A Unity ID allows you to buy and/or subscribe to Unity products and services, shop in the Asset Store and participate
in the Unity community.
Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Aiursrage2k, Aug 21, 2016.
No Man's Sky was sold in this category for several years.
On the topic of reviews there weren't any review copies handed out for No Man's Sky. Yet another early warning that the game wasn't going to live up anywhere near its hype.
I pre-order just because there's a 50/50 chance I'll forget to buy a game that interests me, otherwise. Even after I buy a game there's a 50/50 chance I may not get around to playing it any time soon. Heck I have at least two games in the closet that I haven't unwrapped that I've had for maybe two years.
More interest and intent than spare time...
The other things is what happen to the build people actually played on show floor (actual random people not the dev) before the released of the games,and didn't suffer the issues and features cut? Did sony ask for an early released and those feature will be given the polish for the ps neo? /tinfoil hat
The technical demo being presented at E3 and during interviews wasn't using procedural generation.
theyre scumbags, nuff said
But is that true?
I mean, I followed in direct when they found the file with numbered planet for the E3 build. But does that mean they had baked parameter (the seed mostly), or baked landscape (the mesh), or baked data (data from which teh mesh is generated) or cached data (does not have to hold other system at the same time), or was it just trigger?.
Which would make sense if the game is not finished and all system not integrated. I have no confirmation except that it was "scripted".
but then in the video he talk about rehearshal and this:
Does not looks like a lie.
They also find what seem to be a prototype model of player's appearance, that show things might have been scrapped due to problem (see numerous crash on ps4 despite sony's QA's army). They found model of a space grave too that isn't in the game.
All evidences seems to point to a final integration unseen complexity that blew up their plan.
I'm pulling my Hanlon's razor card and put face up on the table:
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"
@neoshaman: That's definitely more in-depth than what I heard. Good to know it may not have been entirely scripted.
Also notice he show only one planet in that video, there is 3 planet files, what happen to those planets? And then there is the issues that it might also simply not have all the modular model to create all permutation (the final game is richer). While there is no battle between freighter, there has been massive battle of 20+ ships at the same times with one warping in (the same as in the video, ie a sentinel ships). But even when you look at the footage, you see pirate attacking static freighter and the freighter firing back to them, not freighter on freighter battle, with also the power of good camera placement that haven't the final game's cramped FOV.
Spoiler: almost massive battle in the game with bad FOV
ships + 4 cargo
sentinel warping in
16+2 ships 3 cargo
20+ ships 3 cargo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKdi2K87u9g 9 ships 2 cargo
It really beg the question how do you make space battle interesting to look at from a gameplay cockpit.
The more I analyze the more I see public overhyping itself. Most people know about the game from second hand anyway. Things do have been removed but they belong to early video (which also show number of bugs who disappeared like floating weed we see in that e3 video). Most telling to me is how the repurposed the asteroid, it was many big fat voxel asteroid you could blew hole in, now there is many small asteroid and some big voxel one, smells memory issues that don't scale to a finish full featured product.
The problem with the space battles is the HUD - or lack thereof - as well as lack of pacing. A space combat game is essentially a UI battle with drama coming in over your headphones. The ability to actually see what is going on in 'reality', though interesting, is not all that relevant since apart from vfx there's not much you can really pick up when everything is a whizzing dot on a black background. Basically a) I wouldn't have known where to aim in those videos and b) there's no sense of an unfolding battle with any sort of structure, it's just an unsightly melee of random ships, with no beta wingman to yell out about what's going on and give you the latest news.
I thought the sfx was quite good though.
I personally have quite enjoyed my time with the game. It's a different experience for sure--the only real sense of progression I have is upgrading my ship, suit, and multi-tool--but simply taken as a casual, arcade game it works quite well.
However, there are direct quotes of Sean stating either that multiplayer is possible, and that certain things (like seeing what your avatar looks like) are only available through multiplayer, so those complaints are entirely justified. It's a feature that was totally absent from the game that was promised.
Additionally, the technical problems have been embarrassing. When I first got the game, I was getting BSODs because the game kept my CPU (an i7-6700k at that) at 100% for too long. This persisted through several updates (I stopped playing when Deus Ex came out so I haven't checked recently).
