Welcome to software development, we have tea & biscuits...
Meanwhile, in a parallel universe where the sky belongs to no man...
- Thread starter Vanquish383
- Start date
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Not to belabor the point but refunds were indeed acknowledged openly by FDEV and discussions about it, in the press and in forums, are easy to locate. There is very little fake about this. In those there are plenty of testimonials, both good and bad, but you will certainly find several of the ones from people that confirmed they got it. Here is one such example. I mean, we can try to actually ask those people to hand over their bank account passcodes and post their actual receipts just so to make sure 100% but that would put us over the tin foil hat spectrum I reckon. Speaking of which...
To be fair some NMS fans most likely also got their money back after release through refunds in Steam or Sony etc, but the deafening silence of HG on this matter at the time is still night and day compared to FDEV´s much more direct approach for the offline case. More on communication below.
I think we can agree on that first line indeed. On the second one I think you are still strawmanning a bit since no one here has really tried to put a halo on anyone´s head.
The outrage about FDEV´s statements on future content during kickstarter etc is still not an accurate comparison or a reasonable like for like with HG statements though. Whereas HG actually accepted payments and cashed in all that, FDEV did not even confirm the date for release, nevermind sold those things (giant atmospheres, big game hunting, atmospheric worlds etc) to the market at that time. Money did not exchange hands (with the exception perhaps of some LEP owners that feel they should have it by now).
These comparisons with HG promises would have a bit more merit if for example the DDF had been actually used as a guaranteed and officially confirmed feature list for inclusion during development and at release, which it was not.
In addition to the "cashed in or not" money side of those there is also the acknowledging and communication part. On that front I think this rockpapershotgun opinion piece at the time summarizes it well.
That second paragraph tho, heh, looks like the author had a glimpse at the future and saw the excusing HG with Sony
The Broken Promise Of No Man’s Sky And Why It Matters
After years of waiting, No Man's Sky finally took off last week. For some, it soared above the clouds. For others, it c…
www.rockpapershotgun.com
Last edited:
Yeah you got me. Posting the correct version of events with supporting links requires so much emotional attachment and is clearly some sort of psyops at work saving the saviour of space games...
Last edited:
hmm strange how they expect a dev to "explicitly state" that something has been removed....when the dev has NOT "explicity stated" it was in in the first place? That's double standards, that winds me up a tad.
NO-ONE should watch a preview vid of a game years/months even weeks from release and expect everything shown to be in game unless "explicitly stated", all there was with NMS was vagueness which is is why I agree with Cotic's comment "confusing and potentially misleading".
I mean look at review site like Rock paper Shotgun, IGN etc.....how many times has someone bought a game because of a favourable review from a gaming site, only to not quite have the same experience as the reviewer......the honesty of those sites is often called into question. But it's only opinions.
Things I'll agree with:
NMSs hype was very much OTT (both sides contributed)
some of SMs vague comments were confusing and potentially misleading
Does HG, SM and NMS deserve some of the harsh negativity aimed at them (lies and deceit)?....nope.
Thing is no-ones saying anything like "saviour of space games", it's like a right winger thinking everyone who disagrees with them is a "commie" or a left winger thinking everyone who disagrees with them is a "fascist". Just because some of us like NMS doesn't mean we think it's the best space game in the universe and SM is the messiah of space games!Yeah you got me. Posting the correct version of events with supporting links requires so much emotional attachment and is clearly some sort of psyops at work saving the saviour of space games...
Reasonable people can see the "hype" of NMS was flawed and the game has issues, yet not let it cloud our judgement and go OTT with hyperbolic accusations that should be reserved for those who truly do bad in the world.
![[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/234/234580.jpg?1612617334){kind=avatar}
Mods vs Rockers, Oasis vs Blur, Directioners vs Beliebers, now this.
yup how on earth people think humans can live in peace when we squabble over petty stuff!!
Yet you continue to do it.
I can't speak for other people. I can only speak for myself, and I did not receive any kind of a refund. To do that, I would have had to go cap in hand to Frontier and plead with them... and at the time, I was certainly in no mind to do that.
On 'communication' though - perhaps you don't remember, but FDev's response to the offline poop storm on the forums was to ban any mention of the word on the forum. Doing so would incur moderator wrath. It's why I can't link to any of the offline threadnaughts - I don't believe they don't exist any more. Funny that...
