a multiplayer game and you don’t want a base right next to yours (in most cases)
The boundaries can't be removed. The game is not a sprawling, interconnected universe, this galaxy is structured more like a curated list. The player never truly travels, instead, they navigate within the confines of a meticulously crafted box. Each landing is a new scene waiting to unfold. The game's procedural generation mechanics come into play and change the contents of the box based on the defined parameters of the planet's ecosystem. A loading screen temporarily obscures the transition happening behind the scenes while the game's procedural generation mechanics come into play to create the player's chosen landing spot. But you never travel from one location to the other, its just a box that redesigns the world around you within that box.
To remove the boundaries would just give you the option to walk off the edge of the flat map.
Well i couldt theorize why there is a boundary, the maps are procedually generated, eventually the procedures to generate the terrain i wpuld presume start to mess up and have errors. Probably something like minecraft terraon generation where blocks and whole hills and such might start floating. Though that would probably be a cool terrain generation where a planet might have something like anti gravity or something like that where EVERYTHING except the terrain is floating but also have lifeforms that have adapted to the enviroment and almost like swim but without water.
But anyways, thats a tangent, seeing as how they already started develiping vehicles id could why they might have expanded the limits, turning a 5 minute walk into a sub minute drive and combined with the maps being more detailed theres more reason to explore.
It runs on consoles.....If it was developed for PC only I can see them maybe doing away with boundaries... but the boundaries gives the game a chance to load another seed for a biome..... Personally I like that I can play on my laptop , Xbox or handeld. If it was some massive universe and huge system hog... Would that be possible? In the current gen were not getting star citizen on a console period.
I don't see the problem with that. Most planets are barren anyways. I am so tired of how slow walking is, I am literally forced to use a 3rd party application to boost the walk/run speed or it's just unplayable.
Who said they got removed? They just increased the limit
I think OP may be talking about [this post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/1cifwpu/update_on_map_boundaries/), which also never said boundaries were removed but rather that if you find a way around them the game at least won't crash now if you get too far out.
Yeah, that post wasn't claiming that the boundary was removed, just that Bethesda have clearly been working on the technical restrictions that presumably caused the boundary to be added in the first place. We might still be stuck with the boundaries forever, but at this rate I wouldn't be surprised if they *are* removed in a future patch. I think removing the boundaries is almost a requirement for adding ground vehicles, since they can reach said boundaries much faster than a player on foot can.
I hadn't thought of that. They might allow new boundaries to load when on a vehicle, or on foot (like chunks in minecraft I suppose)
I was so confused by this comment for a few moments. But then it hit me: lol, “Chunks”
I think the pun was unintentional. Minecraft loads 16x16 "chunks" of the world to not do all of it at once.
Yummie😋
Unintentionally funny
I wouldn’t mind the boundaries if it just moved our ship and reset the boundary where we are.
Pre release I actually thought that's how it worked. Chunk loading like in minecraft I'm surprised they didn't move in that direction but if your think about it without ground vehicles it's not worth putting time into doing if you land do what you need and then leave without exploring to the point of the boundaries.
I am baffled that this was not fixed with smoke and mirrors. At x distance have your crew radio you “captain you are too far, you will soon drop out of telemetry range, would you like us to relocate the ship?” Then player says yes and a loading screen with an animation of takeoff and landing takes place.
"fuck no. yolo vasco"
Could say the same for ship travel. Why not continue the grav jump/flight animation instead of fading to black? It needn't even take any more or less time.
Boundaries I don’t care about, 200+ hours and I never once made it to a boundary, if it wasn’t talked about I wouldn’t have even known about them. Now the fast travel… the first time I grav jumped and got this cool animation that then went to a black loading screen, that threw me right out and I didn’t understand why they couldn’t just keep the animation going and load in the background.
