Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: IPAndrews on July 12, 2016, 03:30:14 pm
-
By the by, anyone waiting for No Man's Sky?
-
You need to pre-purchase No Man's Sky.
-
There's already a thread about this game: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=86267.0
-
There's already a thread about this game: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=86267.0
First post in 2013, most recent post in October 2015. Yikes, this game is a long time coming, huh.
-
Yep. And there has been a lot of stupid rumours on how this was "just like Star Citizen" because of that. I've argued with stupid little people on the internets who insisted Hello Games promised a release on "late 2014" (no such thing ever happened).
It very much was the opposite. They never went to Kickstarter to ask money for a given deadline / product; they never promised a deadline (until a few months ago) for they even went on to say that they knew they wouldn't be able to deliver timely; all the hype was third party (they barely marketed it themselves, all the talk was done by drooling fans or games media, whenever people asked them more news, they would reply with "We're working hard on the game, that is all"); It seems we're actually getting the game now that it is gone Gold.
Will the game live up to the hype? I dare say no chance. The hype is too high. Fortunately, I've always been very positive about this game but I think I've also been realistic about the game: I think it will be fun and boring at the same time. And I love that combination. It will be a fun indie game. At 60 bucks however, it means I won't be buying it anytime soon. Sorry, no game is worth 60 bucks given the amount of money I make.
-
Lets see if they can make it happen on August 9 like they promise. August 10 in my country actually. If they have made a steam page for it, im hoping this one will be the real release date.
-
Well, the game is done, it's gold, they are in the process of distribution so any delays that might come are different in nature than the one that preceded it.
Anyways, I'm definitely sure I'll be able to play it by halloween time.
-
If we were still living in the days of demos I might be willing to pre-order this, but yes, $60 is a little much to put down on a game I can't test. Looks good, I'll wait for a GOG sale on this one.
-
You try it on steam, 2 hours for a refund.
-
If we were still living in the days of demos I might be willing to pre-order this, but yes, $60 is a little much to put down on a game I can't test. Looks good, I'll wait for a GOG sale on this one.
Processor: Core i3
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics: NVidia GTX 480
Hard Drive: 10 GB
Mouse, Keyboard
Unless you have a very old laptop I guess it would run fine.
Of course I still wouldn't preorder it because I don't like preorders, but a day 7 buy might be possible.
-
That hard drive really stands out in that build. It's like a BMW on bycicle tires.
-
That hard drive really stands out in that build. It's like a BMW on bycicle tires.
Meh, it's probably mostly textures... And still like half the size of most modern MMOs.
-
my bad, I read it like it was a build. I'm really stupid, derp.
-
So that guy who bought a leaked copy of the game for $2000 has now finished it. (https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyTheGame/comments/4va7ve/the_spoilersleaks_megathread/d5yg3u9) It took him about 30 hours to finish, exhausting most of the game's content in that time; he reckons you could speedrun it in 12 hours. It's certainly not the 'hundreds of hours' promised by Sean Murray.
-
Looks like he used the Atlas Stone to get that done, however. Many things he says look like as if it's a dev's build. Two full weeks version before even getting to Gold? Nah.
Upon visiting a local supermarket yesterday with my 4 year old (needed a present because she was going to a friends bday party) I got extremely lucky. When we passed the dvd/games section i saw a big popup display with tadaaa, NMS for PS4. And an employee lady was stocking it.
I didn't hestitate a second. I picked a copy, smiled at the lady, and got my ass to the cashier ASAP. My poor daughter was clueless =) (but daddy the present? In a minute baby in a minute).
I pay for the game, and in the second the cashier hands me the game and receipt, a coworker comes over and says these are not to be sold yet... yadayada. Seeing how i already payed for it, had the game and receipt, i kinda felt sorry for the employee about to get bullied by a supervisor, but hey, i payed for it.
I don't buy this story one word of it. Pure bollocks.
-
He said he held off exploiting the stone in favour of exhausting the available content, which he still managed within 30 hours. I guess you can argue that it's a dev build where faction rep and whatever else was made much easier to grind for, but even so; if it got stamped on a disc then I doubt it's missing any actual content from the final game, dev build or otherwise.
-
Game mechanics are content in themselves. Playing Doom with IDDQD or IDKFA is somewhat different than playing without it. I'm not "defending" the game, I'm attacking this idiot, who is clearly lying and profiting from this leak (his videos are monetised for ****s sake).
I look forward for good reviews.
-
His videos were taken down within a few hours of being put up and then rehosted by a ton of different people, so there's no way he's making any income out of Youtube monetisation here. I am sorry, Luis, I should not have insulted your deeply-held religious beliefs in this thread.
-
Regardless of your banter (crazy religious nut that I am, vowing to not even buy the game until it costs way less than the current price tag... put me in that Star Citizen bag of people who spends tens of thousands right away!), I'm confused here. So the guy went to the shop and bought the game out of a mistake... but it cost 2000$? Bah, nevermind, I'm not going to read all that crazy thread - btw I think I saw Dragon in there trying to hype freespace 2, lol.
Regarding monetization. Don't you find it egregious though? Let's leak a game through youtube and vimeo and twitch and wherever I can, and while showcasing all the bugs and issues with the game in a completely assholeish and illegal manner, I'm gonna also monetize from all the attention I'm sure to get.
Be dismissive all you want, I don't like this kind of source. I also despise reviews that come exactly at day 1 with the reviewers having gone through the game for 40 hours straight with little sleep and then at the end better write cogent words with correct grammar! Impossible shenanigans, which have a poor rate of actually getting the game correctly analysed. SO, I'll wait for actual good reviewers to check the game out a week or a couple of them after the game gets out. Honest, calm, incisive and thought out reviews. Then I'll trust someone's judgement.
If that's being religious, then I'm a total fanatic.
-
Regarding monetization. Don't you find it egregious though? Let's leak a game through youtube and vimeo and twitch and wherever I can, and while showcasing all the bugs and issues with the game in a completely assholeish and illegal manner, I'm gonna also monetize from all the attention I'm sure to get.
I'm not sure where you're getting all this stuff about monetisation, I've seen no mention of it. Given that all his videos have been taken down by strikes from Sony, and that the video hosts are notorious for withdrawing monetisation at the first whiff of trouble from a big rights-holder, I can't believe he made a penny from this, let alone covered the cost he paid for the game. He also bought the leaked copy off ebay, I have no idea where that story you quoted came from.
This is exactly the **** I've seen Star Citizen fans pull, accusing anyone critical of the game of just being a cynical pundit only in it for the multi-dollar profits they stand to get off the YouTube views. It's ridiculous coming from them and it's ridiculous coming from you.
-
It's not "a story I came up with". It's something I saw myself. When I saw one of the videos he posted, first thing that spawned was a 15 second ad.
This is exactly the **** I've seen Star Citizen fans pull, accusing anyone critical of the game of just being a cynical pundit only in it for the multi-dollar profits they stand to get off the YouTube views. It's ridiculous coming from them and it's ridiculous coming from you.
.... and we're done. I have no patience for continuous unjustified douchebaggery. You're the one trying to reach for conclusions based on leaked shenanigans. I will justify why I'm treating No Man's Sky differently and then I'll shut up because I really am not in the mood for this.
