Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 752119]

Dude you're just trolling at this point. The fucking objective has been explained a million times. Just because there isn't a million things on a screen telling you where to go doesn't mean there is nothing to do. Ubisoft makes games for people that get so easily confused.

And LOL at flop - it's a top seller on Amazon, and the special edition sold out.

I think it's more that most people need more of a "purpose" for the games they play. Not a ton of handholding.

Like the game can just be fun to play and not have any real narrative--see Overwatch. But to a lot of people the gameplay they've shown doesn't look fun. A lot of people don't enjoy just exploring for exploring sake.

Others don't even like stuff like Overwatch and need a strong narrative reason to play through a game, and getting to the center of the galaxy isn't enough for them.

Unfortunately a lot of those types of people are posting "What's the point? What do you do? What's the appeal?" etc. instead of just accepting the game isn't for them. It's just gotten an odd amount of media attention and hype for what's a pretty niche genre indie game so more mainstream type gamers are aware of it and commenting on it than say Elite Dangerous and similar I guess.

For me, I just don't think it's my cup of tea as I've struggled to get into ED and I'm not really an explore virtual worlds kind of gamer. I'd rather play a multiplayer game or a narrative driven game in my limited gaming time. But I get the appeal of NMS (and ED) for people who love exploring.

 

[GavinGT]

The game never once had my interest.

 

[L4DANathan]

I feel like it's going to be an almost exact replica of how Spore released. They didn't show very much, which resulted in a ton of people making up their own ideas of what the game would be and get hyped. Then they start showing stuff bit by bit, which deflates the hype for a lot of people who were incorrect. I hope it does well, because I actually like the look of the game as it is, but I think it'll sell a lot less than expected.

 

[Shinjuku108]

"Procedurally generated" is what turns me off from being hyped for this.

I love freedom and exploration in video games - on the condition that it's something that has been handcrafted by someone. Stumbling upon a little cave in fallout or skyrim, an abandoned building or small town with its own self contained story is not only memorable but gives you the feeling that one of the developers had you in mind when you discovered that location/item/whatever.

It's this human touch that drives excitement - what will I find over this mountain or underwater?

No Mans Sky seems to lack this. Everything and anything you find and discover will be a random combination of assets decided by a algorithm. The sense of exploration is thus akin to receiving a postcard from a robot. There's no emotion behind it. The space station with the NPCs you can interact with? Will be just like Doom's snap map most likely. Just a series of rooms put together randomly.

I just can't see excitement lasting beyond a weekend at most...

 

[The Real Napsta]

I dont understand the hype for this game.. most probably it will bomb

I don't understand it either. I still don't know what you actually do in the game.

 

[Fury451]

Admittedly I haven't been closely following this game, but I'm still not really sure what it's actually about. I saw some of the footage they displayed quite some time ago now, and while it looked all very pretty and interesting, I don't think the goal of what you're doing was clear.

I gathered that it's some type of survival game with space exploration.

From that standpoint I don't think the marketing has been very strong. I'm in for things that don't easily fit into a specific genre, but when I look at a title I kind of need to know what it is that I will get from the experience in a broad sense at the very least.

I'm mildly interested in it, but with all of the delays and everything with it i'm not quite sure what to expect.

 

[BouncyFrag]

I'm looking forward to it along with a salty review thread should it score well.

 

[OCD Guy]

Yes it's fine to have an opinion but where basis for it? What are reasons to have doubt on the quality of this game? Saying it's going to flop? Where is the proof that the quality of this game is questionable.

I just want to clarify that me saying it is going to flop was not aimed at a percieved lack of quality.

More along the lines of:

It's because exploration games aren't really common anymore. Even open-world games just tell you where everything is. There's no sense of finding the unknown anymore, and people who like that sort of game seem to be in the minority.

This sort of game is not going to do well in the mainstream. But there are many good games that get overlooked because they're just not mainstream genres.

