Support NeoGAF

[Icyflamez96]

Why else do you think the same question would be asked repeatedly? The answer was never sufficient.

It always went, "what do you do," "you do this and this," "well yeah obviously but what I meant was..."

And typically the final answer was "gosh you want to know everything about this game, leave some mystery huh, don't you want the sense of discovery?? What if you didn't know there were buildings in the game and then you found a building, wouldn't that be an amazing moment?!" It was always shut down by saying we know enough and the rest is a mystery and that's great because the devs want it to be a mystery. And look how that mystery turned out. The answers to those questions mattered. In the end they gave us a different game entirely.

And yeah,some people genuinely didn't know that you could fly a ship and collect resources and such. But to say the rest weren't asking a deeper question than you want to give them credit for, to say they must've just all been trolling on purpose? Don't paint with such a broad brush. You don't get to play the beleaguered "woe is me, trolls trolled us for years with that question" card. It was always a legitimate question.

Say what you mean then. It was extremely unproductive to present that question in such a disingenous manner and you know it. All you're doing is causing a rise at that point, because you KNOW you're going to get people responding to you as if you were asking it at face value, and then it just causes more confusion as people who actually genuinely asked the question were going to wonder why they get some hostile replies because people couldn't tell for sure with what intentions the question was being asked. This conflict was only proliferated by people like you mudding up the message.

You're being nothing but inflammatory and counterproductive to discussion when presenting those implialcations in such a fashion. It would be much more helpful for everyone if you would just say "game doesnt sound interesting" if that's what you meant. Period.

The game turned out the way it turned out because the devs couldn't deliver on half of what they've said.

 

[Birgitte2004]

Counterpoint: Spelunky.

Just like any content generation technique, procedural generation is only as good a tool as the artist/engineer wielding it.

Derek Yu created a masterpiece by matching fantastic platforming mechanics with a procedural generation engine honed to such a fine edge that even after millions of playthroughs it still consistently creates interesting and dynamic level structures.

Hello Games clearly... didn't do that.

Procedural generation is not a magic wand, nor is it a replacement for quality game systems design. It's a tool. Tools can be used poorly. Leaving it up to the "luck of the draw" might not be the best use of that tool.

Spelunky is a short (< 1 hour pretty much always) game. That doesn't really make it a counterpoint to the concept of something like No Man's Sky where the entire universe would take more than your lifetime to see.

If it could take 10000 hours in Spelunky to be lucky enough to find a dungeon that looks like the Temple, and it still always delivered an enjoyable experience, then it would be a counterpoint.

 

[UncleSporky]

Say what you mean then. It was extremely unproductive to present that question in such a disingenous manner and you know it. All you're doing is causing a rise at that point, because you KNOW you're going to get people responding to you as if you were asking it at face value, and then it just causes more confusion as people who actually genuinely asked the question were going to wonder why they get some hostile replies because people couldn't tell for sure with what intentions the question was being asked. This conflict was only proliferated by people like you mudding up the message.

You're being nothing but inflammatory and counterproductive to discussion when presenting those implialcations in such a fashion. It would be much more helpful for everyone if you would just say "game doesnt sound interesting" if that's what you meant. Period.

The game turned out the way it turned out because the devs couldn't deliver on half of what they've said.

You saw the same discussions I did. Either people said "ok, cool, I hadn't seen those videos or that infodump," or they clarified what they really wanted to know.

Not everyone knows how to ask what they want to know precisely, or they can't be arsed to be extremely specific right off the bat. "By what specific mechanics do we interact with the world, how long does it take to gather resources, vs. how many we need to refill our ship and life support, vs. how often these things drain?"

If the answer is "we don't know, it hasn't been detailed yet," then it's completely understandable for people to come back later hoping that more information has surfaced.

I don't even think anyone was really looking for a textual point-by-point rundown. Really they just wanted a good hour or two of actual gameplay, so they'd get to judge for themselves the main loop of collecting/refilling bars. That would've answered everyone's questions and also helped temper expectations. People who were on spoiler blackout wouldn't have had to watch it. But instead it was the same presentation over and over, carefully curated each time.

