Hello Games has released a new trailer for No Man’s Sky that focuses on the battles and fights that players will engage in. As its description reads, on a planet, players are equipped with a multi-tool to defend against deadly predator creatures and mine resources.
Attacking creatures – aggressive or otherwise – or mining resources will call the attention of the Sentinels, a robotic force who seeks to keep each planet in a natural, undisturbed state. The more you fight back against the Sentinels, the higher your Wanted level, and the tougher they will become – from flying drones to quadrupedal machines, towering walkers and eventually dropships.
Space is also patrolled by the Sentinels, so attacking traders for their valuable goods or scavenging resources from freighters will also see you gaining a Wanted level, with Sentinel police ships coming to defend the natural order.
However, it’s not just the Sentinels who you need to beware of in space – pirates will swoop on the unwary, requiring you to evade and escape or fight back to defend your cargo.
No Man’s Sky releases on August 9th.
Enjoy!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
I wonder if the battles have offer rewards for winning. I know the developer Sean Murray has commented multiple times on how he didn’t really want to make the game about fighting and the some of the planetary defense robots would come after you for unprovoked attacks. This makes me wonder if the fighting was added as more of a concession to make the game appeal to a wider audience.
Any who, firmly on my wish list and will be a day 1 purchase, it still blows my mind that before this these guys were known for the Joe Danger games
Yeah, biggest leap I’ve seen for an indie studio in terms of production values, that’s for sure.
The on-ground fighting was actually against those police robots, so that should be optional. Then it showed a big dino with the implication that you would fight those to survive – well, you could probably just avoid them.
I wouldn’t worry about combat being too important in this game. I would worry about what the hell you’re going to do when you don’t pick unnecessary fights. Scanning things, collecting parts, scanning more things, collecting more parts, …. then what? I don’t think there is anything.
But it has quintillions of planets, QUINTILLIONS.
mining?
Is it only me that hates how modern shooters have to always have guns that look so big and take up so much of the POV?
BTW the guns in this game are procedurally generated, so there’s thousands of different looking guns.
because of consoles, you sit far away from your tv and can’t see anything unless it’s gigantic 🙁 I feel your pain
I agree, in fact im pretty sure this all started with Halo 2. Its the first game I remember where I felt annoyed and distracted by the guns taking up too much of the screen area.
That’s a true fault of the consoles.
C’MON AUGUST I’M DYING OVER HERE!
After playing a lot of Elite Dangerous (and still will play more), this game will be like fresh air to me.
I love exploration a lot…I MEAN A LOT!, just the idea of discovery, advance and progress in a way that it will take a long time to get to the center of the Galaxy or even more so…find out whatever they are hiding from us…that idea is great for me.
I believe that it will be possible to find other players in that vast of space, and if that happens (maybe in 1, 2 or even 3 months after starting to play) imagine how special that will be to find another human and then share experiences and such.
They said that it “won’t be possible to find other players, but not impossible” having in mind the massive scale of the universe and since everyone will have a different home.
That also could happen in the center of the Galaxy, imagine like a massive sanctuary or something like that in where all travellers join there flying together.
Who knows what could happen, and the idea of figure that out is just amazing.
Imagination man…like in the old good days. 😉
It will take time…I’m not going to watch other people play that’s for sure…it could ruin the experience.
Reviewers of this game are going to have a hard time with this one…that’s for sure.
They’ve said that in the event of finding another player, it’s not going to be something easy to identify, perhaps when finding one you don’t even realize that’s another player. Kinda cool if you ask me! 🙂
That happened (kinda spoiler) in the game Journey (on PS3), in one part of the game you find a character the same as you and you had no idea until the end that it was actually another player. That’s why that game in particular is so special…they never told us that it was online all the time or that you could play with another player.
Interaction was limited just with sounds and movements, then you could or go with the other person and finish the game together (it was not easy) or do your own thing.
That was amazing and sure there is something similar in here. 😉
The more i see about this game the less i am excited, because it looks more or less the same.
The more mysterious this game is, the better.
At least that’s my impression.
First trailers which weren’t telling how the gameplay would work left me excited. This one blows the cover by clearly showing what the game has to offer and it somehow feels a bit underwhelming.
I hope I’m “wrong”!
It’s planned that way, there’s a specif interview with Danny O’Dwyer from Gamespot when Sean talks about it. Something related to the “wonder of discovery” that few games has nowadays.
Yeah, I know about the mystery concerning the center of the game’s world (that’s a very cool move, in my opinion). However, I was talking about something a bit different there. What I meant was that the those signs in the trailer saying “here you have this”, “do this” were kind of spoiling the charm of the game. That worries me because now I’m afraid the final game may be devoid of this unique atmosphere and flow from the first trailers.
The thing is, and Sean also said this multiple times, the trailers are a hard work to do because it is hard to represent the game. All the trailers, builds and gameplays we’ve seen so far where more or less scripted specifically show some aspects of the game. I even remember one interview where he said that one of the guys at Sony (or just a marketing dept guy, can’t remember) said to him something like “do what you do, but don’t mention the word ‘boring'”. Sean also mentioned that most people might end up in a complete “empty” planet, or find a lot of planets devoid of any life, and your drive as a player is to well… do whatever you want to do (main drive being explore of course).
The guys at Hello Games are fully aware of what they are building up. At this point, honestly, I even glad that most of the game will end up being boring, because I think that it could make the discoveries more and more impactful. 🙂
Yup, trailers always show the idealized versions of games, after all…
By the way, I have a hunch that people led by the hype train will rush the game instead of immersing themselves into the world. And then they will write negative reviews.
