Support NeoGAF

[Speely]

I haven't been following this game but one of my friends told me he just went to Gamestop to try and return the game (he isn't really enjoying it) and one of the employees told him there was multiplayer he just "hadn't found it yet" lol

Everything about this is perfect. I had a good laugh.

 

[Vena]

NB: It is, of course, still totally bullshit that Sean said all of this deep-detail simulation would be in the game and it's not

Fair enough!

 

[Krappadizzle]

But fuck do I hate witch hunts, and fuck do I hate this idea that if a developer didn't deliver on everything they ever talked about them they're basically Molyneux. This is why so many devs doubt talk about their work. ):

And they shouldn't. Show, don't talk. Talk is cheap.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

But fuck do I hate witch hunts, and fuck do I hate this idea that if a developer didn't deliver on everything they ever talked about them they're basically Molyneux. This is why so many devs doubt talk about their work. ):

If you're going to play the "open and transparent card," and allow people to get hyped based on prerelease looks into your development process it seems like you owe it to them to tell them when things are changing.

If you can't do that, then shut up. I don't really need to hear it anyways.

 

[Russ T]

And they shouldn't. Show, don't talk. Talk is cheap.

Lol okay

Fuck that imo

If you're going to play the "open and transparent card," and allow people to get hyped based on prerelease looks into your development process it seems like you owe it to them to tell them when things are changing.

If you can't do that, then shut up. I don't really need to hear it anyways.

Nobody in this situation owes anyone anything.

EDIT: er, besides the multiplayer thing

 

[Peltz]

Really insane that Sean and no one from HG STILL hasn't commented on this controversy. It's been days and still not a single peep about how the (evidently nonexistent) MP works or whether or not it was cut beyond what basically boils down to leaderboards. Literally a yes or no answer.

Internal Hello Games discussion:

"Whoops guys... Did we forget to include that multiplayer we promised? Eh fuck it. Maybe no one outside of GAF will notice."

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

And they shouldn't. Show, don't talk. Talk is cheap.

I kind of disagree. I also think that poster is turning this into something that it's not. Literally all this thread wanted in the beginning was for them to respond. Period. I don't care to an extent what a dev says about his game during production, that is their right and no one can take that away, I almost always enjoy it. What I can't stand for however is when the advertised game isn't what it was at launch and nothing was ever said about the missing features that they thought where so important as to talk about them on huge public platforms in order to increase hype which you do as a selling point for more sales.

 

[Ultrabum]

At the end of the day I'm disappointed with a lot of this game, and I haven't even played it yet. However, I still fully expect to enjoy it, as it sounds right up my alley. I hope it's enhanced through future updates. I'm concerned said updates might not be as cool as they could be because tinkering with the generation algorithm will change the universe, and they probably want to avoid that... Myself, I'm okay with resetting it for everyone from time to time, but well that's just me.

I, too, really want an answer to the question about multiplayer. That was absolutely one of the biggest Rad Things he ever talked about. I love the idea!!! Please please please PLEASE end up just being a bug or sever issues or SOMETHING!

But fuck do I hate witch hunts, and fuck do I hate this idea that if a developer didn't deliver on everything they ever talked about them they're basically Molyneux. This is why so many devs doubt talk about their work. ):



You're still not getting my point about the miscommunication lmao, but whatever let's move past it. It's not important.

I get where you're coming from, but I absolutely DO NOT AGREE that, based on the things you said, that was a lie. None of your explanations actually contradict the IDEA of what he said, only the nitpicky details, which can easily be explained away. It's still entirely possible (and I believe probable, since it's not a complicated thing to do) the procedural generation algorithm does, in fact, do some calculations based on atmospheric composition to determine sky colors!

But probably best to just agree to disagree at this point.

Yes, it is a nit-picky detail. That is why in the original post I had this image:

I would also infer from the fact they used the wrong physical phenomenon that they probably didn't simulate something complicated in the first place, but of course I have no evidence for that.

We can agree to disagree then

 

[Speely]

If you're going to play the "open and transparent card," and allow people to get hyped based on prerelease looks into your development process it seems like you owe it to them to tell them when things are changing.

Bingo.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Nobody in this situation owes anyone anything.

EDIT: er, besides the multiplayer thing

You don't owe your consumer transparency in communications? It's alright to drive prerelease sales and excitement with quotes that are later found to be baloney (either intentionally or because of circumstances)?

