Support NeoGAF

[MUnited83]

Honest question, does Journey requires PS+ on PS4 ?

It doesn't.

 

[Billfisto]

multiplayer was not shown once. at no point did we ever see another player character, at no point did they demonstrate trading between players or combat between players or really any of it.

even based on bullshots there was literally zero evidence that multiplayer was ever a part of this game. the lack of any footage at all should have raised flags, if you were still expecting a multiplayer that was never even visually conceptualized.

This could also be chalked up to obfuscation. I forget exactly where it was said (may have been Gameinformer), but they talked about how "what/who are you?" was one of the mysteries of the game, when someone asked if you were human/bipedal/whatever, and they said you'd need to find out if you saw someone else or someone saw you.

So, from their own narrative, they weren't showing multiplayer because it would mean showing the characters, which would "ruin the mystery" Of course, "don't ruin the mystery" was also their cover for having basically nothing in the way of mechanics.

And people need to get over this concept that datamining somehow gives you the entire development history of a project.

It obviously doesn't, but I think it's very unlikely they would've obsessively scrubbed every reference to MP from the final game, but left in stuff like the E3 builds and whatnot. If they were so prepared as to have different source branches for everything, why not have a separate branch for the E3 builds?

 

[R_thanatos]

It obviously doesn't, but I think it's very unlikely they would've obsessively scrubbed every reference to MP from the final game, but left in stuff like the E3 builds and whatnot. If they were so prepared as to have different source branches for everything, why not have a separate branch for the E3 builds?

Because the E3 build doesn't conflict with the main game in term of features ?
If we're talking on the assumption that A branch including Mp was removed at some point , why does something totally unrelated to the main game be affected by this removal ?

The logic here is that they didn't remove all the files from that presentation proves that there was nothing else ? When plenty of games have left over files all the time ?

 

[Justified]

multiplayer was not shown once. at no point did we ever see another player character, at no point did they demonstrate trading between players or combat between players or really any of it.

even based on bullshots there was literally zero evidence that multiplayer was ever a part of this game. the lack of any footage at all should have raised flags, if you were still expecting a multiplayer that was never even visually conceptualized.

I still don't get how people could fathom multiplayer being in, despite knowing PS+ was not required a year in advance.

I mean, how did every single site/interviewer not ask about that blatant clash of information?

Along with all the interviews, because of this even after the game was out:

 

[cyress8]

I still don't get how people could fathom multiplayer being in, despite knowing PS+ was not required a year in advance.

I mean, how did every single site/interviewer not ask about that blatant clash of information?

Even the people printing the boxes thought it had multiplayer.

 

[DrBo42]

Along with all the interviews, because of this even after the game was out:

Those tweets post launch really make me wonder what his plan was. I can understand during development when the game gets far more exposure and hype than you ever imagined things can spiral out of control. You want to promise and deliver the moon. At some point he must have realized seeing other players wasn't going to make it. How do you not clearly state that? Pressure to not fuck up and tank sales from your publisher? Hope you can put it in before anyone finds a previously discovered world? I really wonder what he was thinking. Still doesn't strike me as a take the money and run type of person so it's rather confusing.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

I still don't get how people could fathom multiplayer being in, despite knowing PS+ was not required a year in advance.

I mean, how did every single site/interviewer not ask about that blatant clash of information?

Why would the game having multiplayer make the game require PS+?

The wording with games is usually that a game has single-player content with an "optional" multiplayer component. And considering Sean compared his multiplayer content to Journey, there's precedent for not requiring PS+.

 

[Living the Dream]

Honest question, does Journey requires PS+ on PS4 ?

I don't have PS+ and was able to interact with another character. Whether that is AI or another person is up for debate.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Because the E3 build doesn't conflict with the main game in term of features ?
If we're talking on the assumption that A branch including Mp was removed at some point , why does something totally unrelated to the main game be affected by this removal ?

The logic here is that they didn't remove all the files from that presentation proves that there was nothing else ? When plenty of games have left over files all the time ?

A few leftover files or assets from multiplayer or other dropped features would also not conflict with the game.

 

[Netherscourge]

I'm still shocked Sean had no vision as to what players were capable of in his own game.

