Support NeoGAF

[SpaceHorror]

If paid DLC seems worth it, I'll buy it. If not, I won't.

As long as we do get free updates I'll be happy either way.

 

[bananafactory]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-01-22-so-what-do-you-actually-do-in-no-mans-sky

Also pretty clear. It's the contradicting statements that make things vague

I think crossing paths with another player is more akin to seeing a ghost or silhouette in Dark Souls. I never remember them talking about co-op or partying up with players and travelling together.

I wouldn't consider 'seeing someone' to be multiplayer. His pre launch tweet was pretty clear

Because, as Oni Jazar quoted (his bold):



Which in my personal reading (where yes, I am giving the dev here some benefit of the doubt) sounds like they have a bunch of updates they want to make that will be free, but they won't promise such levels of support indefinitely (ie. when pushed on whether the game will always remain free) and that major updates could possibly have to be premium DLC as it would be impossible for them to make such updates otherwise.

This makes sense to me because indefinite free updates including major new features makes absolutely no sense without some kind of continuing revenue stream, depending upon the size and scope of that development of course. But they obviously have plenty of free updates planned (base building, frigates, tons of other stuff).

The difference here comes down to an update that never happens (if it takes too many resources to develop) versus the possibility that such an update could maybe be feasible as paid DLC.

I get that people don't want to give Sean the benefit of the doubt here with all the vague and contradictory statements on the game's multiplayer, and I can understand that. But there's also a very reasonable way to interpret his statements on post-release support without attributing malice or deception.

Yeah that makes sense. I'd be interested to see what type of content they consider free and what they consider worthy of paying for

 

[Raven77]

What if most of the DLC is free like The Witcher 3? But some huge changes are paid DLC?

That's kind of how i'm reading his statement. But I would imagine we will get more frequent (and likely smaller) updates. I know they have what appear to be pictures of ground vehicles in their office so they likely already have a lot of this stuff in development and just couldn't get it in for launch. At least, that is what I hope.

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

The guy can't win.

He shouldn't. Or better yet, he should leave the PR to someone else. His ambitions and ideas don't match what he does in reality.

 

[Kinyou]

That quote is from January 2015. The one I posted was from right before the game released. I think he made it pretty clear at that point.

That tweet was then followed by

The chances of two players ever crossing paths in a universe this large is pretty much zero.

Which implies that there is a chance to meet. So that's not clear at all to me.

Sean always said that multiplayer is not the focus, but he never clarified that meeting other players was removed from the game.

I think crossing paths with another player is more akin to seeing a ghost or silhouette in Dark Souls. I never remember them talking about co-op or partying up with players and travelling together.

I wouldn't consider 'seeing someone' to be multiplayer. His pre launch tweet was pretty clear

In that interview he isn't just talking about seeing players, he's talking about other players attacking you

 

[Jacksinthe]

People deluded themselves into creating expectations for themselves- this idea that they're doing an about-face and choosing to charge for stuff that they said were going to be free is bullshit.

Your point is rendered moot by quotes from the devs, themselves :|

I swear, the amount of people who apparently dont care about NMS yet have apparently seen every interview and can list points off the top of their head for their arguments is fascinating.

Developer blatantly makes false claims about game. "Golly! Why so up in arms?"

If you look at the Steam store page, it clearly says "Single-Player" with no mention of multiplayer so that's not true when it comes to multiplayer.

Which is fine.

So why did the dev mislead everyone on multiple occasions?

And what if I don't care about some of the checks that he wrote? What if I care more about the actual game?

Good?

You don't have to care. At all. Some people do and that's fine.

I've come to a realization that people simply want to hate this and nothing will change their mind.

Pretty sure people are hating on the devs misdirection and not the game, tbh. There may be some game bashing but an overwhelming amount of discussion is about expectations set by HG.

I'd love to know how many of the frequent bashers of this game even own it. .

A) irrelevant - see above.
B) you don't need to own a product to dislike misinformation being purposefully stated by the seller. That's beyond irrational.