You are ascribing virtues to Braben and Frontier which they don't deserve & don't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever. You are trying to whitewash history.
I'm not sure why you can't just accept that they really did the dirty on people here. I'm sitting here as living proof of that. It's incredibly disingenuous of you to continue to slate HG and Sean Murray for what they did (much of which is valid from a certain perspective) and yet give Braben a free pass.
I wonder why you do.
The rest of your post is all blah-blah caveat emptor etc. I'm sure what FDev did was legal. No doubt they had a team of lawyers advising them on all of this throughout. That does not make it right though.
For me, Braben (who I used to respect and look up to) is a crook. A snake-oil salesman. Nothing more, nothing less.
You can make the same argument about Sean Murray if you wish, but the major difference between them from where I sit is that he delivered.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Yet you continue to do it.
Well, you kept calling it "fake news". I just presented another fact that disproves that notion.
And yet you summarily dismissed the whole offline refunds notion as "fake news" or "bogus" outright. I do not think I ever suggested all refunds requests were accepted, or had to be. Just that the developer acknowledged those upront and even went public with it (with all the backlash that that entails), unlike HG.
The vehicle for refunds requests is not the forum though. Perhaps I do not remember well (and other patrons may correct me) but I think I do remember the offline thread was probably one of the largest and busiest standing threads around at the time over here. As for the links, I suspect many links to old threads, not just that one, are now quite hard to locate following the latest forum engine update.
By contrast, NMS has never had a forum in the first place. So there was never even a chance to discuss its missing content like it was done here, the only option was to go to 3rd party platforms.
And communication went way beyond that in this case, including having the FDEV´s CEO explaining himself in several interviews, written press and video. Unlike HG´s CEO.
I am really not, I am just presenting you some facts that show how some of the elements that were compared by others at the onset of this particular discussion in reality do not have much in common.
For example, HG statements about what the game (paid in pre sales and release sales) would have but then didnt can hardly be placed at the same level with statements about future content (giant atmospheres, big game hunting, atmospheric worlds etc) where FDEV did not even confirm the date for release, nevermind sold those things to the market at that time. Money did not exchange hands in the Elite case (with the exception perhaps of some LEP owners that feel they should have it by now). There is no caveat emptor shennanigans here, because those items were not even up for sale in the first place, unlike the NMS content.
I do think though, that these recurrent comparisons with HG promises would make more sense and have a bit more merit if for example the DDF had been actually used as a confirmed feature list for inclusion during development and at release or used as sales direct promotion vehicle, which it was not.
Last edited:
That wasn't what I meant to imply. I was being asked why I was allegedly trying to protect David Braben (lol wut?) and so my use of hyperbole was to then call him the saviour of space games in jest. If my previous posts were whiteknighting then lets jump in the deep end
See this is what bothers me, and I'm not pointing fingers here. These "reasonable people" will all too often then act as though another game's flaws are the worst thing ever, let it cloud their judgement and go OTT with hyperbolic accusations. It's like, when they want to defend something they plea for reason but when they want to attack something all reason goes out the window...
The new NMS release isn't overly impressive. Ten minute "spooky" cartoon dungeon crawl, that only lasts that long because they slowed your movement speed down. With zero risk enemies glitching through the walls and floor offering no challenge even going solo, which the trailer said was meant to be super difficult. Its like everything else in NMS lots of stuff but its all individually pretty shoddy. They've added recoil and burst length to the multitool which I suppose is to make it a bit more like a shooter but without any need to dodge or use cover it seems out of place as you just wander into the room spray approximately where the enemies are and you've won, unless you need to wiggle about to get that one stuck halfway into the scenery. I liked the floating helmets and gloves.
Still needs an option to disable auto torch activation.
On the bright-side the single expandable bulkhead I salvaged means I've maxed out my freighters cargo and equipment area's, which I think might be a bug since I just reused the same one over and over until it was maxed out and still have the expandable bulkhead in my inventory. Not that I ever use my freighter since its just a repetitive text interface and I have an activated indium mine so money is meaningless.
Fun casual game if you have twenty minutes to kill.
Still needs an option to disable auto torch activation.
