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



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

    @Paper-Lion People would hate it regardless if they made up fantasies about it.

    Probably, because even the things it actually promised it failed to deliver on.



  • @Paper-Lion Aside from possibly multiplayer, which verdict is still out about what multiplayer actually is and if it's working, there's really nothing else.



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

    @Paper-Lion Aside from possibly multiplayer, which verdict is still out about what multiplayer actually is and if it's working, there's really nothing else.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/4y1h9i/wheres_the_no_mans_sky_we_were_sold_on_a_big_list/



  • @Paper-Lion Angry reddit post? And I already spot mistakes, so need to be a bit more factual than a reddit quote.

    Edit: Alright, let me give you one example that makes it painfully clear these redditors are just fantasizing about something Sean Murray never said.

    Reddit writes:

    The retooling of ships to make them all functionally identical, rather than having different classes for different playstyles, essentially homogenizing ship play into a single playstyle:

    It links to three videos. Let me actually pull out the quotes because they obviously did not pull out quotes as it would show off they are manipulating readers that don't click the link. Bold is the interviewer.

    Clip 1

    It's things like ship and stuff as well. This is the kind of ship we have shown off before. It's just a fighter, but you can view variants of it, and there is an infinite number of variations of that ship. Which is a cool thing for players. Each one of them is pilotable. Each one of them will handle slightly differently. When you have a ship, it feels a little bit like it's your own, you know, because it is pretty unique, and you're not going to see ten other people with the same ship.

    I have had three ships. I've fought in all of them, and I can say, depending on the look of it, it does feel different controlling it. My first and third ship are fighter looking ships while my second ship look like some hover craft. I am able to noticeably turn faster on the fighter ships, so the slightly variation is true. About the "different classes and different playstyles" mentioned by reddit, Sean Murray doesn't say any of that. He is talking about the aesthetics of the ship looking like a fighter, a cargo ship, a racing ship, a weird radar ship. He doesn't say there will be different classes or playstyles.

    Clip 2

    And this is the Korvax ship. So just like that guy I was talking to, that would have been bought buy one of his race. They're a scientific race. So this ship is more scientific. Yeah I don't see any crazy cannons or lasers on that body. Yeah, exactly. So this is something for somebody that's more of an explorer.

    This is true. The three races will have ships showing off different variations, but a unique style to that race. The Vy'keen love to have these pod racer looking engines on their ship that makes them look like scavengers. Also, again, the aesthetic of the ship is scientific. He doesn't mean the ship has scientific abilities like being able to scan more often or any of that (though that might come in future updates). No mention of different playstyles or classes.

    Clip 3

    But that could be a name for me. To build up my ship enough. Like a fast nimble ship that can take out some pods like that. And get away before the police start paying any attention.

    They are not talking about classes, but they are talking about playstyles now, except, it is not about the ships themselves. What Sean Murray is explaining is the ship upgrade system. Having a fast nimble ship versus a slow, gun-heavy ship is in the game when it comes to ship upgrades. Limited slots will force players to choose until they get the max 48 slots in which they can have all of it and feel powerful.

    This is just one of the things I picked out. I looked at the other videos briefly, and it's the same thing. It's more of people taking what Sean Murray is explaining completely out of context and putting their own fantasies into No Man's Sky. I'm not going to bother looking at the entire thing, so if you want to bring up anything specific that you think has merit, then please do so.



  • I found my dream ship in the 2nd system I visited (Vy'Keen variety), and I have yet to see anything remotely like it again...I'm not spending a dime until I find something I like the look of, lol. I wish I'd taken a screenshot back then.



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

    @Paper-Lion Angry reddit post? And I already spot mistakes, so need to be a bit more factual than a reddit quote.

    Why? If it's true it's true. That it's posted on reddit doesn't change that. You picked one thing to defend, and all you could really provide was your own interpretation, not even a direct contradiction of it. And even if we accept your interpretation as the correct one, there're like 30 things in that post, all sourced. You don't get to just dismiss the entire thing just like that. That would be way too convenient for you.

    Pick one of the other points. Don't really care which one personally, they're all equally valid. What about animal AI complexity. All I've ever seen are animals just aimlessly wandering around. Sometimes if you get close to them they move away, and then start wandering around in a different spot. Point is that if the devs stated something was going to be in the game and then it isn't, that's a missing feature. And even if it might seem trivial to you, (I know I certainly don't care about marking things with binoculars) that's really not relevant. Some people might, and those people were lied to. So they would be disappointed.



