No Man's Sky (PC/PS4/XBO)

  • I haven't played No Man's Sky. I've only watched a few gameplay videos and some impressions from people I trust (the Easy Allies review being the latest). I honestly never had any crazy expectations for the game. It seems to be pretty much what I thought it would be. That's certainly going to underwhelm a lot of people. Getting delayed numerous times and having such vague marketing did not help the game at all. People were bound to fill in the blanks with their ideal interpretations of what they thought the game would be. It's certainly an interesting case study on marketing as well as many other facets of the gaming industry right now. Personally, I'm probably going to pick it up half a year from now when it's been patched to hell and the price comes down a bit.

    There are people claiming this game is an overhyped piece of hot garbage and others claiming it's an incredible experience that people just don't understand. The truth rarely falls on such extremes. I think the game has a lot going for it and a lot that could be improved. How much sway the positives and negatives have will greatly vary from person to person.

    On one hand, I definitely feel bad for Hello Games. Their game was handled in such a way that it could never "win". It was always going to disappoint. It was only a matter of how furious the backlash would be. On the other hand... Sean Murray definitely lied about the multiplayer aspects of the game. He clearly said "yes" when asked if you could play with your friends. He maintained up to release that it was possible to encounter other players but that it would be so rare it likely wouldn't happen. This simply isn't the case. The game does not upload any player data beyond your discoveries and other small things making it impossible to encounter other players.

    This shouldn't be overlooked or written off easily. Yes, things change over the course of game development. Features get dropped. But to maintain the notion that it's possible to do something when it absolutely is not... that's not ok. I may have had managed expectations for this game... but I couldn't help but think to myself, "wow, if everyone is heading to the center of the galaxy, I bet you'll encounter more and more people as you get closer and closer to the center!". It's a perfectly reasonable assumption based on everything Sean has said about the game. Now we know it was all bullshit.

    Anyway, I won't harp on Sean or No Man's Sky anymore. Just wanted to get that off my chest. I'm still pretty excited to get my hands on the game, especially when they patch in base building and other new features. I think it might be interesting to list off some things they could add to make the game a more robust experience...

    • Add on-foot traversal upgrades. Let us craft jump packs that let us leap miles across the surface of a planet. Mining resources would be a lot more enjoyable with a greater variety of traversal mechanics. It could change the entire feeling of the game for the better and give you more things to do with all those gathered resources.

    • Add random encounters. I don't know how feasible this is but the game desperately needs this. Take inspiration from the random encounters in games like GTA V, The Witcher 3, etc. You don't need to turn every planet into a generic open world game... but the idea that we might encounter a fight between two enemy factions or a small creature getting attacked by a pack of predators... would make exploring a lot more fulfilling.

    • Let the player join factions. Have a scientific group that rewards players for discovering planets and creatures. A pirate group that rewards players for attacking NPCs and stealing from outposts and ships. A military group that rewards you for stopping pirates from destroying ecosystems and robbing other NPCs. That's just off the top of my head but anything would work. This would give the player a sense of progression and purpose.

    • Online play. Doesn't matter if it's lobbies like Minecraft or instances like Destiny. This game desperately needs multiplayer. Trading, space combat, building settlements, Etc. My other suggestions would only be amplified by the addition of online play.

  • @Light Couple of things. There already are on-foot upgrades. I've upgraded my sprint (thankfully!) and gotten a jet pack that really lets me fly all over. I like the random encounters and factions ideas, the faction idea moreso since there are already several alien races. Joining up with one just makes sense. Multiplayer... so Sean has said he believes server load is the reason why those two players couldn't see each other on day one. Whether or not this is true, I'm not sure, but I honestly don't view him as the lying type (don't make me regret those words Murray!). He even tweeted this on the first day - "We added a 'scan for other players' in the Galactic Map to try to encourage this happening. We wanted it to happen - but the first day?"... so I really don't think his intention was to lie about the multiplayer systems, I just don't think they're working properly. Think of a lot of multiplayer games that have server issues when they first launch - they didn't lie to us, they just have some issues they need to sort out. I may be in the minority here, but I really want minimal online interactions. I don't want to suddenly come across a player controlled fleet that blows me up constantly in space. Maybe encountering one person (or the wake of their destruction) would be interesting, but that's all I want. Anything else changes this game into something entirely different and I shudder to think of what the game would be like if they tried to make it more like Minecraft or Destiny. I like it for what it is without having to compare it to what other franchises are doing.

    It's just a divisive game, I think we all knew that going into it. Sean Murray definitely knew and kept warning this game wasn't for everyone. Even the Allies themselves are mixed, with Ben's review score being average whereas Jones and Ian are loving every second. Honestly, I'm happy when games like this come out because of how much conversation it stirs up, I could just do without the hyperbole on both sides though(best/worst game ever). Luckily, that's missing here but the rest of the internet? Sheesh....