 

[Icyflamez96]

You saw the same discussions I did. Either people said "ok, cool, I hadn't seen those videos or that infodump," or they clarified what they really wanted to know.

Not everyone knows how to ask what they want to know precisely, or they can't be arsed to be extremely specific right off the bat. "By what specific mechanics do we interact with the world, how long does it take to gather resources, vs. how many we need to refill our ship and life support, vs. how often these things drain?"

If the answer is "we don't know, it hasn't been detailed yet," then it's completely understandable for people to come back later hoping that more information has surfaced.

I don't even think anyone was really looking for a textual point-by-point rundown. Really they just wanted a good hour or two of actual gameplay, so they'd get to judge for themselves the main loop of collecting/refilling bars. That would've answered everyone's questions and also helped temper expectations. People who were on spoiler blackout wouldn't have had to watch it. But instead it was the same presentation over and over, carefully curated each time.

If one "can't be arsed" with putting effort into a comment, yet still comment anyway, you know what those often turn into? Textbook shitposts.

There were plenty of people who would straight up say "the game doesn't sound interesting", and that's fine if someone doesn't think it sounds interesting. But, for reasons I explained earlier, presenting that idea in the form of a "what do you do" message is counterprodutive and in many cases inflammatory.

We knew what you do in the game, what we didn't have many details on was more specific info on how many of these key systems would be balanced, and what exactly the grind would be like. That's a fair concern to have had, and was even one of my biggest concerns.

But to be fair, the answer to that question for MOST games is usually not known until people get their hands on it. The assumption is that the devs will attempt to balance things in way that would fit reasonably for their specific game. When devs are questioned on it, that tends to be the sort of response they give.

For example, in response to a question regarding balancing different playstyles, Eidos says they will attempt to balance rewards for both hostile and stealth playthroughs without going into specific detailing on how.

Sometimes devs succeed at balancing, but sometimes they fail. I'm not blaming people for wanting to know that info necasarily, but those tend to be details for most games that we dont truly know until the game comes out, which is one of the reasons I always wait and see what's going on with that kind of stuff before buying a new game.

 

[UncleSporky]

If one "can't be arsed" with putting effort into a comment, yet still comment anyway, you know what those often turn into? Textbook shitposts.

I mean that more in terms of the fact that you get mocked for asking really specific questions, or shouted down for "wanting to destroy all mystery and suck all the fun out of the game."

So you start with asking something broader and more reasonable in the hopes that people won't go to town on you.

 

[Heebie Jeebies]

Could you name a couple aside from the one's you already mentioned? I'm definitely interested in checking some of them out.

Rodina.

Made by 1 person, the development is coming along pretty well, with the latest update including first person combat. The reviews are 'very positive' and there is a demo for you to check out, although i'm not sure if that is an alpha version of the game or if it contains some of the updates since it's release.

It scratches the space exploration itch pretty nicely, but the planets are completely barren of things to do right now so I find it difficult to play for long periods of time.

The developer has a roadmap detailing his plans for future features to be added to the game and he allows the community to vote on the features that he'll be working on next.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

You think the game that was in Sean Murray's head is going to be released in less than 5 years? The other games are great but they all have limitations.

Because space sims, in a universe sized sandbox belongs to Sean Murray. Sure sure. Elite dangerous doesn't exist either, does it? I'm not even sure what you're trying to argue, but you're acting like NMS is a completely unique game in all areas that there is nothing and will never be anything like it unless it just started development after NMS came out... which is blatantly false.

 

[Jobbs]

You think the game that was in Sean Murray's head is going to be released in less than 5 years? The other games are great but they all have limitations.

The NMS described prior to release will never exist. Not even close. It was never going to.

 

[Icyflamez96]

I mean that more in terms of the fact that you get mocked for asking really specific questions, or shouted down for "wanting to destroy all mystery and suck all the fun out of the game."

So you start with asking something broader and more reasonable in the hopes that people won't go to town on you.

If you have specific dialogue exchanges to pull from that to help your point, I invite you to do so. I'm not going to watch the whole video, though I will respond on what I remember about it, but probably wont be that relevant to what you're saying.