  • @Paper-Lion Okay, dude. If you're not going to put in any effort in proving your point, I'm not going to put any more effort.

    You're clearly just trolling when you said "they're equally valid" when I just completely killed one of the points. Just stay in reddit fantasy land of hate if you want to hate on games.



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

    @Paper-Lion Okay, dude. If you're not going to put in any effort in proving your point, I'm not going to put any more effort.

    You're clearly just trolling when you said "they're equally valid" when I just completely killed one of the points. Just stay in reddit fantasy land of hate if you want to hate on games.

    Yeah, you saying that you personally "feel" like the ships handle differently is totally killing it. Undisputable proof right there.



  • @Paper-Lion At least I played the game.



  • @Paper-Lion Don't bother bringing up anything negative about No Man's Sky here buddy. It's all lies and slander!



  • Friendly reminder: Please simmer down and refrain from getting hostile.

    And thanks for answering my query. Wait for sale it is.



  • So, Ben's comments on Frame Trap made me realise why I'm not exactly that interested in No Man's Sky: It's a deck of cards.
    Analogy time!
    Just for reasons I'll say I wasn't on media blackout for the game, so I inadvertently ended up seeing a bunch of trailers (and, by extension, a bunch of life forms). While I'm not going to buy it anytime soon I'm still genuinely curious and might explore after a big update or a price drop. Pls don't hate me for thinking robotically :cold_sweat:
    As some of you guys might now via QI or this Reddit post, there's a insanely high number of ways you can arrange a deck of cards. But, we all know the cards that comprise a deck of 52, or at the very least we'll see them all if we demonstrate an experiment on the shuffling phenomenon. After a while, the fact that an order starting with the 3 of Clubs, the 5 of Hearts, the Ace of Diamonds, the 10 of Spades and finishing all the way at King of Clubs is extremely unique and most likely never done before in the history of the planet starts to lose it's lustre.
    Here's another re enforcement of the gigantic number of combinations that a deck of cards can have - if you were to have an equal number of combinations on every single one of the 18 Quintillion planets that No Man's Sky offers, you'd have 4481009700000000000000000000000000000000000000000 unique decks of cards. Do your own maths to find the actual amount of life in the NMS universe and chuck the remainder in the sky as all the other uniquely generated things the game has (like ships, monuments, planetary structure and all that jazz).
    But, once again, it's all just one set of 52 cards, and even while trying to appreciate the beauty of all the possible combinations I'll see in my life I'll never be able to get it out of my head that a 3 of Clubs is a 3 of Clubs no matter where it is in the deck.



  • I found the infamous video of the 2015 e3 GT live discussion of no man's sky and i like it but the comments section is pure poison, it's like they believe that ben was Satan or worst, i want all of them to record a video with there opinion about every game there hyped for and when its comes out and suck i want to throw the video in there faces, some people need to take a vacation from the Internet and chill out.



  • Ian's point in the latest EZAP was brutal. Ben and several other reviewers had the same problems with the game I did (the game is horribly repetitive and the cracks begin to show with the algorithm after a couple of planets)

    I traded in NMS to my Gamestop and the guy at the desk said I was probably the 15th in a week. He hadn't seen anything like that before.



  • @Lexad But Ian really likes the game. What he said about figuring out the patterns if clearly not a negative for him.
    Figuring out how a game works is what makes games fun. It makes you feel smart for being able to find out how the game world works and how the system works.

    I still don't understand Ben's criticism that results in a passing score for No Man's Sky. I've had 2 qualms about his review, but with his remarks on Frametrap, it's really puzzling to say how you can have fun for like 20-30 hours, judging from my experience of playing the game and how long it takes to do the Atlas Path, and then fault the game for being boring at the 30 or 40 plus mark is a weird criticism.

    Was his expectation of having the feeling of discovery supposed to be infinite for No Man's Sky? Because having that moment even for 10 hours is worth it. It takes like 80+ hours to get to the centre of the universe with upgraded everything and having done all the milestones. I don't think No Man's Sky deserves an almost failing mark with what he said.



  • @Whoaness Relative to other games I play, I've put a lot of hours into No Man's Sky. It's easy to kill 2hrs straight playing that game. But it's not a very rewarding experience for me. And I've been playing it less because of that.

