This Old Neon Forum

Has it live up to the hype? Also what's the point of the game is there any structure to it or is it like minecraft in a way where it just throws you in and says go explore.

Nothing could ever live up to the kind of hype this game received. Hype sucks.

It's a game where you go planet hopping, shoot rocks, manage menus, learn languages and compile data. It's also mostly gorgeous just to look at. As you can probably tell from the half-mocking description, it's not exactly dripping in mainstream appeal, despite mainstream interest. I happen to really love it. I understand why many were left disappointed or confused.

VictorViper wrote:Nothing could ever live up to the kind of hype this game received. Hype sucks.

Apparently people equated the game's pre-release hype marketing (designed to sell copies) with "promises" or some kind of developer-consumer collaboration, and then they felt betrayed when the product they consumed ended up differing from the sales pitches they had uncritically swallowed.

Slurmee, there is a relatively rather loose point/structure, in that you're trying to get to the centre of the galaxy. There's a thin plot thread you can pick up on at the start of the game, but it's not a solid narrative or storyline or anything. Your exploration also takes places against the backdrop of some stuff that has happened in this universe, which doesn't directly come together into a story, but if you nose around and talk to NPCs you can start to piece some of it together, for your own interest.

There was more than just "pre-release hype marketing (designed to sell copies)". Quit selling that. There were actual demos and gameplay vids showing off elements of the game, in front of people (press and others), that just plain didn't make it in. Was there some Molyneux type grandstanding from Sean Murray? Sure. Should one always put faith in the words of a developer making a product that those words will come true? Assuredly not. But when those words are combined with actual gameplay and footage showing off those words, it kind of lends a credit that just sitting in a chair and saying things in an interview with nothing to show off doesn't. Is there a lot of butthurt around an otherwise enjoyable and very pretty game for its genre? You betchya. In the end, people didn't realize that they were dealing with another Molyneux and his progressively growing tree. The mainstream interest was there for a reason, because the game's Managing Director, alongside various other outlets, was putting it out there that it would have something for pretty much everyone. The hype was definitely real, and I agree with Vic, hype sucks. But it wasn't all just some fluff designed to sell copies.

Bottom line, the game is $60, and whether or not you find value in it is if the current game (exploration, crafting, and meeting alien vendors) is something you'd enjoy. I'm not mad I bought it, nor do I regret it. I am sad that the features I wanted and saw before buying were not included, primarily faction fleet battles in space and varying ship categories, but it's just another game in a trending genre that probably would have only been $20 Early Access on Steam.

Drauks wrote:Quit selling that.

What no.

Drauks wrote:There was more than just "pre-release hype marketing (designed to sell copies)". [...] But it wasn't all just some fluff designed to sell copies.

[Neither of these is what I said.]

What was it? You've said "grandstanding" so far. You thankfully haven't said "promises" so don't worry, I don't want you to think I'm putting that foolishness into your intelligent mouth—I'm just bringing that word into the conversation because it's something that's being mentioned in the larger conversations around this.

Of course there was more than just marketing. For example, there was also a lot of shooting the shit and dreaming out loud about big concepts—the kinds of things artists and designers like to do when they're fleshing out a vision. And it was done publicly, because there was an appetite for it. In a light-hearted quick-fire interview way back in 2014, Murray said "at the moment you can land on asteroids", and that quip is actually seriously sourced in those Reddit teardowns of the so-called lies about what would be contained in the game. Hilarious and ridiculous.

Drauks wrote:There were actual demos—
—gameplay vids showing off elements of the game—
—in front of people (press and others)—
—when those words are combined with actual gameplay and footage showing off those words—
—the game's Managing Director [...] was putting it out there that it would have something for pretty much everyone.

These are all common forms of and typical venues for pre-release hype marketing.

Drauks wrote:But when those words are combined with actual gameplay and footage showing off those words, it kind of lends a credit that just sitting in a chair and saying things in an interview with nothing to show off doesn't.

Sitting in a chair saying words with nothing to show off isn't the upper limit of what constitutes pre-release hype marketing. It's still possible and reasonable to be skeptical of something "more".

Drauks wrote:The hype was definitely real

Yes, it was. People were excited about the game.

Drauks wrote:and I agree with Vic, hype sucks.

Sometimes it does. Sometimes it doesn't. I like experiencing self-aware excitement and anticipation about some things.

