Author Topic: No Man's Sky  (Read 9834 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sordid

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5790
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #135 on: November 29, 2016, 05:38:59 PM »
This game's launch in its entirety is pretty unprecedented.  Yes, elements parallel with some past events, but the scale of it all is pretty unique, especially for revolving around a company of 10 or so people who've only made 2 other, much smaller games before this. 

Honestly, I think your stance is kind of insane.  First off, if they cared, it wouldn't be a scam by definition.  Second, Hello Games couldn't refund everyone their money, even if they wanted to due to the way people bought it in the first place as Hello Games is not a retail outlet.  Lastly, while closing the studio (or at least restructuring and rebranding) would make a lot of sense, it would make no sense for all of these people to give up their entire careers over this.  Maybe, maybe Sean Murray since he was the leader and figurehead behind all this, but not the rank and file programmers.

Obviously I was exaggerating for dramatic effect.

Quote
As for the positive reaction on reddit and elsewhere, I am with you that it's astounding how the mood shifted so drastically overnight, but I think it's likely because people are toxic'd out more than gaining a sudden affection for Hello Games.  Besides, literally every thread I've read so far has contained comments of, "I will never trust HG again or spend another cent on their product, but this isn't half bad."  There's no money component to this anymore at this point as the launch was fairly huge (due to the hype) and almost every place selling NMS is doing so for much less than $60. That's why this update shows HG at least still cares about working on this project.  They could easily have cut and run but instead they worked on this for the last 3 months and are claiming it's just the beginning.  They are literally losing money by paying their developers to work on a product which won't bring in enough revenue to cover their cost and if that doesn't show an investment in making this game better (even if it is different) then I don't know what will.

Eh... I don't buy that. They may be a company of a dozen people, but they sure as hell behave like a big AAA publisher. Except with, say, Ubisoft the difference between pre-release promises and the finished product is graphical fidelity and little more than that. With HG and NMS it's every aspect of the game, graphics, gameplay, online functionality, the whole thing. I can't see into their heads, obviously, so I have to guess at their motivations based on their previous actions. Based on their previous actions I estimate their motivations to be very cynical and profit-driven. I could be wrong about them, of course, but so far I haven't been. That DLC is coming, mark my words.

Quote
They can never unfuck what they've fucked up, but this update is at least a nice gesture, even if it could have and should have been better both in form and execution.  I for one, will continue to judge each update on its merits as well as the company, and as well as the game as a whole since, why the fuck not?  What do I have to lose by honestly analyzing new content for a game I already own?  What do I have to gain by encouraging the developer to abandon any further updates? 

Judging each update and the company as a whole based on their merits is what I am doing. The game's a turd. The update's a bit of frosting on top. Frosted turd, still a turd. A company that covers up a turd with frosting and pretends that everything is hunky-dory? Not a very good company, IMO.

As for what would be gained by having the developers abandon any further updates (and preferably their careers), how about an increase in the general level of honesty in the gaming industry? A hard but necessary lesson to the millions of gullible idiots who pre-ordered the game without knowing anything about it? A warning to other developers and publishers who might be considering pulling the same scam? Lots of positives all around, I'd say.

(click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: November 29, 2016, 06:10:51 PM by Sordid »

Offline Eternally Learning

  • Master Mr. a.k.a. Methodical Loaf
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7999
  • Break a leg, badger!
    • Get Past The 140 Character Limit!
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #136 on: November 29, 2016, 07:23:26 PM »
I guess that's where you and I differ.  The game was a turd at launch because it was no more than a promising framework for a game; early access quality at best.  I see this update as actually filling out the framework and a step towards an actually complete game.  Honestly at this point, even if they turn this game into something wildly different than what was sold, I will be happy so long as it's a cohesive and complete game.  That doesn't change what they did though and make me happy with the company.

As for HG themselves, due to their silence it is just about impossible to sort out their motivations, but if they support this game for a year or more with a dozen or so updates like this to actually, finally have a finished product worthy of the price I paid, I'm not completely against paid DLC depending on what it's for (it'd have to be huge and low-priced though).  They've got a looooong way to go before they can even dream of that though.

Offline Sordid

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5790
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #137 on: November 29, 2016, 09:09:41 PM »
The silence I get. Words weren't going to fix anything, regardless of what they said the responses would have been "lies", "stop hyping again", "less words, more content", "what's taking so long, why isn't it out yet?", and death threats. If you want to be charitable, you can look at the silence as HG adopting an "actions speak louder than words" policy. If you're me, you view it as letting the player base simmer until everyone's so desperate for something that they'll be happy about anything.

As for supporting the game "for a year or more with a dozen or so updates like this", that math doesn't work out. This update took them three and a half months of (presumably) full-time work to put out, so a dozen updates like this would mean supporting the game for three years. No way. They're not going to work on this game for three more years without a paycheck at the end of it. A year of support would mean three more updates like this, not enough to flesh out the game. It's fucked either way.

That's my prediction, at least. We'll see how it plays out. I don't want the game to be bad. I want it to be good, because I like having good games to play. I just don't see it happening.

Offline Eternally Learning

  • Master Mr. a.k.a. Methodical Loaf
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7999
  • Break a leg, badger!
    • Get Past The 140 Character Limit!
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #138 on: November 29, 2016, 10:59:51 PM »
I get the inclination towards silence, I just think it was a massive mistake.  Nothing they could have done would have stopped the shit-storm because they very well earned it, but shutting up completely allowed anyone who was supporting them through all this to slowly get jaded and walk away.  Also, my numbers were just random.  It's more the idea that they need to show consistent and concerted effort long-term, leading to a game that actually resembles a finished product.

Offline Dan I

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 883
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #139 on: November 30, 2016, 08:12:24 AM »
As for supporting the game "for a year or more with a dozen or so updates like this", that math doesn't work out. This update took them three and a half months of (presumably) full-time work to put out, so a dozen updates like this would mean supporting the game for three years.

I'm pretty sure there's a logical fallacy that describes this error in presuming that trends are always constant. That because THIS update took 3.5 months doesn't mean other updates will take as long. Not they necessarily won't or that they wouldn't even take longer. But who knows what stuff is in the background of this update that is actually there as ground work for future content.

Actually...we sort of do:

http://www.polygon.com/2016/11/28/13764204/no-mans-sky-land-vehicles-foundation-update-files

There's apparently some files in the Foundation Update (mostly textures and a model) that right now appear to do nothing but are pretty clearly indicating a plan for buggies



Offline Sordid

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5790
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #140 on: November 30, 2016, 02:08:08 PM »
Well yes, it's just an estimate. Buggies sound kinda cool, though.

Offline Dan I

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 883
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #141 on: November 30, 2016, 02:23:22 PM »
I'll also say. I bought NMS on release day and definitely enjoyed it. Was it what was promised? Absolutely NOT and I completely understand the criticism and felt like I did NOT get my money's worth.

BUT, if I step back and consider "If it was advertised correctly and priced correctly would I have been happy with this?" And the answer to that was a resounding yes. Now you can say that's a stupid thought process. But I was trying to judge the GAME in a vacuum and I had to at least concede on that point.

I hadn't played it in a few weeks, not out of any real problems with the game but more that I have two young kids and a MASSIVE games backlog.

I went back to it last night, started a new game in Creative Mode and proceeded to spend 2 hours in my home system building a base. It was really fun.

So do I ultimately think I'm going to get my $60 out of this?

Yeah, honestly, I do.

 

personate-rain