I remember one of the guys asking "what do you do", or "whats the point", and while specific answers could be given to those questions, the other guy responded like "you can do anything you want" which is a response that I also disagreed with and found counterproductive. Because then someone asks "can you build a base?!" to which the answer is "no".

And I think the mystery angle in some respects is very fair. I'd see people ask "what even happens when you get to the center or the galaxy?" Knowing that to me is the equivelent of knowing the ending of the game, so of course I'd want that to stay secret. Now, the ending ended up being nothing, but that doesn't retroactively change the validity of that specific element of the NMS discussion prior to launch. Sean said what's at the center would be "amazing" and much more significant than what it actually turned out to be, just like he talked about tons of other things that ended up not being in the game.

 

[UncleSporky]

The question of what happens at the center is entirely different from wanting to know more about the mechanics. Almost no one outright wanted the ending spoiled. The kind of mystery you had people defending even here on GAF was whether or not buildings existed which was kind of ludicrous.

On the subject of the ending, the weird thing is, I think I get the angle they were going for with the ending more than most people. It's a subject I've thought about often. The ending itself wasn't amazing or satisfying but the subject they're getting at is bigger than they ever would've been able to successfully cover in a hyped up entertainment product.

Wrong venue and certainly the wrong game for a topic that is nonetheless interesting metaphysics. Most people are going to mash A through the dialogue though - looks like psychobabble so it must be undecipherable Star Trek talk, right?

 

[Icyflamez96]

The question of what happens at the center is entirely different from wanting to know more about the mechanics. Almost no one outright wanted the ending spoiled. The kind of mystery you had people defending even here on GAF was whether or not buildings existed which was kind of ludicrous.

On the subject of the ending, the weird thing is, I think I get the angle they were going for with the ending more than most people. It's a subject I've thought about often. The ending itself wasn't amazing or satisfying but the subject they're getting at is bigger than they ever would've been able to successfully cover in a hyped up entertainment product.

Wrong venue and certainly the wrong game for a topic that is nonetheless interesting metaphysics. Most people are going to mash A through the dialogue though - looks like psychobabble so it must be undecipherable Star Trek talk, right?

Trust me, there were. I responded on a few occasions to people asking about what happens when you get to the center. It wasn't too prevalant, but it happened.

Even to Gribble's stance there I think there is some validity. To a lot of us, we were completely a-ok with the game that Sean described. It's a game about exploration, and mystery is an inherent aspect of that. The game mainly appealed to people who love exploration and mystery. Sean hyped up this mystery aspect to many elements of the game, people (including me) were on board with it because, again, the game he already described sounded satisfcatory to us, and I didn't need anymore info about "what's in the game" for it to appeal. And considering that, there's an added appeal to the idea of discovering things in the game that you had no idea would be in, whether it's a "thing" or a mechanic.

I don't think it's fair to mock people who weren't already sold and wanted to know more before they were satisfied, but also, the reasoning I gave in my previous paragraph for why many were okay with that mystery should be understood.

To me, I think the main point of contention with the ending is it feels like there's no proof that they even attempted to make it "amazing". Just like many of the other broken promises in regards to this game. Everyone knew It'd probably take you to a new galaxy, but only doing that isn't amazing in the slightest, in context to the rest of the game at least. No surprising, significant uncovery, no interesting gameplay applications, not even an artsy light show. (Speaking of light show, recall how the intro was supposed to be a wildy abstract 2001: A Space Odyssey esque presentation? Lol) Instead, they did the absolute bare minimum that only gives off the impression to me that the mystery of the center was another broken promise like many other aspects of the game.

As for your last paragraph, there was text? I think I know what you're talking about if I'm putting this together correctly. If it's that lame speech about reality or whatever, then it doesn't change much for me. Maybe in the context of a NMS with all the other promised features, I'd have something to think about, but considering the rest of the game, I don't know if they deserve the benefit of the doubt that they didn't just wing it.

 

[UncleSporky]

As for your last paragraph, there was text? I think I know what you're talking about if I'm putting this together correctly. If it's that lame speech about reality or whatever, then it doesn't change much for me. Maybe in the context of a NMS with all the other promised features, I'd have something to think about, but considering the rest of the game, I don't know if they deserve the benefit of the doubt that they didn't just wing it.

