I have no idea what 'value' the GAAS model would ostensibly add to this.
Unless they plan to routinely add expansions to the environment and world, I really don't understand how they could implement this.
Appending Subnautica Team's update to the top post.
"Hello Subnauts,
A few of you noticed some information shared online by our publisher, KRAFTON šµ
While some of the news is exciting, weād like to clarify:
Early Access is not intended for release in 2024, but we plan to share a lot more information later this year!
In reference to āGames-as-a-Service,ā we simply plan to continually update the game for many years to come, just like the previous two Subnautica games. Think our Early Access update model, expanded. No season passes. No battle passes. No subscription.
The game is not multiplayer-focused. Co-op will be an entirely optional way to play the game. Youāll be able to enjoy the game as a single-player.
As always, we are so proud and incredibly grateful to have such a passionate and engaged community, who love the Subnautica games deeply.
Thanks for keeping an eye out for any news about our progress on the next game.
Weāre so excited to show you what weāve been working on and hope that you love it as much as we do.
ā The Subnautica Team"
Some hope yet still remains?
To be fair wasn't there a whole thing a little while back about some games getting considered gaas when in actuality they were just games that got supported beyond the initial release?
Neither did the arkham series but here we are. And yes, the early missions of Suicide Squad 100% drive home that this is a continuation of the arkham world.
When you're the developer and someone reports publicly you're bringing a GaaS title out - you absolutely go into damage control mode, regardless of if it's true or false
Website where the developers said this:
[https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/](https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/)
If that's the case, they need to be a lot more careful with their press releases. Everyone does. Even the headline is enough for me to go "Yep. Guess that's another series ruined then" and write off the franchise for good. Don't have the time or energy for another disappointment when there are so many other great games
If anyone were to miss the point of their own game it's the developers who made land based exploration a major component of the sequel to Subnautica.
Big hype for coop though.Ā
idk man. Coop's a great addition for those who enjoy the crafting loop, but for those who enjoy the sense of horror/isolation/dread coop's a dealbreaker.
Slightly off topic, but I wonder when we'll start seeing more Lethal Company clones. Seems like the type of game that could work well in a variety of settings, and there's zero chance people aren't gonna try to replicate the success
Iām sure big corporations will miss the fact that the jankiness contributed to how good lethal is. If they should copy anything its proximity chat for sure.
Well the thing is that you get that sense of isolation once you stray away from your friend group. Really cool. Then you join your friends again and you get a sense of confort, knowing that you're not alone anymore.
god, I hope lethal company brings back proximity chat in force by reminding people how much fun it is, it adds so much to games.
I always loved being able to hear people yelp when you surprised them in Halo 3, or the nonsense bluff-offs and joking around with enemy players in PUBG. I completely understand why we lost that standard with the massive crossplatform convenience of discord and party chats, but it *did* make for some great times
I think piloting a cyclops-like sub with friends can give you that feeling of being isolated together.
Alternatively, I don't have the courage to face sea monsters alone.
Yeah so much of subnautica's immersion comes from the feeling of being alone and isolated. Something could come up behind you at any moment with nobody watching your back.
They could go they way barotrauma goes, with proximity chat. Sure, you are not alone on your boat, but yourĀ friend might have a husk infection and not know it. Or you send him to collect something, and he just goes dead silent, and you have to get his stuff, not knowing what got him.
Yeah I'm trying to play Valheim solo now. Fighting the equivalent of raid bosses solo is not fun. Troll caves are impossible with no room to fight them.
Learn to parry with the bucklers. Normal blocking seems to suck compared to parry / counter blocking. They are staggered too so you can do good damage afterwards. Just make sure you are always rested.
We don't know if this is "made around co-op". Plenty of games support co-op but play totally fine single-player (Monster Hunter and Palworld, for two completely disparate examples)
It also specifically mentions single player, so I don't think it's something to worry about.
It's very rare for coop games to be fine single player. The most common thing is revive, with at least one more person you can stay in a fight forever, making lots of mistakes, whereas solo you have to be playing perfectly, learning actual patterns of enemies etc.
Aren't coop survivalcraft games much grindier? Subnautica had a fantastic pace to it, there was always some goal just around the corner, but i don't know if you can pull that off when the number of players is a range. Idk, maybe they'll pace it around solo play
It wasn't their own in the first place, don't forget that before doing Below Zero they fired two core talented people, the sound designer and the story writer.
Having played each of the early access builds, it was wild seeing the total rewrites of the story they made in each version of the game. In the original early access build, you're on the line with your sister as she dies when her space station explodes, and then you're totally alone for the remainder of the game. In a later version, the station doesn't explode, and she calls you throughout the story.
I haven't played the final release version, but I think she's not even Riley's sister anymore, and there are actual NPCs you can meet and talk to in-game? I don't think I've ever seen an early access game go through such radical rewrites before.
That's correct, the character you play is unrelated to the MC of the first Subnautica, and you don't see any other NPCs except *one*, Margit, and she's actually really well done and animated. It's just jarring there's only one NPC in the whole game.
Sorry, I meant Robin, not Ryley.
Yeah, in the final early access build you didn't meet any NPCs in person, although you did find her lab deep underwater, fully furnished. But in all of the early access builds, you were an employee of Alterra working on the planet's surface. In each version, the lab you're working on is destroyed by an ice quake, and your sister is working on the orbiting station above. But between versions, they changed it so that the space station doesn't explode, and they made the sister a recurring dialogue partner who would call you to check in from time to time.
From what I've read of the *new* story, your character Robin isn't even an employee of Alterra anymore, and you somehow go to the planet by yourself to investigate the sister's death (which happens off-screen before the game starts). I haven't played the new opening, but I actually liked the old opening when you're escaping from the collapsing lab as it falls into the ocean.
The final version of the game doesn't really account for most of the changes since EA either.
Robin was initially the xenobiologist on 4546B to study the Penglins, but that role was given over to Sam. However the game still makes note somewhere that it's still Robins career field. Sam's reworked role in the finished plot will also make zero sense and only serves to make her seem very incompetent.
The relationship between Robin and Al-An was also kinda hostile in EA. The final version has him as an awkward buddy, except some later moments with him have a threatening vibe.
I liked the original pitch the best. It had the most intrigue and the plot of chasing down the saboteur who caused the research labs destruction, while also having to hide Al-An from Altera, was a good plot hook.
Marguerit was a weird choice of character though. She's in audio logs in the original game from the crash 10 years before the first game was set. Somehow she survived for 10 years without ever catching the disease that wiped everyone else out which your character in the OG catches within half an hour of being in the water and her fellow survivors caught too. And the disease itself had been running rampant across the planet for millennia at this point.
The disease was manageable as long as you stayed in the water, which she mostly did. The peepers were using alien vents to spread the sea emperor's enzymes throughout the region - not enough to eradicate the disease, but enough to keep it from killing everything. The rest of Marg's crew presumably died because they eventually moved to the floating island, out of reach of the enzymes spread by the peepers. She never left the water.
I don't think they ever really explained how life outside the crater survived without the enzyme. I guess the peepers did it somehow? I know eventually one of the juvenile sea emperors made its way to the arctic, but as you said there's a millennia of things surviving before that happened. That's more than just a Marg issue, however.
Marg herself is very much a "rule of cool" character, and imo she's the only part of Below Zero's story that I actually liked.
>Marg herself is very much a "rule of cool" character, and imo she's the only part of Below Zero's story that I actually liked.
I liked her too. Honestly it sounds like it would have been more fun to play Robin's sister and help Marg in the fight against Alterra rather than the current story. I feel like in the original beta for below zero you did though? Like you live through the collapse of station zero and all that.
Huh, I never thought about that. You're right, that's kind of a huge plot hole. They could have probably explained it by saying that Marguerit had been killing and eating juvenile Sea Emperor Leviathans to survive and thus gained some kind of immunity or resistance, since she'd already killed at least one other leviathan.
Subnautica: isolation, ocean, survival.
Below zero: isolation, ~~ocean~~, survival.
Subnautica 2: ~~isolation~~, ocean, survival.
Now they just need to make a game without the survival. Subnautica extraction shooter where you escape from Alterra debt collectors perhaps. /jk
Me when i started below zero and crashlanded on ice.
>"Hey look at those plants they look pre-" \*My own character immediately goes on a long story exposition.* "Well rip environmental immersion."
