Game Discussions The No Man's Sky Thread

[PiLhEaD]

The call for more "realism" in NMS is an old one, but unlike E: D, NMS has never tried to be "realistic"....

Let's be honest, NMS is no less 'realistic' than the other games - and actually I like the flight model when just pottering over a planet's surface, or boosting around hills/mountains. A bit more 'bite' and less vagueness when in space would be welcome, but it's not a big deal - but it has long been clear that flying your ship isn't the main core of the game. As I said above, I really like the art style* and, in part, why I pre-ordered.

As for 2020, I'm optimistic for NMS, although I had read that HG had already thought to 'park' NMS as they already have another project underway. However it seems they decided to continue after making a significant number of sales, and felt obliged to the new players. (My words, my memory, this may all have been imagined). As for the other projects. Well, I'm not holding my breath - indeed my HOTAS is gathering dust and has been for a while.

Spoiler: * Aaaah!

 

[Juniper]

As for 2020, I'm optimistic for NMS, although I had read that HG had already thought to 'park' NMS as they already have another project underway. However it seems they decided to continue after making a significant number of sales, and felt obliged to the new players. (My words, my memory, this may all have been imagined). As for the other projects. Well, I'm not holding my breath - indeed my HOTAS is gathering dust and has been for a while.

You're basically right - Sean Murray had thought that NMS was "done" after the Visions update & wanted to move onto his next thing, but then that sparked a load of sales, and (more importantly) his senior devs got excited by a few things that they wanted to do - so that became the Beyond update (their biggest to date). He's since said that they're not done with NMS yet, and plan to keep developing it alongside their other unannounced things. The Synthesis update was a bit of a surprise, but it does back those statements up. So let's see.

 

[[VR] Merkir]

If HG ever decided to make a conscious effort to change that (and they could, quite easily, without breaking the game as it stands IMO) then E: D would be in serious trouble IMO. I don't count Star Citizen, because that's still not a game & probably never will be.

I totally agree. I posted a while ago that this was on my wishlist - a fork of their current code to make a completely separate new game. Then upgrade the procedural generation so that the galaxy(ies), systems and bodies were more realistic - Hello Games version of FDev's stellar forge, but for non-milky way galaxies (which actually makes the job a little easier).

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

I'm not sure why it is disputed that Sean Murray blatantly lied pre-launch about quite a few aspects of the game.
All the more respectable what he and HG has achieved after that. I won't credit him as this is today's trend to promise and underdeliver at launch, patch-up the game later after it loses relevance (in many cases).
Still, Sean Murray, despite all the hate and vitriol, stood up and delivered.

I mean, at the time of NMS launch, in my eyes, Elite was the poster child of space games while NMS was laughing stock. Now, NMS is pretty much a well rounded game while Elite is... just sad.

The call for more "realism" in NMS is an old one, but unlike E: D, NMS has never tried to be "realistic". It's very pointedly and deliberately a 1950s pulp scifi epic, and makes no apologies for that. Nor should it.

My point though is that they have cracked everything else. NMS planets leave E: D completely for dust. Base building is mature & works really well, so if that forms part of "new era" they have their work cut out for them. There's a loose open-world story narrative, which E: D lacks. NMS has NPCs that you can interact with - not so in E: D. There are a thousand ways in which NMS is arguably "better" than E: D, but the true fact of the matter is that irrespective of all of this - it's not a "space" game. Very little action actually takes place in space. In NMS, space is just the bit between where the action happens.

If HG ever decided to make a conscious effort to change that (and they could, quite easily, without breaking the game as it stands IMO) then E: D would be in serious trouble IMO. I don't count Star Citizen, because that's still not a game & probably never will be.

2020 should be an interesting year for both games. Based on past performance, my ARX is on NMS, but let's see.

