|
On August 16 2016 06:30 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 03:11 dae wrote:On August 15 2016 10:44 Zooper31 wrote:On August 15 2016 09:23 dae wrote:On August 15 2016 07:26 Zooper31 wrote:On August 15 2016 06:54 QuanticHawk wrote:
the marketing was intentionally deceptive specifically about multiplayer. How so? I know a set of people met in the game in real time and couldn't see each other. But that has been alluded to being a server issue, though we don't know for sure quite yet without an official response. They said the game was multiplayer as in, you could meet other players. They said there wasn't any PvP action and you should never really even expect to meet another player. So basically it's a singleplayer game, how was that wrong? They said multiplayer was possible but rare but afaik it's literally just impossible. Why would a dev spend time on multiplayer that most players won't ever experience. It doesn't make much sense from a priority standpoint. Either they should have put effort into it and made mechanics to make it more common/likely, or just said "no there won't be multiplayer. Better then saying "yes there will be" and then having none. Multiplayer is possible, you can meet other players. If you wanted multiplayer as in PvP they said that wasn't going to be in the game. They've always said meeting other players was going to be an almost impossible task seeing as there are 18 quintillion planets and starting points are random, do the math. Until I see a video of two players interacting with each other in realtime I will assume that Multiplayer is not part of this game. Any other stance on this is ridiculous. There isn't meant to be any interaction though, even if they saw each other and there wasn't server issues and/or unfinished player models not yet in the game. Maybe that's why people were mad there was no "multiplayer" even though they were told exactly what it was gonna be and to expect a single player experience.
People are mad about the multiplayer because they do not like the game (why is not relevant for this argument) and so they look for things to complain about. It is easy to latch on to something the developer lied about (or changed and did not inform on).
They said you could meet other players in the universe.
That has been proven wrong (there is no finished player model in the game files).
As for people being uninformed.
I blame the dev being intentionally vague and limiting gameplay footage to show what the game was actually about.
That is what killed my initial hype for the game. A dev that makes a great game tends to want to show it off, not desperately keep it all under wraps. Doing so sets off way to many alarm bells for me.
|
Its a shit $60 game
Would have been a really good $15 game.
But at $15 they wouldnt have had someone like Sony backing them.
Honestly, the dev team sold out on this project, and it cost them their reputation with the community, which they will really struggle to recover from.
They were intentionally vague and misleading throughout the process, knowing full well what people expected, and realizing they werent giving people what people were expecting.
Its a 10/10 $15 game... but a 3/10 $60 game.
|
I clearly remember Sean Murray saying that the light multiplayer aspect in the game was cool because it was the only way for players to know what they look like.
Really weird that he lied about that, especially since it's not a big deal. He did say that it wasn't a multiplayer game, might as well come right out and say it has absolutely no multiplayer element at all.... If you want to sell me something, don't bullshit me, even on minor details.
|
Its fine because the internet will never forget. Ever. 15 years from now we will have some discussion about having fun playing no mans sky in those first few months. Then someone will in, still bitter and say "Yeah, but alone with no multiplayer. That is why I never bought the game." Sean Murray will die and someone will vandalize his grave with "No multiplayer at launch, lazy dev."
|
On August 15 2016 07:26 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 06:54 QuanticHawk wrote:
the marketing was intentionally deceptive specifically about multiplayer. How so? I know a set of people met in the game in real time and couldn't see each other. But that has been alluded to being a server issue, though we don't know for sure quite yet without an official response. They said the game was multiplayer as in, you could meet other players. They said there wasn't any PvP action and you should never really even expect to meet another player. So basically it's a singleplayer game, how was that wrong?
as you noted, most of the commentary from the dev team regards to multiplayer and lots of gameplay was very cryptic
|
On August 16 2016 08:06 Plansix wrote:
Its fine because the internet will never forget. Ever. 15 years from now we will have some discussion about having fun playing no mans sky in those first few months. Then someone will in, still bitter and say "Yeah, but alone with no multiplayer. That is why I never bought the game." Sean Murray will die and someone will vandalize his grave with "No multiplayer at launch, lazy dev."