Star Citizen releases their own substandard pile of goo while demanding fans to continue to "fund the dream". To me, this is not about a game in a bad shape, it's about a practice of con artistry akin to a cultish religion who demands ever more money from the believers, all the while feeding them with jpegs and really horrible alphas, adding "dreams" on top of "dreams", always cutting back on promises and deadlines. If Star Citizen was developing exactly the way it is but without the horrible fleecing of their fanbase I would perhaps smugly smile at their failures but I'd still hope they'd do good and be hopeful at the end product. As it is, it's more than unethical, it's patently a horror show, with the potential to wipe out a lot of good will from many gamers into the industry and new "dreamful" projects that might come.
NMS is something a small team of developers came up with, a lot of third party hype was built and now everyone's expecting this godlike gameplay from the developers of... Joe Danger. It's ridiculous. I've always been a fan of this concept and the promise of the game but even I never thought this would be something on par with any AAA game (thus why I think 60 bucks for it is an insane price tag). They barely made any marketing for the game (unlike SC), they merely promised a really small amount of things to be in there (unlike SC), and, more importantly than everything else, they spent their own ****ing money to build it. Yes, they aren't fleecing anyone to do this. It's their project. They will either skyrocket into stardom or they will flop massively. On their own. I have tremendous more respect for this approach, as it should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain.
So when I'm being skeptical about *ANY* claims (be them ultra mega positive or negative) regarding NMS before the release and a calm thoughtful review, when I even make the obvious claim that I'm not putting any money into this before it comes down a notch and the game has been deemed worthy by some common standards in the critic scene, you then compare me with the religious nutcases of Star Citizen who are defending the horrible practices that they are making despite any evidence we show them to the contrary.
If this is not douchebaggery I really wonder what constitutes it. I'm done discussing this with you.
-
Did it ever occur to you that the ad was there due to an automatic contentID claim that instead of taking the video down monetised it for the copyright owner? Sure it wouldn't make sense to have the system auto-monetise claimed content instead of taking it down but maybe it was set up that way in advance before any leaks went through?
Hell, the claim didn't even have to come from NMS, could've been any random piece of music used. ContentID is notoriously aggressive.
-
Many things can occur to one's mind. Excuse me while I'm skeptical about someone with multiple stories and incoherent explanations that smell like lies to me and instead wait for actual official channels to either confirm or deny problems with the game. Perhaps you also want to classify this behavior as religiously nutty. If so, let me know so I can ignore you as well.
-
It's just beyond ridiculous that you think this was a big moneymaking scheme aiming to get advertising revenue off the videos. It takes about 5 seconds to realise why that would never work.
-
I never said it was a "big moneymaking" whatever. I was questioning the uploader's ethics and listing things I had witnessed. Welcome to my ignore list.
-
Thank ****, maybe now I can talk to someone who isn't a paranoid fanboy.
-
I think the game will live up to my expectations.
-
This is definitely a game I'm looking forward too. But I love exploration games.
Per Daymeun's videos. (Don't think I spelled his handle correctly.) He uploaded a new video yesterday that clarified a bunch of things and gave an honest review. Overall he says the game is worth it and what is truly telling is that he talks about how he's still playing it and still enjoying it even though he already made it to the center. He also goes over the method he used to get to the center so quickly and it really seems he didn't do much in the way of "trying to exploit all available content". But that's neither here nor there, because after reaching the center, he still plays the game... Which is arguably more the point of the game; to explore planets and solar systems.
For me, getting to the center is interesting and I'm a little curious as to what's there.. but what really gets me excited is when I'm watching the videos and they zoom out to the stars on the map. Usually in the videos it's Sean talking about how you can get to any of them or guys talking about the sheer number of planets in the game.. but all I'm doing is staring at one or two of them just wondering what's there. What will the planets be like? Watery? Volcanic? Desolate? What else can I find? Will there be giant fish/sharks? Small land animals? Harsh weather? I want to know!
-
Sony have not distributed review copies (https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/4wcd32/no_mans_sky_street_date_broken_by_retailers/d6641sf).
-
I've been watching a stream for most of the day as I've been texturing... The game still looks like great fun.
The rumor why review codes haven't been sent it is due to a pending patch. But who knows. Game looks fun to me, but then I only discovered it like a few weeks ago. I haven't had years and years to get my expectations unobtainable high.
-
What I've seen of the game looks pretty cool, honestly, I just think Hello and Sony may not have had the best of intentions in letting the hype train hurtle out of control and revealing almost no information that might reign it in.
-
What I've seen of the game looks pretty cool, honestly, I just think Hello and Sony may not have had the best of intentions in letting the hype train hurtle out of control and revealing almost no information that might reign it in.
No doubt... and the PC version of the game was just officially delayed from the 9th to the 12th, which kinda feels like a Sony decision.
-
The hype is really badly managed. Instead of advertizing a cool game with a very neat and novel concept, they let everyone hype it as the "big ****ing amazing game for all eternity" kind of ****, without anyone calming everyone down. It was utterly intentional, as it is obvious from the price tag, which is ridiculously high, for a game that should be seen squarely as being between "indie" and "AAA".
Instead we got lots of interviews of Sean Murray with the interviewers basically comparing him to Carmack or Einstein. That's totally not going to be counter productive at all.
-
Indeed. I see it as an exploration game. One that has few limits on how much you can explore. I don't expect the space combat to be better than ever. I certainly don't expect the story to be groundbreaking. Luckily, I rather enjoy games that are mostly about discovery and upgrades.
-
Sony have not distributed review copies (https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/4wcd32/no_mans_sky_street_date_broken_by_retailers/d6641sf).
This has actually been going back and forth (http://thisgengaming.com/2016/08/01/publications-might-not-receive-no-mans-sky-advanced-copies-prior-to-launch/) for a while (https://twitter.com/Open_Critic/status/760494661907513345). Looks like the latest word is that there will be advance review copies, but on Monday.
-
Please pardon the double post, but it looks like any conclusions drawn based on pre-release gameplay may be obsolete (http://www.no-mans-sky.com/2016/08/update-1-03/).
-
That's really cool! I've been enjoying the hype train drama a lot, but I am excited to see what this game could be and if that patch isn't all hot air then this is really, really admirable support from the studio.
-
It is pretty much exactly what I expected it would be:
To quote one of the comments: "I expected this game to be a pile of boring **** filled with pointless busywork and planet after planet of samey looking procedurally generated unfulfilling nonsense. Believe me when I say from the very bottom of my blackened little heart that I wished to be proven wrong more than anything. Just this once I wanted to have my nay saying face rubbed into it. My visage however looks to remain completely unblemished. And this makes me genuinely sad."
I honestly didn't understood the hype going into this game. There was no way it would ever deliver on 10% of it.
-
I like the Simon Stålenhag cover art. Other than that, it seems to basically be Space Engineers but without the building things.
-
It's very different from Space Engineers, that's for sure.
-
So yeah it turns out that despite vague promises that you would be able to meet other players, you can't, at least in the current state of the game. This has of course pushed the fanbase straight back into the upper dramasphere.
-
Yes, SE is actually fun.
No vague promises about the multiplayer though, just way too vague denials of multiplayer being a thing.
-
Yeah... Sean Murray could have done a metric crapton better handling the questions pertaining to multiplayer
Vagueness leads to interpretation leads to assumptions leads to people taking the piss on your carefully constructed creation
Course, the gaming community on both sides of attack and defense of Sean Murray could do for a little toning down.
