Mobius and pet octopus
Member
They've literally violating artist integrity and vision and yeah...
Reddit Compiles Definitive List of All NMS Missing Features/False Marketing +Sources
- Thread starter 213372bu
- Start date
They've literally violating artist integrity and vision and yeah...
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
I'm pretty sure that isn't why he said that...
travisbickle
Member
This kind of game isn't happening again for another 5-10 years. Ironically, the devs that try will probably be young students who are right now loving NMS.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Who cares why he said it. It is silly to be mad that someone is modding the game. But, I assumed he wasn't being serious and neither was I.
Huh? You've not heard of star citizen then? Starbound? Space engineer? NMS is not some special snowflake that has never been done before or won't be done again, even in the near future. There are so many games I've seen on steam that are in early access that have similarities to NMS or aim to accomplish somewhat similar goals.
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
Ummm, I mean, I actually care.
It sucks but them fixing the game this soon (if they actually pull it off) is just enabling more devs to release broken games/bad ports because they know that modders will do their work for them.
I have no problem with modders fixing stuff for themselves but, if they are going to share it, It would be better if they at least waited for the game to get a permanent price cut or something if they aren't going to wait to see if HG actually fixes it like they should. It shouldn't be up to us to flipping fix devs broken games, especially when said devs are charging $60 per game and making a literal fortune off of the PC communities efforts.
Even NMS might get there over time. The game feels like a early access game after all XD
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
So if you care why he said it, why are you responding to me? It doesn't matter why he said it, to me. I guess I wasn't clear before. I was just making a joke about artist integrity and all that stuff people spout about game developers when people criticize or mod the game.
True. I could see it getting there. I mean, I am hopeful at least. Not hopeful enough to buy now and hope it comes. But I'll buy it if they actually deliver one day.
If they do treat it like a game they intend to support for years to come, I could definitely see it happening some day.
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
This is an extremely subtle sarcasm post, right?
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
No, it's not honestly. What am I missing? It is late here, did I say something wrong or am I not making a connection?
I am willing to have an open mind about it but this is just how I see it.
Would you rather them wait and watch it burn to the ground?
Maybe the confusion is coming from this part...
When I said them, I meant modders. Not HG.
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
Crap, double post.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Gah, I'll be more clear with what I mean. No need to defend me! <3
I am pissed (in a sarcastic but disappointing way) that modders are fixing the game practically as a "courtesy". All it does is hold the door for developers, and them to say "Thanks". I mean there's nothing wrong with modding i.e. fixing issues with a game that is abandoned e.g. "Vampire: The Masquerade Bloodlines", but already talking about fixing a game that is half-baked to hell is just sad.
When a game with multiple delays with things scrapped last minute gets modded and gets people excited again, I just shake my head now. It was great when Durante fixed Dark Souls 2, a really anticipated sequel. The fix wasn't "Let's fix all issues with the game", but more related to the shitty screen resolution that PC players were restricted to.
Reading discussion like fixing the ENTIRE BROKEN GAME is sad, only because you guys are giving it more thought and effort that the devs did. It's less about enabling other developers to be lazy (Disclaimer: Earth will burn before devs let every game to be fixed by modders), and more about the stages of denial and acceptance that you're all going through.
"Maybe modders will fix the loot system!"
"Maybe modders will add factions!"
"Maybe modders will improve textures!"
"Maybe modders will fix all crashes!"
"Maybe modders will add character customization!"
"Maybe modders will add ship customization!"
"Maybe modders will improve the item replenish system!"
"Maybe modders will fix the FOV and framerate!"
"Maybe modders will add more NPC and A.I. to this massive universe!"
"Maybe modders will add better guns!"
"Maybe modders will add more quests!"
"Maybe modders will fix land and air combat!"
"Maybe modders can remove the black bars!"
"Maybe modders can add a story to this game!"
"Maybe modders can create an entirely new game!"
Maybe modders should get paid the $60 then.
I am pissed (in a sarcastic but disappointing way) that modders are fixing the game practically as a "courtesy". All it does is hold the door for developers, and them to say "Thanks". I mean there's nothing wrong with modding i.e. fixing issues with a game that is abandoned e.g. "Vampire: The Masquerade Bloodlines", but already talking about fixing a game that is half-baked to hell is just sad.
When a game with multiple delays with things scrapped last minute gets modded and gets people excited again, I just shake my head now. It was great when Durante fixed Dark Souls 2, a really anticipated sequel. The fix wasn't "Let's fix all issues with the game", but more related to the shitty screen resolution that PC players were restricted to.
