Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #351  
Old 08-25-2016, 07:28 PM
DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,153
You are missing the point. All the problems WoW suffered at launch were due entirely to its massive success and overwhelming popularity. It far exceeded anyone's expectations.

Last edited by DigitalC; 08-25-2016 at 07:28 PM.
  #352  
Old 08-25-2016, 07:29 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,059
Quote:
Quoth TimeWinder:

I'm seeing an awful lot of online criticism for the game that appears to come from folks not actually playing it: in particular, a lot of comments about the game not having various things (rich worlds of lifeform variety, space combats, ship variety) that it actually does have--they're just not available until you've passed some technology bars (particularly the various hyperdrive types) and moved closer to the center of the galaxy. At about 25 hours in, the game is very different than it was when I started.
If it takes 25 hours for a game to start getting interesting, then the game is a failure. And it's not like there's some interesting things at first, and then new interesting things open up as the game progresses: The things you list are what was advertised as the very core and essence of the game.
  #353  
Old 08-25-2016, 07:35 PM
Knorf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Living the Dream
Posts: 8,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
In my universe, attempting to log in produced "queues" that lasted for hours; getting logged in would often crash you back out within a minute or two, places where more than a couple hundred people gathered would stop responding or monster groups would "teleport in", and you never really knew whether you'd be able to loot something or not. Usually you'd "kneel" to pick something up and freeze for minutes at a time. Most of this stuff took weeks of patching to make work. It was being berated non-stop in the newsgroups and their own forums.

The fact that you can't remember this, I think, proves my point: if NMS can make the game meet more people's expectations soon, nobody will care about the first weeks.
But there's an important point you're missing. WoW never saw its average of online player numbers drop, at all, for a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time. On the contrary, it gained and gained, for months and years. The support was beyond what they had expected, so they didn't have sufficient servers. That was their worst problem. Big deal.

And you're wrong that there was a huge outcry that said it wasn't what Blizzard said it would be. That never happened.

What's happening with NMS is like Spore, to a possibly more extreme degree. Consensus is that NMS is substantially disappointing at best, slightly warm poo at worst.

Last edited by Knorf; 08-25-2016 at 07:39 PM.
  #354  
Old 08-25-2016, 08:02 PM
Johnny Bravo's Avatar
Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 7,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knorf View Post
What's happening with NMS is like Spore, to a possibly more extreme degree.
I agree that there are similarities (both games were disappointments), but I remember the hype for Spore being way bigger - even without normalizing for social media being a smaller presence back then.
  #355  
Old 08-25-2016, 08:43 PM
Knorf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Living the Dream
Posts: 8,583
That could be.
  #356  
Old 08-25-2016, 11:02 PM
coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
But it'll go down in history as one of the all time disappointments and a cautionary tale, the sort of thing that makes the top of lists on gaming sites in a decade.
Too early to say that yet or not. It will undoubtably get another marketing push when PlayStation VR comes out and hopefully will have extra content features by then. But yes if they leave it in the current state and add no new features I agree with you.
  #357  
Old 08-26-2016, 07:31 AM
amanset is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 5,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
Woops, my second post goes to a link where the content was deleted. Mirrored here.
And as has been pointed out, large parts of that list are in the game. It was just that the guy that wrote it hadn't seen them yet.

Not that I am saying that they didn't deliver some stuff they said they would. It is obvious that they failed with some things, but that list is wildly inaccurate, which is probably why it was deleted in the first place.

SenorBeef, you are coming across like the anti-Fan Boy that is written about these days. Those that seem to have a weird interest in seeing something fail. Frankly, as people are saying these days, anti-Fan Boys, who are as blind to something's successes as Fan Boys are to something's failures, are just as damaging and tiresome.

Seriously. You don't like the game but have a weird obsession with keeping us updated regarding how many people are playing it on Steam. Why? Just, why?

ETA:
By the way, I preordered. I got the preorder bonus and everything. But I bought it in a shop across the road from work and so didn't pay for it until I picked it up in the shop. Not all preorders involve putting money down without a chance to read reviews or see player feedback, like you seem to think.

Last edited by amanset; 08-26-2016 at 07:32 AM.
  #358  
Old 08-26-2016, 07:34 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,059
The hype for Spore was definitely bigger, if only by virtue of lasting longer.
  #359  
Old 08-26-2016, 08:18 AM
amanset is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 5,648
Regarding WoW, I think a better comparison is with Diablo 3. Diablo 3 started well but had a serious drop off due to frustrations with loot drops and the Real Money Auction House. However, with 2.0 they turned it around and is a much better game today.
  #360  
Old 08-26-2016, 09:55 AM
Teuton's Avatar
Teuton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Plymouth, UK
Posts: 1,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by amanset View Post
Regarding WoW, I think a better comparison is with Diablo 3. Diablo 3 started well but had a serious drop off due to frustrations with loot drops and the Real Money Auction House. However, with 2.0 they turned it around and is a much better game today.
I think a more accurate comparison could be with SimCity, which launched in a torrent of hype, made a bunch of promises it didn't keep, tripped on its ass at launched day and never got up again, and now noone plays it.
  #361  
Old 08-26-2016, 12:03 PM
Knorf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Living the Dream
Posts: 8,583
SimCity, ugh. What a disaster, especially with the legacy of popular games it had.