I'm on the cusp of buying this game, but it seems like there's some ironing out and more research required before I do. I expected a 3D Starbound with the goal of needing to meet up with people as per Sean Murray's descriptions of how meeting players goes
Now it's currently just Starbound LITE. But hey! Base building is apparently going to be a thing eventually. That is, if it doesn't completely destroy the servers in the process
I was excited about this three years ago. Not so much anymore, but still considering it as I wait for the kinks to be unkinked
-
I would have been a lot more interested in this game without the AAA pricetag, when Space Engine is free. I realize the comparison is ridiculous, but still. Definitely a "I'll wait for a sale" thing. But still, I do like the style that I've seen so far.
-
I would have been a lot more interested in this game without the AAA pricetag, when Space Engine is free. I realize the comparison is ridiculous, but still. Definitely a "I'll wait for a sale" thing. But still, I do like the style that I've seen so far.
I believe they're comparing it to "Space Engineers" which is more of a game than "Space Engine" and does have a pricetag. But I agree that $60 is a bit much for my palate.
-
The last game I paid $60 for was a N64 cartridge. Unless you count total spent on songs in Rocksmith.
Now I wish I had my old N64 to go back and play that game again.
-
Turns out they bungled the pc port. Wait for the patches and enjoy the internet outrage for now.
-
So very true
The steam page salt is real. So very real
-
Whose bright idea was it to make you press and hold for every single interaction in the game? I'm one of the lucky ones not having any real technical problems with the game, but all these little UI problems add up to one big clunky mess.
-
That's a Destiny thing, a ****load of the UI is basically a Destiny tribute album.
-
I've heard all (most) of the problems being experienced are from people using nVidia cards. nVidia is releasing a driver update for NMS (can't remember when, check /r/gaming or /r/pcmasterrace on reddit, that's probably where I heard about it.
-
I've heard all (most) of the problems being experienced are from people using nVidia cards. nVidia is releasing a driver update for NMS (can't remember when, check /r/gaming or /r/pcmasterrace on reddit, that's probably where I heard about it.
Which is really weird considering that NMS is apparently an OpenGL game.
-
Ah, alright, I went and checked my reddit history, it was /r/Games, sorry.
There's a pattern here - the steam reviews.
People with AMD - game is great, don't know what people are talking about with stuttering etc.
People with Nvidia - game stutters and crashes full of problems game is ****.
Fully expect Nvidia to push a driver update in the next couple of days - they're usually pretty quick when there's an obvious issue.
(obviously this doesn't fix issues with porting controls etc, but there's a definite divide inexperience)
Edit: A lot of people are responding with their own experiences, some confirm my suggestion, others flow against it.
As I've said in another comment, I merely noticed a correlation in the reviews on steam and found it noteworthy. There are definitely positive reviews on there, and it seems to be a real 'yay or nay' thing, either the game runs great or it falls over. That strongly correlated with card manufacturers at the time of my posting my initial observation.
The patch afterwards may have affected things for some, who knows. I suppose only time will tell what the cause of people's issues are.
-
They also apparently compiled it with SSE4.1 enabled, which means that those great optimists of the world who tried to run the game on 5 year old AMD CPUs have been left very disappointed.
-
That's a Destiny thing, a ****load of the UI is basically a Destiny tribute album.
This kinda makes me laugh given the part where Sean Murray told people not to expect Destiny and if they were, to play that instead because it's a great game
-
Honestly, I'm rather enjoying this game. I only found it recently, so my hype level never skyrocketed like some folk.
I love exploration games. I don't mind a grind focused on exploration and then upgrades. I find the game rather relaxing! I also so much prefer games that are not online multiplayer. The only online game I play regularly is Splatoon and that hardly even counts because it's multiplayer is basically single player with humans instead of bad AI. (No voice chat, no advanced matchmaking, etc... just click play, get thrown on a random team and fight.)
Yeah many of the planets feel samey, but every once in a while you find a true gem of a world and it's just fantastic. Scenic vistas, weirdly interesting flora & fauna... just super relaxing to pander around looking for the resources I need to get some upgrade. I love it. There's also this article (http://www.wired.com/2016/08/no-mans-sky-review/) which some people are claiming was a paid review, but whatever. It sums up many of my thoughts on the game.
Oh, and my kids are just in AWE at being able to fly around the universe. Can't really beat the fun that comes from my kids getting really into watching me play the game.
-
There's nothing wrong with a single-player game, there's plenty wrong with repeatedly saying there'll be multiplayer and then silently removing it.
-
I don't know that that's necessarily what happened. I kinda browsed the old interviews and never saw anything that was truly specific that multiplayer would be actual p2p style like an MMO. I could have missed it though.
-
Sure, he never promised extensive multiplayer. But he did say, outright, that if you and another player ended up in the same place on the same planet you'd both be able to see each other, something which has been shown to be completely untrue.
-
I'd be interested in reading that interview and seeing what else he said then.
Most conclusive thing I could find was this article that included links.
http://www.idigitaltimes.com/no-mans-sky-multiplayer-controversy-explained-server-issues-crushing-online-features-550145
-
Since you asked
-
Sure, he never promised extensive multiplayer. But he did say, outright, that if you and another player ended up in the same place on the same planet you'd both be able to see each other, something which has been shown to be completely untrue.
It has shown to be untrue in that particular case, but that is not an indication of the feature being removed but only an indication that it doesn't work. There is a distinction between "Not working, as intended" and "Not working as intended" and people are doubling down on the former for ... why?
-
I'm sure it could just be a technical issue rather than a deliberate omission, but Murray's response to being asked about it was unbelievably evasive and definitely pushed people towards believing the latter.
-
Sure, he never promised extensive multiplayer. But he did say, outright, that if you and another player ended up in the same place on the same planet you'd both be able to see each other, something which has been shown to be completely untrue.
It has shown to be untrue in that particular case, but that is not an indication of the feature being removed but only an indication that it doesn't work. There is a distinction between "Not working, as intended" and "Not working as intended" and people are doubling down on the former for ... why?
Agreed, but, it's possible to infer that multiplayer was removed from the features at the last minute from the fact that copies of the game ship with a sticker changing it from a multiplayer game to a single player game (https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/08/11/no-mans-sky-online-play-sticker/).
-
The problem is that, from that same RPS article:
However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that online play – or more specifically the ability to see other players – is cut content as some players assume. “Online play” could just as easily refer to the shared planet names, a feature that’s present in the game and allows you to see planets discovered by others and what names they’ve given to it and its creatures. Perhaps Hello Games later decided the icon was misleading and appealed PEGI’s decision in order to have it changed, or perhaps they printed the box with their best guess before getting a rating from PEGI. Or perhaps the ability to see other players is in the game and simply not working currently because of the server load, as implied.
(Also, woohoo for the profileration of RPS! :P)
-
Interesting. I'm curious what the dates on those interviews are. I'd more bet that the multiplayer was removed or cut during development... they did only have a team of like 10 people working on this game. Either way though, it's not like Sean and Hello Games is the new Peter Molyneux.
Aside from the multiplayer aspect, in my short time of being aware of the game, the trailers and stuff on IGN were pretty accurate to what I'm doing now in the game. Of course, it's also easier for me to overlook the multiplayer stuff because I just don't care for it. But I'm not also going to jump on the "Sean Murray is the worst liar who ever lived" bandwagon.
It also seems to be a bit ambiguous why the players didn't see each other still... so yeah, I'm not jumping on that bandwagon and being a part of the worst of the internet.
-
The problem with this game is that the developers went all "IT'S PROCEDURALY MADE (http://vid.pr0gramm.com/2016/08/15/5322c9ed537c76b8.mp4)" and failed to account for the million flaws such a system has. The code does not account for: Gravity, Environment, Predation, Diet, Evolution...