I can't agree with this at all. First, procedural generation is nothing but a technique. Unless level design is a fundamental part of your game (something like a platformer), procedural generation can work just as well if you work around it. Second, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by procedural gameplay. If you mean the bases and such on each planet, I think they work just fine for how the game plays. It's not an in-depth game. You're meant to move through hundreds of those things, they have to be light on content. Consider something like the street crimes in Watch Dogs or the Assassin's Creed series, or the random events in many other open world games. It's meant to be very light interaction.
And how does one decide what "works," anyway? What's the criteria?
I got so tired of hearing only the one side presented in this thread I decided to have a look on YouTube to see what other folks were saying.
Might be interesting to watch if for no other reason than just to have both sides instead of just the "they are crooks they lied they delivered a bunch of ^%&^!" side.
After watching some videos focused on more than just whining about the game I must say it seems impressive the scale and overall quality of the game. Seems to have a pretty massive feel, offers a lot of interaction, and looks extremely good to boot (not just in general graphics quality but the creativity... a lot of very interesting visuals).
Not sure I'd enjoy it really (definitely not for $60 but I am almost certainly not their target audience) but I can definitely see the work put into it.
The deleting of animal naming is debunked
An intriguing article I just came across: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Mich...s_How_We_Talk_About_Procedural_Generation.php
This is false, even on the Colbert Show ( yeah, crazy that this con got that big) he specifically said you cannot see your own character, and the only way to know what you look like is if other players see you. There were other interviews where he said other players can grief you, in a different interview he said other players can ´take your stuff´.
You are right, a month before launch they backtracked on the multiplayer stuff, but they never actually said it wasn´t in, they just made it sound like it wasn´t an important part of gameplay. I don´t think anyone can argue with what is written on the steam page, because that basically is what is in... where stuff that gets named by you is named for other people for a couple of weeks ( they made it sound like it was permanent though). Basically ´online features´ is a highscore system. I don´t think any fans are arguing against what is on the box or steam page, they are mad about what he said in the interviews and how they are avoiding it now. When they got busted for lying about multiplayer, their reaction was ´omg, two people found each other in our huge universe´.. almost denying that the players did not actually find each other, they just found the same stop to occupy.
Since the thread has had a recent revival, I thought I'd link to one of the recent articles where Sony's president made an interesting little statement on the matter. Having someone who knew how to deal with the public and not allow the hype to escalate out of control from the beginning would have helped them quite a bit.
Now I'm actually curious how many indie developers neglect this aspect of game development when their company reaches the size and/or attention that Hello Games did. Though from what I've seen most developers are pretty tight-lipped so it may not matter quite as much unless you're very open to talking about your project like they were.
What perfect timing. I was going to post a new thread about this and discovered activity here once again.
Here's an example of how to provide the same basic experience of No Man's Sky much more cost effectively and yet not lose out on any of the exploration aspects. Sure it needs the ship upgrades and such but I think it should be obvious those could be added quite easily. The point is the core gameplay is here and could easily be expanded on to far surpass NMS.
It was just released 3 weeks ago and already has over 3,600 downloads on desktop (it is free).
You can get it here: Old Man's Sky
Most people that haven't follow closely the stuff are only seeing the truncated choosen part of the hypelord.
This video has a passage that show how one recurrent message change once you had the remaining footage
You mean aside from WISHING to have this level of hype
Seriously though at a smaller scale, starbound had the same exact problem.
Play starflight MUCH MUCH more complete (and know your history)
Spoiler: Megadrive version
Spoiler: Pc version
Also Mother Fracking STAR CONTROL 2
@GarBenjamin You really are an optimist. I like that, and I agree wholeheartedly that this entire discussion is very one-sided.
There came a point where I wondered if I were standing alone on this topic, so many "game devs" on this board have been very harsh toward the Hello Game's people.
This is gonna be harsh, but I'm calling it as I see it, and its what I believe so f*ck all if you disagree.