That's a quick way to get your ass handed to you.

 

[Russ T]

I kind of disagree. I also think that poster is turning this into something that it's not. Literally all this thread wanted in the beginning was for them to respond. Period. I don't care to an extent what a dev says about his game during production, that is their right and no one can take that away, I almost always enjoy it. What I can't stand for however is when the advertised game isn't what it was at launch and nothing was ever said about the missing features that they thought where so important as to talk about them on huge public platforms in order to increase hype which you do as a selling point for more sales.

Yo I've been following this thread since the beginning and that is not "literally all" some people in this thread want. You definitely seem reasonable (when you're not being a sarcastic butt at people ), but you're not the only person in the thread.

Digging through things he's said in the past trying to find "more lies" is above and beyond what you're talking about.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

I haven't been following this game but one of my friends told me he just went to Gamestop to try and return the game (he isn't really enjoying it) and one of the employees told him there was multiplayer he just "hadn't found it yet" lol

The worst part is that a lot of average, non-enthusiast consumers probably believe that since they aren't doing research or anything.

 

[tuxfool]

Are you sure?

When I was playing the other day, walking around a planet, the game bugged and it was like the star map was in my face. I assumed they translate a little part of the star map and sit it at a distance from the player.

But I don't know? I would like to know what does use a more traditional method, i.e. Faked, but that should be easy for PC guys to work out.

The proof of that is that a system's own sun is unreachable. It seems to be placed in or near the skybox. The systems do have a skybox.

That bug could just be the galaxy map showing up in your face for whatever reason. And the key to the fact that it is separate is that we're calling it a map.

There are also real practical reasons not to model a galaxy as a contiguous space. For starters space is mostly empty, therefore you're using a computationally expensive coordinate system to model mostly empty space. Tied to this, is the fact that to cut down on travel times, you're going to warp through this space, rendering it useless.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

Yo I've been following this thread since the beginning and that is not "literally all" some people in this thread want. You definitely seem reasonable (when you're not being a sarcastic butt at people ), but you're not the only person in the thread.

Digging through things he's said in the past trying to find "more lies" is above and beyond what you're talking about.

I mean that the thread started as a means for HG to respond about the MP issue. All of the other stuff happened organically over the coarse of no responses.

 

[Krappadizzle]

Lol okay

Fuck that imo


Nobody in this situation owes anyone anything.

EDIT: er, besides the multiplayer thing

Anyone can talk, it's WHY Molyneux get's so much shit, it's because all he did was talk, and never had anything of substance to back it up, disappointing a lot of people. I'm not sure how you don't understand how that doesn't apply here in this case? Wanting to learn some insight into a games development is fine, interesting in a lot of cases, but talking about features in your game and then not having said features is a whole different can of worms. I'm not sure why you'd want to be lied to? Many developers give in-depth looks into development without overpromising, or give the "we have some exciting things" in the works response when they aren't sure things are going to work out. You genuinely baffle me.

 

[Russ T]

I mean that the thread started as a means for HG to respond about the MP issue. All of the other stuff happened organically over the coarse of no responses.

I know. I stand by what I said.

Anyone can talk, it's WHY Molyneux get's so much shit, it's because all he did was talk, and never had anything of substance to back it up, disappointing a lot of people. I'm not sure how you don't understand how that doesn't apply here in this case? Wanting to learn some insight into a games development is fine, interesting in a lot of cases, but talking about features in your game and then not having said features is a whole different can of worms. I'm not sure why you'd want to be lied to? You genuinely baffle me.

I literally never said I want to be lied to.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

I know. I stand by what I said.



I literally never said I want to be lied to.

Ummm, so do I?

Literally all this thread wanted in the beginning was for them to respond.

 

[TheSpoiler]

Wait , so you talking that way and didn't even look at the game features ?

Creatures have friends and ennemies, Some are prey , other are predators ..it's in the game , including their favorite food that you can give them to and they will sometimes point you toward something intresting on the terrain if there is any.

I really like how you're ready to burn them alive ...

To be fair, they really don't have "friends" or "best friends" so much as they are around other creatures they co-exist with. They don't migrate or walk together in a pattern. And implying they have an affinity for something over the other implies you can feed them more than one thing, which isn't the case.