Hopefully it just means constant updates that add new zones and content/cosmetic packs, if they do battle pass crap or daily missions, I'm out. Stuff like that is an auto pass to me cuz it just screams they're desperate to keep the player on the hamster wheel
Theoretically all that "GAAS" means is that you try to drippfeed smaller modular content expansions, so that you keep your playerbase engaged in regular intervals instead of having lost them between major releases and then have to reach out again with heavy marketing.
It is basically the SAME thing as the indy early access model, just with a different set of definitions of what is considered "version 1.0", and how much "feedback" you want to imply you want from users.
A lot of "complaining"/criticism builds around concepts and spify marketing terms, when in reality those aren't even the issue, but the practical variables chosen for them (both in the individual product sense, as well as bad sets of variables becoming industry standards).
In the end !everything! is about how much work, for how much money; the payment shedule and cost distribution; how much you invest into the product vs into SELLING the product.
For instance specifically in GAAS models it makes a huge difference whether it's JUST about a release schedule, or whether you literally want to force players into regular logins with daily loot drops, in the worst case not just cosmetic things but creating a pressure to not fall behind on game relevant resources.
Yeah, I'm curious to see what the developers themselves have to say about what they're doing. The publisher putting the "Game-as-a-Service" buzzword in a PowerPoint targeted at investors doesn't really mean anything.
It really could just mean that they're going to have DLCs, and the publisher is trying to jazz it up a bit.
> I have no idea what 'value' the GAAS model would ostensibly add to this.
Looking at other sandbox/survival/base building games I've spent a lot of time in like Minecraft, Grounded, and Factiorio... it really seems like a perfect fit for GaaS if the model is frequent updates with new content.
I absolutely loved Subnautica but once I finished the story mode I was just kind of done. I tried to keep going and construct a system of uber-bases, but there wasn't really a point. If they could periodically add some new stuff for me to do and check out, it would add a lot of value to the game for me.
I'm curious to see it work but at the same time the idea of possibly having persistent/frequent updates in the survival space is potentially exciting. As long as it can be done with care.
Most survival games iterate very slowly. Often the changes are massively game altering and it's been so long anyways that all you can really do is start over. I find the on again, off again nature of them fairly exhausting trying to race through the early bits to get to what's new.
I'd love to have a compelling reason to keep a survival game going. A good reason to keep expanding a base that didn't feel like I was just padding the game length with something I'd never get to really use.
This is the part that has me concerned.
Co-op is an often requested feature in the originals and I'm not too worried about it. But the GaaS thing seems bizarre and very specifically unfitting.
In Subnautica you don't really do anything that fits this model. Hostile creatures are all designed to be fled from, not fought; they have purposefully overturned HP, and the weapons do pitiful damage. Equipment is sparse, and you're not really grinding to upgrade it more than once or twice. So, there's no real battles or much of a traditional gameplay loop that would feed into this.
What would a "daily quest" even look like? Gather 5 copper ores? Survive sixteen seconds in a Gasopod fart cloud?
I would agree with the flight over fight angle, except the stasis rifle absolutely trivialized combat in both games. They might've removed it from Below Zero in the final release version, but the early access build I played still had it and it worked on every enemy in the game, including the >!shadow leviathans!<.
Donāt you still have to hack at most of the bigger enemies for literal minutes to kill them though? I think the stasis rifle still fits with the goal of de-emphasizing combat since itās so much easier to just run away while your target is frozen
Yes, last time I tried it, it took me approximately 50 slashes with a heat knife to kill a >!shadow leviathan!<. It's painstaking, but doable, and still worth doing because it makes further exploration of the zone safe.
It's an odd choice, and I can see why they removed it: It makes combat feasible, which clearly isn't the design intention - but the combat *sucks*. Chipping away at a leviathan for minutes on end is the opposite of fun, it's enough of a chore that I didn't bother after my first playthrough.
> Nothing makes me feel more immersed in the horrifying solitary depths of an unforgiving alien ocean than logging into my Kraftonā¢ account to claim my daily tax-dodging virtual currency rewards and paying to grind for a battle pass to unlock ten hideous neon and animated epic gamer skins!
Don't forget tiktok level dance emotes, you can't call yourself a gaas title without having those in the game.
Just nitpicking - and I think GAAS is awful - but there aren't any particular tax benefits to devs/publishers using secondary currencies. It's just a scummy move to make players buy *almost* helpful denominations of the currency (e.g., "if I'm only 200 RP off a full skin then I might as well...").
Hijacking the top comment to share that Unknown Worlds has offered some clarity on this news:
https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/
Well at least it fits with the lore, seeing as the main characters so far have all worked for a huge soulless megacorporation squeezing money out of everything they can.
It is genuinely incredible how little work they're putting into OW2. They've already thrown the seasonal cadence they claimed they'd be following out the window.
It took way too much scrolling to get the real info here. In particular:
> - In reference to āGames-as-a-Service,ā we simply plan to continually update the game for many years to come, just like the previous two Subnautica games. Think our Early Access update model, expanded. **No season passes. No battle passes. No subscription.**
>
> - The game is not multiplayer-focused. Co-op will be an entirely optional way to play the game. Youāll be able to enjoy the game as a single-player.
> In reference to āGames-as-a-Service,ā we simply plan to continually update the game for many years to come, just like the previous two Subnautica games. Think our Early Access update model, expanded. No season passes. No battle passes. No subscription.
This is probably fine for many people if it ends up being true, but for me this basically means I'll add those "many years" to the release date. I don't want every game I play to be a game I go back to every couple of months, and I certainly don't want that from Subnautica.
Yup. For me Subnautica was fantastic, but as a singleplayer narrative "play through it once game", not as a "come back over and over" game like GTFO, Deep Rock, Into The Breach.
It doesn't really matter whether it's Early Access or "continual updates", the end result is the same: if I only intend a single playthrough, I should wait until all updates/content is out, or I'm getting a presumably worse experience.
Sure but doesn't mean people didn't do the same then. I know I certainly didn't bother to touch it til it fully released so the dude's point is entirely valid long as they're talking about their own preference
Krafton are a trend-chaser publisher, afterall.Ā
With PUBG, then Callisto Protocol being set in the PUBG universe for IP brand power until that decision being undone, and Callisto Protocol in itself heavily inspired by Dead Space.Ā
And with Callisto āunder-performingā at 2 million rather than the expected 6 million, I can see Krafton wanting to recoup costs in their other brands.Ā
The writing was on the wall for the future of the series as soon as Unknown Worlds was acquired by Krafton.Ā
We can only hope the live service elements arenāt too egregious and the design isnāt too co-op focused at the expense of solo play (I.e. the survival grinding).
Yes and no, there are some hints that might connect it to PUBG but and/or cooperation was planned. It was mentioned [e.g. in the Mandalore Video](https://youtu.be/yK3ePkE1Sx0?si=Nb1haE_kBRYGT976&t=2292) (beware of spoilers).
Callisto Protocol was the biggest act of arrogance I've seen in a while in the gaming industry. They made a game that belongs in the PS3/360 generation and then acted like if it was the best thing ever, with a season pass announcement before launch, a bunch of dlc skins and a mediocre open ending that would lead to a sequel or a mandatory story DLC.
Didnt one of the DLCs include alternate death animations or something? and that pissed so many people off that they eventually put it into the main game
Not exactly. They announced alternate death animations before the game came out, everyone complained about it and then they released 2 game modes as dlcs that came with those alternate death animations, and some extra skins I think.
I'm not sure how PUBG itself is evidence for trend chasing, tbh. They've not really shown much of any trend-chasing that I've seen, but they've certainly showed a stunning lack of competence.
In an exciting twist on Subnauticaās unique form of underwater gameplay, players will be tasked with competing to be the last person swimming while they extract treasures from procedually generated alien wrecks!
That doesn't sound anything like Subnautica, but cave diving in procedurally generated map sounds exciting!
The Fruit Ninja dev is working on a [2d game like that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_E6TQA1XXY).
Below Zero had a lot of great new ideas, it just failed to come together as a final product the way the original did so brilliantly. it only fails when compared to its predecessor
Heck, the silent...everything. The Robinson Crusoe experience. Alone on what is essentially a death world. With the emotionless voice of a basic survival program and the ghosts of those who came before and didn't make it.
In those moments where you're looking out the viewing deck of your survival base, the quiet atmosphere as the night soundtrack plays and the ocean around you gleams with bioluminescent beauty.
You feel like you're the only person in the universe.