I don't think a 1:1 comparison is fair. NMS planets are small, '1950s pulp sci-fi' as you put it and don't need to respect and coherent framework like the Stellar Forge. I mean, even from barren planets, we'd expect Elite to deliver realistic erosion, condition, atmospheric flight model based on conditions such as weather, pressure on top of the existing influence of gravity...

These space games often get lost in their vast scope. NMS has defined its scope much better than Elite, what and how they can deliver. FDev seemingly has completely lost the plot if space legs leaks are true. Instead of being the best space flight sim while building the 'human scale' narrative on its excellent lore (on top of the perceived realism of the Stellar Forge), it will be a failed patchwork space game dreamers.

 

[starman]

Erm anyone compare prekickstarter video to actuals+design docs.

 

[Konan]

The call for more "realism" in NMS is an old one, but unlike E: D, NMS has never tried to be "realistic". It's very pointedly and deliberately a 1950s pulp scifi epic, and makes no apologies for that. Nor should it.

My point though is that they have cracked everything else. NMS planets leave E: D completely for dust. Base building is mature & works really well, so if that forms part of "new era" they have their work cut out for them. There's a loose open-world story narrative, which E: D lacks. NMS has NPCs that you can interact with - not so in E: D. There are a thousand ways in which NMS is arguably "better" than E: D, but the true fact of the matter is that irrespective of all of this - it's not a "space" game. Very little action actually takes place in space. In NMS, space is just the bit between where the action happens.

If HG ever decided to make a conscious effort to change that (and they could, quite easily, without breaking the game as it stands IMO) then E: D would be in serious trouble IMO. I don't count Star Citizen, because that's still not a game & probably never will be.

2020 should be an interesting year for both games. Based on past performance, my ARX is on NMS, but let's see.

I want purpose. Gameplay driven purpose. Yeay! I can build a base!....but.....why? What benefit do I get from this? Why is there not much mystery in the game? Why do all the planets look alike...and yes...they look alike. There is no danger in the game. No drama. It's space lego......nothing more

 

[Juniper]

I'm not sure why it is disputed that Sean Murray blatantly lied pre-launch about quite a few aspects of the game.

Because I think it depends very much on how you look at it.

I don't think a 1:1 comparison is fair. NMS planets are small, '1950s pulp sci-fi' as you put it and don't need to respect and coherent framework like the Stellar Forge. I mean, even from barren planets, we'd expect Elite to deliver realistic erosion, condition, atmospheric flight model based on conditions such as weather, pressure on top of the existing influence of gravity...

All well and good, but where is that in Elite? After six years, where is their attempt at realising this ambition? As of right now, I can land on various different biomes on NMS, and walk around, discover a wide variety of plants and animals, explore caves, oceans, feed & ride animals, permanently affect the environment & create bases. Then drive or swim around in various exocraft.

Maybe they are "small", but they don't feel small. I am small. Planets are big.

These space games often get lost in their vast scope. NMS has defined its scope much better than Elite, what and how they can deliver. FDev seemingly has completely lost the plot if space legs leaks are true. Instead of being the best space flight sim while building the 'human scale' narrative on its excellent lore (on top of the perceived realism of the Stellar Forge), it will be a failed patchwork space game dreamers.

Yup.

I want purpose. Gameplay driven purpose. Yeay! I can build a base!....but.....why? What benefit do I get from this? Why is there not much mystery in the game? Why do all the planets look alike...and yes...they look alike. There is no danger in the game. No drama. It's space lego......nothing more

They could certainly do with more biomes (you can get mods that add 1000s more), but to say they all look alike is simply wrong. You clearly haven't been to that many planets. By comparison, landable E: D planets all look and behave alike. Whatever Stellar Forge may or may not be able to do, it's not currently providing any variety on landable planets. They were even all completely beige for 2+ years.

The main "game" benefit of building a base in NMS is for farming resources. Beyond that, it's just something you can do that can be as creative as you like, and you can share those creations with others if you choose. Others can visit. If you don't want to make a base - then don't. It's not compulsory. There's a lot more to the game than that.