You never see a procedural video game even try to make animals look like they have a common ancestry from which they split into Phylium or division, subphylium, superclass, clade, family, species, etc.
Due to different mutations that adapted them to gravity (having six legs or a really strong tail and two legs), environment (ex: water sacs in their bodies or four stomachs), food (Carnivore, herbivore, omnivore...) and vestigial traits from their predecessors. Some animals develop better muscles to run away from predators, others develop claws to climb trees or cave ceilings where they are relatively safe... until a predator develops a counter-response.
There simply won't be a code-made game that accounts for that on the fly because the devs go for one thing: Make it cool and cheap. It's never made with love and care.
-
The problem with this game is that the developers went all "IT'S PROCEDURALY MADE (http://vid.pr0gramm.com/2016/08/15/5322c9ed537c76b8.mp4)" and failed to account for the million flaws such a system has. The code does not account for: Gravity, Environment, Predation, Diet, Evolution...
You never see a procedural video game even try to make animals look like they have a common ancestry from which they split into Phylium or division, subphylium, superclass, clade, family, species, etc.
Due to different mutations that adapted them to gravity (having six legs or a really strong tail and two legs), environment (ex: water sacs in their bodies or four stomachs), food (Carnivore, herbivore, omnivore...) and vestigial traits from their predecessors. Some animals develop better muscles to run away from predators, others develop claws to climb trees or cave ceilings where they are relatively safe... until a predator develops a counter-response.
There simply won't be a code-made game that accounts for that on the fly because the devs go for one thing: Make it cool and cheap. It's never made with love and care.
To be fair, from a programming standpoint, this would be immensely complex to implement, perhaps prohibitively. It's basically a simulated evolutionary biology engine, something that would be groundbreaking in its own right as a scientific tool. I wouldn't expect something like this to exist with any kind of accuracy within 5, maybe even 10 years.
It's one thing to even program it, but it also has to procedurally render the resulting creatures accurately according to the parameters that are calculated by the evolution algorithms. We know this is possible, but doing it well is a very different story. When designing a game, you do what you can with what you have first and foremost. Then you iterate and over time these more advanced aspirations become doable as tech and practice progresses.
Remember Spore? It originally had the lofty aim of doing almost exactly this, if not to as fine a detail level as you're probably thinking. Instead, it delivered Penis Creature Studio. And that wasn't even a game trying to also be a seamless space exploration sim (well, maybe in its very earliest rumors, but that died off quickly IIRC).
I haven't played No Man's Sky, but will probably check it out in several years when it's cheap, my system is more than capable of running it, and there are (hopefully) interesting mods for it. Most new games are relatively **** at release compared to how they mature with age if the support is good and they have modding accessibility.
-
If you're playing No Man's Sky for the creature variety alone, you're not going to be terribly thrilled. Sure, all the creatures are different than on some other planet, but the basic creatures exist pretty similarly throughout. There's usually some sort of multi-legged spider crab, several varieties of 4-legged mammals/reptiles (usually one that has taller legs in front than in back), a couple upright kangaroo/t-rex's depending on how they got put together by the algorithm.. etc. They may have different horns/spikes/colors/heads/legs/size, but their functionally the same thing as on the last planet.
The real fun is when the algorithm spits out a perfectly beautiful landscape, populated by just the right assembly of creatures, with nice weather, and plenty of upgrades to find. I've run across two of those planets so far and they were so fun to run around on. Here's a video of one of my first (long) play sessions. Skip to about 2:29:00. That's when I head to and land on one of my favorite planets I've found. I was on the planet for a while, so you may want to skip around. There's a stretch of lake exploration at about 3 hours.. an interesting creature at 3:34.. and a wonderful view of the pink and orange colored planet at about 3:56-58.
I know that one of the stars on my path is home to yet another great planet.. I just gotta get there! If every planet where like these, suddenly the game would be a lot less interesting to me. Rule of overabundance or something, I guess.
I don't think this game is for everyone.. but I do think a lot of the hate is a little unfounded. People should just sit back and enjoy the good parts of the game! Or.. if it's not worth the price of admission, then watch the good parts on YouTube! There's some real beauty here, regardless of whether or not the game has depth of mechanic or actual multiplayer.
-
Alternatively, throw in the 60$ and give it a test go. Sure, two hours isn't exactly a lot of time and this game is definitely one that'll require more to justify anything, but that's entirely an option on Steam to do
I equate NMS to being like Starbound LITE in the sense that there's a vast universe for you to explore and it's up to you to just explore it because you want to
Least, earlier editions of Starbound. Course, I explored planets to find civilizations I could PLUNDER AND DESTROY AND THROW INTO MY PIXEL PRINTER. Now I just scan things peacefully instead of outright, complete, utter annihilation.
-
The problem with this game is that the developers went all "IT'S PROCEDURALY MADE (http://vid.pr0gramm.com/2016/08/15/5322c9ed537c76b8.mp4)" and failed to account for the million flaws such a system has. The code does not account for: Gravity, Environment, Predation, Diet, Evolution...
You never see a procedural video game even try to make animals look like they have a common ancestry from which they split into Phylium or division, subphylium, superclass, clade, family, species, etc.
Due to different mutations that adapted them to gravity (having six legs or a really strong tail and two legs), environment (ex: water sacs in their bodies or four stomachs), food (Carnivore, herbivore, omnivore...) and vestigial traits from their predecessors. Some animals develop better muscles to run away from predators, others develop claws to climb trees or cave ceilings where they are relatively safe... until a predator develops a counter-response.
There simply won't be a code-made game that accounts for that on the fly because the devs go for one thing: Make it cool and cheap. It's never made with love and care.
People do try this a lot and there's a reason it doesn't work: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/TynanSylvester/20130602/193462/The_Simulation_Dream.php
-
Cute spiky armadillo backed lizard tailed web footed demon horned dog. :)
-
You can find alien dogs in it? Why did no one mention this?!
Now where's my credit card
-
Warning, the second part is quite loud.
-
The team programmed some of the physics for aesthetic reasons. For instance, Duncan insisted on permitting moons to orbit closer to their planets than Newtonian physics would allow. When he desired the possibility of green skies, the team had to redesign the periodic table to create atmospheric particles that would diffract light at just the right wavelength.
Source (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/02/artificial-universe-no-mans-sky/463308/)
How did we not see that this guy was making it all up? Chris Roberts wishes he could spin tall tales as well as this guy. Am I the only one that finds this hilariously implausible?
Go to this Reddit thread (https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyTheGame/comments/4y046e/wheres_the_nms_we_were_sold_on_heres_a_big_list/) if you want to read about all the features that people have figured out are in the trailers that are still on the Steam page but are nowhere to be found in the game that shipped.
-
I read through that list earlier today. Some of it has a lot of credence but some of it is reeaaaaallly nitpicky. Take for example this one.
"Maintaining Wanted Level Indoors" - "Footage of a wanted level not being cleared by entering a structure."
That's such a minor thing and clearly something changed during development because Hello Games thought the game would be more fun this way... or perhaps at least more playable? At least 1/4 of the list on reddit is this kind of nitpicky thing that refuses to take actual game development into account. Same thing happens with movies and trailers... there are often scenes in trailers that don't make it into the final cut of the movie.
Another thing on the list is reflective cockpit glass. That's not a feature.. that's just eye candy.
-
Yeah, and then there are big, noticeable things like this:
"The physics of every other game—it’s faked,” the chief architect Sean Murray explained. “When you’re on a planet, you’re surrounded by a skybox—a cube that someone has painted stars or clouds onto. If there is a day to night cycle, it happens because they are slowly transitioning between a series of different boxes."
