-
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.
Advertising Standards launches investigation into No Man's Sky
- Thread starter Gamezone
- Start date
base shagohod
Member
You should use your psychic powers for good next time.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Thank you for posting that; it should be in the OP. I really more meant that the comparisons people are making to bigger games are false, as what is being investigated is the videos/screenshots on the store page and not anything said about in interviews it or shown pre-release (which is what people seem to think).
Whataboutism. One day will those who use it notice it is a admission of guilt.
Bug fixes.
IceBringer
Banned
Thanks! They're both better games than No Mans Sky!
Captain Tuttle
Member
Haha man you said it, they've detached themselves from this gameSony:
Now THAT'S how you do PR
R_thanatos
Member
So they have not much chance of winning then.
bitbydeath
Member
Good list, the creature size had been disproven a month or more ago but the rest is probably accurate.
lukeskymac
Member
You may want to review Todd's promises about Oblivion and Skyrim if you think so.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Deserved. The only game I've ever refunded in over 20 years of buying them - completely misleading marketing right up to just hours before release. Guy's a con man, and a lot people paid money for this and can't get a refund when they realised it's not what they were sold. This won't change that but at least it might result in those fucking trailers being taken off the Steam page.
Oblivion and Skyrim at least had some rich crafting and leveling systems, loot, abilities and quests and NPC's. NMS has inventory slots, a threadbare 'story' and the most obnoxious ending in a game in years.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Sorry, just had to call it out
That people can compare the two situations is kind of amazing.
Read the quote!
No it isn't, he is literally refering only to the ending.\
No, he is not speaking any truths in that quote as he is only referring to the ending. None of the players decisions impacted the endings as it was either, red, green, blue, destroyed/stranded every single race in the game when the Mass Relays blew up and Joker and a random squadmate/Love Interest somehow up and abandoned you and got stranded on an uncharted planet.
Still cannot be compared to NMS within the context of this investigation.
Silent Chief
Member
So, which ad are they trying to get banned exactly?
Any that aren't representative of the final game. It's mainly about the videos/screenshots on the Steam store.
Sorcerer
Member
I would guess that those games were the stepping stones for the investigation For No Man's Sky.
Corruption in video games is now something taken a bit more seriously.
Hello Games was the company that pushed it too far I suppose.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Did alien colonial marines use e3 footage on their steam page? Sounds like a different story. Games can change mid-production. Here we have advertising on the steam store page that is very different in meaningful ways from the actual game being sold.
Version 3.0
Member
Ooh, make them replace the trailer on Steam with that Jurassic Park parody someone made:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5jWtz3rzco
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5jWtz3rzco
Perfect.
Sorcerer
Member
I understand what you are saying. I mean corruption in general terms, not specific to what Hello Games did. Just shitty practices in general.
I remember ACM looked fucking fantastic, like too good to be true from what was shown before it came out.
That is also great.
I'm confused at the people saying anything about this being a dangerous precedent. If anything, it's probably something needed to the industry. I would also say Hello Games is an extreme case, where they were still everything from outright lying to being silent on what was in the game, thru release and even today. Basically something like saying "Oh yeah, it's a single player game" the day of launch is not acceptable marketing.
I don't think this is applying at all to the game 3 years out with some bull shots and ambitious plans. But more the game that is right around the corner with some fishing marketing and closer to a grab and run like this.
Were they promises kept to the day of launch and never even clarified after?
I don't think this is applying at all to the game 3 years out with some bull shots and ambitious plans. But more the game that is right around the corner with some fishing marketing and closer to a grab and run like this.
Were they promises kept to the day of launch and never even clarified after?
When was it disproven? Not being sarcastic, legit asking cause I haven't seen anything as big as that one specific trailer yet
Hello Games got cocky, they didn't have the skills or PR knowledge to divert the damage to something else.
Sorcerer
Member
Good point.
ScientificPizza
Banned
UI design seems like a weird thing to investigate. Hopefully this sets some precedent for all developers and publishers in the future. Colour me pessimistic tho
Maybe, Sony was distribution and publisher (I think) for the PS4 version.
Probably not. This investigation seems to be focused on the PC version.
Truly amazing
The "my mind is blown" part always gets me!
GYAAAAA HAHAHAHAHA
Then he goes, "We're a small team!" RAAAA HAAAAAA AHAHAHAHAa
R_thanatos
Member
it's not , especially reguarding the ships in formations, and the ai behavior.
The only things they have is about the loading screens and the speed of some transitions
TrojanBlade
Member
Where have they been before this game? If they had investigated most of the games and I got a penny, I would have been a millionaire by now
entremet
Member
They were not.
MaximumSpider
Banned
This will good.