Ah, that’s for sure. Best thing is maintain a calm mind lol.
The thing that most bugs me is the “but what do you do?” and the “is ‘X’ thing in the game?”. I mean, there’s tons answers already there, just look for it on the internet, but people already put their minds on the “this is all hype” train. While I certainly can’t fault anyone for being cynical given what this industry does bad, we are too cynical and are forgetting what it can do good too. There’s no more middle ground. 😐
I know that NMS is nothing new, it may be a dud, may be too simple, too casual, too boring or repetitive, and very well maybe be my biggest disappointment, but holy f*, at the very least I’m applauding the guys at Hello Games for even trying to build something like that.
My thoughts exactly! They set the bar very high and it’s applaudable on its own.
Are you saying that no one can say anything bad about the game at all and if they do it’s because they were hyped too much?, are you seriously trying to claim and state that the game is going to be the best objectively and can do no wrong?. I seriously hope that isn’t anywhere near the case because the game can very well end up like a dud or just not be as amazing as some had hoped. That and reviews will stand by what they give out.
I’m saying that hype may cause people approach the game improperly. For example, if they will search for gameplay like in Star Citizen there, they won’t find it and will get disappointed. And yeah, the trailer branded by such a company like Sony may make people think it’s supposed to be some kind of a blockbuster.
There is no proper way to “approach” the game since it’s subjective on how you approach it to begin with. You telling me how to approach it means you are injecting your pov and interests over mine in order to “approach it” in the way you think is objectively good, that’s not how it works.
If you took a gander at what the game is like, you’ll actually find that it’s emulating various parts of what Star Citizen had set out to accomplish and talked about years ago while NMS was still in the concept stages. You can compare one to the other like how people will compare Bayonetta to DMC, both are different games but contain various elements and mechanics that rub off one another.
marketing rights will do that on purpose because that’s the whole idea, just look at the System Shock “pre Alpha” PC gameplay they slapped their logo onto, they are trying to make people think it’s “only on PS4” because that’s how deceptive marketing is meant to function as. They aren’t meant to pay and tell you it’s also on Xbox or PC, though that would be them being honest.
I think there really are the proper ways to approach games. If one plays a military simulator and expects it to work like Call of Duty, it’s a fault on their end if they get disappointed for the reason that CoD tactics don’t work in that environment.
You think there are but it;s subjective in it;s own right as to the way you think you should approach something, someone else is going to see things differently from your pov and you cannot tell them they are wrong for taking their approach because the entire view is subjective.
Okay, so a reviewer may call a car horrible because it can’t fly. Cuz “subjective” and all… And yet he would be ridiculed. What for? For not treating things as they are meant to be treated.
Reviews for the most part have to stay objective if you didn’t already notice. They can totally toss in their own piece at the end of a review or in the middle/start of it.
Meant to be treated is also subjective if you want to go that route as well.
What was the point, again? I’m afraid we can’t agree because we are discussing two different things.
Yes, reviews should be mostly objective. Comments on a site like this may be way more subjective. That doesn’t change the fact that some opinions are ludicrous because they expect way too much or expect to see things which devs didn’t even mean to deliver (GRID’s devs didn’t mean to implement a complex melee fighting system, so it’s plain stupid to scold the game for the lack of it.)
“Meant to be treated is also subjective if you want to go that route as well.”
Producers of things make them with some kind of usage in mind. Would you argue that screws aren’t meant to be screwed? Chewing gums aren’t meant to be chewed? Cars aren’t meant to be driven? Books aren’t meant to be read?
And yes, this comment is subjective, too. We aren’t robots.
What you find ludicrous is what others can fine normal though, that’s the whole deal about having a subjective opinion, it’s always going to be viewed differently, just how you and I clearly have completely different views on this game and how to present/play it. You want to go in all super mysterious and not knowing an iota of a thing, I want to know the game, how it plays, all that there is to do in order to seek out what it’s about and it’s purpose, all this before handing over my money because I have time and money on my hands and I don’t just hand it out like some charity case. Devs have to earn that money and I have to know about their product.
The whole point of yours is you are trying to enforce a view on everyone else, you are trying to demand us all to adhere to how you think a game should be approached and played rather than simply not doing any of that and letting us all judge the game as is and for ourselves.
Well, I just personally think No Man’s Sky should uncover less things. It’s just my opinion, I’m not trying to enforce anything.
I still don’t get why you don’t notice that almost everything commercial has its intended application. You know, businesses have their target audience. They don’t make some random gizmo and hope that somebody buys it and finds some usage to it.
But yeah, you certainly can use products in a different fashion than intended by producers.
And yep, some things have broader usage… Like sandbox games (including NMS).
“What you find ludicrous is what others can fine normal though”
I agree, although it has its extents. If you did some bizarre things on a street, for example, you’d be labeled by virtually all people as a weirdo.
“I still don’t get why you don’t notice that almost everything commercial has its intended application. You know, businesses have their target audience. They don’t make some random gizmo and hope that somebody buys it and finds some usage to it.”
And marketing and research helps the consumer know what to expect, what the product is and *how it works* rather than “hey you there, here is this random gizmo I made, I’m not going to tell you anything about it but buy it off me anyway!”.
“If you did some bizarre things on a street, for example, you’d be labeled by virtually all people as a weirdo.”
Is it weird for people to want to know something?, to know what is inside a box, to know the box itself and know how it functions and works?. I find it weird for those who refuse to inspect the box, to learn what goes on inside it lest their minds melt at the glimmer of information that reaches their cortex.