I meant button mashing through the dialogue throughout from Nada etc., which could be seen as psychobabble or more lame speech about reality.

 

[Cob32]

Just had an email from Sony who have authorised my refund.

 

[Jobbs]

Just had an email from Sony who have authorised my refund.

How'd you arrange this? I didn't know it was possible. I'd love to get refunded for NMS

 

[Cob32]

How'd you arrange this? I didn't know it was possible. I'd love to refund NMS

Opened up a live chat. Explained the game crashes a lot and already had my save corrupted. Then explained in still crashing after the patch they released that day (1.04 I believe it was).

Lady said she would submit my request to the refund team and i would hear back in 3-5 days if it's been approved or denied. The whole thing was really simple.

 

[Glass Shark]

https://everspace-game.com/faq/

Refreshing to see devs be honest and open about their game, not afraid to answer some questions with "no, you can't do that" or "we don't know yet."

 

[Jobbs]

https://everspace-game.com/faq/

Refreshing to see devs be honest and open about their game, not afraid to answer some questions with "no, you can't do that" or "we don't know yet."

Q: Will there be flyable capital ships?

Everspace team answer: Sorry, at the time being we don&#8217;t plan on having flyable capital ships. We&#8217;re rather trying to focus on fast-paced arcade action with smaller, faster fighters. You will however be able to fight or defend them.

Sean Murray answer: Yes, and we actually going to fully simulate the operation of the ship. Fuel will be calculated at the atomic level. I look at some games where crew members simply aren't shown or are displayed as icons or simple graphics: Our game isn't like that. Crew members are fully simulated AIs each with histories of their own. You can actually talk to each one and they'll respond as if they're a real person. You can choose to do this or just ignore them and let them go about their lives. You can play however you want, we won't tell you how to play.

 

[Sinoox]

Oof.

Maybe a group of 10 people shouldn't promise so much. To be fair, what did the fans expect by a team of only 10 people?

Spoiler

Correct me if I'm wrong about the team size.

Apparently it's 15 people according to my memory. This is the point I bring up all the time though. You can't expect fifteen people to do what people were expecting. Sean needs to take some PR classes or something though. He should of kept his mouth shut on a lot of things.

 

[Pestilence11]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-uMFHoF8VA&feature=youtu.be

2:38-2:42 of that video shows some kind of rotation was in the game at least until April of this year.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

Q: Will there be flyable capital ships?

Everspace team answer: Sorry, at the time being we don’t plan on having flyable capital ships. We’re rather trying to focus on fast-paced arcade action with smaller, faster fighters. You will however be able to fight or defend them.

Sean Murray answer: Yes, and we actually going to fully simulate the operation of the ship. Fuel will be calculated at the atomic level. I look at some games where crew members simply aren't shown or are displayed as icons or simple graphics: Our game isn't like that. Crew members are fully simulated AIs each with histories of their own. You can actually talk to each one and they'll respond as if they're a real person. You can choose to do this or just ignore them and let them go about their lives. You can play however you want, we won't tell you how to play.

All according to the FRA.

Spoiler

 

[Icyflamez96]

Q: Will there be flyable capital ships?

Everspace team answer: Sorry, at the time being we don&#8217;t plan on having flyable capital ships. We&#8217;re rather trying to focus on fast-paced arcade action with smaller, faster fighters. You will however be able to fight or defend them.

Sean Murray answer: Yes, and we actually going to fully simulate the operation of the ship. Fuel will be calculated at the atomic level. I look at some games where crew members simply aren't shown or are displayed as icons or simple graphics: Our game isn't like that. Crew members are fully simulated AIs each with histories of their own. You can actually talk to each one and they'll respond as if they're a real person. You can choose to do this or just ignore them and let them go about their lives. You can play however you want, we won't tell you how to play.

I naturally read this in Donald Trumps voice. I don't know why.

He's an interesting one. There are many questions about aspects of the game that he did completely shoot down, or temper expectations on.

