(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
OK got plenty of updates, so what’s been up? I figure I’ll just put in everything here
Way With Worlds:
- The sample print copy of Book One worked pretty well – though there were some edits. I’ve got a second copy on the way now and if that works out . . . it’ll be good. So dropping in July looks quite likely!
- I did note the draft copies that I get are kinda lower quality than final prints. That has made cover formatting a tad harder.
- I’m hoping to do some blog promotions on the book – and to share my insights!
- Book Two is going to definitely be moved to November. The Sailor Moon book drops in September and the followup could be pretty busy. On top of that my editor is swamped so I’m giving her some breathing room.
- Yes, the followup plans are still in place. Stay tuned – though you may not see them until December 2016 or January 2017.
Skills Transfer Book:
- I’ve got a little minibook based on my previous column on skill portability. I’m rewriting and expanding the ideas to release a useful 99 cent guide. I mention it here as it may be relevant to Sanctumites.
Generators:
- Yep the theme is still food for 2016, though right now I’m juggling at least 3 generator possibilities. Stay tuned.
Whew, that’s a lot. How are you doing?
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
One of the concerns I see expressed about No Man’s Sky is that a small team of indie developers like Hello Games just couldn’t do this. I disagree, and in fact think it’s quite likely’ll they’ll succeed.
So you know i’m not wasting your time, I base this theory on:
- My experience in IT (20+ years).
- My work as a software project manager (12+ years).
- My interest in development processes (12+ years).
- My work in procedural generation (most of my life).
- My experience as a gamer (most of my life).
So let’s look at the reason I think Hello Games is going to pull this off.
A Focused Game
First of all, no matter how “big” No Man’s Sky seems, if you look at it, it’s an extremely focused piece of development:
- Exploring large procedural spaces – mostly planets.
- These spaces have procedural features, including life.
- Mining and finding resources.
- Dealing with hostile and non-hostile life.
- Crafting by combining various resources to change equipment.
- A focused set of equipment for the characters
- Interaction with species via various actions, trees, and simple fight/aid mechanics.
- Space travel.
- Exchanging of good via trade games.
- Cataloging findings.
- All of this is done with a chosen aesthetic.
No Man’s Sky, when you look at it, is somewhere between evolutionary and revolutionary. All the parts have been seen before, its the combination of them that stands out to create a universe.
The game design is very focused – Sean Murray and company have deliberately restrained adding new features. This means that Murray and Team can pay attention to what they want to deliver exactly. Well-defined features allow for focused development, focused testing, and good delivery. If you know what you want to do, you can deliver it a lot easier.
No Man’s Sky is delivering a very focused experience, which allows for focused development. Speaking of . . .
Focused Initial Development
The first developer on No Man’s Sky was Sean Murray himself, who built the core engine, which he eventually expanded to 4 then 13. This is the way you do core initial development.
Small, tight teams – sometimes an individual – are a great way to start a project. One or a few people, working together (often unmanaged) can deliver a prototype with surprising speed because theyre focusing on getting everything together. They’re not trying to market. They’re not trying to make it run on every machine. They’re not even making the most efficient code. They’re ot havign people constantly try and change things. They don’t have to write patches.
They’re making a start. As one guy I worked with called it – “stick smart guys in a room and feed them pizza.”
This is the kind of arrangement that I’d expect would deliver a decent prototype. It may not be perfect – it may only be a prototype that’s eventually discarded. But it lets you get the basics down.
This is exactly how I’d expect a project like this to start – and be successful. It’s a good core foundation.
Agile Development
So you have a focused plan and a core prototype. How do you polish something like this into a game? It’s procedural, it’s going to have a lot of complexities, and it’s not something you plan easily.
The not-so secret is Agile Development. Basically, tight, integrated development where teams have a large list of goals, but focus on small deliverables that are high priority, deliver quick, and focus on interaction and iteration.
Sean Murray’s team uses classic agile processes. They have a morning meeting, set goals, and do a master build in the evening. This is all happening in roughly the same space from what I’ve seen in videos, increasing interaction.
Really, what Agile does is acknowledge that planning everything out often fails as you find the flaws to your giant plan as soon as you start. So you set goals and meet them in increments, researching them as needed, and cooperating tightly with your co-workers. Even if you don’t deliver everything, Agile’s focus on “delivering stuff that works” means you usually get enough – or more than enough – done to meet your goals.
