No Man's Sky

J Mysterio · 09-03-2017 12:41am

DeVore wrote: »

If ever there was a game that showed how people get different things from a "game" this has to be it.

The most interesting new feature in either of their updates for me is the "Photo Mode" which might actually tempt me back

What does that involve? Is it like a screenshot?

Potential-Monke · 09-03-2017 11:35am

You know, what's annoying me about this game is people repeating themselves over the launch. Yes, we get it, it wasn't what you wanted, but there's no need to keep repeating it. Myself, DeVore and a lot of other people really enjoyed it, so we don't need people to keep spouting the same disappointment with it. As DeVore said, everyone gets a different experience with games, we got what we hoped for, a chilled space exploration game. I didn't buy into the hype, and it really turned out exactly like what i expected, albeit a little repetitive after a while.

I'm looking forward to see where they're going with this. The rover will be a great addition, and i haven't even looked at the base building yet, so i've no idea how that will affect the actual exploration side of things. Maybe what HG need to do is create a smaller portion of the galaxy for people who want multiplayer and battles, etc. Would be easier to keep it contained within it's own solar system. You'd still have to travel from planet to planet, and maybe put a bit more distance between them, but i think it's a bit much to be expecting the entire universe to be constantly populated with life, battles and trading. Even our own galaxy, the Milky Way, has over 500 Solar Systems, but we still haven't found life on any of them, current exploration and tech aside. NMS i think gave a less realistic representation of this, making more planets hospitable.

Either way, i will never tire of the moments in the game when you walk over the crest of a mountain and see other planets in the sky above, and have the ability to fly directly to them. Maybe they should add Mercury and Jupiter like planets too, would make exploring a bit easier, knowing you can't land on some planets so you can ignore them completely, or nose dive into them to see what happens!

MOH · 09-03-2017 12:32pm

Taylor365 wrote: »

These are useless updates that no one wants.

An antagonist or some actual life in the universe would be good...

No, they're useful updates that you don't want.
Hard to believe I know, but some people actually have different opinions.

DeVore · 09-03-2017 1:34pm

I'm hoping that the Photo Mode is something like the Shadows Of Mordor photo system which, as a fairly serious amateur photographer, I was *totally* blown away with. Go try it, its... its crazy powerful. I lost a few hours down that particular rabbit-hole... exposure, depth of field, focal length, 360 degree control of the camera for shot framing while freezing the action... completely unexpected in that game.

Venom · 09-03-2017 2:16pm

MOH wrote: »

No, they're useful updates that you don't want.
Hard to believe I know, but some people actually have different opinions.

People want in the game what was originally promised by the devs so its understandable their not overly happy with the updates so far.

Update 1's base building makes no sense since your ment to visit tons of planets on the way to the centre of the galaxy not set up a home on one.

Update 2's space buggy while cool looking is not as good as flying from point A to B in your ship.

MOH · 09-03-2017 2:38pm

Venom wrote: »

People want in the game what was originally promised by the devs so its understandable their not overly happy with the updates so far.

Update 1's base building makes no sense since your ment to visit tons of planets on the way to the centre of the galaxy not set up a home on one.

Update 2's space buggy while cool looking is not as good as flying from point A to B in your ship.

Some people are unhappy. Possibly quite a lot of people. And similarly some, or many, people aren't interested in these updates.

On the other hand, some people enjoyed the original release. And some people are happy that the game is being updated, interested in the updates so far, and where that may lead in the future.

So absolute statements like "these are useless updates that no one wants" are clearly false.

Otacon · 09-03-2017 2:43pm

Venom wrote: »

Update 1's base building makes no sense since your ment to visit tons of planets on the way to the centre of the galaxy not set up a home on one.

You can already do this so they don't need to add anything around that.

Update 2's space buggy while cool looking is not as good as flying from point A to B in your ship.

But it's better than walking or occasionally sprinting to areas your ship cannot get into, like caves.

Zillah · 09-03-2017 3:21pm

tl'dr: I didn't find it disappointing because they didn't provide a dream game, I found it disappointing because it failed in the most core elements of what they were trying to do. There is nothing chill about digging rocks for four hours so you can pay resources to not die, and there is nothing explorative about moving from one identical nonsense solar system to another.

I couldn't care less about multiplayer, big space battles, or anything like that. I could love this game if it had the following:

- Gameplay mechanics that don't feel repetitive and grindy. I didn't enjoy the resource gathering beyond a certain point, and the entire ship, suit, and multitool upgrade system was punishingly unfun because of its scorched earth approach. The ships also all felt largely identical; I was just never excited to do something new or find something new, because it would always be either slightly less annoying to use, or the worst decision you can make because you'd have to build all the upgrades again from scratch. On a side note, they also made me waste tons of time, because I went on a quest to try and find a really good new crashed ship that I could repair, and I found about a dozen and every time they were almost identical to mine; and it turns out that that was deliberate: new ships aren't random, they are artificially constrained to match your own within a very small window. The player would have no reason to suspect that would be the case.

