Support NeoGAF

[GribbleGrunger]

If someone , in a thread asking 'how do you stand on no man's sky' expresses that they are sceptical about the game and unimpressed by the gameplay shown they are psychotic?

Maybe if you ask nicely the mods can make a safe space thread about the game where you can only talk hype and all dissenting opinions are banned.

It'll be like that donald trump subreddit on reddit.

It's not about whether someone likes the game or dislikes the game, it's about how they express it and how persistently they express it. To say 'it's not for me' or to explain why is fine by me, but when people continuously do that in every thread, spread misinformation, even though they've been told otherwise, or compare it derogatively to other failed games [see below], I have to wonder what their agenda is. I hate COD but I wouldn't constantly go into a thread and tell people why I hate it. I'd stay clear and accept it's not a game for me.

And I said: 'It's damned near psychotic,' not specifically that they 'were' psychotic as in the medical definition. I'm just exaggerating a point to make one and I added two words to make sure people understood that.

 

[terencecah]

I think this game is spore 2016


Massive massive hype, leading to a mediocre game

Nothing I've see about this game looks at all worth of its praise

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Wow.

Thoroughly enjoyed that.

Yeah, he's quite an inspirational talker.

 

[LakeEarth]

I think this game is spore 2016


Massive massive hype, leading to a mediocre game

Nothing I've see about this game looks at all worth of its praise

I hope you're wrong, but I can totally see what you're saying.

 

[CrazE]

I think this game is spore 2016


Massive massive hype, leading to a mediocre game

Nothing I've see about this game looks at all worth of its praise

I didn't even see it at E3, which seemed kind of odd for a game right around the corner.

 

[The Broker]

I will wait and see for the reviews. Sean is a great guy but the secretiveness around this game I think is just to hide its many posible flaws or limitations. Too much of nothing is still nothing.

Plus is summer and I like to be outdoors and this is a game that will suck the life of me.

 

[GhaleonEB]

No big spoilers below.

No Man's Sky has had a perfectly normal reveal cadence. Initial trailer showing the nature, size, scope, core ideas of the project. Interviews and press features later on that go into increasing details, with more trailers that flesh out what you do. As the game comes together, hands on impressions from the press and longer demonstrations follow, with more features and polish revealed closer to launch as those things are finished and the developer is more confident talking about them.

 

[Listonosh]

I like this guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6he-aT5eqxs

whoa, just watched it and realized we both made a similar analogy to J.J. Abrams. Hilarious

 

[SomTervo]

No Man's Sky has had a perfectly normal reveal cadence. Initial trailer showing the nature, size, scope, core ideas of the project. Interviews and press features later on that go into increasing details, with more trailers that flesh out what you do. As the game comes together, hands on impressions from the press and longer demonstrations follow, with more features and polish revealed closer to launch as those things are finished and the developer is more confident talking about them.

It has followed that process,yes, just stretched out for about a year longer than normal. That's my point. Do you not remember the threads full of people shouting 'they revealed this too early'? (This isn't my sentiment at all.) It was an especially long time after the flood took out HG's offices. Many mid-large team size games promote for around 1–2 years, while NMS was promoted years in advance. Like four years.

Bear in mind that I'm excited about the game and I personally think it's going to be good. My argument stems from watching countless people cry 'This game looks great' *months pass* 'What do you actually do in it?' *months pass* 'This new video shows nothing' *months pass* 'It's not going to be out for years!?' *months pass* 'A new video showing nothing', etc, and eventually that long-form, incremental release of information allowing people's imaginations to fill in the gaps.

Now here we are. A majority who seem generally excited, a minority who really know the deal with the game (a perspective you can't get without reading a lot of texts - not a single video tells the whole story), and a larger minority who seem to be screaming this misinformed narrative about what the game is (after turning sour during a long reveal cycle).

I honestly do not think that is what happened, with all due respect.

What I believe happened is that from the get go the game was presented honestly about what it is: A procedural exploration game with elements strongly reminiscent of Frontier Elite or Eve (space -but also ground- combat/ gathering/ basic crafting/ commerce/ factions), but somehow people started projecting their idea of what the game SHOULD be, instead of learning and reading about what the game actually is.