-

Having said all of that a LOT of the discussion goes off the deep end on both sides of the argument but only one side holds water. It's fine to criticize a developer for misleading people:

"See that mountain?" . . .

 

[Panajev2001a]

I cannot see how someone could follow all the stories/ruckus and reviews and what-have-you about No Man's Sky without seeing that above is not something that is universally agreed upon. Not even close.

In fact a huge part of the divisiveness of the game centers around whether people find all the contents are satisfying versus those who thought the game was as wide as an ocean but as deep as a puddle.

I am not saying that what I stated is universally agreed upon just that there is a lot of ruckus and loud narrative that the opposite of what I stated is the factual truth.

I am also quite sick of people stating the price of the game should be X because the game is indie and they spout a random number for the people working on it ignoring the time spent, the resources required to set the project up, the salary expectations of industry veterans, expected return of investment and plan to obtain it given a business model not centered around in app purchases and mega season packs.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Psst. Don't argue with common sense in a NMS thread. Let the hate flow through you. Can't you see? It's all lies. Sean is evil and only wants our money. The whole game is mess and no paid DLC can save it. Yes yes I've seen the future just like 90% of the other posters in here...

Some people like to watch the world burn... which makes it impossible to discuss other scenarios where maybe you really need to be concerned about as it just gets lost in noise.

 

[ChouGoku]

I'd be willing to give them more money for more content. Enjoying the hell out of the game so far

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

I completely agree.

In terms of long term profit and success of cashing into the title free DLC would be more profitable. They would essentially building a long term community as well as providing a more finished product for fans.

But the way things are going Hello Games is making millions on this title but people are to eager to defend their decisions because they're a small indie company. Don't give them power to believe they're above crappy practices because they are the "underdog". There is an entire study on this with Youtubers, we want Hello Games to succeed because their small, but once they get big and found success they feel like they can still get away with decisions because of the previous mentality we feed them which creates... Clusterfucks we all know too well.

If people really want what's best for Hello Games and No Man's Sky you should be fighting for a better game that everyone would love and not some half experience they sold us on. I'm enjoying the game for what it is, but I do feel lied too from previous comments about the game, and the fact that their taking a back seat means they are AVOIDING to say anything that will negatively effect the sales of the game right after the game released because they know if they tell the truth or don't find a comment that twist their words the right way the game would severely drop in sales.

To everyone on Gaf, Im not trying to spout a conspiracy theory but rather pointing out that we the consumers do have an enormous impact on the game and the company. Probably more so then any other game or company right now. And so far from experience, giving companies the idea that any of this is okay is just going to make the problem steadily worse for everyone.

I absolutely agree.

I think the thing that hurts the most out of all of this is that so many here think that people like us are out to get HG or something. Like we want to tear them to shreds. I can't express enough how that is just not true. As consumers we absolutely have to stick up for our rights first and foremost. Because trust me, people will take your money any flipping way they can.

What we are wanting here is higher standards for the gaming industry and a friendlier environment for consumers. Back when I was in private school, which I worked my butt off to pay my way through since my family was dirt poor, our school motto was to strive for excellence in all that we do. This lead me to think about that motto every day since. I slowly came to see how whenever I did my best and tried to meet higher standards, especially when doing things for others, the world could indeed change for the better because we would all have better things in the end. For example, businesses would stay in business longer because of the quality of their products and their customers would be happier because of it. That's all we want for HG and it would absolutely be better for them in the end.

But in order for this to happen we need to demand higher standards. Not just for NMS, but for any game that comes along regardless of whether or not they are indie. Because if we give the industry an inch they will take a mile. They will always be pushing against that line that we have drawn. Which is only going to keep being pushed farther back the more we let it and that is exactly what I see happening. By saying that, "it's no big deal. they need to make money to keep afloat" and other similar arguments we are setting the precedent for the industry to follow suit because this is how much we will allow now.

I mean, ask yourselves, is this really the way you want every game to happen? Some people seem like they are ok with setting the precedent for more games to launch like NMS where it's ok if devs launch their games at AAA prices with little meaningful content but in it's place so many false promises. Or even just gaming campaigns where the devs are so vague they could have run for office.

