General Category => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Disch on August 14, 2016, 03:08:48 pm

Title: No Man's Sky
Post by: Disch on August 14, 2016, 03:08:48 pm
I've put enough time into No Man's Sky to form a real opinion on it.

I don't like it.

No Map. Slow movement. Too small inventory. And the biggest sin of all for an exploration game: everything feels the same.

There's no diversity in the terrain. Every planet is the exact same environment just skinned differently. The only thing it seems to mix up is that some planets have water and others don't. And some planets are dangerous (hot/cold/radioactive) and some aren't... but even the danger is the same -- your suit drains until you find shelter.

Where are the forests? Rivers? Volcanoes? Deserts? Jungles? Swamps? Why aren't planets broken up so that part of it is a desert and another part is flooded and another is mountainous? Every planet seems to be completely uniform.

I have a torch in the game but you never have to use it because the lighting is unchanging. Even in the dead of night I can see the horizon clearly.

The weather never changes. There's never snow or ice or storms. I guess sometimes it's rainy but it seems to be planet-wide rain and never stops.

Overall I can find more topographical diversity within a one mile radius of my house than I can find in this entire virtual galaxy. I'd say it's quite underwhelming.

It's an ok game, but I wouldn't recommend anyone pay full price for it. If the concept really interests you wait for it to go on sale. If you aren't sure whether or not you'd like it, then skip it entirely -- you probably won't.

Ultimately it feels like a 3D, less combat oriented, less interesting, less diverse, slower moving, more limited, and somehow smaller version of Terraria.

In fact, yeah... just get Terraria instead. Way better game.
Title: Re: No Man's Sky
Post by: jink640 on August 14, 2016, 08:09:52 pm
Haven't played it (currently unable to do so) but I have seen enough streams to get the main idea. The point of the game is to wander around and slowly upgrade your character so you can reach the center. But only after wandering around even more.

Of course, this is just the hype train derailing and crashing in a terrible fire, but what I want to know is why are people not bashing the developers on unfulfilled promises (the diversity is where)? Hell, Capcom gets slammed when they do stuff like that.
Title: Re: No Man's Sky
Post by: KaioShin on August 15, 2016, 02:18:02 am
Ultimately it feels like a 3D, less combat oriented, less interesting, less diverse, slower moving, more limited, and somehow smaller version of Terraria.

But wasn't this clear from any preview about the game ever?
Title: Re: No Man's Sky
Post by: MegaManJuno on August 15, 2016, 11:02:02 am
It's pretty much exactly what I expected of it, and I can appreciate it for what it is. I do think the "hype train" went a little off the rails on it though, and many people are expecting more of it than what it is.

That being said, I pretty much seem to have started in the asshole of the universe. :(

My first planets/moons in my starting area are:

Frozen wasteland: Constantly refilling hazard protection due to extreme cold. Little life.
Toxic wasteland: Constantly refilling hazard protection due to extreme toxicity. Little life.
Irradiated wasteland: Constantly refilling hazard protection due to extreme radiation. Little life.
..?? Wasteland: I remember it saying something about low gravity (not noticeable difference on control, that I recall). For some reason this one puts extra strain on life support, so constantly refilling life support due to ..?? No life.
Wasteland: Pretty temperate, with no constant refilling of systems for protection/survival. No life.

I enjoyed Terraria and all, but that one was much more focused on the building from what I felt from it. A new planet on Terraria was so similar that I only spent a short time on a second planet before just going back to my original one.

With NMS, I feel like there's way more exploration than crafting going on here (even if the planets are kind of "samey", so far). This is kind of a perfect "chill-out" game for me (that's not to say the game itself if perfect, though). I mean, I am the kind of person who spent an hour climbing up a cliff in the first Tomb Raider game (underground pyramid area), not because there was anything up there, but just to see if I could. I also enjoyed (for the most part) exploring the planets in the first Mass Effect game. To me, those were more of a disappointment, especially now compared to NMS. They were handcrafted and not procedurally generated, yet gave you a very limited area to explore instead of the full planet and were all very lifeless rocky terrain from what I recall. So, at least in comparison to ME, this game is a strict upgrade to me in the exploration aspect.