"With us,” Murray continued, “when you're on a planet, you can see as far as the curvature of that planet. If you walked for years, you could walk all the way around it, arriving back exactly where you started. Our day to night cycle is happening because the planet is rotating on its axis as it spins around the sun. There is real physics to that. We have people that will fly down from a space station onto a planet and when they fly back up, the station isn't there anymore; the planet has rotated. People have filed that as a bug.”
Source, again (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/02/artificial-universe-no-mans-sky/463308/)
Anyway, apparently new nVidia drivers are out, so I will have to give this game another chance - tomorrow.
-
Was just about to share that list actually, reading through it myself
That's such a minor thing and clearly something changed during development because Hello Games thought the game would be more fun this way... or perhaps at least more playable?
I don't know, being able to blast open a steel door and then just casually waltz inside with the robots going "Welp, he got away" is sorta weird. I mean, why even have robots defending the place if they give up the moment someone goes indoors?
It's a gameplay element change that doesn't make much sense
Course, I can't shoot inside either, so maybe that's something to do with it. Why can't I shoot inside buildings?
Sidenote: The flying IS JUST THE GOD DAMNED WORST. If I want to fly ten feet off the ground LET ME FLY TEN FEET OFF THE GROUND. If and when I crash, it'll be my fault! Stop imposing weird restrictions on me game!
However mjn, I thought of the least as being more comprehensive than it was nitpicky. Small changes are still changes (if you add enough of them up, it's cumulatively a large change) and still relevant to the discussion of what was pitched, and what we got
-
Sidenote: The flying IS JUST THE GOD DAMNED WORST. If I want to fly ten feet off the ground LET ME FLY TEN FEET OFF THE GROUND. If and when I crash, it'll be my fault! Stop imposing weird restrictions on me game!
This is the review I needed. Nothing else in this thread has made me decide to not purchase this game, at least until there's a fantastic sale, and even then maybe not...
-
Another thing on the list is reflective cockpit glass. That's not a feature.. that's just eye candy.
Not reflective glass, but translucent. Cockpits were supposed to be visible from outside, but the canopy is opaque. By the way, the post was deleted for some reason, here's an archived version: https://archive.is/V5Zns
-
This is the review I needed. Nothing else in this thread has made me decide to not purchase this game, at least until there's a fantastic sale, and even then maybe not...
You literally have no idea how my brain melts everytime I instinctively try to pitch downwards to find a suitable landing space only to be forced to level out at some height that's too high so I have no bloody clue where I'll be landing when I hit the magical "E" button
Maybe the devs were cutting corners in regards to collision physics or something, I don't know. I just know that if I want to run into a Down Syndrome Goat, I will smash into that thing like nothing else matters! But no, game won't let me do that
Game will also occasionally send me into space when I take off from the planet's surface. That's always entirely amusing however
-
Sidenote: The flying IS JUST THE GOD DAMNED WORST. If I want to fly ten feet off the ground LET ME FLY TEN FEET OFF THE GROUND. If and when I crash, it'll be my fault! Stop imposing weird restrictions on me game!
So the simple planetary flying just for the hell of it that I did in Elite yesterday isn't possible?
-
Bad flight mechanics and no shooting indoors (lol, WHAT the **** is that?) are definitely insta-dealbreakers for me for a game that is little other than flying around exploring, from the sound of it.
-
So the simple planetary flying just for the hell of it that I did in Elite yesterday isn't possible?
You're forced to fly at a certain height from the ground and trying to see what "?" P.O.I. becomes a mess of rolling around
I haven't discovered free look yet, I'd imagine it's in there, haven't found it
Landing is a pain. Here's examples of wtf landing moments
(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13987531_10157198218070167_339305865226932952_o.jpg)
(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/13988159_10157198219925167_3247065746016866416_o.jpg)
(https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-8/14066295_10157198220470167_8120977243047660660_o.jpg)
But all that relatively flat area? Na, unsuitable. Lets stick your ship in a rock now
-
Remember Spore? It originally had the lofty aim of doing almost exactly this, if not to as fine a detail level as you're probably thinking. Instead, it delivered Penis Creature Studio...
NMS = Spore 2 Confirmed.
http://kotaku.com/no-mans-sky-players-are-finding-dick-monsters-1785093816
-
So that's what Spore was for. To populate NMS' worlds with dicks! Genius!
-
What gameplay is there for flying the ship, apart from... flying around? Are there enemies in space? And how free are you to fly about in space, i.e. can you fly to random points or are you forced to go from planet to planet?
The game looks too simple for a $/€ 60 game.
-
Are there enemies in space?
Yes.
And how free are you to fly about in space, i.e. can you fly to random points or are you forced to go from planet to planet?
Yes, you can fly in whichever direction you want with your pulse drive... but there's little point in flying to random spots in space because every spot seems to be equally full of the exact same random asteroids everywhere.
The game looks too simple for a $/€ 60 game.
I definitely recommend waiting for a sale (and for performance issues to get fixed; if you're lucky, you can tweak the settings to get rid of them, but waiting for them to be patched out entirely is a much better idea).
-
because every spot seems to be equally full of the exact same random asteroids everywhere.
Seriously, what the hell is up with this? Did the entirety of the Universe blow up and scatter homogeneously pieces of everything everywhere?
And why does it always constantly feel like I'm stuck in a nebula? Why is there this massive fog in my space!
-
Seriously, what the hell is up with this? Did the entirety of the Universe blow up and scatter homogeneously pieces of everything everywhere?
And why does it always constantly feel like I'm stuck in a nebula? Why is there this massive fog in my space!
Sounds like you're playing Transcend :V
-
Seriously, what the hell is up with this? Did the entirety of the Universe blow up and scatter homogeneously pieces of everything everywhere?
And why does it always constantly feel like I'm stuck in a nebula? Why is there this massive fog in my space!
Sounds like you're playing Transcend :V
Hahahahaha. I was actually kinda thinking of Homeworld but that fits the description much better.
-
First game I asked for a refund on Steam ...
Worst case of "trailer does not match game at all" in a long time for me.
60$ for that? no way.
-
Yes, you can fly in whichever direction you want with your pulse drive... but there's little point in flying to random spots in space because every spot seems to be equally full of the exact same random asteroids everywhere.
So apart from random enemies to destroy, is there anything worthwhile to do in space? Contact other people/npc, mine asteroids, pirating, or any other stereotyped space activity?
-
Yes, you can fly in whichever direction you want with your pulse drive... but there's little point in flying to random spots in space because every spot seems to be equally full of the exact same random asteroids everywhere.
So apart from random enemies to destroy, is there anything worthwhile to do in space? Contact other people/npc, mine asteroids, pirating, or any other stereotyped space activity?
Well you can flick through your inventory while you're waiting for your pulse drive to carry your ship across the 120 seconds worth of space to get to the next planet. That's about it. I had the fortune of playing someone else's copy rather than having to buy it myself, if you really must play it this is how it should be played imho.
Space Engineers - £18.99
No Man's Sky - £39.99
I'll let that speak for itself.
-
After 20 Hours i still like it.
Except from technical side... the first days i was only able to play it with a SSE4 Emulator, because i have Phenom II.
Then the first experimental patch show up that do not need SSSE3 CPUs at all and it runs like a charm. Even with my GeForce 660 Ti GTX i was able to play on 1080 with Max Details (but with disabled Anti-Aliasing) with 30-40 FPS for hours.