I also think a lot of people tend to like instant gratification in games, no mans sky looks like a slow burner in that sense.

As I said though, I hope it does well as it's clearly a labour of love. But time will tell how well it does commercially.

As I've stated already I don't like these sorts of games, so regardless of how good a game is in it's respective genre it won't make a bit of difference. The reason I watched a lot of videos about it, was due to the positivity and intrigue this game had. Unless you had your head buried in the sand there was no way you didn't hear about this game online.

And I'd be lying if I said it didn't grab my attention, well enough to want to find out more, but the more I saw of it, the more it re-enforced that I know I personally wouldn't stick with it, due to not being the traditional type of game I enjoy.

I do step out of my comfort zone, I tried bloodborne, knowing it wasn't the usual type of game I enjoy but unfortunately it didn't change my mind. The thing is though there have been times when I've tried a game I wouldn't normally like and ended up loving it. For me though it needs to hit a certain price point so if I don't like it the loss isn't too great.

 

[Figboy79]

The fact that a game can actually have people asking what the hell you do is reason enough to avoid.

The people asking "what do you do," as this point are being purposely obtuse. There is a plethora of information about what the game is about, and it's gameplay systems. Mainly because Sean Murray has to answer the same question of "what do you do" in every single interview he gives.

Pick a random interview, and I almost guarantee the answer to questions like, "what do you do?" "Is there multiplayer or co-op?" "How many planets are there?" "Can you craft things?" "Can you mine things?" etc. Eric, are there. It has a painfully simple game loop:

No Man's Sky:

1) Spawn on a planet.
2) Depending on the conditions of the planet, you'll have to prioritize finding shelter to keep environmental hazards like extreme hot or cold temperatures from killing you, or hunting for resources that will upgrade your multi-tool, armor, and ship. Your multi-tool can be used for mining materials and offense.
3) Upgrading your ship will eventually allow you to travel the stars, in a quest to get to the center of the universe.
4) The above goal requires you to venture from planet to planet, starship to starship, collecting, trading, stealing resources from other sentient NPC's to get further and further to the center.
5) Mining planets isn't as easy as it sounds, because disrupting the ecosystem of a planet can bring the robotic guardians down upon you. They police the universe.
6) There are also alien languages to learn. Discovering monoliths and selecting the right option will reward you with knowledge and lite of the Galaxy. That knowledge can increase your rep with the other sentient factions in the game.
7) befriending a faction can reward you with equipment and discounts when trading. You can curry favor through dialogue, or helping out that faction if you see them getting attacked by pirates (or you can piss them off by pirating their resources yourself).
8) During your trek to the center of the Galaxy, you can name the creatures and planets you discover. This information will be uploaded to an online database, so other players can locate your planets and creatures, and share their own.

I'm sure I'm missing things, but that's the overall gist of the game. It's emphasis is on exploration and discovery. The gameplay loop isn't designed for you to stick it out on a planet for 100 hours, but you're encouraged to get off world and find new stuff.

There doesn't seem to be a quest system. Planning your way to the center of the universe is up to you. You'll set your own tasks, and ideally emergent gameplay scenarios is where the fun will lie. I personally enjoy exploration and documenting animals (one of my favorite games ever is Beyond Good and Evil; I was addicted to photographing every species on planet Hyllis). I don't need intense shootouts and epic set pieces, and this game will not be for everyone. My impression is that this game will be for folks that want to sit back and chill for a few hours, and unwind getting lost in a world.

The "what do you do" crowd seem to be annoyed that the game isn't dripping with a ton of gameplay bells and whistles, but the Hello Games team have never been coy about explaining what this game is. From the first trailer, it showed you what to expect. They've sense elaborated on that in more detail, but it is exactly what they say it is. They haven't made any Will Wright esque claims like Spore. They haven't claimed that the game is going to be revolutionary, or teem with complex gameplay mechanics and dripping feature after feature. It's always been a game about exploring and discovery. Some people can't accept that. They seem to feel that a game of its scope almost demands that it be more than just waking around a planet and collect resources, that there's just GOT to be more to it! But it's always been what it's been.