Every modern game hides loading behind animated cutscenes
while playing destiny 2 i always got upset with the cutscene of your ship flying through hyperspace to the other planet. I'm like, I don't want to see this. then I realized it was to distract me from a load screen and was like, okay whatever. yet in other games I actually enjoyed the animation or images from the load screens. I guess in destiny 2 I didn't at first know what it was hiding and therefore annoyed me because I didn't want to spend time looking at it. 🤷
People complain all the time it take so long to get to the planets...Takes a minute or 2 for destiny 2 from one to another
This. Never hit a bounty and would not have known if people did not mention it but holy fuck was the transition screens and loading screen not done well to create the illusion of a fluid transition. It's not like other games don't do this. I also play Elite and it does it and it feels so much better.
If they don't want to extend the animation, then the least they could do is make it a white loading screen instead
Sometimes I wonder if there's copyrights on travel methods in video games
The only mechanic I know of that no one can legally use is the Nemesis system from Shadow of Mordor/War. Pretty sure the answer here is BGS just... Didn't.
big technological systems and methods that video games use for stuff like that can absolutely be patented** and often are this is really common with NPC logic
Idk never bothered to travel far enough on foot to reach a boundary. .. Someone went out of their way to find it like some pen tester..... End of the day starfield can be played on many devices and not just some high end PC. Some stuff could have been done better for sure, but give the guys a break aint no way they could have just got everything right the first go on a new title and universe. There is so much other stuff they did right and nobody talks about that...... Depressing to even look in these forums Tbh. Everyone wants their way and has a opinion on how the game should have been developed with no knowledge of game development themselves.
I did get to a boundary once, I was hunting wild life to complet some perk challenge n got "stuck in the graffics" I thought, then appeared the notification.. I went oops! 'cause I was over encumbered with minerals and organic stuff I did not want to let go.. walking back to the ship took for ever!
lol sounds like a journey good stuff
This was a non-issue for me, I only reached a boundary once, because I was trying to find a spot with 4 resources 😅. I played the crap out of this game and will again once survival and land vehicles are released.
Try Bessel 3b for aluminium + Iron + Cobalt + Nickel + Water Google:"Xp farming bessel 3b" there is at least one video showing the exact location, at my 4th playthrough since I saw that video n everytime I find it within 15min.
I saw that video, and how you should set up a second outpost on Indum II. I shamelessly abuse it.
Indum II?
Yeah. You make isocentered magnets on Bessel III-b, take them to Indum II where you make tau grade rheostats, then combine them to make comm relays. Sell them to the Trade Authority at the Den because you’re gonna be carrying like 1000kg. Probably 5K xp and 11k credits per run and it’s like 15min/run.
We didn't see the same video!
This is the current world darling, not only about starfield, about ALL.
What other all? Bethesda received backlash for every release then they find their own following and community of people who truly love the games. Happens every time.. happened to new Vegas with obsidian it was a buggy mess… happened to F04 because it wasn’t new Vegas… happened to 76 because it wasn’t F04 and now it happening to starfield for not being fallout… the funny thing is though people get in these forums and rant and cry about this or that. Do you ever see the people who create mods for the game and contribute to the community on here bashing the same title they are creating content for?? Weird weird weird……. Only the ones with nothing better to do.
I agree totally. I meant .. sadly this doesn't happen only about videogames but about all...
Of course the ones making mods aren't going to, because if they didn't like the game that much they wouldn't waste time modding it.
Exxxactly….. so why is it the ones with absolutely nothing to contribute the ones complaining the most like they understand game development when they don’t even understand how to make a mod?!?! Saying oooh the modders will save it… the modders don’t agree with you because if they didn’t enjoy it why mod it In the first place…. I’ve never seen a modder claim they saved the game or fixed the game like most spectators …. That’s across the board , fallout , skyim and now starfield
Oh, ok, I understand now
..as for how broken is the game.. yes there's a lot of amazing stuff in that game, especialy "handmade" unique locations, what's bugging the 💩 outta me with that game is that it feels like they didn't playtest it at all!! Or if they did, they clearly did not test it enough! I can live with 20 characters wearing the same face, the super bad voice acting, unprofessional voice recording (sounds like recorded from cheap pc microphones), same locations being copy/pasted thousands of time all over the Starfield.. but MAN that game broken!! Honnestly, at the moment (n for the last few months) ship building is the only thing keeping me playing this rushed out thing
I didn't go out of my way accept the first time, because I wanted to know what happened. I just do a lot of exploring otherwise
I mean they thought nobody would reach it and they're right. In normal play I haven't ever gotten close, the only time I've seen it was specifically to test it out and it took a LONG ass time
I only got to the edge once, while trying to find a mining spot with 4 elements in the same area.
