Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Dogbert666, 16 Aug 2016.
I thought you had?
Oh, that was me trying to be funny.
No, I haven't purchased because no VR support. I've heard VR is in the works but I dun know if that's accurate.
I haz no actual experience of the game. Just reading different opinions.
I read: great technological feat, poor game.
Ultimately the game play will make or break NMS imo.
^^^ He's happy.
If the game gets mod support the possibilities long term are endless. In games like this that's what makes or breaks it.
For most people exploring 1 planet fully will take a long time. Between 12-24 hours if most reports are accurate.
I am happy with what I've played for just under 30 hours now. I would say I've scratched the surface at that play time as well. I've only visited 5 planets.
5 down, 18 Quintilian to go.
*Ahem* 17999999999999999995 to go.
It may be 40 minutes long, but I think this video does a damn good job explaining the problems causing the years of hype and the problems resulting from that hype:
Lol. I really couldn't be bothered to count.
Fascinating video. Really explains the hype-machine perfectly!
And guess what?
Here we go again!
"Star Citizen 3.0's planetary landing blows No Man's Sky away" << Hype machine abandons No Man's Pie and in favour of Star Citizen.
Running old hardware shielded me from hype. By the time I get around to playing a game, the chances are it'd been around for a while, the hysteria had died down and I could see the game for what it really is.
Unfortunately, having just upgraded my hardware, I am now vulnerable.
You should not have upgraded yet. A delay of at least another year.
My CPU, RAM and mobo needs upgrade.
The guy makes a particularly interesting point in that No Man's Pie development was closed-off and secretive while Star Citizen is open and involves players.
I completely agree with your statement here. Like you, I followed NMS from a distance with reserved interest. Alarm bells started to sound when game journalists started pumping out articles defining 'hype' and how some games flounder when trying to live up to what people expect them to be.
As yet I've not purchased the game and I have to say that I'm quite glad about it. I've read and watched a number of reviews. Most notably Angry Joe's Youtube review which handily splices in footage of Sean Murray talking about features or giving answers to community questions which turn out to be complete lies, as the features aren't in the game. Joe most notably pointed out how he talked about and showed footage just 4 months ago regarding the individuality of ships, how different types cater to different gameplay styles and how you can customise them to make yours personal. Not in the game just a few months later.
What I think we have here is the second coming of a Peter Molyneux personality. Interesting that both guys are British. They might be visionary in their own way, but at least Molyneux has some outstanding business kudos and critical acclaim behind him before he started blowing smoke up everyone's arses. Mr Murray on the other hand has just outright lied. Perhaps he wasn't prepared for the media focus and spouts untruths when he's nervous? Even so, that would only account for half the stuff that isn't in this game. The other things were actually shown in videos and demos - those are even less forgivable. They seem like masterfully crafted deception. Far beyond 'overly ambitious' those things have just disappeared from the game without so much as an honourable mention.
When the title works properly and has some additional content in it that makes it worth playing, and when it costs no more than £20 (because it's not worth more than that) I may consider buying. Until then, not a chance in hell.
Peter Molyneux and his company 22cans, plus Lionhead back when that was a thing, is based in Guildford, Surrey; Sean Murray and his company Hello Games is based in Guildford, Surrey. I'm not saying Sean Murray is a persona created by Peter Molyneux following extensive plastic surgery so that he can re-enter the games industry without the weight of his history, but I would point out that I've never seen the two of them together in the same room.
Either that, or someone needs to do an analysis of the tap water in Guildford, stat.
Ha too right. Start with a good wake up call. Maybe a sniff of the vapours? God knows with all the game's features turning into just that, it's in plentiful supply!
Haha put a smile on my face
Couple of friends were ridiculously hyped for this, I didn't really ever pay it much attention, and I'm fairly glad I didn't as from what I have seen it definitely looks like too much hype.
Not saying it's a bad game but when you hype something up enough it will always be a disappointment.
Well that didn't last long.
There's a reason I haven't written a story on that figure: these days, all games see a massive drop in week two. Why? Day-one sales are bolstered by pre-orders, so "day one" is actually "day minus a hundred through day one inclusive." Even when pre-orders aren't available, most sales occur within an early launch window - 'cos people who wanted the game know it's out and buy it. Sales will then drop drastically over a period of weeks, sit massively low for months, then spike again when there's a GOTY release or sale on.
Don't just take my word for it, though. Here are sales figures for Dustforce. Day one sales were at 4,796; day seven sales had dropped to 1,079. For those playing along at home, that's nearly an 88% drop in sales - bigger than No Man's Sky, yet Dustforce was not regarded as a failure. Here's Overcast showing the same pattern, and non-gaming-app Unread with the author describing it as "a typical launch week curve." Back to games, the massively successful Monument Valley - 2.4 million sales, nearly $6 million in revenue - shows the same launch-day spike and massive dip.
Okay, those figures are for a small indie game - but that's only 'cos big publishers rarely release detailed sales figures. I can assure you, it's the standard trend: the majority of a game's sales are made in the first week, then very few sales are made until something exciting happens to put it back into the public consciousness again. If No Man's Sky's sales hadn't dropped 80% in the first week, then that would have been a news story worth covering!
EDIT: Now here are some useful figures:
GTA V: -83%
Dark Souls 3: -80%
Fallout 4: -80%
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End: -78%
Halo 5: Guardians: -78%
Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain: -78%
Street Fighter V: -78%
FIFA 16: -74%
Batman: Arkham Knight: -74%
The Division: -73%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt: -69%
Quantum Break: -64%
Far Cry Primal: -64%
Call of Duty: Black Ops 3: -57%
Star Wars Battlefront: -52%
Ratchet & Clank: -49%
Battlefield Hardline: -43%
Assassin's Creed Syndicate: -39%
So, NMS is beating GTA V in terms of launch-week survival, and roughly level-pegging with Dark Souls 3 and Fallout 4. Uncharted 4, Halo 5, MGS V, and Street Fighter V are all around the same level, too, and even the OMG BEST GAME EVAR THANX CDPR MASTER RACE The Witcher 3 dropped 69 per cent. What's really surprising is the low 35 per cent drop for Doom - which could have something to do with a lower-than-expected launch week where only hardcore fans bought, then a pick-up in week two as people realise that it's not a Bethesda money-grab but a properly decent game (or so I've heard, I haven't played it m'self.)
EDIT: This, though, is more concerning: the game has gone from nearly 213,000 simultaneous Steam players to 23,000. That's not normal.
Reminds me of XRebirth...
That was the last game I pre-ordered; it was a lesson learnt.
Separate names with a comma.