I think that's a pretty deep misunderstanding of the game, though? Elite/EVE are full-blown sims, practically. Lots of data, lots of RPGing. NMS has far more restrained RPG and sim elements. It's mainly a survival game where exploration is key to progression (ie it's an adventure game). It's not really a sim or an RPG like Elite or EVE. It was totally inspired by Elite's galaxy-systems and gameplay, though.

 

[blackflag]

I'm super skeptical but interested so I'm going to wait for reviews and impressions.

 

[Oozer3993]

My most anticipated game for the near future. Probably even nudging out The Last Guardian. If you were to ask me to design my perfect desert island game, I'd probably say "Explore an entire galaxy." And, by golly, that's what you do in No Man's Sky. I've already joked to coworkers that if I disappear during the release week, don't fret. I'm just playing NMS.

 

[cool_dude]

I got burned by the Spore hype, as well as many other people. So, armed with that experience and criticism about procedural generation, many of us can see beyond the hype and see the game for what it is: a tech demo with an uninteresting "game" loop.

Look at how still the plant life is. Look at the ubiquitous floaty thingies. Look at how unnatural blowing up that gray rock to have red rocks float to you. Look at how procedural generation leaves behind a very weird formation.

These are the transitions. They are actually edited (shortened) by the creator because of the length of planet entry and exit. You lock on and cannot control until the transition ends. Imagine entering and exiting 9 times in a row before finding a planet with life.

For planet entry, the transition allows the world to load before you are able to land (notice the object and texture pop-in):

 

[Thor Molecules]

What I find fascinating is the lengths some people are going to to express why those of us who are excited for this game are wrong. It's reaching 'fanatic' levels of hyperbole and misinformation. Why are people so intent on pushing their opinion on a game they won't even play? It's damned near psychotic. I feel as if this is a symptom of something far more obvious.

People are excited for something and they can't understand why. But the problem can't be with them so it has to be with us and the game and they need us to see it and agree so that they can truly be assured that something isnt wrong with them.

 

[RedSwirl]

Considering Elite Dangerous has only planetoids available and thousands of people enjoy that game for dozens to hundreds of hours, I'd say planet variety won't be a drawback, even if it does end up being homogeneous. I don't even have Horizons season pass in Elite (so no planet landing at all) and I have close to 60 hours invested in that game, just scanning spheres in empty space and occasionally trading text from one station to another (simplification of resource trading).

The exploration and discovery elements of this game being painted as a potential negative if variety isn't endlessly breathtaking and innovative has spiraled way out of control.

Also, this wasn't meant to be the omni-game - the game meant for everyone to play. Space sims and Space sim-lites are not everyone's cup of tea. Just because this got a huge spotlight doesn't mean this is an attack on anyone who isn't interested. Space enthusiasts' genre is getting more attention than normal and this has oddly caused a backlash from people that don't typically play space games... I guess because this game is taking headlines from potentially other games? I don't know. The narrative about this game is crazy.

Maybe this is the problem. Frontier Elite II had the same sense of scale back in 1993 but not that many people put up a fuss about it.

I guess it's because this is the first time a space simulator is being 1) built to have accessible mainstream controls, and 2) released on a mainstream console in North America. A lot of this confusion is because it's being advertised to people who've never played Elite.

What if that planned Super NES version of the original Elite had actually been made? What if they'd tried to do a PS1 port of Elite II or Elite III? In light of this it's a bit odd that the Xbox One version of Elite Dangerous has mostly flown under the radar.

 

[mnannola]

Will be a legendary game if it has great VR support built in.

 

[Darryl]

Can someone sum up real quick why folks are turning on this game now?

I have been media blackout on it, tbh.

As long as the concept is still the same.. you get dropped in a universe with procedurally generated planets, animals, fauna.. and you can fly around and just explore new places seamlessly... then I am still in Day 1.

Why are so many people off of the hype train now?

It was initially shown during the console transition and a lot of people first heard of it when they were trying to see some of the first PS4 games (I think it was at some GOTY awards show?). It became a symbol of what people were expecting of the next-generation of gaming, imo. The next-step beyond open-world. It was exciting because it was promising.