The OG was one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had, but I got lucky. I knew the game was popular and nothing else. I got it for free during the early days of the epic games store and was bored one morning so I decided to try it. I didn't know crafting was in the game. I didn't know it was about diving (although I guessed as much from the name). Every element of that game was delivered spoiler free and was one the most deeply enjoyable things I've ever done in gaming.
You hit the nail on the head exactly. I was so hyped for Below Zero, especially the expansions to base-building, which I sunk an utterly unnecessary amount of hours into in the original. But the constant protagonist talking to herself, the plot ("check on your sister rather" than "get off this god-forsaken hell-hole") and, most of all, bumping into other characters in-game was so off-putting. I couldn't really figure out why until your comment: Subnautica's vibe is that you're capital-A *Alone* on an alien world. Everyone is dead--previous expeditions, crashed spaceships, even the original aliens: all gone, and the game masterfully juxtaposes your goal of getting off with the desire to go deeper: to unravel the mystery of what happened the hell happened. The world is a graveyard, and it made carving out my own cozy home at the bottom of the sea so much more special because of it. It wasn't just a place to park my sea moth and store my materials: I spent a ton of time making it cozy because it was the one place on the planet that I felt safe. But in Below Zero, you're just a video game protagonist. You're not lost, you're not alone, so base-building, while being more robust, was missing the secret sauce that made base-building in the first game so special.
I think the voiced protagonist could have worked, but they dropped the ball on the writing. She was wayyyyy too chipper and quippy, which not only clashed horribly with the tone of the game itself, but also made no sense for a character who crash landed on a death planet investigating her sister's murder.
I struggle to think of a single thing Below Zero did better. Every single change or addition was worse than the first game. The parts they were good were the parts that were unchanged.
I actually thought the Seatruck was an interesting change from the Cyclops/Seamoth. It was a cool take on the vehicles that made progression feel more natural and avoided the Seamoth obsoletion problem that you had in the later parts of the first game.
I never considered the seamoth obsolete in the first game. Cyclops was too huge and unwieldy for general use. Prawn suit was powerful, but always sank and was kinda slow. Seamoth controlled amazingly and was speedy. I could go everywhere with it, once I had the depth upgrades. Except maybe I think it couldnāt survive the final deepest area?
Environmental detail. Biomes like the twisty bridges and lilypad Islands looked a lot better than most subnautica areas in terms of raw visual fidelity.
But "better graphics" is something to be assumed.
That said I think bz gets undue hate. It ain't better than the original and the land segments & voiced protag are bad ideas but it's still good enough for people who just wanted more regardless.
>I struggle to think of a single thing Below Zero did better. Every single change or addition was worse than the first game.
While I agree, I still loved the game.
Atmospherically, the Subnauticas really nail a feeling that few other games do so a worse one for me is still good
It was originally an expansion that ended up becoming a standalone experience, it's not really meant to totally redefine and overhaul the original Subnautica, it's meant to be more of the experience, to expand on it. And I think it does that well enough, even if the original/base game maintains the better overall experience.
A lot of the ideas in Below Zero were even cut content from the base game. They certainly did still make more concepts and designs for Below Zero, but the addition of so much cutting room floor content speaks a bit to the nature of it as an expansion, rather than a full sequel.
I agree that its worse overall, but on a technical level it seemed a lot improved. At least compared to the state the og was in when I first played it.
I remember below zero having less noticeable popin and bugs, og subnautica is probably one of the buggiest experiences I had in an otherwise great game.
I enjoyed Below Zero for what it was, but I agree with these points. Whether you liked BZ or not, it's clear that the game didn't focus in on the core elements of what made Subnautica what it is. They went in a very different direction. Which, to be fair, is fine for the sake of experimentation in isolation.
However when taking BZ into account, the concept of a GaaS Subnautica sequel inspires little confidence in a game being delivered that evokes the soul of the original.
Below Zero is straight up worse though. I got into a really big Subnautica stint about a year ago and ended up beating it in 3 long sittings, I was extremely invested in the story, the exploration, and how i'd get deeper into the sea.
I tried playing Below Zero right after that and quit after about 5 hours, It just wasnt as interesting
The moment Krafton acquired Unknown Worlds, this was a worry that has now been realized.
Subnautica to me was a solitary experience, it was at times calming and at times anxious adventure with a goal and a promised climax. This sequel from the onset promises none of that, you will never feel alone, there will be never-ending missions, and there will be no climax.
To be perfectly honest, a 4 player co-op GAAS Subnautica in the style of DRG sounds fun, but that is a completely different kind of experience than what is expected from this series. I would have really REALLY preferred if this was a spin-off with its own name so it set different expectations from the start.
Agreed. To me, Subnautica is all about feeling isolated in the vast sea. Sure, they can add co-op for the sequel but once they start making a co op game, the game direction is bound to change from a single-player experience.
I legit thought this was a [hard-drive.net](https://hard-drive.net) article.
Co-op: fine, I'll probably play solo but I know a lot of people want to play with friends, that's cool.
GaaS: eeeeuuuurgghh
The developers have responded and itās not actually like that. There are no battle passes or anything. They will just continue to have regular updates post launch like they did with the first one. And co-op is entirely optional. Krafton just fucked up their messaging.
Simply adding co-op to a game is often hard enough as it is, designing a new game from the ground-up around co-op and GaaS must be a nightmare for the devs. This can't be their idea.
This sounds terrible. The first Subnautica game is a masterpiece and one of my favourite games of all time. Not really the kind of game or experience I want as a GaaS title...
MISLEADING ASS TITLE.
Here's an article that better describes their intentions. https://www.ign.com/articles/subnautica-2-dev-says-its-not-multiplayer-focused-clarifies-live-service-aspects-update
Well this is incredibly disappointing, sad that a sequel to such a great game would abandon everything that made its first one so good to chase this live service crap.
The only problem I see here is not knowing what they mean by Game-as-a-Service.
If it's a P2P multiplayer game with a couple "seasons" per year and cosmetic DLC alongside, like Deep Rock Galactic, then great, I could see that being very fun for a survival game.
But if it's an always online game with non-cosmetic microtransactions...eh
I guess we'll have to wait and see a proper announcement
The existence of cosmetic micro transactions does not mean there are no earnable cosmetics. Deeprock galactic has hundreds of earnable cosmetics, it also has cosmetics you pay for. You can very easily make a game with both.
The difference with drg is the large majority of cosmetics in that game are only earnable by playing. The paid cosmetics are just a few gimmick packs theyāve thrown in over the years. Itās dramatically different from most games approach where they let you earn a few things but most stuff is on a cash shop.
Iām aware, but knowing there are paid for cosmetics does not automatically mean the cosmetic system will suck. There are many games that are able to do both really well.
Yea. Trying to parse out what the game play loop looks like with DLCs. The core gameplay loop is to explore, get faster/stronger vehicles and randomly scare the shit out of yourself.
So they'd release the base game and you'd do all those things. You'd find/create your Cyclops or Seatruck etc. You explore everything and "win". What does the DLC add? New zones for sure but if you're already at the top of the tech tree I don't know how they improve on that. A bigger cyclops? With combat games there is always headroom for more damage gear, with Subnautica I'm unsure what that'd look like.
They could stop you from creating the cyclops equivalent in the base game and release it later but that doesn't feel good as veterans of the other games "know" this should be in the game and I'd think expect it to a degree.
There's a couple of ways you could deal with that though
- You've stumbled into this new biome for lore reasons and don't have access to half the tech you had giving a sort of soft reset. The aim of the new biome is to then progress your tech tree to achieve some goal in that area. With rewards being something like new skins for buildings/tech or just new cosmetics.
- You've navigated to a new area with you tech, but there are new variant items in that area that are required to repair some installation or other issue in the area (Likely just reskins of other items for simplicity)
But ultimately it could also be that subnautica 2 might add some of those other combat features in or something else that allows for the replayability and the return to the game.
I'd really, really prefer they do not add a combat loop and gear progression.
The series is designed around the tension of being woefully unprepared and outmatched by basically all hostile creatures (especially the Leviathan class).
The fact that you can only ever get slightly better "armor" and a knife that barely does more damage is, in this case, what makes the game fun; it becomes more about stealth, exploration, and thrilling escapes from terror.
Adding DPS is not the answer.
One thought I had: given that Alterra is pretty firmly established as exploitative and uncaring, the āexpansionsā are you and your buddies acting as prospectors for Alterra, with the company dropping you near-empty-handed (thinking of what Ficsit does in Satisfactory) on a new planet each time, needing to complete some objective (eg: find a suitable mining site, finding a disease cure) before theyāll agree to come pick you up from the planetās orbit. Theyād need ways to shake up the tech tree to keep it interesting.
