Seems like a lot of hype around this game but no thread apparently? I'm interested in TL's thoughts about this game, I don't own a PS4 but would consider playing this on PC.
Premise
No Man’s Sky is a game about exploration and survival in an infinite procedurally generated galaxy, coming to PS4 on August 9th in North America and August 10th in Europe, and on PC worldwide on August 12th.
probably my most anticipated game of 2016, so much so that im still considering pre-purchase for the dank upgraded ship despite my never-pre-purchase rule
On August 04 2016 02:55 KeksX wrote: My view? Probably gonna be a modern spore.
I know this reads like a negative -- underwhelming, cartoony, misleading promises and an incredibly ambitious scope, really goofy implementation of how certain creatures behave -- but if done correctly that's kind of what I'm looking forward to. Spore turned out to be disappointingly shallow and silly, but a more serious implementation of the procedural worlds/creatures/etc is a fascinating idea. That's what everyone said right before that game came out though, so we'll see how NMS truly turns out to be.
I've had my eyes and hopes on this game for a while now. I'm still waiting to see some preliminary reviews before I sink my teeth in but I'm very excited for next week. All it really needs to pull the whole thing together for me and keep me invested is the slightest aspect of progression and something to work toward. I really don't mind the aimless exploration aspect; I did it in Elite Dangerous for a while when I didn't feel like hauling cargo or dogfighting just because I love space and unique discoveries and the amazing visuals. And the "progression" for exploration in that game was almost non-existent, I just had to be in the right mood. If there's any feeling of parts or upgrades or ships to work toward where you can actually feel the difference every 10 or so in-game hours that's all I really want out of it. Combat and multiplayer and things like that are much lower priority for me in NMS than a lot of other people it seems. Purely a bonus if done well.
On August 04 2016 02:55 KeksX wrote: My view? Probably gonna be a modern spore.
I know this reads like a negative -- underwhelming, cartoony, misleading promises and an incredibly ambitious scope, really goofy implementation of how certain creatures behave -- but if done correctly that's kind of what I'm looking forward to. Spore turned out to be disappointingly shallow and silly, but a more serious implementation of the procedural worlds/creatures/etc is a fascinating idea. That's what everyone said right before that game came out though, so we'll see how NMS truly turns out to be.
I've had my eyes and hopes on this game for a while now. I'm still waiting to see some preliminary reviews before I sink my teeth in but I'm very excited for next week. All it really needs to pull the whole thing together for me and keep me invested is the slightest aspect of progression and something to work toward. I really don't mind the aimless exploration aspect; I did it in Elite Dangerous for a while when I didn't feel like hauling cargo or dogfighting just because I love space and unique discoveries and the amazing visuals. And the "progression" for exploration in that game was almost non-existent, I just had to be in the right mood. If there's any feeling of parts or upgrades or ships to work toward where you can actually feel the difference every 10 or so in-game hours that's all I really want out of it. Combat and multiplayer and things like that are much lower priority for me in NMS than a lot of other people it seems. Purely a bonus if done well.
The zeal with which they have tried to hide anything and everything makes me think its Spore in the bad way.
You can make the biggest sandbox ever but the hard part is making it a fun box to play in. That is where I expect the game to fail sadly
I find the entire discussion about the developers hiding things to be comical. I’ve been following this game since it was announced with reserved excitement and this is exactly what I knew was coming. They have been very up front with the scope of the game and what you are going to be doing.
My impression of the hype was that people saw the first pitch for the game and then just lets their imagination fill in all the things they wished would be in the game. I’ve seen it so many times with games before. But this isn’t a case of the developer actively deceiving people, since they have said over and over what they were trying to make without spoiling the whole things for people.
I remember seeing the preview on the E3 2015-stream, and thinking hey, this is pretty cool! However, after some guy bought an early copy and subsequently let out info that the game was rather shallow and the mechanics easilly exploitable, I've gotta say my expecations have dropped a lot. I'll probably wait for a while to buy it, in case there happens some drastic patching that improves upon what seems to be weaknesses.
On August 04 2016 05:05 plated.rawr wrote: I remember seeing the preview on the E3 2015-stream, and thinking hey, this is pretty cool! However, after some guy bought an early copy and subsequently let out info that the game was rather shallow and the mechanics easilly exploitable, I've gotta say my expecations have dropped a lot. I'll probably wait for a while to buy it, in case there happens some drastic patching that improves upon what seems to be weaknesses.
Spore as a comparison is what I fear, too.