- Space that actually felt worth exploring. Every planet was littered with the same four buildings, every system had one of the same two or three space stations. No where felt lonely, and no where felt crowded; everything looked the same. None of the space made sense: the planets were about twenty miles from each other, they didn't orbit a star, there was never even a sun in the sky when you were on the planets. There were no big stars or little stars or binary stars or systems with a black hole. It was just a crappy, repetitive, uninspiring world to spend time in.

- Ships that were fun to fly: the flight mechanics were the ugliest, most unenjoyable I've ever seen. Horribly limited speed in atmospheres (because the engine couldn't handle rendering the world quickly enough), sluggish controls, and most egregiously of all, an inability to even look down in a game all about spotting interesting things on the ground.

By all means dismiss people who expected the moon and the stars and want to rage about the developer's failing to meet their outrageous expectations, but I take exception to the claim that is is a chill exploration game. It's nothing of the sort. If I want to enjoy flying a space ship there are half a dozen options with much nicer space ships, and if I want to chill out and discover interesting things I'd be better off spending a few hours in Space Engine, which is both free and manages to make solar systems that are interesting and actually behave like bodies in space.

DeSelby83 · 09-03-2017 3:25pm

Can we please not start this argument again. Some people like it some don't and they are both valid points of view but do we really need to bash on about what it is or isn't it what was it was not promised.

Zillah · 09-03-2017 3:32pm

DeSelby83 wrote: »

Can we please not start this argument again. Some people like it some don't and they are both valid points of view but do we really need to bash on about what it is or isn't it what was it was not promised.

The only reason I posted is because we're again seeing the whole "Oh you don't like it because you're one of those gullible people who fell for the hype" argument. It's not a reasonable attitude to have towards the people who felt the game failed in its most fundamental aims.

I won't be having any drawn out arguments, but it presses my buttons when I see people dismissing the entirely legitimate problems that paying customers had with the game.

EoinHef · 09-03-2017 3:44pm

Zillah wrote: »

The only reason I posted is because we're again seeing the whole "Oh you don't like it because you're one of those gullible people who fell for the hype" argument. It's not a reasonable attitude to have towards the people who felt the game failed in its most fundamental aims.

I won't be having any drawn out arguments, but it presses my buttons when I see people dismissing the entirely legitimate problems that paying customers had with the game.

On the flip side anyone posts anything positive on the game or discuss its current state there is an avalanche of people telling them that the game is crap and there wasting their time and how bad the devs are and its not the game that was promised.

Anyway,think most people who are willing to give the game a chance currently are happy to see these updates come out periodically and hopefully expand on whats there at the moment.

Potential-Monke · 09-03-2017 4:58pm

Zillah wrote: »

- Space that actually felt worth exploring. Every planet was littered with the same four buildings, every system had one of the same two or three space stations. No where felt lonely, and no where felt crowded; everything looked the same. None of the space made sense: the planets were about twenty miles from each other, they didn't orbit a star, there was never even a sun in the sky when you were on the planets. There were no big stars or little stars or binary stars or systems with a black hole. It was just a crappy, repetitive, uninspiring world to spend time in.

I don't know what planets you were visiting, but I've been to plenty of planets which had their sun in the sky at certain times, it moved with time and gave beautiful views with the other planets visible also. And when you're travelling at Pulse Drive you're moving a lot faster, i've had 3 minute travel times at max Pulse getting from planet to planet, and some only took 30 seconds. Plus it's based on science that's not yet available, so maybe travel will be that quick. Not sure about orbiting, i think you were right that they don't, but for the amount of time you spend in a solar system, i can't imagine they'd move that much to begin with, what with Earth taking 365 days to orbit our sun, so you wouldn't notice the orbit anyway. But you're right about the variation in types of star systems, but i'd say that was more to make each system have something to do, as you needed (early on) systems with resources so you could actually leave and not be stranded.

Zillah · 09-03-2017 5:39pm

It's nothing to do with travel time, in a real solar system planets are so far away from each other that you can't see them at all, or they show up as tiny stars in the night sky. You can still do moons and gas giants for that "looming over me in the sky effect".

It's nothing to with being able to actually see them moving on their orbits, it's about the solar system being set up like anything that actually exists in space, rather than just a bunch of planets randomly clustered together.

Maybe I'm misremembering the sun, or they patched it, but there was something fucky, like it didn't show up in the sky or it wasn't there when you were in space - I'd have to hop back into the game to see.

The point being that space in No Man's Sky isn't anything like space as we know it.

Maximus Alexander · 09-03-2017 5:48pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Even our own galaxy, the Milky Way, has over 500 Solar Systems,

I suppose this is technically correct. 100 billion is definitely more than 500. :pac:

DeVore · 09-03-2017 5:58pm

If I were to critique the game I would probably post something like Zillah did... I think its worth analysing a games flaws if we're fans of "Games" as a concept and as an intellectual pursuit. I think its not worth having a bun-fight over.