As I hinted at above, it's definitely not without its faults, however. I've already ran into a couple or minor bugs with item placement - floating copper nodes, getting pointed to ruins that don't actually exist (stuck in the ground maybe?) - and one straight up game freeze. Also, it does seem kind of silly that Plant A on Planet X that looks extremely similar to Plant B on Planet Y are entirely separate discoveries. I do wish there were a little more diversity between the planets... but, with all my starting planets being wastelands with little to no life, maybe there will be some more diversity once I get out of this system.
Title: Re: No Man's Sky
Post by: Axiphel on August 15, 2016, 12:37:51 pm
It's a $20 dollar game being sold at $60. You go to a planet, look around, get resources and go to the next planet. Wide as an ocean and barely as deep as a puddle.
Title: ###
Post by: FCandChill on August 15, 2016, 09:47:28 pm
Comment removed because reasons...
Title: Re: No Man's Sky
Post by: Grimlock on August 17, 2016, 01:14:00 am
I've about 7 or 8 solar systems in and about 30 planets and an atlas center, here's my take on the game:

While some solar systems are full of uninspiring planets there are some really neat looking ones to be found.  Some planets have very unique terrain characteristics while some planets have unique and interesting life forms and plants.  The real gems are the planets that combine the three.  I'd say for me so far the really interesting planets are probably 1 out of 6 or so.

The thing about NMS is that it's very open ended, you can choose to do whatever you want.  There's even a path you can follow if you prefer some direction in your gaming.  At any moment you can choose to go from exploration to mining or to combat with a sentinel or space ship, or you can collect technology, work towards upgrades, or learn the systems species language.  There's a lot to choose from.

There's a few things I would have liked to have seen done with a different approach.  First I don't like the fact that every planet has a ton of alien buildings on them, some planets should have none in order to be more realistic.  Every system has an alien presence, Space station, and lots of large alien ships here and there.  I would have liked to have seen something more like "Star Flight" where most planets are not inhabited by advanced species.  It would have been better if it were all ruins of a lost civilization which could have surrounded some vast galactic mystery.  Mushrooms seem to be growing everywhere in this game, even in small tunnels on moons that look just like our own, lifeless and dry.  Floating models are common also.  I don't care for the automated landing and launch sequences, allowing the player to land and launch on their own would have added a lot to the game.  They should have made it so you could fly very slow and hover with thrusters again similar to "Star Flight".

Some of the animal life is very Frankenstein looking while others are pretty unique and unexpected.
 The Frankenstein animals sometimes look like a bunch of animal parts were sewn together in a dark room in a dreary lab somewhere.

I think the ships should have dedicated slots for tech and dedicated slots for cargo, not combined as is.  The exosuit given how it expands by one space at a time maybe sharing is good since you can't buy a new updated one.

I did find a few bugs, if you land under something like a floating piece of land you slam into it hard when you use the launch sequence (no manual lift off)  I crashed once and almost twice because of it.  Also I landed on a mountain side and exited the ship into the mountain, luckily I was able to just enter my ship again.

For what it is I think this game is done pretty well.  It's a mellow exploration game with some combat and tech elements to it.  It's primary focus is on the exploration side.  Some planets are on the crusty uninspired side but with a little patience you find a unique one and stay with it for a little while before heading of to the next planet or system.  I'd recommend it for the exploration aspects although I still think having all those alien structures on every planet takes away from that, it's like you're playing catch up with all the other alien species who have already spread to every known planet and moon in the galaxy.

On another note I have already found 2 systems already discovered by another (named Nore), I guess that's supposed to be rare?
Title: Re: No Man's Sky
Post by: KaioShin on August 17, 2016, 03:11:46 am