 

[Zukkoyaki]

I'm not going to lie, I don't give a flying fuck about No Man's Sky and never have.

 

[ichtyander]

I know I'm repeating myself from other threads, but this game needs to happen, at least so that others may perfect the formula if Hello Games don't pull off an interesting game. And honestly, the seamless planetary transition, classic sci-fi inspirations and the creatures' simulated vocal chords are enough to have me intrigued, and that's just me massively and unfairly downplaying the whole thing they're trying to do.

But that's me looking at it from both a technical standpoint, and as someone that deeply relates to what Sean Murray's been saying about his formative years, growing up with home computers, his love for the demoscene, classic sci-fi, space, and the balls to finally try to create one of the major "dream game" blueprints in some form, and with an insanely small team for such an endeavor to boot.

I feel like their spirit and enthusiasm should be applauded in any case, and when I think of No Man's Sky I feel like they're bringing back a piece of that magical time when Ian Bell and David Braben made the original Elite. There are very few things that are cooler than that in my book. Although to be fair, smaller devs have created this new, fresh air of all sorts of neat ideas for years now, it's just that NMS is a very specific, crystallized idea that's close to my heart.

But it's also fascinating the journey this game has had in a marketing sense, how the mixture of worldwide interest and reluctant reveals have created a weird, very polarized population of gamers. I'm sure that to a lot of people Hello Games are almost like these old geezers who are either out of touch with today's gaming culture and standards or just have no real grasp on what they're doing and are just making a disaster of a game. Say what you will about Hello Games or NMS, but the way the marketing's been handled for this game is probably something someone could write a book, or at least an essay about.

It's not the only game revealed too early, or delayed (once!), but it's certainly a very rare case of an indie game that has its developers deliberately withholding information and being really vague about a lot of the gameplay systems (and I'm saying this as someone who's been reading every piece of info on the game), especially in a world of early access games, frequent development video diaries and blog updates. I'm not that surprised that this raises red flags for a lot of people, since that kind of behavior is usually related to failed kickstarters, early access game devs that fail to post updates for months on end, straight up silently giving up or Peter Molyneux.

Spoiler

Still love you Pete!

EA's been doing a somewhat similarly weird thing with Mass Effect: Andromeda (maybe not the greatest of examples), revealing it way too early and actually showing very little of it, but it's EA (big publisher), hasn't been nowhere nearly as hyped by the media (yet) and also it has three games before it made by a well known developer, so people can expect certain things and can feel somewhat safe about it.

It's going to be really interesting to see how people react when NMS releases, and it's quite possible that a lot of people will be disappointed/confused about what it actually turns out to be, but I wish Hello Games all the luck and hope they'll not only push through it but have at least a moderately successful game.

 

[RedSwirl]

I'm looking forward to it along with a salty review thread should it score well.

Critics will probably not agree on No Man's Sky, and I already accept that.

 

[OmegaDL50]

How do you make a hand crafted space game stretches across potentially billions of square miles of space. Trillions of planets with massive galaxy.

Do you honestly believe is possible to hand place every single planet, every single object.

Are people just not comprehending the actual scope or the necessary work involved for a realized and realistically scaled space game and expect it be hand crafted? Seriously?

 

[Bear Force One]

Pretty much my dream game. Day one. I've adored this since it was first demoed.

 

[GavinGT]

Every time I hear the gameplay loop described, it doesn't sound fun at all. And it doesn't help that it's always a giant wall of text when a few sentences should suffice.

 

[neonille]

I don't understand it either. I still don't know what you actually do in the game.

https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyT...do_you_do_in_no_mans_sky_and_other_questions/

 

[MilkBeard]

How do you make a hand crafted space game stretches across potentially billions of square miles of space. Trillions of planets with massive galaxy.

Do you honestly believe is possible to hand place every single planet, every single object.

