You know what I like about you and your videos, man? I was expecting yet another "No Man's Sky is a really wide and shallow pool" type review, but you opened up your video by talking about this is exactly the thing you're not gonna talk about. You constantly have your ear to the ground on gaming culture and you know exactly what do focus on to make it unique. 'preciate ya
Thanks @Errant for saying this out loud. This is exactly what I thought of the game, and now whenever someone asks me what I think of it, I'm gonna link this video.
Totally make a video on Zen games! "Quietly collecting my thoughts as I collect Plutonium" - lol, not going to tell that one to my mindfulness instructor.
Dushan Stojchev I don't think you know what I mean. The animals, plants, the procedural generation of the formations on the planets. It just all starts feeling the same. Not to mention all planets have the same buildings everywhere. There's only so much you can do with procedural generation. You'll still start seeing the same patterns.
+Cloud Stratus I've been to over 200 planets and still get surprised by what I see, every once in a while. But to your point, there are a lot of similar looking planets/creatures. The game definitely could have used more variety. It's one of the many things that seem to be cut from the game. Like Sandworms and other gigantic creators.
The flora, fauna and planet variety is obviously pretty poorly implemented. As with everything in this game they delivered just enough so their heads don't get chopped off by the fans.
It's only surprising when you're not able to predict it - but the patterns become too clear, too quick. It's not that "once you've seen one planet, you've seen them all." but "once you've seen the algorithm, you've really seen it all"
I was satisfied when you finally made the Spore comparison. This was one of the better reviews you've done in a while, I think. Thanks for putting this out.
I was expecting another typical review of NMS. Mainly those "wide as an ocean but deep as a puddle" type review that are a dime a dozen but this was honestly quite a fascinating review of it. It is flawed as hell but it did do some things right which is what everyone seems to forget. Anyway great review, you got another sub. :3
Yeah, I would say that this game is would be more appreciated with a steam sale or something like that. I really do like this game, but the price point seems a bit off currently.
"There really is nothing else like it out there right now." I dunno man. I feel like Starbound has a lot of the same qualities that you're describing. I won't say anything to its quality, but I've used it as a Zen game myself a few times.
I think spore already did this in space stage as well and was equally mindbogglingly dull despite the exploration element. Spores added advantage was that everything was player created including your ship and settlements and you could terraform planets. So its actually not as good as spore. And spore was horrible. It was a fantastic editor and nothing more, the actual game element was a disaster. NMS is very similar to Starbound as well in the form of the loot/craft progression systems. But Starbound was a much cheaper and more enjoyable game despite major technical issues. Straight up they oversold NMS, they charged far too much for a product that would never compete with other AAA titles. It is very much an indie game masquerading as a AAA and that's why it failed.
Spore did it better too. It had basically the same depth of mechanics. Space battles were as shallow and basic, trading non-existent and planet variety just as random... however Spore worked and they were effective results. In NMS most of the mechanics slightly fail. Perhaps it is as said just due to a lack of balance. Perhaps it is because most of the features have missing aspects and so feel unfinished, because they are unfinished.
Yes, Starbound is No Man's Sky with one less dimension and a thousand more things to do. The funny thing is that the first alpha version of Starbound people could play was just as weird and "empty" as NMS.
From what I gather two early access games PULSAR: Lost Colony and Rodina might already be better versions of No Man's Sky. Starbound is probably the only complete game that's like No Man's Sky and better.
8 ปีที่แล้ว +1
No Man's Sky could've been an amazing sci-fi ecology sim
This pretty much reflects how I feel about the game. I love playing it for an hour or two after I've had a shit day, fixes me right the fuck up. I am glad I didn't drop 60 bucks on it though and torrented it instead, but I'll definitely buy it in the next Steam sale.
I've put in over a hundred hours. I love this game. I love the lore and the feeling of excitement every time my view screen heats up as I enter a new planet's atmo, scrutinizing the surface to see if I can detect what kind of life or minerals the planet will have. I hope it does well enough that they keep working on it and adding things. I enjoy a LOT of what it already has to offer but I also want to see what they do when they have time and resources.
This is the first video I found about No Man's Sky that doesnt talk about how hype ruined it. You just talked about flaws _in the game itself_. Gaming reviews in general need to do this more often.
"There's nothing else like that", erm Spore is pretty much exactly that. Or if you interested in just visual exploration of planets then Space Engine is a way to go.
Yep. There are a few other older 2d planet generation games. Some newer ones (Starbound etc). Some do crafting better (Minecraft), some do survival better (Neo Scavenger), some do space flight better (Elite etc). But, those vistas. Those horizons. They are amazing. :)
Also Empyrion. The main thing that NMS has over it's competition is the art is clean and has style to it, not just gritty brown or a flat cartoon world.
I appreciate your approach to viewing this game. It reminds me of an Albert Einstein quote: "A man should look for what is, not for what he thinks should be."
Watching this video years after the initial release and it’s still evergreen. No Man’s Sky is a much better game now but by choosing this route or perspective you created content, a narrative that really stayed fresh.
No, not "people like him". It's a direct jab at Totalbiscuit and no one else. Advocating for 60FPS, wide FOV, and consumer rights is what TB is known for. I think it was a poor attempt at saying "I'm not a technical critic guy" but it was a needless and lousy jab. We don't have enough people advocating for these things and I think it should be encouraged. And you can see how it affects this video. Most systems and technical issues in the game contradict what he's trying to be positive about. Maybe one should be a little more technical to give a more accurate representation of a game, even when it's about whether a game is "zen".
"We don't have enough people advocating for these things and I think it should be encouraged." Are you kidding me? All of my TH-cam recommended videos at the moment are stuff like "Sean Murray's Lies" or "The No Man's Sky Scam!!!" The internet is crawling with low-effort technical critics. What we need are different perspectives.
I completely align with your views on this. I still love this game, because I love the act of exploring in itself and I've always mainly been interested in the procedural generation tech of the game more so than the game itself. On treating it like a zen game, I end up treating this game much like I treat emulated Pokemon games. I lower the game volume, open up a RadioLab or Serial podcast on my second monitor, and listen to that as I explore procedural worlds.
TLDR, No Man's Sky is only good if you don't think about it. For someone who likes to insist that games don't exist within a vacuum, its very unusual for you to critique it in such a way.
I think he's trying to play devils advocate in this vid. He's saying "yeah the games got issues but it does do some things right that other games fail to achieve" when a lot of reviewers/ people in general just shit on this game (rightfully so imho) and dont point out any of the positive aspects of this game.
We know the production and delivery of the game has issues. Mentioning it again in a video may not add much to the discussion or learn anything. But actually looking at the games mechanics, we can learn from that and progress. We know that lying is bad, or failing to deliver features will cause complaints. But learning how to make "good" games, that is hard. :)
I've been following discussions regarding NMS for a while now and yours was one of the most thought-provoking. Kudos too for wanting to distance yourself from the usual suspects. Rock on, dude.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this game now that they've released a bunch of major updates that drastically change the play & bring it closer to what was originally promised
I still think 60fps needs to be a bigger sticking point now. Technology had progressed to the point where it should be expected, especially when it's an objective benefit not just to fidelity, but to gameplay. If anyone reads this and doesn't believe me, find a friend with a machine (either a pc or a PS4 with the last of us remastered) and play the same portion of a game once capped at 30fps then again at 60. Control is smoother and the Game is more immersive. 120 or 144 is still on the debatable side for necessity, but for as massive an improvement as the bump from 30 to 60 is, I can't understand why it isn't a bigger deal.
+mightyNosewings It doesn't at all need to be though. A machine as weak as the Wii U had games that ran at 60fps and still looked gorgeous. They had to be stylized, but they made it work with the equivalent of mediocre hardware from 5 years ago. Not to mention The Last of Us being stunning while running 60fps. There's no reason in my opinion that games couldn't be released with the option to lower the fidelity to get 60 fps. It wouldn't even need to be granularly controllable like on pc. It could just be a toggle that automatically drops the video quality to the point where 60 fps would be consistent. Especially with how similar pc and console hardware is now, I see no reason that couldn't happen with minimal effort on the dev's side. I'll fully admit that there may be something I'm missing that would make that impossible, but with how simple it is to change visual fidelity on pc, along with the fact that the last of us looked incredible while running 60 AND that a toggle was possible, I really struggle to see why it wouldn't be.
The other problem, I think, is that Gamers™ want everything. They want their games to come out RIGHT NOW, and they want them to have a specific kind of technically-impressive quasi-realistic look to them, and they want them to be bugfree, and they want them to run at 60 FPS, and they want them to have like 100 hours of content, and they want them to be $60 or cheaper. Oh, and sometimes they want them to be well-designed or, even more occasionally, actually novel or interesting. Well, we can't have everything. Game development is hard, and developers have to make tradeoffs. Bloodborne is one of my favorite recent releases despite its 30 FPS limit and overall jankiness, because it's a fascinating game made by smart people who cared.
i love games that i can zone out, but be real, this is no eurotruck simulator, it feels much more like a prodecurally generated desert bus with non-sensical mechanics that push a hard sense of urgency for absolutely no reason other than forcing you to gather resources and a pseudo-narrative that doesnt tell anything, the gameplay cycle is astronomically tedious (go to a planet, suck resources, sell stuff, find the things that vaguely tell a pseudo-narrative, repeat until you finish the game) and also the originality of the planets start to blend in after you played for some hours. honestly, it really is a amazing achievement in gaming terms for generating procedural worlds, but that is where it ends
lol im watching half the gameplay here, and it's just aiming lazers at rocks and plants.. scan derpasaur's and plants, fly here land there. super mario 64 had more content and meaning than this
Cool perspective. Look at it for what it is, and not for what it isn't. Not like no one hasn't heard that line before, but this video draws attention to it, and that's worth while; the perspective that might be hard to catch in the midst of everything that's a bit mind opening, a nugget to take with after the video is over. Good stuff Errant.