He was shocked people met up together on the first day... when it was obvious that there were no real limitations implemented to slow that down. The galaxy was traversed solely by warping from system to system. There was no SPACE between any systems, thereby negating any sense of astronomical scope that they wanted us to believe.

He approached game testing from the point of view of how HE would play the game and ignored the fact that nobody willingly suspends disbelief to make a game feel more immersive than it really is.

HE has to make it feel immersive, not rely on everyone else to pretend it is immersive.

That's where he failed. He assumed everyone would play the game like he would - just aiming at the center of the galaxy and doing his own thing. Never trying to test the game's limitations.

 

[BigDug13]

multiplayer was not shown once. at no point did we ever see another player character, at no point did they demonstrate trading between players or combat between players or really any of it.

even based on bullshots there was literally zero evidence that multiplayer was ever a part of this game. the lack of any footage at all should have raised flags, if you were still expecting a multiplayer that was never even visually conceptualized.

They had to put a sticker that said single player on the retail box because the retail box was printed with multiplayer advertised. The retail friggen box said multiplayer when it was made.

 

[spindoctor]

Considering Sean Murray can't even be bothered to speak up in defense of himself I have no idea why anyone else is.

Yep. It's baffling. People are debating and redefining the act of lying just to defend him.

"I'm not excusing what he did but <proceeds to write an essay of excuses>"

"Yes, things he said would be in the game are not in it, but he still wasn't lying because <game development is complicated>"

Come the fuck on on.

 

[Jobbs]

I think it kind of strains credulity to imagine that multiplayer was implemented in some form during development and no references to it or evidence of it whatsoever exists in the code.

Also was the scan for players on the galactic map thing implemented? Why did he say that. I don't remember anything like that

 

[Okami Haundo]

Along with all the interviews, because of this even after the game was out:

Wasn't Sean's argument at the time that they were having some server problems? Now that things have calmed down I wonder if anyone has or is willing to try this again.

 

[Permanently A]

I see we're doing the same song and dance two months later.

Interviews just before release:

"Will you be able to do thing?"
Sean: "Yes"

Thing is not in the game.

NMS fans: "I wouldn't call that lying. It's more complicated than that."

Come on.

Post of the thread.

 

[Spiral Insanity]

Wasn't Sean's argument at the time that they were having some server problems? Now that things have calmed down I wonder if anyone has or is willing to try this again.

It is not possible.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

I think it kind of strains credulity to imagine that multiplayer was implemented in some form during development and no references to it or evidence of it whatsoever exists in the code.

Also was the scan for players on the galactic map thing implemented? Why did he say that. I don't remember anything like that

I dunno. I guess it's a stretch, but I still have a pet theory that a lot got thrown out when that Superformula controversy/potential lawsuit reared its head.

 

[Netherscourge]

Wasn't Sean's argument at the time that they were having some server problems? Now that things have calmed down I wonder if anyone has or is willing to try this again.

Sean tried to make it sound like it was possible, but improbable. He then made it sound like "server issues".

The reality was that it was not in the game at all and he was foolishly hoping players wouldn't even bother trying it right away, to buy him some time to put it into the game. That Hello Games would add it to the game afterward, when players started getting closer to each other - in a few MONTHS.

They didn't realize players could actually get together on Day One without any sort of cheating involved. And when two players did occupy the same game space at the same time, nothing happened because they weren't actually online together. There was no netcode in the game.

So, Sean lied.

 

[Netherscourge]

I dunno. I guess it's a stretch, but I still have a pet theory that a lot got thrown out when that Superformula controversy/potential lawsuit reared its head.

The Superformula, if it was even used, would have been used for the planet & creature generation.

Not the multiplayer netcode.

That wouldn't affect being able to see other players online. That's a whole other gaming system.

 

[Dr Zhivago]

I think it kind of strains credulity to imagine that multiplayer was implemented in some form during development and no references to it or evidence of it whatsoever exists in the code.

Not at all. I've worked on games where the entirity of the networking code could be removed with conditional compilation. This was because the networking was pretty flakey at the start of the project and it was useful to be able to remove it.

 

[Okami Haundo]

Sean tried to make it sound like it was possible, but improbable. He then made it sound like "server issues".

