-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Where do you stand on No Man's Sky?
- Thread starter The_Dama
- Start date
Exactly. Saying that it's bad or shady that Sean is purposely withholding information about the game makes very little sense to me, when the whole point is to explore and figure things out yourself. I would compare this to J.J. Abrams, who likes to keep things somewhat shrouded in mystery and then unveil it when the piece of media releases.
I want to see someone hollow out a planet. I'm sure someone will attempt to do it.
I'm excited to play, and understand that it's not going to be to everyone's taste, which I think is fine. I think there are a lot of people upset because the game isn't what they wanted it to be, rather than anything inherently wrong with the game. It's about big, expansive -- but likely shallow -- exploration and survival. If that's not your thing, NMS probably isn't going to be for you.
Fallout-with-swords
Banned
I'm excited, I'm content with it just being an exploration game. Any secrets or hidden elements will be a bonus.
Handy Fake
Member
I think they've held back many of the gameplay elements deliberately as they probably see this as a 'you have to play it to get it' type of thing. I don't think they need the pre release hype too much. If the game is good then word of mouth will sell it. It's also the type of game which could well have fairly long legs, it's not got much competition on the horizon.
I want it to be good, as the idea is intriguing. I doubt it'll be perfect but it looks unique enough to be worth a try. Even if it gets boring after 20 hours, that's more than most single player games give me.
I want it to be good, as the idea is intriguing. I doubt it'll be perfect but it looks unique enough to be worth a try. Even if it gets boring after 20 hours, that's more than most single player games give me.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
As I said earlier, can you imagine if we didn't know anything?
'Ah, we're getting a picture on the TV. We can make out a fair amount of detail. Good, Neil, we can see you coming down the ladder now.'
'I'm at the foot of the ladder ... The ground seems to be very fine grained as I get closer to it, almost like powder ... I'm going to step off the ladder now ... That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind ...'
'We see you, Neil, Neil? Come in Neil.'
'My God ... I see ... Something isn't right here ... I can't ...'
'Neil? Can you clarify? What isn't right? What are you seeing?'
'A building, I'm seeing a fucking building.'
I'm so sorry, Sean, I knew what you were trying to achieve.
That's simply where I stand; I've watched the footage, and it looks extremely primitive. I think Sony's backing ultimately hurt them by raising expectations, and they're now in over their heads trying to deliver on promises beyond the scope of their capabilities.
I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
So you've never talked shit about a terrible game? I doubt there are more than a handful of games ever released where everyone involved didn't actually work hard to make the best game they could.
I would give the developers far more credit than you. I don't think they are so fragile that they'd read the post you quoted, slump their shoulders and spiral into a deep depression because some random asshole on a forum, who's never played the game, thinks it won't be good.
I think early game might be kind of similar to that. Remember that 1 in 10 will probably be an inhabited world while the rest will be more desolate in the outer rim. There will be variation, but not much. Based on some earlier info from Sean about the procedural generation of flora and fauna, the maths they are using seems to get a bit 'wilder' the farther in you get, so I expect some level of advancement or increase in how alien some of these worlds are.
Really, I think exploring this universe and seeing a bunch of stuff no one has ever seen or maybe ever will see is all kinds of awesome. The empty lonliness of space. A wanderer with no place to call home. Drifting from planet to planet, system to system. One man versus the universe. This is my No Man's Sky.
I think the idea is every planet will indeed be different but yeah, the real question is by how much? Will it simply be that they have another toe or will it feel genuinely unique? Remains to be seen. hope that theres tons of variety
I'm not sure this is possible due to how the streaming works. Doesn't the landmass reset after you're a certain distance away? If planets are really big then I can't imagine someone drilling that far down without losing sight of the surface
Really depends on if the ps4 keeps the whole planet in memory while you're on it or just what's your immediate surrounding but it was made to sound like the latter
mysocksarepink
Banned
not for me, it seems like minecraft, like there's no real point.
for those hyped, I hope it works out for you
for those hyped, I hope it works out for you
not for me, it seems like minecraft, like there's no real point.
for those hyped, I hope it works out for you
I enjoy minecraft for the exploration. Nothing better than limitless exploration.
More_Badass
Member
If I recall, there are hundreds of base animals, which then can also be mutated with the attributes of other animals to create new creatures
So imagine a trex skeleton being body-horror morphed into the shape of a dog, and the dog turning into some kind of trex creature.