I don't know why so many people got so upset over a feature the devs barely said was in the game. I read part of the Reddit article about NMS and its multiplayer features. All that article contained was a bunch of links to videos of the spokesman saying it had Multiplayer in various capacities and nothing else. No discussion of gameplay features, nothing. I don't understand how people could be so f%cking blind. You're mad at Hello Games because they said a there would be MP a handful of times? Why don't you take a second and think about the fact that whatever you've been reading had been hyping the game for weeks if not months. If you read that Reddit article, and do just a tiny bit of critical thought you would realize that article exhibits the most blatant and basic of biases. That bias is when a person provides purely related information, and nothing else. Its like someone cherrypicked every last scrap of information relating to the subject and compiled it all together to hype the game up.
I think its f***ing hilarious and morbidly sad that so many gamers got upset about all of this because it wasn't HG that lied to you. No, it was the third party reviewers and Reddit.
I mean has anyone ever thought about the idea that maybe HG backed off the multiplayer hype a little before release because there was so much hype about it?
If NMS doesn't have MP why wouldn't HG just say "Oh sh** we'd better fess up about that Multiplayer" when two livestreamers ventured across the same locations in the game. No, the spokesman said it was highly improbable and surprising. Does anyone here even know just how easy it is to modify a game to do virtually anything you want? Most people don't realize that it takes security researchers weeks to find a way to exploit a bug in normal applications. Games are a walk in the park comparatively!
I don't know why people can't just be happy. You got the game, now play it. If you wanted multiplayer then you can go and f#cking make your own game! Tell me its so easy, plz. You had weeks before launch where the game was demo'ed. After the initial launch if you hadn't pre-ordered you could have just decided not to buy it. Or if you did preorder it, you could have returned it!
"But I wanted something with multiplayer, its the devs fault" No. Expectations are your own damn fault. If you really want that, you can go make your own game, and deal with all the work, angry & abusive customers, and financial hardship that comes with that too.
Stupid people need to drop off the face of the Earth.
We'll miss you.
Because they are "gamers". That is what they do. Always have, always will. If they aren't upset about something, they'll get upset about other people getting upset.
Fixed that for you. The Reddit community for the game has a great deal of understanding people and a good deal of the ones who are the most understanding are those who understand what is and is not feasible to accomplish. One major problem with hype is that it most affects those who don't actually know what is achievable and what is far fetched.
Also it seems Those understanding people are generally 30+ years old, they did know the slow conceptual scifi before the "melodramatic space cow boy opera" genre took of
by the way, is this game made by Unity? At seeing its graphic, it looks like so.
No. It was built from scratch. (No engine)
I think that "fans" is a better term than "gamers". This isn't at all limited to video games, people like us are just far more exposed to it from that particular group. As an extreme example, sports fans have been known to cause riots on occasion as a result of energetic over-enthusiasm.
Heck, you could almost replace it with "people". You'll never make everyone happy with everything, and as soon as you have widespread attention some of the people who don't like your thing will try to make sure you know about it.
Are you joking? That is like a few days before release, after months of pre-orders and months of interviews where he said the exact opposite. I guess you are going to say he didn´t lie about factions and the huge effect they will have on the game, and those big space fights where you can pick sides.... because you know, some NPCs have a faction name tagged onto them, so technically there are factions.
I sawythis every time, but I know it never will come true. Players just have to be smarter about pre-orders, especially from a developer with no track record. But I have seen multiple people, people who play a ton of games say that this was one of the most deceptive launches of all times, right up there with some Aliens-marines game that I never heard of.
As far as I'm aware he didn't lie. As far as I could tell looking at what he said and when he said it, he genuinely believed what he was saying at the time, and he changed what he was saying as his own expectations changed.
He did make a bunch of ambitious promises and then fail to deliver, not unlike a whole bunch of other people before him. It's more than fair enough for people to be disappointed by it and call them out on it, but I think it's a bit rough to label him a liar unless that's specifically the case.
What you're saying is sound in theory but there is one incident that makes me question whether this is actually the case or not and it's the situation where two players attempted to meet with each other. If Sean Murray truly didn't intend to lie about the situation he should have immediately stated that multiplayer of that nature wasn't present.