Oh, and there's definitely danger in NMS (if that's what you want) in Permadeath mode.

You want mystery? Well, who actually are you? Why are you there, and why do you not remember a 'before'? Who is the Atlas & what is its purpose? What are the Gek and Korvax all about? What is the anomaly, and where does it actually exist? Just a few things to get you started...

E: D doesn't have bases at all... you cannot affect the environment or game world in the slightest. I can create a cave in NMS, and come back in 6 months, and it'll still be there. E: D doesn't even have caves.

Sorry, but there's really no comparison. E: D has a heck of a lot of catching up to do, because they dropped the ball big time by not focusing on planetary gameplay after 2.0 and instead faffed around with other stuff that nobody asked for or wanted. All well documented at this point, and no point in re-hashing it.

But looking at the two games side by side at this point, and NMS wins hands down on every level bar space flight.

 

[JonesTheFilm]

Sorry, but there's really no comparison. E: D has a heck of a lot of catching up to do, because they dropped the ball big time by not focusing on planetary gameplay after 2.0 and instead faffed around with other stuff that nobody asked for or wanted. All well documented at this point, and no point in re-hashing it.

I do love both ED & NMS and actively play both of them but this quote neatly sums up my biggest disappointment with ED. It started off with bags of promise but feels to me to have been struggling to find direction in the last couple of years or so.

 

[Konan]

Because I think it depends very much on how you look at it.



All well and good, but where is that in Elite? After six years, where is their attempt at realising this ambition? As of right now, I can land on various different biomes on NMS, and walk around, discover a wide variety of plants and animals, explore caves, oceans, feed & ride animals, permanently affect the environment & create bases. Then drive or swim around in various exocraft.

Maybe they are "small", but they don't feel small. I am small. Planets are big.



Yup.



They could certainly do with more biomes (you can get mods that add 1000s more), but to say they all look alike is simply wrong. You clearly haven't been to that many planets. By comparison, landable E: D planets all look and behave alike. Whatever Stellar Forge may or may not be able to do, it's not currently providing any variety on landable planets. They were even all completely beige for 2+ years.

The main "game" benefit of building a base in NMS is for farming resources. Beyond that, it's just something you can do that can be as creative as you like, and you can share those creations with others if you choose. Others can visit. If you don't want to make a base - then don't. It's not compulsory. There's a lot more to the game than that.

Oh, and there's definitely danger in NMS (if that's what you want) in Permadeath mode.

You want mystery? Well, who actually are you? Why are you there, and why do you not remember a 'before'? Who is the Atlas & what is its purpose? What are the Gek and Korvax all about? What is the anomaly, and where does it actually exist? Just a few things to get you started...

E: D doesn't have bases at all... you cannot affect the environment or game world in the slightest. I can create a cave in NMS, and come back in 6 months, and it'll still be there. E: D doesn't even have caves.

Sorry, but there's really no comparison. E: D has a heck of a lot of catching up to do, because they dropped the ball big time by not focusing on planetary gameplay after 2.0 and instead faffed around with other stuff that nobody asked for or wanted. All well documented at this point, and no point in re-hashing it.

But looking at the two games side by side at this point, and NMS wins hands down on every level bar space flight.

first thing I wasn't comparing it to ED....which yes Ed has it fair share of problems. I vs been playing NMS for quite awhike. I had a large base with over 300 hrs when that save was deleted by an update. Jumped back in and now have 200 hrs of gameplay. NMS is space lego. The short story narrative was easy and wound up to be nothing....as far as permadeath mode.....It was difficult until I got my ship off the ground. The game is way too easy. ED does have something that gives it more purpose though. That is the bgs. It could be implemented better for sure but expanding your faction gives some sort of focus and purpose. The factions in NMS are laughable at best.