It's not like "here's a creature, now put different legs on it". The game changes the entire skeletal structure of the creatures themselves
This was literally just covered in the thread. Any deformation you have done to a planet will be stored on your machine, just not for other players.
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
I think that divide is where most of the "what do you do" shit comes from. A lot of people just don't like exploring in games and want to be more actively engaged all the time.
NMS is getting more hype than most exploration focused indie games and it seems people not into thise type of those games kee questioning the appeal instead of just ignoring it since it's not for them.
It's the plague of the Internet era. Everyone must have and share strong opinions on everything.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
High hopes I had. Now... with all the delays, and the the last one SO close to launch, I lost my interest. Never promise an almost infinite game.
This guy is awesome I most confess. Still no hype.
This guy is awesome I most confess. Still no hype.
I feel like Hello Games and Sean Murray have really worn everything on their sleeve in terms of this game.
I think they've been straight forward and open about what the game is, what you do in the game, and their goals and desires with the game. Yet there still seems to be a group of people that can't grasp that the game may not be for them, and what they find boring, another gamer will find fascinating, and vice versa.
Outside of not wanting to spoil the systems closer to the center of the universe, I feel like they've been very transparent. A few things they were coy about (ie, what your player looks like), were in order to keep a sense of discovery. I'm sure, if they wanted, they could show us a thousand unique planets, but where would the fun be in discovering a batshit crazy or intriguing planet all by yourself, naming that planet and it's weird creatures, and then sharing it with others?
We've known what the game was from day one, and they've been peeling back the layers on some of those already revealed gameplay systems. The thing is, I don't think there is anymore mystery left in regards to what the game offers. What you see is what you get. If that doesn't appeal to you, cool, move on to some other games. It's not really that hard to do. But to act like the developers have promised the moon, and what they've shown has somehow been deceptive is just disingenuous. We control our own hype. We control how excited we get for a product. If I'm excited for a game or movie, or tv show, or comic book, or novel, it's not because some marketing campaign dazzled me with its presentation. It's because the concept of the product, and the execution of said concept intrigue me. I'm willing to take a chance on something that interests me. I pass on things that don't.
The Gears of War games are fantastic, but I have no interest in them, so I don't play them. All of those cool racing games like Forza, Gran Turismo, Driveclub, etc, are awesome and cool, but I'm not interested in that type of game, so I don't play them. There is enough out there about No Man's Sky to parse if the concept and execution intrigue you. There is not enough info out there about No Man's Sky for any of us to discern how good or bad the game is. How much it's going to sell, or how big of a success/flop it's going to be with critics. It's all too early for that, and none of us have played it. The only opinion about any entertainment media I consume that I care about is my own. While I enjoy reading what other people think about stuff, ultimately, what I think about it trumps all. If I hate No Man's Sky, and somebody else loves it, that's cool. If I love No Man's Sky, and somebody else hates it, that's cool.
But to make declarations concerning the quality and content of the game as if they are fact, without having actual hands on experience to pull from seems kind of silly. And this goes for both positive and negative declarations. Everybody with an opinion wants to be right, and I'm in the camp that just wants to play a fun game. Exploring the galaxy sounds fun, so I hope the execution favors fun.
I think they've been straight forward and open about what the game is, what you do in the game, and their goals and desires with the game. Yet there still seems to be a group of people that can't grasp that the game may not be for them, and what they find boring, another gamer will find fascinating, and vice versa.
Outside of not wanting to spoil the systems closer to the center of the universe, I feel like they've been very transparent. A few things they were coy about (ie, what your player looks like), were in order to keep a sense of discovery. I'm sure, if they wanted, they could show us a thousand unique planets, but where would the fun be in discovering a batshit crazy or intriguing planet all by yourself, naming that planet and it's weird creatures, and then sharing it with others?
We've known what the game was from day one, and they've been peeling back the layers on some of those already revealed gameplay systems. The thing is, I don't think there is anymore mystery left in regards to what the game offers. What you see is what you get. If that doesn't appeal to you, cool, move on to some other games. It's not really that hard to do. But to act like the developers have promised the moon, and what they've shown has somehow been deceptive is just disingenuous. We control our own hype. We control how excited we get for a product. If I'm excited for a game or movie, or tv show, or comic book, or novel, it's not because some marketing campaign dazzled me with its presentation. It's because the concept of the product, and the execution of said concept intrigue me. I'm willing to take a chance on something that interests me. I pass on things that don't.
