No Man's Sky

Ignoring all the (sometimes justified, sometimes....not) controversy over the game, I actually am quite enjoying my time with it. It's definitely missing a lot, and it being a full priced game is something one can raise some contention with, but it actually is pretty much what they've said it is - a game where you collect material to replenish your systems, upgrade things, and explore and name a bunch of stuff. And it does it pretty well, all thigns considered. It's definitely a game I think I like a lot mostly because I just like the idea of this big, giant universe where, within the parameters of everything being made from the same basic assets, the things you see are things only you have seen, and whether someone else comes along alter and sees the thing you've named, or no one ever sees it again, is just really neat and does a good job of showing how huge are own real universe is. In all fairness, I only play for a couple hours once a week, and that helps a lot, but I'm genuinely curious to see if they'll keep supporting this from here on in. If not, it's fine for what ti is, but I also understand why people might want to burn it all down.

I don't hate the game. I just...

I don't know. It IS more or less exactly what they said it would be, so I don't know exactly what I was expecting. I generally don't at all mind spoilers so I looked up the end game, and what I read was pretty disappointing. I just can't put in all that time on a game and just get that.

I still want to get the game at some point -- though I don't think my computer is quite good enough to run it, so I'll have to either wait until I get a better computer or for an Xbone release.

I was never under the impression that it was (or should) have been anything more than flying around looking at stuff with some procedural space pirates in there. I was fine with that. The game's only really getting panned because people deliberately over-hyped it, I think.



Space Engine is a good game for procedural exploration. It has the entire galaxy with all known real-life stars, then it fills in the rest with procedural generation. All kinds of planets and stars and black holes -- it's really neat. It isn't a spaceship simulator, just zooming around with a camera, though I think you can mod in actual spaceship overlays/controls. Also, it's free.

Something to check out if you like the idea of No Man's Sky and want a free alternative.

It sounds like it's exactly what I thought it would be; an ambitious technical demo, but not really what the consumer thinks of as a traditional game. I'll pick it up after the furniture rearrangements are over--until then my PS4 is unplugged, and I may as well wait and see if the price goes down.

Personally, I think that there will be a sequel. I'm contemplating how I could actually get a letter on a developer's desk, because I see a seed for a fantastic guild-based PvP MMO. One which could command dedicated followings for years. Single player survival? That might've been a "we need to ship this soon or the business is doomed!" decision.

A friend of mine bought this on PS4, so I had a chance to play it over at his place before. It really seems like something I could see myself getting lost in for hours at a time. I had planned on getting this game whenever I got around to upgrading my PC, and I likely still will. I really don't understand the criticism of this game being exactly what it said it was going to be, since there really wasn't any deceit? I feel that blaming the game for the community over-hyping it really doesn't seem that fair.

Yeah, as soon as it was announced people were super stoked by the idea -- and by the ideas they had in their own heads. Then came the immediate gripes: But what are you going to DO in the game??? As if exploring isn't a viable thing. It was a viable thing to me. If you need more to do in games, fine, don't buy this one. Go buy Elite: Dangerous or something.

Then the developers and Sony felt compelled to add the survival dynamic. Then some quasi-promise of a journey to the center of the universe, which people thought was going to be some mysterious story mode. Which it really wasn't -- just an incentive to keep exploring in a certain direction.



No Man's Sky is more evidence that we need to follow Bethesda's example of announcing right before release -- to cut down on fanboy backseat directing and just take the game as pitched.

Apparently there's going to be some investigation into the studio advertising for NMS: www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-09-28-advertising-standards-launches-investigation-into-no-mans-sky


I can't remember something like this happening before but I wouldn't be surprised if they found a lot of the complaints were just overreactions by overhyped players.

I hope that's all it ends up being. The last thing the gaming community needs is giving more power to overly-whiny fanboys who complain over EVERYTHING. Every time I look at a gaming article about something, it's nothing but dudebros bitching and moaning about the smallest things.

Planned features always get cut. And if they don't, the game has to be delayed -- which results in even more whining. Developers almost always have a caveat saying "subject to change upon release." Even in betas, when the game is just about done. You could argue that this kind of thing might keep developers in line. But I also see a shit ton of frivolous lawsuits because no one's ever happy.



MAYBE

If you WAITED FOR LAUNCH REVIEWS

YOU WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN DISAPPOINTED