The thing that still gets me about Sean is he came off like he was very conscious of not being that guy. When he first revealed that there were NPCs in the game, it was a surprise because he previously said multiple times that there were no NPCs. When asked by an interviewer why he previously said there were no NPCs, Sean answered by saying something like "I didn't want to promise a feature that we wouldn't know for sure could be implemented how we wanted, but it was always part of the vision". Was this all part of his scheme to give his words more credibility or something?

He also talked much about managing expectations. There's a video with him on the topic of Spore and NMS. He dropped Peter Molyneux jokes as if he was confident he wouldn't be seen that way, because I'm sure he must feel real silly about that in retrospect considering many people rightfully see him that way now.

 

[Pestilence11]

I naturally read this in Donald Trumps voice. I don't know why.

He's an interesting one. There are many questions about aspects of the game that he did completely shoot down, or temper expectations on.

The thing that still gets me about Sean is he came off like he was very conscious of not being that guy. When he first revealed that there were NPCs in the game, it was a surprise because he previously said multiple times that there were no NPCs. When asked by an interviewer why he previously said there were no NPCs, Sean answered by saying something like "I didn't want to promise a feature that we wouldn't know for sure could be implemented how we wanted, but it was always part of the vision". Was this all part of his scheme to give his words more credibility or something?

He also talked much about managing expectations. There's a video with him on the topic of Spore and NMS. He dropped Peter Molyneux jokes as if he was confident he wouldn't be seen that way, because I'm sure he must feel real silly about that in retrospect considering many people see him that way now.

Both of those points made it come as a such a shock when tons of shit was missing, for me anyways.

 

[Jobbs]

I naturally read this in Donald Trumps voice. I don't know why.

He's an interesting one. There are many questions about aspects of the game that he did completely shoot down, or temper expectations on.

The thing that still gets me about Sean is he came off like he was very conscious of not being that guy. When he first revealed that there were NPCs in the game, it was a surprise because he previously said multiple times that there were no NPCs. When asked by an interviewer why he previously said there were no NPCs, Sean answered by saying something like "I didn't want to promise a feature that we wouldn't know for sure could be implemented how we wanted, but it was always part of the vision". Was this all part of his scheme to give his words more credibility or something?

He also talked much about managing expectations. There's a video with him on the topic of Spore and NMS. He dropped Peter Molyneux jokes as if he was confident he wouldn't be seen that way, because I'm sure he must feel real silly about that in retrospect considering many people rightfully see him that way now.

Well, him saying these things made him sound better and more credible, right? So they're the exact things a manipulative person would say

 

[Sacul64GC]

I saw people bringing up earlier thoughts about flat worlds earlier well I have been having issues. It seems like any time I have a location an hour or more away I never get closser to it when flying on the planet. It just keeps resetting the estimated time. Only way I have been able to reach these is by going back into space and re-landing. Any thoughts?

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

I saw people bringing up earlier thoughts about flat worlds earlier well I have been having issues. It seems like any time I have a location an hour or more away I never get closser to it when flying on the planet. It just keeps resetting the estimated time. Only way I have been able to reach these is by going back into space and re-landing. Any thoughts?

Was this all in one setting/playsession? Have you tried this on multiple planets? What platform are you playing on? Can you go to a place where you have a planet or some kind of marker in the sky so you can see if it moves the longer you travel?

Do some more tests and maybe take a video.

If we could get someone else to watch the vid and try to reproduce the same thing then we might have something definitive.

Spoiler

Yikes if true...

 

[Diancecht]

I am still kind of in love with the game NMS was marketed as. Watching the material used to hype the game, I just still sort of want to believe that that game exists. Now I simply hope another developer comes along and knocks it out of the park for real.

Multiplayer was never a huge deal for me, I still wanted to see people gather and do stupid things in game together. It's a sandbox, it's what you do... you get together and do stupid things.

I hope Star Citizen will be that crazy space exploration game that we all want. They have the talent, background, team and fuck ton of resources.

I still dream a single-player Battlestar Galactica game but that's never gonna happen.

 

[Icyflamez96]

Is star citizen planning on having interesting/meaningful planetary exploration? Cuz that's like 90% of the reason I was interested in NMS and not as much the other space games. If not, it will never fill that void for me.