The reality was that it was not in the game at all and he was foolishly hoping players wouldn't even bother trying it right away, to buy him some time to put it into the game. That Hello Games would add it to the game afterward, when players started getting closer to each other - in a few MONTHS.

They didn't realize players could actually get together on Day One without any sort of cheating involved. And when two players did occupy the same game space at the same time, nothing happened because they weren't actually online together. There was no netcode in the game.

So, Sean lied.

That is certainly an interesting story, holy wow. The pure lack of netcode could certainly suggest that Sean lied, but the positive side of me wants to believe that something else could have happened. I would absolutely love to read/watch a documentary about this game some day.

 

[Justified]

Wasn't Sean's argument at the time that they were having some server problems? Now that things have calmed down I wonder if anyone has or is willing to try this again.

Yea he did, he said alot of things that amount to misdirection or just a straight out lies.

It no need to created mental gymnastics to justify his comments (Im not saying this to you specifically, just the generic defense or excuses of his false statements )

That is certainly an interesting story, holy wow. The pure lack of netcode could certainly suggest that Sean lied, but the positive side of me wants to believe that something else could have happened. I would absolutely love to read/watch a documentary about this game some day.

Something else like what? AFTER release Sean still try to pass off some form of multiplayer interaction was possible, by claiming they added features to make it easier, and servers issues was the problem not that it wasnt in game)

 

[Spiral Insanity]

The thread title still says 'disgruntled employee', is that still up there because we don't know exactly what happened?

 

[Justified]

The thread title still says 'disgruntled employee', is that still up there because we don't know exactly what happened?

Honestly because it doesnt add up.

In one tweet they blame the LinkedIn hack, and lack of 2FA. In another tweet they blame an email server hack

 

[Okami Haundo]

Something else like what? AFTER release Sean still try to pass off some form of multiplayer interaction was possible, by claiming they added features to make it easier, and servers issues was the problem not that it wasnt in game)

From a purely objective standpoint, I would ask who reviewed the code before the game "went gold". Even though Hello Games is a small team, I don't think it would be "impossible" for someone to have removed the netcode from the game without the rest of the team knowing. Given that they expected these kinds of interactions to be rare, I can't imagine it was at the forefront of their minds.

I'm not planning to argue for or against Hello Games here, I just merely stated that I'm curious as to what the story behind the game is. Calling Sean Murray a liar certainly seems like the easiest path to take; But I prefer to think about the information we don't have (which would be any kind of response from Hello Games) rather than jumping to being angry. I did not pre-order or purchase No Man's Sky, so I have no personal or emotional investment in what is or isn't in the game.

 

[AuthenticM]

I see we're doing the same song and dance two months later.

Interviews just before release:

"Will you be able to do thing?"
Sean: "Yes"

Thing is not in the game.

NMS fans: "I wouldn't call that lying. It's more complicated than that."

Come on.

yup, lol

 

[WordAssassin]

It obviously doesn't, but I think it's very unlikely they would've obsessively scrubbed every reference to MP from the final game, but left in stuff like the E3 builds and whatnot. If they were so prepared as to have different source branches for everything, why not have a separate branch for the E3 builds?

Not to say this happened, but why is it hard to believe that multiplayer was its own branch, and the E3 demo was part of the main branch that they continued to work on up to release? Maybe when they tried to merge the multiplayer branch with the main one it fucked stuff up, and they were scrambling to fix it right up until release?

It would have been nice to get a "We're experiencing difficulties implementing multiplayer into our current build" but again, these people got death threats for a two-month delay so how would people have reacted to them admitting they couldn't get multiplayer working before release? There were people who, despite fans and Hello Games and Sean's insistence that NMS was a single player experience, would not let go of the idea they could find a way to meet up with all their chums and fuck shit up together. People who theorized that at the center you'd find a galactic hub that acted like a lobby. They would have (and since, have) gone totally mental.

Or they could have actually believed they could pull it off right up till the last minute.

 

[Justified]

From a purely objective standpoint, I would ask who reviewed the code before the game "went gold". Even though Hello Games is a small team, I don't think it would be "impossible" for someone to have removed the netcode from the game without the rest of the team knowing. Given that they expected these kinds of interactions to be rare, I can't imagine it was at the forefront of their minds.