Really enjoyed seeing you break down what worked and didn't work about this game in your typical thought provoking style. I wanted to throw a few thoughts I had into the discussion. On inventory: This is probably just an issue with my game, but I haven't found any ships with more than 26 slots for a while, so I actually have more storage in my suit than my ship, which is plain silly. On exploration: You're super spot on with how the game is great at providing the sense of there always being something just over the next hill, because most of the time there is. They're largely all the same, yes, but that doesn't matter when you're 'in the zone', which leads into... On 'zen': Besides being a great decompression experience on it's own when it works for you, it also adds a little bit of philosophizing to that with gentle implicit nudging in the direction of pondering the old 'why are we here?' 'what is the meaning of life?' style stuff by really emphasizing the sheer scope of the universe. As Douglas Adams put it: "Space is big."
Late comment, but I did definitely get the "lose yourself" aspect of this game. While I only played it for a few weeks due to the myriad of flaws you and others have listed, there were times where I indeed felt a sense of calm in flying low over planets, dodging asteroids, and walking around alien landscapes just to see what's there. Great video, Errant Signal!
The recent update is really good for giving the player a sense of purpose and objectives, they've fixed a LOT of the UI and inventory issues by now as well. Still haven't found a big dinosaur thing like the trailer but god-damn it is a fine game and still costs the same price when they could have taken the money and run.
I totally agree about the Zen aspect of No Man's Sky. Putting on a series to binge or audio book to listen to and sometime I don't even jump to a planet. I just let my spaceship float towards a planet while I watch a show. I agree, if people can learn to enjoy it for what it is, a exploration simulator and less of immersive space opera then we wouldn't have had such a bad response.
Thank you. I've been trying to get that idea across to people. It's a weird game, and it is a flawed game, but its existence is necessary to inspire others to build off of what it is. That type of thing is necessary to keep the medium moving ever forward. Just my opinion.
I understand where you're coming from about the game. Even some people who've quit the game or said it just wasn't for them have said they can understand how others can enjoy it. However, Hello Games really did dig No Man's Sky's grave with how much they talked up the game. Especially with all the features they talked about/showed off in TV/online previews, that just didn't make it into the final product. There is definitely a market for what No Man's Sky actually is. Sadly, it was sold to a lot of people as something else. Plus, a fair number of the people who were VERY hyped for this game seem to REALLY need a zen game. A news site reported on there likely being a 2 month delay of the game and the author got death threats from people. Then when the devs confirmed that the delay was real, they got death threats. I mean, when you have an audience that includes some people so ready to be upset, how can you expect any other result than the conversation to turn out negative when the game fails to live up to expectations? It's sad, but kind of expected. Anyway, thanks for the video! =w= b
I've just recently watched a video from Jim Sterling on that whole issue, talking about FFXV mostly if I recall correctly. Your comment just perfectly sums that issue up. +1 "Delayed Reaction (Jimquisition)"
***** hell, AAA devs get away with all kinds of shit. and as far as i am aware, hello games rode along with the hype train, so they didn't do anything to give people realistic expectations.
I really do hope that Hello gets the opportunity to properly support this game further. I know that people don't think that they have a solid foundation to build off of, but I personally believe that they do. I am very patient and would love to see Hello expand on the base content of this game.
+MrBrothasky and from where they will get money to do so? Sony as publisher helped them financially and Sony will take the share of income as a first thing, whatever might be left will go to halo games (this is my speculation based on some unhappy Devs speaking generally about contracts with publishers). Sony might no be interested in investing money in something that a lot of people wanted to refund. One day sales were a success but I doubt the game will sell, sales already spiked down. second hand copies can be bought in some EU countries for around 1/3 do the original price. Good for me I was never a passenger on a hype train. Even from presentations huge universe you can do whatever but what? And if it comes to gameplay and game mechanics game does not deliver.
+mravg79 I cannot pretend that I will know where the money is going to come from. mechanics can be fine-tuned and expanded upon. The exploration for exploration's sake centered around an absurdist story structure is very odd for a mainstream release. perhaps that wasn't the place that this title should have drawn attention, but at most I think the game will be remembered as an oddity in game design that garnered a cult following. There are plenty who still love the game despite its shortcomings and have found that there are broader themes that are, unfortunately, not being discussed amidst the vocal majority that cannot see beyond the irksome flaws. Flaws that, quite frankly, exist pervasively within modern gaming as a whole. I don't know where I am really going with this. Sony doesn't own the IP. They just funded the project with the idea of giving exclusivity over the other consoles. The lasting life of the title will rely on what Hello Games does, and they are working on fixing what the majority of people find as irksome flaws.
BTW, I can understand if you're hesistant to boil down a game this way, but I figured I'd ask: Is it worth the $60 price tag? You echoed the thought I've heard from TheXPGamers and others that the game still offers a unique experience you won't find elsewhere... but is that, by itself, worth so much money upfront?
+Errant Signal i enjoy what the game is, but given what we were promised - the basis of any commercial purchase, i can't help but lament what the game could have been.
I completely agree with this video. One small correction though, something that is never explained or properly indicated within the game. Crafted upgrades in the inventory cannot be moved because apparently if upgrades are connected to each other by a straight line and then connected in turn to the tool they're upgrading (e.g. the boltcaster or the mining beam) then their "upgrade power" is increased, indicated by a weird non-sensical color scheme around the upgrades and the tool.
This video pretty much is what I really wanted to know about the game, because everyone keeps talking about what they expected. That's not useful for understanding what it *is*, and I appreciate you taking the time to whip up a video about it.
I'm a big fan of NMS for the exact reasons you described in this video - it's a small, flawed game, by a small team, that does what it does in a way that nothing else can. Thank you for the really great breakdown. Subbed!
I agree. In my first 5 hours of playing this game on a forested planet, the game actually really felt like Proteus and I was definitely into that. The next 10 was relaxing to the soundtrack while finding all the wildlife and mining gold Then I shut the game off when I realized there wasn't much more to do beyond that and how everything felt way too contrived. Something like Proteus feels like an actual place whenever you turn it on.
there are other games like this, only better and at a lower price point. try subnautica if you want layered exploration, distinctive atmosphere, tons of mystery, and incredibly interesting challenges. Subnautica has actual progression and a greater sense of permanence. much like no man's sky, if there is any main goal, it is more to get to the center of the planet, than to the center of a galaxy. the deeper you dive, the stranger and scarier things you encounter. I've seen hundreds of different flora and fauna. most benign, a few terrifying, but virtually all interesting.
You know, this is the best review I've encountered for NMS. They released a patch that allegedly fixes a lot of the problems. Have you considered revisiting the game and mentioning if the changes improved the game experience?
Kinda ironic that NMS is at it's best as a zen game when Shean Murray said in many interviews that it wasn't going to be a game to zone out to and relax. Great video ES, keep up the good work.
0:11 Making clear what this video is NOT trying to do - Not a list of grievances - Not trying to draw a line for where the lie is - Not a technical criticism 0:55 Interested in how the game comes together. 1:17 Where it works 2:30 + Landscapes 2:46 The Game proper is kind of annoying 3:56 Saving 4:27 Bugged Ending 4:49 Units Received 5:56 Not really a flying game 6:30 Namimg planets and animals 8:02 Borrowing core from other games 8:32 It’s a Go find something game 9:13 Nomadism, homelessness, Absurdist 10:02 no coherence, it’s a zen game 11:16 Rewarded with amazing views 11:48 Really good to Zone out 12:28 What it is 13:11 It May Be Bad... But it’s got some value
The Atlas path is a ritual, so if you sell the Atlas stones you failed to stay with the path. It is a very punishing fail state, but contextually I think it makes sense.