lmfao
I'll wait for a steam sale to get this game 
|
that being said still a cool game. just feel it was rushed and underdeveloped/half baked. but that is basically gaming in 2016.
the minecraft business model and the proliferation of fast internet has doomed us to a lifetime of unfinished products
|
Another welcome change would be a way to unlock the camera while you are flying. It feels a bit constrained to only be able to look directly in front of you.
|
On August 14 2016 16:05 Endymion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2016 06:49 Fleetfeet wrote:On August 14 2016 02:04 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Hilarious thing is this game looks exactly like I expected it to be. Tons of procedural generated content with very little meaningful variance, and a game that plays much more like a tech demo than a fully fleshed out game.
It's like people have absolutely no idea what reasonable game development actually looks like.
The only major thing would be if there continues to be major development on this post-release. Most games like this start out as a basic framework and grow from there. I think it'd be wise for everyone here to take a giant step back and let the game be what it is. Especially in this community, we're more driven towards more tryhard gameplay-driven competitive challenging stuff. Almost unanimously my speedrunning / competitive gaming circles are saying either "Trash" or "Meh"... but several of my super casual console pleb friends are playing this, have been playing this since it came out on ps4, and genuinely enjoy it. No game is made for every person, and yes while an "actually good" minecraft would be fantastic, that wasn't listed as this game's intentions. Implying that it isn't "Reasonable game design" is actually just stupid. The game just isn't made for you; it's perfectly fine and functional (on console) as a casual space explorer. Honestly this game sets a lot of benchmarks for games logistically, in terms of procedural generation and scale. I'm looking forward to what this game will pave the way for, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna waste my time pretending that it's terrible at what it's doing. i disagree wholeheartedly.. i think that it would be wise for you to step back and look at the game for what it is, and judge it by games that are actually good.. personally, i would be saying that NMS is a horrible game even if it released perfectly with 300 fps on pc and ps4, because it would still be a barren wasteland of mechanics. i still stand by my argument that there's nothing at all to do in the game, and that other games both with procedural exploration (minecraft, terraria) and without procedural generation (subnautica) shit on this game to an unprecedented degree. and that's if the release was smooth and everything on the box was delivered.. as it stands the devs lied about multiplayer, and they lied about the quality of the mechanics that barely got included... read the back of the NMS box and tell me that the devs aren't lying through their teeth: Share your journey The galaxy is a living, breathing place. Trade convoys travel between stars, factions vie for territory, pirates hunt the unwary, and the police are ever watching. Every other player lives in the same galaxy, and you can choose to share your discoveries with them on a map that spans known space. Perhaps you will see the results of their actions as well as your own... trade convoys? you mean those automated ships that do NOTHING if you kill them? prices don't increase or decrease.... factions? LMFAO!!!!!! pirates??? you mean random automated spacecraft that do NOTHING if you kill them? police?!?!?!!? not that i have seen other than automated responses................ every player lives in the same galaxy? uhhh nope! let's move onto the next blurb! Find your own destiny Your voyage through No Man's Sky is up to you. Will you be a fighter, preying on the weak and taking their riches, or taking out pirates for their bounties? Power is yours if you upgrade your ship for speed and weaponry. Or a trader? Find rich resources on forgotten worlds and exploit them for the highest prices. Invest in more cargo space and you'll reap huge rewards. Or perhaps an explorer? Go beyond the known frontier and discover places and things that no one has ever seen before. Upgrade your engines to jump ever farther, and strengthen your suit for survival in toxic environments that would kill the unwary. will i be a fighter??? maybe if i wanted to play a tacked on shooting mechanic that is outdone by doom 1/quake 1 from over 20 years ago!! same with the space combat, it's utter shit compared to shit from 20 years ago... tie fighter? freespace? "upgrade your ship for speed and weaponry" where are the meaningful decisions between the two when all combat is the exact fucking same regardless of your kit, because all pirates are also the exact same... look at games like mechwarrior where your loadout drastically changed combat, from being slow and lumbering with lots of missiles to being a lightly armed with jump-jets, trying to out maneuver your opponent... this game has literally none of that, despite it having even more potential being a space game. a trader? HAHAHA.. what a great UI for trading, so what, buying low and selling high between identical vendors in identical space stations in near identical systems makes for compelling trading now? give me a break, i might be spoiled by the memory of eve trading but this is just silly... they did the BARE MINIMUM yet people are trying to say you can "trade" lmfao.. also, all planets have basically the same resources because of how short sighted the game mechanics are... you can't get stuck on a planet without fuel to escape orbit, or get stuck without fuel to fly on the planet itself, leading to actually memorable experiences..nope, that would be too hard on our players!! just come on... this game deserves a class action lawsuit for the ways the devs have lied through their teeth, without even delving into the HUGE performance issues and lack of good faith evident in some of the problems...