Reading discussion like fixing the ENTIRE BROKEN GAME is sad, only because you guys are giving it more thought and effort that the devs did. It's less about enabling other developers to be lazy (Disclaimer: Earth will burn before devs let every game to be fixed by modders), and more about the stages of denial and acceptance that you're all going through.
"Maybe modders will fix the loot system!"
"Maybe modders will add factions!"
"Maybe modders will improve textures!"
"Maybe modders will fix all crashes!"
"Maybe modders will add character customization!"
"Maybe modders will add ship customization!"
"Maybe modders will improve the item replenish system!"
"Maybe modders will fix the FOV and framerate!"
"Maybe modders will add more NPC and A.I. to this massive universe!"
"Maybe modders will add better guns!"
"Maybe modders will add more quests!"
"Maybe modders will fix land and air combat!"
"Maybe modders can remove the black bars!"
"Maybe modders can add a story to this game!"
"Maybe modders can create an entirely new game!"
Maybe modders should get paid the $60 then.
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
Yeah, this is what I thought you meant and is how I feel so I was just defending the same idea mate.
So, like any Bethesda game ever?
Modders do it because they can, and want to. We shouldn't rely on them. But if they come along and make some awesome mods that improve the game in every possible manner it's good for everyone.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
So, like any Bethesda game ever?
Modders do it because they can, and want to. We shouldn't rely on them. But if they come along and make some awesome mods that improve the game in every possible manner it's good for everyone.
LOL! The thing is that Bethesda games are modded to improve on an already great existing title that gamers fall in love with so much that they want to make it better and vast and do remasters and future ports for, and add more fun shenanigans and crazy god rays. That or small things that bother people like the inventory system or how you want to kill every NPC.
What people are asking here is an open heart surgery compared to playing tic-tac-toe on a fractured hand's cast.
A No Man's Sky mod which destroys every planet you eject from will be something I'll play because it adds a fun element to an existing title. Not sure if anyone's working on this mod but this should be number one priority... right after Hello Games fix their game and add what they promised.
Could you name a couple aside from the one's you already mentioned? I'm definitely interested in checking some of them out.
Was more half jokingly
although! Bethesda games are super full of bugs, crashes etc. Quests that can't be completed. They're fun games but we rely on modders a lot to fix shit on the PC very often.
VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
So, like any Bethesda game ever?
Modders do it because they can, and want to. We shouldn't rely on them. But if they come along and make some awesome mods that improve the game in every possible manner it's good for everyone.
Yeah, but sometimes people just don't understand or haven't thought about the repercussions of their actions. In this case that would be enabling the industry to launch more games in a broken state because they see that people are willing to fix more and more broken games. All it takes sometimes is for someone to ask the question, "What kind of industry do you want to see and is there something that you can do or are doing to influence it?"
Also, there is a difference between fixing a game that is broken as soon as possible, and improving upon a game that didn't release in a terrible shape or that has been fixed by the devs.
EDIT: Beaten like a rug basically.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Was more half jokingly
Bethesda games are super full of bugs, crashes etc. Quests that can't be completed. They're fun games but we rely on modders a lot to fix shit on the PC very often.
Agree! I have never finished a Bethesda game due to this, and its a shame. Modders fixing bugs is awesome. Modders fixing the entire game is awesome too, but then they should get a share of the pie.
foolishoptimist
Member
I'd love a
n honest
It must be really hard to work on a game where so much stuff is procedurally generated, such that you never really have finished assets.
There's a tonne of legit reasons for why the final game could be missing so many key elements:
- Unresolvable Bugs
- PS4 performance limitations
- balance issues
- conflicting gameplay mechanics
- user feedback Issues
- out of time
- Accidental removal not picked up in QA(This actually happened on a game I worked on
Of course, there's so many things missing in this case, that either something catastrophic went wrong, or more likely, some/all of it was just BS all along.
Still enjoying the game though.
travisbickle
Member
You think the game that was in Sean Murray's head is going to be released in less than 5 years? The other games are great but they all have limitations.
everyday math
Banned
Nope never again.
My guess is because a lot of people can project themselves into the image he has created for himself. Or he's your next door bearded vaping honest dreamy neighbour. You know you can trust that guy.
Edit: on the topic of modding, while I understand the "not fixing the game instead of the developers who get paid for it" part, I would rather have a better game through modding, but I kind of doubt the mods can really correct the core flaws of the game (lack of space physics).
HarryHengst
Member
Never preorder games ever. Its dumb and it promotes broken games because hey, people paid for it anyway!