    I used to see a structure of some kind and get excited. Now I don't care. The combat is flat and doesn't require any skill. I don't get any joy out of combat encounters. We trade hits and I usually outlast them. There's no way to dodge, deflect, and there's not much cover. Same with dogfights. There's no skillful evasive maneuvers. Just trade hits, repair your shield, reload until the other one's dead. Aggressive animals just rush you til you kill them. I'm not expecting COD level of scripted interactions and set pieces but I don't get any sense of excitement or challenge from a fight.

    Ben did say something along the lines that going deeper into the game detracted from his earlier experiences. I can easily grind for hours but that's the nature of grinding. Time goes by fast, but it's not very rewarding. Sure I get currency for my efforts, but then what? More inventory? For what? More loot?

    I don't think it's fair to say so definitely that figuring out a game system makes it fun. For me and others, it makes me realize the game is more shallow than I originally expected. The repetitive number puzzle is a joke ex, 7312-3127-1273-****. That's great for the first go around. But to repeat that puzzle pattern feels offensive to my intelligence.

    I bought this game at launch. Like Huber said it's a nice relaxing Sunday afternoon game. I think there's a good foundation here. And I hope they can build something to make it more interesting to a broader audience. My dream random encounter is that there's a bounty for some wanted criminal, dead or alive. You can hunt them down, picking up their trail and tracking them planet to planet, maybe system to system. Finally pinning them down at their procedurally generated hideout, filled with goons, traps, etc.



  • @matt Well first, it's not a combat game. It's not a shooter or a space sim. Combat is there to serve the purpose of diminishing your resources. It's not meant to be hard as the game is about exploration. Combat is not supposed to serve as a detractor and prevent the player from going out to explore. It's a much more casual focused game.

    Second, the future does not affect the past. That's just not possible. Whatever you heard Ben say is something else. And, yes, maxing out more inventory, making more upgrades, getting more loot is very rewarding.

    Again, just like combat, don't expect such a system to be so complicated that it'll take you ten minutes to figure out. It's meant to be fairly easy, still requiring high level grade school math to discern patterns, but it's not something that you can figure out instantly in less than a second. I could take this example and apply it to Persona 4. Shadows have certain elemental weakness. You figure out the right order and the right targets to get to an all-out attack. The same enemies and formations appear again and again. Does that insult your intelligence? For myself, I find these simple puzzles to be a small reward.

    Sigh... well here we go again. You're putting your fantasies into the expectations of this game. I don't know what kind of game you thought this was, but it certainly won't be a bounty hunting space combat game. I hope you realize that whatever you're thinking will never be in the game and was never said to be in the game.



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

    @matt Well first, it's not a combat game. It's not a shooter or a space sim. Combat is there to serve the purpose of diminishing your resources. It's not meant to be hard as the game is about exploration. Combat is not supposed to serve as a detractor and prevent the player from going out to explore. It's a much more casual focused game. I didn't say it's a combat game. But the game has combat and I don't think this aspect of the game is fun. I didn't question its purpose. I understand its purpose.

    Second, the future does not affect the past. That's just not possible. Whatever you heard Ben say is something else. And, yes, maxing out more inventory, making more upgrades, getting more loot is very rewarding. To you and others. Not to me and others.

    Again, just like combat, don't expect such a system to be so complicated that it'll take you ten minutes to figure out. It's meant to be fairly easy, still requiring high level grade school math to discern patterns, but it's not something that you can figure out instantly in less than a second. I could take this example and apply it to Persona 4. Shadows have certain elemental weakness. You figure out the right order and the right targets to get to an all-out attack. The same enemies and formations appear again and again. Does that insult your intelligence? For myself, I find these simple puzzles to be a small reward. I haven't played Persona. I didn't have any expectations for the puzzles in this game. I didn't expect it to have any puzzles. My takeaway from my time with the game is that there is one puzzle that exists in this universe.

    Sigh... well here we go again. You're putting your fantasies into the expectations of this game. I don't know what kind of game you thought this was, but it certainly won't be a bounty hunting space combat game. I hope you realize that whatever you're thinking will never be in the game and was never said to be in the game. Yes. Sigh. I think you're exaggerating a bit too much considering you don't know me at all. I simply suggested a new type of random encounter for the game. Do I think the game would be more fun for me if it was done? Yes. Do I expect/demand them to put it in the game? No, maybe, I don't know. No one knows, including you. I hope you realize this game is far from perfect. It has flaws. You don't have to take it personally when someone doesn't like something that you do.