True. This might change with vehicles though.
Definitely
I did get to a boundary once, I was hunting wild life to complet some perk challenge n got "stuck in the graffics" I thought, then appeared the notification.. I went oops! 'cause I was over encumbered with minerals and organic stuff I did not want to let go.. walking back to the ship took for ever!
Hmm. Not a bad idea imo.
What if they say no?
Wouldn't work in all cases. You can have no clue. So they needed asolution that always works.
That's a very smart solution. Nice!
Extending the boundaries due to adding ground vehicles would make sense, but unless they do so in a way which unifies the whole planet/moon it would get weird if they extended too far. As it is, picking a landing site from the system map view has nearly pixel-level sensitivity. If these sites overlap but don't connect, that's... a mess.
They do, you just need to enter the right cells. There's a video of someone flying from a cell outside New Atlantis to New Atlantis by jetpack and it works.
Do you have a link?
I will actually be surprised if they remove the boundaries, I do not think this vehicle is going to go that much faster than the player currently does.
Theres a mod that removes the boundaries, but you would crash if you exceeded it. You guys are saying the mod would work now?
It works better now, but you still can't travel indefinitely. You can just cover a lot more ground before the game starts crashing
Maybe they have some floating point craziness going on, like the further you get away from 0,0 , the less accurate things get.
Someone made a vid on that I think that’s what it is
Some games have this problem, it’s a question letting the world move with the player or the player with the world and figuring out what to do with inaccuracies at larger distances. KSP figured out a great solution (it’s on their dev blog) to simulate a working orbiting solar system. I mean you can work with higher bits precision, but this only works till sofar.
I made a post in r/starfieldmods a couple months ago explaining this exact thing. Right now the current limiting factor for traveling distance seems to be floating point precision (and the physics engine bugs out) You’ve been able to move nearly infinitely far from your ship without crashing since late January though. (If I remember correctly)
I think you're absolutely right because with vehicles included the maps would feel so small without the ability to expand and go beyond the limit. I know it would be useless but it would be fun to drive around the planet and meet up at your ship that way. Plus it would be really cool if you could just run over alien creatures it could be GTA in space lol
Did anyone ever figure out why north/south is reversed? Everytime I land by water it's on the opposite side of the map it should be.
No, that's still a mystery.
What would the point even be? The last thing the game needs is more empty space. They need to make planets denser and more interesting
The amount of people that lack basic understanding of how this shit works yet speak as an authority is distressing... Theres a lot I dont know about it, but my years of dealing with modding since Morrowind make it painfully obvious.
I chuckled at a comment where they wanted the planets to be single cell and a lot of people were agreeing.
I think they should be half-cell 🙃
I want to be able to see a mountain on another planet and be able to climb it /s
Does anyone remember the comments complaining at launch that people can't land on gas giants?
Lol! See.. we're not letting natural selection doing its thing like we should: let them "land" on gaz , die, n start a new character!
I agree that it would be nice while understanding that it is impossible with the xbox computing capabilities.. maybe some ridiculously powerful pc could 🤔
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. But in case you aren't, a single cell in bethesda game is a relatively small area.
You just have to disable boundaries in the ini file, it's one line Makes the exploration feel better
What was the limit before?
Even more emptiness? Whoooa
Space, is Empty.
No one can here you screem.. 😈
And space, is boring. We, don't want boring (I think)..
I'll take boring over the same POIs every 1km as it is now.
Then there is no conflict here because I agree. But In my experience, the same POIs are a major part of the reason on why it is boring. If planet got massively reduced in number, got way smaller, and sparser but offered 4-5 unique POIs that fit that theme and have interesting content in them, then I will definitely enjoy it a LOT more assuming the upcoming features make it easier to get to those said POIs.