In short, the team at Hello Games is using the exact kind of software processes that would lead to success.
Plenty Of Resources
A team of 13 or so people may seem small, but gaming (and indeed any software development) has a number of resources to call upon.
- There are services out there to do development or provide code. You can outsource pretty easily if needed. Not sure if the team does it, but it’s an option. There’s a lot of games made by a “team” that really involve many outsourced teams.
- There are a huge amount of libraries, graphic tools, code engines, and more for development teams to use. You can bet that these have been used by the No Man’s Sky team – just like any other development project. Few pieces of software are created from scratch in their entirely – and you can bet a lot of media resources aren’t.
- There’s already lots of procedural games and algorithms and theories, from past Roguelikes to the Superformula. There’s a lot of examples to be used or to at least show what is possible.
- People network. You can bet the folks behind NMS were asking friends, fellow coders, and other connections for advice.
In short, there’s all the resources out there the team may need to make NMS a reality – resources other games have leveraged. In fact . . .
Public Accountability
The NMS team, despite the game’s hype, is remarkably modest. Sean Murray seems affable and humble. The game is getting played up, but Hello Games isn’t bragging or strutting around. It’s refreshing.
At the same time, the NMS team has been very clear about the game and game goals and what it does. Though there’s occasional assumptions by gamers about the game, it’s easy to find the team being very clear on what they’re doing.
They’re being publicly accountable. They’re saying what the game is – and if they screw up, it’ll be very obvious.
Frankly, I don’t think anyone does something like this and delivers anything less.
The Conclusion
NMS has focused goals, started right, uses the right management techniques, has resource to call on, and Hello Games has been clear on what they’re doing in a way that holds them accountable.
Me, despite some concerns about the game that I’ve stated, I think Hello Games is going to deliver.
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
As I wait for No Man’s Sky (if I disappear for a week in June, you know why), I’ve been analyzing the game, what it means, and what it tells us about procedural entertainment. Today I’d like to focus on crafting.
I love crafting. I enjoyed the Atelier series of games, finding new alchemical potions. I love Starbound‘s crafting (OK, maybe I’ll vanish in July too). You can guess that Minecraft was a revelation. This all goes back to Demon’s Winter, a vastly underrated DOS game that let you build magic items.
With No Man’s Sky, the huge emphasis on crafting has me intrigued. The thrill of finding elements, the joy of a discovered blueprint, the fun of creating the right components. I love the challenge of building the ideal loadout, and NMS is going to give me that and all of the exploration and resource collecting. I’m looking forward to it.
I will be the guy staying on one crap planet for hours because of a wealth of ruins filled with schematics. Trust me.
No Man’s Sky provides a mixture of real and made-up elements, a nice nod to both recognizability and to the proper sci-fi feel. But as I’ve watched the game, I’ve come to realize there’s another, missed opportunity that other games should take up.
Procedural elements.
Imagine a game like NMS (or NMS II, which again I feel is possible) that has procedural elements. The joy of discovery is not just felt on finding a new world or a new blueprint, a strange crystal or interesting rock formation could hold an element no one else has seen. There could be elements even the creators hadn’t foreseen, out there, lurking.
Sci-Fi and fantasy is often about strange and unusual materials. Let’s see more of that in games.
Of course to make them useful and understandable, procedural elements would need to be handled in certain ways. here’s my thoughts on it:
Where They Fit
Procedural elements would have to work into an existing crafting structure. The elements have to have some recognizable use despite their procedural nature. This would likely mean:
- The crafting structure recognizes general classes of elements (builds weapons, catalyst, etc) and procedural elements fit a general class but have unique cases. “Iron” is the same all over, but that procedural deposit of “Dekelite” has unique traits, thought both can be used to build weapons.
- Thecrafting structure recognizes specific elements, and procedural elements can “substitute” for regular ones and bring certain benefits. Thus “Chromatic Polytanium” may substitute for “Copper,” but any scanning device built with it has extra bonuses.
- Items that are used to power/supply other items may provide unique bonuses. A unique element that provides energy may, perhaps, deliver double the fuel value of a common one.
Unique Traits
It’d be pretty easy to make procedural elements that seem very samey, so work would have to be done to vary them. The need for variance would depend on how often they’d be encountered, of course (more on that later). But traits may vary along such areas as:
- Specific use.
- Elements they substitute/are used for.
- Bonuses and combinations of bonuses.
- Disadvantages and tradeoffs.