From reports that guy found an exploit to earn money fast and just did that for 30 minutes at a time for the sole purpose of being the first one to make it to the center of the galaxy. Although it’s possible, its sounds like the worst way to play this game. And they could patch it out day one too.
So he got to the center without doing anything that would make the game enjoyable.
I think this one will be big and empty, like Mass Effect 1 on steroids empty, just without even a meaningful story to keep me engaged. You can't just procedurely generate a fine crafted game, it's too random, especially when the game seems so light weight in term of space taken.
As someone with a shit PC and no PS4 I'm waiting on reviews to see if I'm taking the plunge and getting a ps4. I've been following the game on and off and it looks like its either going to be a blast or boring as all hell, I don't see a middle ground.
On August 04 2016 05:03 Plansix wrote: I find the entire discussion about the developers hiding things to be comical. I’ve been following this game since it was announced with reserved excitement and this is exactly what I knew was coming. They have been very up front with the scope of the game and what you are going to be doing.
My impression of the hype was that people saw the first pitch for the game and then just lets their imagination fill in all the things they wished would be in the game. I’ve seen it so many times with games before. But this isn’t a case of the developer actively deceiving people, since they have said over and over what they were trying to make without spoiling the whole things for people.
What I mean is that a giant sandbox needs something to do in it. Crafting bases, ships, stations. Fighting things, trading with people. Just stuff to do.
And they have been very stringent in what they show. Ofcourse they want to not spoil people on story but I am off the belief that if you make a good game you want to show it off to people, you want to show the building, the fighting, the economies you interact with. Hiding it all ,akes people wonder just how much there is to do in this big sandbox.
Just being a sandbox is not interesting to most people.
On August 04 2016 05:03 Plansix wrote: I find the entire discussion about the developers hiding things to be comical. I’ve been following this game since it was announced with reserved excitement and this is exactly what I knew was coming. They have been very up front with the scope of the game and what you are going to be doing.
My impression of the hype was that people saw the first pitch for the game and then just lets their imagination fill in all the things they wished would be in the game. I’ve seen it so many times with games before. But this isn’t a case of the developer actively deceiving people, since they have said over and over what they were trying to make without spoiling the whole things for people.
What I mean is that a giant sandbox needs something to do in it. Crafting bases, ships, stations. Fighting things, trading with people. Just stuff to do.
And they have been very stringent in what they show. Ofcourse they want to not spoil people on story but I am off the belief that if you make a good game you want to show it off to people, you want to show the building, the fighting, the economies you interact with. Hiding it all ,akes people wonder just how much there is to do in this big sandbox.
Just being a sandbox is not interesting to most people.
It has stuff like that. There are space police, other ships. You can fight other ships. There is a whole alien language you can translate and who knows where that goes. There are warp gates, teleporters and other things. But yes, a game about exportation and discovery has to keep its cards close to its chest.
As someone who played the first Elite back in the day, this game is just the super pretty version of that game where you can finally get out of your ship. Not knowing what is out there is part of what I want from the game. There are people on the internet that like similar games to me, so I only need to hear if they like this game and I'll be ready to go.
On August 04 2016 05:05 plated.rawr wrote: I remember seeing the preview on the E3 2015-stream, and thinking hey, this is pretty cool! However, after some guy bought an early copy and subsequently let out info that the game was rather shallow and the mechanics easilly exploitable, I've gotta say my expecations have dropped a lot. I'll probably wait for a while to buy it, in case there happens some drastic patching that improves upon what seems to be weaknesses.
Spore as a comparison is what I fear, too.
From reports that guy found an exploit to earn money fast and just did that for 30 minutes at a time for the sole purpose of being the first one to make it to the center of the galaxy. Although it’s possible, its sounds like the worst way to play this game. And they could patch it out day one too.
So he got to the center without doing anything that would make the game enjoyable.
yeah. This seems like the time of game that I'd play when I got tired of making nerds cry in bw and making awesome posts
On August 04 2016 05:03 Plansix wrote: I find the entire discussion about the developers hiding things to be comical. I’ve been following this game since it was announced with reserved excitement and this is exactly what I knew was coming. They have been very up front with the scope of the game and what you are going to be doing.
My impression of the hype was that people saw the first pitch for the game and then just lets their imagination fill in all the things they wished would be in the game. I’ve seen it so many times with games before. But this isn’t a case of the developer actively deceiving people, since they have said over and over what they were trying to make without spoiling the whole things for people.
What I mean is that a giant sandbox needs something to do in it. Crafting bases, ships, stations. Fighting things, trading with people. Just stuff to do.