Are people just not comprehending the actual scope or the necessary work involved for a realized and realistically scaled space game and expect it be hand crafted? Seriously?

Yup. There would need to be some kind of procedural generation. Just too much. Otherwise it would take 10-20 years to make.

 

[Octavianus]

Have they ever commented on the ps4 and pc version sharing the same server or not? I"m guessing it's a no, but it would be cool if they weren't segregated.

Yup. There would need to be some kind of procedural generation. Just too much. Otherwise it would take 10-20 years to make.

10-20 years is incredibly generous

 

[travisbickle]

The fact that a game can actually have people asking what the hell you do is reason enough to avoid.

People asking "what do you do?" has nothing to do with the quality of the game.

It has to do with the fact the game was on-stage at E3 yet doesn't have a defined mid-30s tough male protagonist with a depressing back-story, a large group of people he has to kill, a variety of weapons to kill them, or a human/animal partner whose death they speculate about.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

How do you make a hand crafted space game stretches across potentially billions of square miles of space. Trillions of planets with massive galaxy.

Do you honestly believe is possible to hand place every single planet, every single object.

Are people just not comprehending the actual scope or the necessary work involved for a realized and realistically scaled space game and expect it be hand crafted? Seriously?

I think a lot of people don't want an endlessly playable game. Most people play a game a while, maybe beat it, then move on to something else.

I'm more excited for Mass Effect Andromeda, and hoping the planet exploration is a big step forward from ME1. I'd much rather have a smaller, more manageable number of well crafted planets than a gazillion procedurally generated ones. At the end of the day I'd probably explore about the same number before getting bored and moving onto something else anyway.

Again, nothing wrong with NMS. Just not my cup of tea, so I get why some would like a smaller game with handcrafted planets. Not everyone is someone who dumps hundreds of hours into individual games.

 

[DizzyCaffeine]

Every time I hear the gameplay loop described, it doesn't sound fun at all. And it doesn't help that it's always a giant wall of text when a few sentences should suffice.

Agreed. I'm interested in the game and I will definitely pour over reviews and impressions, but I have not seen a single gameplay video that made the game appear fun to play.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

The first time it was shown, I thought it was the dumbest, most useless idea for a game ever. I haven't paid any attention since then.

 

[More_Badass]

Yup. There would need to be some kind of procedural generation. Just too much. Otherwise it would take 10-20 years to make.

I remember Sean talking about how guys working on Star Trek and Star Wars games, who were interested in their tech, would be shocked seeing entire planets spawned in seconds.

 

[tci]

The game initially got me. But it have taken too long and I have gone to other games. Most likely will not get it now.

 

[Mattenth]

I'm bearish :-\

I still don't get what you do in the game.

And before you link me to some giant paragraphs of text, let me just say this: almost every major title I know of puts out a "gameplay trailer." The gameplay trailer for No Man's Sky just told me so little about what I was going to be doing. It feels like almost all of the other trailers: he's just flying around, landing on a planet, and exploring.

Forgive me if my expectations are off, but I thought the gameplay trailer for No Man's Sky might actually show deep crafting systems, interesting spaceflight mechanics, and more.

I'd go so far as to nominate that trailer for one of the worst "gameplay trailers" of all time. 1/8th of that entire trailer is devoted to showing stars flying around. Another 1/8th is devoted to showing stuff that's on rails and not under player control.

I mean, is that the "gameplay" of No Man's Sky? Seriously. I want to know. Point to the gameplay mechanics in that trailer that I should be excited about.

Does something happen if you fly into an asteroid? Is there any suspense to the spacecraft at all?

Anyways, yeah, I'm bearish. The visuals looks amazing, and if you're someone who loves to explore, I'm sure you're going to get a ton of out it. The technology is astounding.

But I still feel like I haven't seen any real meaty gameplay yet.



Edit: Another question. Can you die in No Man's Sky?