Is it weird for people to want to know something?, to know what is
inside a box, to know the box itself and know how it functions and
works?. I find it weird for those who refuse to inspect the box, to
learn what goes on inside it lest their minds melt at the glimmer of
information that reaches their cortex.
No, it isn’t weird at all. As I said, I would personally like NMS to be mysterious, but I see how people don’t want to buy a cat in the sack.
And marketing and research helps the consumer know what to expect, what the product is and *how it works* rather than “hey you there, here is this random gizmo I made, I’m not going to tell you anything about it but buy it off me anyway!”.
I’d agree in most cases. As above, this is just my preference. I reckon that not saying anything about certain games (like NMS) is a cool thing. I’m aware, though, that many people don’t want to risk their money, and fully understand them.
“No, it isn’t weird at all. As I said, I would personally like NMS to be mysterious, but I see how people don’t want to buy a cat in the sack.”
Yes, yes it is. If everyone thought the way as you do then we wouldn’t have discovered nearly as much as we have through various fields in science, medicine, movies and everything else. Those that like to keep things mysterious 24/7 are those that don’t wish to know much at all, those that don’t dare ask the question or to know it’s.
“I’m aware, though, that many people don’t want to risk their money, and fully understand them.”
Well then you’ll have to take notice that what was said there conflicts with your “mysterious approach”, if anything it takes precedence over the whole mysterious approach as not everyone wants to toss their money into a black pit of nothingness in the hopes something comes out of it.
“Yes, yes it is.”
Did you change your mind? You initially implied that it wasn’t weird.
“If everyone thought the way as you do then we wouldn’t have discovered
nearly as much as we have through various fields in science, medicine,
movies and everything else.”
What does my attitude have to do with the lack of progress? We aren’t talking about practical things like science or medicine, which really should advance as fast as possible. We’re talking about games. Things made to entertain us. Inside their worlds more ? better. You know, who is excited when their character has too much ammo, money and hitpoints? Who is excited when there’s no challenge at all? Games are in fact all about purposefully creating obstacles in order to have fun by overcoming them. Mysteriousness included in a few games won’t hurt the world by making it less advanced. Games don’t advance any technology to begin with.
“Those that like to keep things mysterious 24/7 are those that don’t wish
to know much at all, those that don’t dare ask the question or to know
it’s.
I agree, people who want to keep everything mysterious are backward. I’m not one of them, though. I don’t want to keep all things mysterious 24/7. I just think adding some mystery, some challenge to NMS would spice it up and make it better.
Well then you’ll have to take notice that what was said there conflicts with your “mysterious approach”,
I have Opinion X, but at the same time respect Opinion Y. Nothing wrong or conflicting there.
“Did you change your mind?”
Not at all.
“What does my attitude have to do with the lack of progress? ”
I’m talking about wanting to know something in general, from discovery via science, medicine, stories etc. Not wanting to know anything about a story or a world is rather ignorant.
Don’t know why you;re throwing challenges into the subject. Plenty of games have challenges, I don’t know how NMS is meant to be akin to Dark Souls if we want to really talk about “challenging” games.
You’d be surprised to see that some games do improve and advance graphical technology because they are needed in the first place to paint the canvas rather than nothing happening at all.
” I just think adding some mystery, some challenge to NMS would spice it up and make it better.”
How much mystery though?. Like just how much are we honestly talking about because your version sounds like a lot of mystery than say a pinch of mystery and we know currently as things are the game hardly has a mere pinch of it going on.
“I have Opinion X, but at the same time respect Opinion Y. Nothing wrong or conflicting there.”
But there is a conflict because I don’t want to take your “approach” to how to “play” the game, I want to take it the way I want and I want to know about the game, what to do without the devs acting like it’s some alien tech they themselves don’t know anything about. You want that and it conflicts as a result. By all means respect it but it doesn’t change your stance so it’s akin to shrugging shoulders and going with your own way.
I’m talking about wanting to know something in general, from discovery via science, medicine, stories etc. Not wanting to know anything about a story or a world is rather ignorant.
Yeah, so I agree there. But creators of those stories or worlds shouldn’t necessarily reveal them in entirety. They may give a mental challenge to the players, readers or watchers, by hiding some details. Hell, there even are things entirely revolving around mysteries. Games/books/movies about criminal investigations, for instance. Or adventure games.
Dark Souls is a good example, too. I don’t play it, but I heard about its incredibly complex story, which isn’t revealed outright. Players have to gather a lot of faint clues hiding around the world, and put them together. It’s a challenge. Yes, this word is relevant there. Do you think challenges are wrong or something?
How much mystery though?
A pinch of it. And, now as I think of it, NMS is probably good as it is. The center of the galaxy is mysterious enough. People who want to discover mechanics on their own should just stay away from the trailer (my bad there).
You’d be surprised to see that some games do improve and advance graphical technology
They do, but it’s an advancement for the sake of our enjoyment, it isn’t crucial for humanity. And some mysterious indie games won’t stop extremely beautiful games from being developed, anyway.
But there is a conflict because I don’t want to take your “approach” to how to “play” the game, I want to take it the way I want and I want to
know about the game, what to do without the devs acting like it’s some
alien tech they themselves don’t know anything about. You want that and it conflicts as a result.
OK, so I want A, you want B, but it’s the devs who will choose either A or B. Those options are mutually exclusive. Doesn’t matter what we want, we don’t decide it. So there’s no harm done. Do I want to take your preference away from you? No.