His actual response was to basically ignore the incident and make a statement about the servers being too heavily loaded to properly handle the online features of the game at the time. He didn't state what those features were though.
He had made a statement a couple days earlier that the game was not a multiplayer game and to not seek that sort of experience but then he proceeded to sabotage that statement by claiming that the chance of meeting another player was almost zero. If it literally couldn't happen he should have said so. Vague statements will be interpreted wrong.
Regardless of whether any of this was purposeful or not though there is one thing clear. He never should have dealt with the public himself. Or at least not without having someone used to dealing with the public assist with the numerous statements he would be making.
I see what you mean. I didn't dig deep into this, but a supercut of his statements on mutliplayer-features didn't give me the impression he was fully convinced they were gonna be there even when he made his statements. But your guess on this is as good as mine. Maybe he just "wanted to believe" like Molyneux often did?
I have to ask though, if they always thought, due to the universe size, multiplayer meetups were incredibly rare, wouldn't it be a highly irrational management decision to even invest any development resources into building a fully fleshed out multiplayer mode in the first place? I mean assuming every player spreads out in that giant universe, that mode would rarely be experienced by anyone through random encounters, and would be rather impractical even for players that deliberately want to meet up. Imagine you want to play with your friend and he's a few realtime hours worth of travel time away from you. I've played Elite Dangerous with friends for a while and planning out a gaming session always starts out with "So, in which system are you currently?". The problem with these kinds of games is, that the difference between 2 friends actually playing together on the same server, and just playing singleplayer while having a skype call, is minimal. There just isn't enough meaningful interaction possible.
I'd much prefer these games to have interesting, complex and non-grindy singleplayer modes, than any kind of multiplayer at all.
As much as I have trouble believing anything of the StarCitizen hype, I have to admit that what I saw from that game looked a little bit more promising in terms of possible interactions with players (stealing their ships ^^).
Can't believe you guys spent a whole month discussing this.
The majority of this thread is only one week of discussion. It was only revived a couple days ago.
This was built with the Lithium game engine, right?
LIES! ALL LIES!
So, what are your thoughts on Everspace?
I have been following the game very carefully so I can back this up.
- The game was reveal during the VGX award in 2013 By christmas they lost their entire first build to a flood. They have to redo from scratch.
The first mention of multiplayer is there: http://www.gamespot.com/videos/what-is-no-man-s-sky/2300-6416493/
They are talking darksouls and async multiplayer where you see what other player name. One journalism get it, when one mention destiny he reframe to minecraft type playground away from complex single player experience.
IN rock paper shootgun: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/12/09/first-look-no-mans-sky/
Basically the focus is on SHARED universe.
Search is fill people discussing how they would love to meet their friends in the game ... Lot of forum post about "multiplayer confirmed" too (based on flimsy evidence and optimist reading of the facts). You can feel the pressure ROFL
I think by that point they start considering and maybe made prototype who never made it in building branch (hence no code, it's in own dev sandbox, I think, never merged).
Most research return discussion of people hype for multiplayer ...
A lot of interview are on video, it's hard to track snippet of video to show quickly, but he essentially repeat what he have said so far: there is a kind of multiplayer, you don't play together, you can SEE messages or if a player was there (as in naming and all).
player reinterpreted what was said in the most bizarre way possible, word of mouth created teh hype and drown the actual word. Basically there is multiplayer if you ignore everything Shaun said about the nature of this multiplayer TECHNICALLY it is multiplayer after all lol.
The game is exactly as announced ...
No matter how much people analyze it and throw out tons of information I think @Ryiah already got to the heart of the matter. If the dev had simply ever said... "THERE IS NO MULTIPLAYER HERE. IT IS A SINGLE PLAYER GAME" then all would be well.
He had multiple opportunities to do that and instead it seems like each time he tried to present it in a way that it was possibly "in there". Like he carefully chose his words to try to imply without ever saying it. All he ever had to do was say "No". That is it. This is the reason I think people feel like he misled them.