One of the problems with the game is the lack of "outliers". So there is nothing particularly rare in the game. Nothing you are going to wander across and say "WOAH, I found one of these?!"... that goes from flora to fauna to equipment to crafts to star systems. The lack of that *possibility* makes the game feel shallow. This doesn't mean it has to actually happen regularly, but it has to be a possibility. Where the game does this *well* is in the art direction of the planets.

You want to explore planets and find new ones because clearly they are quite different, even though they have a unifying art-style, and for the explorers among us, that's our box ticked. That box needs to be ticked for fauna (dinosaurs?), crafts (mega ships?), equipment (rare legendary quality items), buildings (the ruins are great but meaningless... would be great to have rare stations, unusual buildings), star systems (binary black holes, neutron stars, warp gates etc).

Constructing my ship would also make things more personalised and would probably have been a better approach than base building but at least now you can encounter other peoples bases (with the next update).

A little bit of mystery and intrigue would spice up the lack lustre narrative, again hinting at things and giving rare clues to something bigger going on in the universe, something outside the world the player is inhabiting to make that world feel like a small part of a larger whole, rather than a repetitive drag.

On that note, I'd kill the grind... its so weird that you need to do this ridiculous "busy work" for people to feel like its a "game". That's not what defines a game, agency defines a game. The feeling that the game is unfolding according to your own actions and "anything could happen" as a result of decisions you make.

This game has oodles of potential and may yet fulfil it but right now it feels like an early access that probably needed another year in the oven but got rushed out by a publisher who wanted their cash back. I'm glad to see the updates still coming, I hope they do fulfil their potential.

Creamy Goodness · 09-03-2017 6:09pm

but...but...but... Sean Murray LIED!!!!!

johnny_ultimate · 09-03-2017 6:17pm

Zillah wrote: »

The point being that space in No Man's Sky isn't anything like space as we know it.

Actually one of the things I really like about the game

(which isn't to say, of course, it wouldn't benefit from a whole lot more algorithmic astrophysics)

Zillah · 09-03-2017 6:35pm

DeVore wrote: »

One of the problems with the game is the lack of "outliers". So there is nothing particularly rare in the game. Nothing you are going to wander across and say "WOAH, I found one of these?!"... that goes from flora to fauna to equipment to crafts to star systems. The lack of that *possibility* makes the game feel shallow. This doesn't mean it has to actually happen regularly, but it has to be a possibility. Where the game does this *well* is in the art direction of the planets.

Absolutely. That and a sense of differentiation and structure. I would have desperately loved if some solar systems felt alien, distant, and alone. If I found a big black obelisk on a random moon in a solar system that felt like no one had ever been there (or at least not for billions of years) it would be so cool. But in NMS I can only find obelisks that are literally a stone's throw from someone else's back garden.

Why not have planets with hazards that need technology to over come, and can be scanned from orbit? "You need Level 3 radiation shielding to survive this planet" - oh gosh, I better go upgrade my radiation shielding and find out what's there! Maybe you can use Level 2 shielding but you have to overcharge it constantly with resources, so there is a difference between "I can't go there yet", "I can go there but it's super dangerous", and "I can go there because I'm an upgraded baddass". As hazards exists now it just feels like another resource hole to justify the grind.

You could have most systems be desolate, but allow you to detect radio emissions from the "civilised" ones, so you can go off into the unknown or find a base as needed, like having a city marked on a map vs the wilderness of the countryside.

All of this would require a lot more time and careful game design to craft an experience, and instead it seems like they just dumped a technically functioning tech demo before it was ready.

Their procedural technology is very clever, but they didn't spend enough time making it a game. I think the main reason I'm so opinionated on this is that it's not a bad game, those you can ignore; it represents so much potential that just didn't follow through.

Dave_The_Sheep · 09-03-2017 9:03pm

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

but...but...but... Sean Murray LIED!!!!!

I realise you're being facetious. Or trying to make a point about people bitching about the game. But ...

... Yeah. HG lied through their teeth about the game. It's been done to death so I won't go through the myriad of ways this is true. It's undeniably true. The game is not worth the prices that people were initially charged for it, for a game that was not the one they were told they were buying.

They can tack on as many updates as they like, and describe them as "free updates" (yeah as if you could even try and charge something after the farce that this has turned into).

I'm someone who managed to (through serious effort and modding) get a decent sense of enjoyment out of the game. I came home of an evening and spent a few dozen hours across a few weeks traipsing across some nice looking planets withs some vaguely different flora and fauna. It was relaxing. It was nice. But I had to remove most of the actual 'game' elements that they put in (Inventory management, ship size, money, resources).

It was nothing like I expected it to be, like it was sold to be.

It's ok. It's worth about 20% of it's actual value at release. So you can stick your "LIED!!!" up your arse.