By all means respect it but it doesn’t change your stance so it’s akin to shrugging shoulders and going with your own way.
Well, nobody can prefer everything at once. If one prefers blue shirts but understands that someone may like green shirts, is it bad? No. It’s certainly more open-minded that thinking there’s only one valid preference.
I dunno about that last part. If I find a trailer boring or the info boring then chances are I;m going to find those segments in the game boring as well. take for instance the planet and animal tagging systems, we know what those are, their purpose, how they are represented and work, to me that is boring through and through. I’d rather something more interesting than being one who labels planets and animals on some covert mission to get to the center of a dot.
It;s also easy to counter what I’ve said with “this game isn’t for you”, which most fans or people who love things close to them would say, it’s easier to say that than to deal with the critique that maybe the devs haven’t done something all that great to appeal to a decent chunk of people. I mean this is a reason why we have lackluster games that don’t review well and don’t sell too great, those games and devs just didn’t make the right moves, toss in the right things to make you excited and frankly this is what is happening with NMS to me and the opposite when it comes to Starbound.
See Ive come to know and watch Starbound transform as a game over the past few years, I’ve come to know a decent amount about the game and yet a lot still alludes me and the game didn’t have to try playing it super secret and mysterious in order to get me interested. The very ideas they gave us upon release were more than enough to get me to grab it along with friends. What Starbound offers is basically what NMS offers, difference being that SB offers more in terms of crafting, building and the like while NMS has you trading, shooting some ships and tagging stuff while trying to get to some area that seemingly has no story. Starbound has a story for example and the freedom of exploration and complete with drop in and out co-op/multiplayer on your own server or a dedicated one on Steam.
Why am I telling you this you might be wondering?, I’m mentioning SB simply because both games have procedurally generated content, a focus on exploring the unknown, finding other races and getting to somewhere, the difference being like I said above but with SB having a focus on crafting, story and open exploration but NMS banking on a tag system, GTA like gameplay and the whole mystery of a place no one knows nothing about but hope will blow their minds (which automatically sets for high expectations as any sort of mystery that big will do).
I get your criticism, agree with some points and still think this is “isn’t a game for you” deal. You’ve said it yourself, with all the info you’re still not sold to the idea and find Starbound more akin to your taste. They don’t have to appeal to a big chunk of people, it’s for people that like Noctis, for people that likes Elite Frontier but without the heavy sim parts, and I get that. You find it boring, I don’t, it’s simple as that.
“You’ve said it yourself, with all the info you’re still not sold to the idea and find Starbound more akin to your taste.”
See that deal makes it sound like it’s fine for it to not appeal to me, why is it wrong for me to want it to appeal to me?. I don’t get why it’s fair to not judge it or criticize it because it’s apparently “not for me” because it doesn’t click with me. That means that there is no such thing in this world that is subjective or objectively bad because we can simply chalk it up as “well maybe it;s not for you”. It’s like the ultimate get out of jail card when it comes to valid complaints, issues and criticism.
Take a look at Battlefront for example, sold a lot on consoles, sold mediocre on PC and the online numbers are near to death on PC, don’t tell me that “the game isn’t for them”, there are legit grounded reasons as to why it didn’t sell well or play well with PC gamers, with a different group of gamers of which who played the same game console players played when it came to battlefront 1-2.
It takes effort to criticize and then effort to accept those criticisms without emotion or favoritism being injected into the thought process of said criticism. However it is also easier to just shrug and go with “maybe it ain’t for you”.
I am directly challenging anyone who goes with that line because that line could be used for nearly everything in life in order to avoid criticism or the desire to see change.
But it is, “normal” isn’t a straight line. From my perspective I accept all criticism, agree with some points and have the option to like or dislike the game regardless. Criticism isn’t universal truth, is parameters to which we use to built standards.
As much as we can discuss, and we will, and judge and all that, there’s no spoon… erm I mean, there is no objectively bad or good game, it is all perspective really.
I’m well aware but to simply say “it isn’t for you” is not a way to dismiss the quality of the game and what it could have done better, it’s why we have scores, reviews and the like.
Again, I’m not trying to use it as a dismissal of criticism and this “it could have done better”.. yeah like every game ever, it just going to depend of who you ask. The game is what it is, it’s done, it’s their project and when you say “it can do better” others can say “I’m satisfied with this”. From that point on, you either accept what are you getting into or “it’s not for you” territory.
And again, scores and reviews doesn’t hold any critic value without some academic discussion backing it. It is good for business and it is a quick and dirty way to serve the consumer but it doesn’t serve the medium itself.
The game is what it is, it’s done, it’s their project and when you say “it can do better” others can say “I’m satisfied with this”. From that point on, you either accept what are you getting into or “it’s not for you” territory.
The way you talk about it makes it sound like the “I’m satisfied with this” crowd has somehow won over and outweighed the “it can be done better crowd”. By winning out I mean “drowning” out, forcing the other group to “move on” rather than possibly agreeing that more could be done and maybe vouching for more to be done in the future.
Without reviews and scores the masses wouldn’t be able to weigh their decisions based on the quality given before them. I mean they exist in the first place for many valid reasons and have done for centuries. Just because they don’t serve what you think might be awesome doesn’t mean they should stop existing, they serve to aid those who want to know how something holds up.
There are times where we don’t even need reviews and yet a majority of the population could dislike something while the small cult could love it, it still shows that a majority dislike something while the minority like it. it still shows that things can be bad and people like like bad things but it won’t stop something from being bad. That’s just how life works.
F me, you are really taking me as defensive.