The Gears of War games are fantastic, but I have no interest in them, so I don't play them. All of those cool racing games like Forza, Gran Turismo, Driveclub, etc, are awesome and cool, but I'm not interested in that type of game, so I don't play them. There is enough out there about No Man's Sky to parse if the concept and execution intrigue you. There is not enough info out there about No Man's Sky for any of us to discern how good or bad the game is. How much it's going to sell, or how big of a success/flop it's going to be with critics. It's all too early for that, and none of us have played it. The only opinion about any entertainment media I consume that I care about is my own. While I enjoy reading what other people think about stuff, ultimately, what I think about it trumps all. If I hate No Man's Sky, and somebody else loves it, that's cool. If I love No Man's Sky, and somebody else hates it, that's cool.
But to make declarations concerning the quality and content of the game as if they are fact, without having actual hands on experience to pull from seems kind of silly. And this goes for both positive and negative declarations. Everybody with an opinion wants to be right, and I'm in the camp that just wants to play a fun game. Exploring the galaxy sounds fun, so I hope the execution favors fun.
I see what you mean, it still definitely looks OK though. It's such a hilarious nitpick.
Everything it has promised and that I look for it to deliver has already been shown in the videos.
1. You are in space.
2. You are in a ship.
3. Your ship can shoot other ships that will respond to you doing so.
4. You can land on planets and get out of that ship.
5. Some planets will have life, NPCs, wrecks, portals, and useful resources.
It's a sci fi game that will deliver spaceflight and planetary exploration. It is not promising radiant AI, an epic story, a deep RPG system, or fast-paced teambased multiplayer action.
It's not like Hello Games said "every world/star/spacehippo" is interesting. It said they are procedural. That's the most basic promise one could make. It's like a baker saying "this bread is made with flour" instead of saying "this bread is amazing."
What exactly do you think it is promising that it cannot deliver?
G-Bus
Banned
Seems like the perfect game to smoke a bowl and relax with.
There's enough of everything else out there. What's wrong with a game thats a little more mundane and easy going?
I get why people are confused by the hype but I also don't get the hate. Not interested? Don't buy it. But don't shit on people that like the idea of having a giant fucking universe that's procedurally generated you can explore. How is that not at least a little bit exciting?
Too much bang bang, giant set piece, explosions these days. Jaded the masses imo.
There's enough of everything else out there. What's wrong with a game thats a little more mundane and easy going?
I get why people are confused by the hype but I also don't get the hate. Not interested? Don't buy it. But don't shit on people that like the idea of having a giant fucking universe that's procedurally generated you can explore. How is that not at least a little bit exciting?
Too much bang bang, giant set piece, explosions these days. Jaded the masses imo.
not for me, it seems like minecraft, like there's no real point.
for those hyped, I hope it works out for you
There's deffo a point. Get to the center of the galaxy. Minecraft gives you no real objective - but every hour or two when you look at the starmap in NMS it'll be pointing you to the end of the game: the galactic center.
See below. Not re the quantity of animal/planet types (must be tens/hundreds of animals and tens of planets at least) but re how you get unique, crazy mixes on a nearly infinite scale:
You're the best, Socks.
fucking perfect
Just for the record: the other (alien) ships are members of a handful of alien factions who are at war with each other and who you can build relationship statuses with and enter dialogue with (they also have bases/towns on life-supporting planets), the game has a relatively deep RPG system in that it has a large skill tree with many options/upgrades for your guns, suit and ship, and apparently relatively customisable spaceships. We don't know about the story: it might be epic. It might not be.
The above has been "promised" in videos and in hands-on previews. Worth reading
But yeah, no teambased multiplayer action.
Jeronimo Jones
Member
I'm in. I'm willing to give it a try over first person shooter #7385 despite some small concerns.