However, it was what it was. It was essentially an indie developer tech demo. Lots of indie developers make these kinda things as thought experiments. It's easy to push the scope when you limit the polish. It's no surprise that people filled the game's obvious gaps with their mind's own creations. It obviously had multiplayer, for example. Why would anyone want to be lost in this big world too large to explore yourself.. without their friends? It had to have combat, or crafting, or whatever else. That's easy, even simple games have that stuff. All they had to do was add it. There was obviously more to it. Ultimately, we're finding out that a lot of the things that could've been exciting to do in this big huge world may not be there after all. The game is being left to stand on it's own merits and is now being freed of previous expectations. Naturally, the excitement is wearing off.

 

[Felipe Simao]

Toxic as usual. Your everyday no man's sky thread.

Day 0 for me. I love exploration in games and this looks right down my alley. Cant wait.
Keep up the good work, Sean.

 

[Elandyll]

...
I think that's a pretty deep misunderstanding of the game, though? Elite/EVE are full-blown sims, practically. Lots of data, lots of RPGing. NMS has far more restrained RPG and sim elements. It's mainly a survival game where exploration is key to progression (ie it's an adventure game). It's not really a sim or an RPG like Elite or EVE. It was totally inspired by Elite's galaxy-systems and gameplay, though.

One thing I've never seen NMS being mistaken for though, is a Sim, as I was not talking about details of flight model/ UI/ commands, but of "activities" and scope (although on that last one NMS has Elite beat by a wide margin).

 

[SocksAndShoes]

I got burned by the Spore hype, as well as many other people. So, armed with that experience and criticism about procedural generation, many of us can see beyond the hype and see the game for what it is: a tech demo with an uninteresting "game" loop.

So your issues with the game so far come down to plant life not moving,"ubiquitous floaty things", the fact that the deformation (which is not procedurally generated) looks weird, and the fact that loading times are a part of the game. Everything else you're complaining about are things you couldn't have first hand knowledge of ("uninteresting gameplay loop").

Cool, don't buy it then. This is pretty simple.

 

[hououinkyouma00]

I've never played it but having seen all the footage I'm skeptical.
They have shown the same stuff over and over, and I don't care if it ends up being a H1Z1 style survival game.

 

[RedSwirl]

The one thing Hello Games hasn't elaborated on yet is how the trading economy works. We've heard that a lot of testers never landed on planets and simply made a living trading resources from space station to space station.

 

[Moon_frogger]

Look like the next spore. A hugely ambitious concept that ends up being shallow and not fun after a few hours.

I'm guessing by the time most people get to their 4th or 5th randomly generated plant they will get fatigue and this game will just die. Of course I'm sure I'll be called a troll or worse for this opinion but seriously, it's just an opinion based on what I've seen. I'm sure it will be great for some people. I mean, even spore had its fan base

 

[Thor Molecules]

I got burned by the Spore hype, as well as many other people. So, armed with that experience and criticism about procedural generation, many of us can see beyond the hype and see the game for what it is: a tech demo with an uninteresting "game" loop.

Look at how still the plant life is. Look at the ubiquitous floaty thingies. Look at how unnatural blowing up that gray rock to have red rocks float to you. Look at how procedural generation leaves behind a very weird formation.

These are the transitions. They are actually edited (shortened) by the creator because of the length of planet entry and exit. You lock on and cannot control until the transition ends. Imagine entering and exiting 9 times in a row before finding a planet with life.

For planet entry, the transition allows the world to load before you are able to land (notice the object and texture pop-in):

All the legitimate criticisms there are about this game and you resort to straight up fucking lying. The rock formation has nothing to do with procedural generation and there are no space to planet loading screen transitions.

 

[xxracerxx]

So your issues with the game so far come down to plant life not moving,"ubiquitous floaty things", the fact that the deformation (which is not procedurally generated) looks weird, and the fact that loading times are a part of the game. Everything else you're complaining about are things you couldn't have first hand knowledge of ("uninteresting gameplay loop").

Cool, don't buy it then. This is pretty simple.

cool_dude must make sure everyone in the known universe knows that NMS is trash and that it is going to bomb hard. You should expect him in every NMS thread there is.

