|
On August 24 2016 04:05 Djzapz wrote:
So how could you be "not sure" why NMS and HG got the backlash they got. It's obvious.
Oh it's very obvious why they got the backlash. I'm not arguing that. I've just never seen it to such an extreme extent when the same problems have been unfortunately prevalent in the industry. They (Hello Games) specifically have gotten blown up to such a hilarious degree. It seems more like the straw that broke the camel's back, and my point was that it's interesting that people are using NMS specifically as a platform to try and launch a revolution in the gaming industry. Or I'm wrong and maybe it's happened with other titles I just didn't pay such close attention to.
Obviously the game's got huge issues and the whole debacle sucks. I'm just tired of all the "I told you so" folks still parading around, here and everywhere. It's exhausting. We get it. Big Reddit threads that talk about specific issues, or comparisons/promotions for smaller games that do things better, are far more interesting.
|
|
|
Hello Games and Sony are doing a great job of getting other media outlets to paint them as victims. HG and Murray can never try to play that victim card directly with their own words and proclamations.. they'll get destroyed even more.
they should call upon the Jon Jones PR team. He is a labelling himself a victim now. All we need is for Sean Murray to run over a pregnant lady and then flee the scene and disappear for a weekend and we're all set.
the victim card is a powerful deflection and the very smart marketing guys at Sony are playing that for all its worth.
|
You say "we get it" and maybe you do but many don't. People famously don't understand business. [Going off on a tangent here]: Recently, a youtuber was accused of faking a huge giveaway. Although it's starting to look like the giveaway is going to take place, a staggering number of people immediately adopted the good ole' "no harm no foul" position. Their justification was that the youtuber in question had nothing to gain from the giveaway, fake or real. He just did it to look cool, and promising tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment without delivering is a zero sum thing. No one gains anything, no one is truly hurt by it. A lot of people, surprisingly, can't connect the dots at all. They don't see giveaways as a business decision, they don't understand that the people and businesses which do giveaways expect a return on investment.
People have an extremely naive outlook on these things, and they very rapidly adopt an individualistic understanding of the issues. You'll have games with huge performance problems like Batman Arkham something, and people will complain while others will say "works on my PC so there's no problem at all with this game".
Trying to get people to think critically... at the end of the day maybe it's a fool's errand. But it's tempting to insist when already people are trying to say it's water under the bridge. I need this to stop happening, it's not water under the bridge.
|
how many times did Testie get caught hacking and everyone just let it slide? even though the guy is canadian, it was fun watching him get rofl-stomped at every Blizzcon.
|
lmao this thread is pure comedy gold. bravo folks 
|
watching NMS development and updates the past 2 years.. it was like a giant 2 year long version of the "Kramerica Industries" episode on Seinfeld with Sean Murray in the role of Kramer.
comedic software development begets more comedy.
watching this idiocy makes me appreciate Blizzard all the more and shows us how rare genuine honesty is.
|
When I watched the first demo of NMS and when they said its a procedurally generated universe, and since I use procedural generation in my day to day work, though nothing of the scale NMS demonstrated, I use it mostly for textures and 3d models for rocks/planets/etc, it kind of raised an eyebrow.
The demo they showed was incredibly well done, I just couldnt believe that a small indie team would be capable of doing such a thing. The amount of work that will have to go in that, the number of parameters/rules the generator would have to go through and come out aesthetically that good was just mind boggling to me. Thats the biggest problem of procedural generation, while it technically creates different and unique things, the number of parameters the generator uses are just a few in most cases that people dont perceive them as different, or if they look different, they would probably look like crap. To achieve perceptual difference and to be aesthetically pleasing at the same time especially on flora and fauna is such a massive task, perhaps even impossible because you'd have to input parameters that make sense for biological systems, which needless to say are quite a few orders of magnitude more complex than simple mathematical systems to make rocks and planets. So the demo (which was created by artists and there's nothing procedural about it) and the actual game are quite different and that's one of the first things people note, the world is dull and looks the same. While to some its a disappointment, for me its a relief tbh, because if that was procedurally generated, I'd be out of a job in a few years lol.
I was very eager to preorder but having crashed and burned on so many hype trains before, I decided against it and wait for reviews because I just couldn't shake off the feeling that something was way off about how the game was presented.
To say I'm disappointed how the game turned out would be a lie. I knew they wouldnt deliver everything they promised, but so many people did, they were sold a lie and that IS NOT OK. It doesnt matter if some players enjoy the game, that's besides the point, the backlash is well deserved because the game they promoted is not the game people got.
|
|
|
|
|
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all.
|
On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all.
I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever.
|
On August 29 2016 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all. I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever.