More_Badass
Member
Sean Murray seems like such a humble personable guy. Here are some great interviews with him
Showing off the behind-the-scenes of how the procedural engine works, how ships, animals, etc. are generated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU
On managing expectations and working on the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4zKTNLz0kQ
I though this was a good quote from him
Showing off the behind-the-scenes of how the procedural engine works, how ships, animals, etc. are generated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU
On managing expectations and working on the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4zKTNLz0kQ
I though this was a good quote from him
Handy Fake
Member
HundredEyeMonk
Member
Can someone sum up real quick why folks are turning on this game now?
I have been media blackout on it, tbh.
As long as the concept is still the same.. you get dropped in a universe with procedurally generated planets, animals, fauna.. and you can fly around and just explore new places seamlessly... then I am still in Day 1.
Why are so many people off of the hype train now?
I have been media blackout on it, tbh.
As long as the concept is still the same.. you get dropped in a universe with procedurally generated planets, animals, fauna.. and you can fly around and just explore new places seamlessly... then I am still in Day 1.
Why are so many people off of the hype train now?
Neuromancer
Member
FOR
If it pans out it could be one of my favorite games of all time. If I end up not enjoying it as much as I thought, it would still have been a bold and exciting experiment. Either way I feel like I can't possibly lose by picking it up.
If it pans out it could be one of my favorite games of all time. If I end up not enjoying it as much as I thought, it would still have been a bold and exciting experiment. Either way I feel like I can't possibly lose by picking it up.
Nothing I've seen about the game has ever looked interesting to me.
I can't speak for everyone, but for myself: While the general concept is appealing on a certain level, the appeal is mostly due to the mind's tendency to expound on endless possibilities and insert excitement into the unknown. In reality, past experience tells me that the game is likely to end up formless and without well-designed challenges due to the nature of probability with such a massive expanse of non-curated content.
I prefer my games to have challenges that are deliberately designed to be overcome. Tools vs. Obstacles is the root of game design, and the obstacle aspect of such a massive amount of content is impossible to get right. It's one thing when a game is procedural on a small scale like Spelunky, but another entirely on a large scale.
I can't speak for everyone, but for myself: While the general concept is appealing on a certain level, the appeal is mostly due to the mind's tendency to expound on endless possibilities and insert excitement into the unknown. In reality, past experience tells me that the game is likely to end up formless and without well-designed challenges due to the nature of probability with such a massive expanse of non-curated content.
I prefer my games to have challenges that are deliberately designed to be overcome. Tools vs. Obstacles is the root of game design, and the obstacle aspect of such a massive amount of content is impossible to get right. It's one thing when a game is procedural on a small scale like Spelunky, but another entirely on a large scale.
No big spoilers below.
For a long time Hello Games only showed gameplay videos and those gameplay videos just included walking, shooting and flying. They showed it too early: like years before release.
So as people saw more and more footage they were like 'the game will be a mile wide but an inch deep. Where will be nothing to do. All you'll do is walk and shoot and explore a probably-dull-yet-infinite universe filled with re-used assets everywhere'.
It was a fair enough reaction, until Hello Games started revealing more information about your objective in the game, about how its procedural systems work, about how it will change as you progress through it, about how deep the skill system is, about how deep some other mechanics are, and about a swathe of other gameplay features.
Most of the above were revealed in the last few months, but a few months of mostly text-based content isn't enough to change the minds of people who made up their minds over a year ago based on the few trailers that were shown.
TL;DR: people turned on the game quite a while back when Hello Games/Sony mismanaged the game's advertising, and now as we approach release and the hype train gathers momentum, they're becoming more vocal. (Even though their concerns have been alleviated - they just don't know it and won't educate themselves.)
Won't happen. Apparently there is a limit in how deep you can dig into a planet (I can't remember what the number is). What is not known is if that is how deep into the crust you can dig (like if it is 5' if you are on a mountain you can only dig 5' into the mountain) or if the limit is in relation to "sea level" so to speak.
They realised that what you described doesn't suit them personally so the game must be shit. Or something. It's pretty tragic.
Honestly no. A lot was actually said last year about the systems. The only really new thing we found out was that there were NPCs you can dialogue with and languages you could learn. Everything else really isn't new info. Granted a lot of it was text but I remember some one even on one of hte NMS posts last year compiled everything said about it and it gave a pretty good idea of what you did (pretty much most other than dialogue of what we know now) and people still complained "What do you do?" even when people would quote the post at them. IT's why it feels like a lot of this "what do you do?" is concern trolling. Or at the very least people who just aren't interested in the game and don't realize that just cause the game isn't for them doesn't mean others don't want a game like that.