 

[tuxfool]

Is star citizen planning on having interesting/meaningful planetary exploration? Cuz that's like 90% of the reason I was interested in NMS and not as much the other space games. If not, it will never fill that void for me.

It sort of depends on what you mean by planetary exploration.

 

[Sacul64GC]

Was this all in one setting/playsession? Have you tried this on multiple planets? What platform are you playing on? Can you go to a place where you have a planet or some kind of marker in the sky so you can see if it moves the longer you travel?

Do some more tests and maybe take a video.

If we could get someone else to watch the vid and try to reproduce the same thing then we might have something definitive.

Spoiler

Yikes if true...

PS4 ver, I hit the share button when it happened the other day so I should have footage of that but I have never uploaded before. Happened a 2nd time today which prompted me to post this.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

They were honest about not needing ps plus at least lol

 

[Calabi]

I saw people bringing up earlier thoughts about flat worlds earlier well I have been having issues. It seems like any time I have a location an hour or more away I never get closser to it when flying on the planet. It just keeps resetting the estimated time. Only way I have been able to reach these is by going back into space and re-landing. Any thoughts?

I've had that as well.

 

[Seiniyta]

I've had that as well.

This is why:

 

[G-DannY]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/games-like-no-mans-sky/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

These 8 games do what ‘No Man’s Sky’ doesn’t

 

[Saint of Killers]

*ctrl-f Jaden Smith*

...

Pfft.

 

[Sleight of Jam]

So I went into my local Game store and got a full refund for this game. They were very reluctant to give me the refund as they were a adamant that it needs to be sealed, but no where on their website does it say that and I had to show this to them, also I'm pretty sure they legally have to now in the UK.

But it feels good man, they asked why and I said because this isn't the game that i was sold on, even the art on the back of the box is deceptive.

 

[wowbaggerBR]

No Man’s Sky Sales Drop by 81% in Second Week

Heh, those 100 people are really loud, aren't they?

 

[Dalek]

No Man’s Sky Sales Drop by 81% in Second Week

Heh, those 100 people are really loud, aren't they?

I just saw this too.

 

[Jobbs]

Has there ever been a better music combined with a worse game? I'm sure there hasn't. I love this

 

[SomTervo]

Spelunky is a short (< 1 hour pretty much always) game. That doesn't really make it a counterpoint to the concept of something like No Man's Sky where the entire universe would take more than your lifetime to see.

If it could take 10000 hours in Spelunky to be lucky enough to find a dungeon that looks like the Temple, and it still always delivered an enjoyable experience, then it would be a counterpoint.

... But plenty of people have 10,000 hours in Spelunky and still have fun and still haven't mastered it? If the argument is "can procedural generation make fun content" Then the answer is yes. We just arguably aren't good enough at it yet on this scale.

 

[SomTervo]

I naturally read this in Donald Trumps voice. I don't know why.

He's an interesting one. There are many questions about aspects of the game that he did completely shoot down, or temper expectations on.

The thing that still gets me about Sean is he came off like he was very conscious of not being that guy. When he first revealed that there were NPCs in the game, it was a surprise because he previously said multiple times that there were no NPCs. When asked by an interviewer why he previously said there were no NPCs, Sean answered by saying something like "I didn't want to promise a feature that we wouldn't know for sure could be implemented how we wanted, but it was always part of the vision". Was this all part of his scheme to give his words more credibility or something?

He also talked much about managing expectations. There's a video with him on the topic of Spore and NMS. He dropped Peter Molyneux jokes as if he was confident he wouldn't be seen that way, because I'm sure he must feel real silly about that in retrospect considering many people rightfully see him that way now.

I love this post.

I knew there was a reason why I always argue Murray's corner (at least to an extent) and I had totally forgotten about these moments.

They indicate even more that the game was a very different beast in 2015 and that he did actually have some awareness about how he was handling PR - and that the rumours of NMS's troubled development at the end of 2015 probably indicated the slashing of the game from an oak tree to a weed into 2016.

Again, doesn't excuse their total radio silence throughout summer 2016 till now.

 

[rashbeep]

yeah you guys are right, he's a liar and we should limit game maker's free speech unless they are official PR. good idea.

This is a joke, right?