Buying them day 1 and pre-ordering are two different things. I never pre-order but sometimes buy day 1.
because barefoot?
gingerbeardman
Member
Guildford is a kind of Silicon Valley of game developers in the UK
Jacksinthe
Banned
I don't believe much is "generated" other than terrain, tbh. And those all follow a set of rules for the exact same experience on every planet for everyone.I'd love aPost Mortem of this game.n honest
It must be really hard to work on a game where so much stuff is procedurally generated, such that you never really have finished assets.
There's a tonne of legit reasons for why the final game could be missing so many key elements:
- Unresolvable Bugs
- PS4 performance limitations
- balance issues
- conflicting gameplay mechanics
- user feedback Issues
- out of time
- Accidental removal not picked up in QA(This actually happened on a game I worked on
Of course, there's so many things missing in this case, that either something catastrophic went wrong, or more likely, some/all of it was just BS all along.
Still enjoying the game though.
Assets are all created ahead of time, they are just placed by a set of rules. That's the nature of "procedural". The more rules, the more exceptions, the more exceptions to this exceptions, the better the outcome.
I also don't believe they were given devkits a month before release and had to cut features. They had plenty of time to tone down the PR speak when they couldn't get things up and running but the reality is that the only tempering of hype was done just two days before release on Twitter of a single issue, then the day of release, backtracked on that tempering and doubled down as if it existed. They knew. There's no way they didn't and just kept up the charade.
When we brought our gamw to PS4 we got everything working flat out. Even before our devkits came in we had access to Sony's SDK and resources, there was no going in blind. They had plenty of time to figure out what could be and what couldn't be done.
From the game they wanted to make, features alone, it should be possible. I say that meaning their Newtonian physics, periodic table BS notwithstanding. None of that needs to exist to achieve an end result. That was just hypespeak.
I can talk about our procedural rain and level generation system like it's something amazing and unseen but the bottom line is that it's just a simple set of rules built on knowns and certainly not magic.
I can talk about my collision and how it works and all the crazy things I do to make sure there is no getting stuck or funkiness when you overlap (http://stuff.absinthegames.com/getOuttaJail.gif) but the reality is that it's not voodoo, it's just known rules.
Theres no need to go all science-y with BS when you're not using it. When the end result is afforded with much simpler and elegant solutions.
Holy shit that entire interview is just criminal.
I'd love to see a mod that gives it a Plague Inc. feel where you infect every planet you land on and any life or plant forms slowly die of disease. A lesson on what could happen and a metaphor for our treatment of Earth in general.
Moon_frogger
Member
youre not the only one. Turns out 'what do you do in this game' wasn't a played out meme used by trolls but a legit question from level headed gaffers that didn't get sucked into a bunch of transparently bullshit hype.
That whole interview is just full of BS. I wish they would revisit it or something.
I recall this having a high opening, so taking a look.
The Friday(Aug 12th) it opened on, 212,321 Peak Players
The following Friday, 41,594 Peak Players(Highest for the weekend was 46k)\
So ~ 80% Drop in a week's time.
With its current average for the month is 60k Players. This will only get lower as the month goes on, but assuming it stays at 60k. Means it dropped 72%.
Compared to some of the other titles that opened big.
Fallout 4(Nov12th) opened with 471,995, Avg was 226,297. Drop 52%
Dark Souls III(April 12th) opened with 129,831, Avg 74,831 Drop 42%
GTA 5(April 14th) opened with 360,761, Avg 192,714. Drop 47%
So while it sold a ton to start. It's not retaining its player base.
The Friday(Aug 12th) it opened on, 212,321 Peak Players
The following Friday, 41,594 Peak Players(Highest for the weekend was 46k)\
So ~ 80% Drop in a week's time.
With its current average for the month is 60k Players. This will only get lower as the month goes on, but assuming it stays at 60k. Means it dropped 72%.
Compared to some of the other titles that opened big.
Fallout 4(Nov12th) opened with 471,995, Avg was 226,297. Drop 52%
Dark Souls III(April 12th) opened with 129,831, Avg 74,831 Drop 42%
GTA 5(April 14th) opened with 360,761, Avg 192,714. Drop 47%
So while it sold a ton to start. It's not retaining its player base.
Icyflamez96
Member
Not sure how this changes anything about the what do you do discussion. The answer continues to be the same as it always has. Land on planets, gather resources, upgrade, get units, buy ships, explore, move onto the center. Though there are clearly many elements (and the execution) that fell short, but that doesn't give anymore merit or validity to the people asking the question. Not to say it lacked merit, because it's a fair question for someone who really doesn't know, but presenting that question in an attempt to spite any side of the discussion is fruitless.
Sean was crystal clear about things that were in the game, and things that ended up not being in the game. There wasn't much aside from multiplayer that he was vague about.