To that point, they never coordinate together. It's just another way of saying "they group together in a certain radius".

 

[flashbandit16]

I shortened the quote to save space.

I am confused why you are so angry, and so I have re-read this post. In the top half you talk about classical mechanics. This is irrelevant to the green sky quote because they deal with a different branch of physics.

I never mentioned weather or not classical mechanics are in the game, I don't know.

You also say that I cannot know without the build of the game. I can know, because I know how diffraction works. Diffraction cannot make a sky green. Therefore, any simulation of diffraction cannot create a green sky, and diffraction was never simulated at any time during the creation of the game (in regards to sky color, maybe in some other area it was).

They claimed to simulate diffraction. They clearly did not, and made no attempt to because it is impossible for diffraction to do the thing they claimed it was simulated to do.

Without considering anything they have said about classical mechanics.

They said they simulated diffraction, and they did not.

Edit: Perhaps in an early build of the game there was a complex algorithm to determine sky color, but it was cut due to time or whatever. That is not what they claimed, they claimed they simulated diffraction to determine sky color. This statement is as wrong as 2+2=5. It is literally false.

I found this wikipedia page from a link in the wikipedia page about Rayleigh Scattering linked in a previous post of yours. It is about Anomalous Diffraction Theory which could be the equation that Hello Games is using to create the color of the sky. The reason why they would use this theory is because it is a"computationally fast technique to calculate light scattering by particles".

 

[Russ T]

Ummm, so do I?

...Okay fair enough lol I missed that part

EDIT: But shit like the post below me is just ridiculous if they're serious! And that's what I'm talking about

 

[Cfer]

Will someone casually ask SM in an interview if he is a pathological liar like they did with Peter Molyneaux?

Or are we assuming he's a Machiavellian liar who did this to divide gamers and ignite petty arguments amongst GAF

 

[Ultrabum]

I found this wikipedia page from a link in the wikipedia page about Rayleigh Scattering linked in a previous post of yours. It is about Anomalous Diffraction Theory which could be the equation that Hello Games is using to create the color of the sky. The reason why they would use this theory is because it is a"computationally fast technique to calculate light scattering by particles".

That is really cool, if that's what he was talking about that would definitely make sense as far as the science goes.

Edit: to be clear, this is a method used to simplify particles for simulations. They are still not calculating diffraction when they use it to talk about scattering in the article, they are talking about the assumptions that the simplification makes in order to speed up the simulation.

The same simplification speeds up calculations of diffraction and scattering coincidentally, if I am understanding this correctly. I know much less about simulation than I do optics.

 

[Krappadizzle]

I literally never said I want to be lied to.

You did, but you also said that the reason devs don't talk more is because of witch hunts and you want them to talk more. Witch hunts that happen because devs lie about their games.

 

[Russ T]

That is really cool, if that's what he was talking about that would definitely make sense as far as the science goes.

I agree that is really cool haha. Wish I'd known about that earlier on.

 

[Russ T]

You did, but you also said that the reason devs don't talk more is because of witch hunts and you want them to talk more. Witch hunts that happen because devs lie about their games.

Well you could at least be honest and not victim blame. Witch hunts are no one's fault but those doing the hunting. They happen because people are pretty, unforgiving, and, well, human, I guess. It sure ain't a good thing, and it's definitely not justified here.

Edit: oh no I've been so good about not double posting on my phone and now here I fuck it all up ):

 

[SomTervo]

Anyone can talk, it's WHY Molyneux get's so much shit, it's because all he did was talk, and never had anything of substance to back it up, disappointing a lot of people. I'm not sure how you don't understand how that doesn't apply here in this case?

Molyneux and Murray are comparable, but only on very insubstantial terms.

I followed all of Molyneux's + Lion Head's games very closely and sucked up every bit of info I could about them - from Populus to Black and White, and again, to Fable - and the extent to which the man exaggerated and falsified was staggering. I still like his games, they're not bad games at all, but in comparison to the talk he talked, they were heinous.