  • @Whoaness

    Look, you don't like that I don't like this game.

    I can go into a marvel movie and point out that the villain is a two dimensional cardboard cutout. I can point out that the controls in no man's sky are weak and no where close to what I PERSONALLY prefer in a game. For a $60 game, this put itself up to comparison of other triple a games whether it deserves that distinction or not.

    I was speaking in generalities in that there is a base model for these things and slight variations. Once I have seen that base model it is going to behave pretty much the same in every planer. That is not something that inspires me to run to the next planet. I have seen the squishies on a couple of planets and they behaved the same as the previous planet. Most games get a lot of flack when they drop a new skin on the same ai type (ala destiny) and I accuse them of This too.

    I have no hostility to you or Sean or hello games. I simply don't care for this game and I can compare it how I please. I am not trying to convince you or anyone this game is hot garbage or anything, my arguments have been solely personal. I don't even think the game is bad, it has a lot going for it, but it is not for me.

    If you are enjoying the controls then awesome, but don't tell me I can't compare it to other experiences I have had. I am glad this game is giving you and others joy. But you cannot deny this game is decisive in the gaming community. Also don't sit there and call me a liar because my opinion doesn't match your own

  • So I'm enjoying the game, I think it's cool, interesting, a really nice way to just relax and listen to podcasts while I just explore a system. I'm still disappointed though, because as much as I might like this game, I wish I didn't spend $60 on it. I personally don't think there's enough to do or enough motivation for me to continue for it to have been a full priced game.

    I got hyped about what they showed us over the past few years, but there wasn't much else to show I don't think. I feel like they just laid all their cards on the table and I thought that there'd still be more to it.

  • @Lexad No, I don't like it when people criticize any game for something that it's not. It's as simple as that.

    You aren't defending yourself when I pointed out contradictions in your two posts, so put more thought into your criticisms rather than making untrue statements that makes your critiques irrational.

  • Let's all take some deep breaths and chill out. :)

    It's just a game everyone!

  • @TokyoSlim You can't take deep breaths in space. Same reason no one can hear you scream. It's rough out there.

  • @SabotageTheTruth said in No Man's Sky - 18,000,000,000,000,000,000 Planets:

    @TokyoSlim You can't take deep breaths in space. Same reason no one can hear you scream. It's rough out there.

    You're assuming I'm human. Maybe I'm taking deep robot breaths of low pressure noble gasses and space particulates! Also, nobody can hear me scream because I haven't ever done it.

  • I was wondering, I see a lot of people mentioning the price and how that factors into their decision making on this game which is totally fair. I do wonder tho, if this game was $40 or even $20 how much that would curb review scores or just the general opinion of the game.

    Personally I don't think the review scores are too far off overall. For me this game is a strong 7-7.5 but the money for the game really didn't factor into my purchase or general enjoyment of the game (also got it at Best Buy with that gamer club thing so i think it cost me closer to $48). I see the most often complaint is that there isn't much to do in the game overall, however there's lots of good games where you don't really do too much, like the recent Abzu or Journey before it. Those were cheaper/shorter games, so maybe the complainant isn't so much that there's not much to do, but there's not much to do and it takes a much longer/cost more to get to the end of the game. I dunno, kinda just thinking out loud.

  • I don't think that price should effect review scores, personally. What a game costs changes over time and has no effect on the quality of the game as a work of art. I think by factoring a score into a review, you're essentially conceding that it's a consumable product instead of a work of art.

  • @Ringedwithtile That's definitely correct. No one goes "Pokemon is $60, 5/10" and then a few days later when the price drops "Pokemon is now $20, 10/10". It doesn't make sense.

    They can suggest to buy it when it's lower priced, or maybe not even buy it, but it shouldn't factor into the criticisms of the game.

  • @Ringedwithtile There's nothing wrong with criticizing a product priced at AAA quality that doesn't meet said quality. People think it's bad, but you see the opposite all the time, people giving a break to lesser games because they're budget titles. Think about The Witness. People complained about that, but if a game is good enough, the price won't matter. Stephen's Sausage Roll is another good example. It might not look as graphically impressive, but the quality of the puzzles and general length of the game justify the price tag. These are games that are mostly bug free and lack game breaking glitches, unlike No Man's Sky.

  • @Ringedwithtile As a consumer, especially one without a lot of money to just spend and buy multiple $60 releases every month (heck, every year) the price absolutely matters. The example that always comes to mind is The Legend of Korra. If that game was $60, or even $30, I'd think it was stupidly overpriced. As a $15 title though I thought it was well worth the price of admission and an easy sell.

    Games are a consumable product. That's just a nature of them. That doesn't mean they can't be art as well. Movies are both products and art, just as another example.

