Game Discussions The No Man's Sky Thread
- Thread starter Dull Bladerunner
- Start date
-
- Tags
True, but neither Minecraft nor Don't Starve did cost 60 € on release and where backed by so much marketing.
Reaching the center is one goal, but it isn't the only goal nor does it end the game.
Last edited:
To be fair marketing has been mostly OK. What hasn't been is PR....HG and Sean didn't do reality check for fans regarding feature set and it shows.
As for price - it is valid criticism and it will be brought up against this game again and again. I don't think it is end of the world though - if you sink few hundred hours, I think 60 USD is fully justified. But I won't get it at that price, because only game I backed with so much - and more - money was and will stay ED.
Yup - I now judge by what I can see, not what is promised. (talk is cheap you see - FD taught me that)
NMS is a refreshing twist on the space genre IMO.
ED went for semi-realism whilst NSM went for fun.
Different games .. different market.
Last edited:
Thanks! That was just what I was looking for
This game should suit me perfectly - I love crafting and survival games like MineCraft and Ark Survival. The same thing set in what looks like a great sci-fi universe can't be anything other than brilliant!I can however see that it won't replace Elite for me like I had hoped a while ago. The flight aspects are just too simple to give that proper "space pilot" feeling which Elite, despite its faults, does incredibly well. It will however be a great supplement to my space-game diet
<br />
<br />
That was more or less Seans approach to the situation, but as i mentioned above he said he would not have a problem if players wanted to do that, and not 'get on' with the game to get to the centre. So adding in base building, just gives those players that might not want to do the 'main quest' something else. They might find their perfect planet and want to settle down on it for example.
I find ED take relaxing and fun, while some people will find it frustrating. And some people will find constant survival nagging of NMS annoying, while some people will enjoy heck out of it.
But yeah, they are very different games.
I'll definitely be interested to start seeing screenshots of what (are I think are PG created?) creatures NMS throws out, but I don't think this one's for me. That's beyond driving my imagination of course, of what may or may not be inhabiting ED water worlds, and what "big game hunting" may or may not bring!
There's another important issue at play here, defining the way players approach games these days. Something we mention from time to time but don't really pay much attention to.
Many old gamers, especially those over 30 are familiar with video game advertisement tropes. We got used to it in a very natural way since late 80s to about 2005. Game marketing always hyped things up and we knew (and still know) exactly what to expect from a game after viewing its marketing campaign.
Then after about 2004-2005 something happened and people apparently lost that intuition. They nowadays seem to believe even more than the advertisement claims. Back in the 90s, a game advertisement said "an unprecedented adventure that will take you to the heart of vast jungle teeming with life" and you knew you'd get a maze of trees with walls of impassable shrubbery, filled with scripted animals attacking you in predictable intervals for an on rails experience. We still had fun with it. Now the same thing happens but the animations and the way scripting works has advanced a little so you get a greater suspension of disbelief and have a richer experience.
Now, somehow people understand and expect things either as literally written in the ad or they expect even more. ED's 'blaze your own trail' becomes 'I'll be able to found my own little empire and then should be able to conquer my corner o f the galaxy' instead of the 'the game won't tell you what to do in any given time and you'll have to choose from what's available'.
The same thing is true for NMS. They said 'a PG universe with quintillion planets to visit and you'll get to see what the generation algorithm throws at you as interesting combinations of colours and movement. Someday after release you'll even be able to meet and interact with other players but don't expect multiplayer at launch. It'll come later when the game matures and lot's of people get through the single player experience'. It somehow became 'I'll be a space pirate and blow up half of my planet and build my base in the resulting asteroid field and I'll launch the photon torpedoes I'll invent using the technology I'll steal from aliens'.
Many old gamers, especially those over 30 are familiar with video game advertisement tropes. We got used to it in a very natural way since late 80s to about 2005. Game marketing always hyped things up and we knew (and still know) exactly what to expect from a game after viewing its marketing campaign.
Then after about 2004-2005 something happened and people apparently lost that intuition. They nowadays seem to believe even more than the advertisement claims. Back in the 90s, a game advertisement said "an unprecedented adventure that will take you to the heart of vast jungle teeming with life" and you knew you'd get a maze of trees with walls of impassable shrubbery, filled with scripted animals attacking you in predictable intervals for an on rails experience. We still had fun with it. Now the same thing happens but the animations and the way scripting works has advanced a little so you get a greater suspension of disbelief and have a richer experience.