On Murray's end, I also followed the game insanely closely, just as closely as Lion Head's output - and in No Man's Sky's case, 90% of the experience he promised is there, along with a load of stuff he didn't even mention or promise at all. It's really close to the broad vision he has always outlined. The details are where the devil has risen - it is really bad they evidently lied about several aspects, no matter how minor, and haven't owned up to it. Personally, I'd consider the multiplayer thing 1-2% of the experience (I honestly think it was meant to be like 'ghosts' in Dark Souls - very transient - especially from how he described it in all cases except the 'play with your friends' one) and the 'star system' simulation being way simplified is a bit more of a substantial part of the experience, like 8%. That could have impacted a lot of stuff.

I found this wikipedia page from a link in the wikipedia page about Rayleigh Scattering linked in a previous post of yours. It is about Anomalous Diffraction Theory which could be the equation that Hello Games is using to create the color of the sky. The reason why they would use this theory is because it is a"computationally fast technique to calculate light scattering by particles".

Huh. Interested to hear the other guy's response to this.

That is really cool, if that's what he was talking about that would definitely make sense as far as the science goes.

Edit: to be clear, this is a method used to simplify particles for simulations. They are still not calculating diffraction when they use it to talk about scattering in the article, they are talking about the assumptions that the simplification makes in order to speed up the simulation.

The same simplification speeds up calculations of diffraction and scattering coincidentally, if I am understanding this correctly. I know much less about simulation than I do optics.

Oh, cool. Interesting.

 

[UncleSporky]

Nobody in this situation owes anyone anything.

EDIT: er, besides the multiplayer thing

I don't really care what terminology is used, whether they "owe" information, whatever.

We're talking about what happens when devs mention a lot of little details, in detail, that hype people up, and whether it's important that they let people know when those details change.

Look at Molyneux's past.

"On the official Lionhead Studio forums Peter Molyneux apologized for announcing features that did not make it into the final version of Fable."

Their forums are already getting hammered. Post text available below.

Text from the Lionhead Studios Post -
A message from Peter Molyneux.
"There is something I have to say. And I have to say it because I love making games. When a game is in development, myself and the development teams I work with constantly encourage each other to think of the best features and the most ground-breaking design possible.

However, what happens is that we strive to include absolutely everything we've ever dreamt of and, in my enthusiasm, I talk about it to anyone who'll listen, mainly in press interviews. When I tell people about what we're planning, I'm telling the truth, and people, of course, expect to see all the features I've mentioned. And when some of the most ambitious ideas get altered, redesigned or even dropped, people rightly want to know what happened to them.

If I have mentioned any feature in the past which, for whatever reason, didn't make it as I described into Fable, I apologise. Every feature I have ever talked about WAS in development, but not all made it. Often the reason is that the feature did not make sense. For example, three years ago I talked about trees growing as time past. The team did code this but it took so much processor time (15%) that the feature was not worth leaving in. That 15 % was much better spent on effects and combat. So nothing I said was groundless hype, but people expecting specific features which couldn't be included were of course disappointed. If that's you, I apologise. All I can say is that Fable is the best game we could possibly make, and that people really seem to love it.

I have come to realise that I should not talk about features too early so I am considering not talking about games as early as I do. This will mean that the Lionhead games will not be known about as early as they are, but I think this is the more industry standard.

Our job as the Lionhead family of studios is to be as ambitious as we possibly can. But although we jump up and down in glee about the fabulous concepts and features we're working on, I will not mention them to the outside world until we've implemented and tested them, and they are a reality.

Thank you for reading.

Peter."

Notice how he is explaining all of these things after the fact, after the game released and people were disappointed.

Doesn't it seem like it would've been better to explain that these features had been dropped in the months before the game released?

You can say he owed that explanation to no one, that he had no responsibility to clarify. Whatever you think of the dev's responsibility, the public reaction/fallout is pretty clear by now.

If you're hyping people up with the details of your simulation, and those details all end up scaled back because it's easier just to put in a static tree, or colored skybox, then you should probably let people know that this changed before you release, just for your own sake if nothing else.

 

[R_thanatos]

To be fair, they really don't have "friends" or "best friends" so much as they are around other creatures they co-exist with. They don't migrate or walk together in a pattern. And implying they have an affinity for something over the other implies you can feed them more than one thing, which isn't the case.

To that point, they never coordinate together. It's just another way of saying "they group together in a certain radius".

ooh i disagree .

I've seen it with my eyes.

I had a male creature that was friend with another from the same species and was best friend with another female side.
On that planet i saw them as a group of 4 ( sometimes up to 7 )in various patterns and variants across the surface .... they were herbivores creatures.