Personally I don't care about the game one way or another just saying looking at all of this information and trying to blame it on media and players I think is wrong. The dev spokesman had multiple opportunities to make it clear what was and was not in the game. He just chose to always speak in subtle hints instead of just saying the facts.
Man he totally did that multiple time lol how can you read that (with article flat out telling there is no multiplayer) and still come to that conclusion? He expended when SQUIZZED about it repeatedly!
The selective reading is very strong, people REALLY WANT to be upset
SM has repeatedly stated in interviews that the game would be multiplayer. Alright,so there are other interviews where he claims the opposite.
That doesnt mean that all those explicit and clear statements about multiplayer have been reinterpreted.
SM said you could see other players, play with your friends, grief other players a little, that there would be competetive aspects and i think in one interview he mentioned that you could be killed by other players. No reinterpretation needed, it's all there. On camera, from the company owner, in no uncertain terms.
For those who havent seen the interviews, there are plenty of videos with the gathered statements on Youtube.
Ironically, some of those videos are linked at the top of SM's pre-launch post "What do you do in No Man's Sky" (link follows bellow).
As far as i know, they also said that they didnt lose any code in the flood, just hardware. In any case, losing the build because your hardware explodes would be grotesque in this day and age. This isnt a single indie dev coding from his home who cant be bothered to use version control, it's a business with a dozen or so employees who had already released 2 games.
Furthermore, shortly before PC launch he made this post on his website:
explaining what NMS "is".
He links those interviews where he confirms multiplayer and plays through the scripted demoes.
There are other gems:
"That means this maybe isn’t the game you *imagined* from those trailers. If you hoped for things like pvp multiplayer or city building, piloting freighters, or building civilisations… that isn’t what NMS is."
So here we learn that the game doesnt have pvp multiplayer. So it has coop MP, right? I can see other players, right? After all, the only way to find out how my character looks is for other players to see me.
He goes on:
Reddit and NeoGaf actually have really good guides to what the game is and isn’t, gathered from interviews I’ve done.
From the reddit thread he linked:
So how does the game handle two players being in the same area?
When you and another player are in the same area, unlikely as it is given the scale of a universe, with planets that can be the size of Earth or bigger, you’ll be placed in the same lobby – in this lobby data is shared. The terrain one player blows up is visible on the other players machine, and so on and so forth.
Sounds sweet, so my friend can see all the lewd things I’ve drawn in the sand? Nice.
Yes, but don’t expect much more than that. No Man’s Sky at its heart is a single player experience, it’s just set in a multiplayer universe.
There are other examples from the reddit thread but they are less clear cut, ie "Cool, so there’s plenty of ways to make money just by being a space pirate, but you keep mentioning death, what happens when I die?", indicating that you can play purely as a space pirate.
And so on and so on and so on.
I dont understand how the dishonesty in this can be debatable.
Isn't it ironic then that the only way you can reach your conclusion is with selective reading? The problem is that he frequently sabotaged his own statements by presenting vague comments. I already gave examples in the link to his twitter account but they're also present in the more recent articles you've quoted.
Just look at this quote you gave us from Rock Paper Shotgun in 2015. When asked about player interaction he could have very easily stated that it wasn't present and that players couldn't interact with each other. What he did instead was to mention deathmatch and then say there are better examples. How does this not imply that it was present?
Your last quote from The Bit Bag is very amusing to me because you're implying that we're listening to other players for our statements and that's just blatantly false. We're quoting as directly from Sean Murray as we're able to and in my case that's straight from his Twitter account where he is being purposefully vague and sabotaging past statements.
Here is the things.
They simply said just that, he said, NO it'isnt. BUT YET, people kept asking for it No isn't vague
When you are asked for something repeatedly you try to explain what you are doing, that's where the vagueness come from, being squizzed.
Also most damning quotes are in end 2015 early 2016, and even then he downplay the multiplayer to recenter around shared experiences which is in the game. And since for him it's the core of the game (it's on the lore) it's normal he focus on this aspect, and it is as described mostly. He name drop darksouls message often.
Also if you people keep asking the same question during 3 years, you might consider implementing it, which what I think start happening late 2015, the same with NPC, they repeatedly say they wouldn't have NPC, yet they finally revealed NPC (also a 4th race data was found in the source). So I think they might have consider pleasing the crowd at some point and where confident to pull it of but couldn't (around when QA testing started).