 

[SocksAndShoes]

cool_dude must make sure everyone in the known universe knows that NMS is trash and that it is going to bomb hard. You should expect him in every NMS thread there is.

Yeah, Just saw his/her post history.

Sony game threads: negative snooty comment, laughing at games graphics, negative snooty comment, comment about Sony VR dying a slow death, etc.

MS game threads: literally almost all of them end in a "!".

And then there's this:

Xbox One is great. Don't ask SonyGAF for advice.

Blatant and embarrassing.

 

[somme]

They've been particularly cagey when it comes to showing huge amounts of the game and its features because NMS is ultimately an adventure game, into the unknown.

If they show lots of stuff there will be no point in actually playing it. They've shown enough.

 

[Axass]

I think it'll be a major disappointment for a huge amount of people. Some will love it.

 

[Figboy79]

Yeah, Just saw his/her post history.

Sony game threads: negative snooty comment, laughing at games graphics, negative snooty comment, comment about Sony VR dying a slow death, etc.

MS game threads: literally almost all of them end in a "!".

And then there's this:



Blatant and embarrassing.

I admit his post history is pretty fucking transparent. We get it, man, you don't like Sony and loooove your XBox. There's nothing wrong with that, but why constantly attempt to shit up threads about games you aren't interested in? You don't like the game. Nothing wrong with that either, but why are you attempting to police how other people that are interested in what this game has to offer view the game? I don't like racing games, but I won't be visiting Forza or GT threads trying to convince the people that love those games that their excitement for said game is unwarranted.

@cool_dude:

Look at it this way: The people that are excited about No Man's Sky have more than likely devoured every bit of information concerning No Man's Sky. All of the interviews. All of the gameplay videos. All of the trailers. All of the previews and hands on write ups concerning the game. I'd be comfortable saying that, if they have pored over all of that No Man's Sky coverage, yet they are still excited about the game, none of your nay-saying is going to sway them.

Do you think they haven't seen the pop in? The animations? The various details and short-comings of a procedurally generated universe? The framerate hiccups in the PS4 version? And all of the other not so perfect elements of the games design? Yet here they are. Still looking forward to the game. Or cautiously optimistic, or perhaps no longer interested at all. The point I'm trying to make is that your special brand of insight isn't new. It's that the people still excited for No Man's Sky aren't bothered by such "egregious" issues as you are. They know what they're getting, because they've gobbled up all of the released information about the game. Since Sean Murray and Hello Games have been very forthcoming about what the game does and does not have, there's no subterfuge or deception in terms of false expectations being raised. There's been no Kojima caliber bait and switches in terms of what the player can expect from this game.

It's just that those excited for the game are comfortable with what they're getting. Yes, many will let the hype get the better of them, but some people are hyped for 100% exactly what has been shown, not some false expectation of a Mass Effect style presentation and narrative, with complex gameplay systems deeper than any MMO. They just understand that it is a chill on the couch and relax while walking across an alien planet, searching for resources to help them survive just that bit longer, or go just that bit deeper into the ocean, or into toxic environments, or to get that resource that will allow them to go to that planet that they see hovering above them through the clouds. They aren't expecting dialogue wheels and side-quests.

As a guy who has a huge nerd boner for pretty much anything Science Fiction related, the idea of being able to explore numerous planets that look like something out of an Asimov or Joe Haldeman novel cover is exciting to me. And don't get me wrong, I love my shoot shoot, boom boom, set-piece extravaganza games, but I also love my Journey's, Shadow of the Colossus, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, and Terrarias. Games that aren't traditional blockbusters, but are compelling and entertaining. I like the idea of finding a planet that no one has been on, and cataloging the flora and fauna, rooting around for portals and ruins, maybe find some rare resources that I can either use to make my equipment better, or trade for better stuff. I know that that won't appeal to everybody, but I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to try and make people feel the way I do about it. If they ask me, like this thread has, why I'm interested or not interested, I'll answer, but I won't try to convince anyone to be like me. That's silly.