 

[Juniper]

first thing I wasn't comparing it to ED....which yes Ed has it fair share of problems. I vs been playing NMS for quite awhike. I had a large base with over 300 hrs when that save was deleted by an update. Jumped back in and now have 200 hrs of gameplay. NMS is space lego. The short story narrative was easy and wound up to be nothing....as far as permadeath mode.....It was difficult until I got my ship off the ground. The game is way too easy. ED does have something that gives it more purpose though. That is the bgs. It could be implemented better for sure but expanding your faction gives some sort of focus and purpose. The factions in NMS are laughable at best.

Aye, fair points - I did kinda go off on one there - sorry. In my defence, you were replying to a post where I was comparing NMS to E: D, so I took it as a continuation of that.

As a solo player, I don't really care too much about factions, but if that floats your boat...

And again, for myself only, I don't mind if the game is "easy". Life itself is a challenge... I play games to get away from that. Using the old noggin is fine, but anything that requires quick reflexes (e.g. Planet Zoo, of all things ) is generally pushed further down my playlist.

I suppose it ultimately goes to show how pointless it is comparing two completely different games.

 

[PiLhEaD]

.... FDev seemingly has completely lost the plot ...

Not 'seemingly'. They have. And I think the reason is that they felt badly stung by the claim of ED not being a 'proper' MMO, hence the layers of half baked nonsense that they have pancaked on top. Rather than stay true to Elite being (at its heart, imho) a single player experience they panicked, and now 'we are where we are'.

In the mean time NMS had its clear vision, and built on it. So if you compare the gameplay in both games, excluding the flight model, one outshines the other like the sun outshines a waning match.

I sincerely hope FDEV deliver something worth playing in 2020. It's just that I don't think that they can, I think it is beyond them, they lack the 'agility'. And by then, who knows what HG will have given us.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

Not 'seemingly'. They have. And I think the reason is that they felt badly stung by the claim of ED not being a 'proper' MMO, hence the layers of half baked nonsense that they have pancaked on top. Rather than stay true to Elite being (at its heart, imho) a single player experience they panicked, and now 'we are where we are'.

In the mean time NMS had its clear vision, and built on it. So if you compare the gameplay in both games, excluding the flight model, one outshines the other like the sun outshines a waning match.

I sincerely hope FDEV deliver something worth playing in 2020. It's just that I don't think that they can, I think it is beyond them, they lack the 'agility'. And by then, who knows what HG will have given us.

I think the Elite experience was a coherent one right around until Sandro started influencing it and Braben/Brookes went off-hands.
I don't care what the concept of an MMO is. I loved the vast space playground, the excellent flight experience, the lore, slow but interesting story arc and mysteries - and the excitement what comes next in development. Yes, multicrew was a misguided decision, but otherwise most features had great potential, especially powerplay.

But I agree in a way - if space legs are true, then that will completely break the game as I think it will be impossible to deliver without compromising severely on what made Elite great in the first place.

 

[Juniper]

I think the Elite experience was a coherent one right around until Sandro started influencing it and Braben/Brookes went off-hands.
I don't care what the concept of an MMO is. I loved the vast space playground, the excellent flight experience, the lore, slow but interesting story arc and mysteries - and the excitement what comes next in development. Yes, multicrew was a misguided decision, but otherwise most features had great potential, especially powerplay.

Strange that you bemoan Braben/Brookes leaving the project & Sandro's involvement, then go on to praise PP.

Powerplay was Sandro's baby. I agree it had potential - but the BGS should have performed the same job with appropriate development & then become largely automatic. Having another layer on top of under developed foundations was always the issue.

But I agree in a way - if space legs are true, then that will completely break the game as I think it will be impossible to deliver without compromising severely on what made Elite great in the first place.

We have exactly zero information on what 'new era' will bring. But if they try and make it an FPS with "space legs" then yes, E: D will fail. Hard.

I agree with Pilhead. I don't believe FD have the capability to fix Elite.