“Just because they don’t serve what you think might be awesome(…)”
C’mon.
“That’s just how life works.”
From your perspective that is.
take it as you can dude.
Some games are really not for certain people. If I were reviewing MMO, MOBA and Japanese games, should I give them all 1/10 because I hate vibes of those titles? No, they are just not for me, but are critically acclaimed by other people.
That shouldn’t stop games from reviewing poorly, I’m sorry but there is such a thing as bad games and games that just don’t do well.
Starbound has me at wondering what I’ll discover, yet I’ve known about the game since it’s early access release back in Dec 2013. The game doesn’t have to tell you everything in order to “spoil” the game. Some that are super easy to spoil might need to reevaluate their lives though. I’m not as easy to spoil but what you give me better be mind blowing.
Different approaches, what may work for one may not work for another. I’m sold to their approach, and I’m fully aware of the skepticism.
Different ways doesn’t always mean objectively good success. I mean we have good and bad films, good and bad games, not all games are good like all movies aren’t good regardless of cult followings.
That’s subjectivity. Notice how I never said “good” or “bad” I’ve said “different” as in “it is their idea and it works for me”.
Yes but deep down I’m willing to bet you think it’s good versus something you think is bad.
I can’t convince you otherwise, and I’m not going to waste my time trying, I can only give my word for it, the rest is up to you. You see what you want to see. 🙂
You don’t ened to waste your time, you just ened to accept that the game could inf act fail to deliver and might not be an awesome game all around the world. We have cult followings for movies and games and yet the large majority pan them as bad, that’s just how the world works. I think bayonets are awesome weapons, the military and the world today does not, thems the breaks.
Tell you what, some time in the future when you see a bad game or something you think is bad, remember this conversation, it will come in handy because you will be on my side of the spectrum once that happens.
I’ve already accepted that it may fail, and adjusted my expectations Sun, and again, yes I may think some game is bad and you can call me out whenever you want. It won’t change anything this is what we do, we judge things “bad” or “good” and in the end we have the ability to move on.
You don’t really sound like you’ve rapidly changed your expectations, I mean this very ongoing conversation kinda points towards that state.
I wouldn’t want to call you out, I just want you to know that the game isn’t a special snowflake that needs protection from criticism or it’s chances to fail, every game has that happen before/after their release.
I never said the game is special or am I avoiding criticism, what are you on about?
I said I like the game, I’m to the idea and a number of people just so happen to be on the same boat.
Why is so hard to understand that a number of people are into the game and others not? This isn’t shielding of criticism is genuine “I like this game regardless”.
Let’s be real now, what do YOU want out of NMS?
I know you like the game and some that do and some that don’t.
What I;m trying to get at is any form of early defense because the game lacks all the info we need to know along with not being out yet and so far those in the defense mode are “maybe it’s not for you so go away” mode.
No seriously telling someone it’s not for them ends any conversation right there and then since there is nothing more to talk about or go on with as you’ve told them it isn’t for them.
“Let’s be real now, what do YOU want out of NMS?”
You mean we weren’t being real from the start?, when do things get real at all?.
What do I want?, that’s rather specific to ask of me, and it’s rather specific to ask in terms of a defined answer you’ve likely got stored to give me in terms of “well it’s not for you”. No really If I give you an expectation I can guarantee you’ll give me some form of answer that doesn’t involve agreeing flat out and going with “well maybe they should throw that in the game”. If not then you’ll notice the above and change accordingly to not fall into the “not for you” answer.
You know what? Sod this, if I type my response we will be going in circles.
Game is going to be out in a few weeks, until then, you do what you do, I do what I do.
Cheers.
By all means.
If it was going in circles then you must have known as to why.
So you’d rather every single game just not tell you anything or at least super tiny snipped meaning you have to buy every single game without any sort of research?.
Not every single game… No Man’s Sky, though, should take this approach, because mysteriousness makes it better.
Well no because NMS is a game like other games, it;s quite hypocritical to be selective and not do it for all games but only of your choosing because you want whatever game you love despite not knowing a single thing about it to give out information for those who want to form purchasing decisions.
Mystery doesn’t always mean better though. And it’s so easy to make the argument “well you set the bar so high so there” whenever you try including mystery, it’s not always going to be awesome all the time as you imply it will be.
“no because NMS is a game like other games”
It isn’t! Some games benefit from being mysterious, some don’t. Knowing ins and outs of Battlefield before its release won’t really ruin it, but if you learn the same about Starseed Pilgrim, your fun will be certainly spoiled. What’s there to not understand? It’s not hypocritical to treat every game individually! It’s not goddamn communism.
Butting in here, that’s exactly what I want, for the devs and media to stop feeding me crap about unreleased games.
When the game is finished, I still want nothing from the devs, and never a word from the publisher, they are biased, and can’t be trusted.
Most media is equally biased, and I have learnt to read reviews, carefully, and rarely trust everything written.
Videos of gameplay are usually the source I rely on, even then careful selection is required from multipe sources, often muting the opinion of the player.
I haven’t read this article or watched the video, I know very little about this game, beyond the universe size and exploration focus, and until it’s released, I have no damn interest in speculating over “gameplay” for a game, I can’t play myself.
The sellers will never show the worst of this game, so until it’s released, everything shown is selling a product, I never use the seller as a source.
When you’ve played the game released, come and tell me what you like, and what you don’t, only then can your opinion have any merit.
I’m mildly interested, but need a released game to get any more exited than that.