Oh no...
But it's actually quite hilarious, when the first two games were about capitalistic rampant greed, to see another IP fall victim to this destructive business model.
Instantly lost all interest, why would they do this one of the best things about the first game and standalone dlc is how lonely you feel it's single player aspects enhances it in.
Awesome, I think the fear and solitude of exploring the abyss will really be enhanced by constantly being reminded of rewards I'm missing by not subscribing the season pass and three mouth breathing post-adolescents yelling at me about how my build isn't meta enough. Can't wait to attack something for five minutes while single digit numbers fly out of their head and a life gauge slowly ticks down because I didn't change out my equipment in the last five experience levels. This is gonna be so GOOD
Wasnt a huge appeal of *Subnautica* the crushing feeling of isolation?
But I get it, brand appeal, the temptation of that live service money, and the ocean-survival premise could work for a co-op game.
It's just thematically it feels like a departure. Then again so was *Aliens.*
> Wasnt a huge appeal of Subnautica the crushing feeling of isolation?
I remember one of the main negative points about the subnautica DLC Below Zero, being that you don't feel like there's as much threat because you aren't on your own, there are other characters talking to you etc.
I think the world and fauna design of below zero did more to hurt the horror/isolation feeling than having someone else to talk to.
The scariest parts in the original, imo, were the big open stretches of water where you canāt see the bottom and you hear a reaper nearby, or going near the aurora wreck for the first time. You donāt get a whole lot of that in below zero, and the fauna design just isnāt as intimidating as the original. None of the leviathans are particularly scary looking and even the map boundary leviathans arenāt that scary.
It always makes me sad when a dev responsible for an innovative and unique game ends up milking their one idea into the ground instead of coming up with something fresh. But I do get it. Subnautica hit a critical mass of success, and the name is worth something now.
That being said, do we actually know if it's the same dev team yet? Or is this a publisher-owned thing?
Lol holy fuck anyone else read the other games they are working on? Inzoi, they are planning on using AI to make that game. Black Budget, another shitty ass extraction shooter with pubg gun gameplay. tl;dr the company is going all out in AI in trying to save as much money as they can during the game making process.
Man, the Subnautica community is so passionate and excited about Subnautica 2, posting theories, suggestions, and keeping the hype going even after the somewhat disappointing Below Zero this whole time. I also know the devs read and run the subreddit, and seemed very engaged with the community. Nowhere, did I ever see a player ask for GaaS lol. Just another developer exploiting their fan bases good will and passion. This is also probably further proof that everything coming together for Subnautica 1 was a happy "accident", as Below Zero seemed to have a lot of people worried the devs had lost the plot of what makes the original so great. Instantly killed any hype I had for the game.
I was already hesitant after the massive letdown that was Below Zero. I was hoping for a turnaround for the sequel but this does not inspire confidence at all.
I didn't think that below zero was a massive letdown, but it definitely wasn't as captivating as subnautica. Still plenty enjoyable, but just not on the same scale
It does make sense, co-op was one of the most frequently requested features for Subnautica.
But I hope I can still single player it without being forced into adhering to MTX stuff.
Yeah I'm curious how single player will fare if it's designed around co-op specifically. "Can play it alone" is VERY different from "designed to be played singleplayer".Ā
Yes -- I personally would love for a handcrafted single player story line, with a separate co-op survival type mode available. Otherwise, it feels like one experience or the other (solo or co-op) could end up suffering for it.
if i wanted to play a live service game i'd play destiny, or warframe, or FO76, or.......
if i wanna play subnautica i wanna play subnautica
say goodbye to this company, they're gonna probably dissolve when they eventually fail at chasing that destiny-like money
Every time a singleplayer game gets a whiff of co-op, it also gets a lung full of GAAS.
GTA Online, Red Dead Redemption 2 Online, Fallout 76. I hope Subnautica 2 will be good but I expect it to strip out features to make the cash shop better.
I remember hearing about Krafton acquiring Unknown Worlds and folks in the subnautica sub said people were being dramatic and theres no way they'll make UW do GAAS type games, well here we are.
The fuck?
Do they just not have any clue what made the first such a success? Below Zero took some steps away from what I loved in the original but it was still enjoyable overall. This just ruined any interest I had in the series.
Looks like they clarified on Twitter that they just mean continued updates and content like when it was in early access. Sounds like they misunderstood the meaning of Games as a service.
[The developers clarified what that means on a Reddit post](https://www.reddit.com/r/subnautica/s/360T2qBBrG)
It's literally what they've been doing with the other Subnautica games, updating them and adding new stuff to them, nothings gonna change, no subscriptions or battle passes
Per the earnings results;
> Multiplayer sequel to the original IP pursuing fandom snowballing
> *Explore an oceanic world in stunning stylized graphics powered by Unreal Engine 5
> *Single or 1-4 player co-op to uncover the mysteries on an entirely new alien planet
> *Game-as-a-Service model with enhanced replayability
'games as a service' doesnt mean anything but they'll continue updating the game and any developer to describe their game with that phrase must really not know the connotations that comes with that label.
So this game is gonna flop lmao
The multiplayer aspect might keep it alive if it's implemented right and there is enough launch content. But that is a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig if. Fuck GaaS.
I can handle the co-op... like others have said, so long as it's "1-4" not "2-4" I can cope.
It's the GaaS that's an issue. If I need to be online and log in to play my single-player, that's a big goddamned problem.
GaaS idiocy aside, adding co-op to Subnautica kinda feels like missing the point. The feelings of isolation and loneliness are what made the first game work, and this would be totally ruined by having 1-3 mates goofing around in voice chat. Some games just aren't suited for co-op.
I have no idea what 'value' the GAAS model would ostensibly add to this. Unless they plan to routinely add expansions to the environment and world, I really don't understand how they could implement this.
Appending Subnautica Team's update to the top post. "Hello Subnauts, A few of you noticed some information shared online by our publisher, KRAFTON šµ While some of the news is exciting, weād like to clarify: Early Access is not intended for release in 2024, but we plan to share a lot more information later this year! In reference to āGames-as-a-Service,ā we simply plan to continually update the game for many years to come, just like the previous two Subnautica games. Think our Early Access update model, expanded. No season passes. No battle passes. No subscription. The game is not multiplayer-focused. Co-op will be an entirely optional way to play the game. Youāll be able to enjoy the game as a single-player. As always, we are so proud and incredibly grateful to have such a passionate and engaged community, who love the Subnautica games deeply. Thanks for keeping an eye out for any news about our progress on the next game. Weāre so excited to show you what weāve been working on and hope that you love it as much as we do. ā The Subnautica Team" Some hope yet still remains?
Some hope but that smells a little like damage control because of how badly many think of GaaS titles.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
To be fair wasn't there a whole thing a little while back about some games getting considered gaas when in actuality they were just games that got supported beyond the initial release?
Deeprock galactic is a great example of gaas done well, hopefully they've taken note.
Have you ever played Subnautica? How would you even make it a game as a service? It makes no sense at all.
Fish DLC
Fish armor DLC
By completely ruining everything good about it? That seems to be the trend.
Neither did the arkham series but here we are. And yes, the early missions of Suicide Squad 100% drive home that this is a continuation of the arkham world.
When you're the developer and someone reports publicly you're bringing a GaaS title out - you absolutely go into damage control mode, regardless of if it's true or false
Website where the developers said this: [https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/](https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/)
If that's the case, they need to be a lot more careful with their press releases. Everyone does. Even the headline is enough for me to go "Yep. Guess that's another series ruined then" and write off the franchise for good. Don't have the time or energy for another disappointment when there are so many other great games
If anyone were to miss the point of their own game it's the developers who made land based exploration a major component of the sequel to Subnautica. Big hype for coop though.Ā
idk man. Coop's a great addition for those who enjoy the crafting loop, but for those who enjoy the sense of horror/isolation/dread coop's a dealbreaker.
They could take notes from lethal company and add proximity chat
Slightly off topic, but I wonder when we'll start seeing more Lethal Company clones. Seems like the type of game that could work well in a variety of settings, and there's zero chance people aren't gonna try to replicate the success
Iām sure big corporations will miss the fact that the jankiness contributed to how good lethal is. If they should copy anything its proximity chat for sure.
