Quantcast
No Man's Sky, the comeback of the generation? NMS v2.0 reviews

Forums - Gaming Discussion - No Man's Sky, the comeback of the generation? NMS v2.0 reviews

mZuzek said:
Vodacixi said:

So, the fault is on us for believing what they said they would do and for expect a technical quality on par with they show on trailers. Ok, better let you enjoy your topsy turvy version of common sense.

I mean... technically, they didn't lie, did they?

they did deceive people into thinking the game would have all these features from the get-go and gave them a shallow beta instead.

Contradicting yourself aside, there is simply no excuse for what Hello Games did. That they chose not to be honest and upfront is purely on them.



Around the Network
Lonely_Dolphin said:
mZuzek said:

I mean... technically, they didn't lie, did they?

they did deceive people into thinking the game would have all these features from the get-go and gave them a shallow beta instead.

Contradicting yourself aside, there is simply no excuse for what Hello Games did. That they chose not to be honest and upfront is purely on them.

It's not technically a lie. There is a middle-term between being completely honest and upfront or being a liar, and it's a middle-term just about every company ever is very happy to dance in. Welcome to capitalism.



mZuzek said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:

Contradicting yourself aside, there is simply no excuse for what Hello Games did. That they chose not to be honest and upfront is purely on them.

It's not technically a lie. There is a middle-term between being completely honest and upfront or being a liar, and it's a middle-term just about every company ever is very happy to dance in. Welcome to capitalism.

That's quite a blatant denial of reality right there. You can like and enjoy a game while still acknowledging it's faults, there's no need to defend it just cause you bought it.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
mZuzek said:

It's not technically a lie. There is a middle-term between being completely honest and upfront or being a liar, and it's a middle-term just about every company ever is very happy to dance in. Welcome to capitalism.

That's quite a blatant denial of reality right there. You can like and enjoy a game while still acknowledging it's faults, there's no need to defend it just cause you bought it.

I'm not defending it from the backlash it received, I'm saying it deserved it. I've enjoyed this game while acknowledging it's faults since forever. And I'm not in denial over anything right now. All I'm saying is that the promises that were made prior to this game's release, have now been fulfilled, so technically they weren't lies because I don't think they ever specified that those promises were gonna be in the vanilla version. Obviously, everyone expected that the game they bought at launch would have those things, because that was what the promises implied, but they never explicitly said it'd happen - for being unclear about the state of the product they were releasing and selling it based on hype created over promises of content they didn't have at the time, they do deserve the backlash they got.

They also deserve a bare minimum of respect for having doubled down on their game and fixing all the issues people had with it. Is it the right way to go over releasing a game? No, absolutely not. What they did was wrong. But you know, they could've just left their game as it was back then, saving themselves loads of money, time and effort. People had already bought it anyway, right? That would've been a lot worse, but they didn't do that. You can say that's the least they should've done, and I agree to an extent, but there are a lot of companies out there who don't do even that much.



Vodacixi said:
DonFerrari said:

Seems like a very high standard to hold when Bethesda with a very big studio can get away with even worse.

Classic and silly argument. "Ahhh, but I'm gonna assume without even knowing you or asking you that you don't think the same of this other very similar case". I share the same feeling for Bethesda Game Studios as I do for Hello Games (not Id Software or Machinegames though).

But if you want my opinion, this kind of behaviour feels even more severe for an indie developer like Hello Games. Because being No Man's Sky their first big game, they had a lot to prove. And if all they do is lie to people... that's not a good start at all.

Nope not said you were doing it, but you are holding a standard that community doesn't hold for Bethesda. And sorry an independente studio like Hello Games deserve a lot more lenience than a big and established studio that have been doing this for several years and still sellin millions.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
Nautilus said:
No Mans Lie managed to turn out to be a "decent" game only because of all the money they basically stole from the people that bought the game expecting to be something utterly different.

I honestly think this one of the saddest gaming story of the last years, one that incentivizes to lie through your teeths in order to secure the early sales, only to actually develop the game later.

sky citizen doublés it down



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

mZuzek said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:

That's quite a blatant denial of reality right there. You can like and enjoy a game while still acknowledging it's faults, there's no need to defend it just cause you bought it.