I don't feel the game's strengths are anywhere near as accidental as you make it sound, I'd like to believe this game very well achieved what the developers sought out to do and they deserve all the more credit for it. I mean really listen to all the pre-release interviews and what they chose to emphasize, "look at how many creatures and landscapes we can generate", this is what they wanted you to stop and appreciate. There was a reason the question was always "but what do you DO in No Man's Sky??" before release. The systems were never emphasized, very likely not because they were unfinalized or not hitting goals, but they were never important all along.
true, though i think the situation is less that they did this accidentally and more they did it without understanding it's value. no man's sky strikes me as being very similar to the kinds of experimental proofs of concept you'd get in a university course. it feels like the designers made this great terrain generator full of wondrous things and really wanted to show it off. but the problem is that they sold themselves on the hype as much as the audience. they wanted epic space battles, factions and integrated mechanics, star wars meets minecraft in an amazing sandbox and i think they both overestimated themselves and didn't know how to best make use of the design features they had, so once the limitations of what they could actually do with their time and money set in; instead of focusing on the exploration through a wondrous universe the mechanics are a hodge podge of lackluster sci-fi mechanics the designers assumed we wanted. the end result is that the games systems are at odds with the game's tone and purpose leaving the game feeling directionless on multiple levels. ultimately the game feels like it would have benefited from trimming down the existing systems to focus on systems that better fueled and motivated going out and exploring more of this amazing universe
Sean Murray, the head dev, promoted the systems a ton before the game was released, ergo your statement is not correct although it would be nice if it were true. Like the guy in the video said there are numerous videos and websites dedicated to listing out all the things that Sean and the rest of Hello games said would be in the game but aren't. In Murrays words No Man's Sky was supposed to be a game of "endless possibilities" not just "endless landscapes".
The problem I see with it is that though all the lovely little systems are interesting and fairly well built and complete, the integration and overall planning was an afterthought, at best.
It's interesting that there's a tension between all the ways that a game can be bad. NMS is quite obviously bad technically (performance-wise) and in terms of its gameplay loop, but it's NOT bad in its core, which is what you were saying here. I bought it on day one and, despite suffering from low FPS and all the bad UI design, I haven't refunded it because I like it for what it is and I'm confident that patches and mods can make it interesting and better. It's like Euro Truck Simulator 2 in space, and if they added a delivery mechanic to make it EVEN MORE like ETS2, I'd be super super happy.
Hi Chris. I love your videos, and I don't mind ones I disagree with -- it's always good to hear different viewpoints. But really, to half-praise a game with crazy technical issues you didn't need to trivialize technical issues as a whole. Low FOV, insane framerate drops and constant jittering giving people headaches and nausea contradict your point about this game being zen. So does the terribly annoying UI, and the "game" systems constantly bothering you with messages like "life support *low* at 75%". The game having lego creatures (which even the 8-year-old Spore was much better at), the same flora over and over, and the early 2000-era quality textures contradict your point about the game giving you great vistas and textures to look at. Saying that UI complaints are petty is really weird. User interface, the name should give it away, dictates the way you interact with the game. I don't see how that's petty. Technical issues don't exist in a vacuum and they affect gameplay and game feel. Maybe we should encourage people to look at these issues rather than jab at the one person who consistently does.
His entire video sounds like a person feeling very ripped off, but instead of calling it for what it is, he tries to justify his purchase, and thus he ends up being condescending
Bucky•JaKRBT To be honest I don't think that's the case. I think he honestly enjoys the experience and more power to him. I'm just saying trivializing technical and user experience issues is not necessary to say you enjoy this mess of a game. And we have very few people (if not one person) who look out for these issues in games and we need this to be encouraged, not trivialized.
Sterling, Bunnyhop, TB, and Angry Joe are all the same person? The 10 dudes on my YT frontpage that showed up 'cuz I clicked one NMS opinion piece yelling about how broken NMS are all one person? I hope the games media doesn't stop this person from making their non-media video reviews, it could be dangerous.
An excellent and above all fair discussion, Christopher! These are my thoughts precisely. I hadn't followed the hype train at all and I just got the game because it was this 'procedurally-generated space game' that a friend had talked about and I'm a sucker for both components. I really like it for what it is. And while I'm a dedicated PC user and always have been, I right out acknowledge that this is a couch game if I've ever seen one, for reasons very accurately described in your video. Keep up the good work!
I know this is pretty late for this comment but there is a reason behind not being able to move upgrades in your inventory: "Arranging your inventory properly can give you substantial bonuses as the various components and upgrades have synergy and get a boost when placed next to each other in proper slot formation. When the borders of similar upgrades are touching, they'll light up indicating synergy. The more upgrades that are touching, the more "powerful" the end result will be."
I want to thank you for putting out thoughtful content that really reflects on the full experience of a game. Your videos are a welcome change from the frenetic, attention grabbing gaming media so often seen. I look forward to each new one.
I actually use NMS as a sort of zen-meditative device when I'm too preoccupied or tired or stressed to do any actual thinking. But this is the reason why I like this game, it asks nothing and lets you do the wandering yourself. I like that, I know I have agency and I like using that agency in games to do whatever comes to my mind. After the initial shock wears off, it is very liberating -- milk some animals, make some pies, sell them for money, shoot some horrors, and then start again. I don't think this is at all accidental in NMS, it's put there for a reason. We do live in a profoundly meaningless universe, and this game is a perfect illustration of that.
I think this game would improve immensely if they added VR compatibility, It'd be great to get lost in all these worlds and actually feeling you're standing on them.
Wow. Absolutely excellent, as always. You really hit the nail on the head with this game. I've really enjoyed my time with it but that's because I've approached it similarly to what you're talking about in the last third or so of your analysis. It's a fantastic game just to BE in, particularly if you approach it like a photographer, which I have (I've got like 350 screenshots saved, it's ridiculous). Landing on a planet and just feeling the absolute freedom to do absolutely nothing "meaningful" (i.e. nothing that will garner you progress in the traditional sense) is a great thing, I think. You also did very well in pointing out the bajillion tiny things the game does poorly, which I pretty much agree with on all counts. I'm at a point where I'm satsified with the time I've had with it and now I'm looking forward to future updates. I'm VERY interested to see what NMS looks like in a year. Keep up the good work! Your videos are some of the best on youtube :)
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like… tears in rain. Time to die.
You are joking... yet FOV sliders, optimization, UI and options matter. Some of the more important things for a Zen game as well (how can you zone out and forget of your issues if you get headaches from the FOV?). This simple technical and quality of life elements are exactly that - fairly simple. No one expects every game to be a masterpiece of the art form... but at least this much everyone can expect. Otherwise, great video :P ! And sorry if that was just a fun jab, but developers and publishers actually do not care for the people (it seems).
It is funny that he pokes fun at TB at the start of the video (0.42 on) when that is actually the truth. FOV is something that can make or break one's experience, so is a game that runs properly (FOV certainly contributing to that). So he is not interested in having a video game that works properly on the technical side? OK, then. His jab at TB (it was more the tone and usage of rah rah, implying these complaints are whiny/entitled) and the likes just makes him look bad and I didn't really bother watching the video any further. Not like other commenters prove me right in that choice.
It is funny that he pokes fun at TB at the start of the video (0.42 on) when that is actually the truth. FOV is something that can make or break one's experience, so is a game that runs properly (FOV certainly contributing to that). So he is not interested in having a video game that works properly on the technical side? OK, then. His jab at TB (it was more the tone and usage of rah rah, implying these complaints are whiny/entitled) and the likes just makes him look bad and I didn't really bother watching the video any further. Not like other commenters prove me right in that choice.
TinyTachyon Did I ever say that? They are an art form, if a young one. Reviewing them is a complex process, but if you are sick from playing it or have to fight the game... Well it ain't good.
Alexander Yordanov ah sorry for making the flippant comment! i was trying to reply to Knops, who took a more reactionary position than you. I agree, a smoother user experience would be much better for a game like No Man's Sky!
NMS really feels like hiking in the mountains to me. Each step is easy, but in total the journey is hard. The rewarding, unique parts of the experience can be both mundane and extraordinary at the same time, whether it be a new planet or drinking tea made from snowmelt while the golden hour lights the mountains around you. I actually think that's what's so important about the game's weakish systems - they're light obstacles by design. Many gamers (myself included) are used to a mechanical intensity similar to rock climbing. Constant focus and challenge. That can be great fun, but NMS scratched a very different itch, as you mentioned. Maybe it's the backpacker in me, but I found the inventory management to be mostly fine. Moving things is easy, but moving everything is hard. It has just a bit of friction, which is quite grounding.
Honestly one of the biggest flaws for me is that the just doesn't look good. A lot of the textures are very low quality. The shading is just crap makes everything look like shit. A lot of the random animals look really stupid with buggy animations. I don't get how people can call this game beautiful when honestly it looks like shit.
Oh my God could you imagine of they opened up to modders, allowing companies to sell games building on top of No Man's Sky as long as players already owned the game. Imagine what mods could do to this game!
Nice job. I haven't had the pleasure or pain of playing NMS, but I am saving up for a PS4 to play it, because after spending over 100 hours of watching rants, raves, reviews, walkthroughs and tips&tricks, I have grown quite attached to it. It has a lot of things that I've been looking for. Like to explore strange new worlds. While I agree it does have a lot of little flaws and hopefully Hello Games will be adding more depth and fixing some of these flaw, it does have some things that no other game has ever offered. Also I've learned a lot about how to best play NMS and look forward to exploring some secrets that nobody else has noticed. Anyway thanks again for your "transmission". Take care now.
Dude... Thanks for sharing. I haven't played the game but I smoked weed while watching this review and... for what it's worth, it's beautiful. Both your review and the game as you see it. Thanks man, take care.