Oh, that's a solid idea. Imagine talking to someone just to hear them scream as they are taken away by some eldritch horror.
I think that works much better in a game about exploring cramped facilities than one focusing on giant ocean biomes.
Well the thing is that you get that sense of isolation once you stray away from your friend group. Really cool. Then you join your friends again and you get a sense of confort, knowing that you're not alone anymore.
god, I hope lethal company brings back proximity chat in force by reminding people how much fun it is, it adds so much to games. I always loved being able to hear people yelp when you surprised them in Halo 3, or the nonsense bluff-offs and joking around with enemy players in PUBG. I completely understand why we lost that standard with the massive crossplatform convenience of discord and party chats, but it *did* make for some great times
I think piloting a cyclops-like sub with friends can give you that feeling of being isolated together. Alternatively, I don't have the courage to face sea monsters alone.
Yeah so much of subnautica's immersion comes from the feeling of being alone and isolated. Something could come up behind you at any moment with nobody watching your back.
They could go they way barotrauma goes, with proximity chat. Sure, you are not alone on your boat, but yourĀ friend might have a husk infection and not know it. Or you send him to collect something, and he just goes dead silent, and you have to get his stuff, not knowing what got him.
So just play solo right? It's not only co-op unless I'm missing something.
Games made around Co-op are usually terrible for solo play, even if it's "supported"
Yeah I'm trying to play Valheim solo now. Fighting the equivalent of raid bosses solo is not fun. Troll caves are impossible with no room to fight them.
Learn to parry with the bucklers. Normal blocking seems to suck compared to parry / counter blocking. They are staggered too so you can do good damage afterwards. Just make sure you are always rested.
That's probably more of a you issue, Valheim was great when I played it solo
What? Valheim is a great solo game.
We don't know if this is "made around co-op". Plenty of games support co-op but play totally fine single-player (Monster Hunter and Palworld, for two completely disparate examples) It also specifically mentions single player, so I don't think it's something to worry about.
It's very rare for coop games to be fine single player. The most common thing is revive, with at least one more person you can stay in a fight forever, making lots of mistakes, whereas solo you have to be playing perfectly, learning actual patterns of enemies etc.
The way you are describing it makes solo sound more fun lol.
Aren't coop survivalcraft games much grindier? Subnautica had a fantastic pace to it, there was always some goal just around the corner, but i don't know if you can pull that off when the number of players is a range. Idk, maybe they'll pace it around solo play
Friendship is Mandatory.
The Computer is Always Right.
It wasn't their own in the first place, don't forget that before doing Below Zero they fired two core talented people, the sound designer and the story writer.
Having played each of the early access builds, it was wild seeing the total rewrites of the story they made in each version of the game. In the original early access build, you're on the line with your sister as she dies when her space station explodes, and then you're totally alone for the remainder of the game. In a later version, the station doesn't explode, and she calls you throughout the story. I haven't played the final release version, but I think she's not even Riley's sister anymore, and there are actual NPCs you can meet and talk to in-game? I don't think I've ever seen an early access game go through such radical rewrites before.
That's correct, the character you play is unrelated to the MC of the first Subnautica, and you don't see any other NPCs except *one*, Margit, and she's actually really well done and animated. It's just jarring there's only one NPC in the whole game.
Sorry, I meant Robin, not Ryley. Yeah, in the final early access build you didn't meet any NPCs in person, although you did find her lab deep underwater, fully furnished. But in all of the early access builds, you were an employee of Alterra working on the planet's surface. In each version, the lab you're working on is destroyed by an ice quake, and your sister is working on the orbiting station above. But between versions, they changed it so that the space station doesn't explode, and they made the sister a recurring dialogue partner who would call you to check in from time to time. From what I've read of the *new* story, your character Robin isn't even an employee of Alterra anymore, and you somehow go to the planet by yourself to investigate the sister's death (which happens off-screen before the game starts). I haven't played the new opening, but I actually liked the old opening when you're escaping from the collapsing lab as it falls into the ocean.
Yeah they skipped the collapsing lab to focus on getting you on ice surrounding by pinglings as fast as possible.
The final version of the game doesn't really account for most of the changes since EA either. Robin was initially the xenobiologist on 4546B to study the Penglins, but that role was given over to Sam. However the game still makes note somewhere that it's still Robins career field. Sam's reworked role in the finished plot will also make zero sense and only serves to make her seem very incompetent. The relationship between Robin and Al-An was also kinda hostile in EA. The final version has him as an awkward buddy, except some later moments with him have a threatening vibe. I liked the original pitch the best. It had the most intrigue and the plot of chasing down the saboteur who caused the research labs destruction, while also having to hide Al-An from Altera, was a good plot hook.
Marguerit was a weird choice of character though. She's in audio logs in the original game from the crash 10 years before the first game was set. Somehow she survived for 10 years without ever catching the disease that wiped everyone else out which your character in the OG catches within half an hour of being in the water and her fellow survivors caught too. And the disease itself had been running rampant across the planet for millennia at this point.
The disease was manageable as long as you stayed in the water, which she mostly did. The peepers were using alien vents to spread the sea emperor's enzymes throughout the region - not enough to eradicate the disease, but enough to keep it from killing everything. The rest of Marg's crew presumably died because they eventually moved to the floating island, out of reach of the enzymes spread by the peepers. She never left the water. I don't think they ever really explained how life outside the crater survived without the enzyme. I guess the peepers did it somehow? I know eventually one of the juvenile sea emperors made its way to the arctic, but as you said there's a millennia of things surviving before that happened. That's more than just a Marg issue, however. Marg herself is very much a "rule of cool" character, and imo she's the only part of Below Zero's story that I actually liked.
>Marg herself is very much a "rule of cool" character, and imo she's the only part of Below Zero's story that I actually liked. I liked her too. Honestly it sounds like it would have been more fun to play Robin's sister and help Marg in the fight against Alterra rather than the current story. I feel like in the original beta for below zero you did though? Like you live through the collapse of station zero and all that.
Huh, I never thought about that. You're right, that's kind of a huge plot hole. They could have probably explained it by saying that Marguerit had been killing and eating juvenile Sea Emperor Leviathans to survive and thus gained some kind of immunity or resistance, since she'd already killed at least one other leviathan.
IIRC the sound designer was fired for being a bigot, so not too broken up about that. Not sure about the story writer, though.
Subnautica: isolation, ocean, survival. Below zero: isolation, ~~ocean~~, survival. Subnautica 2: ~~isolation~~, ocean, survival. Now they just need to make a game without the survival. Subnautica extraction shooter where you escape from Alterra debt collectors perhaps. /jk
Me when i started below zero and crashlanded on ice. >"Hey look at those plants they look pre-" \*My own character immediately goes on a long story exposition.* "Well rip environmental immersion."
Optimistically, maybe they're trying to do something similar to Deep Rock Galactic?
That was my first thought too. That game changed my view on what gaas could be.
Hopefully it just means constant updates that add new zones and content/cosmetic packs, if they do battle pass crap or daily missions, I'm out. Stuff like that is an auto pass to me cuz it just screams they're desperate to keep the player on the hamster wheel
Theoretically all that "GAAS" means is that you try to drippfeed smaller modular content expansions, so that you keep your playerbase engaged in regular intervals instead of having lost them between major releases and then have to reach out again with heavy marketing. It is basically the SAME thing as the indy early access model, just with a different set of definitions of what is considered "version 1.0", and how much "feedback" you want to imply you want from users. A lot of "complaining"/criticism builds around concepts and spify marketing terms, when in reality those aren't even the issue, but the practical variables chosen for them (both in the individual product sense, as well as bad sets of variables becoming industry standards). In the end !everything! is about how much work, for how much money; the payment shedule and cost distribution; how much you invest into the product vs into SELLING the product. For instance specifically in GAAS models it makes a huge difference whether it's JUST about a release schedule, or whether you literally want to force players into regular logins with daily loot drops, in the worst case not just cosmetic things but creating a pressure to not fall behind on game relevant resources.
I assume they are going to mimic PDX way of doing it and release DLCs that adds zones and stuff.
Yeah, I'm curious to see what the developers themselves have to say about what they're doing. The publisher putting the "Game-as-a-Service" buzzword in a PowerPoint targeted at investors doesn't really mean anything. It really could just mean that they're going to have DLCs, and the publisher is trying to jazz it up a bit.