Then the last beta patches were downloaded... and after half an hour of gameplay my performance goes down into unplayable areas.
There they have still much to do.
But from gameplay, i like it so far. The three planets in my starting systems seems similiar, but were different enough to explore them and to reach 100%.
Yeah, maybe there is not to much to do except of scanning, to sell resources for extensions of Suit and Ship and to mine resources you do not have already, but until now, it was enough.
And i think there will be bigger updates, so, the nearer i come to the center, the more possibilities i will have, which is also a interesting view of "progression".
-
Yes, you can fly in whichever direction you want with your pulse drive... but there's little point in flying to random spots in space because every spot seems to be equally full of the exact same random asteroids everywhere.
So apart from random enemies to destroy, is there anything worthwhile to do in space? Contact other people/npc, mine asteroids, pirating, or any other stereotyped space activity?
https://giant.gfycat.com/UnnaturalChillyAmberpenshell.webm
You can do this
There's always that
But yeah, as Buckshee said, there isn't a whole lot to do in Space other than constantly avoid bloody asteroids and shoot ships. That said, the five star sentinel response to your actions is pretty intense
-
That video is very illustrative of NMS. Nice visuals and some cool ideas, marred by some things that should be easy to fix and some simplicity presumably brought on by the spore effect. If you made space combat richer, bring it closer to a full featured spacesim, and make it so you don't have to freaking open your inventory every six seconds to recharge your damn shields.
-
So apparently the game is a pure **** port on the pc, plus it fails utterly where I absolutely didn't expect: on the interface.
Come on people, way to waste such an opportunity.
-
On the bright side, they did fix the Phenom II problems so that's at least a plus
-
Kotaku's take (http://kotaku.com/no-mans-sky-the-kotaku-review-1785383774) on the game is a fairly interesting read. Basically the reviewer initially sank a few dozen hours into it and wound up feeling immensely disappointed...and then they went back to it with an entirely different gameplay approach and wound up really enjoying it. It sounds for all the world like the sort of game that only really clicks for certain people, or for people playing it a certain way, neither of which meshed with what the game was initially billed as. I think those saying that it would had been widely praised if it had been born as a $20 indie title instead of a super-hyped $60 AAA affair are exactly right. I didn't even follow most of the hype myself, and it's not really my style of game, so I don't think I'd bother with it even with a substantial discount.
-
Thirty hours later and I've lost all desire to bother trying to find all the creatures on the planet. I'm always stuck with one elusive prick despite my best efforts to check caves, water, land, air and all those white dots on the scanner
-
Kotaku's take (http://kotaku.com/no-mans-sky-the-kotaku-review-1785383774) on the game is a fairly interesting read. Basically the reviewer initially sank a few dozen hours into it and wound up feeling immensely disappointed...and then they went back to it with an entirely different gameplay approach and wound up really enjoying it. It sounds for all the world like the sort of game that only really clicks for certain people, or for people playing it a certain way, neither of which meshed with what the game was initially billed as. I think those saying that it would had been widely praised if it had been born as a $20 indie title instead of a super-hyped $60 AAA affair are exactly right. I didn't even follow most of the hype myself, and it's not really my style of game, so I don't think I'd bother with it even with a substantial discount.
That was my whole pitch from back to 2013. I *always* saw this game as exactly that kind of cool new indie title that did something new that was missing in the scene. I was hoping the crew would stick to it for they never descended into the Star Citizen trap, but Sean Murray is indeed to be blamed for letting everyone's hopes start to go to ridiculous zones. And when I saw that 60 bucks I thought, "these guys are in for a ride indeed, one that was paved by Sony, no doubts about it". They should have never got into a deal with Sony, I think that kind of stuff was their downfall (even down to their QA support, which was absolutelly appalling on the PC end, go figure).
-
Turns out NMS's flight model allows for perfectly functioning low-altitude flight which can be modded back in:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-08-23-a-new-pc-mod-fixes-one-of-no-mans-skys-most-frustrating-traits
-
Angry Joe review:
Are these types of games just too much for people to build? Did he blatantly lie repeatedly to us to scam us for money? This is a bug filled hollow cheap knockoff of what it was supposed to be, and he should be ashamed of himself for releasing it in this condition and charging full price for it and not letting us know the state it's in. You all know about Star Citizen, perhaps Elite Dangerous might reach their goal, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were still working on the game and towards that final goal ten years from now. Horizons is moving significantly slower than I expected.
Come on game industry. Let's get back to basics. A game just set in our solar system with colonised planets and moons would still be absolutely massive. Hell, just set on a 1:1 scale colonised moon would be enormous and one of the biggest game Worlds in all of gaming. Quality over quantity. Not this wide as the ocean deep as a puddle stuff.
Or can we just get back to something like "You're The Hero, flying The Ship, for The Resistance / Earth against The Empire / The Aliens in The War to save The Planet / The Galaxy."
-
Hype culture is worse culture
-
Turns out NMS's flight model allows for perfectly functioning low-altitude flight which can be modded back in:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-08-23-a-new-pc-mod-fixes-one-of-no-mans-skys-most-frustrating-traits
THANK BLOODY GOD
Though their flight model still sucks
-
+1 for PC Master Race and the ability to MOD. Amirite? :nod:
-
yeah, mods are quickly making the PC version way cooler...
Here's my last play session with mods Big Fauna, Big Flora, and Low Flight enabled.
https://www.twitch.tv/mjnmixael/v/85799087
-
Has the game been bugging you too much?
-
I've had only one or two crashes. No other bugs to speak of.. and I've been playing since day 1.
-
Aw. That's actually nice to know!
-
yeah, mods are quickly making the PC version way cooler...
Here's my last play session with mods Big Fauna, Big Flora, and Low Flight enabled.
https://www.twitch.tv/mjnmixael/v/85799087
Seems the low flight mod still has some hiccups where the original settings fight against it
Otherwise not bad at all
Aw. That's actually nice to know!
My experience has been similar, I've only had a CTD twice and some wonky texture stretching but that's about it so far
-
The Low Flight Mod just lets you fly below the arbitrary flight floor in the unmodded game. The weird slowness you saw also occurs without the mod, so it's something in the design of the flight model that's kinda funky.
-
The Low Flight Mod just lets you fly below the arbitrary flight floor in the unmodded game. The weird slowness you saw also occurs without the mod, so it's something in the design of the flight model that's kinda funky.
And here I thought that weird sluggishness was due to the flight floor which kept fighting against me
Woo, screw this game...
-
Just watched the Angry Joe (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTTPlqK8AnY) review. Basically he solidified my opinion. I'd love to try it one day and see what it's like but there's no way in hell I'm buying the game unless they put back in things that were promised and drop the price to something far more reasonable.
He does a good job of pointing out the lies they told about stuff that would be in the game though. Also I've never been so happy to be spoiled about a game's ending as I was by that video. If I'd got to the centre of the galaxy and gotten that ending I would have had to kill someone.
-
Just watched the ending on youtube as well.
Guess Mass Effect 3 wasn't so bad after all ... :P
-
Wow, that video is pretty damning. Definitely staying away for several years as usual until the mods flesh it out and the price goes to bargain bin levels.
-
The ending is pretty well-written!
-
Come on game industry. Let's get back to basics. A game just set in our solar system with colonised planets and moons would still be absolutely massive.