My only experience with NMS is seeing a friend play it for a couple of minutes, but I immediately thought "Euro Truck Simulator but in space". Which obviously isn't what most players were hoping for, but isn't bad in and of itself. If the devs fix the technical issues and address some of the minor gripes regarding UI and such I will most likely pick the game up in a couple of weeks/months and try "that particular approach" ^^
Wow. That thing about the ship inventory slots representing twice as much space... I've watched like five different people playing this game and that never came up. That's a pretty big indicator of how obscure it is.
Man, I think my fellow Totalbiscuit fan's are being a bit knee-jerk here. He could have put it better, sure, but Totalbiscuit's why I, and I think many others, found out about this channel. Heck, TB's had a couple reasonable chats in the comments before, if I recall correctly. I doubt he'd try piss us off deliberately. I think he was trying to say his was more of a "Game as Art" or "Game as Systems" more that "Games as Product" review. Expecting Campster to talk about the technical failures of NMS is like expecting a Post Modern review of Gone Home from Totalbiscuit, Bunnyhop to renounce his love of Kamiya and Kojima or Jim Sterling to take up sexual puritanism.
ok i get most of this but the jim sterling sexual puritanism didnt that already happen when he spoke out about dead or alive xtreme volleyball 3(and i think there were a couple of other things too), maybe because im not that familiar with his content im missing the joke or wrong but i dont get it.
+TheNejD It's a running gag in his vids to mention his "pounding it" to burly male characters and his collection of sex toys. The "overwatch porn" vid is a good example. Haven't watched the doa episode myself. let's not get sidetracked here though.
So we could say Campster covers the pretentious field of games? Since his Quake "review" where he talked about the "feelings" it gave him without justifying any of his points to his Beginners Guide and now this... Campster's reviews have devolved into something so self-absorbed that he barely talks about the games he reviews anymore,.
+llucllumador Eh, your opinion. There's always a place for artistic criticism like there's always a place for technical and consumer rights criticism. Expecting all types of criticism from every critic is a bit silly. To quote Jeff Gerstman, in turn quoted by TB, "Know your critic." Don't expect the one true review from everyone. Find a critic you find shares your taste, and you'll more likely find games you like or dislike. Heck, a critic you don't share taste with can still be useful. If they like a game, maybe you won't and vice versa.
"...what plants provide you with which resources..." Resources such as Zinc, Platinum, Plutonium, Thamium9 etc. look identical on every planet "...where vital outposts are..." They are generated all over every planet. There's no need to search, just fly in a straight line for 10-15 seconds and one will pop up
I don't think he's jabbing at TB at 0:42 at all. All he's saying in that expression is that he's not interesting in the technical failures in NMS (something that's been recorded, discussed and overall acknowledged by the masses as being shoddy) but rather the reason that NMS seems to have failed on a Game Design level. In his video, my impression is that he's more interested in what the game would be like, even if it was perfectly bug/glitch free. This point tries to differentiate his essay from all the others and telling us that he's ignoring the game's undeniable screw-ups. HE'S NOT INSULTING TB, STOP GETTING ANAL.
Yeah, no doubt it's just a prod trying to steer people to what he wants to talk about, not a jab to seriously criticize other youtubers. But he does bring it in such a serious tone that some people will ruffle their own feathers about it instead of focusing on the rest of the video. That's how internet people are (sometimes).
Yeah, I would actually guess he's suscribed to TB, since those things are kind of an "inner joke", FOV Slider!!! 60 FPS MasterRace! that sort of thing, TB has even made shirts out of those
I think you hit on the very reason I originally saw this in concept way back and _already knew_ that I wouldn't be interested: it looks and sounds from the ground up less like they had an idea for a game and more like they just had a really fancy game engine they wanted to sell.
Very much this. Anyone impressed by what No Man's Sky's procedural generation can put out, simply hasn't seen it done right. The stuff Space Engine can generate actually feels awe-inspiring with a sense of scale that NMS doesn't come close to.
Thank god someone had the stones to say it. If i wanted to wander the cosmos endlessly id play space engine loaded with texture packs. Its the same thing. NMS concepts aren't new, arnt well executed, and are sold on lies. My biggest issue is the game is just that - i cannot give this game a pass, and i will not give it a pass. If the community did then the future looks bleak. Is this what we have to look forward to with a AAA release? "Well the game didn't live up to its unrealistic hype - but gosh darn it it looks pretty and lets your mind wonder! We should look at it for what it is and appreciate that!" (yeah you could say that about any game) No. Fucking. Thanks. **steps off soapbox**
I've seen this soapbox speech many times over the years across many games. All it does is increase your own anger and feed witch hunting. Remember, at the end of the day this is a GAME for $60 developed by 15 people on their first large project. You can spend your time getting mad or you can take what they offered and enjoy what it does well.
***** and this is where your defense of the product fails completely . If it were charged at 15 dollars, 20 dollars, 30 dollars, that would of been acceptable. However when you charge 60 dollars - the same price as other AAA prices - then you are held at AAA expectations. Moreover when your head developer / founder goes on interview after interview supporting it as such then just like that you are expected to be at AAA presentation. Wither or not it was made by 15, 10 or less people - do not promise that you can build Rome and present progress as if your building Rome, when in fact you can barely make a small strip mall off the highway. Edit: Again - your response makes me scratch my head. You 'seen this through other games through the years' as you basically said. When is the last game that pulled a NMS stunt?
Let's be real here, even if this game was billed as an experimental Indie Project at $5, people would still be flipping their shit. The level of outrage far outstrips the actual product and more represents the impossible expectations people set. People say Murray lied and hyped, but in reality his interviews and gameplay sessions closely mirror the game I'm playing right now. I don't see anyone else treating other games like NMS. How come nobody made lists of missing stuff from Destiny or The Division? Even BF4 didn't receive this level of hatred, yet it legitimately did not work on release. People are getting themselves worked up and angry over nothing, on a perceived slight. It's your choice if you want to be mad and angry, but let's not pretend that you're giving a fair shake to Hello Games.
Heh, similar arguments people use for Fallout 4. "You should not have any expectations, even if it's supposedly a 4th installment in a series, it's just a good game for what it is"
Spot on assessment. As frustrating as it is, I am still really enjoy playing this game. I think it really is a puzzle game, similar to Myst. You are not told what the mystery is; you have to explore and deduce it. Despite frustration with losing hyperdrive after playing 50 hours, I have invested more than 70 hours now and I'm still (so far) having a good time.
As someone who didn't buy into any of the hype, didn't see a single trailer or interview, and whose only knowledge of this game is the internet circle jerk of its mediocrity, this provided some great insight on the game's strengths (no matter how few or fleeting). Thank you
As much as I disliked No Man's Sky, I will give you props for making one of the better reviews on the game: honest regarding its shortcomings but forgiving given its scope and ambition. This is the first video on the game that is genuinely making me rethink my experience. I may even hold off trading the disc in favor of a few more hours of exploration.
You know what I like about you and your videos, man? I was expecting yet another "No Man's Sky is a really wide and shallow pool" type review, but you opened up your video by talking about this is exactly the thing you're not gonna talk about. You constantly have your ear to the ground on gaming culture and you know exactly what do focus on to make it unique. 'preciate ya
anytime I see one of your vids in my sub box, I get super excited. keep it up bro.
+
+
Word.
+
+
And don't forget the soundtrack. Oh man... that soundtrack.
*zones out*
Thanks for approaching a NMS discussion in a different light than literally every other person on the internet right now.
Closest thing to a kind discussion I've seen about No Man's Sky so far. I like your perspective on it.
Thanks @Errant for saying this out loud. This is exactly what I thought of the game, and now whenever someone asks me what I think of it, I'm gonna link this video.
Totally make a video on Zen games!
"Quietly collecting my thoughts as I collect Plutonium" - lol, not going to tell that one to my mindfulness instructor.
0:45 Errant Signal confirmed NOT Total Biscuit. Thanks for the clarification.
I kind of disagree that this game can keep on surprising you. After 20 or so planets everything looked the same to me.
20 planets out of 18 quintillion would look the same, yes.
Dushan Stojchev I don't think you know what I mean. The animals, plants, the procedural generation of the formations on the planets. It just all starts feeling the same. Not to mention all planets have the same buildings everywhere. There's only so much you can do with procedural generation. You'll still start seeing the same patterns.
+Cloud Stratus I've been to over 200 planets and still get surprised by what I see, every once in a while. But to your point, there are a lot of similar looking planets/creatures. The game definitely could have used more variety. It's one of the many things that seem to be cut from the game. Like Sandworms and other gigantic creators.
The flora, fauna and planet variety is obviously pretty poorly implemented.
As with everything in this game they delivered just enough so their heads don't get chopped off by the fans.
+Jackson In all but the literal sense, that fans *have* chopped of their heads ^^
Have you seen fireships burning off the arm of Orion?
Or c-beams glittering in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate?
It's only surprising when you're not able to predict it - but the patterns become too clear, too quick. It's not that "once you've seen one planet, you've seen them all." but "once you've seen the algorithm, you've really seen it all"
That last sentence sums up the way I feel all games should be criticized / played
Thanks for the honest look. A zen game is a perfect descriptor- I find it super relaxing to zone out for an hour of it after a busy day.
NMS is like a box for other, more systemically inclined devs to grab ideas and tech from for future projects.