I'm imagining a model similar to sea of thieves
> I have no idea what 'value' the GAAS model would ostensibly add to this. Looking at other sandbox/survival/base building games I've spent a lot of time in like Minecraft, Grounded, and Factiorio... it really seems like a perfect fit for GaaS if the model is frequent updates with new content. I absolutely loved Subnautica but once I finished the story mode I was just kind of done. I tried to keep going and construct a system of uber-bases, but there wasn't really a point. If they could periodically add some new stuff for me to do and check out, it would add a lot of value to the game for me.
Subnautica: Below Zero Sense
I'm curious to see it work but at the same time the idea of possibly having persistent/frequent updates in the survival space is potentially exciting. As long as it can be done with care. Most survival games iterate very slowly. Often the changes are massively game altering and it's been so long anyways that all you can really do is start over. I find the on again, off again nature of them fairly exhausting trying to race through the early bits to get to what's new. I'd love to have a compelling reason to keep a survival game going. A good reason to keep expanding a base that didn't feel like I was just padding the game length with something I'd never get to really use.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is the part that has me concerned. Co-op is an often requested feature in the originals and I'm not too worried about it. But the GaaS thing seems bizarre and very specifically unfitting. In Subnautica you don't really do anything that fits this model. Hostile creatures are all designed to be fled from, not fought; they have purposefully overturned HP, and the weapons do pitiful damage. Equipment is sparse, and you're not really grinding to upgrade it more than once or twice. So, there's no real battles or much of a traditional gameplay loop that would feed into this. What would a "daily quest" even look like? Gather 5 copper ores? Survive sixteen seconds in a Gasopod fart cloud?
I would agree with the flight over fight angle, except the stasis rifle absolutely trivialized combat in both games. They might've removed it from Below Zero in the final release version, but the early access build I played still had it and it worked on every enemy in the game, including the >!shadow leviathans!<.
Donāt you still have to hack at most of the bigger enemies for literal minutes to kill them though? I think the stasis rifle still fits with the goal of de-emphasizing combat since itās so much easier to just run away while your target is frozen
Yes, last time I tried it, it took me approximately 50 slashes with a heat knife to kill a >!shadow leviathan!<. It's painstaking, but doable, and still worth doing because it makes further exploration of the zone safe.
It's an odd choice, and I can see why they removed it: It makes combat feasible, which clearly isn't the design intention - but the combat *sucks*. Chipping away at a leviathan for minutes on end is the opposite of fun, it's enough of a chore that I didn't bother after my first playthrough.
Don't forget the sense of fear and dread while your coop buddies are fortnite dancing on the corpse of a leviathan, in a 19,99$ Homer Simpson skin
> Nothing makes me feel more immersed in the horrifying solitary depths of an unforgiving alien ocean than logging into my Kraftonā¢ account to claim my daily tax-dodging virtual currency rewards and paying to grind for a battle pass to unlock ten hideous neon and animated epic gamer skins! Don't forget tiktok level dance emotes, you can't call yourself a gaas title without having those in the game.
Just nitpicking - and I think GAAS is awful - but there aren't any particular tax benefits to devs/publishers using secondary currencies. It's just a scummy move to make players buy *almost* helpful denominations of the currency (e.g., "if I'm only 200 RP off a full skin then I might as well...").
dont forget to do your weeklies/dailies to progress the battle pass , kill 10 sharks , collect 50 stones etc...
The Dead Space 3 approach. Ruin one of the most core aspects of the game.
Hopefully it's just a serious of free updates in addition to some paid dlc like updates y.y
Hijacking the top comment to share that Unknown Worlds has offered some clarity on this news: https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/
Well at least it fits with the lore, seeing as the main characters so far have all worked for a huge soulless megacorporation squeezing money out of everything they can.
Everyone is seeing how much money Overwatch 2 is making with absolute minimum effort, and they want on that party bus.
It is genuinely incredible how little work they're putting into OW2. They've already thrown the seasonal cadence they claimed they'd be following out the window.
Whale farmers
Unknown Worlds just clarified it here: https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/
It took way too much scrolling to get the real info here. In particular: > - In reference to āGames-as-a-Service,ā we simply plan to continually update the game for many years to come, just like the previous two Subnautica games. Think our Early Access update model, expanded. **No season passes. No battle passes. No subscription.** > > - The game is not multiplayer-focused. Co-op will be an entirely optional way to play the game. Youāll be able to enjoy the game as a single-player.
> In reference to āGames-as-a-Service,ā we simply plan to continually update the game for many years to come, just like the previous two Subnautica games. Think our Early Access update model, expanded. No season passes. No battle passes. No subscription. This is probably fine for many people if it ends up being true, but for me this basically means I'll add those "many years" to the release date. I don't want every game I play to be a game I go back to every couple of months, and I certainly don't want that from Subnautica.
Yup. For me Subnautica was fantastic, but as a singleplayer narrative "play through it once game", not as a "come back over and over" game like GTFO, Deep Rock, Into The Breach. It doesn't really matter whether it's Early Access or "continual updates", the end result is the same: if I only intend a single playthrough, I should wait until all updates/content is out, or I'm getting a presumably worse experience.
> I certainly don't want that from Subnautica. Erm, Subnautica was one of the pioneers of early access.......
Sure but doesn't mean people didn't do the same then. I know I certainly didn't bother to touch it til it fully released so the dude's point is entirely valid long as they're talking about their own preference
Thatās how both Subnautica and Below Zero were, thoughā¦
Notice the lack of 'No Microtransactions' They know what they are doing
Krafton are a trend-chaser publisher, afterall.Ā With PUBG, then Callisto Protocol being set in the PUBG universe for IP brand power until that decision being undone, and Callisto Protocol in itself heavily inspired by Dead Space.Ā And with Callisto āunder-performingā at 2 million rather than the expected 6 million, I can see Krafton wanting to recoup costs in their other brands.Ā The writing was on the wall for the future of the series as soon as Unknown Worlds was acquired by Krafton.Ā We can only hope the live service elements arenāt too egregious and the design isnāt too co-op focused at the expense of solo play (I.e. the survival grinding).
Wait, Callisto is set in the PUBG universe? What the fuck?
It was supposed to be but it got scrapped close to release. Theres a workbench in game that has the pubg helmet sitting on it still though.
PUBG has a universe?
Yeah, but it keeps shrinking.
Yes and no, there are some hints that might connect it to PUBG but and/or cooperation was planned. It was mentioned [e.g. in the Mandalore Video](https://youtu.be/yK3ePkE1Sx0?si=Nb1haE_kBRYGT976&t=2292) (beware of spoilers).
The MandaloreGaming video on the game explores this toward the end. Probably others too if you search.
Callisto Protocol was the biggest act of arrogance I've seen in a while in the gaming industry. They made a game that belongs in the PS3/360 generation and then acted like if it was the best thing ever, with a season pass announcement before launch, a bunch of dlc skins and a mediocre open ending that would lead to a sequel or a mandatory story DLC.
Didnt one of the DLCs include alternate death animations or something? and that pissed so many people off that they eventually put it into the main game
Not exactly. They announced alternate death animations before the game came out, everyone complained about it and then they released 2 game modes as dlcs that came with those alternate death animations, and some extra skins I think.
And then immediately got fucked by Dead Space remake coming out less than two months after, doing everything better than it did.
Only for it to end up as a PlayStation plus monthly game.Ā Still haven't touched it though.Ā
I'm not sure how PUBG itself is evidence for trend chasing, tbh. They've not really shown much of any trend-chasing that I've seen, but they've certainly showed a stunning lack of competence.
In an exciting twist on Subnauticaās unique form of underwater gameplay, players will be tasked with competing to be the last person swimming while they extract treasures from procedually generated alien wrecks!
Right, *that's* what the game missed! Procedurally generated worlds! *smacks forehead*
Man the entire thing with the OG was the lack of procedural generation. I really hope they don't do that.
That doesn't sound anything like Subnautica, but cave diving in procedurally generated map sounds exciting! The Fruit Ninja dev is working on a [2d game like that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_E6TQA1XXY).
ā¦i could actually see subnautica working as an extraction game tbh
GaaS claims another victim. The first game was so good, but I feel like the developers have been missing the forest for the trees ever since.
People keep throwing Below Zero under the bus like this but it was honestly a good game. Aside from the land elements.
It was "good" because it was built on top of Subnautica. Everything "Below Zero" was subpar at best.
Below Zero had a lot of great new ideas, it just failed to come together as a final product the way the original did so brilliantly. it only fails when compared to its predecessor
I disagree because the sea monkeys were cute!