It's not a multiplayer game so I don't think that's a big concern for them. Unless there's like 100k+ refunds which seems super unlikely even if they didn't like the game. Most people either don't know you can refund or don't care.
That being said, when they add new features and implement a proper gameplay loop that number might slowly rise again. Especially with mods into play.
HarryHengst
Member
I agree with this. Yes, the game could have been a lot better, but nothing on that reddit list would have changed the ''but what do you do'' question. They are all just things that would give more life to the game. But the basic gameplay loop would stay exactly the same.
Something that came to me as I have been looking through post and reviews of this game is how different people's experiences can be in this game solely due to luck of the draw with procedural generation.
With games created by hand everyone experiences the same levels, the same environments, the same npc, etc. in more or less the same way. Similar to a movie director, it's in a way that has been picked by the developer to be in line with their vision of the game that they want people to play and experience. Procedural generation doesn't get this advantage and it seems to have an impact on the perception of players in a couple of large ways.
First the game doesn't necessarily get to put its best foot forward. With games created in the traditional way a team sits down and makes a decision about how they are going to present their game to the player in the best way they can. Something that's in line with their vision, is fun and exciting for the players, etc. With this process theoretically the player is always getting the best experience that the team could put together for their game. Procedurally generated games like NMS don't get that luxury of hand picked experiences. Because it's all generated by an algorithm the developers have no idea what the first planet a given player starts on is going to be fun or interesting to do there. They don't know what the first 10, 20, 100, 1000 planets are going to be like for any given player and that puts them at a disadvantage when trying to create a succinct experience. The best that Hello Games can do in this respect is put their best assets into the generation pool, tune their algorithm as well as they can and hope for the best.
All of the factors I just mentioned with procedural generation has made comparisons between two gameplay experiences almost impossible and it has created the very divisive and varied reactions to this game that we're currently seeing. One player might start off and their first 10 planets are amazing places that really resonate with them while another player's first 10 might be places that they hate and don't find interesting at all. These two experiences will yield vastly different opinions about the quality of the game making it extremely hard to rate overall as everyone's experience is completely different.
A great example of this happening was demonstrated really clearly on the most recent episode of The PC Gamer Show. Tom Marks really disliked the game because the first few planets he visited didn't resonate with him at all. While Tim Clark and Rebecca Ford both had more compelling experiences early on in the game leading to more positive views on the game as a whole.
There are things about the game mechanics that are consistent that can definitely be compared across playthroughs and players but this game poses a really interesting question; how do you rate and review a game that will be different for each person playing, not just interpreted differently but almost a completely different game?
With games created by hand everyone experiences the same levels, the same environments, the same npc, etc. in more or less the same way. Similar to a movie director, it's in a way that has been picked by the developer to be in line with their vision of the game that they want people to play and experience. Procedural generation doesn't get this advantage and it seems to have an impact on the perception of players in a couple of large ways.
First the game doesn't necessarily get to put its best foot forward. With games created in the traditional way a team sits down and makes a decision about how they are going to present their game to the player in the best way they can. Something that's in line with their vision, is fun and exciting for the players, etc. With this process theoretically the player is always getting the best experience that the team could put together for their game. Procedurally generated games like NMS don't get that luxury of hand picked experiences. Because it's all generated by an algorithm the developers have no idea what the first planet a given player starts on is going to be fun or interesting to do there. They don't know what the first 10, 20, 100, 1000 planets are going to be like for any given player and that puts them at a disadvantage when trying to create a succinct experience. The best that Hello Games can do in this respect is put their best assets into the generation pool, tune their algorithm as well as they can and hope for the best.
All of the factors I just mentioned with procedural generation has made comparisons between two gameplay experiences almost impossible and it has created the very divisive and varied reactions to this game that we're currently seeing. One player might start off and their first 10 planets are amazing places that really resonate with them while another player's first 10 might be places that they hate and don't find interesting at all. These two experiences will yield vastly different opinions about the quality of the game making it extremely hard to rate overall as everyone's experience is completely different.
A great example of this happening was demonstrated really clearly on the most recent episode of The PC Gamer Show. Tom Marks really disliked the game because the first few planets he visited didn't resonate with him at all. While Tim Clark and Rebecca Ford both had more compelling experiences early on in the game leading to more positive views on the game as a whole.
There are things about the game mechanics that are consistent that can definitely be compared across playthroughs and players but this game poses a really interesting question; how do you rate and review a game that will be different for each person playing, not just interpreted differently but almost a completely different game?
Counterpoint: Spelunky.