EDIT: As a member of "SonyGAF," I think Xbox ONE is great, I just haven't gotten one yet. I'm currently not interested in a lot of the games outside of Sunset Overdrive and Quantum Break for now, but I also have a gaming PC, and so many of the ONE's games are hitting PC, so I won't miss out on too much. Not all of us are into console wars bullshit.

 

[kyser73]

snip


I think that's a pretty deep misunderstanding of the game, though? Elite/EVE are full-blown sims, practically. Lots of data, lots of RPGing. NMS has far more restrained RPG and sim elements. It's mainly a survival game where exploration is key to progression (ie it's an adventure game). It's not really a sim or an RPG like Elite or EVE. It was totally inspired by Elite's galaxy-systems and gameplay, though.

Nah, the original Elite and Elite II: Frontier are pretty close to NMS - I'd argue NMS is actually more a successor to them in content & approach than Dangerous, which is pretty heavy space sim control-wise.

Definitely not like Eve though, other than looking like a massive time-sink

 

[Deleted member 752119]

The one thing Hello Games hasn't elaborated on yet is how the trading economy works. We've heard that a lot of testers never landed on planets and simply made a living trading resources from space station to space station.

Sounds just like trading in elite dangerous. Find a station that has a high supply of something and thus sells it cheap and take it to the nearest place with short stock and paying a premium on it.

Hopefully there's more guidance though as ED is super obtuse.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I loved Spore. Fucking loved it.

Was it flawed? Yes. But did it fail to deliver on its base concept? No.

I got burned by the Spore hype, as well as many other people. So, armed with that experience and criticism about procedural generation, many of us can see beyond the hype and see the game for what it is: a tech demo with an uninteresting "game" loop.

Look at how still the plant life is. Look at the ubiquitous floaty thingies. Look at how unnatural blowing up that gray rock to have red rocks float to you. Look at how procedural generation leaves behind a very weird formation.

These are the transitions. They are actually edited (shortened) by the creator because of the length of planet entry and exit. You lock on and cannot control until the transition ends. Imagine entering and exiting 9 times in a row before finding a planet with life.

For planet entry, the transition allows the world to load before you are able to land (notice the object and texture pop-in):

All of what you are saying is valid but you're acting like this isn't a huge game made by very few people.

 

[akidnamededdy]

I think this game is spore 2016


Massive massive hype, leading to a mediocre game

Nothing I've see about this game looks at all worth of its praise

I've been trying to figure out the perfect way to express how I feel about this game and I think you nailed it.

It's an idea that sounds too good to be true.

I'm not writing it off completely yet but I'm not allowing myself to get too excited either.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

All of what you are saying is valid but you're acting like this isn't a huge game made by very few people.

While true, people aren't obligated to give games that don't appeal to them a pass because it was made by a small team. Especially when it costs the same as uber polished AAA games like a Uncharted 4 made by huge teams.

Not saying it's wrong or them to price it at that. Just that people make their value judgements subjectively and not everyone is going to lower expectations because it's a small team when the game is full price.

 

[Listonosh]

I admit is post history is pretty fucking transparent. We get it, man, you don't like Sony and loooove your XBox. There's nothing wrong with that, but why constantly attempt to shit up threads about games you aren't interested in? You don't like the game. Nothing wrong with that, but why are you attempting to police how other people that are interested in what this game has to offer view the game? I don't like racing games, but I won't be visiting Forza or GT threads trying to convince the people that love those games that their excitement for said game is unwarranted.

@cool_dude:

Look at it this way: The people that are excited about No Man's Sky have more than likely devoured every bit of information concerning No Man's Sky. All of the interviews. All of the gameplay videos. All of the trailers. All of the previews and hands on write ups concerning the game. I'd be comfortable saying that, if they have pored over all of that No Man's Sky coverage, yet they are still excited about the game, none of your nay-saying is going to sway them.

Do you think they haven't seen the pop in? The animations? The various details and short-comings of a procedurally generated universe? The framerate hiccups in the PS4 version? And all of the other not so perfect elements of the games design? Yet here they are. Still looking forward to the game. Or cautiously optimistic, or perhaps no longer interested at all. The point I'm trying to make is that your special brand of insight isn't new. It's that the people still excited for No Man's Sky aren't bothered by such "egregious" issues as you are. They know what they're getting, because they've gobbled up all of the released information about the game. Since Sean Murray and Hello Games have been very forthcoming about what the game does and does not have, there's no subterfuge or deception in terms of false expectations being raised. There's been no Kojima caliber bait and switches in terms of what the player can expect from this game.