Now, somehow people understand and expect things either as literally written in the ad or they expect even more. ED's 'blaze your own trail' becomes 'I'll be able to found my own little empire and then should be able to conquer my corner o f the galaxy' instead of the 'the game won't tell you what to do in any given time and you'll have to choose from what's available'.
The same thing is true for NMS. They said 'a PG universe with quintillion planets to visit and you'll get to see what the generation algorithm throws at you as interesting combinations of colours and movement. Someday after release you'll even be able to meet and interact with other players but don't expect multiplayer at launch. It'll come later when the game matures and lot's of people get through the single player experience'. It somehow became 'I'll be a space pirate and blow up half of my planet and build my base in the resulting asteroid field and I'll launch the photon torpedoes I'll invent using the technology I'll steal from aliens'.
Base building is definitely coming
Next up we’re adding the ability to build bases and own giant space freighters. Temporal AA and my new cloud rendering tech should be coming soon too. It will really change the game again, and enhance it visually.
http://www.no-mans-sky.com/2016/08/update-1-03/
Last edited:
What I have seen in LP and reviews creatures look good, they reuse body parts, but when they are meshed together works. I personally feel that there are too many animals...they could have decreased number of species and make them more meaningful.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Excellent argument there, repped +1.
Yeah, but that sounds weird, doesn't it. Getting to the center was the main design for the last five years. And now suddenly they want to add stuff that works against this design. I cannot imagine how a good game can come out of this. You cannot make everyone happy. I'd rather have they focus on making the trip to the center more exciting. A good/meaningful base building game is not something you come up with in a "patch". There need to be a lot systems that interact with bases, there needs to be diversity, a reason. With that fidelity it will never be as flexible as Minecraft. So what will it be?
Sean has pointed out that No Man's Sky is a game that is being developed for years to come and it will consistently evolve. The game as it is now, is just a canvas.
And I can't stress enough that even when you reach the center - the game doesn't end. It goes on.
Yeah, and that's fine. But please don't make another "ED-style" game, where rather shallow gameplay is added before the gameplay that is already in the game receives the polish it needs.
So does the £40 that I'm considering spending cover any and all updates to the game? Is there a roadmap for future releases? Or is this based on vague bits of information that Sean may or may not have said during interviews where he's trying to build hype and sell his game? Forgive me for being cynical, but I've been sold the moon on a stick before and been caught out *cough*Godus*cough*.
Presumably it goes on in quite the same way though, which for some people will negate the endgame aspect of reaching the centre.
I've played the game for 5 hours and I can tell already that for myself, the game is well worth the asking price as it is. There is no roadmap or anything, all we know is that the game keeps evolving and in the near future we will get base building and freighters in a patch.
Last edited:
I'd not read a thing that there would be meaningful player interactions from Sean's comments, the most I'd expect from what I read was the ability to "see" the other player and that's it. I just can't believe the angst over what could just be a tech glitch. It's like "daddy promised me a pony" tantrums going on!!
I naivly thought that there would be some "exploration" style updates to coincide with Horizons.....we got driving around on barren landscapes, shooting the occasional shootable rock when we found it.......and that's about it. I have no interest in the "bases", crashed ships are not that interesting, engineers had the same affect as powerplay on me...i.e. awful. I'm not saying the game is awful, just that FD are making decisions that don't interest me at all. Even the stuff planned for this season don't interest me much, I want interesting things to find and a MUCH better way of cashing in exploration data...I know the later has some reasons, but those reasons are pure tosh for me personally. I'm not going to invest days, weeks even MONTHS of gaming to have it all wiped out, that is just NOT my idea of fun (hence I've concluded Elite is not the game for me beyond an occasional pick up)
I believe that until all planets are landable (gas Giants notwithstanding) and there are INTERESTING things to find on the planets then I'm pretty much done with Elite aside from the odd play every couple months or so.
See reasons above
TLDR, Elite not the game for explorers I thought it would be, NMS seems to fit that bill for me.
Fair point then.