On the bright-side the single expandable bulkhead I salvaged means I've maxed out my freighters cargo and equipment area's, which I think might be a bug since I just reused the same one over and over until it was maxed out and still have the expandable bulkhead in my inventory. Not that I ever use my freighter since its just a repetitive text interface and I have an activated indium mine so money is meaningless.
Fun casual game if you have twenty minutes to kill.
General Options menu, disable auto torch. They snuck that one in with the February patch.
Statements from the Liar In Chief do not translate to action - nor facts. So he fire fought in the media to save face, and took flak for it - what a hero.
You're right - Sean Murray took a different tack. He just went dark, except to pop up every few months to say "Hey guys, I have something new here. Free."
Because it didn't actually happen. If you backed on Kickstarter above £200 (and hence played the alpha), you got zip. This is fact. You may not like it (I certainly don't), but it doesn't change anything.
Nobody is suggesting it is. I was talking specifically about discussing FDev's bait and switch with offline mode. That was banned. Probably still is, but nobody cares any more.
As I said, what a hero.
Talk is cheap. Show me the money.
Yep, but if FDev had done any of the things that they said they were planning to do with the game (I listed a few) it would undoubtedly have sweetened the deal a great deal more. That was Sean Murray's thinking, and that's why he carried on and completed the game.
Meanwhile, we got power play, multicrew, multiplayer that was broken for years for many people, and no offline mode.
Let's be 100% crystal clear on this. Offline mode (or lack of) would have been a deal-breaker back in the Kickstarter days, which is why Braben et al were at pains to state and repeatedly state that it would be a thing. It was by FAR the most common question in the comment sections, and I answered it myself many times thus making me a liar by proxy. Not offering offline would have meant E: D would not have been funded at all. Same with the DDF "god like powers" which saw a spike in the last week of the Kickstarter on the back of that statement.
Sure, Kickstarter is not a store (blah blah) and so what they did was legal. But that doesn't make it right... and certainly not honourable.
Well, see... that's the thing. Up until that newsletter drop, that's indeed what everyone in the DDF thought was happening.
Then we all realised we'd been duped, and we were simply having a natter with some devs whilst they threw us a bone or two to design a completely different game.
It's one thing to shoot your mouth off in an interview once or twice, about something you're not sure you're going to be able to do.
It's quite another to lie to hundreds of people continually for the duration of an entire year, when you know you're doing it.
And then deny them refunds because they'd helped them test their game.
Sean Murray went on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert (among other places) to promote the game via a narrative he had foolishly generated over many interviews in exactly the same way as Peter Molyneux used to do at trade shows, just listing off ideas for how the game would be in his mind without stopping to think about reality and how consumers would be affected if they couldn't deliver. His inexperience with releasing games on that kind of budget and to that kind of scrutiny is what lead to the release debacle.
They have been in a position where they don't have to charge for subsequent updates to attone, but considering the millions they took in pre-orders and investment, they were in a very confortable position to do that. They were fortune as the brand was damaged, their reputations was damaged. If they had tried to make NMS2 at that point or even another small game nobody would have bought it under that company name.
They've done a good job at repairing that brand, however it wouldn't have been possible if they weren't as profitable in the first place thanks to the kind of press that had Sean sitting there talking to Stephen Colbert in the first place.
David Braben, like every other video game kickstarter at the time, was inexperienced with crowdfunding and challenging people's preconceptions. He made a few videos where he talked about stuff that subsequently got cut from the first release and stuff that got cut all together. He didn't go on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and talk about offline mode though. Nobody cared, it was still a niche' title. Frontier now are very cautions about what they release and when in terms of information about features in development.
Two developers that wanted to make space games and followed through, made mistakes and learnt from them. You can debate all day who is the most evil.
I've not seen Chris Roberts since 2019 though ;-)
They have been in a position where they don't have to charge for subsequent updates to attone, but considering the millions they took in pre-orders and investment, they were in a very confortable position to do that. They were fortune as the brand was damaged, their reputations was damaged. If they had tried to make NMS2 at that point or even another small game nobody would have bought it under that company name.
They've done a good job at repairing that brand, however it wouldn't have been possible if they weren't as profitable in the first place thanks to the kind of press that had Sean sitting there talking to Stephen Colbert in the first place.