But yeah, the level of NMS disappointment is clearly comparable, at least in terms of a percentage of lost players in a short time, never mind refund demands (which are a new thing), to the launch of failed titles like SimCity and Spore. Not WoW. I also don't think Diablo 3 dropped so far so fast by a long shot.
  #362  
Old 08-26-2016, 05:41 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by amanset View Post
SenorBeef, you are coming across like the anti-Fan Boy that is written about these days. Those that seem to have a weird interest in seeing something fail. Frankly, as people are saying these days, anti-Fan Boys, who are as blind to something's successes as Fan Boys are to something's failures, are just as damaging and tiresome.

Seriously. You don't like the game but have a weird obsession with keeping us updated regarding how many people are playing it on Steam. Why? Just, why?
Games are shittier than they could be because publishers are willing to put out an incomplete product hoping to be able to make enough sales through preorders and day one sales before people realize they've been duped.

Imagine if every game didn't preorder, didn't buy a game day one, and only bought games after video/reviews/etc were out. Do you think that would change the game industry? Do you think they'd put more emphasis on having a quality game on release?

It's just like movies - when they know they've got a stinker on their hands, they don't fix it, they just make a big marketing push for day one ticket sales, and throw on a review embargo, and hope they can cash in however much they can before people realize their product is shit and the sales dry up.

I wanted NMS to be good, because hey, it'd be a cool game. But it's bad. It's really bad. It's the worst case of hype to delivery ratio since Spore at the very least.

So I want to it to serve as a lesson. I want it to make people remember the last time they got so hyped for a game they preordered it and it turned into a big pile of stinking shit, so that the next time this comes around, they might wait a day and actually find out if the game is good or not before commiting their money. After a few years of this, game publishers will actually become interested again in delivering a good product, and games will improve because of it.

So if this thing is going to be a disappointment, which it is, I want it to be an epic scale crash and burn dumpster fire of a disappointment so maximize the chances that it changes the industry for the better.
  #363  
Old 08-26-2016, 07:28 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
Games are shittier than they could be because publishers are willing to put out an incomplete product hoping to be able to make enough sales through preorders and day one sales before people realize they've been duped.

Imagine if every game didn't preorder, didn't buy a game day one, and only bought games after video/reviews/etc were out. Do you think that would change the game industry? Do you think they'd put more emphasis on having a quality game on release?

It's just like movies - when they know they've got a stinker on their hands, they don't fix it, they just make a big marketing push for day one ticket sales, and throw on a review embargo, and hope they can cash in however much they can before people realize their product is shit and the sales dry up.

I wanted NMS to be good, because hey, it'd be a cool game. But it's bad. It's really bad. It's the worst case of hype to delivery ratio since Spore at the very least.

So I want to it to serve as a lesson. I want it to make people remember the last time they got so hyped for a game they preordered it and it turned into a big pile of stinking shit, so that the next time this comes around, they might wait a day and actually find out if the game is good or not before commiting their money. After a few years of this, game publishers will actually become interested again in delivering a good product, and games will improve because of it.

So if this thing is going to be a disappointment, which it is, I want it to be an epic scale crash and burn dumpster fire of a disappointment so maximize the chances that it changes the industry for the better.
Orrrr...you could just live and let live and let people who are enjoying the game (Like me) do so without reading "EVE Online monocle-level" hate.
  #364  
Old 08-26-2016, 08:37 PM
Richard Pearse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 10,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post

I wanted NMS to be good, because hey, it'd be a cool game. But it's bad. It's really bad. It's the worst case of hype to delivery ratio since Spore at the very least.
Have you played it? It's certainly not "really bad". To me, it's a bit like Minecraft, a pretty game that I enjoy playing but is not deep enough to hold my attention for any length of time.

If no one bought games day one and always waited for reviews they would soon discover that just because something reviews well doesn't mean they will enjoy playing it. They will then go back to buying games that look like they might interest them without relying on reviews. I mean really, why base your spending on whether another person likes something or not? Isn't the important point whether YOU like it?

Example, I like realistic motorcycle racing games such as MotoGP, if I relied on reviews I would never buy one because they never review well. Reviewers are looking for something entirely different to what I'm looking for in a motorcycle racing game.

I don't get your fascination with this either. You come across as very bitter. It is not a good look.

There is a strange phenomena where a game, movie, or TV show is either awesome! or shit! In reality there are many many games, TV shows, and movies that are just fine. They are not great, and they're not terrible, and there's nothing wrong with that. There is nothing inherently wrong with dumping $60 on a game and getting 10-20 hours of mindless entertainment out of it and then never giving it another thought, or paying $10 to see a forgettable movie at the cinema.

All of the really good games and movies stand on the shoulders of a bunch of mediocrity that is just good enough to be profitable.
  #365  
Old 08-26-2016, 09:12 PM
msmith537 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knorf View Post
SimCity, ugh. What a disaster, especially with the legacy of popular games it had.