- Additional effects (perhaps if you make a potion with this element it always confers invisibility)
- Physical traits (even different colors or weights).
A game that uses procedural elements should have enough variances that they’re actually interesting, unique, ad surprising. Otherwise it might not be worth implementing.
But done right it could be amazing. Imagine traipsing through a fantasy forest to discover a rare gem deposit whose naturally holy traits repel demons and confer charisma. Imagine exploring a distant world to find a fuel source that boosts your hyperdrive beyond capacity – but will wear down your spaceship. Each finding is something unique, wondrous.
When You Can, Add Story
I’ve written about the need for procedural games to have pproceduralhistory. Same goes for procedural elements – I can’t say it’s required, but having “more” to the elements than a name and trait may be neat.
Maybe a procedural element in a fantasy game exists because a certain area is irradiated with magic. A procedural element in a SF game may have unusual energy properties because it was formed on a planet near the sun. Add something tomake the elements meaningful.
Or at least give us some flavor text for fun. Something to help us build our own story.
Oh and make sure the names are appropriate. I’d much rather find Chromatic Steel with it’s ability to make swords tht dazzle with rainbow light than a similar element called Furbonanium. Only use nonsense if it fits.
Don’t Overdo it
Finally, unless procedural elements are a theme of the game (and it may be), don’t overdo them. If you want these elements to stand out, then they have to stand out.
In any game of reasonable gameplay (20-40 hours) odds should be that only 1 or 2 procedural elements are found unless that’s a core part of the game. An element like this should be fascinating, amazng, perhaps game-changing – and overdoing it reduces the wonder.
That moment you find that rare deposit should be one you remember for the rest of the game.
So that’s my take on where NMS’ offspring should go – and a lesson we can learn from the current development of NMS. If a game focuses on the wonder of discovery and crafting, why not surprise your audience with procedural elements. Give people that unique experience that is personal – and perhaps theirs and theirs alone.
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
Whew! Guess who’s got a book about Worldbuilding, formatted for Print and Kindle? This guy.
Of course that doesn’t mean the book is ready, it’s ready-ish. I’d reached the point where I’d edited the hell out of the book and decided it was time to format it – formatting is a great way to find all your editing mistakes as you go through the book. Now I’ve got a Kindle version that looks good and a print version on the way so I can check it out.
Which of course means I’ll probably find plenty of mistakes – print copies are great for that. But at least now any changes will be made to the configured, checked, edited, and most importantly ready-to-go final copies.
(which I realize doesn’t make them exactly final, but you get he idea)
So what this means is that Way With Worlds Book 1 is in its final rounds. Barring any major accidents, it’ll definitely be out late July.
Of course the reason I’m not pushing it faster is:
- I have book 2 coming from the editor in less than a month, and I figure a go-over of that may help.
- I’ve got the Sailor Moon book coming back from that editor and really need to take a crack at that with my co-author, so we’ll probably blow a whole weekend editing.
Still, it’s closer all the time. I think you’ll find it’s worth the wait . . .
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
With No Man’s Sky (NMS), the giant procedural space game coming out, I am gladly analyzing as A) I game, and B) I love procedural generation. So let’s turn back all my speculation on what could be and focus on what could go wrong.
As much as I am enthused about it, I can see areas where the game could have problems. I’m going to explore these areas, so we can review how right/wrong I was – which should be useful to measure both my predictive abilities and how the NMS team works!
Now to make this more useful, I’m going to rank the chances these things could go wrong as Red (at least 50% chance), Yellow (50-25%) and Green (under 25%). These are not necessary interest-killers or will make it a bad game – but it would be a problem for enjoying it and experiencing the game.
Now let me get predicting:
High-pressure Survival Grind (Red): NMS is a survival game, but my concern is that the game is going to mix high-pressure survival with tedious grind – you’ll be on the edge of your seat all the time, but the edge is going to feel the same and never end. That’ll get both stressful and boring, and that would be an interest-killer.
Hopscotch (Red): Planets may be procedural and bursting with detail, but I’m also concerned that planets could be clusters of neat stuff separated by not so neat. This means hat exploring a planet is really a game of scanning-and-flying hopscotch that will also turn into a kind of grind. My concern is that this would not be optional but required to really experience the game.