It's just that those excited for the game are comfortable with what they're getting. Yes, many will let the hype get the better of them, but some people are hyped for 100% exactly what has been shown, not some false expectation of a Mass Effect style presentation and narrative, with complex gameplay systems deeper than any MMO. They just understand that is a chill on the couch and relax while walking across an alien planet, searching for resources to help them survive just that bit longer, or go just that bit deeper into the ocean, or into toxic environments, or to get that resource that will allow them to go that planet that they see hovering above them through the clouds. They aren't expecting dialogue wheels and side-quests.

As a guy who has a huge nerd boner for pretty much anything Science Fiction related, the idea of being able to explore numerous planets that look like something out of an Asimov or Joe Haldeman novel cover is exciting to me. And don't get me wrong, I love my shoot shoot, boom boom, set-piece extravaganza games, but I also love my Journey's, Shadow of the Colossus, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, and Terrarias. Games that aren't traditional blockbusters, but are compelling and entertaining. I like the idea of finding a planet that no one has been on, and cataloging the flora and fauna, rooting around for portals and ruins, maybe find some rare resources that I can either use to make my equipment better, or trade for better stuff. I know that that won't appeal to everybody, but I'm certainly not going to go out of my to try and make people feel the way I do about it. If they ask me, like this thread has, why I'm interested or not interested, I'll answer, but I won't try to convince anyone to be like me. That's silly.

EDIT: As a member of "SonyGAF," I think Xbox ONE is great, I just haven't gotten one yet. I'm currently not interested in a lot of the games outside of Sunset Overdrive and Quantum Break for now, but I also have a gaming PC, and so many of the ONE's games are hitting PC, so I won't miss out on too much. Not all of us are into console wars bullshit.

Probably couldn't have said it better myself, though I certainly have attempted =)

 

[FStop7]

At this point I'm looking for something like a deeper FTL with more of an emphasis on discovery.

 

[SocksAndShoes]

As a guy who has a huge nerd boner for pretty much anything Science Fiction related, the idea of being able to explore numerous planets that look like something out of an Asimov or Joe Haldeman novel cover is exciting to me. And don't get me wrong, I love my shoot shoot, boom boom, set-piece extravaganza games, but I also love my Journey's, Shadow of the Colossus, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, and Terrarias. Games that aren't traditional blockbusters, but are compelling and entertaining. I like the idea of finding a planet that no one has been on, and cataloging the flora and fauna, rooting around for portals and ruins, maybe find some rare resources that I can either use to make my equipment better, or trade for better stuff.

Nailed it. This is exactly why I'm excited for the game.

 

[Mr. X]

I think a lot of people are expecting something it won't be and it's going to be interesting to watch reaction.

 

[More_Badass]

Nailed it. This is exactly why I'm excited for the game.

All I ever wanted from this game are pretty planets to explore, weird alien creatures to observe, and interesting secrets to uncover. Everything else is icing on the cake.

I think people really need to watch Sean talk about the game. He is so candid and humble. This isn't a Molyneux promising wild dreams and claims. It's a team that only shows and talks about things when those features are implemented. It's a lead dev who is very transparent in showing how their tech works and saying exactly what they want to deliver with their project

Seriously, just watch the guy

30 minute behind-the-scenes breakdown of how the procedural engine works, how ships, animals, etc. are generated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU

40 minutes talk about managing expectations of the game and the nature of working on the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4zKTNLz0kQ

 

[gamerMan]

For some reason the game reminds me off Space Shuttle on the Atari.

 

[neonille]

I got burned by the Spore hype, as well as many other people. So, armed with that experience and criticism about procedural generation, many of us can see beyond the hype and see the game for what it is: a tech demo with an uninteresting "game" loop.