But yeah, the level of NMS disappointment is clearly comparable, at least in terms of a percentage of lost players in a short time, never mind refund demands (which are a new thing), to the launch of failed titles like SimCity and Spore. Not WoW. I also don't think Diablo 3 dropped so far so fast by a long shot.

I haven't played No Man's Sky, but the buzz I'm hearing sounds very similar to Spore. Spore promised to be the "ultimate game of everything", combining aspects of SimCity, Civilization, and whatever 4X space strategy game was popular before then. Basically it sucked at all of them.

SimCity was just bad. Honestly, I can't figure out why all the SimCity games sucked after SC4 (SimCity 2013 and SimCity Societies). The people who made Cities Skyline and Cities XL get it. People just want to create massive urban environments in an open sandbox with lots of modding support, not micromanage a 1 mile square the size of Hoboken, NJ.
  #366  
Old 08-26-2016, 11:43 PM
Martini Enfield is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Pearse View Post
Have you played it? It's certainly not "really bad". To me, it's a bit like Minecraft, a pretty game that I enjoy playing but is not deep enough to hold my attention for any length of time.

If no one bought games day one and always waited for reviews they would soon discover that just because something reviews well doesn't mean they will enjoy playing it. They will then go back to buying games that look like they might interest them without relying on reviews. I mean really, why base your spending on whether another person likes something or not? Isn't the important point whether YOU like it?

Example, I like realistic motorcycle racing games such as MotoGP, if I relied on reviews I would never buy one because they never review well. Reviewers are looking for something entirely different to what I'm looking for in a motorcycle racing game.

I don't get your fascination with this either. You come across as very bitter. It is not a good look.

There is a strange phenomena where a game, movie, or TV show is either awesome! or shit! In reality there are many many games, TV shows, and movies that are just fine. They are not great, and they're not terrible, and there's nothing wrong with that. There is nothing inherently wrong with dumping $60 on a game and getting 10-20 hours of mindless entertainment out of it and then never giving it another thought, or paying $10 to see a forgettable movie at the cinema.

All of the really good games and movies stand on the shoulders of a bunch of mediocrity that is just good enough to be profitable.
This is an excellent observation and I agree with every word of it.

I really don't get the quasi-tribal nature of gaming, sometimes - it's not a zero-sum game; the existence of No Man's Sky doesn't mean that some other insanely awesome and worthy game doesn't get to exist instead.

As anyone who follows the gaming industry fairly closely will know, people will mostly have stopped raging about NMS in a few weeks and will be on to something else - my money is on vocal game-ragers hating on Battlefield 1 because it's from EA and won't be a hyper-realistic trench warfare simulator.
  #367  
Old 08-27-2016, 12:13 AM
coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Pearse View Post
Have you played it? It's certainly not "really bad". To me, it's a bit like Minecraft, a pretty game that I enjoy playing but is not deep enough to hold my attention for any length of time.
Well there is quite a lot to do in the most recent releases of MineCraft and it's certainly very deep, if you get into constructing redstone circuits, mine tracks and resource farming contraptions, not to mention multiplayer servers. I estimate that NMS is roughly at the stage where Minecraft 1.2 beta was, except that because of the graphical requirements and complexity NMS needs 15 people on it while Minecraft could be developed with just one person for a long period of time.
  #368  
Old 08-27-2016, 03:53 AM
Richard Pearse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 10,541
Sure, I'm not saying it is literally like Minecraft, I mean I get the same out of it.
  #369  
Old 08-27-2016, 08:10 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,059
Quote:
To me, it's a bit like Minecraft, a pretty game that I enjoy playing but is not deep enough to hold my attention for any length of time.
I'm having a hard time thinking of any game with more depth than Minecraft, which makes me wonder what it was you were actually trying to say, there. Perhaps it's that the depth of Minecraft isn't very easily accessible?
  #370  
Old 08-27-2016, 09:53 AM
coremelt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
I'm having a hard time thinking of any game with more depth than Minecraft
Dwarf Fortress, Nethack, Crusader Kings 2.... I'm sure there's more but it's a shortish list....
  #371  
Old 08-27-2016, 08:25 PM
Knorf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Living the Dream
Posts: 8,583
This just in: Steam is apparently being much more generous than their official policy with NMS refunds.
  #372  
Old 08-27-2016, 10:04 PM
Richard Pearse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 10,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
I'm having a hard time thinking of any game with more depth than Minecraft, which makes me wonder what it was you were actually trying to say, there. Perhaps it's that the depth of Minecraft isn't very easily accessible?
I think that's part of it. Not so much that Minecraft isn't easily accessible but that it doesn't engage me enough to make me want to access it. It wasn't meant to be a deep comparison, I just see parallels in how I play the two games and how they engage me.
  #373  
Old 08-28-2016, 07:34 AM
msmith537 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
Dwarf Fortress, Nethack, Crusader Kings 2.... I'm sure there's more but it's a shortish list....
There seems like there is this whole genre of "build and explore the universe" sandbox games - Space Engineers, Star Made, Empyrion, No Man's Sky.
  #374  
Old 08-28-2016, 10:27 AM
Knorf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Living the Dream
Posts: 8,583
There's nothing to build in No Man's Sky.
  #375  
Old 08-28-2016, 02:02 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,273
The No Man's Sky controversy reminds me a lot of the release of Outpost back in the early 1990s. It was a game where a colony ship made it to another planet, lost contact with Earth, and split into two colonies. You controlled a colony and had to manage resources, build up your colony, and compete with the other colony (though not militarily). It was an amazing, engaging concept that a lot of people fell in love with. But the actual game lacked most of the functionality it was supposed to have - numerous things you were supposed to be able to just weren't there, a lot of parts of the game just didn't seem to work, and what did work was so simple it wasn't engaging. The developers left a snarky note in the release notes about how 'sometimes you have to let your baby fly' as the only explanation for the incompleteness, and people got seriously pissed. Sierra actually offered rebates for years after the flopped release, but it hurt their reputation for a while.
  #376  
Old 08-28-2016, 10:25 PM
Arrogance Ex Machina's Avatar
Arrogance Ex Machina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lappeenranta, Finland
Posts: 1,567
No Man's Sky's Steam page has this over the price:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steam
The standard Steam refund policy applies to No Man's Sky. There are no special exemptions available. Click here for more detail on the Steam refund policy.
That's a first.
  #377  
Old 08-29-2016, 07:14 AM
amanset is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 5,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
So I want to it to serve as a lesson. I want it to make people remember the last time they got so hyped for a game they preordered it and it turned into a big pile of stinking shit, so that the next time this comes around, they might wait a day and actually find out if the game is good or not before commiting their money. After a few years of this, game publishers will actually becom
I like the game.