What about the precedent of you can refund a game you played for 50+ hours?
|
On August 29 2016 08:19 Dizmaul wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2016 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all. I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever. What about the precedent of you can refund a game you played for 50+ hours?
What about it?
I hope you are aware that this precedent already existed.
H1Z1 had the same happen to it, Arkham Knight had it, google tells Journey of the Light did aswell.
If you (the developer) fuck up badly Steam will allow refunds regardless of playtime in order to protect itself as a brand and from potential lawsuits I imagine.
|
On August 29 2016 08:29 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2016 08:19 Dizmaul wrote:On August 29 2016 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all. I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever. What about the precedent of you can refund a game you played for 50+ hours? What about it? I hope you are aware that this precedent already existed. H1Z1 had the same happen to it, Arkham Knight had it, google tells Journey of the Light did aswell. If you (the developer) fuck up badly Steam will allow refunds regardless of playtime in order to protect itself as a brand and from potential lawsuits I imagine.
It was a question if you thought it was toxic. You clearly don't. Never said its new or right or wrong.
|
On August 29 2016 08:40 Dizmaul wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2016 08:29 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:19 Dizmaul wrote:On August 29 2016 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all. I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever. What about the precedent of you can refund a game you played for 50+ hours? What about it? I hope you are aware that this precedent already existed. H1Z1 had the same happen to it, Arkham Knight had it, google tells Journey of the Light did aswell. If you (the developer) fuck up badly Steam will allow refunds regardless of playtime in order to protect itself as a brand and from potential lawsuits I imagine. It was a question if you thought it was toxic. You clearly don't. Never said its new or right or wrong.
"Precedent" kind of implies it's a first.
|
On August 29 2016 08:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2016 08:40 Dizmaul wrote:On August 29 2016 08:29 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:19 Dizmaul wrote:On August 29 2016 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all. I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever. What about the precedent of you can refund a game you played for 50+ hours? What about it? I hope you are aware that this precedent already existed. H1Z1 had the same happen to it, Arkham Knight had it, google tells Journey of the Light did aswell. If you (the developer) fuck up badly Steam will allow refunds regardless of playtime in order to protect itself as a brand and from potential lawsuits I imagine. It was a question if you thought it was toxic. You clearly don't. Never said its new or right or wrong. "Precedent" kind of implies it's a first.
You're right I should of been more clear and said do you think it could perpetuate a toxic precedent. (of refunding a game after playing 50+ hours)
|
On August 29 2016 09:20 Dizmaul wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2016 08:59 WolfintheSheep wrote:On August 29 2016 08:40 Dizmaul wrote:On August 29 2016 08:29 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:19 Dizmaul wrote:On August 29 2016 08:03 Gorsameth wrote:On August 29 2016 08:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Heeey, whining works! I'm sure this won't set a toxic precedent at all. I don't consider the precedent of "Do not strait up lie about features in your game" is toxic, but whatever. What about the precedent of you can refund a game you played for 50+ hours? What about it? I hope you are aware that this precedent already existed. H1Z1 had the same happen to it, Arkham Knight had it, google tells Journey of the Light did aswell. If you (the developer) fuck up badly Steam will allow refunds regardless of playtime in order to protect itself as a brand and from potential lawsuits I imagine. It was a question if you thought it was toxic. You clearly don't. Never said its new or right or wrong. "Precedent" kind of implies it's a first. You're right I should of been more clear and said do you think it could perpetuate a toxic precedent. (of refunding a game after playing 50+ hours)
I'd say that's highly unlikely. You need a critical mass of people complaining for there to be any response. If enough people are satisfied with the game, then the producers, distributors, developers, etc. don't actually have to pay attention.
And, importantly, in spite of all the drama with NMS, the issue is largely with games that simply don't work on release. H1Z1, Arkham Knight, NMS, all games that were actually completely busted on release for a significant enough amount of people. The precedent really has nothing to do with any kind of play time, but the quality control that Valve and Sony are willing to tolerate on their platforms. Good and bad may be subjective, but broken software is not.
|
|
|
He's not a prophet, just a guy saying basically what most people with a good understanding of software development and the capabilities of small teams would tell you.
If you read his current posts he actually likes the game because his expectations were far more grounded than most.
This was pretty much my stance, interesting concept, doubtful they would make anything actually interesting but interesteed to see what actually came out of it, the reason I haven't bought it is because of the price point, I'm not paying £50 for what I'm pretty sure this game is. Might pick it up in 6mo - 1 year when its <£20 and has had more work done to it though.
I understand the hate though, hype culture / pre-ordering is weird and doesn't exist much outside of gaming but within the context of gaming I think creators need to be very careful with what they say publicly. I don't think Murray is a bad guy, just a kind of Molyneux 2.0 but without the backing of a AAA team and Microsoft money to frantically try and make your wild hype generation a reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