You want games to go silent, A large majority do not, especially with money on the line and honestly I’d rather not loose any and all research tools and evidence to form my purchasing decisions because some people want to toss money into a black pit in the chances of maybe getting a good game. I’d rather be informed than not.
they said the universe is so big you mite not run in to any players this was a scripted trailer i wouldnt trust it..lol
Sean Murray has nothing to worry about. His procedurally generated customers will procedurally buy the game.
I hope this is the ps4 version. So Much Aliasing…
stars to surface ya don’t say!?! well y couldn’t guys do something like take your ship from them stars out in space ( or take off at some other planet) and kamikaze it in to some giant creature fartin around on planet surface, or something like that!?! would have been better than writing it out, just sayin…
——————————————————————————————
“Yeah but you don’t have to hide every single thing behind a name and
expect everyone to buy it without asking “what’s in the box”. I;m not
asking for the devs to tell us A-B about NMS, I want to know all there
is to do, the purpose of the game rather than fly to planet A, trade
with Alien X and tag planet Z, rinse and repeat.”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
I don’t want to spoil the game for myself, so I don’t know. But… Didn’t the devs reveal the purpose of No Man’s Sky? Even if they didn’t, you can always read some reviews or ask people after the release.
——————————————————————————————
“DS has it’s own niche with it’s own way of handing out some story, not every game has nor should follow their route”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Hey, but “should” is subjective. For me, every game should be challenging, and most aren’t.
Some devs will just choose their productions to be more cryptic. So there’s that. Hello Games is neither right nor wrong, just takes their own chosen approach. Don’t like mysteriousness – don’t play the game.
——————————————————————————————
“I don’t see why it has to be crucial and important to humanity in order
to advance something, you can advance something for the benefit of
enjoyment and fun.”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
I just stressed that because you earlier said:
“If everyone thought the way as you do then we wouldn’t
have discovered nearly as much as we have through various fields in
science, medicine, movies and everything else.”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Because no, even if everyone had liked some mystery added to the fictional worlds, that wouldn’t have inhibited the discoveries you mentioned.
——————————————————————————————
“What I was trying to point out was the influence that conflicts, as in
there is no middle ground because group A wants mystery, devs give
mystery”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Ah, so that was about the alleged changes made because of the group of people that prefers mysteriousness…
Well, that’s how the world works. Devs (or producers of virtually everything) can’t cater to everyone’s needs. They may either conduct some kind of a survey and find out what the majority of people like, or simply choose the variant they prefer (or think most people will be okay with).
In the case of No Man’s Sky, I doubt they asked someone else for an opinion. When they were publicly announcing it, the fact that the game would more or less revolve around some secret had been already decided.
But for me, there’s more freedom of choice if the mystery is present. That’s because you can always reveal it after the release if you want, by asking some people about it or reading reviews.
——————————————————————————————
“It doesn’t take my prefs away, nothing ever does or will, but it will
damn well stop me from buying or getting into a game or anything else
with the lack of decent information”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Of course, it’s just a product, a thing which you may not buy if it doesn’t meet your expectations. If I were you, I wouldn’t worry, though, because reviews will reveal all the mechanics, maybe even that one big mystery.
——————————————————————————————
“but it doesn’t change the fact that you wouldn’t sway to the other side
of the opposite opinion and wanted that side to become more a reality
than your own”
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
But what else to do? What else would you do? Many people already have their preferences estabilished and they’re fine with them. What purpose would taking a 180° turn serve?
Saying “yeah, I respect their opinion” won’t change much. It will show, though, that I’m not a close-minded buffoon or troll.
——————————————————————————————
“I don’t want to spoil the game for myself, so I don’t know. But… Didn’t the devs reveal the purpose of No Man’s Sky? Even if they didn’t, you can always read some reviews or ask people after the release.”
Why can’t you just not watch trailers then if you don’t want the game “spoiled” for you in a such a way that it would give me the info I want before the actual release. Why have I got to be compromised for the sake of a few moments of wonder that easily get replaced by another memory.
“For me, every game should be challenging, and most aren’t.”
But games were not designed to be challenging all the time and it;s why we have different genres that suit different people. That and a large majority of gamers don’t always want DS esque challenges in their daily gaming lives, this is why we have an elite few who go balls to the wall with hardcore challenges and not the vast majority of gamers, otherwise casual and easy modes would be a thing of the past or next to none existent if the hardcore elite were the majority.
I always say to those who want a flexing ultimate challenge to go outside, do some workouts and take on the Scottish log toss, one of the heaviest of challenges out there and manly as hell too.
“Some devs will just choose their productions to be more cryptic. So there’s that. Hello Games is neither right nor wrong, just takes their own chosen approach. Don’t like mysteriousness – don’t play the game.”
Actually being very cryptic can hamper your game and it’s delivery method, not every cryptic game has been a roaring objective success all around, there have been times where trying to be super mysterious has backfired.
That last part is basically your entire answer to this whole conversation, I’m glad we’ve gotten to the real meat and potatoes of this debate. That last line could be said for nearly everything in life, but we all know it makes for a poor form argument while refusing to adapt or change.
“Because no, even if everyone had liked some mystery added to the fictional worlds, that wouldn’t have inhibited the discoveries you mentioned.”
Actually it would have because like I said above, going in all super cryptic can work against a game, it can turn people off, piss people off and of course deter people. To say it can never work against anyone is rather naive and foolish if you ask me.
“I doubt they asked someone else for an opinion. When they were publicly announcing it, the fact that the game would more or less revolve around some secret had been already decided.