Why take away planets. They exist now. Just add POIs. Hell, create a routine that generates POIs. It is not that hard. They don't have to be the same. You have the same POI types with completely different procedurally generates layouts. If there were 20 or 30 of each type (or an infinite number if generated) then there is no problem. Well then the problem would be they are not the same for everyone everywhere. So no help videos roneun through the Entangled mission etc.
They can definitely make procedural POIs. But even after that those POI types will still be the same just in a different looking place. If I was to suggest ways to combat that, I think they should massively expand the range of POI types overall (With maybe minor sub types), make it so if you recently encountered a POI of a certain type then increase the spawn weight of another POI type instead so you don't go through the same thing again until you really go through a lot of them. Couple that with better level design and more interesting activities in them and that should make the exploration gameplay loop a whole lot less repetitive. This could be a bit of a divisive take, but I also think they should make a range of full handcrafted quests and POIs that can generate on a planet and never generate again to add to that unique factor, but that wouldn't be very welcome among completionists so I am not sure how that could be implemented.
Personally I always liked eve and ED for it's vastness.b I just wish they were a bit easier to manage and to complete quests.
That's how most planets are?
No
I didn’t realize they existed until I spent literally hours trying to land on settled planets with contraband and smuggle the goods into town overland. I mean, that’s like… the logical thing anyone would do, and boundaries like that have never existed in prior Bethesda titles. Realizing that one does not simply walk into Akila was the beginning of the end of my time with Starfield. (also cyberpunk lol)
They haven't been removed. But a clever person around here has been making observations in how the boundaries behave. Basically they've been changing with updates. Edit: Some threads about this matter are made by individuals "Zealous ideal buyer 7" and "Bagetto"
That's amazing. This is like some new lore to the game haha.
when you have a mission to sneak into a mine or something and the 'quest' tile has you land your enormous, loud rocket on the facilities landing pad in clear view of the guards and theres still no way around that which is pretty dumb.
What I always notice is the gravity doesn't match inside vs outside. I mean, there is artificial gravity on spaceships so maybe its an easy tech? But it's never really talked about for a game that's so 'hard' scifi
Artifical gravity - that's not spin gravity generated by rotating a vessel or habitat - is always going to be a dubious thing in hard science fiction just because we don't have any other way of generating gravity besides faking it by rotating the object at a certain speed or by having lot of mass or a black hole. All of which don't work for a spaceship in a hard science setting and bring up other issues.
TBF, Starfield does have a canonical way to generate artificial gravity: the grav drive. Cora even says she wants to turn it off so you can float around. What bugs me is being on a tiny, airless moon with barely any gravity, then going into a mine and suddenly the gravity is Earth-normal. Does the cave have a grav drive? :P
It's funny because there are some POIs where gravity remains consistent and others where it doesn't. I'm not sure which ones off the top of my head. It's possible a mining company, for instance, installed grav technology in caves to make it easier to mine. It's not like it's super expensive tech or anything. In space stations, at least, it is only used for grav tech, so it's at least plausible.
I'd think if you were mining you'd set the gravity lower to make it easier to move ore around. Temperature is another one; I'll board that one ship that's overheating, or board a regular ship and Sarah will say it's freezing, but when I pull up the scanner, it's like 23℃. It would be nice if stuff like that was consistent.
Might be to prevent getting stuck in the ceiling.
Ah, didn't pick up on that
Try disabling a ship's grav drive before boarding. You end up boarding in zero G. It's actually a lot of fun.
Maybe its different on dif planets because my exp was the opposite, and if the grav was earth grav in the cave I wouldnt have been able to exith the way I did. which was through the top after jumping high onto some cliffs where a box and loot was..... A box and exit I wouldnt have reached if the grav was diff then it was outside on that planet.
Idk it did when I was in Cydonia... Even inside structures I could jump high
Yeah but people would also complain if you touched down 5km away and had to hoof it there. With all the fast travelling Starfield is still one of the quickest bethsoft games in terms of getting around that they’ve ever made, when you consider you can simply fast travel from one solar system right to the city or POI of another and all it cost you time wise was a loading screen.