You're literally arguing that the things they delivered don't live up to your expectations of what they should be. I believe this is why I'm recommending people take a step back and let the game be what it is. If you feel robbed... too bad for you. I for one had the foresight to not preorder a game that the media offered to me beforehand was suggesting would not be the experience I was looking for.
I watched a friend of mine play this for some portion of the 50 hours he's spent on it already - he enjoys it for the relaxing voyages through space it offers. I can respect that and let it be what it is, instead of trying to crucify a team of like 15 people for not delivering the single-player space MMO orgasmfest I've always dreamed of.
|
On August 16 2016 06:30 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 03:11 dae wrote:On August 15 2016 10:44 Zooper31 wrote:On August 15 2016 09:23 dae wrote:On August 15 2016 07:26 Zooper31 wrote:On August 15 2016 06:54 QuanticHawk wrote:
the marketing was intentionally deceptive specifically about multiplayer. How so? I know a set of people met in the game in real time and couldn't see each other. But that has been alluded to being a server issue, though we don't know for sure quite yet without an official response. They said the game was multiplayer as in, you could meet other players. They said there wasn't any PvP action and you should never really even expect to meet another player. So basically it's a singleplayer game, how was that wrong? They said multiplayer was possible but rare but afaik it's literally just impossible. Why would a dev spend time on multiplayer that most players won't ever experience. It doesn't make much sense from a priority standpoint. Either they should have put effort into it and made mechanics to make it more common/likely, or just said "no there won't be multiplayer. Better then saying "yes there will be" and then having none. Multiplayer is possible, you can meet other players. If you wanted multiplayer as in PvP they said that wasn't going to be in the game. They've always said meeting other players was going to be an almost impossible task seeing as there are 18 quintillion planets and starting points are random, do the math. Until I see a video of two players interacting with each other in realtime I will assume that Multiplayer is not part of this game. Any other stance on this is ridiculous. There isn't meant to be any interaction though, even if they saw each other and there wasn't server issues and/or unfinished player models not yet in the game. Maybe that's why people were mad there was no "multiplayer" even though they were told exactly what it was gonna be and to expect a single player experience. So many people were uninformed about this game and then berate it for being exactly what it set out to be. It seriously is a very provocative game so far apparently. It's by far from getting any GotY award, but it's far from the pile of trash lots of people say it to be. Future updates are only going to make this game truly shine but it's a wonderful experience as it stands for people who enjoy exploring new worlds.
Holy shit, this is so wrong. Missinformation came from the deliberate actions from dev team and their marketing. If by wonderful expieriance you mean flying and landing on planets so you can grind for materials so you can fly and land on more planets, well, i wish i could be you cause if i approached stuff with so little expectations life would be so much easier.