Look at how still the plant life is. Look at the ubiquitous floaty thingies. Look at how unnatural blowing up that gray rock to have red rocks float to you. Look at how procedural generation leaves behind a very weird formation.

These are the transitions. They are actually edited (shortened) by the creator because of the length of planet entry and exit. You lock on and cannot control until the transition ends. Imagine entering and exiting 9 times in a row before finding a planet with life.

For planet entry, the transition allows the world to load before you are able to land (notice the object and texture pop-in):

You know....i just went through your post history and seriously, how old are you?
You're acting like a 13-year old arguing on the schoolyard over wich console is the best, mocking everything that Sony does and praising everything that Microsoft does. If you don't like anything that has to do with the ps4 then why bother?

 

[LesPaul]

I honestly don't care at all. I never have but maybe when we finally see what it is all about I will give it a shot.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

All I ever wanted from this game are pretty planets to explore, weird alien creatures to observe, and interesting secrets to uncover. Everything else is icing on the cake.

I think people really need to watch Sean talk about the game. He is so candid and humble. This isn't a Molyneux promising wild dreams and claims. It's a team that only shows and talks about things when those features are implemented. It's a lead dev who is very transparent in showing how their tech works and saying exactly what they want to deliver with their project

Seriously, just watch the guy

30 minute behind-the-scenes breakdown of how the procedural engine works, how ships, animals, etc. are generated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU

40 minutes talk about managing expectations of the game and the nature of working on the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4zKTNLz0kQ

That's exactly how I feel and where my expectations are set.

What is your theory for what's at the centre of the galaxy/universe? Here's mine:

When you get to the centre of the galaxy you discover the greatest irony of all: In a game that's procedurally generated, you discover that in 'reality' the universe is in fact procedurally generated. That's why the atlas is presented as a geometric shape with a pulsing living cell in the centre. Perhaps a computer with Geometric Organic Dimensions written on it.

 

[oti]

I'm not "actively hyped" for it but still curious.

 

[More_Badass]

That's exactly how I feel and where my expectations are set.

What is your theory for what's at the centre of the galaxy/universe? Here's mine:

When you get to the centre of the galaxy you discover the greatest irony of all: In a game that's procedurally generated, you discover that in 'reality' the universe is in fact procedurally generated. That's why the atlas is presented as a geometric shape with a pulsing living cell in the centre. Perhaps a computer with Geometric Organic Dimensions written on it.

It probably has to be related to yourself and the Sentinels. I'm kind of expecting some supermassive space station or structure.

Also Sean said you can keep playing after you reach the center, so I imagine you probably unlock some advanced tech/options or maybe some kind of new game plus. Or maybe players reaching the center will affect the universe as a whole and other players might see changes throughout the universe

 

[GribbleGrunger]

It probably has to be related to yourself and the Sentinels. I'm kind of expecting some supermassive space station or structure.

Also Sean said you can keep playing after you reach the center, so I imagine you probably unlock some advanced tech/options or maybe some kind of new game plus. Or maybe players reaching the center will affect the universe as a whole and other players might see changes throughout the universe

It depends on whether you're aiming to go to the centre of the universe or the centre of the galaxy. There's plenty of evidence to suggest it's the centre of the galaxy so I'm thinking something similar to spelunking in Don't Starve. It gives you an option to return to the galaxy you've just travelled through or continue on to the next galaxy.

If it's practical for them to affect the galaxy then that would be interesting, but is it practical? How fragile are those algorithms and what would happen if thousands of people suddenly changed them?

 

[Figboy79]

All I ever wanted from this game are pretty planets to explore, weird alien creatures to observe, and interesting secrets to uncover. Everything else is icing on the cake.

I think people really need to watch Sean talk about the game. He is so candid and humble. This isn't a Molyneux promising wild dreams and claims. It's a team that only shows and talks about things when those features are implemented. It's a lead dev who is very transparent in showing how their tech works and saying exactly what they want to deliver with their project

Seriously, just watch the guy

30 minute behind-the-scenes breakdown of how the procedural engine works, how ships, animals, etc. are generated
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-kifCYToAU

40 minutes talk about managing expectations of the game and the nature of working on the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4zKTNLz0kQ

Pretty much. I watched those videos back when they were originally upload, and they are really frank and candid.