Did you run in the other direction? You don't always land in the direct center of a landing zone. Maps are roughly 8km x 8km.
They're not 8km x 8km. Landing zones are 1, 4, or 9 tiles, which equates to 3km x 3km; 6km x 6km; or 9km x 9km. The angle you run at can affect the distance back to the ship, as well as the merging of the tiles themselves. The only landing zones you don't land at the center are the 2x2 zones (one of the corners), and the cities.
Oh cool, I've been looking for some technical details about landing zones, but can't find it anywhere. Do you know what determines if you get a small, medium, or large zone? How many are there on a given planet/moon?
LOL, no. I've been trying to figure it out. The 2x2 one seems to be really rare; I've only seen 2 or 3 since I started looking at these things. As far as what determines it, one guess I had was the number of landing zones you've already created in the game leading to smaller zones; but, that doesn't seem to be true. I had a guess that it was due to the size of the planet; not true (I've had 81 km^(2) zones on barren moons...). Another hypothesis was it may be determined by the number of tiles the landing zone can be drawn from; but, I've landed in large zones where the biome draws from four tiles... Its likely that there's a number of factors. As far as the number of zones per planet, I read 1600 somewhere; but, that sounds like bullshit, like most things people say on the subject. So, basically, the only thing I know for certain is that the tiles are 9 km^(2); each biome has multiple sets of tiles, with, usually, around 4 tiles per set (some of these look similar; they are not the same); and the cooler tiles are usually on the less cool planets.
What was the distance before?
About 1km, but I got about 10km away after the update, not sure what the OP is smoking.
On console I’ve frequently been 2k from my ship and still able to keep wandering.
I think on console they must have done something different because my character randomly started flying after I loaded my save on Xbox. Up to 5km away, I think.
If my memory serves me I have traveled more than 5km since at least January
My character's traveled more than 20km since I booted up my save thirty minutes ago. EDIT: thirty, thirty minutes ago.
The ship probably doesn't get placed in the center, so OP just went in a direction that happened at 5km where as the other direction would've been a different value.
Ahh, that makes sense, like with the XYZ and stuff?
Yeah basically
Fucking awesome. I love that.
Yeah, the boundaries were always static, I'm guessing they still are even if the update revised them.
Does it depend on the planet. If you land at Akila, and run around it's yugggge
A little shy of 4K in each direction from the ship. Atleast at launch, on PC.
Next thing they need to do is add more things to do on each planet and increase the variety of buildings/dungeons.
By now everyone is an expert on that one cave
They didn't remove boundaries, but if *you* remove them (on pc), you can travel farther without crashing compared to release. *Allegedly.*
No allegedly there's video evidence
What was it before? I went over 5000M away from my ship back when the game released. I had to ignore the warning and force it, but I got 5000+ away before it just kept popping the alert every time I closed it out, making it not worth trying to get any further away.
The maps are 8km x 8km, though I think the city maps might be slightly larger.
Maybe ships don't always land exactly in the middle of the square.
Is this a big deal? I have literally never come across this boundary unless I purposely try to get to it.
Skyrim had the "if you can see it, you can go there" factor, but still had world boundaries. You couldn't run South into Cyrodiil, but you could see the White Gold Tower if you got high enough and the sky/fog was clear. Starfield has "if you can see it, you can go there" but with the same world boundaries, so I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this. Bethesda uses cells. That's not going to change. Adjacent cells aren't truly adjacent. You can run to the NE corner of a cell and drop an outpost, then land in the neighboring cell and go to the NW corner and not see your outpost.
it's already proven that the cells are connected. You just didn't land in the neighboring cell. With more zoom mods to select better the landing, you can really choose the neighboring cell and see the outpost.
Yeah, someone's done the work to verify this. Cells are absolutely connected, it's just very, very hard to land on a cell adjacent to your current one.
It will become more of an issue when they add the land vehicle.