That's not how I want the industry to become and it really doesn't have to be that way. I know that it sucks that HG is the one stuck in the crosshairs but you have to start somewhere. I mean, how frigging cool would it be if more and more people started to call for HG to speak out and it was HG themselves who took that first step to setting the precedent for being upfront and honest towards the consumers and striving to reach higher standards in this industry. That IMO would solidify their reputation beyond what NMS will ever be able to do. In just doing that and sticking to it, they could reach the levels of respect that CDProjekt and the handful of others have who also IMO strive for this standard.

 

[Panajev2001a]

A whole lot of No Mans Boys in this thread. I really appreciate Jim for providing such a fitting label.

Because labelling people instead of arguing is much easier, yeah this surely helped logical reasoning here .

 

[Oemenia]

The new SFV it is.

 

[dalin80]

The new thread title is definitely more fitting, you really had to do some contorting to get the original sentiment to match the actual content.

But there is a hate band wagon to jump on at the moment and gaf is always going to gaf.

4m is pretty dang big! Were they worming through sand and everything?

Sunbathing on some rocks, I was expecting grief but they were just out for an evening chill then slowly slithered off to a local cave when night came.

Have seen fish/whales much much larger but not much bigger then say a large elephant on land yet.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I don't want to calculate the logic in what he said, just saying exactly what he said. In August of this year he said the quote:

"We do want to add a ton of features, like we’ve just discussed: Freighters, bases, these type of things. But we want to do it for free. You’ve paid for the game, so you should get this stuff without paying even more money. So no, there will be no paid DLC, just patches"

What I take that to mean is that there won't be any paid DLC, but the game will continue to be supported for free. It is literally exactly what he said.

Would you rather they resold eventual later down the road big big DLC in a new NMS 2 titled package or that they sold then as paid DLC? I would prefer an updated plan, as it is not like he said that we would be getting NOW tons of paid DLC or something, rather than having to purchase a new game for a game which should simply be evolved over time and this would be more customer friendly... but people are free to prefer spending more money and fracturing the user base over an eventual way down the line slight change in plan which would have likely been more cost effective for everyone...

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Man, the crowbat video is savage

 

[Panajev2001a]

Also... I keep. It understanding why there is a problem accepting smaller developers not relying on plethora on micro transactions to try to charge more or charge the same as the guys with super widely recognised IP's do. If we just want to ensure that we either get AAAA games from fewer bigger and bigger publishers and the occasional small artsy conceptual game this is the road to achieve it.

 

[molnizzle]

Man, the crowbat video is savage

Yeah. I like the game, but that video was on point as usual.

Not sure why the thread was locked when the ones for his other videos weren't.

 

[Stealth_Cobra]

I feel like they are pushing it.... I mean it's not like the critical and fan reception is all that great, and they aready made people sixty bucks for a small indie developped game... So threatening for paid updates this early seems almost like extortion.

Start by delivering the quality experience you promised, then many you can start talking about the future of No Man's Sky and paid DLCs.

 

[NullPointer]

Man, the crowbat video is savage

Holy god damn.

Yes it is.

 

[QuantumSquid]

If Hello Games sticks with NMS and adds cool stuff to it over time, then maybe one day it could be something special. It already sort of is - it just needs more substance.

 

[Experien]

Man, the crowbat video is savage

I am interested in this video, where can i find it?

edit; nevermind, found it

 

[Sad Affleck]

Consider Enemy Starfighter/House of the Dying Sun. For years, the plan was to be a Mount & Blade style space game in a dynamic world and factions. A month before release, dev said how that plan had been too ambitious, that the structure didn't suit the combat and gameplay, and he had decided to scrap that larger version and scale the game down to a linear hand-crafted campaign.

Is it lying when the SuperHOT kickstarter page has this art style but the devs eventually decide to go with this one?


Or when Klei said Don't Starve wouldn't have multiplayer, and then deciding to implement multiplayer later?

Let's take it one by one.