For some reason this seems to bother you. I expect you simply don't believe me.
  #378  
Old 08-29-2016, 07:16 AM
amanset is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 5,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini Enfield View Post
As anyone who follows the gaming industry fairly closely will know, people will mostly have stopped raging about NMS in a few weeks and will be on to something else - my money is on vocal game-ragers hating on Battlefield 1 because it's from EA and won't be a hyper-realistic trench warfare simulator.
It is DICE. We all know there are going to be server issues at the beginning.
  #379  
Old 08-29-2016, 10:27 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,572
My best friend got a refund.

It's an anecdote, but I cannot think of a more alarming canary. I love my best friend but he lives a lifestyle that can best be described as.. consumptive. He and his wife buy stuff basically nonstop; they get a shipment from Amazon or some other online retailers basically every day and he buys so many PC games I honestly cannot fathom how he finds time to play them. They do very well, you understand, but they spend it on whatever things their hearts desire.

I cannot - not in 25 years of knowing him - think of one single occasion, ever, when he returned a product because he was dissatisfied with it. Not ANY sort of product.

People always bitch about new games but there's no point denying No Man's Sky is one of the most egregious examples in video game history.
  #380  
Old 08-30-2016, 09:57 AM
Ike Witt's Avatar
Ike Witt is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lost in the mists of time
Posts: 14,828
Is the game worth buying for $20, or is it better priced at $10-15?
  #381  
Old 08-30-2016, 10:20 AM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
To this day I cannot figure out what people were expecting or what they wanted, that they feel they didn't get. I know there are lists but every time I read one I'm like "well okay but I mean, that little detail wasn't that big a deal to you, was it? Was it really? .....ww...wwh....wwhyyy?"

I play the game and I feel like I'm playing exactly the game from all the trailers. There are details that are different. But the look-and-feel, the basic thrust of the game, is exactly as advertised.

I see things not in the final product and I think "aw too bad they couldn't get everything in that they wanted to, but I hope they get to patch it in later!"

But a bunch of people, and I genuinely am seriously actually puzzled by this reaction, but for whatever reason, a bunch of people instead react as follows: "Sean Murray is a fucking liar!"

I like this article, a bit long but I read every word and I almost never do that: https://blog.mode7games.com/promisin...35d#.mhpovu2lu

It's by one of the developers of Frozen Synapse. (BTW I have not noticed, yet, any negative comments from any actual game developer about this whole affair. Did I miss it?)

Couple of choice quotes:

Quote:
Take someone who believes in unlikely things for a living. Put them in a room with an enthusiastic extrovert and a video camera. Ask them to predict the future. Disregard all qualifiers.

Tell them they’re a liar. Tell them they’re a con artist. Tell them they’re a disappointment.
Quote:
Let’s say you’ve only seen, perhaps, the reveal trailer and one or two of these video interviews. You haven’t read the more detailed quotes above. In my opinion, based entirely on what Sean Murray has said, it would still not be reasonable for you to assume that the game will definitely have fully-fledged multiplayer at launch. There’s evidence for some sort of interaction, but absolutely none for a comprehensive affair. Placed in the context of the game as a whole, the likelihood decreases even further.

So, it’s not reasonable to believe this, but is there legerdemain in play? I think not: someone isn’t lying if they believe what they’re saying to be true.

I am convinced that Sean Murray, to the best of his ability, thought that the light multiplayer features he had planned (such as players being able to see each other in passing) would make it into the final version of the game. That might seem deluded to you; however, the guy envisaged an infinite universe where every planet looks like a sci-fi book cover, so perhaps you shouldn’t talk to him about plausibility and actuality.