I've seen it.

As for the affinity , that's just your misinterpretation , some creatures love cooper , other love iron and the list goes on .. They never talked about some kind of deep feeding system that you imply ... It's just a "maybe" from your end that was never confirmed EVER

 

[delta_reg]

There is a very fancy sky color algorithm that involves some RNG and some RGB.

Okay this one got me. Well done.

 

[Walpurgis]

If you're going to play the "open and transparent card," and allow people to get hyped based on prerelease looks into your development process it seems like you owe it to them to tell them when things are changing.

If you can't do that, then shut up. I don't really need to hear it anyways.

Exactly. If some devs compulsively withhold certain details and are "open" on others, they should simply keep quiet.

 

[gatormatt]

Planets with rings around them? So do we know for sure that they don't exist in NMS?

 

[orthodoxy1095]

I don't really care what terminology is used, whether they "owe" information, whatever.

We're talking about what happens when devs mention a lot of little details, in detail, that hype people up, and whether it's important that they let people know when those details change.

Look at Molyneux's past.



Notice how he is explaining all of these things after the fact, after the game released and people were disappointed.

Doesn't it seem like it would've been better to explain that these features had been dropped in the months before the game released?

You can say he owed that explanation to no one, that he had no responsibility to clarify. Whatever you think of the dev's responsibility, the public reaction/fallout is pretty clear by now.

If you're hyping people up with the details of your simulation, and those details all end up scaled back because it's easier just to put in a static tree, or colored skybox, then you should probably let people know that this changed before you release, just for your own sake if nothing else.

Spot on.

 

[R_thanatos]

Planets with rings around them? So do we know for sure that they don't exist in NMS?

There are no planets with rings nor gas giants in NMS so far.

So far ...

 

[Trojan]

Wtf is going on in this thread. I hardly read anything about multiplayer in recent posts. This must be the most divisive game ever.

 

[Russ T]

people are pretty

EVERYONE HERE IS BEAUTIFUL

 

[SomTervo]

I don't really care what terminology is used, whether they "owe" information, whatever.

We're talking about what happens when devs mention a lot of little details, in detail, that hype people up, and whether it's important that they let people know when those details change.

Look at Molyneux's past.



Notice how he is explaining all of these things after the fact, after the game released and people were disappointed.

Doesn't it seem like it would've been better to explain that these features had been dropped in the months before the game released?

You can say he owed that explanation to no one, that he had no responsibility to clarify. Whatever you think of the dev's responsibility, the public reaction/fallout is pretty clear by now.

If you're hyping people up with the details of your simulation, and those details all end up scaled back because it's easier just to put in a static tree, or colored skybox, then you should probably let people know that this changed before you release, just for your own sake if nothing else.

That's really interesting - an important point is, though, how long after the game's release did he post this? Edit: I just checked. It was like a month later. Just over three weeks.

One of the most ridiculous things about this thread is about how people want these answers utterly immediately. Like within days, when the team's to-do list is probably already several hundred items long for each person.

I'm not defending what they've been disingenuous about - but it's been four/one day/s since launch.

 

[Speely]

Wtf is going on in this thread. I hardly read anything about multiplayer in recent posts. This must be the most divisive game ever.

Procedurally-generated fallout.

 

[Abelian75]

Holy shit! Someone datamined the music for the multiplayer menu.

Fucking priceless. Goddamn.

 

[TheSpoiler]

ooh i disagree .

I've seen it with my eyes.

I had a male creature that was friend with another from the same species and was best friend with another female side.
On that planet i saw them as a group of 4 ( sometimes up to 7 )in various patterns and variants across the surface .... they were herbivores creatures.

Uh, but how do you know they are best friends? They don't play. They don't interact. They just stand by each other and coexist. Thus why I used those words. There's no indication of friendship beyond "they don't each each other".

And, once again, grouping together just means they coexist. The game makes no difference between the groupings and them just being in the same radius. I guess you could spin it and say "that's their intention", but when you read things like that, you hope for more than the usual stuff already done in a thousand other games.

What would be nice is if they migrated, moved from one sector to the next together, interacted with each other beyond standing a few feet away, nuzzled, I dunno. Just anything to indicate something more than the most base of AI interactions.

I've seen it.