PC launch of this thing got compared to Arhkam Knight, and i actually find it very innacurate. Behind technical problems Arkham Knight was actually a good game, with gameplay that was engaging. This "new gen exploration game" is nothing more than a scam. 60+ euro for this thing is insulting.
|
On August 16 2016 13:22 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2016 16:05 Endymion wrote:On August 14 2016 06:49 Fleetfeet wrote:On August 14 2016 02:04 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Hilarious thing is this game looks exactly like I expected it to be. Tons of procedural generated content with very little meaningful variance, and a game that plays much more like a tech demo than a fully fleshed out game.
It's like people have absolutely no idea what reasonable game development actually looks like.
The only major thing would be if there continues to be major development on this post-release. Most games like this start out as a basic framework and grow from there. I think it'd be wise for everyone here to take a giant step back and let the game be what it is. Especially in this community, we're more driven towards more tryhard gameplay-driven competitive challenging stuff. Almost unanimously my speedrunning / competitive gaming circles are saying either "Trash" or "Meh"... but several of my super casual console pleb friends are playing this, have been playing this since it came out on ps4, and genuinely enjoy it. No game is made for every person, and yes while an "actually good" minecraft would be fantastic, that wasn't listed as this game's intentions. Implying that it isn't "Reasonable game design" is actually just stupid. The game just isn't made for you; it's perfectly fine and functional (on console) as a casual space explorer. Honestly this game sets a lot of benchmarks for games logistically, in terms of procedural generation and scale. I'm looking forward to what this game will pave the way for, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna waste my time pretending that it's terrible at what it's doing. i disagree wholeheartedly.. i think that it would be wise for you to step back and look at the game for what it is, and judge it by games that are actually good.. personally, i would be saying that NMS is a horrible game even if it released perfectly with 300 fps on pc and ps4, because it would still be a barren wasteland of mechanics. i still stand by my argument that there's nothing at all to do in the game, and that other games both with procedural exploration (minecraft, terraria) and without procedural generation (subnautica) shit on this game to an unprecedented degree. and that's if the release was smooth and everything on the box was delivered.. as it stands the devs lied about multiplayer, and they lied about the quality of the mechanics that barely got included... read the back of the NMS box and tell me that the devs aren't lying through their teeth: Share your journey The galaxy is a living, breathing place. Trade convoys travel between stars, factions vie for territory, pirates hunt the unwary, and the police are ever watching. Every other player lives in the same galaxy, and you can choose to share your discoveries with them on a map that spans known space. Perhaps you will see the results of their actions as well as your own... trade convoys? you mean those automated ships that do NOTHING if you kill them? prices don't increase or decrease.... factions? LMFAO!!!!!! pirates??? you mean random automated spacecraft that do NOTHING if you kill them? police?!?!?!!? not that i have seen other than automated responses................ every player lives in the same galaxy? uhhh nope! let's move onto the next blurb! Find your own destiny Your voyage through No Man's Sky is up to you. Will you be a fighter, preying on the weak and taking their riches, or taking out pirates for their bounties? Power is yours if you upgrade your ship for speed and weaponry. Or a trader? Find rich resources on forgotten worlds and exploit them for the highest prices. Invest in more cargo space and you'll reap huge rewards. Or perhaps an explorer? Go beyond the known frontier and discover places and things that no one has ever seen before. Upgrade your engines to jump ever farther, and strengthen your suit for survival in toxic environments that would kill the unwary. will i be a fighter??? maybe if i wanted to play a tacked on shooting mechanic that is outdone by doom 1/quake 1 from over 20 years ago!! same with the space combat, it's utter shit compared to shit from 20 years ago... tie fighter? freespace? "upgrade your ship for speed and weaponry" where are the meaningful decisions between the two when all combat is the exact fucking same regardless of your kit, because all pirates are also the exact same... look at games like mechwarrior where your loadout drastically changed combat, from being slow and lumbering with lots of missiles to being a lightly armed with jump-jets, trying to out maneuver your opponent... this game has literally none of that, despite it having even more potential being a space game. a trader? HAHAHA.. what a great UI for trading, so what, buying low and selling high between identical vendors in identical space stations in near identical systems makes for compelling trading now? give me a break, i might be spoiled by the memory of eve trading but this is just silly... they did the