But for me, there’s more freedom of choice if the mystery is present. That’s because you can always reveal it after the release if you want, by asking some people about it or reading reviews.”
You don’t know that for certain and as well as that the devs can ask friends and family for their opinions, it’s what we do as a species to make sure if we want to make something happen or not. Yes some people go “yes I want to make this”, but there are also those that make something but also ask for their say in order to adjust to what that person has said, again something we do very commonly as a species.
I find there is more freedom of choice without having to be all cryptic. I can still have that sense of wonder and discovery without having things hidden from me or made to be super mysterious.
“. If I were you, I wouldn’t worry, though, because reviews will reveal all the mechanics, maybe even that one big mystery.”
I’d rather the devs do their job and do what everyone else does by informing you first off as to what is going on rather than taking the mysterious angle. That level of hype has led to the gaming gathering a heavy defense force despite them not knowing much of the game at all and it not even being out yet.
“But what else to do? What else would you do? Many people already have their preferences estabilished and they’re fine with them. What purpose would taking a 180° turn serve?”
Seeing actual error has had people turn their angles around for one and for another it;s seeing logic, again which also changes people’s perspectives and opinions rather than “uh I like it, not gonna change, go play something else”, that to me shows refusal to critique any part of the game let alone accepting what the other person has on the game unless it fits the view of those who like said game (which is why you’ve been defending it this whole time all the way rather than accepting that maybe, just maybe the game won’t be an objective smash hit, maybe it will have some short falls and errors, just telling me it will isn’t reason enough, it’s having acknowledge that from the start and cut the defense short which never happened).
“Why can’t you just not watch trailers then if you don’t want the game
“spoiled” for you in a such a way that it would give me the info I want
before the actual release.”
I just peeked at the trailer from this article, and I think I’m not even going to watch other ones. And you should be glad, as well. You can watch all those trailers and uncover the unknown. One got released today.
And by the way: official media created by developers are often misleading. No matter if they are cryptic or not. They show idealized versions of games. So gameplays and reviews remain the most useful for evaluating if you want to buy the title.
“Why have I got to be compromised for the sake of a few moments of wonder that easily get replaced by another memory.”
Because somebody has to be compromised. As I said, the devs can’t cater to everyone at once.
“But games were not designed to be challenging all the time and it;s why we have different genres that suit different people.”
My point was just: we often can’t have things customized just for us (using the analogy of games’ difficulty). But anyways, I think way too many games are too easy now. Difficulty levels should be a godsend there, but unfortunately, some games don’t use them, and even if they do, the highest level is often still too easy.
“Actually it would have because like I said above, going in all super
cryptic can work against a game, it can turn people off, piss people off
and of course deter people.”
As well as it can work for a game, though. Maybe people not liking artificial (human-made; for entertainment) mystery just should stay away from games advertising as mysterious. Of course, it pissed some people off (virtually everything have angered someone at some point, probably), but didn’t inhibit any serious, scientific discoveries, as you once implied.
Games that aren’t mysterious are still the vast majority, by the way.
“You don’t know that for certain and as well as that the devs can ask friends and family for their opinions”
It would still be a very small group of people who decided that.
“which is why you’ve been defending it this whole time all the way rather
than accepting that maybe, just maybe the game won’t be an objective
smash hit”
I said many times that this game aimed very high and it was very easy to screw up. I’m not deluded.
“Seeing actual error has had people turn their angles around for one and for another”
Changing people’s mind about some wrong things may be easier, but doing the same with preferences of things not doing real harm is extremely hard, I think. And why even do that, in the first place? If one prefers white chocolate and I prefer standard one, should I scold them because they negatively influence the production of cocoa? No, liking something isn’t an error which you have to fix.
“I’d rather the devs do their job and do what everyone else does by
informing you first off as to what is going on rather than taking the
mysterious angle.”
In fact, they are doing this right now. Releasing many trailers about various aspects of the game, which should dispel any doubts about the gameplay.
“You can watch all those trailers and uncover the unknown. One got released today.”
You make it sound like boundless information and yet it really isn’t, it’s the basics, the gist of it all.
“And by the way: official media created by developers are often misleading. No matter if they are cryptic or not. They show idealized versions of games. So gameplays and reviews remain the most useful for evaluating if you want to buy the title.”
That still hasn’t stopped games from putting out decent marketing or information to let you know what you’re in for. Still not buying into the entirety of “wait for reviews only” excuse as that excuses all marketing both good and bad.
“Because somebody has to be compromised. As I said, the devs can’t cater to everyone at once.”
And this is the result of it all, this is why you see those saying it;s boring or how they want to know more and yet you meet these groups nearly all the time, you’ve even done it in the latest article when someone called it boring, you clearly wanted to step in and go “nuh uh” because guess what, it caters to you and to to them and yet you seem to fail to grasp how much it can annoy others when they aren’t the target. This is why I mentioned before, yes you can go “you have an opinion” but it’s basically akin to shrugging your shoulders and moving on, the same way you do that towards the gent saying it was boring.
I’ve also seen games cater to at least two target markets at once, it’s never impossible, it just requires honest to god effort, if you don’t put in said effort then of course you don’t deserve any pats on the back or well done for doing nothing. if someone else does it then of course they get the pat on the back, NMS clearly isn’t getting that pat on the back.
“But anyways, I think way too many games are too easy now. Difficulty levels should be a godsend there, but unfortunately, some games don’t use them, and even if they do, the highest level is often still too easy.”