And they have been very stringent in what they show. Ofcourse they want to not spoil people on story but I am off the belief that if you make a good game you want to show it off to people, you want to show the building, the fighting, the economies you interact with. Hiding it all ,akes people wonder just how much there is to do in this big sandbox.
Just being a sandbox is not interesting to most people.
I guess to stay in the metaphore: you need to actually put sand in sandbox for it to be fun. Something people can shape - actually shape and not just name - something people have influence over. Something people can see and say "This is what I did/made/got!".
I fear that No Man's Sky will be more like a game where you go and say "Oh, that's neat. Huh." and then it will get your nametag and it's done.
On August 04 2016 05:03 Plansix wrote: I find the entire discussion about the developers hiding things to be comical. I’ve been following this game since it was announced with reserved excitement and this is exactly what I knew was coming. They have been very up front with the scope of the game and what you are going to be doing.
My impression of the hype was that people saw the first pitch for the game and then just lets their imagination fill in all the things they wished would be in the game. I’ve seen it so many times with games before. But this isn’t a case of the developer actively deceiving people, since they have said over and over what they were trying to make without spoiling the whole things for people.
What I mean is that a giant sandbox needs something to do in it. Crafting bases, ships, stations. Fighting things, trading with people. Just stuff to do.
And they have been very stringent in what they show. Ofcourse they want to not spoil people on story but I am off the belief that if you make a good game you want to show it off to people, you want to show the building, the fighting, the economies you interact with. Hiding it all ,akes people wonder just how much there is to do in this big sandbox.
Just being a sandbox is not interesting to most people.
It has stuff like that. There are space police, other ships. You can fight other ships. There is a whole alien language you can translate and who knows where that goes. There are warp gates, teleporters and other things. But yes, a game about exportation and discovery has to keep its cards close to its chest.
As someone who played the first Elite back in the day, this game is just the super pretty version of that game where you can finally get out of your ship. Not knowing what is out there is part of what I want from the game. There are people on the internet that like similar games to me, so I only need to hear if they like this game and I'll be ready to go.
I don't know if the bolded part is true. Minecraft, exploration and discovery, is fairly public about enchanting / fighting / porting to the underworld etc. Fallout 4? Exploration and discovery. Not shy about gun modding / skill trees / basebbuilding etc. Firewatch? Exploration and discovery. Very clear that it's a narrative and not resource-based. Starbound / Subnautica / Skyrim etc etc, also not shy about showing us what they're about before they're actually released.
These games are often about exploring, finding resources, and returning with resources to make your shit more fucking swag than it was before. What's making people uneasy, I suppose, is that they have only shown the exploring and acquiring resources (...sort of?) parts without showing what you're doing with them, which is the "fun" part in a gamers-live-vicariously sort of way.
This game looks gorgeous and has a lot of hype surrounding it, but I'm super definitely not going to pick it up unless I end up hearing it's what I want it to be, and not what it looks like.
I'm pretty sure the developers have been pretty clear that this is a niche title, a small studio isn't going to have the resources to create deep mechanics in a massive procedural game like this.
Personally, while it looks shiny, since becoming a software engineer I've become a lot more aware of what appropriate expectations are. I think this is a really cool idea for a game but one that I honestly don't think will appeal to me, definitely not at full AAA price. Nor do I think it will sell like a normal AAA, if they hit half a million in sales these guys will have done phenomenally well for such a small team.
It's going to be pretty similar to The Witness in that respect I think. I loved that game, but I know plenty who felt like it wasn't what they thought it was going to be or seemed to like the idea in principle but not in practice.
I haven't looked at any of the leaked footage or read any discussions about it, but honest don't feel I need to, talk of bugs and shallow mechanics doesn't really surprise me. The bugs and balance should hopefully be sorted but anyone who thought this would have a massive amount of depth simply extrapolated too much from the marketing material.
People need to start looking at these things for what they are, not what they want them to be, that's how you avoid the hype train.
The price tag is going to be a deterrent for me. Even when they first showed it, I didn't expect they would ask a full "AAA release" price for it. It just seemed like a fun little game, but it got hyped to absurd levels through not much fault of the developers'. People are just thirsty for the ultimate space sim nowadays, and so far nobody has been able to provide it. I thought it was pretty obvious from the get-go that NMS would focus on the world building and less on the actual things to do in the game.
So the website still says Aug 12th, however, Steam is saying Aug 9th, i wish Hello Games would just give us a straight answer here. I wouldn't mind waiting a few extra days, which would give me time to read some reviews, but i don't like being left in the dark dammit!