BARE MINIMUM yet people are trying to say you can "trade" lmfao.. also, all planets have basically the same resources because of how short sighted the game mechanics are... you can't get stuck on a planet without fuel to escape orbit, or get stuck without fuel to fly on the planet itself, leading to actually memorable experiences..nope, that would be too hard on our players!! just come on... this game deserves a class action lawsuit for the ways the devs have lied through their teeth, without even delving into the HUGE performance issues and lack of good faith evident in some of the problems... You're literally arguing that the things they delivered don't live up to your expectations of what they should be. I believe this is why I'm recommending people take a step back and let the game be what it is. If you feel robbed... too bad for you. I for one had the foresight to not preorder a game that the media offered to me beforehand was suggesting would not be the experience I was looking for. I watched a friend of mine play this for some portion of the 50 hours he's spent on it already - he enjoys it for the relaxing voyages through space it offers. I can respect that and let it be what it is, instead of trying to crucify a team of like 15 people for not delivering the single-player space MMO orgasmfest I've always dreamed of.
you think i bought this pos game, let alone preordered it? i knew it would crash since day 1 of announcement, i just didn't expect people to actually defend such a shamble of a game.. also, to the people defending the devs for lying and talking shit because people are crucifying them.... shame on you.. imagine if blizz had tried to lie about any tiny aspect of SC2 and the shitstorm that would have followed.. this is a MAJOR part of AAA game mysteriously vanishing into thin air (with regard to multiplayer)... as far as the rest of the game missing, i guess they never said that their game would actually be a game.. other than the words on their steam page
|
On August 16 2016 06:30 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 03:11 dae wrote:On August 15 2016 10:44 Zooper31 wrote:On August 15 2016 09:23 dae wrote:On August 15 2016 07:26 Zooper31 wrote:On August 15 2016 06:54 QuanticHawk wrote:
the marketing was intentionally deceptive specifically about multiplayer. How so? I know a set of people met in the game in real time and couldn't see each other. But that has been alluded to being a server issue, though we don't know for sure quite yet without an official response. They said the game was multiplayer as in, you could meet other players. They said there wasn't any PvP action and you should never really even expect to meet another player. So basically it's a singleplayer game, how was that wrong? They said multiplayer was possible but rare but afaik it's literally just impossible. Why would a dev spend time on multiplayer that most players won't ever experience. It doesn't make much sense from a priority standpoint. Either they should have put effort into it and made mechanics to make it more common/likely, or just said "no there won't be multiplayer. Better then saying "yes there will be" and then having none. Multiplayer is possible, you can meet other players. If you wanted multiplayer as in PvP they said that wasn't going to be in the game. They've always said meeting other players was going to be an almost impossible task seeing as there are 18 quintillion planets and starting points are random, do the math. Until I see a video of two players interacting with each other in realtime I will assume that Multiplayer is not part of this game. Any other stance on this is ridiculous. There isn't meant to be any interaction though, even if they saw each other and there wasn't server issues and/or unfinished player models not yet in the game. Maybe that's why people were mad there was no "multiplayer" even though they were told exactly what it was gonna be and to expect a single player experience. So many people were uninformed about this game and then berate it for being exactly what it set out to be. It seriously is a very provocative game so far apparently. It's by far from getting any GotY award, but it's far from the pile of trash lots of people say it to be. Future updates are only going to make this game truly shine but it's a wonderful experience as it stands for people who enjoy exploring new worlds.
well this is a lie right? you are supposed to see the other people exploring? that in itself is an interaction dude. it's a feeling of accomplishment. you get to see what they have. what they've found. where they are. now it just sounds like you're arguing for the sake of it, but just lying outright.
and full disclosure, I'm on board with the actual single player experience delivered. it is as was described, and is pretty cool.
to say they didn't lie about the potential for a multiplayer experience, in that you'll be traveling the universe with other explorers, is bullshit though.
|
On August 16 2016 08:06 Plansix wrote:
Its fine because the internet will never forget. Ever. 15 years from now we will have some discussion about having fun playing no mans sky in those first few months. Then someone will in, still bitter and say "Yeah, but alone with no multiplayer. That is why I never bought the game." Sean Murray will die and someone will vandalize his grave with "No multiplayer at launch, lazy dev."