For one thing, it makes absolutely no sense to lie: there’s no benefit. If you were going to make up multiplayer features, why wouldn’t you claim the game had full combat? What would be the point of inventing these small subtle enigmatic things which were liable to disappoint people? It’s vastly more likely that a man who spends his life trying to reach the stars has slightly over-reached.
Quote:
Let’s look one more time at what he’s actually said in the videos:

There is some way in which you could call the game “massively multiplayer” ie many people can play simultaneously in the same space
There is some form of direct interaction with other players

So, we infer that this type of multiplayer is clearly a minor peripheral feature. It is reasonable to assume that minor features will get cut shortly before launch; developers are not always able to announce these for reasons I will go into later. If I don’t really care about multiplayer that much, I stop here: it surely doesn’t bother me.

If I’m truly heavily invested in those ideas — perhaps my deepest fantasy is to shoot Alex Hayes in the head with a laser while jumping off a stone structure that looks like a hippo — the next thing I do, as a reasonable person, is seek out more evidence. I would now look at more considered interviews where Murray has been asked a direct question and given time to expand on the topic. Here’s the Eurogamer quote again:

…[the player] will be attacked by AI, potentially — very rarely — other players, things like that if they cross paths with them

“Potentially — very rarely”. If I am someone who is heavily invested in games, I know that, when a developer says “potentially — very rarely”, it means “this feature is a prime candidate to be cut during development.”

Is the developer being disingenuous? No, because this is a known transaction. We have to, at some point, assume a baseline level of intelligence in our audience otherwise all communication would fail.

Last edited by Frylock; 08-30-2016 at 10:21 AM.
  #382  
Old 08-30-2016, 10:23 AM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
I see the trailers and I think "Wow these guys are aiming for something really cool! I hope they get there, or close!"

I see gameplay videos and I think "They got reasonably close!"

I play the actual game and I think "This is just too cool, I cannot wait to see what comes down the pipe five years from now along these lines!"
  #383  
Old 08-30-2016, 10:38 AM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frylock View Post
To this day I cannot figure out what people were expecting or what they wanted, that they feel they didn't get. I know there are lists but every time I read one I'm like "well okay but I mean, that little detail wasn't that big a deal to you, was it? Was it really? .....ww...wwh....wwhyyy?"
Well, at the most basic level from early reviews I thought the game would be focused on exploration, discovery, and categorizing things, not a dull repetitive exercise in grinding resources and managing crappy inventory space. There were supposed to be interesting animals interacting on different worlds, instead you get color-shifted creatures whose physiques don't make sense sparsely distributed on their color-shifted planets. Players were supposed to be able to run into each other occasionally.

I'm really glad for the negative reviews, because I would have been pissed if I foolishly believed the demos and developer statements and bought this game (And I would have banged away at it for more than two hours before realizing it was a waste of time, so wouldn't be able to get a Steam refund).

Quote:
I see things not in the final product and I think "aw too bad they couldn't get everything in that they wanted to, but I hope they get to patch it in later!"
They're a for-profit business asking for full AAA price on the game. The attitude of 'well, most of it doesn't work, but gosh I feel sorry for those people getting paid out of my pocket who couldn't finish the product I bought' is one that encourages bad games.

Quote:
For one thing, it makes absolutely no sense to lie: there’s no benefit. If you were going to make up multiplayer features, why wouldn’t you claim the game had full combat? What would be the point of inventing these small subtle enigmatic things which were liable to disappoint people? It’s vastly more likely that a man who spends his life trying to reach the stars has slightly over-reached.
Lying drives additional sales, it's a tactic that's been well established in the three decades of history in the home video game market. You have to really be drinking the cool-aid to think that video game companies and developers don't lie about features or that there's no benefit to video game companies for advertising features that don't exist.

And yes, I count 'really believing' that you're going to finish a feature that takes a lot of work and isn't working now to be lying. This is not the 1980s when games were undiscovered, or the 1990s when multiplayer and CD-sized games were new and unexplored and maybe someone could be excused for not knowing how this stuff worked. Self-deception is still deception.
  #384  
Old 08-30-2016, 11:24 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,059
For starters, they said that it would be multiplayer, and it isn't. That right there is a huge one.
  #385  
Old 08-30-2016, 11:28 AM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
For starters, they said that it would be multiplayer, and it isn't. That right there is a huge one.
They hesistantly said there will be some weakly multiplayer features, and as time went on, became more and more hedge-y about that, culiminating in a straight, clear statement from Murray towards the end that it's not a multiplayer game.

What happened here should be obvious. No lies occurred on this front.
  #386  
Old 08-30-2016, 12:07 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
Well, at the most basic level from early reviews I thought the game would be focused on exploration, discovery, and categorizing things,
Not sure exactly what you're referring to by "categorizing things" but aside from that, the above seems like exactly the kind of game I have installed on my system righ now.

Quote:
not a dull repetitive exercise in grinding resources and managing crappy inventory space.
The grinding and inventory stuff was apparent in the trailers, it's exactly as I expected. What did you expect? What game with an inventory/grinding system would you _not_ describe as having a "crappy" such system? What are good inventory management and grinding games? Were you expecting something like that? Or were you not expecting inventory and grinding at all because if it's the latter I just don't know man, I just don't know.