 

[Seiniyta]

It's amazing Hello Games haven't put out a statement, even a complete fluff-non answering one. Nothing, nada.


On the subject of the music, probably one of the main reasons why I played it for over 100 hours. It's incredible.



On the subject of procedural generation as a whole. I'd like a studio like Ubisoft take a crack at a game like No Man's Sky. The procedural generation of NMS itself is pretty good, but limited by the amount of base models the generator pulls from. Ubisoft with their army of modellers/artists could really do something amazing with it.

Bethesda I also could see them doing it well. But they seem content doing Elders Scrolls and Fallout.

 

[Dash Kappei]

If one of your key features was broken weeks before you were supposed to turn in your final code even after multiple delays, wouldn't AS games encourage you to cut that feature and wrap up the project for release? As your publisher, isn't AS games in charge of your marketing and couldn't they pressure you to avoid talking about said missing feature IF they thought it would hurt initial sales?

I'm not saying what the guy did was right. It wasn't. But it just seems too far fetched that he would lie about a non existing feature for so long compared to the scenario I posed above.

Listen, let's not put our head in the sand please. This scenario of evil PR forcing the guy to gloss over the fact something would be amiss to not negatively impact sales of the game is far-fetched to say the least and it's annoying seeing it put down almost as it was a fact, and even if this narrative turned out to be partially true, that would still be a far cry from the multitude of experience-defining features missing from the released game: *SM* started it all since what we got is a whole different product then what he has proudly advertised for years. "One feature " my ass, the entire fabric of the game as it was described over the years doesn't exist, we're not talking about a tangential feature that could be dropped for performance reasons at the last minute.

 

[Icyflamez96]

Has there ever been a better music combined with a worse game? I'm sure there hasn't. I love this

Maybe a couple Sonic games.

 

[Jobbs]

It's amazing Hello Games haven't put out a statement, even a complete fluff-non answering one. Nothing, nada.

If he cared at all he'd go face the music and answer all the questions and complaints.

The fact that he just vomited all the hype and lies and nonsense, freely, everywhere, for years and then goes completely silent after the game comes out and everyone's seeing what the game actually is just further solidifies the SOSM stuff

If he wants to complete the Molyneux cycle he'll stay silent until it's time to hype the next game, at which point he'll say there were problems this time and he learned from them blah blah but next time it's all different...

 

[KratosEnergyDrink]

Is star citizen planning on having interesting/meaningful planetary exploration? Cuz that's like 90% of the reason I was interested in NMS and not as much the other space games. If not, it will never fill that void for me.

If you like exploring (and have a Wii U) you might try Xenoblade Chronicles X, this game has one big (giant) world but more variety than NMS and the world is handmade, so exploring is rewarding.

 

[Chezzymann]

Has there ever been a better music combined with a worse game? I'm sure there hasn't. I love this

Sonic 06

 

[Muzicfreq]

This is why:

Makes sense that it does this. at the same time not all planets are the same size. I've seen some say 8 hours and some a few

It's amazing Hello Games haven't put out a statement, even a complete fluff-non answering one. Nothing, nada.


On the subject of the music, probably one of the main reasons why I played it for over 100 hours. It's incredible.



On the subject of procedural generation as a whole. I'd like a studio like Ubisoft take a crack at a game like No Man's Sky. The procedural generation of NMS itself is pretty good, but limited by the amount of base models the generator pulls from. Ubisoft with their army of modellers/artists could really do something amazing with it.

Bethesda I also could see them doing it well. But they seem content doing Elders Scrolls and Fallout.

Sure if you want DLC to patch in the story that will cost $20 and ship upgrades to be microtransactions ect.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

Old, but just saw the Crowbcat video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8P2CZg3sJQ

So good, is probably his best one.

TBH after this Sean's credibility is totally ruined, it will very hard for him to sell a game, to me at least, until is proven good.

 

[Phreaker]

No Man&#8217;s Sky Sales Drop by 81% in Second Week

Heh, those 100 people are really loud, aren't they?

Is this really a big deal though? Uncharted 4 fell 78% in its 2nd week. Dark Souls 3 80% as well. GTA V 83% and so on.