As for the affinity , that's just your misinterpretation , some creatures love cooper , other love iron and the list goes on .. They never talked about some kind of deep feeding system that you imply ... It's just a "maybe" from your end that was never confirmed EVER

I never said it had to be a deep feeding system, but they'd do better to clarify instead of leaving things up to interpretation, something HG isn't good on doing.

 

[Iva Demilcol]

Wtf is going on in this thread. I hardly read anything about multiplayer in recent posts. This must be the most divisive game ever.

No, it's not.

Spoiler

Sorry

 

[SomTervo]

Uh, but how do you know they are best friends? They don't play. They don't interact. They just stand by each other and coexist. Thus why I used those words. There's no indication of friendship beyond "they don't each each other".

And, once again, grouping together just means they coexist. The game makes no difference between the groupings and them just being in the same radius. I guess you could spin it and say "that's their intention", but when you read things like that, you hope for more than the usual stuff already done in a thousand other games.

What would be nice is if they migrated, moved from one sector to the next together, interacted with each other beyond standing a few feet away, nuzzled, I dunno. Just anything to indicate something more than the most base of AI interactions.



I never said it had to be a deep feeding system, but they'd do better to clarify instead of leaving things up to interpretation, something HG isn't good on doing.

They do move together and sort of 'migrate' - especially birds - but yeah the only really exciting behaviour they have IMO is the food chain. You can legit see a big creature kill a smaller creature which in turn chases a smaller creature.

It's very simple, though, of course.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

That's really interesting - an important point is, though, how long after the game's release did he post this? Edit: I just checked. It was like a month later. Just over three weeks.

One of the most ridiculous things about this thread is about how people want these answers utterly immediately. Like within days, when the team's to-do list is probably already several hundred items long for each person.

I'm not defending what they've been disingenuous about - but it's been four/one day/s since launch.

Was Molyneux a compulsive tweeter like Sean was? I don't remember him ever being like that. That's why people expected a quick answer. He went from never shutting up to completely silent.

 

[UncleSporky]

That's really interesting - an important point is, though, how long after the game's release did he post this? Edit: I just checked. It was like a month later. Just over three weeks.

One of the most ridiculous things about this thread is about how people want these answers utterly immediately. Like within days, when the team's to-do list is probably already several hundred items long for each person.

I'm not defending what they've been disingenuous about - but it's been four/one day/s since launch.

Well yeah, because every day that passes is one more day that people buy it and get disappointed. One more day for it to solidify itself as "that game with all the broken promises," as Fable is pretty well known to this day.

maybe things would've been different if they'd been as open about the scaling back as they were initially about the inclusion of those features.

Every day without clarification makes it look more and more like they just wanted to cash in on those preorders before dropping the official bombshells players have had to datamine for. Or an attempt at stretching things out past the Steam refund period.

 

[TheSpoiler]

They do move together and sort of 'migrate' - especially birds - but yeah the only really exciting behaviour they have IMO is the food chain. You can legit see a big creature kill a smaller creature which in turn chases a smaller creature.

It's very simple, though, of course.

I forgot about the birds. Those definitely go from section to section, however small it may be.

But yeah, the issue is the simplicity and lack of actual depth within those interactions.

So I take back what I said. It's there - but it's just done in a simple way like every other video game once you brush off the PR speak.

 

[SomTervo]

Well yeah, because every day that passes is one more day that people buy it and get disappointed. One more day for it to solidify itself as "that game with all the broken promises," as Fable is pretty well known to this day.

maybe things would've been different if they'd been as open about the scaling back as they were initially about the inclusion of those features.

Every day without clarification makes it look more and more like they just wanted to cash in on those preorders before dropping the official bombshells players have had to datamine for. Or an attempt at stretching things out past the Steam refund period.

I don't think that's fair about "wanting to cash in on preorders", they're probably just depressed as fuck and realised that they have ruined a lot of people's experiences with bar PR, so are focusing on the development/follow up side - but I agree on all other points.

Was Molyneux a compulsive tweeter like Sean was? I don't remember him ever being like that. That's why people expected a quick answer. He went from never shutting up to completely silent.

Very true. Not that Twitter was even around those days.

I forgot about the birds. Those definitely go from section to section, however small it may be.

But yeah, the issue is the simplicity and lack of actual depth within those interactions.