Pacing (Red): You start out with little equipment on a distant world, have to survive, and eventually build your technology and resources. Sounds standard, but unless the game is carefully designed, you could experience highly erratic pacing – most likely a slow start but a surprisingly fast end if you max out equipment (see below). I also see potential pacing issues in different worlds and goals making it extremely hard to predict what one has to do to achieve a goal – because of the procedural generation.
Every Planet Different – And The Same (Yellow): I’m pretty confident the planets themselves will vary interesting, but not quite confident every planet will be different enough to warrant interest in exploring it a lot. I could be wrong (which I why this is yellow), and the NMS team seems to want to avoid this, but I can’t shake the concern. It seems like there’s a lot of impressive math, but what I’ve seen suggests some relatively standardized environments and all planets are single-environment. That can get boring – it’ll be new then quickly seem the same.
Stretches Of Boredom (Yellow): I don’t mind a bit of boredom or peace. But one of my concerns about NMS is that it’ll have uncontrollable stretches of boredom, stuck on dull worlds and sectors of space. Good visuals and environments will alleviate or eliminate this (yes, you spent 30 minutes looking for a mineral but it looks awesome).
Topped Off (Yellow): There’s supposed to be all sorts of ships and blueprints to find, but I’d be concerned the game could have some people max out their equipment and the like too early – loosing challenge and initiative. It’s procedural, so it may be hard to put pacing into the game. This is part of my larger concern about Pacing (above).
The Hunt (Yellow): Certain items, equipment, minerals may be vital for parts of the game, for equipment – but for some players they may be out of reach (again, due to procedural generation). If it’s not something people can find/buy/substitute for in a reasonable amount of time the game may be frustrating.
Same Old Equipment (Yellow): We get various ships, suits, and Omnitools, but from what I see they’re mostly about premade traits and various plugin spaces. Not sure they’re going to be that interesting after awhile. Are you going to go that far to get an Omnitool that moves a plugin space to one grid cell further rightward?
It Doesn’t Hold Together (Green): Though I trust Hello Games on the Lore, I’m concerned that it won’t be experienced enough, in enough context, to keep interest. The game may not need a story, but it’s sense of experience requires Lore. The whole thing could not cohere, have no sense of “there.”
Different, But Not Different Enough (Green): I’m mostly confident Hello Games can deliver varied worlds – but not entirely convinced it’ll be different enough for a whole game. I’m concerned that past a certain point – say about 70% of the way – things will start looking too much alike. I’m aware we’ve only seen a limited subset of worlds, but I’m not totally convinced. Yzheleuz and Phlek do give me some hope. This is one of my lesser concerns, but if planets aren’t different enough from each other and individual planets are large stretch of “same” (above) it’d get boring fast.
So there’s my concerns, roughly boiling down to:
- Most concerned about serious pacing/challenge issues
- Mildly concerned about equipment, resources, and variance on a planet.
- Slightly concerned about lore coherence and worlds varied enough.
What concerns do you have?
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
I’m hyped for No Man’s Sky, the space exploration game that uses math to give us a procedural universe – since it’s all constructed from equations, the game has quintillions of possible world to explore. On the rare time two people find the same world, it would be the same for both due to – math.
But as I’ve read and watched the news on NMS, there’s also talk of the lore of the game. The story, the meaning. The developer Hello Games has been very cagey on it, for obvious reasons – they don’t want to spoil the “story” in the game.
This lore, however, is already designed as far as we know. That brings up something I think it a potential disadvantage in NMS – and in many procedural/random games. A lot of the “story” is disconnected from the way the setting is made. The lore is set, and at best sets the stage for the generation of the world – or at worst isn’t just connected anyway.
This means in many cases the randomness of the world is sort of meaningless even if there’s some meaning in the components. There’s no history, just algorithms. Why is the dungeon built the way it is? Why are these artifacts on this world? I see little to no attention paid to not just generating a setting but the meaning behind it – the history – in many a game.
Like it or not, a lot of these procedural games are about making something that seems “right” but doesn’t have much real history. Now I love procedural games, I can get into them, but I admit this flaw, and I think the art is limited by this disconnection. There’s no “real history,” just a shadow play of numbers.
But this also gives us an insight into what future procedural games could be.
What if large chunks of their history, their backstory, are generated? What if, in turn this history affects the generated environments. What if this history is part of the lore characters find, from the names of places to the powers of procedurally generated items? Perhaps the characters themselves are connected to some procedurally generated lore.
Some examples.