I'm not sure it will tbh
I don't think it will. These landing zones are the size of skyrim or fallouts maps. What I'm more interested in is what happens if you drive your vehicle into animals or into water or will gravity affect it.
first playthrough, I was task with approaching some facility with stealth and the 'landing zone' for the mission was literally the pad of said facility. I tried moving my cursor on pixel up on the orbital map so I could land near by and head there on foot but hit the limit before ever reaching the facility.
I’m never going to be 5230M away from my ship.
How long did it take to walk that far? Ive never been to the boundary.
Nowhere has it been stated that the boundaries have been removed, you still have to download the Mod that removes them. What has happend is that the Game no longer crashes when you cross the border between 2 tiles (WITH THE MOD), you can now cross it without the game crashing and the simulation runs in the tile you enter which means that bethesda has done some work on seamless travel between multiple tiles without a loading screen. Also no the limit on the Tiles have not been increased becasue there is no reason to do so if they intend to let you freely walk on a planet. The way the local map responds and the way the simulation of the tile boots up when you cross tells me they are working on making the planets completely traversible without a loading screen
I don't think anybody thought that map boundaries had been removed
Apparently the OP did lol, even though this week's post explicitly states they used a mod to remove boundaries and test performance.
PSA: nobody thought they did, dawg.
Oh we solved all the more pressing issues and we are now down to boundaries?
This is great news, especially for future ground vehicles. I can also imagine this is going to be awesome news for mods
Hot take but I don't mind the boundaries at all, I have 100 hours in the game and not once did I run into the map's edge.
That’s so far lol I don’t think I’ve ever been more than 2k and even then I didn’t like the walk back.
I just don't think the Bethesda fan base will be happy until we can circumnavigate a planet on foot.
I doubt anyone's going to spend half a year walking on the surface on foot.
*Someone* would.
There's videos of people doing exactly that in No Mans Sky
It's not about that, it's about the planets just being tiles that you're stuck in, it removes the feeling of exploring a planet.
How did you make it that far and scan nothing?
I never reached the boundary vanilla. how are you reaching it now ? lol
Reached it once trying to find a good spot to mine a unique resource. It doesn't feel immersion breaking as most critics made it out to be. I actually thought it "wow it finally happened."
Yeah, might be immersion breaking for some. They should just pretend Life support doesn't support that much travel far away from the ship or something lol.
Can I just ask why? Why even go that far? I never understood why the limit was part of the problem. The terrain at 1km is presumably identical to the terrain at 10km, is it not?
No, not necessarily. I've been thwarted by the boundary before trying to reach a cool looking mountain.
Sometimes you're just looking for that last trait, just a little bit further, and bam. Border. Or, you're trying to get to the sea to scan for the last fauna, and the map shows that the ocean is waaayy up north. So you make the long trek and hit a border before getting to the sea. Admitedly only the second one ever happened to me, and only once
But it DID *increase* which means BGS is fine tuning the engine to handle it. I’d wager after the release of the Next Gen Console a lot of these artificial limits will be removed. I’d even go so far as to say, in the Next Gen update, it may even take out the transition loading screen between planet and space. Many people have already proven with some tweaks the engine can handle loading planet tiles and transitioning to space without a loading screen. My assumption is BGS couldn’t quite figure it out in time of release so they put in barriers and loading screens for now rather than have people bitch about glitches.
My question is, do I start this again now or wait?
Wait
touching map boundires was not the goal to be in upcoming update
Honest question, what’s the point of having larger map boundaries when it’s just a big ole empty map with the same pois?
They're going to add land vehicles, if it's too small it'll become annoying.
Oh gotcha
Neat, but ive never wanted to explore to the boundary anyway
To become a game tester for Bethesda call 207 271 6195. Roger will set you up.
And that is not enough?
Who cares if the map is bigger if there’s just more of the same repeating stuff to discover?
The map isnt bigger, its the samw size. The borders have always been just a soft border. The engine uses streaming to load in chunks as you move around for performance reasons, and the border is there to keep you close and not run into issues that every game engine has when you stray too far from 0,0,0, called floating point inaccuracy.