Quote:
There were supposed to be interesting animals
From trailers and interviews, what actual operational definition of "interesting" do you have in mind here?

Quote:

interacting on different worlds,
That's in the game...

Quote:
instead you get color-shifted creatures whose physiques don't make sense
Why would you have expected, from anything you saw, heard, or know from common sense, that creatures would "make sense"? What does "makes sense" even mean here? The game is not, and was never advertised as, an evolution simulator for example.

Quote:
sparsely distributed on their color-shifted planets.

The idea that planets are merely color shifted versions of the same thing is easily disproven by fifteen minutes of gameplay. As for sparse distribution, again, the sparsity (which varies by planet btw) is _exactly as advertised_ as far as I can tell. People keep pointing to this one trailer with tons of lush life all over the place, but ignore all the other footage that was out there in other trailers. I don' tunderstand this.



Quote:
Players were supposed to be able to run into each other occasionally.
See linked article, other comments in this thread.

Quote:
They're a for-profit business asking for full AAA price on the game. The attitude of 'well, most of it doesn't work, but gosh I feel sorry for those people getting paid out of my pocket who couldn't finish the product I bought' is one that encourages bad games.
Demonstrably friggin' false by a cursory glance at the indie games industry. Patronage is risky and _also_ enables and encourages great developments when the risk pays off.


Quote:
And yes, I count 'really believing' that you're going to finish a feature that takes a lot of work and isn't working now to be lying.
Ah, then you're not using the standard English language I guess....
  #387  
Old 08-30-2016, 12:37 PM
Teuton's Avatar
Teuton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Plymouth, UK
Posts: 1,752
I think the fact that they are asking a full AAA price is a big part of why I'm not buying it now. If it was half the price - as many indie titles are - I'd be much more interested in what's there.

The big lie, to me, is that this is a full, polished, AAA game deserving of the price tag.
  #388  
Old 08-30-2016, 12:44 PM
Pantastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frylock View Post
Not sure exactly what you're referring to by "categorizing things" but aside from that, the above seems like exactly the kind of game I have installed on my system righ now.
I'm not sure what you hoped to gain by asking the question then. As someone who was glad that reviews slammed the game because it kept me from wasting money on a piece of junk, I answered your question based on my experience since I presumed it was an honest question. You responded with extreme nitpicking (breaking a simple sentence into four pieces, for example), simple denial of basic facts and personal preference, and ended with a false accusation that I'm not even using standard English. I'm nowhere near enough invested in the game to go back and forth nitpicking English usage or tracking down what trailers I saw when I formed my pre-release impression of the game. And while I'm generally fine with discussing gaming preferences, I'm not going to try to discuss a vague and subjective topic with someone who's being angry, pedantic, and isn't even listening.
  #389  
Old 08-30-2016, 12:59 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teuton View Post
I think the fact that they are asking a full AAA price is a big part of why I'm not buying it now. If it was half the price - as many indie titles are - I'd be much more interested in what's there.
I defend the game but do think it should have been more like thirty or maybe forty dollars.
  #390  
Old 08-30-2016, 01:01 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
I'm not sure what you hoped to gain by asking the question then. As someone who was glad that reviews slammed the game because it kept me from wasting money on a piece of junk, I answered your question based on my experience since I presumed it was an honest question. You responded with extreme nitpicking (breaking a simple sentence into four pieces, for example), simple denial of basic facts and personal preference, and ended with a false accusation that I'm not even using standard English. I'm nowhere near enough invested in the game to go back and forth nitpicking English usage or tracking down what trailers I saw when I formed my pre-release impression of the game. And while I'm generally fine with discussing gaming preferences, I'm not going to try to discuss a vague and subjective topic with someone who's being angry, pedantic, and isn't even listening.
I did not break a simple sentence into four pieces. The sentence was (literally, in the technical sense even) complex.
  #391  
Old 08-30-2016, 01:18 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
I'm not sure what you hoped to gain by asking the question then. As someone who was glad that reviews slammed the game because it kept me from wasting money on a piece of junk, I answered your question based on my experience since I presumed it was an honest question. You responded with extreme nitpicking (breaking a simple sentence into four pieces, for example), simple denial of basic facts and personal preference, and ended with a false accusation that I'm not even using standard English. I'm nowhere near enough invested in the game to go back and forth nitpicking English usage or tracking down what trailers I saw when I formed my pre-release impression of the game. And while I'm generally fine with discussing gaming preferences, I'm not going to try to discuss a vague and subjective topic with someone who's being angry, pedantic, and isn't even listening.
To further expand:

My point in my first reply to you was that it is fairly clear that your post contained inaccuracies about the game. I'm not talking about personal preferences, I'm talking about whether people even actually understand what the game was supposed to be like according to official marketing and what it's actually like. The two are not nearly so different as many (such as yourself) seem to think. And where they do differ, judgments that people "lied" etc are not supported. NOthing at all about personal preferences is relevant to any of this--I didn't bring that up.