DISSESHOWEDO
Banned
right here:
Same, got this pre ordered the moment they relaesed it! Also will fit nice to bloodborne's collector's edition.
You're probably right, I'm probably compressing the time in which these events happened a lot in my head.
Have to admit, that is a good looking collector's edition, and, fittingly, looks like it would be right at home on a bookshelf filled with science fiction novels with covers from the 60s-70s. I'm almost entirely digital this generation, so I won't be picking that up, but it does look quite eye-catching in that minimalist, austere way.
addyb
Member
I was initially in the "what do you do" camp and wasn't interested in it. As the release got closer I thought it would be a nice change of pace away from the hectic games I usually play so stuck a digital pre order in. It could end up being crap and I've wasted £35 but it won't be the first time I've bought a stinker. I think in small doses I'll get on with it.
SneakyStephan
Banned
If someone , in a thread asking 'how do you stand on no man's sky' expresses that they are sceptical about the game and unimpressed by the gameplay shown they are psychotic?
Maybe if you ask nicely the mods can make a safe space thread about the game where you can only talk hype and all dissenting opinions are banned.
It'll be like that donald trump subreddit on reddit.
There are plenty of people saying they are sceptical.
Then there are a handful of people, eg cool_dude, who are spouting complete crap about the game which is false and/or disingenuous, and going to insane lengths to argue with anyone who thinks the game might turn out OK. And he's arguing with complete nonsensical non-arguments, too.
I wouldn't have used 'psychotic', but it's almost there.
Also mocking the idea of 'safe spaces': good idea.
I've never been a big fan of open-world survival/exploration style games as - in all honesty - I lack the creativity to make games like this fun. I need a goal and purpose driving me at the centre of the experience and No Man's Sky seems like a game purposely designed to be lacking that.
Given the hype around the game, I'm staying distantly interested, though the amount of time between announcement and release has decreased my interest a slight bit.
If it's one of those games that takes ages to release but then gets consistent 90+ scores, I'll probably try it for curiosity's sake, otherwise, I'll just ignore it.
Given the hype around the game, I'm staying distantly interested, though the amount of time between announcement and release has decreased my interest a slight bit.
If it's one of those games that takes ages to release but then gets consistent 90+ scores, I'll probably try it for curiosity's sake, otherwise, I'll just ignore it.
SneakyStephan
Banned
I specifically compared it to r/the_donald
Normally a safe space means you can express yourself without being judged or harrassed.
Not be called a psychopath. He wants an echochamber ->trump subreddit
Posters itt insulting people who like NMS?: 0 (maybe cooldude being condescending)
Posters itt insulting people who don't like NMS? lots on the last few pages, using words like psychopath and ugly
I honestly do not think that is what happened, with all due respect.
What I believe happened is that from the get go the game was presented honestly about what it is: A procedural exploration game with elements strongly reminiscent of Frontier Elite or Eve (space -but also ground- combat/ gathering/ basic crafting/ commerce/ factions), but somehow people started projecting their idea of what the game SHOULD be, instead of learning and reading about what the game actually is.
Hence the claims of:
The game being randomly generated (it isn't), having only a few permutations of the same elements (false), being an offshoot of Minecraft or Spore (it's nothing like either), having multiplayer (it doesn't and never was supposed to) and then being super disappointed when it doesn't allow you to meet your pals, having no goal (there is one, going to the center of the galaxy), nothing to do except walking/ flying around (the game has hostile environments you need to craft equip to progress in, ennemies, factions, space and ground combat, commerce with trade routes, gathering and crafting, factions to ally with or go space pirate on, Alien ruins with languages to learn, etc.).
Basically, in my opinion, it's been a case of Hearing the game's name, seeing a few screens of it, getting excited as seeing some people (who actually knew what the game was about in their case) say it was their potential game of the forever, and then making in their heads all kinds of things that the game would be/ do.
Then, finally thinking about asking what is the game even about, reality about what the game actually is hit them, and it's not enough being disappointed it's not what they thought the game was. They have to make sure people realize it can't be a good game, because it's not the game they had in mind.
To these people, all I have to say about NMS is -yes- those of us like myself who know what the game is about are immensely excited about it.
We're sorry it's not "your" game.
But frankly, in my opinion