David Braben, like every other video game kickstarter at the time, was inexperienced with crowdfunding and challenging people's preconceptions. He made a few videos where he talked about stuff that subsequently got cut from the first release and stuff that got cut all together. He didn't go on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert and talk about offline mode though. Nobody cared, it was still a niche' title. Frontier now are very cautions about what they release and when in terms of information about features in development.
Two developers that wanted to make space games and followed through, made mistakes and learnt from them. You can debate all day who is the most evil.
I've not seen Chris Roberts since 2019 though ;-)
Last edited:
I know this stuff is lost in the mists of time now but they gave the offlinegaters refunds, they even included the ones who dishonestly claimed they couldn't play online after racking up twenty plus hours online pre release. Which they really shouldn't have done to be honest.
Its not like any of us ever disconnect from the internet to play games any more. An imaginary problem that they solved with solo
.Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Heh, a few posts earlier someone suggested to "not let it cloud our judgement and go OTT with hyperbolic accusations". Perfect timing.
So he fire fought in the media to save face, and took flak for it - what a hero.
There is a clear and definite difference in management styles and ethics when it comes to either be proactive towards admitting a mistake publicly, or be reactive, hide and see what happens.
I do not think for a minute that FDEV could expect that there was a chance that flak would not be taken. No, a decision to actively issue a cancellation announcement and acknowldge refunds is not taken lightly and it is usually made fully aware of the onslaught of backlash that comes right after. And which most surely would impact sales (at the critical time of a release) and reputation with the market and investors.
On the other hand, going silent and hoping for the best was the approach seemingly taken by HG to avoid all that. Unfortunately (or fortunately as the case may be) the thing spiralled dramatically much worst than what Sean could have probably predicted. His subsequent "atonement for committed sins" is worth of praise indeed, but "sins" those were.
It actually did, and you have seen relevant sources in this thread. FDEV acknowledged refunds, principles for the same were stated, and there are refund request testimonials confirming it.
I do not think I ever suggested all refunds requestors arrived at a happy resolution, or had to though. Just that the developer acknowledged those upront and even went public with it with all the backlash that that entails.
Unlike HG.
The difference here is still huge though, and not very comparable. HG sold content, accepted money and cashed in only to not deliver it at release. FDEV clearly stated certain content elements (giant atmospheres, big game hunting, atmospheric worlds etc) would not be at release, and would only be payable at an unspecified time in the future. Money did not exchange hands in the Elite case (with the exception perhaps of some LEP owners that feel they should have it by now). Those items were not even up for sale in the first place, unlike the NMS content.
This is incorrect. There is quite a lot of evidence wihtin the DDF from the devs showing it was not meant to be a confirmed feature list for inclusion during development and/or at release. You participated in it and should know.
Last edited:
The irony is that the overwhelming majority of the gamer community doesn't care all that much about the past, it has become a footnote. You see it everywhere when NMS launches an update. People will say:"I was bummed with the launch and how they handled it, but now its really cool!", inevitably followed by a small brigade of people who cannot tolerate this first part and will derail whatever discussion there may have been about the latest patch into an endless attempt to deny what happened almost half a decade ago. And as a result the past gets discussed in great detail over and over and over again. And all that had to happen to prevent this was either ignoring it, or saying:"Yeah, sure that was pretty crappy, but its cool now! What do you think of these new abandoned wrecks you can explore?".
But instead you get a rehash of an argument whether he did or did not say something that was captured from eight different angles and broadcasted on live television. I am sure Sean is thrilled to have these defenders and cant wait to have this discussion continue for many decades, instead of just moving on and discussing the work he did the past half a decade.
Anyway, I'm launching it now. Lets see if I can find my own wreck...
Anyway, I'm launching it now. Lets see if I can find my own wreck...
Land in any station go to the out of place looking scrap dealers tent and buy a wreck beacon thingy.
That wasn't what I meant to imply. I was being asked why I was allegedly trying to protect David Braben (lol wut?) and so my use of hyperbole was to then call him the saviour of space games in jest. If my previous posts were whiteknighting then lets jump in the deep end
See this is what bothers me, and I'm not pointing fingers here. These "reasonable people" will all too often then act as though another game's flaws are the worst thing ever, let it cloud their judgement and go OTT with hyperbolic accusations. It's like, when they want to defend something they plea for reason but when they want to attack something all reason goes out the window...
Strange I'm getting all that, but from the opposite viewpoint Elite being defended and NMS being slated!!