Just like any content generation technique, procedural generation is only as good a tool as the artist/engineer wielding it.
Derek Yu created a masterpiece by matching fantastic platforming mechanics with a procedural generation engine honed to such a fine edge that even after millions of playthroughs it still consistently creates interesting and dynamic level structures.
Hello Games clearly... didn't do that.
Procedural generation is not a magic wand, nor is it a replacement for quality game systems design. It's a tool. Tools can be used poorly. Leaving it up to the "luck of the draw" might not be the best use of that tool.
I never really had a sense of what I "do" in the game until I played it, tbh, and when I played it I was like "...oh."
UncleSporky
Member
The question was most often asked with the implication, "yes, we've seen the same trailers as you, we know there's exploration and ships and such, but what else do you do, and/or what are the mechanisms for how the game is played, because what's been shown is not meaty or interesting enough."
This is how the question was asked in that gametrailers video where the two guys are going back and forth, how there are "prescribed ways of asking questions about this game," you can't ask to know more because that would "destroy the mystery."
His example was like, oh in World of Warcraft you can be a rogue, what does that entail? And the answer comes back, oh yeah, you just....be a rogue, act roguish, go on rogue exploits with your friends. But that doesn't answer the question. What abilities do you learn? Are rogues in this game more damaging or dodgy, and can they steal?
Turns out when people are asking "what do you do in this game," a proper answer would've been, "collect the same resources on every planet to refuel your ship, constantly be bothered by your own decreasing life support, and run out of inventory space all the time."
That's what people wanted to know before release.
Jacksinthe
Banned
Kinda wrong.
Procedural generation isn't just throwing things together without rules. The more defined the rules are, the better the result.
You can take 5 different animals and randomly mix and match heads to bodies. Or, you can say the body of a zebra should not be allowed to have the head of a cat.
The latter constitutes a rule. The more refined the rule, the more targeted of a result.
Now we must also understand the universe is the SAME for every player. It's not unique. The same seeds are used globally which is why you can see the same planets others have visited.
The only real reason they chose generation is so they didn't have to model every planet by hand. This way you can have a virtual limitless amount of planets without needing to create them and a small package size. No building, tree, rock, etc is made from scratch by the engine. They make these assets ahead of time and can randomize the layout of a building or dungeon (think Diablo) or randomize the geometry of the rock, the amount of leaves on a tree, etc. Think of them as Legos.
The rules could have been more refined, easily.
There's a million ways to make procedural generation and you don't have to be a programmer to make the rules that the generation is governed by. You just need a bit of forward thinking so you don't wind up with a human head on a rhino's body with worms as arms unless that's what you are going for.
Sleight of Jam
Banned
Elon Musk gave Sean a tour of SpaceX because of this game. I wonder how Elon feels now and if Sean lied to him too?
Poor Elon
Poor Elon
Icyflamez96
Member
Well we had those answers much beforehand. Nms is lacking more meaningful in-depth planet exploration and resource distribution, and a bunch of features that Sean Murray had previously talked about, but that doesn't change the fact that we did have a lot of info to answer that question throughly beforehand. And I know you realize the game was said to be much more than it turned out to be, so what's left now is the most barebones execution of only some of the features talked about.
My main point is, anyone acting like the fact that Sean Murray talked about features that ended up not being in the game, or not being executed on well, somehow means that the people who "knew what you do" prior to launch were non level-headed individuals, are making an incredibly silly assertion.
We had the answers to that question as it is presented at face value. That's what people responded to. If the implication was "what exists doesnt sound interesting" then those people should have said so. That's a fine opinion to have.
I don't know why we're using poor execution and Sean Murray's lies about what's actually in the game as leverage to spite the side who was frustrated by the rather disingenious presentation of that question.
UncleSporky
Member
Why else do you think the same question would be asked repeatedly? The answer was never sufficient.
It always went, "what do you do," "you do this and this," "well yeah obviously but what I meant was..."
And typically the final answer was "gosh you want to know everything about this game, leave some mystery huh, don't you want the sense of discovery?? What if you didn't know there were buildings in the game and then you found a building, wouldn't that be an amazing moment?!" It was always shut down by saying we know enough and the rest is a mystery and that's great because the devs want it to be a mystery. And look how that mystery turned out. The answers to those questions mattered. In the end they gave us a different game entirely.
And yeah,some people genuinely didn't know that you could fly a ship and collect resources and such. But to say the rest weren't asking a deeper question than you want to give them credit for, to say they must've just all been trolling on purpose? Don't paint with such a broad brush. You don't get to play the beleaguered "woe is me, trolls trolled us for years with that question" card. It was always a legitimate question.