I know you enjoy the game and you want the others to know :D.
But not being truthful still hurts their credibility if they want to make another game in the next few years.
|
Hyrule19210 Posts
I played a bunch yesterday. The way the game starts up is dumb and unintuitive and nothing at all is explained, but after about an hour I'd gotten used to the controls and it became a lot more fun.
Seriously though, who doesn't let people change video settings before diving into a 90 second graphics intensive renderfest you can't cancel?
|
On August 16 2016 21:11 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 08:06 Plansix wrote:
Its fine because the internet will never forget. Ever. 15 years from now we will have some discussion about having fun playing no mans sky in those first few months. Then someone will in, still bitter and say "Yeah, but alone with no multiplayer. That is why I never bought the game." Sean Murray will die and someone will vandalize his grave with "No multiplayer at launch, lazy dev." I know you enjoy the game and you want the others to know :D. But not being truthful still hurts their credibility if they want to make another game in the next few years.
I’m sure they will be fine and learn from the experience. Thankfully demographic of reddit/forum users willing to complain about games they didn’t buy is a loud, but small group.
|
I feel like the EVE model of MMO, PVE, PVP, mining, construction etc., combined with the planet/solarsystem/galaxy generation of NMS would make a pretty mindboggling game.
Anyone want to comment?
|
Well i play both games. If eve could be played as a first person game, with all of the element's of NMS mixed with the complexity and depth of eve - you would hit gaming utopia.
Personally i love eve, and am really enjoying NMS. It has the same eve feel, and tgat isn't a good thing for the average gamer. Like eve NMS makes you set your own goals, have your own accomplishments and dreams fulfilled in game. There are no quests, no stupid bench marks 'checkpoints'. Not having that leaves a ton of people feeling lost and unfulfilled.
|
On August 16 2016 22:29 Ota Solgryn wrote:
I feel like the EVE model of MMO, PVE, PVP, mining, construction etc., combined with the planet/solarsystem/galaxy generation of NMS would make a pretty mindboggling game.
Anyone want to comment?
Agreed, I said that same thing several pages ago. NMS has the basis for a great game, but the reality is it just has nothing interesting to do.
|
On August 16 2016 23:59 Darpa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 22:29 Ota Solgryn wrote:
I feel like the EVE model of MMO, PVE, PVP, mining, construction etc., combined with the planet/solarsystem/galaxy generation of NMS would make a pretty mindboggling game.
Anyone want to comment? Agreed, I said that same thing several pages ago. NMS has the basis for a great game, but the reality is it just has nothing interesting to do.
I dont think such a game would be ever made. EVE is already MASSIVE. No reason to invest 100+ mil in such a game when you can cash in with the garbage that is already sold
|
On August 17 2016 00:32 gingerfluffmuff wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2016 23:59 Darpa wrote:On August 16 2016 22:29 Ota Solgryn wrote:
I feel like the EVE model of MMO, PVE, PVP, mining, construction etc., combined with the planet/solarsystem/galaxy generation of NMS would make a pretty mindboggling game.
Anyone want to comment? Agreed, I said that same thing several pages ago. NMS has the basis for a great game, but the reality is it just has nothing interesting to do. I dont think such a game would be ever made. EVE is already MASSIVE. No reason to invest 100+ mil in such a game when you can cash in with the garbage that is already sold
All these flavors and you choose to be salty
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