So I take back what I said. It's there - but it's just done in a simple way like every other video game once you brush off the PR speak.

At least there's a lot of potential for content updates. They clearly have a lot of control over the universe even if the 'year 1' version of the game is very rudimentary.

I didn't really expect anything greater than 'like every other video game' anyway it's just a game at the end of the day.

 

[R_thanatos]

Uh, but how do you know they are best friends? They don't play. They don't interact. They just stand by each other and coexist. Thus why I used those words. There's no indication of friendship beyond "they don't each each other".

And, once again, grouping together just means they coexist. The game makes no difference between the groupings and them just being in the same radius. I guess you could spin it and say "that's their intention", but when you read things like that, you hope for more than the usual stuff already done in a thousand other games.

What would be nice is if they migrated, moved from one sector to the next together, interacted with each other beyond standing a few feet away, nuzzled, I dunno. Just anything to indicate something more than the most base of AI interactions.

You know how they are by their behavior and their animation.

The game do make a difference since some creatures can atack each other and other attack in groups. Sometimes you can attack one and see another flee or you can see another creature attacking you as a result.
As for the friend aspect , it's obvious when you attack a peacefull creature and see them flee.

If it's not that you were talking about , please define the "The game makes no difference between the groupings" part , is it about the different behavior of species , or between the same group of species ?

Edit : saw the answer above

 

[Krappadizzle]

At least there's a lot of potential for content updates. They clearly have a lot of control over the universe even if the 'year 1' version of the game is very rudimentary.

I didn't really expect anything greater than 'like every other video game' anyway it's just a game at the end of the day.

I'd buy it at full price today if the game had the things it said it would. I'm by no means ready to give up on it. If in the future, many things....MANY things get added, polished and tuned, I'll be there to buy it. But in it's current state, with how they've disregarded a big portion of the community that want answers, I'll wait.

I really think this game would have not been so criticized if it was $30. With the lack of MP, on top of the other features they failed to deliver on, it just doesn't have a $60 value for me and many others I'd guess.

To me, it seems like this game was never meant to be a $60 game, but the response from the reveal and the community on top of the awesome looking footage led them thinking that they had a $60 game that offers the same value as other $60 games.

I payed $20 for Inside. The game isn't longer than 3 hours or so. Replayed it twice, loved it. For the price I payed I had an awesome time and would recommend it to anyone. If that game was $60? I'd not have been so enthusiastic in telling others to play it.

 

[TheSpoiler]

I didn't really expect anything greater than 'like every other video game' anyway it's just a game at the end of the day.

I love AI interactions, so it was a pretty heavy blow in terms of immersion and fun factor for me. And while it's just a game, it's also a product I'm spending money on, and spending time talking here on an enthusiast forum. We are all pretty invested in this hobby if we are here, in some form or another.

 

[Moon_frogger]

Man all that talk about reinventing periodic tables and how their game has 'real physics' where every other game games it....why didn't someone shut this guy up a long, long time ago. That shit isn't just shades of Peter molyenux, it's orders of magnitudes worse than the dumbest things molyenux has ever promised in one of his games. We tried to tell you guys this game couldn't possibly live up to this kind of hype. Going back through the old threads would be so entertaining now that all has been laid bare. I'm among those of you still enjoying the game but anybody even attempting to defend this gibberish needs to go see a doctor.

 

[flashbandit16]

That is really cool, if that's what he was talking about that would definitely make sense as far as the science goes.

Edit: to be clear, this is a method used to simplify particles for simulations. They are still not calculating diffraction when they use it to talk about scattering in the article, they are talking about the assumptions that the simplification makes in order to speed up the simulation.

The same simplification speeds up calculations of diffraction and scattering coincidentally, if I am understanding this correctly. I know much less about simulation than I do optics.

Yeah I don't really know that much about physics because when I got to physics class in high school my brain completely shut down, so I don't know how this equation works.

Now to get more on topic about the expectations for No Man's Sky which I can say that this game completely met my expectations because I did not care about multiplayer and I am happy about my purchase.

Now that doesn't mean I don't agree with the people that are upset in this thread and I do agree that Shawn Murray did lie about multiplayer in this game. Hello games should had absolutely announce months ago before the games release that multiplayer would not be in this game. Hopefully multiplayer will be added later with a update because Shawn Murray has said that he wants to update the game periodically like Minecraft.