Kerbal Space Program. :) OK, it's not real scale (mainly for gameplay reasons), but can be made so with mods. What's interesting, it didn't start with a huge idea. It started as a very rudimentary physics sim that simply kept growing. Sure, it has its flaws and the graphics are medicore at best, but compared to how things look for other projects operating on such a scale, well...
Another thing to note that it has never involved any sort of multiplayer. Sure, the idea has been floating about, but it's always been a sideshow at most. So yeah. Start small, work your way up and stay away from grand multiplayer schemes (at least until the point you really don't have anything better to work on). To think of it, FSO (and many other open-source projects) also worked out that way. On the other hand, when ArmA3's devs tried focusing on multiplayer in the latest expansion, it was a complete disaster. Make of that what you will.
-
I got a message from a friend who I'd asked about No Man's Sky. He said this.
There are a lot of people commenting on whether or not they deliberately lied to us about what was in the game. And it's possible that they didn't do it deliberately, but here's why I think they did. One of the main reasons people don't lie is cause they respect the people they are talking to. You only need to play No Man's Sky for an hour or two to realise that the developers have absolutely no respect for their audience. I've never played a game that gave less of a **** about wasting your time. From making it take 2-3 seconds to click on any button on the interface, to making it take a good 5 minutes to dig up a single deposit of gold, to making it take over a minute of just sitting about doing nothing to travel between planets. The game is determined to draw out the amount of time it takes to do anything for no good reason whatsoever. Is there any good reason why it should take 20 seconds to initiate dialogue with an alien? Or why any dialogue should appear on screen at slower than reading speed when it's not going to scroll?
There is a good game here but it's been buried under layer upon layer of bull****, with luck modders will be able to dig it back out.
From watching a few gameplay videos, I kinda see what he means.
-
The ending is pretty well-written!
So well-written it took no effort. :P
-
Come on game industry. Let's get back to basics. A game just set in our solar system with colonised planets and moons would still be absolutely massive.
Kerbal Space Program. :) OK, it's not real scale (mainly for gameplay reasons), but can be made so with mods. What's interesting, it didn't start with a huge idea. It started as a very rudimentary physics sim that simply kept growing. Sure, it has its flaws and the graphics are medicore at best, but compared to how things look for other projects operating on such a scale, well...
Another thing to note that it has never involved any sort of multiplayer. Sure, the idea has been floating about, but it's always been a sideshow at most. So yeah. Start small, work your way up and stay away from grand multiplayer schemes (at least until the point you really don't have anything better to work on). To think of it, FSO (and many other open-source projects) also worked out that way. On the other hand, when ArmA3's devs tried focusing on multiplayer in the latest expansion, it was a complete disaster. Make of that what you will.
Scope is consistently a source of problems for pretty much anything these days. I don't know how long the actual development cycle was for NMS, but for a team of 12 people and what it appears they wanted to develop, they way over-scoped for whatever production time they had.
The last project I worked on, my senior game design project had a 6 month production cycle and 7 people all working part time on it. In retrospect given the uneven distribution of talent, the project was slightly over-scoped, though it had all the features (save for camera perspective switching) originally outlined, it's very rough around the edges.
Networking anything is a massive can of worms to open up if you're a small team and in hindsight, I think believing that a team of 12 would be able to deliver the scale of game they were promising as well as having Dark Souls esque multiplayer was optimistic, not necessarily completely foolish, just extremely optimistic.
-
Rumour has it that Steam have started offering refunds to anyone who feels cheated regardless of time played.
I suspect that is a steaming pile of crap, but I have seen posts from people who claim they got their money back.
-
Well, the Steam page very clearly says that there are no changes to the refund rules for NMS, and the gaming press hasn't been able to confirm refunds happening outside of the normal rules in any way.
-
Rumour has it that Steam have started offering refunds to anyone who feels cheated regardless of time played.
I suspect that is a steaming pile of crap, but I have seen posts from people who claim they got their money back.
Most people I know who had gone over the two hour limit managed to get their money back after submitting the request
There was some scuttlebutt about Sony seeing to it that digital copies on the PS4 were refunded too
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/234633-amazon-sony-steam-refunding-players-unhappy-with-no-mans-sky-former-sony-content-director-calls-refund-seekers-thieves
I personally cannot say my own experience at any rate. Either way, seems it's mostly anecdotal but nonetheless frequent
-
In other, extremely minor news - the Steam rating for NMS has crossed into Mostly Negative, at 39% of positive reviews. I haven't played the game, not at that kind of a price point, but it seems kinda harsh.
-
In other, extremely minor news - the Steam rating for NMS has crossed into Mostly Negative, at 39% of positive reviews. I haven't played the game, not at that kind of a price point, but it seems kinda harsh.
Given the nature of how steam does their rating system, this isn't surprising. Without the middle ground choice, you're going to have a lot of people telling others that they don't recommend the game and write in the review "Yeah, wait till things get updated" rather than a thumbs up saying the same thing
Course, I entirely think the score is justified. They did it to themselves
-
I really hate the yes/no good/bad rating system that took over the internet since whatever that old website that facebook stole "liking" things from started it.
-
The real reason good/bad rating systems took over is that in five-star systems the overwhelming majority of reviews are either five or one stars.
-
Allow people to vote but have 10s and 1s cancel each other out. Just don't tell everyone that you're doing it.
-
10s and 1s already automatically cancel each other out?...?
-
Not really, they just pull the mark towards 5. I'm talking about having them completely cancel each other out or having an algorithm weight them based on the other marks the film is getting.
So for instance in a film like Suicide Squad which had a disproportionate number of people voting it worse movie evarrr! And fanboys giving it 10s to cancel them out you'd simply ignore all the 10s and 1s and calculate the score based on the other votes. Cause let's face it, the film deserves neither a score of 10 or a score of 1.
-
I see what you mean. Like particles and anti-particles. Whenever there's a bunch of 1s and 10s, they cancel each other out. If there is way more 10s than 1s, then only those that didn't cancel out count.... wait. That doesn't work too, that would mean there would be a nasty war on who would get the biggest number of supporters, the 10s or the 1s. So scrap them off. Yeah. Wait. That doesn't work... they would figure it out and then the war would be between 2s and 9s. Well, 2s and 9s are out too. Wait.
Ah **** numbers.
-
It's pretty simple really, you take the 1s and 10s out of the review dataset, count them both, subtract the smaller from the larger and then put what's left back in.
-
On a side track, I've been seeing posted on /r/RebelGalaxy (http://www.reddit.com/r/RebelGalaxy) that a lot of people that picked RG up for free on PSN are saying it fills the slot they had hoped NMS would rather nicely. So that's a plus (for RG, which is a nice game, for a decent price (especially on sale / free). Hopefully NMS will eventually grow out of its current state.
-
It's pretty simple really, you take the 1s and 10s out of the review dataset, count them both, subtract the smaller from the larger and then put what's left back in.
I wouldn't do that. It's not that different from now, it just depends on if there are more haters or fanboys.
I would compare the numbers against the rest of the dataset. For instance, if you have a lot of 1s and 10s but no 9s and 2s then people are ****ing around and not voting what they truly think of the film. So you discard all the 10s and 1s. The rest of the data set will give you a fairer picture of the data.
That's a simplified version. You really need a statistician rather than me to tell you how you could come up with a fairer system which couldn't be gamed as easily but I'd guess such things do already exist. As I said, the secret is to not tell people that you're doing that. Same as how Google never reveal how their rankings work so that people can't game them.
-
Everyone knows how ratings work given enough time. Make it harder to understand these guys will only see that as another game to beat.