- Imagine an NMS-like-game where the basic expansion patterns/conflicts of various species are procedurally generated – and in turn the effects on certain worlds and areas is created. Places between two peaceful species have great trade. Worlds right at areas of conflicts may have graveyards of crashed spaceships. Bits of history can be worked in, again procedural – you don’t just salvage equipment from a downed ship, but find out when and why it fell.
- A procedural dungeon crawler could have history generated depending on what the origin is. If there’s a gate from the netherworld burrowing up from underground, later levels would be older and more hellish. Perhaps earlier heroes went in to battle and fell, so each treasure has meaning.
- A game of global domination (or galactic domination) could start not just with the usual empty planet/galaxy trope but one filled with existing politics and peoples – with histories (and relations). The games become not just standard 4X experiences, but ones of discovering – and manipulating, a rich history.
- Such games would be not just fun like any good random/procedural game, but also far more compelling. Rich, unique lore exists -perhaps even if only until roguelike permadeath means you start a new dungeon. That lore in turn is meaningful because it explains and tells you something about the world. The tale comes to life because the history has a living quality, not one made static or one bolted onto a randomizer.
Procedural history is procedural meaning, and that brings the game further to life.
Maybe NMS will inspire enough people to do even more procedural work, some will look at procedural history for their games.
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
The update on my first book on Worldbuilding is . . . further along than expected.
After the long editing process, the formatting for print went well (probably as I had done a lot of the basics before sending it to the editor). I’m going to format the Kindle version next – not just to get it out of the way, but because doing so also acts as yet another read-through. I actually will do that this weekend.
Once that’s done, I’ll set up the cover and a sample doc and start running print copies. I still plan to release in July even if this goes well, just because I have so much else on my plate.
Besides, Book 2 comes back from the editor end of May or so . . . and I still have the Sailor Moon book.
Though the big worry there is, as noted elsewhere, the cover. Fan To Pro‘s cover was a total pain.
I’m pretty pleased with the book, but admit there’s times it comes off a bit artsy. I think that’s the intention, but it contrasts with my usual instructional style. It’s nice to see different voices in my writing – and I am hoping to broaden out even further. I think I need to develop more “voices.”
The content is definitely solid. There’s parts I’m seriously proud of, such as my exploration of worldbuidling sex, meditations on power, and my work on magic and technology. I think people can learn a lot from this – even if they disagree with me (and there are places I see folks will differ).
And book two, well, that’s when I dive into some serious details . . .
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
Last time I speculated on what would come next for No Man’s Sky. My take is that though it may have a good life (5-10 years) it’s going to end eventually. The comparative lack of interactivity is probably the killer.
My friend Serdar noted something that jumped the gun a bit in my analysis of the future – namely, that the studio should consider releasing the code. I was going that direction and wanted to expand on it.
So at some point I think NMS will end-of-life, and I’m leaning towards five years. But in that time – and at that time – Hello Games could do a few things.
First, I think they should release a planet generator that allows people to tweak various parameters – or randomize it. Serdar referred to the idea as a generator for Roger Dean Album Covers. I heartily concur. People might even pay a few bucks for it.
Secondly, the above planet generator? Pair it with some non-interactive exploration and music. After seeing what could be done on Panoramical, imagine what it’d be like to just jam to procedural music and scrolling alien landscapes?
Third, and foremost, at some point they should release all or most of the code of the game. Maybe license it, maybe free. Have the final legacy of No Man’s Sky (which will truly be foundational if it’s what they say it is), be the launching of even more children. It would doubly cement Hello Games legacy, and give innumerable people and groups and games a boost.
NMS could truly be world-changing. However there’s one more thing . . .
I think there will inevitably have to be a No Man’s Sky Next. No Man’s Sky-er. The Noer and the Manner Skye. Whatever.
Hello Games is going to learn an enormous amount of lessons from this. They will learn more about their code. They will learn more about players. They will release patches and updates and experience the limits of what their engine can do. They will, in short, be equipped to create a sequel that would outstrip what the original could do.
So, with NMS having a probable limited lifespan, my thoughts are this:
- Begin research for No Man’s Sky Next immediately.
- After a year or two release the “Roger Deanifier.” It’d also probably give any cooperative coders and 365 days of static a boost yes, I want them to team up with the guy behind Panormalical, OK?
- 3) As things calm down, begin work on No Man’s Sky Next – using the current NMS as a bit of a testbed.
- 4) When ready to release No Man’s Sky Next, drop the code of the original game on the internet.