    You're right that game costs change over time but games themselves change over time too thanks to patches and updates. Team Fortress 2 in 2016 is barely the same game it was at launch in 2007, both from a cost perspective and a content perspective. I'd almost go as far as to say a review of it from launch is worthless to a consumer now.

  • @Mbun I don't agree, but that's cool. I don't think a price should dictate an expectation of quality, it seems a bit unfair to smaller developers. And I also agree that people give budget or free to play games a slide because they cost less, and I don't like that either. I think they should be treated for what they are, not what it takes to access them. They're two separate things to me.

    @DeweyDTruman The price doesn't matter to me, and I make very little money. If I can't afford, I don't buy it. I don't expect a critic to speak on my behalf for this personal decision, and I definitely don't hold it against the quality of the game itself if it's outside of my price range.

    And yeah, they are technically products because they cost money, but to run with your film comparison: If I see a documentary made by a couple people that cost a couple thousand to make and runs 90 minutes, it costs me $12. The same amount that a 100 million dollar film from Hollywood that runs twice the length does. I don't think it's fair to criticize the film with more meager means because it didn't deliver an experience comparable to the Hollywood product. They're different things despite the price point. I feel similarly about games, even if games are unique in the sense that their prices are all over the place.

    Also games that change over time definitely deserve reevaluation, just as all work in products like serialized storytelling or exhibited, unfinished works at festivals and museums.

    I realize I'm in the minority here, but it's just how I feel about these things.

  • @Light 1. you kinda already can. Upgrading your jet pack and using the punch-dash you can cross large distance on foot really quickly.

    1. I've seen predators attacking non-predators (i say non-predators because some animals just absorb nutrients rather than being herbivorous)

    The Gek and Vy'Keen, for the most part, are peaceful now because they went through their conquer the universe phase (except the Korvax who seem to have always been peaceful) and the Sentinels put them down.

    1. That's in the game. The Atlas is the scientific group. killing pirates in any given system will raise your standing with the race that controls the system. Piracy is it's own reward.

    2. Space combat against other players or any combat would suck serious balls in this game as the game isn't balanced for competitive. new players will just get curb stomped by vet players because of the gear differential. My Boltcaster does max damage and has a Homing Mod, i barely even have to aim. Base building is coming, along with owning your very own Freighter.

  • @Ringedwithtile You're not the minority. That's how criticism should operate. That's how EZA is operating.

    I don't know which reviewers score based on price, but if they do, I don't go to that site or read their reviews anymore.

  • There seems to be two different points here.

    1. Price should not impact the review of a game in terms of how it plays, looks etc.
    2. Price should impact whether or not you recommend the game.

    So you can review a game and say something like it's buggy and doesnt always work but when it does work its great. If that game is 60$ it's not going to be something you recommend, but if it's 15$? You're more likely to recommend it. But it doesn't change the fact the review itself.

    I look forward to seeing where this game goes. I enjoy it right now, but I don't think it will be something I play for too much longer. Luckily FFXV has been delayed so my next must play game I don't think is until... October? Last Guardian I think. The question will be whether or not this will keep me interested even without having another new game to take my attention away.

  • @unholyrevenger72

    1. I'm thinking more about adding a variety of traversal methods (if not surface vehicles as well).

    2. More of that as well as more unique encounters would be appreciated. From what I've seen almost every NPC asks the same question and you just pick one of three answers. It'd be a lot more engrossing if NPCs asked for more specific tasks or if they just had more fluff dialogue to add to the lore and immersion. Not to mention finding underground facilities or buildings in the clouds with their own implied history. Like I said, these could be incredibly rare instances but every time you come across something unique it would spark your interest in exploring more of the galaxy.

    3. I'm thinking more along the lines of the system the Souls games have in place. It would feel a lot more inclusive and special if you could officially join these groups and they had their own special rewards (paint jobs for your ship, unique modifications, etc.).

    4. Obviously the game would need to be designed with multiplayer in mind. You can't tack multiplayer onto a single player game that wasn't designed for online play without running into problems.

  • Here's my finalized equipment:

    alt text
    alt text
    alt text

    My ship can take on 25 pirates at once. My multitool can take down the AT-ST sentinel easily. I'm all set for the journey to the Galactic Center.

  • @Inustar

    1. Combined with the ship other forms of transport are unnecessary once you learn to Dash with the jet pack.

    2.Fluff Dialogue is kinda pointless, when they speak a foreign language. i know 200 gek words but still can't hold a conversation not only because i'm missing words but Gek Syntax is different as well. I'm fairly certain Gek do not have an equivalent for 'the' and may only have one tense, As for specific things, they do ask you for specific things you just have a 1 in 3 chance of getting it right if you don't speak that language based on your inferences made on body language.