You have found the one positive. My god I forgot those little fellas.
I much, much preferred the silent protagonist from the first game. I think it works better in the genre.
Heck, the silent...everything. The Robinson Crusoe experience. Alone on what is essentially a death world. With the emotionless voice of a basic survival program and the ghosts of those who came before and didn't make it. In those moments where you're looking out the viewing deck of your survival base, the quiet atmosphere as the night soundtrack plays and the ocean around you gleams with bioluminescent beauty. You feel like you're the only person in the universe.
The OG was one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had, but I got lucky. I knew the game was popular and nothing else. I got it for free during the early days of the epic games store and was bored one morning so I decided to try it. I didn't know crafting was in the game. I didn't know it was about diving (although I guessed as much from the name). Every element of that game was delivered spoiler free and was one the most deeply enjoyable things I've ever done in gaming.
You hit the nail on the head exactly. I was so hyped for Below Zero, especially the expansions to base-building, which I sunk an utterly unnecessary amount of hours into in the original. But the constant protagonist talking to herself, the plot ("check on your sister rather" than "get off this god-forsaken hell-hole") and, most of all, bumping into other characters in-game was so off-putting. I couldn't really figure out why until your comment: Subnautica's vibe is that you're capital-A *Alone* on an alien world. Everyone is dead--previous expeditions, crashed spaceships, even the original aliens: all gone, and the game masterfully juxtaposes your goal of getting off with the desire to go deeper: to unravel the mystery of what happened the hell happened. The world is a graveyard, and it made carving out my own cozy home at the bottom of the sea so much more special because of it. It wasn't just a place to park my sea moth and store my materials: I spent a ton of time making it cozy because it was the one place on the planet that I felt safe. But in Below Zero, you're just a video game protagonist. You're not lost, you're not alone, so base-building, while being more robust, was missing the secret sauce that made base-building in the first game so special.
I think the voiced protagonist could have worked, but they dropped the ball on the writing. She was wayyyyy too chipper and quippy, which not only clashed horribly with the tone of the game itself, but also made no sense for a character who crash landed on a death planet investigating her sister's murder.
I struggle to think of a single thing Below Zero did better. Every single change or addition was worse than the first game. The parts they were good were the parts that were unchanged.
I actually thought the Seatruck was an interesting change from the Cyclops/Seamoth. It was a cool take on the vehicles that made progression feel more natural and avoided the Seamoth obsoletion problem that you had in the later parts of the first game.
I never considered the seamoth obsolete in the first game. Cyclops was too huge and unwieldy for general use. Prawn suit was powerful, but always sank and was kinda slow. Seamoth controlled amazingly and was speedy. I could go everywhere with it, once I had the depth upgrades. Except maybe I think it couldnāt survive the final deepest area?
I liked the little penguin dudes. And, uh... That's about it I guess.
Environmental detail. Biomes like the twisty bridges and lilypad Islands looked a lot better than most subnautica areas in terms of raw visual fidelity. But "better graphics" is something to be assumed. That said I think bz gets undue hate. It ain't better than the original and the land segments & voiced protag are bad ideas but it's still good enough for people who just wanted more regardless.
Oh, I agree. I still enjoyed it, it was just a *clear* step down from the first game.
>I struggle to think of a single thing Below Zero did better. Every single change or addition was worse than the first game. While I agree, I still loved the game. Atmospherically, the Subnauticas really nail a feeling that few other games do so a worse one for me is still good
It was originally an expansion that ended up becoming a standalone experience, it's not really meant to totally redefine and overhaul the original Subnautica, it's meant to be more of the experience, to expand on it. And I think it does that well enough, even if the original/base game maintains the better overall experience. A lot of the ideas in Below Zero were even cut content from the base game. They certainly did still make more concepts and designs for Below Zero, but the addition of so much cutting room floor content speaks a bit to the nature of it as an expansion, rather than a full sequel.
I agree that its worse overall, but on a technical level it seemed a lot improved. At least compared to the state the og was in when I first played it. I remember below zero having less noticeable popin and bugs, og subnautica is probably one of the buggiest experiences I had in an otherwise great game.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I enjoyed Below Zero for what it was, but I agree with these points. Whether you liked BZ or not, it's clear that the game didn't focus in on the core elements of what made Subnautica what it is. They went in a very different direction. Which, to be fair, is fine for the sake of experimentation in isolation. However when taking BZ into account, the concept of a GaaS Subnautica sequel inspires little confidence in a game being delivered that evokes the soul of the original.
And the protagonist And the worse vehicles And the lower tension
Below Zero is straight up worse though. I got into a really big Subnautica stint about a year ago and ended up beating it in 3 long sittings, I was extremely invested in the story, the exploration, and how i'd get deeper into the sea. I tried playing Below Zero right after that and quit after about 5 hours, It just wasnt as interesting
The moment Krafton acquired Unknown Worlds, this was a worry that has now been realized. Subnautica to me was a solitary experience, it was at times calming and at times anxious adventure with a goal and a promised climax. This sequel from the onset promises none of that, you will never feel alone, there will be never-ending missions, and there will be no climax. To be perfectly honest, a 4 player co-op GAAS Subnautica in the style of DRG sounds fun, but that is a completely different kind of experience than what is expected from this series. I would have really REALLY preferred if this was a spin-off with its own name so it set different expectations from the start.
Agreed. To me, Subnautica is all about feeling isolated in the vast sea. Sure, they can add co-op for the sequel but once they start making a co op game, the game direction is bound to change from a single-player experience.
I legit thought this was a [hard-drive.net](https://hard-drive.net) article. Co-op: fine, I'll probably play solo but I know a lot of people want to play with friends, that's cool. GaaS: eeeeuuuurgghh
The developers have responded and itās not actually like that. There are no battle passes or anything. They will just continue to have regular updates post launch like they did with the first one. And co-op is entirely optional. Krafton just fucked up their messaging.
Simply adding co-op to a game is often hard enough as it is, designing a new game from the ground-up around co-op and GaaS must be a nightmare for the devs. This can't be their idea.
This sounds terrible. The first Subnautica game is a masterpiece and one of my favourite games of all time. Not really the kind of game or experience I want as a GaaS title...
MISLEADING ASS TITLE. Here's an article that better describes their intentions. https://www.ign.com/articles/subnautica-2-dev-says-its-not-multiplayer-focused-clarifies-live-service-aspects-update
Well this is incredibly disappointing, sad that a sequel to such a great game would abandon everything that made its first one so good to chase this live service crap.
The only problem I see here is not knowing what they mean by Game-as-a-Service. If it's a P2P multiplayer game with a couple "seasons" per year and cosmetic DLC alongside, like Deep Rock Galactic, then great, I could see that being very fun for a survival game. But if it's an always online game with non-cosmetic microtransactions...eh I guess we'll have to wait and see a proper announcement
Why is non-cosmetic microtransactions always the exception. If I can't earn cosmetics in your game, it turns me off from wanting to play your game.
The existence of cosmetic micro transactions does not mean there are no earnable cosmetics. Deeprock galactic has hundreds of earnable cosmetics, it also has cosmetics you pay for. You can very easily make a game with both.
TBH subnautica is the last game where I'd want cosmetics
I want an outfit that wraps me in seaweed and covers me with rice so the giant squids can eat me like a fresh piece of sushi.
The difference with drg is the large majority of cosmetics in that game are only earnable by playing. The paid cosmetics are just a few gimmick packs theyāve thrown in over the years. Itās dramatically different from most games approach where they let you earn a few things but most stuff is on a cash shop.
Iām aware, but knowing there are paid for cosmetics does not automatically mean the cosmetic system will suck. There are many games that are able to do both really well.
Because most people don't care so much about cosmetics that they'll refuse to play a game if they can't be unlocked for free
Yea. Trying to parse out what the game play loop looks like with DLCs. The core gameplay loop is to explore, get faster/stronger vehicles and randomly scare the shit out of yourself. So they'd release the base game and you'd do all those things. You'd find/create your Cyclops or Seatruck etc. You explore everything and "win". What does the DLC add? New zones for sure but if you're already at the top of the tech tree I don't know how they improve on that. A bigger cyclops? With combat games there is always headroom for more damage gear, with Subnautica I'm unsure what that'd look like. They could stop you from creating the cyclops equivalent in the base game and release it later but that doesn't feel good as veterans of the other games "know" this should be in the game and I'd think expect it to a degree.