1:33 All these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain
The thing that really stops it being a zen game for me is "Life support systems low" popping up way to frequently (and at 75%, 75% is not low...)
I was satisfied when you finally made the Spore comparison. This was one of the better reviews you've done in a while, I think. Thanks for putting this out.
I was expecting another typical review of NMS. Mainly those "wide as an ocean but deep as a puddle" type review that are a dime a dozen but this was honestly quite a fascinating review of it. It is flawed as hell but it did do some things right which is what everyone seems to forget. Anyway great review, you got another sub. :3
surprisingly level headed. Might buy it when its at a reasonable price, though.
Yeah, I would say that this game is would be more appreciated with a steam sale or something like that. I really do like this game, but the price point seems a bit off currently.
This summarizes my thoughts on it very well as well.
"There really is nothing else like it out there right now."
I dunno man. I feel like Starbound has a lot of the same qualities that you're describing. I won't say anything to its quality, but I've used it as a Zen game myself a few times.
I think spore already did this in space stage as well and was equally mindbogglingly dull despite the exploration element. Spores added advantage was that everything was player created including your ship and settlements and you could terraform planets. So its actually not as good as spore. And spore was horrible. It was a fantastic editor and nothing more, the actual game element was a disaster. NMS is very similar to Starbound as well in the form of the loot/craft progression systems. But Starbound was a much cheaper and more enjoyable game despite major technical issues. Straight up they oversold NMS, they charged far too much for a product that would never compete with other AAA titles. It is very much an indie game masquerading as a AAA and that's why it failed.
Spore did it better too. It had basically the same depth of mechanics. Space battles were as shallow and basic, trading non-existent and planet variety just as random... however Spore worked and they were effective results.
In NMS most of the mechanics slightly fail. Perhaps it is as said just due to a lack of balance. Perhaps it is because most of the features have missing aspects and so feel unfinished, because they are unfinished.
Yes, Starbound is No Man's Sky with one less dimension and a thousand more things to do. The funny thing is that the first alpha version of Starbound people could play was just as weird and "empty" as NMS.
And there's actually things to do in that game.
From what I gather two early access games PULSAR: Lost Colony and Rodina might already be better versions of No Man's Sky. Starbound is probably the only complete game that's like No Man's Sky and better.
No Man's Sky could've been an amazing sci-fi ecology sim
This pretty much reflects how I feel about the game. I love playing it for an hour or two after I've had a shit day, fixes me right the fuck up. I am glad I didn't drop 60 bucks on it though and torrented it instead, but I'll definitely buy it in the next Steam sale.
I've put in over a hundred hours. I love this game. I love the lore and the feeling of excitement every time my view screen heats up as I enter a new planet's atmo, scrutinizing the surface to see if I can detect what kind of life or minerals the planet will have.
I hope it does well enough that they keep working on it and adding things. I enjoy a LOT of what it already has to offer but I also want to see what they do when they have time and resources.
"WHY IS QUITTING IN THE OPTIONS MENU?!"
Is the only thought in my head and it was so loud I had to rewind to hear what ErrantSignal said..
Wow, you are so right. If you ignore all of the bad stuff, what remains is good.
This is the first video I found about No Man's Sky that doesnt talk about how hype ruined it. You just talked about flaws _in the game itself_. Gaming reviews in general need to do this more often.
"There's nothing else like that", erm Spore is pretty much exactly that. Or if you interested in just visual exploration of planets then Space Engine is a way to go.
Yep. There are a few other older 2d planet generation games. Some newer ones (Starbound etc). Some do crafting better (Minecraft), some do survival better (Neo Scavenger), some do space flight better (Elite etc).
But, those vistas. Those horizons. They are amazing. :)
Also Empyrion. The main thing that NMS has over it's competition is the art is clean and has style to it, not just gritty brown or a flat cartoon world.
He mentioned Spore... did you even watch the video?
+Sangie Nativus he must reach the post count for today...
I appreciate your approach to viewing this game. It reminds me of an Albert Einstein quote: "A man should look for what is, not for what he thinks should be."
You know its kind of funny, for a game that runs on fractals and recursive depth, it has very little.
Watching this video years after the initial release and it’s still evergreen. No Man’s Sky is a much better game now but by choosing this route or perspective you created content, a narrative that really stayed fresh.
Seeing gameplay of NMS makes me wanna get stoned tbh
was that a dig at TB at 0:42
Almost certainly but not a sharp dig; it isn't the worst thing to be a consumer advicate with a prediliction towards 60fps and sliders.
certainly at people like him...wait, that's your criticism/question?
No, not "people like him". It's a direct jab at Totalbiscuit and no one else. Advocating for 60FPS, wide FOV, and consumer rights is what TB is known for.
I think it was a poor attempt at saying "I'm not a technical critic guy" but it was a needless and lousy jab. We don't have enough people advocating for these things and I think it should be encouraged.
And you can see how it affects this video. Most systems and technical issues in the game contradict what he's trying to be positive about. Maybe one should be a little more technical to give a more accurate representation of a game, even when it's about whether a game is "zen".
TB cares about that stuff, Campster doesn't. No biggie.
*Edit* And that should be where this ends peoples........ Holy fuck why is of such import?
"We don't have enough people advocating for these things and I think it should be encouraged."
Are you kidding me? All of my TH-cam recommended videos at the moment are stuff like "Sean Murray's Lies" or "The No Man's Sky Scam!!!"
The internet is crawling with low-effort technical critics. What we need are different perspectives.
I completely align with your views on this. I still love this game, because I love the act of exploring in itself and I've always mainly been interested in the procedural generation tech of the game more so than the game itself.
On treating it like a zen game, I end up treating this game much like I treat emulated Pokemon games. I lower the game volume, open up a RadioLab or Serial podcast on my second monitor, and listen to that as I explore procedural worlds.
TLDR, No Man's Sky is only good if you don't think about it.
For someone who likes to insist that games don't exist within a vacuum, its very unusual for you to critique it in such a way.
I think he's trying to play devils advocate in this vid. He's saying "yeah the games got issues but it does do some things right that other games fail to achieve" when a lot of reviewers/ people in general just shit on this game (rightfully so imho) and dont point out any of the positive aspects of this game.
lol "shut off yer brain!"
More... No Man's Sky is best enjoyed in a way the developers probably didn't intend?
Does the game even have propane in it?
We know the production and delivery of the game has issues. Mentioning it again in a video may not add much to the discussion or learn anything. But actually looking at the games mechanics, we can learn from that and progress.
We know that lying is bad, or failing to deliver features will cause complaints. But learning how to make "good" games, that is hard. :)
I've been following discussions regarding NMS for a while now and yours was one of the most thought-provoking. Kudos too for wanting to distance yourself from the usual suspects. Rock on, dude.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this game now that they've released a bunch of major updates that drastically change the play & bring it closer to what was originally promised
I still think 60fps needs to be a bigger sticking point now. Technology had progressed to the point where it should be expected, especially when it's an objective benefit not just to fidelity, but to gameplay. If anyone reads this and doesn't believe me, find a friend with a machine (either a pc or a PS4 with the last of us remastered) and play the same portion of a game once capped at 30fps then again at 60. Control is smoother and the Game is more immersive. 120 or 144 is still on the debatable side for necessity, but for as massive an improvement as the bump from 30 to 60 is, I can't understand why it isn't a bigger deal.
60fps can only be a meaningful sticking point for people with enough money to afford reasonably good hardware.
what mightyNosewings basically said.
60fps is perfectly reasonable for most games nowadays to run on.
Who cares if the game is garbage? It's just a bonus I think. But it makes no game a better one!
+mightyNosewings It doesn't at all need to be though. A machine as weak as the Wii U had games that ran at 60fps and still looked gorgeous. They had to be stylized, but they made it work with the equivalent of mediocre hardware from 5 years ago. Not to mention The Last of Us being stunning while running 60fps. There's no reason in my opinion that games couldn't be released with the option to lower the fidelity to get 60 fps. It wouldn't even need to be granularly controllable like on pc. It could just be a toggle that automatically drops the video quality to the point where 60 fps would be consistent.
Especially with how similar pc and console hardware is now, I see no reason that couldn't happen with minimal effort on the dev's side. I'll fully admit that there may be something I'm missing that would make that impossible, but with how simple it is to change visual fidelity on pc, along with the fact that the last of us looked incredible while running 60 AND that a toggle was possible, I really struggle to see why it wouldn't be.
The other problem, I think, is that Gamers™ want everything. They want their games to come out RIGHT NOW, and they want them to have a specific kind of technically-impressive quasi-realistic look to them, and they want them to be bugfree, and they want them to run at 60 FPS, and they want them to have like 100 hours of content, and they want them to be $60 or cheaper. Oh, and sometimes they want them to be well-designed or, even more occasionally, actually novel or interesting.
Well, we can't have everything. Game development is hard, and developers have to make tradeoffs. Bloodborne is one of my favorite recent releases despite its 30 FPS limit and overall jankiness, because it's a fascinating game made by smart people who cared.