 

[PiLhEaD]

Well, yet another patch for gameplay and stability issues has been released today on GOG. Well done HG!

I'm off to continue building my newest base, hexagonal in design, then I must find a deep ocean to build a deep underwater base. I also need to track down the last Atlas stations to complete the central narrative, and in the mean time I might even try a black-hole for a bit of random exploring. I've yet to try riding any of the creatures, although I did set up a farm the other day which was not quite as rewarding as I'd hoped, but then the cookery/recipe aspect to the game doesn't really excite me.

Hmm. That's my weekend booked out. Hope wifey doesn't have any plans (involving me)...........

 

[cpbtrading]

I think many players think space legs = fps. It doesn't.
It means being able to move around your ship and do maintenance, repair, build even. Plus float out into space and mine asteroids for recources that might only be available in small areas in caves and crevices, same goes for planetside. To be able to explore in great detail and so much more.

ED would benefit from legs to improve the space feel, round it off and not just be a static entity in whatever your driving. Doesn't have to mean fps at all.
SC too would have been better avoiding that side, but the ability to say no isn't CR's strong point.

NMS does legs well, it does the choice of getting involved with fps well too in the controls, i.e. you can turn it off.

 

[Stigbob]

I think many players think space legs = fps. It doesn't.
It means being able to move around your ship and do maintenance, repair, build even. Plus float out into space and mine asteroids for recources that might only be available in small areas in caves and crevices, same goes for planetside. To be able to explore in great detail and so much more.

ED would benefit from legs to improve the space feel, round it off and not just be a static entity in whatever your driving. Doesn't have to mean fps at all.
SC too would have been better avoiding that side, but the ability to say no isn't CR's strong point.

NMS does legs well, it does the choice of getting involved with fps well too in the controls, i.e. you can turn it off.

I'm playing NMS at the moment, its fun like first person spore and has a lot of bits of stuff to do in it but I don't think its really in ED's league. The thing is with NMS despite all of the bits they are individually pretty shoddy.

The PG stuff just isn't there at all really six different planet types, lots of quadrupeds, birds and fish with maybe six tail/leg/head/body types some hopping whelks and stuff as well but they are boringly incredibly similar on different planets. On that front it lacks even spores variation.

The FPS has some of the worst hit detection I've ever seen you need to aim four feet or so below carnivorous indoor plants to hit them at all and animals you miss with the sniper laser drop dead anyway because the beam is just for show. Constantly getting stuck on plants off to one side whilst walking.

Economy wise I looked at raw mat prices and blueprints built an activated indium mine and am now rich to the point of money being no object at all. Got the end game s-class squid fighter by it showing up as I wandered through a random space port and my freighters a beast. I feel I may already have hit end game after not very long in game at all.

Base building is duplo stuff.

Ground vehicles locked to 3rd person view because the cockpit interior view is not transparent.

Old bits of the game now superceded lying about pointlessly, like the tool tip to recharge phase beams that don't need recharging anymore or the call spaceship for 1 navigation data pillars even though you can do it free from the quick menu.

Alien interaction is a list of canned phrases and irritating little dances with RNG governing reactions, I'd prefer it to be text based only.

Difficulty wise I only died once by standing about to get eaten and see what happened.

You can complete multiple missions by doing just one, even fetch quests for other stuff get successfully finished by another for entirely different stuff.

Can't turn off tool-tips.

Can't turn off mission notifications.

One of the worst cases of consolitis ever seen on the controls front this just isn't a mouse and keyboard friendly game.

Some really daft bugs like the vanishing crashed ship, even though the distress beacon says its still there.

Space flight lol. I can solo nexus pirate squadrons without using a single recharge just point and click with the mouse.

Don't get me wrong its a nice simple relaxing challenge free game, but its probably not going to be a keeper for me and I'm glad I picked it up in a sale. If FDEV are giving us space-feet in 2020 I really can't see them struggling to beat this hands down, it just screams stuff slapped together that doesn't really coalesce whereas ED is the industry benchmark for flying spaceships and it'll stay on my hard drive.