Would releasing the code empower competitors? Doubtlessly, but you can be pretty sure they have and will have plenty. Releasing the code just cements the possibility of it.
And of course if done right, NMS Next would live on far longer than the first, becoming a doubtlessly deserved fixture.
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
As noted due to my interest with No Man’s Sky I’m blogging about it as it fits my interests in computers, media, and of course procedural generation!
I’m looking forward to No Man’s Sky. I expect it to be a hit. I expect it to be huge. I’ve also wondered that after that “huge hitness” what’s next for i?
This is worth asking because if NMS is a hit, what happens afterwards may be a model for other, similar properties. NMS’ broad scope and procedural content make it stand out – but as there’s many procedural games with broad scope out there and/or coming.
Or in short, I assume what happens to NMS may provide a template for future games and concurrent ones. I want to try and guess now.
Here’s a few things I see:
* GO LONG TERM: It sounds like NMS is going to be around for awhile, and with a galaxy to explore there’s certainly many places to go. We’ve seen long-term games with broad content have endurance (Minecraft, Terraria) and others with similar ambitions (Starbound). NMS is something I can see people playing obsessively, though . . .
* NEEDS MORE: Even hough I’m jazzed for it, I’m not sure the current content set would keep me playing regularly beyond 3-6 months. I think NMS will need to add more content and features over time to maintain interest, else it’ll be for dedicated explorers (which may be the goal). Dedicated explorers would probably play this for 1-3 years.
* MAY ENTER PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS: NMS has been on Colbert, been in the news, it’s got the kind of buzz that could make it become “A thing” like Minecraft – something everyone hears about and many try. If successful, it will inspire others to try the same thing (much as Minecraft did), and may give it a longer life. That will also inspire imitators (I imagine at some point procedural games will become comparatively common). That gives it more life.
* WILL LIKELY GO TO ALL PLATFORMS: If NMS is the big hit that I suspect it is, I think there will be an obvious effort to get it to other platforms (I’m at least sure Microsoft will want it on X-Box, but I think the X_box will become a sealed PC next iteration so it might not be an issue). There’s no reason not to extend it, and I imagine there’s demand. (The fact Starbound is on X-Box intrigues me)
* HOW FAR CAN IT GO? The limit of NMS is that its own limits work against it. Hard/impossible to find people. No/little building or influence. As big a booster as I am I’m not sure how far NMS will go before it seems that there’s not as much interest. People do like interaction and exploring and pimping out equipment isn’t like building castles. I also wonder how much they can add on to a game with so much procedurally balanced content.
My prediction on NMS is that it’s got up to 5 years of life in it, but I can’t see it bearing large expansions.
However, an interesting question is how it could not be expanded on, but retrofitted. With all that code and all that work, it might be better if Hello Games focused on No Man’s Sky II and made it truly long-term.
– Steve
(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, www.SeventhSanctum.com, and Steve’s Tumblr)
Been awhile since a Way With Worlds Update! So let’s find out where we are on my essays-rewritten-and-now-a-book on worldbuilding.
First, there’s a web page for the first book that gives you some idea of what I’m up to. You can also see the sample cover art – and you’re going to love the final cover!
I also got the book back from my editor. My editor is a “word of God type editor” – when it’s edited it’s done. So I spent an entire day going through her edits for the first book. After about ten hours of work, I have a book that is mostly ready for publication. One more read through and it’s ready for publishing (which itself is going to take a few months).
This brings up a really good lessons – there are several kinds of editors and you have to know how to work with them. Some are like a friendly guide with advice. Others are the Word Of God. Yet others are instructional. Each is different and you have to figure which works for you, your works, and your goals.
For instance, these books, though being creative and chatty are instructional. I needed a Word Of God editor on them.
On the other hand, some of my more intimate career books need a lighter touch as an editor. They’re chatty and friendly.
My upcoming Sailor Moon book has yet a different editor, a fansourced editor with an academic background and a fandom background, which seems perfect.
Now there’s also been a few schedule changes, so let’s recap!
- The First Book is out end of July as planned.
- The Second Book is out the end of October. It was originally August, but between the editor’s needs, my schedule, and the fact it’s damn stupid to put a sequel out a month later.
- After that is still a special surprise. Stay tuned.
I think you folks are going to love the books. It’s really my near-final word on Worldbuilding, and there’s a wealth of worldbuilding advice.
– Steve