We would recognize No Man's Sky for what it is if Sean Murray wouldn't lie to us.
i love games that i can zone out, but be real, this is no eurotruck simulator, it feels much more like a prodecurally generated desert bus with non-sensical mechanics that push a hard sense of urgency for absolutely no reason other than forcing you to gather resources and a pseudo-narrative that doesnt tell anything, the gameplay cycle is astronomically tedious (go to a planet, suck resources, sell stuff, find the things that vaguely tell a pseudo-narrative, repeat until you finish the game) and also the originality of the planets start to blend in after you played for some hours.
honestly, it really is a amazing achievement in gaming terms for generating procedural worlds, but that is where it ends
lol im watching half the gameplay here, and it's just aiming lazers at rocks and plants.. scan derpasaur's and plants, fly here land there. super mario 64 had more content and meaning than this
Cool perspective. Look at it for what it is, and not for what it isn't. Not like no one hasn't heard that line before, but this video draws attention to it, and that's worth while; the perspective that might be hard to catch in the midst of everything that's a bit mind opening, a nugget to take with after the video is over.
Good stuff Errant.
Really enjoyed seeing you break down what worked and didn't work about this game in your typical thought provoking style. I wanted to throw a few thoughts I had into the discussion.
On inventory: This is probably just an issue with my game, but I haven't found any ships with more than 26 slots for a while, so I actually have more storage in my suit than my ship, which is plain silly.
On exploration: You're super spot on with how the game is great at providing the sense of there always being something just over the next hill, because most of the time there is. They're largely all the same, yes, but that doesn't matter when you're 'in the zone', which leads into...
On 'zen': Besides being a great decompression experience on it's own when it works for you, it also adds a little bit of philosophizing to that with gentle implicit nudging in the direction of pondering the old 'why are we here?' 'what is the meaning of life?' style stuff by really emphasizing the sheer scope of the universe. As Douglas Adams put it: "Space is big."
And i think Starbound does almost everythin No Man's Sky does and better, imo. It's just not 3D
"It's a fantastic game to zone out to" - well said. I love it.
Bravo man. What a well-written essay. If the developers watch this and don't grow a bit afterwards, I don't know what will make them.
Late comment, but I did definitely get the "lose yourself" aspect of this game. While I only played it for a few weeks due to the myriad of flaws you and others have listed, there were times where I indeed felt a sense of calm in flying low over planets, dodging asteroids, and walking around alien landscapes just to see what's there. Great video, Errant Signal!
The recent update is really good for giving the player a sense of purpose and objectives, they've fixed a LOT of the UI and inventory issues by now as well.
Still haven't found a big dinosaur thing like the trailer but god-damn it is a fine game and still costs the same price when they could have taken the money and run.
Thank you for providing a critic unlike all the rest.
Please continue what your doing!
*walks over to patreon*
Funny thing, I consider your videos quite meditational too:) Great as usual.
Everything I hear about it tells me that No Man's Sky is a game I would be really into buying if it cost $5-$10.
I totally agree about the Zen aspect of No Man's Sky. Putting on a series to binge or audio book to listen to and sometime I don't even jump to a planet. I just let my spaceship float towards a planet while I watch a show. I agree, if people can learn to enjoy it for what it is, a exploration simulator and less of immersive space opera then we wouldn't have had such a bad response.
Thank you. I've been trying to get that idea across to people. It's a weird game, and it is a flawed game, but its existence is necessary to inspire others to build off of what it is. That type of thing is necessary to keep the medium moving ever forward. Just my opinion.
I understand where you're coming from about the game. Even some people who've quit the game or said it just wasn't for them have said they can understand how others can enjoy it. However, Hello Games really did dig No Man's Sky's grave with how much they talked up the game. Especially with all the features they talked about/showed off in TV/online previews, that just didn't make it into the final product.
There is definitely a market for what No Man's Sky actually is. Sadly, it was sold to a lot of people as something else. Plus, a fair number of the people who were VERY hyped for this game seem to REALLY need a zen game.
A news site reported on there likely being a 2 month delay of the game and the author got death threats from people. Then when the devs confirmed that the delay was real, they got death threats.
I mean, when you have an audience that includes some people so ready to be upset, how can you expect any other result than the conversation to turn out negative when the game fails to live up to expectations?
It's sad, but kind of expected. Anyway, thanks for the video! =w= b
I've just recently watched a video from Jim Sterling on that whole issue, talking about FFXV mostly if I recall correctly. Your comment just perfectly sums that issue up. +1
"Delayed Reaction (Jimquisition)"
***** hell, AAA devs get away with all kinds of shit.
and as far as i am aware, hello games rode along with the hype train, so they didn't do anything to give people realistic expectations.
I really do hope that Hello gets the opportunity to properly support this game further. I know that people don't think that they have a solid foundation to build off of, but I personally believe that they do. I am very patient and would love to see Hello expand on the base content of this game.
+MrBrothasky and from where they will get money to do so? Sony as publisher helped them financially and Sony will take the share of income as a first thing, whatever might be left will go to halo games (this is my speculation based on some unhappy Devs speaking generally about contracts with publishers). Sony might no be interested in investing money in something that a lot of people wanted to refund. One day sales were a success but I doubt the game will sell, sales already spiked down. second hand copies can be bought in some EU countries for around 1/3 do the original price. Good for me I was never a passenger on a hype train. Even from presentations huge universe you can do whatever but what? And if it comes to gameplay and game mechanics game does not deliver.
+mravg79 I cannot pretend that I will know where the money is going to come from. mechanics can be fine-tuned and expanded upon. The exploration for exploration's sake centered around an absurdist story structure is very odd for a mainstream release. perhaps that wasn't the place that this title should have drawn attention, but at most I think the game will be remembered as an oddity in game design that garnered a cult following. There are plenty who still love the game despite its shortcomings and have found that there are broader themes that are, unfortunately, not being discussed amidst the vocal majority that cannot see beyond the irksome flaws. Flaws that, quite frankly, exist pervasively within modern gaming as a whole. I don't know where I am really going with this. Sony doesn't own the IP. They just funded the project with the idea of giving exclusivity over the other consoles. The lasting life of the title will rely on what Hello Games does, and they are working on fixing what the majority of people find as irksome flaws.
Would you mind sharing links to the articles you talk about? That way they'd be easier to find.
They should be in the thingy below the video! I link to both Philippa Warr's piece and Bogost's Gamasutra piece!
Oh they are, my mistake. BP
BTW, I can understand if you're hesistant to boil down a game this way, but I figured I'd ask:
Is it worth the $60 price tag?
You echoed the thought I've heard from TheXPGamers and others that the game still offers a unique experience you won't find elsewhere... but is that, by itself, worth so much money upfront?
+Errant Signal i enjoy what the game is, but given what we were promised - the basis of any commercial purchase, i can't help but lament what the game could have been.
ah.. "Ian Bogost's bit on Zen games" Link is not highlighted..
Please - can you add "" to make it highlighted : ]
I completely agree with this video.
One small correction though, something that is never explained or properly indicated within the game. Crafted upgrades in the inventory cannot be moved because apparently if upgrades are connected to each other by a straight line and then connected in turn to the tool they're upgrading (e.g. the boltcaster or the mining beam) then their "upgrade power" is increased, indicated by a weird non-sensical color scheme around the upgrades and the tool.
This video pretty much is what I really wanted to know about the game, because everyone keeps talking about what they expected. That's not useful for understanding what it *is*, and I appreciate you taking the time to whip up a video about it.
I'm a big fan of NMS for the exact reasons you described in this video - it's a small, flawed game, by a small team, that does what it does in a way that nothing else can.
Thank you for the really great breakdown. Subbed!
No Man's Sky feels more like a tech demo than a game.
I love the zen side of this game. So much.
Great commentary. I really enjoy the game for the reasons you mentioned toward the end. I also acknowledge the shortcomings of the game.
I agree. In my first 5 hours of playing this game on a forested planet, the game actually really felt like Proteus and I was definitely into that.
The next 10 was relaxing to the soundtrack while finding all the wildlife and mining gold
Then I shut the game off when I realized there wasn't much more to do beyond that and how everything felt way too contrived. Something like Proteus feels like an actual place whenever you turn it on.
there are other games like this, only better and at a lower price point. try subnautica if you want layered exploration, distinctive atmosphere, tons of mystery, and incredibly interesting challenges. Subnautica has actual progression and a greater sense of permanence. much like no man's sky, if there is any main goal, it is more to get to the center of the planet, than to the center of a galaxy. the deeper you dive, the stranger and scarier things you encounter. I've seen hundreds of different flora and fauna. most benign, a few terrifying, but virtually all interesting.
You know, this is the best review I've encountered for NMS. They released a patch that allegedly fixes a lot of the problems. Have you considered revisiting the game and mentioning if the changes improved the game experience?
Kinda ironic that NMS is at it's best as a zen game when Shean Murray said in many interviews that it wasn't going to be a game to zone out to and relax. Great video ES, keep up the good work.
0:11 Making clear what this video is NOT trying to do
- Not a list of grievances
- Not trying to draw a line for where the lie is
- Not a technical criticism
0:55 Interested in how the game comes together.