 

[PiLhEaD]

...NMS does legs well, it does the choice of getting involved with fps well too in the controls, i.e. you can turn it off.

Spot on, and due in no small part due to NMS being designed from the outset to be a different experience to ED. In truth I don't think these games are much in competition, however HG have shown, for one example, how to weave a single narrative into and through a sandbox game. Similarly, as you note, the simplicity of their PvP/PvE controls makes ED's lead-feet look somewhat farcical.

There is no doubt that HG have 'inspired' (borrowed) elements of their game directly from Elite. I would strongly advise FDEV to pay similar 'credit' to HG but, alas, I have long felt that they are in the grip of the 'not invented here' syndrome*, doubly so as DBOBE/Bell laid a huge amount of the groundwork for space games with their early Elite games.

(* Broadly, no matter how good any idea is, it is rejected as 'we' didn't come up with it.)

 

[cpbtrading]

I have never put NMS against ED, whenever that comes up, I always say they are very different games and not worth trying to compare them.
The same has to be said for ED v SC, they simply don't compare. Not sure why players need to compare.

I played the first Elite back in the 80's. It was a inspiration, my only disappointment was I didn't have enough time to play it, I had a young family and was building a business up at the time. It should have come in the mid 70's for me..

I do believe ED would be tremendous with legs in my view. Open up all sorts of different play styles and indeed allow for new features (not fps necessarily).
But we'll see next year perhaps.

I play a few space games and like each one. SE, ED, NMS, Evochron, I/Rift, SC (although refunded main ships) etc, etc.. I can't say as I could compare many of them to each other. If I could I probably wouldn't have bought them in the first place. Each game I play are different in many ways. Really the only comparison, is they all have stars..

 

[Stigbob]

Spot on, and due in no small part due to NMS being designed from the outset to be a different experience to ED. In truth I don't think these games are much in competition, however HG have shown, for one example, how to weave a single narrative into and through a sandbox game. Similarly, as you note, the simplicity of their PvP/PvE controls makes ED's lead-feet look somewhat farcical.

There is no doubt that HG have 'inspired' (borrowed) elements of their game directly from Elite. I would strongly advise FDEV to pay similar 'credit' to HG but, alas, I have long felt that they are in the grip of the 'not invented here' syndrome*, doubly so as DBOBE/Bell laid a huge amount of the groundwork for space games with their early Elite games.

(* Broadly, no matter how good any idea is, it is rejected as 'we' didn't come up with it.)

Open and Solo as a binary choice isn't much different to multiplayer on/off really. Aside from group as an extra bonus obviously.

The "seamless" single player narrative is pretty badly buggered in NMS, if you don't play follow the icon and do things like build stuff before you are told you have to tear it down and start again as it can't cope with you having already done stuff. Except fetch/murder quests where they all get completed if you just do the one. Seems to be both extremes. The constant quest reminders for stuff I'm ignoring also grate.

Not a game that rewards thinking for yourself or doing your own thing, which is an odd approach to a sandbox.

 

[PiLhEaD]

Open and Solo as a binary choice isn't much different to multiplayer on/off really...

Have a good look in the options. You can play multiplayer in NMS but turn off any PvP aspects - so meet other explorers without them being able to attack/damage you. You have similar control over any bases that you build/publish. As I said above, it makes FDev's binary solution look poor along with their inability/unwillingness to learn from HG/NMS.

The "seamless" single player narrative is pretty badly buggered in NMS... before you are told you have to tear it down and start again as it can't cope with you having already done stuff...

I don't agree, this has not been my experience, and no matter how 'buggered' you consider it, NMS at least has narratives to follow - if you want to.

I'm not saying that there aren't irritations in the game, but they don't bug me nearly as much as they seem to do you.