arrow-left arrow-right close decoration email facebook hr-decoration logo_small menu-decoration next prev twitter youtube

Welcome! This is where we talk about things, like games, space and pancakes.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with OpenID Sign In with Steam

No Man's Sky - post launch discussion

SamSam Compulsion Team
I can't help but feel that there are a number of similarities between the launch of No Man's Sky and WHF, particularly in regard to player expectations about what the game actually is. It's pretty controversial, and there are a lot of disappointed people.

What are everyone's thoughts on the game so far? Do you think that disappointment is fair? If so, for what reasons? If not, why not?
  • shmerlshmerl Member
    edited August 2016
    I didn't buy the game yet, but I've red some already successfully run the GOG version in Wine on Linux. Ironically, I've heard it runs better in Wine on Linux than natively on Windows.

    I might buy it when they'll discount it, since I don't want to encourage releases that don't support Linux. Also, waiting for several bug fixes releases can be useful.
  • Iris_LockspurIris_Lockspur Member, Moderator
    It really shows how careful you have to be with managing hype. To me, it still looks like a beautiful game and I can tell the team put a lot of work into it, but I feel like the massive hype made them push it out sooner than it needed to be.

    And the only thing I can really say that deters me from wanting to purchase it (other than the price) is I've heard from multiple sources that creatures aren't solid and you just phase through them. That takes a lot of the immersion out of the experience, I would say.
  • shmerlshmerl Member
    edited August 2016
    Interestingly, there is a crowdfunded game which looks rather similar, up to having same ideas like procedural generated worlds and voxel graphics. What's the story with that?
  • SamSam Compulsion Team
    Yeah, the lack of collision is a bit of a negative for me. Interesting choice on their part.

    I feel like there is a lot of misunderstanding about these types of games in the community. One day I'll hopefully find time to write a blog post about the common topics I see that just don't understand game production. And particularly how that relates to financing.

    In the meantime, while hype is difficult to deal with, I think they will be regretting many of the things they said you could do in game. Particularly multiplayer. Your game can't be all things to all people - you have to know when to say "no, that's not in the game".

    @shmerl I like the look of that game, and wish them luck. However, it doesn't look like they're planning the giant universe, procedural animation and wildlife that NMS did. So that reduces the complexity of the game they're making by a great deal (meaning that it's more likely that they'll have time to build and polish what they're aiming for). Otherwise though, they do seem very similar.
  • fromthewoodsfromthewoods Member, Moderator
    edited August 2016
    Ever since the game was showed plp went nuts over it. I see this happen more often when the graphics are not realistic. When visuals are colorful and stylized people seem to have more strong feelings towards it. But im just guessing.

    I have not played the game and only seen videos. But ever since the second trailer it looked to me like a mix of Elite: Dangerous and Starbound. Wich would be great. But it doesnt have the amazing flight mechanics of Elite, and lacks the cheer awesomeness of Starbound. I may be terribly wrong. It feels like if exploration was harder/more complicated it would be a great game, for me. Again, havent played it, but i dont think i will anytime soon.

  • tectec Member, Moderator
    I think this game was over-hyped so its no wonder people were disappointed. It reminds me very much of Elite and a game where you would have to sink a lot of hours in doing not very much. I couldn't really see how it differentiates itself very far from Elite. One of the things I like about WHF is that while there is a certain amount of scavenging, inventory management and general walking about the island areas seem just about the right size and the quests keep it interesting. Its far better for a game to underplay itself a bit then get great reviews, but if people get carried away I suppose its difficult to stop the hype.
  • While I do believe people should have been more realistic about their expectations of the game I also am of the position that the marketing team also helped perpetuate these misunderstandings; and watching the interviews it looks like this happened out of a really good place, he (Sean Murray) is obviously really excited about the game, but some of the features he described were incorrect or "technically there". I wasn't particularly upset by "No Mans Sky" it was a good survival game, it just lacked the depth it could have if given more production time. I know there will always be difficulty making procedural worlds personal but a lot could have been achieved by adding more thematic options, and while i'm not the worlds biggest hater of light boxes he stated they would not exist in the game, this was not the case and the alternative would have added another level immersion which was a shame. Honestly I believe that was its biggest factor that upset its fan-base was the lack of immersion. I never really felt like I was there.

    And that I can honestly say is one of the things "We Happy Few" has in spades; immersion and thematic design.
Sign In or Register to comment.