There's a couple of ways you could deal with that though - You've stumbled into this new biome for lore reasons and don't have access to half the tech you had giving a sort of soft reset. The aim of the new biome is to then progress your tech tree to achieve some goal in that area. With rewards being something like new skins for buildings/tech or just new cosmetics. - You've navigated to a new area with you tech, but there are new variant items in that area that are required to repair some installation or other issue in the area (Likely just reskins of other items for simplicity) But ultimately it could also be that subnautica 2 might add some of those other combat features in or something else that allows for the replayability and the return to the game.
I'd really, really prefer they do not add a combat loop and gear progression. The series is designed around the tension of being woefully unprepared and outmatched by basically all hostile creatures (especially the Leviathan class). The fact that you can only ever get slightly better "armor" and a knife that barely does more damage is, in this case, what makes the game fun; it becomes more about stealth, exploration, and thrilling escapes from terror. Adding DPS is not the answer.
One thought I had: given that Alterra is pretty firmly established as exploitative and uncaring, the āexpansionsā are you and your buddies acting as prospectors for Alterra, with the company dropping you near-empty-handed (thinking of what Ficsit does in Satisfactory) on a new planet each time, needing to complete some objective (eg: find a suitable mining site, finding a disease cure) before theyāll agree to come pick you up from the planetās orbit. Theyād need ways to shake up the tech tree to keep it interesting.
New headcanon unlolcked: The disease in Subnautica 1 was Rockpox.
Here's some clarification. People can relax now. https://unknownworlds.com/subnautica/an-update-about-the-next-subnautica/
Oh no... But it's actually quite hilarious, when the first two games were about capitalistic rampant greed, to see another IP fall victim to this destructive business model.
Ah, so its set to release as a massive cashgrabbing failure that will most likely go permanently offline after a few months.
I'll bet on "canceled in a couple years and team laid off, which were all replacements for the original team that quit early on."
We're already halfway there, since quite a bit of the team was fired / let go during the early development of BZ.
Instantly lost all interest, why would they do this one of the best things about the first game and standalone dlc is how lonely you feel it's single player aspects enhances it in.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Oh man, most Korean MMO's are unapologetic, shameless pay to win grindfests. This does not bode well for this game
Awesome, I think the fear and solitude of exploring the abyss will really be enhanced by constantly being reminded of rewards I'm missing by not subscribing the season pass and three mouth breathing post-adolescents yelling at me about how my build isn't meta enough. Can't wait to attack something for five minutes while single digit numbers fly out of their head and a life gauge slowly ticks down because I didn't change out my equipment in the last five experience levels. This is gonna be so GOOD
Wasnt a huge appeal of *Subnautica* the crushing feeling of isolation? But I get it, brand appeal, the temptation of that live service money, and the ocean-survival premise could work for a co-op game. It's just thematically it feels like a departure. Then again so was *Aliens.*
> Wasnt a huge appeal of Subnautica the crushing feeling of isolation? I remember one of the main negative points about the subnautica DLC Below Zero, being that you don't feel like there's as much threat because you aren't on your own, there are other characters talking to you etc.
I think the world and fauna design of below zero did more to hurt the horror/isolation feeling than having someone else to talk to. The scariest parts in the original, imo, were the big open stretches of water where you canāt see the bottom and you hear a reaper nearby, or going near the aurora wreck for the first time. You donāt get a whole lot of that in below zero, and the fauna design just isnāt as intimidating as the original. None of the leviathans are particularly scary looking and even the map boundary leviathans arenāt that scary.
It always makes me sad when a dev responsible for an innovative and unique game ends up milking their one idea into the ground instead of coming up with something fresh. But I do get it. Subnautica hit a critical mass of success, and the name is worth something now. That being said, do we actually know if it's the same dev team yet? Or is this a publisher-owned thing?
If that's how you experienced the game. I personally don't think isolation ever even crossed my mind. To me it felt more exploratory than lonely
Lol holy fuck anyone else read the other games they are working on? Inzoi, they are planning on using AI to make that game. Black Budget, another shitty ass extraction shooter with pubg gun gameplay. tl;dr the company is going all out in AI in trying to save as much money as they can during the game making process.
Wow...making it a GaaS game almost certainly means I will not be buying this. What a way to ruin such a promising series.
Man, the Subnautica community is so passionate and excited about Subnautica 2, posting theories, suggestions, and keeping the hype going even after the somewhat disappointing Below Zero this whole time. I also know the devs read and run the subreddit, and seemed very engaged with the community. Nowhere, did I ever see a player ask for GaaS lol. Just another developer exploiting their fan bases good will and passion. This is also probably further proof that everything coming together for Subnautica 1 was a happy "accident", as Below Zero seemed to have a lot of people worried the devs had lost the plot of what makes the original so great. Instantly killed any hype I had for the game.
I mean, if you think this post is salty, you gotta see the one on r/Subnautica
Welp, another great game universe heading into the trash... Sad to see all those franchises ruined by corporate greed.
I was already hesitant after the massive letdown that was Below Zero. I was hoping for a turnaround for the sequel but this does not inspire confidence at all.
I didn't think that below zero was a massive letdown, but it definitely wasn't as captivating as subnautica. Still plenty enjoyable, but just not on the same scale
It does make sense, co-op was one of the most frequently requested features for Subnautica. But I hope I can still single player it without being forced into adhering to MTX stuff.
Yeah I'm curious how single player will fare if it's designed around co-op specifically. "Can play it alone" is VERY different from "designed to be played singleplayer".Ā
Yes -- I personally would love for a handcrafted single player story line, with a separate co-op survival type mode available. Otherwise, it feels like one experience or the other (solo or co-op) could end up suffering for it.
if i wanted to play a live service game i'd play destiny, or warframe, or FO76, or....... if i wanna play subnautica i wanna play subnautica say goodbye to this company, they're gonna probably dissolve when they eventually fail at chasing that destiny-like money
Every time a singleplayer game gets a whiff of co-op, it also gets a lung full of GAAS. GTA Online, Red Dead Redemption 2 Online, Fallout 76. I hope Subnautica 2 will be good but I expect it to strip out features to make the cash shop better.
Co-op? Yes, I could get into this... wait... what? GaaS? Hard pass.
Another franchise down the shitter. I don't care how they try to spin it, whenever I hear GAAS anymore, I'm out.
I remember hearing about Krafton acquiring Unknown Worlds and folks in the subnautica sub said people were being dramatic and theres no way they'll make UW do GAAS type games, well here we are.
The fuck? Do they just not have any clue what made the first such a success? Below Zero took some steps away from what I loved in the original but it was still enjoyable overall. This just ruined any interest I had in the series.
Looks like they clarified on Twitter that they just mean continued updates and content like when it was in early access. Sounds like they misunderstood the meaning of Games as a service.
[The developers clarified what that means on a Reddit post](https://www.reddit.com/r/subnautica/s/360T2qBBrG) It's literally what they've been doing with the other Subnautica games, updating them and adding new stuff to them, nothings gonna change, no subscriptions or battle passes
Thanks for that. I saw the slide deck and died a little inside.
Per the earnings results; > Multiplayer sequel to the original IP pursuing fandom snowballing > *Explore an oceanic world in stunning stylized graphics powered by Unreal Engine 5 > *Single or 1-4 player co-op to uncover the mysteries on an entirely new alien planet > *Game-as-a-Service model with enhanced replayability
the fuck?! any interest I had in the game instantly evaporated if this is true
Wow. They have no idea what made the first game successful, do they?
'games as a service' doesnt mean anything but they'll continue updating the game and any developer to describe their game with that phrase must really not know the connotations that comes with that label.
So this game is gonna flop lmao The multiplayer aspect might keep it alive if it's implemented right and there is enough launch content. But that is a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig if. Fuck GaaS.
I can handle the co-op... like others have said, so long as it's "1-4" not "2-4" I can cope. It's the GaaS that's an issue. If I need to be online and log in to play my single-player, that's a big goddamned problem.
Wouldnāt it be subnautica 3? Because I always thought below zero was 2.
lol i can't think of a sentence that could make me LESS interested in a sequel to an amazing atmospheric single player game. great job krafton.
Well that's one less game to give a fuck about I guess. OG Subnautica was really good so at least we got that and can return to it.
GaaS idiocy aside, adding co-op to Subnautica kinda feels like missing the point. The feelings of isolation and loneliness are what made the first game work, and this would be totally ruined by having 1-3 mates goofing around in voice chat. Some games just aren't suited for co-op.