I'm not planning to argue for or against Hello Games here, I just merely stated that I'm curious as to what the story behind the game is. Calling Sean Murray a liar certainly seems like the easiest path to take; But I prefer to think about the information we don't have (which would be any kind of response from Hello Games) rather than jumping to being angry. I did not pre-order or purchase No Man's Sky, so I have no personal or emotional investment in what is or isn't in the game.

If thats a possibility, their team is worst off than believed. For such a small company, to have someone remove online multiplayer from the code without the head guy knowing would be pretty bad

 

[GuitarAtomik]

From a purely objective standpoint, I would ask who reviewed the code before the game "went gold". Even though Hello Games is a small team, I don't think it would be "impossible" for someone to have removed the netcode from the game without the rest of the team knowing. Given that they expected these kinds of interactions to be rare, I can't imagine it was at the forefront of their minds.

Really? That's a theory you want to entertain? That someone on the team was able to scrub the game of all multiplayer functionality and code right before it went gold without anyone else on the team finding out? Why would anyone on the team even do that?

 

[Okami Haundo]

If thats a possibility, their team is worst off than believed. For such a small company, to have someone remove online multiplayer from the code without the head guy knowing would be pretty bad

Based on your beliefs, would the head guy be reviewing the code for the entire game on a nightly basis? I'm not saying that I truly believe this scenario happened, but I don't think it's absolutely absurd that something happened other than Hello Games lying. Regardless, I stated before and I'll state again that I really want to see a documentary about this game. Once it drops to the right price I'll probably pick it up as well.

Really? That's a theory you want to entertain? That someone on the team was able to scrub the game of all multiplayer functionality and code right before it went gold without anyone else on the team finding out? Why would anyone on the team even do that?

Why would Sean Murray "lie" about such a large number of features that aren't in the final game? It's not a theory I want to entertain, it was merely an example used as a counterpoint to a comment by another Gaffer. I have no personal investment in what is or isn't in No Man's Sky.

Have an Obi Wan quote to clear your mind.

 

[Jobbs]

Have an Obi Wan quote to clear your mind.

Um, he says that in ROTJ on Dagobah as a ghost, not in ANH on Tatooine..

 

[ClosingADoor]

Based on your beliefs, would the head guy be reviewing the code for the entire game on a nightly basis? I'm not saying that I truly believe this scenario happened, but I don't think it's absolutely absurd that something happened other than Hello Games lying. Regardless, I stated before and I'll state again that I really want to see a documentary about this game. Once it drops to the right price I'll probably pick it up as well.

No, a major feature like multiplayer does not get removed from the code without the guy in charge knowing about it. This does not make any sense.

 

[superNESjoe]

From a purely objective standpoint, I would ask who reviewed the code before the game "went gold". Even though Hello Games is a small team, I don't think it would be "impossible" for someone to have removed the netcode from the game without the rest of the team knowing. Given that they expected these kinds of interactions to be rare, I can't imagine it was at the forefront of their minds.

Lol you clearly don't make video games, and this is not at all how they work.

 

[Clefargle]

This game has been so bad and fuck anyone who apologizes for straight up false advertising. I can't believe people try and make themselves feel good about supporting not only a half assed game, but one that is missing core features it promised. It's pretty sad

 

[mitchman]

Having multiplayer in this game never made sense to me. Multiplayer where only a handful of people would ever see another player is never worth the resources on the client and server to implement, so I expected it to be cut.

 

[Mr Fahrenheit]

I see we're doing the same song and dance two months later.

Interviews just before release:

"Will you be able to do thing?"
Sean: "Yes"

Thing is not in the game.

NMS fans: "I wouldn't call that lying. It's more complicated than that."

Come on.

It's really an amazing thing, isn't it?

 

[Okami Haundo]

Lol you clearly don't make video games, and this is not at all how they work.

I do not make games! If you do and would be willing to elaborate I would appreciate it!

 

[w0s]

multiplayer was not shown once. at no point did we ever see another player character, at no point did they demonstrate trading between players or combat between players or really any of it.

even based on bullshots there was literally zero evidence that multiplayer was ever a part of this game. the lack of any footage at all should have raised flags, if you were still expecting a multiplayer that was never even visually conceptualized.