-
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/680355
-
The Steam voting system works for the most part. The idea is to read the reviews regardless if you're actually looking for veritable opinions
There are always going to be the ones who are quick to judge and ram away on the bandwagon, but then again that's true to any voting system that exists. If 1s and 10s don't count in a system, that doesn't account for the pointless reviews made by 2s-9s
Some people just throw on whatever and say stupid bull**** because why not
Reviews are to always be taken with a grain of salt, not salt itself
Either way, NMS rightfully deserved the backlash that it got. No matter if you liked the game or whether or not you're that special snowflake that keeps cramming down how people are stupid for believing what was said and that you knew exactly what the game was years ago... it still for the majority and most part did some ****ty things and overall is a meh game
On the note of Rebel Galaxy however, that game has an awesome soundtrack
-
On the note of Rebel Galaxy however, that game has an awesome soundtrack
Indeed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biJJIc63GAo&list=PL-cp-wV-ngAlizjLg8_Wo0aXVL6hT3New)! ( <- YT playlist for RG OST, Spotify -> here (https://play.spotify.com/user/worldssmallestviolin/playlist/1oju5thz6TEtrESL81HzvZ)
-
Yeah. I kind of am in that bracket where I think I got what the game was all about 3 years ago, but am still in awe on how Sean and his people mismanaged everyone into thinking crazy ****. I do agree that they deserve every single backlash. I'm just sad about the thing because NMS is a different game than most games and I kind of wanted them bumped and ready to keep going where this was headed. I don't think the motivation is there any more though.
I'll try to make my points clearer.
NMS is a different game than, say, Mass Effect, not just because it doesn't really have a compelling story, voice acting, etc., but because of how its systems work. If Bioware wants to revamp its game, they have to write a new story, create one or two new weapons, new characters, create a new landscape or setting, and create whole new levels. Then they release a DLC with two plus hours of gameplay.
NMS isn't that. It works like Minecraft or, even, Civilization. If they change stuff in the game, they are changing the systems that change the systems that are creating the game itself. IOW, with the same amount of effort that Bioware puts into crafting two plus hours of story, they can change their entire game. So I kind of believe that NMS could still become a really great game, within say, 3 years time. Perhaps I'll buy it then, who knows? Clearly, they released it far too soon and fooled everyone into thinking that this game already contained what they were still daydreaming of including in.
There are decisions that can still be "included" in, like say, actual factions, actual great battles, sidekick ships, better progression in terms of weaponry and ****, nerfing a bit the constant survival crap, making planets better, etc.
But there are those decisions that are already "honed in", that seem to be part of NMS' vision. And these suck balls. First, planets don't rotate. I can totally see why: going into and out of a planet would be dizzy otherwise. But the problem is that now "day" and "night" is completely non physical. There is no "sunrise" nor "sunset". That sucks balls. I don't see any DLC going to "fix" this issue though, for it seems to be part of the design now. Another stupid decision: planets are all the same once you see a small patch you've seen it all. Stupid decision. But I don't think it was a technical issue, I actually think it was a design decision (because of some things Sean said regarding this). It completely devalues the "finding a new whole planet" for you to discover.
Planets that would have different biomes and them having a logic regarding temperature and solar exposure and whatnot would be pretty cool. Planets that would be mostly deserts but then at the poles you'd find ice. That would be cool. Etc. This could still be redesigned (and again, it just requires work on the systems that build systems, doesn't require actual hard work of designing one planet after the other), I just don't think they will do so.
But these aren't my biggest gripe against NMS. My biggest problem comes with the "exploration game" that it pretends to be. It's not. It's stupid. Every planet is inhabited by hundreds, if not thousands of loners down there sitting at some desk within small colony bases that are equally spread out in these balls. If you make the maths, that's like a thousand quintillion aliens out there with the same habitats and clothes. IOW, it's a completely inhabited universe. But it's a weirdly sparse universe, without any cities or anything and where all of these aliens are "travellers". You almost think that all of these are as much of an adventurous sort as you are. But then, if the universe is filled with these, what are you exactly doing photographing all of the creatures everywhere? Surely these creatures are already known to everyone else? (Clearly they know, for they already know how *many* of them are you to find on each planet) Why are you getting money out of this?
So there struck me a metaphor: it's like visiting a zoo. A big giant ****ing zoo. There are mechanical watchers everywhere that will ZAP you if you try to destroy that damned plant that tried to eat you just now, the architecture is all the same, you get to see all the animals out there, and you get some kind of cards that you collect for every animal that you pay attention to and be rewarded by your attentive posture.
All the "adventure" and "exploration" is utterly lost. There's no planet where you don't find these sentinels and you can blow it up to smithereens if you wanted to. There's loneliness but you always feel there's a hut somewhere, there's a habitat, there's a station, there's this uplink to the galactic whatever.
These problems are more than things that are lacking in the systems. These were design choices. And I disagree with them wholeheartedly.
How to fix it? Dunno. I see two games in here: in one of them, the idea of exploring a deserted universe where ancient stones tell you of a grand civilization once gone, and where nature is thriving once again and you get to catalog it. In this game you could even maintain the idea of sentinels, as these kinds of relics that are still trying to maintain the planets of a foregone civilization, and you have to deal with. The other game, a spacefaring game where you are part of a thriving civilization, filled with ships everywhere, trading posts and habitats, where you get to speak with all of these people if you want to and be part of its economy.
They built both of those games into one. And it just doesn't make any sense. Unless it's a zoo. And that's ****ing hilariously sad.
-
I am as ever a fan of two youtube channels in particular, so... here we go!
-
Patch 1.3 was released.
They're still working hard on it, despite everything, and they learned to stop talking too much. I can respect that.
Slowly, the game is becoming what was initially promised. The whole ingame universe is a complete contradiction in itself still, but hey, I approve of these improvements.
-
That doesn't help much with the big question though. Is it worth it yet?
-
That doesn't help much with the big question though. Is it worth it yet?
Going by the original trailers on kick starter ... i'd say they are about 5% there and making at least 1% progress each month.
Somewhere around 50% it may even start to become fun to play!
Kidding aside ... I'm so glad i refunded in time and every update and video I have seen so far has made me even more content with this decision.
As far as ambition and promises (not kept) I would say No Man's Sky is right up there with Star Citizen. Except they made the mistake of releasing the game. Huge mistake that. :lol:
-
I cannot say. I'm not playing it for the time being. I still have problems with its inherent world they built, which has too many inconsistencies for my brain to like it.
-
I don't think they're actually inconsistencies. I suspect the ending (which I'm very happy to have largely spoiled for myself) explains them away. It makes them dreadful story choices, but not actual plot holes.
-
I saw a guy streaming, but all he was doing was walking around some base, extracting improbable amounts of roots from plants.
-
I came back to this game since NEXT, and I gotta say, I've been having a lotsa fun. Now, they're going to include sea stuff in. This game has already pulled me back in, and it's trying hard to make me stay. I'm not bothered by this at all!!
-
No Man's Sky: The Subnautica Update
-
Totally and I'm no bothered!
-
Oh I didn't say it was a bad thing. It' actually seems like an HD patch for the bases at least.
-
Hey remember when some people insisted that this game was exactly like Star Citizen? I do.
-
Well, it is more correct to say, that Star Citizen want to be like No Man's Sky :D
-
Beyond is a legit update and the VR is pretty dang great. I know what I'm doing this weekend.
-
I just assumed that what they were promising at launch was impossible to deliver, and after their mess of a launch they'd crash and burn and we'd never hear from them again.
So I was wrong on that account.