Where have they been before this game? If they had investigated most of the games and I got a penny, I would have been a millionaire by now
You wouldn't get a penny anyway.
They only really remove/ban material from being used. Frankly it's a slap on the wrist at best.
This worries me, as a developer and as someone that creates entertainment.
Hello Games made a mistake in misrepresenting their game. I'm going to say it was probably because NMS was an overly ambitious game with limited staff. Perhaps they were running out of cash or time to sustain their business and needed to get the game out ASAP, thinking gamers would understand that their product was one that would have constant updates with all features promised eventually rolled out to the masses.
The truth is - game features can be delayed indefinitely if they don't measure up, especially in a world where game patches are common. A broken feature is worse than not having that feature at all; so features get cut, often at the last moment of development and often in the hopes of introducing that feature in the future.
Gamers who're understandably disappointed have a choice to not support Hello Games in the future. Additionally, they can try to get a refund.
There are PLENTY of games which fail to live up to their pre-release expectations. (MGS2 anyone?) NMS might be one of the more extreme examples since it has a few failed promises, but it does not deserve the witch hunt that has transpired since release. Would there be as much backlash if it wasn't a full-priced game? Probably not.
If developers are to be held to a semi-judicial review of pre-release marketing bullet points compared to final features, that sets a very dangerous precedent. Games are entertainment and, as I see it, enjoyment of entertainment is a subjective experience for the consumer.
Let's say one customer really enjoyed NMS at release because they never saw any pre-release marketing and enjoyed the experience for what it was. Conversely, let's say another customer DID see the pre-release marketing and had certain expectations, then felt cheated and enraged because the final product didn't measure up.
Those are 2 valid experiences - you can't say one is right and one is wrong. You can say one experience is more unfair to the other, but that's about it.
Hello Games made a mistake in misrepresenting their game. I'm going to say it was probably because NMS was an overly ambitious game with limited staff. Perhaps they were running out of cash or time to sustain their business and needed to get the game out ASAP, thinking gamers would understand that their product was one that would have constant updates with all features promised eventually rolled out to the masses.
The truth is - game features can be delayed indefinitely if they don't measure up, especially in a world where game patches are common. A broken feature is worse than not having that feature at all; so features get cut, often at the last moment of development and often in the hopes of introducing that feature in the future.
Gamers who're understandably disappointed have a choice to not support Hello Games in the future. Additionally, they can try to get a refund.
There are PLENTY of games which fail to live up to their pre-release expectations. (MGS2 anyone?) NMS might be one of the more extreme examples since it has a few failed promises, but it does not deserve the witch hunt that has transpired since release. Would there be as much backlash if it wasn't a full-priced game? Probably not.
If developers are to be held to a semi-judicial review of pre-release marketing bullet points compared to final features, that sets a very dangerous precedent. Games are entertainment and, as I see it, enjoyment of entertainment is a subjective experience for the consumer.
Let's say one customer really enjoyed NMS at release because they never saw any pre-release marketing and enjoyed the experience for what it was. Conversely, let's say another customer DID see the pre-release marketing and had certain expectations, then felt cheated and enraged because the final product didn't measure up.
Those are 2 valid experiences - you can't say one is right and one is wrong. You can say one experience is more unfair to the other, but that's about it.
ScientificPizza
Banned
For the physical they were
Holy......LMAO. Wow - that's really bad. So it looked nothing like that E3 2014 Trailer? Like in no part of he game? Even a small mission? I'd be pissed too.
That broke Jurassic music tho - LOL.
BlitzerRadic
Member
Statements made in an interview by an impartial 3rd party news organization does not qualify as advertising... not even close.
Consider this, there is all kinds of blatant false advertising going on right now everywhere. Food glamour shots. Retouched/enhanced photos. Renders of products instead of actual photos. Models wearing pinned clothing, etc..
I consider these thing far more egregious than what was misrepresented in NMS.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Oh, come on. Semantics - they're still incredibly misleading and are a part of the game's marketing, whether you agree or not. There's no reason to do them if it doesn't sell the game to the audience.
People are more than aware that a burger never looks pristine or untouched when you get it, or that models are used to portray clothes in the best possible way.
The issue - and people keep ignoring this, which is why it keeps coming up again - is the outright misinformation the developers themselves spread about this game. They sold features that flat out DO NOT EXIST. This thread in particular is focused on the Steam page which has a 2014 build and screenshots that don't and can't exist in the game.
This isn't about selling a feeling or a stylised advertorial - people took issue with a game that in no way matched what he was selling it as. Read.
Maybe it is no better or worse than other games (I disagree), but it's the one where people felt they'd 'had enough' of the bullshit that is sold to them. Sucks to be HG, i guess.
CountAntonius
Member
lol Truth.