 

[FuturusX]

Voting to remain, the brexit movement is riding on the backs of racist propaganda. Oh wait this is a thread about a non issue

Day One.

 

[xxracerxx]

I'm bearish :-

I still don't get what you do in the game.

And before you link me to some giant paragraphs of text, let me just say this: almost every major title I know of puts out a "gameplay trailer." The gameplay trailer for No Man's Sky just told me so little about what I was going to be doing. It feels like almost all of the other trailers: he's just flying around, landing on a planet, and exploring.

I just don't get what I'm actually doing in all of this.

I'd go so far as to nominate that trailer for one of the worst "gameplay trailers" of all time. 1/8th of that entire trailer is devoted to showing stars flying around. Another 1/8th is devoted to showing stuff that's on rails and not under player control.

I mean, is that the "gameplay" of No Man's Sky? Seriously. I want to know. Point to the gameplay mechanics in that trailer that I should be excited about.

Does something happen if you fly into an asteroid? Is there any suspense to the spacecraft at all?

Anyways, yeah, I'm bearish. The visuals looks amazing, and if you're someone who loves to explore, I'm sure you're going to get a ton of out it. The technology is astounding.

But I still feel like I haven't seen any real meaty gameplay yet.

So you will only accept a trailer to tell you what the game is?

 

[mokeyjoe]

I'm fairly neutral regarding the game, definitely curious but cautious. It doesn't really matter as my flatmate has it on pre-order so I dont need to decide one way or the other.

I really don't understand the 'what do you do' crowd. Even with my casual interest it's pretty easy to grasp what the game is about. I mean, put simply, it's a twist on the space sim genre with a focus on exploring.

 

[neonille]

I'm bearish :-\

I still don't get what you do in the game.

And before you link me to some giant paragraphs of text, let me just say this: almost every major title I know of puts out a "gameplay trailer." The gameplay trailer for No Man's Sky just told me so little about what I was going to be doing. It feels like almost all of the other trailers: he's just flying around, landing on a planet, and exploring.

I just don't get what I'm actually doing in all of this.

I'd go so far as to nominate that trailer for one of the worst "gameplay trailers" of all time. 1/8th of that entire trailer is devoted to showing stars flying around. Another 1/8th is devoted to showing stuff that's on rails and not under player control.

I mean, is that the "gameplay" of No Man's Sky? Seriously. I want to know. Point to the gameplay mechanics in that trailer that I should be excited about.

Does something happen if you fly into an asteroid? Is there any suspense to the spacecraft at all?

Anyways, yeah, I'm bearish. The visuals looks amazing, and if you're someone who loves to explore, I'm sure you're going to get a ton of out it. The technology is astounding.

But I still feel like I haven't seen any real meaty gameplay yet.

1. The main goal of the game is to get to the center of the galaxy
2. In order to get there, you have to upgrade your ship.
3. In order to upgrade, you need resources
4. Resources can be found by visiting new planets
5. As you are exploring and gathering resources, sentinels, aliens and animals can attack you.

Is it clearer now?

Yes, there is combat so you can die, and your ship can get destroyed. But you can always get the "basic" ship for free...

 

[vix]

I think this game has gotten to the point where people shit on it just cause.

 

[OmegaDL50]

Explore Space, gather resources to upgrade your ship, suit and gun. Trade and communicate with alien factions to learn their language. Or attack their space stations and steal those resources or tech knowledge instead. Better tech gets you better ships, better survivability to travel further, work your way to the center of the universe.

This took me less than 5 minutes. If people really wanted to know what they actually do in this game, they would put a modicum of actual effort to seek information if they truly wanted to know.

The information exists, We are beyond the point of being obtuse and playing at ignorance on what the gameplay loop this game has.

 

[theecakee]

I'm interested, not dying to play it though.

 

[MilkBeard]

^ From what I gathered watching a few minutes of the IGN video, you explore planets, cooperate and/or fight with NPCs, get recipes for new designs, improve your tech, expand your area of operations, explore, explore explore (and a lot of this has various gameplay options for handling any particular situation) all while making sure that you stay alive.