Times change us all. Like I said some years ago I was all into balls to the wall challenges because I had plenty of free time and wasn’t hampered by a career and the like. Having a full time job with less time to spend on gaming has me going for games that I can easily get into, games that don’t require me to slave away to the game rather than the game being fun for me. It;s why the MLG and the casual or super casual crowds never mix together all too well because in the MLG world, they want everyone to be tough as nails like they think they are while the casual crowd just want to do what they do.
If you think something is too easy then go outside and find something more challenging, like I said the Scottish log toss is a pretty damn entertaining and decent challenge to take on if all you desire is a pure hard challenge, it shouldn’t make a difference if it’s a game or not, it’s the fact that you want something hard to test your mettle. You’ll also find that there are more casual and super casual users out there than there are those who adore nothing but getting their knuckles bashed in for fun, that’s why you see less hardcore balls to the wall challenges these days.
“As well as it can work for a game, though. Maybe people not liking artificial (human-made; for entertainment) mystery just should stay away from games advertising as mysterious. ”
Maybe the game could be less cryptic or those susceptible to spoilers should learn to not lose their mind when something is made known to them?. I honestly find the “omg spoilers SHUSH!!” crowd to be the worst lot out there because they actively try to control how anything is given to them or to anyone else rather than taking it in like anyone else does, they give off a level of sensitivity to certain levels of information that makes them go all emotional or agitated because they knew something.
“Games that aren’t mysterious are still the vast majority, by the way.”
I’m sure you can at least for an iota of a second imagine as to why they are the way they are today, but I guess we could blame those that want to know something and the games rather than acknowledge that maybe we don’t want everything to be under wraps 99% of the time for what could be bad setups. Of course the main and always used excuse for bad setups of mystery is “aw dang you set the bar too high for yourself, all your fault”, which again excuses the writing and design of the mystery and goes for the user instead of the game and the creator.
“I said many times that this game aimed very high and it was very easy to screw up. I’m not deluded.”
But you’ve also said “maybe this isn’t for you/for others” towards other folk before as well as excusing the game’s approach. That to me is a form of delusion because you seem to have the bar set and stuck at a certain level, any form of negativity from someone else has you interacting with them and going “well that’s just your opinion man” and saying maybe the game isn’t for them. That is basically you going out of your way to defend the game at most costs rather than accepting that maybe the game won’t deliver and being done with it, instead you go with “maybe” but you still show us that you’ve got the bar still stuck at a certain level that refuses to budge, it’s like telling me “yes” to something but really you’re showing me a “no”.
“In fact, they are doing this right now. Releasing many trailers about various aspects of the game, which should dispel any doubts about the gameplay.”
And yet it;s very basic elements, like CoD showing you guns you can shoot levels of basic, like showing you the angle of a map you can play on.
Game hasn’t told me the main purpose, anything relating to a story, what aliens both good and hostile we can talk and trade with, all sorts of weapons we could craft and find, the tools we could use, all the sorts of ships we could buy or maybe even customize. Instead the game shows us snippets which lends to the whole cryptic thing they clearly have going on to generate their form of hype with Sony’s marketing money.
“That still hasn’t stopped games from putting out decent marketing or
information to let you know what you’re in for. Still not buying into
the entirety of “wait for reviews only” excuse as that excuses all
marketing both good and bad.”
Not revealing too much isn’t bad marketing. Did someone get angry because devs of Starseed Pilgrim or Journey didn’t show too much?
And they showed basics, which is, in my opinion, exactly what should be shown about games in trailers.
“you’ve even done it in the latest article when someone called it boring,
you clearly wanted to step in and go “nuh uh” because guess what, it
caters to you and to to them and yet you seem to fail to grasp how much
it can annoy others when they aren’t the target.”
I didn’t answer the person who said it was boring. I answered the one who had some negative bias and outright called the game “sh*t”. I said it looked interesting for me. Because yes, I like its premise very much. If it pans out badly, I won’t praise it blindly, though. I’ll say that it’s a poorly done title, etc. For now, I can’t tell if the game delivered because it hasn’t been released.
When people aren’t the target of a game, they obviously won’t be attracted by it. Why are they even angry? That’s arrogant.
“I’ve also seen games cater to at least two target markets at once”
Catering to more target markets isn’t necessarily better.
“I’m sure you can at least for an iota of a second imagine as to why they are the way they are today”
In fact it is happening because mystery is more eccentric. And of course, 99% of games won’t be eccentric.
But I think it’s refreshing to play a game delivering an unique experience from time to time.
“any form of negativity from someone else has you interacting with them
and going “well that’s just your opinion man” and saying maybe the game isn’t for them.”
I just tend to give games benefit of the doubt, that’s why I’ll be less critical about them before they are released.
If they say outright, without seeing anything substantial, that some game is very bad, I guess they don’t like its whole premise so it is probably not for them.
Something tells me you won’t be critical about the game once it;s out in the open. I’ve seen gushy fans overlook a lot of flaws in plenty of games that it took years to even get admittance to said flaws, sometimes never.
I’ve also played plenty of games with unique experiences that didn’t rely on trying to inject artificial mystery and force it hard.
I don’t know why, it’s not like somebody is paying me for liking No Man’s Sky. If its flaws aren’t ruining the game, I won’t write it off. If they make something as annoying as Far Cry 2, on the other hand, I’ll have to find some other title.
I guess I won’t buy in case it gathers some poor notes in reviews, as well.
But if you are more than happy to point out flaws for other games then you should for NMS, it’s only fair even if you like one game but dislike the other.
You’re correct, there’s no regular multiplayer interaction. It’s like for some reason they decided to make the game crap.