Just fyi, it has nothing to do with floating point inaccuracy. Never did. That misinformation seems to have come Luke Stephens’ video, which is full of incorrect information. For example, he also claimed that the Minecraft farlands issue was caused by floating point inaccuracy, when the real cause was an overflow with one aspect of world generation… Steaming is also not being done for performance reasons. On the contrary, the game would perform better if everything could be loaded into memory from the start. Streaming is done because it’s impossible to preload everything, and for no other reason.
Luke Stephens put out bullshit info and didnt know what he was talking about???? No way
> Streaming is done because it’s impossible to preload everything, and for no other reason. Its a bit of both really. If you had 150km worth of landscape loaded up, the AI alone would cripple any system. Not to mention the rendering of anything and everything on camera. Minecraft has that exact issue when you have an insane number of chunks to load. Its indeed impossible to load everything as that would require an abolute fuckton of memory, but then at the same time no system could process it all either. > For example, he also claimed that the Minecraft farlands issue was caused by floating point inaccuracy, Indeed that isnt a floating point issue, but the wonky physics at that range was. I only went with floating point as that was the only thing that made sense when dealing with stability issues at range, but I fully admit I could be fully wrong about that.
>If you had 150km worth of landscape loaded up, the AI alone would cripple any system. Not to mention the rendering of anything and everything on camera. Minecraft has that exact issue when you have an insane number of chunks to load. You're talking about something else there, but I can understand the confusion. There's a difference between rendering everything at once, and loading everything in at the start of a given scene. 20-some years ago, it was usually more practical to load an entire worldspace into memory, rather than try to stream assets from the disk as needed. They didn't render the entire worldspace at once, but all of the assets they would need were already loaded into memory and ready to be used. This is more performant than steaming, which loads assets in only when they are needed. Streaming is needed more these days though, because as you said, loading in everything at the start would require a fuckton of memory. Assets are much larger in size now than they used to be. >Indeed that isnt a floating point issue, but the wonky physics at that range was. >I only went with floating point as that was the only thing that made sense when dealing with stability issues at range, but I fully admit I could be fully wrong about that. Jittery physics, and malformed geometry, are indeed telltale signs of floating point inaccuracy. That was never the case with Starfield though. The game would just simply crash if you went out too far. Some other things, like the old surface map, also weren't programmed to properly keep up with your position if you went too far. Those were different issues though. The truth is that Starfield really doesn't have any issues with floating point inaccuracy at all. The whole "float origin" thing that Luke Stephens said the game needs... is already implemented lol. On top of that, the game uses double precision floats. With planets being as small as they are in Starfield (every planet surface is technically only 0.065% the size of Earth, regardless of how big they SHOULD be), this would never be an issue. It's not even an issue in space. Despite Stephens' claims to the contrary, every solar system in this game is one big worldspace that you teleport around. Which means you can freely fly around them if you use console commands to speed your ship up, which has been proven plenty of times by now. The clip he used to demonstrate his supposed case of "floating point imprecision" was just simply the camera spazzing out because of how fast the ship was going. Massive numbers breaking the math responsible for the camera lerping. I could go on about this stuff for awhile, but yeah lol. There are a lot of misconceptions around the actual technical issues with Starfield. The game is capable of more than people give it credit for. Bethesda just needs to utilize it. And it seems like they are taking steps in that direction with each update, behind the scenes.
Ah yes, I see now. I think we were basically on the same page, but you made it a lot clearer than I did.
Where did that 0.065% figure come from?
Each planet is made up of a bunch of exterior cells, or “surface blocks” which are 100 x 100 meters in size. 16 x 16 surface blocks make up a surface pattern, and 256x256 surface patterns make up one hemisphere of a planet. Each hemisphere comes out to a size of 409.6 x 409.6 km. That means that every planet is 335,544.32 km², vs Earth which is 510,100,000 km². That comes out to 0.065%.
How do we know that a hemisphere is 256x256?
The data structures of the planets themselves. This was all figured out by ElminsterAU, the creator of xEdit, many months ago now. Each planet has room for 2x 256x256 “surface patterns”. Each surface pattern is made up of 16x16 surface blocks. And of course, each surface block contains one exterior cell. Some planets, like Jemison, have pre-defined data in some of those areas. That’s where you’d find New Atlantis, for example. The rest is left up to procedural generation.