A lot of these guys are used to the way big companies handle their PR. They talk big, make bold promises, and if the game falls short of expectations, they roll on to the next big, impressive project and go back to talking big and making bold promises on their next title.

The thing is, indie developers don't have that luxury. They can't let failed expectations roll off of their backs and move on to the next project, because there will literally be no next project if they fail to deliver on the current one.

Hello Games isn't owned by Sony. They are a 12 person team, who have been working on this game for four years. It is nearing completion, and they made sure to only talk about features that they'd realistically be able to implement in the game. Once the procedural algortihms were sorted out, they were able to grow the game out. Most of the features present in the game were talked about years ago, with the most recent revelations about the game revealed earlier this year (before E3), was that there were alien languages to learn by interacting with monoliths scattered throughout the galaxy. Other features like equipment/ship/armor upgrades were known ages ago.

An indie team can't afford to bullshit you. Their reputation depends on them being able to deliver what they promise. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, EA, Activision, etc, etc, can afford to lie to us all they want, because they more than likely have enough other cool looking projects to make us forgive a misstep or broken promise. Believe me, as a huge fan of the Fable series, I know all about the feel of smoke being blown up my ass.

Sean Murray and Hello Games can't afford to boast like a Carnival Barker. They can't afford to deceive and fool us by making claims they can't back. Because they know if they do, Hello Games' rep is ruined. That could have financial ramifications if word of broken promises spread and people don't purchase the game. Look at what happened to Lionhead. I loved the Fable games (Well, 1 was great, 2 was disappointing, 3 had fun co-op that me and my wife would play all of the time, but it still didn't capture the joy and charm of the first Fable), and where is Lionhead now? How is Molyneux regarded now?

People in the gaming industry aren't making games to get one over on you. They aren't setting out to make terrible, mediocre games. I know, because I work in the gaming industry. We do it because we have a love and passion for gaming, and want to make cool games that we, ourselves, would like to play as well. If Sean was guarded about No Man's Sky early on, it was because he didn't want to over-promise on a game he already knew his 12 person team would have to break themselves to pull off. He only revealed features when he knew they could do it and it was implemented successfully. If the game falls short, it certainly wasn't because they were trying to disappoint people or con them. Indy devs realy can't risk their livelihoods on fucking over the fanbase.

 

[Kindekuma]

I've watched a lot of gameplay videos, and I dunno how I feel about NMS. I appreciate the open style of it, but I know I'd get bored of it really quick.

It's a gorgeous game with a lot of heart and effort behind it, but I don't know if it has what it takes to keep me interested as a player.

 

[N° 2048]

I am SO excited.
This is the game I've always wanted. Space exploration, land on planets, etc.

Day fucking 1. Also the devs seem like some of the nicest people ever. They really are pouring their love into this game.

 

[Galactic Fork]

Look at how still the plant life is. Look at the ubiquitous floaty thingies. Look at how unnatural blowing up that gray rock to have red rocks float to you. Look at how procedural generation leaves behind a very weird formation.

The plant thing is true, it'd be cool if they blew in the wind. And you're free to hate the floaty things. Whatever.
However, the part left behind by the mining gun thingie isn't that way because of procedural generation, it's there because the gun removes a spherical portion. It's not blowing it up, it's harvesting.

These are the transitions. They are actually edited (shortened) by the creator because of the length of planet entry and exit. You lock on and cannot control until the transition ends. Imagine entering and exiting 9 times in a row before finding a planet with life.

This is just untrue. You are boosting to get out faster, you do have control. You see many times in live gameplay videos where boosting is controlled during entry and exit. The controls are slower because you are boosting very fast. I mean suuuure you might think you should be able to turn on a dive while traveling at a speed that lets you exit the planet's atmosphere in a few seconds, but I disagree.

This proves you are not here in good faith.

For planet entry, the transition allows the world to load before you are able to land (notice the object and texture pop-in):

It's not a transition, it's the speed causing the generator to skip a few layers of detail, which is a valid complaint, but it's not a loading time. You should actually go look at live gameplay videos.

 

[MilHombreLobo]

On the planets, I believe.