I read each word, and what you interpreted as "pedantry" was in fact the very evidence that I was listening--I went through each point you made (and your sentences, being complex, made more than one point each, hence the breaking-up--it's a standard mode of discussion on the internet and at the SDMB specifically) and responded to it substantively.

As to anger, maybe some frustration shows forth from my general experience of what seem to me to be broadly, clearly unsupported ideas they have about this game and its marketing. I'm sure you've had the experience of encountering ideas that seem reasonably well-developed yet completely disconnected from what seems clear to you to be the actual truth of the matter. (Again, not personal preference--actual, observable facts and logical inferences are the kinds of things under discussion here.)

Last edited by Frylock; 08-30-2016 at 01:19 PM.
  #392  
Old 08-30-2016, 01:44 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,271
Of course they lied, for fucks sake. They said you could play the game as a space trader, if you wanted to. Or a pirate. Like it was fucking freespace. That you could spend the whole game in space if you wanted to, because there are multiple ways to play. They knew what they were catering to by saying that. What they were promising And none of that is in the game.

They said there would be a universe that was alive with alien factions that would war with each other, and you could make big decisions about who to help or who to hurt and it would be meaningful and there's none of that. That there'd be alien creatures off doing their own thing - flying by on trade routes, giant battles between factions. There's none of that in the game.

None of the unvierse feels alive at all. The planets don't move. Freighters don't move. Alien outposts on planets look the same, are more or less randomly placed - never in little cities in logical places - and they all just have an unmoving, uninteresting NPC in them. There are no meaningful faction interactions. There's no one else going about their business in the universe. It feels static and stale.

They said you could buy different ships and specialize different ships for these different roles you could take on. But all the ships are the exact same except for inventory space. There are no speed ships or big trade freighters or fighter craft.

They should you actually being able to fly around planets and dart through canyons and stuff (and showed it in the videos). No, it's a simplistic flight model that prevents you from actually going near the surface of the planet and only allows one button land/dock/etc sequences.

They said the center of the universe would be this big deal and you'd be amazed when you got there and the ending was really unique and... welp.

The universe is extremely samey. You pretty much get all resources easily on all planets. It's not as though you have to make a risky trip to a volcanic planet near a sun in order to acquire some hard to find material - you just walk around and take your random unobtanium nodes from any planet at any time. The creatures are just randomly scrapped together from a parts/color list - there's no function towards making them make sense to their environment or interact with other species. Every planet has the same gravity. There's so little creativity in the planet diversity it's actually kind of remarkable. They could've made all sorts of wondrous things. Ringed planets. Neutron stars. Planets with acid rain that you needed to make special preparations for. Hundreds of unique possibilities. But no, everything is basically the same thing with a recolor. There aren't even mountains or interesting geology.

They said there would be crafting - combining things in unexpected ways to create a deep crafting system with undiscovered possibility - and there's no crafting system at all.

These aren't minor criticisms, these are fundamental ways you can play the game that are totally missing. And they know it. They still use the E3 2014 footage with all the promised features as their main video on the steam sale page.

If people say "yeah, it doesn't have everything, but I'm still enjoying it", so be it. But saying "oh they never lied, every criticism is just nitpicking" is, well, voluntary shill territory.

Last edited by SenorBeef; 08-30-2016 at 01:45 PM.
  #393  
Old 08-30-2016, 01:49 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
Of course they lied, for fucks sake. They said you could play the game as a space trader, if you wanted to. Or a pirate. Like it was fucking freespace. That you could spend the whole game in space if you wanted to, because there are multiple ways to play. They knew what they were catering to by saying that. And none of that is in the game.

They said there would be a universe that was alive with alien factions that would war with each other, and you could make big decisions about who to help or who to hurt and it would be meaningful and there's none of that. That there'd be alien creatures off doing their own thing - flying by on trade routes, giant battles between factions. There's none of that in the game.
I don't know what to say about this, it really is something that flummoxes me. Like, I read/heard exactly the same words you did. You're accurately paraphrasing their literal content. But it is beyond me how anyone could have taken these as promises as to what will definitely be in the game.

Like, it just wasn't that kind of speech act. It has been clear to me throughout that this was a kind of wish list, a high-hopes list, and _not_ a promised list of definite features. I have never taken these words as anything other than that, from the very beginning when I first heard about the game.

Like, for whatever reason, I know to put an "if all goes well, it will be awesome if we can" before any developer's claims about a game especially at long intervals prior to release--and to understand that the developer understands themselves to mean exactly that and expects the audience understands this as well. But others, clearly, don't understand things that way.

But also: Trading _is_ in the game. Piracy _is_ in the game. It's rudimentary, but nothing particularly complex was promised! It's poorly designed, but I don't know, just, how could someone have expected a well designed game out of this? Like seriously how? How did anyone not go into this not knowing full well that from a game-mechanical standpoint this was going to be a trifle at best? That seemed obvious to me. Why not to you guys?

Last edited by Frylock; 08-30-2016 at 01:50 PM.
  #394  
Old 08-30-2016, 01:56 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,271
So your defense is essentially "Yeah, sure, they said they'd have these features. The features aren't there. They didn't lie, though, you're just an idiot for thinking that the person who was making the game could make claims about what was in the game!"