I'm not defending it from the backlash it received, I'm saying it deserved it. I've enjoyed this game while acknowledging it's faults since forever. And I'm not in denial over anything right now. All I'm saying is that the promises that were made prior to this game's release, have now been fulfilled, so technically they weren't lies because I don't think they ever specified that those promises were gonna be in the vanilla version. Obviously, everyone expected that the game they bought at launch would have those things, because that was what the promises implied, but they never explicitly said it'd happen - for being unclear about the state of the product they were releasing and selling it based on hype created over promises of content they didn't have at the time, they do deserve the backlash they got.

They also deserve a bare minimum of respect for having doubled down on their game and fixing all the issues people had with it. Is it the right way to go over releasing a game? No, absolutely not. What they did was wrong. But you know, they could've just left their game as it was back then, saving themselves loads of money, time and effort. People had already bought it anyway, right? That would've been a lot worse, but they didn't do that. You can say that's the least they should've done, and I agree to an extent, but there are a lot of companies out there who don't do even that much.

Do you have a source for this? As far as I remember they never specified they had plans for there to be anything more than a vanilla version. I could only agree with your logic here if this is true. I realize it's just semantics whether we wanna say it was an outright lie or technically not. You clearly understand that what they did was shady and that's good enough for me! I guess I'm more vindictive, I don't want to give the slightest impression that what they did is ok by saying they were truthful in the end.

I don't recall them ever apologizing, only going radio silent for months after the game launched, so I have no respect for them, but I can respect those that still do. No denying that it's better to fix the game later than never at all, but I still don't want to give them praise so as to not encourage a repeat.



Vodacixi said:
I don't care how much the game has changed over time. I don't care how good it is now. This is what happened: Hello Games lied to everyone about what the game was gonna be and how it was constructed. Not only that, but they launched the game in a very poor state, with tons of bugs, uneven performance and more. That was in 2016. Well, 2019 is 4 months away from ending and we still haven't heard a single apology from Sean Murray or Hello Games as a whole. In fact, the only declarations they released over the last months basically said that we the consumers and the press are very bad persons because we judge a game too early.

I'm sorry, but these people don't deserve a fucking penny. They are among the worst of the industry, and if it were for me, I wouldn't allow Hello Games to create another game ever again.

That being said, I'm glad that the people who payed for it at release can now get something closer to what they initially promised.

All I can say is thank all the gods you have zero power in the industry and it's not up to you. 

It would be a crappy world if people couldn't move forward.  I'll judge the next game they make based on its own merits and I hope it's great because great games are more important to me than feelings of spite.



mZuzek said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:

Contradicting yourself aside, there is simply no excuse for what Hello Games did. That they chose not to be honest and upfront is purely on them.

It's not technically a lie. There is a middle-term between being completely honest and upfront or being a liar, and it's a middle-term just about every company ever is very happy to dance in. Welcome to capitalism.

So what if it failed at launch? Do you honestly think they would've kept going updating the game for three years to fulfill the promise?



Vodacixi said:
Zoombael said:

And i say: If you believed the would launch in any different state than it did, then its your own goddamn fault. 

Neither was surprising. Not the condition NMS launched in, nor the community reaction.

What the hell did people expect from a little indie studio. With at the time i think 15 employees. An epic space opera saga. Right.

I bought it a couple of weeks ago. I think i never played a more tediously boring game. And people praising HG for redeeming themselves. Oy...

So, the fault is on us for believing what they said they would do and for expect a technical quality on par with they show on trailers. Ok, better let you enjoy your topsy turvy version of common sense.

"Believing". You knew they couldnt deliever. You should ve known. Everybody should ve known, but the press and the community chose to stay oblivious to the fact that some dozen weak backyard indie developer on a limited budget, within 3 years time span cannot develop the sci fi space adventure of your dreams and anyone who believed they could AND pre ordered/bought at release was a fool to do so. 

No one was forced by anyone to buy the game at release without reading reviews. Who the hell does that in this day and age? I do when i know exaclty what to expect, in content and quality. RE2R for example.

As ive mentioned, i ve bought NMS couple of weeks ago. I didnt expect much, not because of all the negativ hubbub. I naturally dont expect much from indie devs. I invested 10h into it and i got nowhere. Dead end after dead end, combined with the hardcore excessive obligatory grind/mining and i was done. How anyone can deem this good gaming is beyond me. My job has more entertainment value than NMS.



Hunting Season is done...