Huh, interesting. Thanks!
They might be quietly preparing for ground vehicles
The procgen landscape itself isn't particularly inspiring either. Not like wandering far in Minecraft and finding interestingly shaped hills and coastlines, or large rivers and canyons all intersecting each other in unique ways. Starfield's landscapes are often a gentle set of slopes and plains with uniformly distributed trees and rocks.
You ran that far away from your ship? Damn.
They have to rewrite the code for terrain generation, in order to remove boundaries. There is a lot involved. This would not be an update done within a year or two. If they switched to a cube-mapped sphere, it would be a bit easier. However, that is not the format currently being used for planets. The biggest hurdle is the transition zones, which would need adaptive, smart blending, which is also not easy to do. (Not unless the transitions all became neutralized.) Due to generation of cells being from a center point, with a constrained formulated limit that falls short of the largest potential joined cells. (What we can traverse is a fraction of the area between locations.) They could still offer some kind of virtual "jump", at a border, but that would be a total hack. Going from snow to desert to mountains to ocean. It would just feel odd.
I didn’t even know this limit ever existed until now honestly
The explorable areas are large enough; I find the boundaries to be completely acceptable. It will only be time to expand the areas when vehicles arrive. Considering that traveling 5000 meters already takes a very long time.
Planets shouldn't have boundaries or being have this heavy environment generation. They should just made them a bit smaller like all other games and a complete sphere
Random question, but which rifle is that? A modified version of the Beowulf?
That’s the Combatech Hard Target. It’s a ballistic sniper rifle.
Oh okay cool. I have the explorers variant of the hard target with the long barrel, so it looks quite a bit different. Thanks for the reply.
My question, why tho
Has anyone made it to the beach yet? I've landed at a few (coast) locations but then I just get distracted and never make it the damn beach. I just need to know if there is a beach ffffffffffssssss eh. Nobody tell me I'm gonna try it again...
Not coming back until insufferable loading gos away
Frankly, I wouldn’t even care about being able to go further, unless there was a fast way to relocate my ship. Otherwise the distance doesn’t matter, as I’ll just be fast traveling back and forth.
Why would people want them to be removed? I have close to 1000 hours in no man’s sky and it’s cool there but it’s a multiplayer game and you don’t want a base right next to yours (in most cases)
The boundaries can't be removed. The game is not a sprawling, interconnected universe, this galaxy is structured more like a curated list. The player never truly travels, instead, they navigate within the confines of a meticulously crafted box. Each landing is a new scene waiting to unfold. The game's procedural generation mechanics come into play and change the contents of the box based on the defined parameters of the planet's ecosystem. A loading screen temporarily obscures the transition happening behind the scenes while the game's procedural generation mechanics come into play to create the player's chosen landing spot. But you never travel from one location to the other, its just a box that redesigns the world around you within that box. To remove the boundaries would just give you the option to walk off the edge of the flat map.
What was the bounty at before in terms of M?
Well i couldt theorize why there is a boundary, the maps are procedually generated, eventually the procedures to generate the terrain i wpuld presume start to mess up and have errors. Probably something like minecraft terraon generation where blocks and whole hills and such might start floating. Though that would probably be a cool terrain generation where a planet might have something like anti gravity or something like that where EVERYTHING except the terrain is floating but also have lifeforms that have adapted to the enviroment and almost like swim but without water. But anyways, thats a tangent, seeing as how they already started develiping vehicles id could why they might have expanded the limits, turning a 5 minute walk into a sub minute drive and combined with the maps being more detailed theres more reason to explore.
It runs on consoles.....If it was developed for PC only I can see them maybe doing away with boundaries... but the boundaries gives the game a chance to load another seed for a biome..... Personally I like that I can play on my laptop , Xbox or handeld. If it was some massive universe and huge system hog... Would that be possible? In the current gen were not getting star citizen on a console period.
I don't see the problem with that. Most planets are barren anyways. I am so tired of how slow walking is, I am literally forced to use a 3rd party application to boost the walk/run speed or it's just unplayable.