To me it feel like a trap they didn't build and was push in.
For context, people were disappointed after destiny's promise of space craft open world, they brought their desire to this game IMHO, the game was often compare to destiny early on.
I'm out anyway, I don't have stock in this, but I was puzzled by the reception since the announce of the game.
@neoshaman I'm going by the videos shown in this thread. What I am talking about is the video interviews with the dev... not what he may have tweeted or otherwise said.
It gives the appearance that every time he was interviewed or otherwise asked about the game by some authority (meaning more than average Joe and Jane player) he never simply said "No. It does not have multiplayer". At least I have not seen a video showing that yet. If one is in this thread I missed it and apologize for that. But even if he did that doesn't automatically get rid of the multiple videos where he implied the opposite.
Anyway, it is this wishy-washy stuff that is the issue.
Obviously, it is just a matter of different views and I really don't understand why you seem to be taking it so personally.
It's just different views. You seem to have no problem with vague statements and indifferent responses. Others (including me) don't think that is the way things should be done.
Just say "no". Not say "well the universe is really huge so the odds of running into another player are very tiny" and then later say "Don't expect multiplayer" and then in yet another interview imply there is multiplayer and then on Twitter say there is no multiplayer and then on Twitter imply there is multiplayer.
It honestly boggles me why you cannot see how confusing of a message that sends. I don't know if he simply was scared that if he always (from day one and consistently every time after) said "there is no multiplayer" the sales would be much lower or if he simply really wanted there to be multiplayer and had even worked to do it but were unable to. If it was the latter it would have been great to say "we really wanted to make this a multiplayer experience but in the end it just proved to be too much for us to take on. But we are not giving up on it and will continue to work to add in multiplayer as best as we can" (IF they really were doing that).
That would have changed perceptions greatly I think. I'm not saying the guy was just a con artist. It could have been simply that he was scared of low sales if he had been open all along.
I don't care about the game one way or another. Just talking about this discussion of wanting to blame everyone else except this dev.
I'm tired of making long posts for someone who clearly prefers to brush it all off. Here is a direct link to his Twitter statement (don't link me to stupid articles where a user made a statement - those are worthless unless they're backed by references).
If you still believe this is him saying "No" then you may need to brush up on your English comprehension.
I'm just confused, this is so odd, day one ask for multiplayer, says there is none, people keep asking 3 YEARS!! You are down to do some mistake trying to explain yourself, that's literally gaslighting. To me the message is confusing only if you really wanted a certain kind of multiplayer, because what he describe is in the game, you can see naming of other planet, when you see a planet called gravitano ball farm you what's in.
There is a reason PR answer are so trite, but that's scary stuff if you are a dev who can't afford PR. But do I take it personally or people who argue the contrary? I mean I'm answering to people here!
Im very bad at being out
Yes, he made that statement and then he followed it up with this one. Once again you're ignoring the links I'm giving you in favor of ones that support your statement exclusively. This post was made by him approximately two minutes after the one you quoted just now. He never should have posted this statement as it invalidates the previous one.
I don't understand your point, that's literally just below your linked tweet.
Your point was:
He says NO (at least it's a negation if we want to be nitpicky)
You are playing semantics, there is online features where you feel the presence of other players, still not multiplayer as other want to push, in fact day one two players find each other using that online feature that signal player presence ... That's not vague, it worked as intended.
That tweet is simply confirming that the game has some online functionality (it could have easily been taken for anything because he doesn't specify) and there are easter eggs (which is a irrelevant statement). Absolutely nothing about that post is specific enough to draw a conclusion either way.
He said the chances of encountering someone are pretty much zero. That's not a "no".
If you ignore the post above yes but that's playing semantics
That's just it. Why did he follow up a very solid statement about a lack of multiplayer with a statement that could very easily be taken the wrong way? It's examples like this one that some people believe he was being purposefully misleading.
The developer repeatedly made claims about multiplayer features in the game. End users are not making this up. Have you watched the following video?