1:17 Where it works 2:30
+ Landscapes
2:46 The Game proper is kind of annoying
3:56 Saving
4:27 Bugged Ending
4:49 Units Received
5:56 Not really a flying game
6:30 Namimg planets and animals
8:02 Borrowing core from other games
8:32 It’s a Go find something game
9:13 Nomadism, homelessness, Absurdist
10:02 no coherence, it’s a zen game
11:16 Rewarded with amazing views
11:48 Really good to Zone out
12:28 What it is
13:11 It May Be Bad... But it’s got some value
The Atlas path is a ritual, so if you sell the Atlas stones you failed to stay with the path. It is a very punishing fail state, but contextually I think it makes sense.
I don't feel the game's strengths are anywhere near as accidental as you make it sound, I'd like to believe this game very well achieved what the developers sought out to do and they deserve all the more credit for it. I mean really listen to all the pre-release interviews and what they chose to emphasize, "look at how many creatures and landscapes we can generate", this is what they wanted you to stop and appreciate. There was a reason the question was always "but what do you DO in No Man's Sky??" before release. The systems were never emphasized, very likely not because they were unfinalized or not hitting goals, but they were never important all along.
Nice one, you're right.
true, though i think the situation is less that they did this accidentally and more they did it without understanding it's value.
no man's sky strikes me as being very similar to the kinds of experimental proofs of concept you'd get in a university course. it feels like the designers made this great terrain generator full of wondrous things and really wanted to show it off. but the problem is that they sold themselves on the hype as much as the audience.
they wanted epic space battles, factions and integrated mechanics, star wars meets minecraft in an amazing sandbox and i think they both overestimated themselves and didn't know how to best make use of the design features they had, so once the limitations of what they could actually do with their time and money set in; instead of focusing on the exploration through a wondrous universe the mechanics are a hodge podge of lackluster sci-fi mechanics the designers assumed we wanted. the end result is that the games systems are at odds with the game's tone and purpose leaving the game feeling directionless on multiple levels.
ultimately the game feels like it would have benefited from trimming down the existing systems to focus on systems that better fueled and motivated going out and exploring more of this amazing universe
Sean Murray, the head dev, promoted the systems a ton before the game was released, ergo your statement is not correct although it would be nice if it were true. Like the guy in the video said there are numerous videos and websites dedicated to listing out all the things that Sean and the rest of Hello games said would be in the game but aren't. In Murrays words No Man's Sky was supposed to be a game of "endless possibilities" not just "endless landscapes".
The problem I see with it is that though all the lovely little systems are interesting and fairly well built and complete, the integration and overall planning was an afterthought, at best.
The discussions about what it could or should have been, it's what it claimed it was.
It's interesting that there's a tension between all the ways that a game can be bad. NMS is quite obviously bad technically (performance-wise) and in terms of its gameplay loop, but it's NOT bad in its core, which is what you were saying here. I bought it on day one and, despite suffering from low FPS and all the bad UI design, I haven't refunded it because I like it for what it is and I'm confident that patches and mods can make it interesting and better. It's like Euro Truck Simulator 2 in space, and if they added a delivery mechanic to make it EVEN MORE like ETS2, I'd be super super happy.
Hi Chris. I love your videos, and I don't mind ones I disagree with -- it's always good to hear different viewpoints.
But really, to half-praise a game with crazy technical issues you didn't need to trivialize technical issues as a whole.
Low FOV, insane framerate drops and constant jittering giving people headaches and nausea contradict your point about this game being zen. So does the terribly annoying UI, and the "game" systems constantly bothering you with messages like "life support *low* at 75%".
The game having lego creatures (which even the 8-year-old Spore was much better at), the same flora over and over, and the early 2000-era quality textures contradict your point about the game giving you great vistas and textures to look at.
Saying that UI complaints are petty is really weird. User interface, the name should give it away, dictates the way you interact with the game. I don't see how that's petty.
Technical issues don't exist in a vacuum and they affect gameplay and game feel. Maybe we should encourage people to look at these issues rather than jab at the one person who consistently does.
The one person? Are you sure? On Steam all the time I see people complaining about framerates and options menus and such. I thought it was the norm.
I'm talking about games media, not discussion forums and user ratings.
His entire video sounds like a person feeling very ripped off, but instead of calling it for what it is, he tries to justify his purchase, and thus he ends up being condescending
Bucky•JaKRBT To be honest I don't think that's the case. I think he honestly enjoys the experience and more power to him. I'm just saying trivializing technical and user experience issues is not necessary to say you enjoy this mess of a game.
And we have very few people (if not one person) who look out for these issues in games and we need this to be encouraged, not trivialized.
Sterling, Bunnyhop, TB, and Angry Joe are all the same person? The 10 dudes on my YT frontpage that showed up 'cuz I clicked one NMS opinion piece yelling about how broken NMS are all one person?
I hope the games media doesn't stop this person from making their non-media video reviews, it could be dangerous.
An excellent and above all fair discussion, Christopher!
These are my thoughts precisely. I hadn't followed the hype train at all and I just got the game because it was this 'procedurally-generated space game' that a friend had talked about and I'm a sucker for both components. I really like it for what it is. And while I'm a dedicated PC user and always have been, I right out acknowledge that this is a couch game if I've ever seen one, for reasons very accurately described in your video.
Keep up the good work!
I know this is pretty late for this comment but there is a reason behind not being able to move upgrades in your inventory:
"Arranging your inventory properly can give you substantial bonuses as the various components and upgrades have synergy and get a boost when placed next to each other in proper slot formation.
When the borders of similar upgrades are touching, they'll light up indicating synergy. The more upgrades that are touching, the more "powerful" the end result will be."
I want to thank you for putting out thoughtful content that really reflects on the full experience of a game. Your videos are a welcome change from the frenetic, attention grabbing gaming media so often seen. I look forward to each new one.
I actually use NMS as a sort of zen-meditative device when I'm too preoccupied or tired or stressed to do any actual thinking. But this is the reason why I like this game, it asks nothing and lets you do the wandering yourself. I like that, I know I have agency and I like using that agency in games to do whatever comes to my mind. After the initial shock wears off, it is very liberating -- milk some animals, make some pies, sell them for money, shoot some horrors, and then start again. I don't think this is at all accidental in NMS, it's put there for a reason.
We do live in a profoundly meaningless universe, and this game is a perfect illustration of that.
I think this game would improve immensely if they added VR compatibility, It'd be great to get lost in all these worlds and actually feeling you're standing on them.
Wow. Absolutely excellent, as always. You really hit the nail on the head with this game.
I've really enjoyed my time with it but that's because I've approached it similarly to what you're talking about in the last third or so of your analysis. It's a fantastic game just to BE in, particularly if you approach it like a photographer, which I have (I've got like 350 screenshots saved, it's ridiculous). Landing on a planet and just feeling the absolute freedom to do absolutely nothing "meaningful" (i.e. nothing that will garner you progress in the traditional sense) is a great thing, I think.
You also did very well in pointing out the bajillion tiny things the game does poorly, which I pretty much agree with on all counts. I'm at a point where I'm satsified with the time I've had with it and now I'm looking forward to future updates. I'm VERY interested to see what NMS looks like in a year.
Keep up the good work! Your videos are some of the best on youtube :)
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like… tears in rain. Time to die.
Another elegant and thoughtfully made deviation from public opinion. No Man's Sky may not be good, but at least some good can come from it.
You are joking... yet FOV sliders, optimization, UI and options matter. Some of the more important things for a Zen game as well (how can you zone out and forget of your issues if you get headaches from the FOV?).
This simple technical and quality of life elements are exactly that - fairly simple. No one expects every game to be a masterpiece of the art form... but at least this much everyone can expect.
Otherwise, great video :P ! And sorry if that was just a fun jab, but developers and publishers actually do not care for the people (it seems).
It is funny that he pokes fun at TB at the start of the video (0.42 on) when that is actually the truth. FOV is something that can make or break one's experience, so is a game that runs properly (FOV certainly contributing to that). So he is not interested in having a video game that works properly on the technical side? OK, then.
His jab at TB (it was more the tone and usage of rah rah, implying these complaints are whiny/entitled) and the likes just makes him look bad and I didn't really bother watching the video any further. Not like other commenters prove me right in that choice.
It is funny that he pokes fun at TB at the start of the video (0.42 on) when that is actually the truth. FOV is something that can make or break one's experience, so is a game that runs properly (FOV certainly contributing to that). So he is not interested in having a video game that works properly on the technical side? OK, then.
His jab at TB (it was more the tone and usage of rah rah, implying these complaints are whiny/entitled) and the likes just makes him look bad and I didn't really bother watching the video any further. Not like other commenters prove me right in that choice.
i absolutely agree, video games aren't art they're blenders and should be reviewed as such
TinyTachyon
Did I ever say that? They are an art form, if a young one. Reviewing them is a complex process, but if you are sick from playing it or have to fight the game... Well it ain't good.
Alexander Yordanov
ah sorry for making the flippant comment! i was trying to reply to Knops, who took a more reactionary position than you. I agree, a smoother user experience would be much better for a game like No Man's Sky!
The fact remains is that Elite: Dangerous has already solved all of No Man's Sky's problems over a year ago, and yet the latter got all the hype...