1- Enemy Starfighter. The developer informed the consumers one full month ahead of release about the change of plans in a clear and honest manner.

2- Klei added additional functionality to the game, they didn't subtract from it.

3- That's an artistic choice by the developer, the essense of the game remains untouched. I don't think anyone would be upset if No Man's Sky had green oceans instead of blue or if the ships had a different design.

I don't personally see the similarities between Hello Games and the cases you described.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

I am interested in this video, where can i find it?

edit; nevermind, found it

I'll post it for others who are interested and couldn't find it anyway. It isn't very visible since the thread got locked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8P2CZg3sJQ&feature=youtu.be

EDIT: Oh crap, I forgot to mention that the vid does spoil the ending apparently but only at the very, very end of the video where the galaxy map starts zooming. If you are worried about that then just stop there.

Double Edit: I just watched it again and the cue to stop watching to avoid the ending is right after Sean says, "Well, lets not spoil it for people."

 

[AcademicSaucer]

This dude on reddit has a list of all the promised things that dont seem to be in the final release


https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyT...res_the_nms_we_were_sold_on_heres_a_big_list/

 

[ironcreed]

I'll post it for others who are interested and couldn't find it anyway. It isn't very visible since the thread got locked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8P2CZg3sJQ&feature=youtu.be

EDIT: Oh crap, I forgot to mention that the vid does spoil the ending apparently but only at the very, very end of the video where the galaxy map starts zooming. If you are worried about that then just stop there.

Double Edit: I just watched it again and the cue to stop watching to avoid the ending is right after Sean says, "Well, lets not spoil it for people."

I am just now getting a full grasp on just how full of shit Hello Games were. As I obviously did not keep up with every interview and everything that was said. I feel like an idiot for ever believing in this game, not to mention buying it.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I feel like they are pushing it.... I mean it's not like the critical and fan reception is all that great, and they aready made people sixty bucks for a small indie developped game... So threatening for paid updates this early seems almost like extortion.

Aren't you slightly overselling this? Also they did. It force people to buy anything, they presented a game and said that the price of it was $60 which IMHO is not robbery and before calling them out in outrage for lying about the support they deliver to the game I still think they deserve the benefit of doubt.

 

[qcf x2]

This dude on reddit has a list of all the promised things that dont seem to be in the final release


https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyT...res_the_nms_we_were_sold_on_heres_a_big_list/

Welp, there it is.

 

[TheVoidDragon]

This dude on reddit has a list of all the promised things that dont seem to be in the final release


https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyT...res_the_nms_we_were_sold_on_heres_a_big_list/

Wow. I didn't realize there was quite that much that wasn't in the game anymore, or even that it was different only just a few months ago.

 

[elco]

No joke you don't work for free. That's not what is being discussed.

The whole "don't write checks your ass can't cash" is the problem :|

Wait, did you say you were a developer earlier? Care to share what you wrote? I'd also be curious how close your final product was to what you set out to write.

 

[tayls129]

You've got to love when your "infinite" game has DLC. Man, they really forgot to make a game after their computer spit out the galaxy formula result.

 

[Trojita]

Because, as Oni Jazar quoted (his bold):



Which in my personal reading (where yes, I am giving the dev here some benefit of the doubt) sounds like they have a bunch of updates they want to make that will be free, but they won't promise such levels of support indefinitely (ie. when pushed on whether the game will always remain free) and that major updates could possibly have to be premium DLC as it would be impossible for them to make such updates otherwise.

This makes sense to me because indefinite free updates including major new features makes absolutely no sense without some kind of continuing revenue stream, depending upon the size and scope of that development of course. But they obviously have plenty of free updates planned (base building, frigates, tons of other stuff).

The difference here comes down to an update that never happens (if it takes too many resources to develop) versus the possibility that such an update could maybe be feasible as paid DLC.

I get that people don't want to give Sean the benefit of the doubt here with all the vague and contradictory statements on the game's multiplayer, and I can understand that. But there's also a very reasonable way to interpret his statements on post-release support without attributing malice or deception.

Thanks for clarifying it. Wanted to thank you earlier but was unable to.