The game is obviously designed for that. If they wanted you to stay on one planet for long periods they wouldn't have made each planet totally homogeneous.
So the ability to build blocks make a game better. Got it
Well funny how these reviewers keep mentioning Minecraft with NMS.
Instant gratification is the problem. Watch any stream, players just going from objective to objective. Over and over, no exploring. Planets are massive but I better go to that other icon on that other planet 5 hours away.
The PC version should. But I still don't know how you mod Minecraft into NMS.
So the ability to build blocks make a game better. Got it
Better is subjective. But if we're trying to figure out why Minecraft blew up the way it did, then the "ability to build blocks" is absolutely central to that event.So the ability to build blocks make a game better. Got it
Instant gratification is the problem. Watch any stream, players just going from objective to objective. Over and over, no exploring. Planets are massive but I better go to that other icon on that other planet 5 hours away.
I did not want to leave my first planet and I'll just leave it there. Here is the actual scale of it from space after I left:
![]()
And yes you can go all around planets and land anywhere.
What you're describing is the tool. What people DO with that tool is what's creative and exciting, how do you not get this?
I have a question... does the landscape you see in that image from that altitude/space actually match the reality of the terrain when you fly down? Or is that a generic texture and things are only procedurally generated when you get lower down?
Correct. Multiplayer and creativity made Minecraft blow up. Not the survival aspect.
No Man's Sky Isn't The Game I Expected
http://www.polygon.com/features/201...sky-first-impressions-review-preview-10-hours
In these early hours, I am enjoying the parts of No Mans Sky that are purely exploration. Studying weird alien lifeforms and scanning them in to a growing database, for example, really helps get across a sense of believable biology on planets, even as Im aware that theyre all procedurally generated.
The problem, then, is that those parts are so constantly interrupted or put on hold for the sake of a survival loop that just isnt very fun. Shit, Im almost out of carbon, which means I need to wander over to some local plant life and slowly cut it down with my mining tool. Damn, Im ready to leave this planet but my thrusters are low on power; time to wander mindlessly until I happen across some plutonium.
The mundanity of this cycle is exacerbated by an insultingly tiny inventory space that requires near-constant juggling and micromanaging. Was it plutonium or platinum that I needed? Can I actually keep all of these tradeable trinkets Ive found until I stumble across an NPC willing to trade with me, or can I just not spare the space? These are the types of strategic questions I found myself asking as I played No Mans Sky, and frankly they just dont make for a terribly engaging experience so far.
Well, Minecraft was survivor only when it was first released.
I believe NMS has the potential to become "the next Minecraft", but that would require years and years of constant updates, support, new mechanics and an active community.
I don't see why they'd not add multiplayer in a few years from now if the game keeps on selling and if the feature keeps on being requested by a really large community.
Making a planet "your own" would be awesome too, a "teleporter" could bring friends together and so on... I believe it would all be possible, but only, ONLY, if the community is active, growing and demanding like it's been for the past few years with Minecraft.
That definitely doesn't sound like an enjoyable thing to do.
That definitely doesn't sound like an enjoyable thing to do.
That's a problem I have with the majority of streams I've watched. I can totally see people getting bored or disappointed if all they want to do is jump from waypoint to waypoint as quickly as possible. If you treat the game like a grind, it'll be a grind. That's the impression I'm getting.
That definitely doesn't sound like an enjoyable thing to do.
The game requires you to grind apparently.
That definitely doesn't sound like an enjoyable thing to do.
That definitely doesn't sound like an enjoyable thing to do.
Just found this on Harry Denholm's Twitter and thought it was relevant. They didn't exactly shoot down the comparisons.
https://twitter.com/HarryDenholm/status/755155729821077504
I never played Minecraft.This confirms every fear I had about the game. I knew it was going to be a $60 Minecraft survival mode in space.
That's a problem I have with the majority of streams I've watched. I can totally see people getting bored or disappointed if all they want to do is jump from waypoint to waypoint as quickly as possible. If you treat the game like a grind, it'll be a grind. That's the impression I'm getting.
My question I guess as someone who used to be kind of psyched about this game is what am I missing by NOT randomly wandering on that planet for hours if nothing particularly complex, no city scapes, building clusters of note or anything of that nature will be there? Variations of rock, flowers and animals that all behave essentially the same? For a game that only has exploration going for it, I just wish any of these planets captured on screenshots didn't all look fundamentally the same to each other.
The exploration seems to promise nothing to actually discover at the end, so why wander that 30 minutes, two hours, whatever away from the way points? What should I expect to find that makes that worth it when I can see the vistas just the same without blowing an extra hour?
I never played Minecraft.
Is that a bad thing comparing it to that?
That definitely doesn't sound like an enjoyable thing to do.
Minecraft was survival only, but you survived by digging and building shelters. The fundamentals of the game have never really changed. Minecraft is a sandbox game and Notch set out to create a building sandbox game.
NMS and Minecraft are completely different games and have different goals. I get frustrated when people try and claim this game is just like Minecraft when it is not. This is an exploration/survival game through and through. It's more Ark with procedurally generated worlds and a large galaxy than Minecraft.
I have a question... does the landscape you see in that image from that altitude/space actually match the reality of the terrain when you fly down? Or is that a generic texture and things are only procedurally generated when you get lower down?
I personally don't like Minecraft but I respect it as a creative platform. NMS is completely missing the creative aspects, though, and is instead another formulaic survival game with a big universe and a bigger marketing budget.
Maybe that's what's bothering a few people? I mean I get not liking a game and stating that clearly but at this point we're so far beyond that it's a bit sadAh whaa Sony gave a game they though had value a large ad budget.
Pretty easy system to get down too I pretty much know where to find everything I need(except stuff I haven't found yet obviously)Planets are packed with essential resources so it's not like it takes long to find something.
Do you just want to be handed everything without working towards improving your items?
These games have upgrades. Just like other games with them. To shit on one but not others seems out of place.
Exactly. It can also lead to some cool discoveries you might have missed otherwise.Pretty easy system to get down too I pretty much know where to find everything I need(except stuff I haven't found yet obviously)
Yeah, speaking as someone still fucking trapped on the starter world there's really a pretty quick cap on how much you care about exploring the same terrain and finding the same handful of creatures.
Having to continually hunt out carbon - though it's thankfully not a hard task - just to maintain my ability to walk around and mine things is already getting annoying.
Regarding the inventory, you start off limited because they want you to manage what you need at the moment with what you can sell in order to work towards better gear. It's a tried and true system that requires thinking and balance over just gathering everything you see.
I do think complaints about the inventory are largely due to the fact that a lot of games ask you to collect everything these days. Or it's just become second-nature to have everything you possibly can rather than the Resident Evil-style system of carrying only what you need + some extras to sell. Preference certainly comes into play, of course, but it's hard to break out of certain patterns when every other game beats it into you.
I never played Minecraft.
Is that a bad thing comparing it to that?
It isn't. That's really the only thing standing in my way of really enjoying the game. It's frustrating.