NMS really feels like hiking in the mountains to me. Each step is easy, but in total the journey is hard. The rewarding, unique parts of the experience can be both mundane and extraordinary at the same time, whether it be a new planet or drinking tea made from snowmelt while the golden hour lights the mountains around you.
I actually think that's what's so important about the game's weakish systems - they're light obstacles by design. Many gamers (myself included) are used to a mechanical intensity similar to rock climbing. Constant focus and challenge. That can be great fun, but NMS scratched a very different itch, as you mentioned.
Maybe it's the backpacker in me, but I found the inventory management to be mostly fine. Moving things is easy, but moving everything is hard. It has just a bit of friction, which is quite grounding.
Honestly one of the biggest flaws for me is that the just doesn't look good.
A lot of the textures are very low quality.
The shading is just crap makes everything look like shit.
A lot of the random animals look really stupid with buggy animations.
I don't get how people can call this game beautiful when honestly it looks like shit.
Oh my God could you imagine of they opened up to modders, allowing companies to sell games building on top of No Man's Sky as long as players already owned the game.
Imagine what mods could do to this game!
Nice job. I haven't had the pleasure or pain of playing NMS, but I am saving up for a PS4 to play it, because after spending over 100 hours of watching rants, raves, reviews, walkthroughs and tips&tricks, I have grown quite attached to it. It has a lot of things that I've been looking for. Like to explore strange new worlds. While I agree it does have a lot of little flaws and hopefully Hello Games will be adding more depth and fixing some of these flaw, it does have some things that no other game has ever offered. Also I've learned a lot about how to best play NMS and look forward to exploring some secrets that nobody else has noticed. Anyway thanks again for your "transmission". Take care now.
Well despite all the trolls.. This is the best review of this game I've seen
Dude... Thanks for sharing. I haven't played the game but I smoked weed while watching this review and... for what it's worth, it's beautiful. Both your review and the game as you see it. Thanks man, take care.
My only experience with NMS is seeing a friend play it for a couple of minutes, but I immediately thought "Euro Truck Simulator but in space". Which obviously isn't what most players were hoping for, but isn't bad in and of itself. If the devs fix the technical issues and address some of the minor gripes regarding UI and such I will most likely pick the game up in a couple of weeks/months and try "that particular approach" ^^
Wow. That thing about the ship inventory slots representing twice as much space... I've watched like five different people playing this game and that never came up. That's a pretty big indicator of how obscure it is.
Man, I think my fellow Totalbiscuit fan's are being a bit knee-jerk here. He could have put it better, sure, but Totalbiscuit's why I, and I think many others, found out about this channel. Heck, TB's had a couple reasonable chats in the comments before, if I recall correctly. I doubt he'd try piss us off deliberately. I think he was trying to say his was more of a "Game as Art" or "Game as Systems" more that "Games as Product" review. Expecting Campster to talk about the technical failures of NMS is like expecting a Post Modern review of Gone Home from Totalbiscuit, Bunnyhop to renounce his love of Kamiya and Kojima or Jim Sterling to take up sexual puritanism.
ok i get most of this but the jim sterling sexual puritanism didnt that already happen when he spoke out about dead or alive xtreme volleyball 3(and i think there were a couple of other things too), maybe because im not that familiar with his content im missing the joke or wrong but i dont get it.
+TheNejD It's a running gag in his vids to mention his "pounding it" to burly male characters and his collection of sex toys. The "overwatch porn" vid is a good example. Haven't watched the doa episode myself. let's not get sidetracked here though.
So we could say Campster covers the pretentious field of games? Since his Quake "review" where he talked about the "feelings" it gave him without justifying any of his points to his Beginners Guide and now this... Campster's reviews have devolved into something so self-absorbed that he barely talks about the games he reviews anymore,.
+llucllumador Eh, your opinion. There's always a place for artistic criticism like there's always a place for technical and consumer rights criticism. Expecting all types of criticism from every critic is a bit silly.
To quote Jeff Gerstman, in turn quoted by TB, "Know your critic." Don't expect the one true review from everyone. Find a critic you find shares your taste, and you'll more likely find games you like or dislike.
Heck, a critic you don't share taste with can still be useful. If they like a game, maybe you won't and vice versa.
Yes, please do a dedicated video about zen games!
oh boy.. i dindt knew it until now... but i was waiting for this review al this time
Thank you! Great video!
This is how I describe it to people I talk to about it.
"...what plants provide you with which resources..."
Resources such as Zinc, Platinum, Plutonium, Thamium9 etc. look identical on every planet
"...where vital outposts are..."
They are generated all over every planet. There's no need to search, just fly in a straight line for 10-15 seconds and one will pop up
I don't think he's jabbing at TB at 0:42 at all. All he's saying in that expression is that he's not interesting in the technical failures in NMS (something that's been recorded, discussed and overall acknowledged by the masses as being shoddy) but rather the reason that NMS seems to have failed on a Game Design level. In his video, my impression is that he's more interested in what the game would be like, even if it was perfectly bug/glitch free. This point tries to differentiate his essay from all the others and telling us that he's ignoring the game's undeniable screw-ups.
HE'S NOT INSULTING TB, STOP GETTING ANAL.
Yeah, no doubt it's just a prod trying to steer people to what he wants to talk about, not a jab to seriously criticize other youtubers. But he does bring it in such a serious tone that some people will ruffle their own feathers about it instead of focusing on the rest of the video. That's how internet people are (sometimes).
Yeah, I would actually guess he's suscribed to TB, since those things are kind of an "inner joke", FOV Slider!!! 60 FPS MasterRace! that sort of thing, TB has even made shirts out of those
A Wild Apologist appears!
giganova Haha, fair enough.
I think you hit on the very reason I originally saw this in concept way back and _already knew_ that I wouldn't be interested: it looks and sounds from the ground up less like they had an idea for a game and more like they just had a really fancy game engine they wanted to sell.
two words: space engine. a free game made by one russian guy provides better exploration than this $60 trainwreck hyped to hell and back.
Very much this.
Anyone impressed by what No Man's Sky's procedural generation can put out, simply hasn't seen it done right. The stuff Space Engine can generate actually feels awe-inspiring with a sense of scale that NMS doesn't come close to.
Thank god someone had the stones to say it. If i wanted to wander the cosmos endlessly id play space engine loaded with texture packs. Its the same thing. NMS concepts aren't new, arnt well executed, and are sold on lies. My biggest issue is the game is just that - i cannot give this game a pass, and i will not give it a pass. If the community did then the future looks bleak. Is this what we have to look forward to with a AAA release?
"Well the game didn't live up to its unrealistic hype - but gosh darn it it looks pretty and lets your mind wonder! We should look at it for what it is and appreciate that!"
(yeah you could say that about any game)
No. Fucking. Thanks. **steps off soapbox**
I've seen this soapbox speech many times over the years across many games. All it does is increase your own anger and feed witch hunting.
Remember, at the end of the day this is a GAME for $60 developed by 15 people on their first large project. You can spend your time getting mad or you can take what they offered and enjoy what it does well.
*****
and this is where your defense of the product fails completely . If it were charged at 15 dollars, 20 dollars, 30 dollars, that would of been acceptable. However when you charge 60 dollars - the same price as other AAA prices - then you are held at AAA expectations. Moreover when your head developer / founder goes on interview after interview supporting it as such then just like that you are expected to be at AAA presentation.
Wither or not it was made by 15, 10 or less people - do not promise that you can build Rome and present progress as if your building Rome, when in fact you can barely make a small strip mall off the highway.
Edit: Again - your response makes me scratch my head. You 'seen this through other games through the years' as you basically said. When is the last game that pulled a NMS stunt?
Let's be real here, even if this game was billed as an experimental Indie Project at $5, people would still be flipping their shit. The level of outrage far outstrips the actual product and more represents the impossible expectations people set. People say Murray lied and hyped, but in reality his interviews and gameplay sessions closely mirror the game I'm playing right now.
I don't see anyone else treating other games like NMS. How come nobody made lists of missing stuff from Destiny or The Division? Even BF4 didn't receive this level of hatred, yet it legitimately did not work on release. People are getting themselves worked up and angry over nothing, on a perceived slight.
It's your choice if you want to be mad and angry, but let's not pretend that you're giving a fair shake to Hello Games.
Heh, similar arguments people use for Fallout 4.
"You should not have any expectations, even if it's supposedly a 4th installment in a series, it's just a good game for what it is"
Spot on assessment. As frustrating as it is, I am still really enjoy playing this game. I think it really is a puzzle game, similar to Myst. You are not told what the mystery is; you have to explore and deduce it. Despite frustration with losing hyperdrive after playing 50 hours, I have invested more than 70 hours now and I'm still (so far) having a good time.
As someone who didn't buy into any of the hype, didn't see a single trailer or interview, and whose only knowledge of this game is the internet circle jerk of its mediocrity, this provided some great insight on the game's strengths (no matter how few or fleeting). Thank you
As much as I disliked No Man's Sky, I will give you props for making one of the better reviews on the game: honest regarding its shortcomings but forgiving given its scope and ambition. This is the first video on the game that is genuinely making me rethink my experience. I may even hold off trading the disc in favor of a few more hours of exploration.