Didn't people take pictures of a sticker over the back of a game case that once showed multiplayer rating?

 

[chillybright]

I see we're doing the same song and dance two months later.

Interviews just before release:

"Will you be able to do thing?"
Sean: "Yes"

Thing is not in the game.

NMS fans: "I wouldn't call that lying. It's more complicated than that."

Come on.

Spot on.

This is true for every single NMS thread after release.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I do not make games! If you do and would be willing to elaborate I would appreciate it!

You're basically stating that a developer would remove a feature from the game without discussing it with the studio lead. That he does this for no good reason, because why remove it? And that this happens during the final days of development while they are busy making a day 1 patch to fix a whole lot of issues. And nobody noticed this. And nobody then put the code they have made before back in with one of the patches to calm down the gigantic backlash they received from the community. It doesn't make sense.

Didn't people take pictures of a sticker over the back of a game case that once showed multiplayer rating?

The PEGI rating changed from 12 to 7. They also removed the online icon. I think this was just for the Limited Edition.

 

[c0Zm1c]

Also was the scan for players on the galactic map thing implemented? Why did he say that. I don't remember anything like that

It was added through the launch day patch if I remember correctly. It scans for player discoveries, star systems others have visited, rather than the exact locations of players themselves.

 

[superNESjoe]

I do not make games! If you do and would be willing to elaborate I would appreciate it!

I don't have enough time to properly elaborate, but you don't just remove code from a game, especially something like netcode that is intimately engrained into the structure of the whole game, and expect it to run as if nothings wrong.

Code references itself, constantly, and crashes when it doesn't find what it's looking for. What you're suggesting is so dramatic and implausible that it's laughable. I don't mean that to be rude, but it is.

 

[Gestault]

I do not make games! If you do and would be willing to elaborate I would appreciate it!

I don't have enough time to properly elaborate, but you don't just remove code from a game, especially something like netcode that is intimately engrained into the structure of the whole game, and expect it to run as if nothings wrong.

Code references itself, constantly, and crashes when it doesn't find what it's looking for. What you're suggesting is so dramatic and implausible that it's laughable. I don't mean that to be rude, but it is.

Think of it this way: Netcode is more like the foundation for a building than the decor. The idea of an individual secretly changing it last minute and the other pieces still being functional is basically ridiculous. Any semi-major changes require team efforts, and new rounds of testing.

 

[superNESjoe]

Think of it this way: Netcode is more like the foundation for a building than the decor. The idea of an individual secretly changing it last minute and the other pieces still being functional is basically ridiculous. Any semi-major changes require team efforts, and new rounds of testing.

This is a much better analogy. And this doesn't just count towards netcode, but any structural portion of your games code.

 

[Billfisto]

This is a much better analogy. And this doesn't just count towards netcode, but any structural portion of your games code.

Do you believe the multiplayer could have been in another branch that wasn't integrated, as some have been suggesting?

 

[Lo_Fi]

This game has been datamined to hell and back.

They left the E3 demo shit on there but they removed any evidence of multiplayer and this alleged physics shit?

I honestly can't relate to the people defending this. He lied. The evidence is there. It's no longer and assumption. There is enough proof here to tell most of the story of what happened. Jobbs has the right of it. No I don't think any reasonable person thinks this game was conceived with deceitful intent. But Murray had ample time to rein the hype in, or apologise with a ganeplan, like we saw with Driveclub and MCC.

Radio silence does nothing but fuel the fire of wilful deceit here.

Unlike a shit ton of other games which usually have CRF content left on the disk, a shit ton of the things Sean Murray talked about have absolutely no evidence of having ever existed based on the data mining. Come on dude. We're LONG past the point of "just making assumptions." There's an orgy of evidence that Sean knew exactly what he was doing and isn't some innocent naive mistreated dev. The e3 demo is especially egregious considering he talked about how much of a big risk it was to go to a planet which was procedurally generated, (even though it was premade and scripted).

See my post explaining source control and branching:

I'm not arguing that multiplayer exists in the final game. I'm arguing that datamining the final build cannot prove that there was never any development on multiplayer at any point in development. Because some in here are arguing that they KNOW Sean was lying about multiplayer the whole time and that they never even implemented it at any time.