Drauks wrote:—but it's just another game in a trending genre that probably would have only been $20 Early Access on Steam.

Or $0 with a free-to-play model involving microtransactions on refuels or whatever they charge the kids for these days!

_____

I'd say a relatively small fraction of the blame for people's disappointment belongs to the developers, and that fraction is for not being able to deliver a massive, revolutionary, mind-blowing game that would satisfy everyone's wildest imaginations and turn the industry upside-down using hipster dev tools (procedural generation, beards). As a corporate entity, they probably should have refrained from trying to get people excited about their product or entice people to purchase their product.

The rest of the blame is split between the media on one hand and uncritical gamer-consumers on the other.

The media's coverage of the game from announcement to release, gleefully lapped up the pre-release hype marketing and somehow, for some reason, presented it without framing it as marketing—presented the developer as a disarmingly charming participant and consumer-collaborator in some magical journey instead of as a business-artist selling a vision and ultimately a product.

Hype sells games, but someone has to "fall for" pre-release hype. Why fall for it? Wishful thinking? Willingness to make a gamble? Probably not this one—recognizing it as a gamble requires self-awareness and shouldn't result in outcry after disappointment. Sometimes getting caught up in hype is entertainment in and of itself, and riding the wave is fun (I'm the first to get hyped for From/Souls stuff). But some people (the "lies!" and "false advertising" folks) need to learn to think critically about what they're being shown by people who have a vested interest in showing them something really enticing. And they need to do their research. If you're going to hand someone a few crisp Elizabeths, you should know what you're getting in return in advance. I thought "don't pre-order games" was supposed to be the critical consumer mantra by now. But as soon as half the population of the planet sees a cartoon spaceship taking off from the surface and going into orbit with no loading screen it happily slaps down a deposit. This is the demographic that still thinks Nintendo is its "friend" and somehow believes that companies want to make decisions that are in consumers' best interests.

Honestly, the only legitimate complaint about the developers' actions & presumed intentions here is that the most recent high-concept demo build of the game (March-April 2016, I think?) showed some features that weren't in the shipped product. If they knew certain minor, non-central features weren't going to make it to launch, maybe they shouldn't have made their pretty videos include such pretty scenes? But even then, I have a hard time believing any self-respecting critical thinker would seriously believe that a small-scale demo build—featuring a tiny-scale procedurally-generated fraction of a universe that wasn't deployed on all servers to millions of simultaneous players—released mostly for the purposes of creating trailers and slice-of-game videos—would be representative of the full-scale live game.

I didn't follow No Man's Sky development since it clearly started looking to be too many things I wasn't interested in.

Anyway, I saw this article posted somewhere else, and it seems to be of interest about the discussion that's going on:
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoMansSkyTheGa ... ront_page/

I've now found my way to an amazing Canadian winter planet! It's generally -65 during the day and -75 during the night. The surface is snow-covered and the flora is abundant (and it's mostly coniferous trees).

So far, I've found really big hawk-like flying things, and 4-5 different species of little hopping worms that can be differentiated by the spines on their backs. I've also found one creature that's totally bananas—it's a little cluster of bubbles/warts that seems to infect/possess big round rocks , causing them to jump around. At first I thought the whole big round blob was the creature, but when you scan it and observe it in your discoveries, it only shows the little cluster of bubbles.

There are also oceans of obviously-not-water (liquid at -78 degrees), but there doesn't seem to be anything living in there (at least, not that I've found yet).

Definitely planning on making 100% discoveries on this one.

(Word on the street is a better waypoint system is coming in an upcoming patch. It'll be nice to find a home base on a planet and then be able to find your way back there, even if you get really far away.)

Brendan Keogh touched on a central design element of the game that's largely responsible for why it's been resonating so well with me:

"There is a transience at the heart of No Man’s Sky. A sense of vagrancy. There’s no hub. No centre (except the ‘centre of the universe’ which remains an abstract, uncontextualised idea most of the time and serves to be more an ‘end’ than a ‘centre’). You build no bases. You make no real home. You have no chest that you can access on different planets into which you can put your life’s belongings, building up a priceless reservoir of valuable materials and trophies of your travels. All you have is what fits on your back and what fits in your ship. That’s it. That’s always it. You will never put down your roots. You will always be moving on to somewhere else."

Congratulations to Hello Games and No Man's Sky for winning the well-deserved Innovation Award from the GDC last night!