And "How could it possibly have been good and had all this stuff? It couldn't! You were an idiot for thinking it would be good!"

"In conclusion, game is fine, no one lied"

You said
Quote:
I see gameplay videos and I think "They got reasonably close!"
Yesterday the game peaked at 11,213 players. It's currently the #38 most played game on steam. We're not even 3 weeks into the launch. The game started with a 212k peak, and it can no longer hit just the 12k part of that. It might be the most refunded game in history.

Clearly the vast, vast majority of the players who paid full price for this game do not think "they got reasonably close" - and having you essentially blame the customers by saying "of course it isn't going to be any good, how could it! you were dumb for believing what they said", rather than blaming the developers for overhyping and lying about a product they knew would be a huge disappointment is pretty bizarre to me.

Last edited by SenorBeef; 08-30-2016 at 01:57 PM.
  #395  
Old 08-30-2016, 02:04 PM
Cornelius Tuggerson is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: US, VA
Posts: 1,050
Monday peak was at 11213. If the trend keeps up Empyrion(still in alpha) will have more concurrent players in a week or two. I'm not really into minecraft or space sims, but watching this train wreck has been a most fulfilling experience.
  #396  
Old 08-30-2016, 02:09 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
So your defense is essentially "Yeah, sure, they said they'd have these features. The features aren't there. They didn't lie, though, you're just an idiot for thinking that the person who was making the game could make claims about what was in the game!"
No, no my defense is manifestly not that.

My defense is that the claim "this will for sure be in the game" for almost everything people have gotten mad about, has never actually been made. Rather, statements that any reasonable person should have understood as describing a provisional plan, was taken instead as a hard specification on the final product.

Quote:
And "How could it possibly have been good and had all this stuff? It couldn't! You were an idiot for thinking it would be good!"
Not exactly. Just watching the trailers indicated to me that the gameplay was going to be dirt simple. Listening to Murray talk about how the point was more about exploring and it was a "chill game" let me know the gameplay was going to be dirt simple. Understanding how incredibly ambitious it would be to actually have _all_ the features you mentioned as _fullblown_ game mechanics well integrated with each other let me know the gameplay was going to be dirt simple.

Quote:
and having you essentially blame the customers by saying "of course it isn't going to be any good, how could it! you were dumb for believing what they said", rather than blaming the developers for overhyping and lying about a product they knew would be a huge disappointment is pretty bizarre to me.
I don't exactly blame the customers--I think the developers made some serious communication mistakes, none of which involved deception.

Having said that, long experience does show me that people--and most people are customers--are, yeah, pretty much incorrigibly dumb.

Last edited by Frylock; 08-30-2016 at 02:09 PM.
  #397  
Old 08-30-2016, 02:11 PM
SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 28,271
Do you think that having the E3 2014 trailer, which includes many things that are clearly not in the game, as the main video on the steam store page is deceptive?
  #398  
Old 08-30-2016, 02:22 PM
Frylock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 19,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
Do you think that having the E3 2014 trailer, which includes many things that are clearly not in the game, as the main video on the steam store page is deceptive?
Probably so, tbh.

I have been wondering if that was HG's call or Sony's.

If Sony's it is absolutely almost certainly deceptive. (By "deceptive" I mean "intentionally lying.")

If HG's it might be deceptive, though I think there's a realistic possibility it is still marketing-clueless indie-like developers advertising a game based on what they hope it will become rather than what it is.

Last edited by Frylock; 08-30-2016 at 02:23 PM.
  #399  
Old 08-30-2016, 03:07 PM
Raza's Avatar
Raza is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Atl-N, 34°09'N 84°05'W
Posts: 1,475
If this were a $10-20 game, or even better: a $10-20 early access game, 96% of the displeasure wouldn't exist.

To understand why some of us are pissed, look at another AAA $60 game, Fallout 4. It too is an open-world sandbox, albeit terrestrial. It has hundreds of stories, quests, missions, stumble-upons, plus scores of NPCs with unique personalities and desires. Your actions permanently affect parts of, or in some cases, the entire "universe". There is a fairly deep crafting system, allowing you to fine-tune individual parts of your weapons and armor, plus make food and other items, and share or sell them to NPCs. You are free to role-play, or not, as you choose; but your character is a "real" entity, with stats and a look and a reputation.

I have played Fallout 4 for 100 hours and I've probably experienced less than half of what is out there. And when I have, there is incredible mod support for all kinds of new experiences.

NMS has none - absolutely none - of the depth of FO4, but they're the same price, and probably came with similar hype. I've paid $60 for a game that has perhaps 20 hours of gameplay life, if that.

It's not a "fail" - it does some things right, or at least headed in the right (and/or new) direction. But when you charge a AAA-price, people expect a AAA experience.
  #400  
Old 08-30-2016, 04:07 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,172
I looked at the so-called list of things promised and not included*...fwiw there is in-atmosphere fighting.


*And if 1/1000th of the outrage and scrutiny were applied to the current crop of politicians, there would be literal million man marches every damn day.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:08 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017