    I don't know why you feel the need to defend this game to the death. But I'll bite. To be fair, I've made my pre-order purchase contribution to Hello Games and have the right to have an opinion on the game. I applaud their efforts. I hope for them to continue as a studio and progress in creating cooler and better things.

    I like their game, but I don't recommend it when asked about it.



  • @Whoaness Just for clarity, what @Lexad was referring to was Ian's comments on the most recent EZA Podcast (August 24th). His opinion of the game has changed more closely to Ben's due to the "ending" or lack thereof. I personally haven't made it to the center so I don't know how that could change things that much, but I will admit Sean and Friends did hype up the center and I've heard nothing but negatives about it. Definitely a shame.



  • @matt I didn't recommend the game if you look at my advice to ChaosBahamut. If the game isn't exactly what you want, then the high $60 asking price is not worth it. To the general audience, I would say this should be $20 because it doesn't contain enough for them. It's not a GTA of space explorations, and it was never meant to be.

    I defend this game because people are lying about what Sean Murray said and use their made-up lies to slander him and his hard work. It's okay to think it would be cool that there is a bounty hunter mode, but to say the game sucks because Sean Murray promised X feature and Y feature is what a lot of people are doing. If you watched the first E3 trailer, you should have known that the space combat wasn't going to be hardcore.

    Actually, looking back at that space combat comment, and having played years of Tie Fighter and Wing Commander games, those comments would even apply to a space sim. There is no cover in space, no dog fighting like in the movies, only tanking damage. Only different is that No Man's Sky elects not to have a space sims system of port, aft, starboard, stern shielding where tanking damage in space sims is just about rotating your ship away form the enemy so that shields get the chance to recharge.

    @SabotageTheTruth @Lexad Oh yeah my bad. I didn't even know the podcast was out at that point. I just watched it and was going to make some edits, but forgot.

    Well all I could say, without spoiling, is that it's Ian. He likes to change his opinion as he feels like it. Going from best game to worst game from watching a youtube video that neglects the journey isn't how you play a game. Neglecting the fun moments had with the game isn't very critical. Imagine of Obstruction just had a "congratulations" at the end and that was it (which is funny given that Myst was pretty much like that). I don't think that makes you forget the interesting puzzles you had when playing the game. Another example is that I really hate Mass Effect 3's ending, and I think it ruins the entire trilogy, but I wouldn't give the game a 6/10 when it had great combat, story moments, and characters.

    I don't feel like getting to the centre was ever the objective of the game like how you would progress through a story to get to the ending. There is no story for getting to the centre, so there shouldn't be expectations that it's going to have an hour long MGS4 ending or something. Now for the actual ending itself for those who want to be spoiled:

    The idea of the centre containing a portal to another galaxy is a fine idea. The end of the Atlas quest foreshadows the existence of multiple universes, and it has you go through a black hole, possibly for the first time if you were just doing the Atlas quest, and makes you realize the purpose of the black holes are portals to another part in space. Humanity has always wondered if there's anything beyond the black hole, and we know in the centre of our own galaxy contains a supermassive black hole. Even Interstellar ventures into the same conclusion talking about how the black hole is actually an infinite space-time universe that defies the laws of physics. Realistically, black holes should kill you, but to imagine that there is a possibility that a black hole contains more than just the end is exciting.
    Now, gameplay-wise, seeding another galaxy layout is thematic to what the game is about. Think about this as a new game plus, you're getting a fresh start at discovering more species and planets. No Man's Sky is all about discovering, and being thrown into a second galaxy is exciting for those who enjoy that aspect. I can understand people being disappointed because getting to the centre takes a lot of work, but a lot of people are skipping the point of the game (same as I did) and are just collecting warp cores to rush to the centre instead of exploring planets along the way. Rather than thinking the centre of the universe contains a playable version of Knack 2, I think this idea is more appropriate than anything else.
    A goal oriented person would find this "ending" disappointing, but I disagree with the comments about Sean Murray hyping it up. He always talks about the goal of the game as an afterthought. I've always heard him talk about discovering planets and species, and when objectives are brought up, he would say something like "Yeah we have something like that. It'll be something to direct the players through their journey." It never felt like he was making it sound exciting like I've seen EZA hype it up multiple times (Playable Knack being in the centre lol).