 

[Mattenth]

So you will only accept a trailer to tell you what the game is?

If you're going to put out a gameplay trailer, maybe you should actually include some gameplay mechanics?

I'm not alone in this complaint: a lot of people are wondering "so what's the gameplay like?"

The asteroid and dying questions are serious ones. Can you run into an asteroid? What happens if you do? Do you die? What happens when your character dies? How often should you expect to die?

Is there any failure condition at all?

 

[More_Badass]

I'm bearish :-

I still don't get what you do in the game.

And before you link me to some giant paragraphs of text, let me just say this: almost every major title I know of puts out a "gameplay trailer." The gameplay trailer for No Man's Sky just told me so little about what I was going to be doing. It feels like almost all of the other trailers: he's just flying around, landing on a planet, and exploring.

This trailer breaks it down in three world
https://youtu.be/vFTxBjxeK0I
Explore. Fight. Trade

If you're familiar with Elite, Minecraft, and The Long Dark, you know what you do in No Man's Sky. It's an arcadey space sim + sci-fi survival game

 

[travisbickle]

I think a lot of people don't want an endlessly playable game. Most people play a game a while, maybe beat it, then move on to something else.

I'm more excited for Mass Effect Andromeda, and hoping the planet exploration is a big step forward from ME1. I'd much rather have a smaller, more manageable number of well crafted planets than a gazillion procedurally generated ones. At the end of the day I'd probably explore about the same number before getting bored and moving onto something else anyway.

Again, nothing wrong with NMS. Just not my cup of tea, so I get why some would like a smaller game with handcrafted planets. Not everyone is someone who dumps hundreds of hours into individual games.

Hasn't Minecraft just become the highest sold game of all time?

It's pretty obvious the industry exists on games that can be completed and thrown away, but there's a lot of people who will buy games that don't end like Minecraft and MMOs.

 

[TheAggroCraig]

I'm not writing it off entirely, but I have no intentions of buying it based on what I've seen (which isn't a ton tbh). I know me and I know I wouldn't dedicate a ton of time to it, so I don't see a point in buying it unless it's cheap or something.

 

[Mattenth]

1. The main goal of the game is to get to the center of the galaxy
2. In order to get there, you have to upgrade your ship.
3. In order to upgrade, you need resources
4. Resources can be found by visiting new planets
5. As you are exploring and gathering resources, sentinels, aliens and animals can attack you.

Is it clearer now?

Yes, there is combat so you can die, and your ship can get destroyed. But you can always get the "basic" ship for free...

So you detailed 3 systems:
- Crafting
- Gathering
- Combat

Is there a trailer that deep dives into any of those systems? I'd love to see it.

 

[neonille]

So you detailed 3 systems:
- Crafting
- Gathering
- Combat

Is there a trailer that deep dives into any of those systems? I'd love to see it.

No there isn't, but now you know what you do so...problem solved

 

[mujun]

I'm really looking forward to it. That being said I feel like it's 50 50 as to whether I get sick of it quickly or not. I have my fingers crossed that it's something that keeps me interested for a couple of months.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

Not interested, never really have been. I just don't see the appeal. (And I've played and enjoyed stuff like Proteus so it's not an issue of "I have to be spoonfed a narrative".) Hopefully it turns out good for the people who are into it though.

 

[PaulBizkit]

I'm definitely going to buy this. Just hope to have a ps4 when it comes out (money's been tight lately)

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Hasn't Minecraft just become the highest sold game of all time?

It's pretty obvious the industry exists on games that can be completed and thrown away, but there's a lot of people who will buy games that don't end like Minecraft and MMOs.

Of course. I wasn't at all meaning to say there's not a big market for those types of games.

Just that people saying they'd prefer hand crafted planets probably aren't wanting a gazillion of them in response to the post saying that such a game wouldn't be possible. The people saying that would probably prefer a smaller game with a manageable number of well crafted planets.