Source control/version control is super fucking cool. I don't know it super-well (just enough to use it for my own projects), but it basically is like Windows' system restore, but for whatever project you or a team are working on. Something fucked up and broke? Roll back to yesterday's version, it'll be exactly the same as it was yesterday. Really fucked something up irreperably and your mistake goes back a few months but only for certain files? Roll only those files back, and they'll be exactly the same as they were on that day you rolled back to.

In addition, branching allows the team to work on multiple things at the same time without messing each other up, by working in separate branches. And you can merge those branches together. The way I usually use it or have seen it used is to have a "main" branch that is, well, the main version of the game. Then, you'll typically have other branches, for things that might take longer to develop, and then merge them in down the line. Want to create a new enemy, but making him on the main branch messes up other teammate's work? Make a new branch, and then merge that branch into the main one when it's ready to go. Is it going to be something that takes longer to make? Cool, you can keep making your own thing, and when you need to, merge the main branch into yours to keep your version updated (important for my point: there still wouldn't be any code of the new enemy in the main branch in this case. You could abandon/cut that enemy at this point and the main branch would have no proof of that new enemy ever existing. The main branch goes on to become the final game eventually).

What I'm saying is that multiplayer could have been one of those branches, and it never got merged into the main branch because they cut it. That would make it so that in the final build of the game, you wouldn't see any code relating to multiplayer. But they still worked on multiplayer.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I don't think anyone really thinks the whole thing was conceived as a scam, but the finished product and the weeks leading up to launch certainly feel like one.

Plenty of people in this thread acting like it, especially a lot of the gifs. But if that's not what people think, then we're in agreement.

So we've blamed Sony as the distributor, and we're on to blaming PS4 hardware now?

It is entirely possible that HG has signed a contract where they can't talk about certain things, one of them being changes that they had to make because of the PS4. You look at changes like the number of ships in fleets in trailers vs. number of ships in fleets in the game, and, well, it's entirely possible that that's optimization. And it's entirely possible that they optimized that aspect for PS4, rather than PC (as PC is generally more powerful/flexible). I imagine Sony doesn't want to have the PS4 thrown under the bus and being blamed for the PC version being "held back" by the PS4 version.

And people need to get over this concept that datamining somehow gives you the entire development history of a project.

Thank you. If you (general you) want to be a backseat game developer, at least know something about game development (source control, for example, is standard in the industry, it's not some obscure thing). Even then, you probably don't know the full story.

Because the E3 build doesn't conflict with the main game in term of features ?
If we're talking on the assumption that A branch including Mp was removed at some point , why does something totally unrelated to the main game be affected by this removal ?

The logic here is that they didn't remove all the files from that presentation proves that there was nothing else ? When plenty of games have left over files all the time ?

Thank you. HG doesn't need to justify their game development practices to any of us. If your argument hinges on "well they left in the E3 demo stuff, why not X", there could be a million reasons why. They don't need to justify why. Is the future of game development going to involve players asking developers to justify every single change during development, and if they don't, suddenly there's something shady going on?

Not at all. I've worked on games where the entirity of the networking code could be removed with conditional compilation. This was because the networking was pretty flakey at the start of the project and it was useful to be able to remove it.

Post of the thread right here.

 

[Schlorgan]

Holy cow, how is this thread still going?

 

[boredandlazy]

Holy cow, how is this thread still going?

Unbridled hatred has long legs.

 

[Billfisto]

Unbridled hatred has long legs.

For me, it's not hate. I traded my copy (and any feelings for it) in long ago, when it became clear it was just another crappy game.

I'm just really curious as to what actually happened. I'm a big fan of Gamasutra's post-mortems and Retro Gamer's articles on how old games were made, so I can't help but be interested in what the heck went so spectacularly and visibly wrong here.

 

[Freshmaker]

For me, it's not hate. I traded my copy (and any feelings for it) in long ago, when it became clear it was just another crappy game.

I'm just really curious as to what actually happened. I'm a big fan of Gamasutra's post-mortems and Retro Gamer's articles on how old games were made, so I can't help but be interested in what the heck went so spectacularly and visibly wrong here.

Yeah. I'm rather ambivalent on the game. I mainly just want an explanation of what happened out of curiosity at this point.