Author Topic: No Man's Sky  (Read 17363 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sordid

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5792
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
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9097
  • 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: 5792
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
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9097
  • 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: 891
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: 5792
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: 891
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.

Online John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6410
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #142 on: November 24, 2017, 02:38:16 AM »
Hello Games' Sean Murray gives a lecture about how their team went about designing the procedural terrain generation system for NMS. Regardless what you think about the game or Mr. Murray himself, this is a fascinating discussion about the challenges of randomly generating realistic terrain.


Offline Eternally Learning

  • Master Mr. a.k.a. Methodical Loaf
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9097
  • Break a leg, badger!
    • Get Past The 140 Character Limit!
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #143 on: July 30, 2018, 02:14:43 AM »
So for those unaware, Hello Games has released their biggest update of this game yet, titled "No Man's Sky NEXT."



This is the biggest step they've taken yet towards fixing this game and creating something worth the initial asking price of $60 and they've now officially slashed the price to $30 in conjunction with NEXT's release.  I haven't played it yet, but from what I've seen, there are huge gameplay and visual overhauls that drastically alter the core of the game.  It still seems to be largely the same gameplay loops in terms of upgrading, building, and harvesting, but lots of changes around that core seem to impact how that plays out, especially the addition of full on multiplayer.  Also, they've allowed you to shift to a 3rd person view which a lot of people are praising for really making the environments feel more open.

This release prompted me to read back through this thread and I have to say that it's been a very interesting journey.  At this point, I'd basically forgotten that my initial response to the game at launch was generally positive.  I mean, I remember playing it for 20+ hours before giving up, but reading my comments reminds me just how much the core loop worked even if it petered out quicker than I'd have liked it to.  My take at this point is that in light of new interviews Sean Murray has given, it seems my suspicions were correct and they basically went overboard hyping this game with all the features they were working on implementing before realizing there was no way they could release that game in a reasonable time frame and with the money they had left.  So they decided to scale back to a game that was a complex as they could release in a stable form and decided not to inform the public that they'd removed or not completed mounds of promised features in order to get as much money as possible at launch with which to actually complete the game over time.  So far as I know, creating major updates for a game that was near universally panned for up to 2 years and at no additional cost to the player is pretty well unprecedented and really does speak to the earnestness of their intentions behind this game and IMO squashes the idea that they were lying to consumers to get rich.  That said, I think it's 100% appropriate to call what they did a scam, it just wasn't a get rich scam, it was a scam to fully fund the game they wanted to make.  It's also 100% unacceptable that they did this and lied about it and I would never ever pre-order a game from them or buy anything that hadn't been thoroughly reviewed first.

I've seen some people discussing whether or not gamers buying the game now is akin to rewarding them for the scam, but respectfully I have to disagree.  I think as long as consumers tie the money they shell out to the quality of the product they are buying, the only message that I see from buying the game now is that if you fix your game, we might still buy it and that's not a terrible message to send IMO.  It'd be a different case if the NEXT update was not free DLC for people who already own the game however.

Online Billzbub

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4332
  • I know you know I know
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #144 on: August 01, 2018, 02:55:44 PM »
Is it now worth buying for $30?  I know nothing of this game beyond your most recent post, but your post makes it sound kinda cool.
Quote from: Steven Novella
gleefully altering one’s beliefs to accommodate new information should be a badge of honor

Offline Eternally Learning

  • Master Mr. a.k.a. Methodical Loaf
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9097
  • Break a leg, badger!
    • Get Past The 140 Character Limit!
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #145 on: August 01, 2018, 03:11:31 PM »
Is it now worth buying for $30?  I know nothing of this game beyond your most recent post, but your post makes it sound kinda cool.

I honestly have no real idea since I haven't played it since the update. I will say that I did get 20 some hours of enjoyment out of it in its initial, much worse state, so chances are it probably is worth it now. There's a ton of videos online if you wanna get a better idea for how it might match your tastes though.

Offline wastrel

  • Great poster... or greatest poster?
  • Technical Administrator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 13519
  • Science: A cold-hearted bitch with a 14" strap-on
Re: No Man's Sky
« Reply #146 on: August 01, 2018, 03:59:36 PM »
I'm about 16 hours into the update and find it extremely playable, with a lot more depth.  The overall mechanics of the game are mostly the same, so if you weren't interested before, probably won't like it now either.

 

personate-rain
personate-rain