 

[Pop]

Hoping for the best, expecting pretty worlds to run around and do repetitive tasks in that gets old within 20 hours.

So what do you do in Halo all the time?? Don't tell me you just run around shooting people over and over again.

You see, every game is repetitive.

 

[GavinGT]

So what do you do in Halo all the time?? Don't tell me you just run around shooting people over and over again.

You see, every game is repetitive.

Yes, every game is repetitive. So it all comes down to how fun that gameplay loop is and what you can do to improvise within that loop.

 

[True Fire]

I still have no idea what the point of the game is. I've been watching gameplay videos, reading interviews, and asking fans on NeoGAF and Reddit, but I still have no idea what the point is. Everybody keeps saying things like "the information is out there" and "they've explained the objective a million times," but they never explain what the objective is. They just say things like "we don't want to put the game in a box because you can do so many things," and it sounds so shady.

EDIT:

1. The main goal of the game is to get to the center of the galaxy
2. In order to get there, you have to upgrade your ship.
3. In order to upgrade, you need resources
4. Resources can be found by visiting new planets
5. As you are exploring and gathering resources, sentinels, aliens and animals can attack you.

Is it clearer now?

Yes, there is combat so you can die, and your ship can get destroyed. But you can always get the "basic" ship for free...

This is better. It doesn't sound very entertaining, but you did a better job explaining than the game's marketing team.

It just seems like they took the "dicking around" premise from Grand Theft Auto and other open games, and stripped it of the actual story and core gameplay mechanics.

 

[neonille]

I still have no idea what the point of the game is. I've been watching gameplay videos, reading interviews, and asking fans on NeoGAF and Reddit, but I still have no idea what the point is. Everybody keeps saying things like "the information is out there" and "they've explained the objective a million times," but they never explain what the objective is. They just say things like "we don't want to put the game in a box because you can do so many things," and it sounds so shady.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=208054521&postcount=679

 

[Octavianus]

No there isn't, but now you know what you do so...problem solved

No, no....What do you do though?

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Oh, so you've played the game already. Or have a crystal ball that tells the future. You do realize it cuts both ways. Yes, it could possibly be a disappointment, as some one who is hyped for the game I realize that is still a possibility (I don't think so obviously as I'm buying day one and I have faith based on what I heard from the developer and also from people who have played it who seem to verify the developer isn't lieing about what you can do in the game). But just as I don't know for sure it is going to be a good game, you are just as foolish to insist you know that it won't.

Not once in my post did I say it was going to be a bad game.

The question was "where do you stand on NMS" not "Is NMS a bad game?"

The question you have to ask yourself, why such a passionate responce for a game You haven't played either?

 

[Fury451]

The people asking "what do you do," as this point are being purposely obtuse. There is a plethora of information about what the game is about, and it's gameplay systems. Mainly because Sean Murray has to answer the same question of "what do you do" in every single interview he gives.

I appreciate your thorough breakdown of the gameplay as it's understood so far. I would point out though that the fact that he's constantly having to repeat himself in every interview sort of indicates a fundamental issue with the presentation of the concept.

Personally the breakdown does not sound all that appealing to me. Even with a potentially limitless world, it sounds like it could get fairly repetitive fairly quickly. That will all come down to how it plays out once it's in hand of course.

So you will only accept a trailer to tell you what the game is?

The purpose of any trailer is to make you want the product. That is doubly important when it comes to a video game; trailer that demonstrates gameplay has to be indicative of what the gameplay is, otherwise there's really no incentive to take notice of it. Just look at any of the CGI trailers that launch an announcement of the game, and all the subsequent complaints about how they are pointless.

The gameplay in NMS may be amazing, but the trailers up to this point have certainly done a poor job of showing The scope of what it is if the game is as big as it is reported to be . Unless the trailers are genuinely showing the extent of what it consists of, in which case it's going to be polarizing.