Loading... hold tight!
The burger at Mc Donalds doesn't look like the picture, my wash really doesn't get pure white with this super new soap, suicide squad trailers may have looked fun, it always works like that.
Look, only point Im trying to make here is that even if they lied about stuff, that doesnt mean its fair game on our side as well.
look up lie in the dictionary
There's something intrinsically boring about procedural generated content.
It sounds terrible based on this list of issues put together by user 'rationalcomment' over on Reddit:
It doesn't actually feel like a real universe, there are no planetary physics and gravity is the same on all planets. There are no actual solar systems. The planets don't rotate around a sun but are stationary, sitting together in a blob. The moons don't even go around the planets.
All of the various wonders of the universe (neutron stars, supernovas, pulsars...etc) are entirely absent. There are no systems with a dozen planets, or gas giants, or even ringed planets.
There are no stars, they're just part of the skybox but you can't fly to them.
The 18 quintillion planets that was so heavily marketed isn't impressive when you realize what that actually means: if you took 11 things and come up with 50 variations for each, that is close to 18 quintillion combinations. Most planets are entirely the same but with different bumps and colors, they have the same objects on them and largely the same resources. Once you've seen the first dozen planets, you've seen them all.
There is no actual differences between the ships, except the number of inventory slots. There are no ships specializing for say speed or combat.
You can't actually fly between these systems or go into say the dark space or outer asteroid belt. The only way to travel between them is to open up the map and click warp, which initiates a loading screen animation and loads up the new planets. There is no deep space. You feel like you're in an instance with 3 or 4 planets that are mostly the same, then you load up a new skybox with a new set of similar planets. It's nothing like say Space Engine, where you actually do get a true sense that you're in a real universe.
You can't even fly your ship. You can't fly low across a planet as there is an invisible boundary and you can't crash your ship. The controls are terrible, it has none of the complexity of other space flight sims.
You can't manually land your ship, you simply press a button for it to autoland. Tons of other maneuvers (like entering a space station) are entirely autopilot.
The asteroids which are everywhere have insane pop-in issues, they only show up like 50 meters in front of you. Same while you're on land, the pop-in can get absurd at times.
The freight ships don't move, they just sit there passively forever. They add zero gameplay depth.
The space stations are all basically the same.
The planets are littered with outposts, all identical and with a single NPC alien standing still and staring into the wall.
The NPCs are entirely shallow, there is literally no point to even talking to them since they never say anything interesting and simply give you something random you likely don't need. Even the automated quest giving NPCs in Bethesda games that hand out those Radiant AI quests would be a massive improvement.
All of the monoliths are the same, it's nothing but a chore to chase them down. The words you learn don't add any depth to your interactions with the aliens, since they never have anything interesting to say anyway.
There are no actual biomes on each planet. Each planet is the same no matter where you land.
The animals are build on 14 different skeleton designs, with a bunch of random animal parts scrapped on top of each section to maximize the number of permutations and there is no attempt to make the animal make any sense in it's environment or have anything unique in it's behavior. The animals have no evolutionary history and animal AI is practically non-existent.
There are no tall trees like were shows in E3, they're all saplings. There are no large forests, no large creatures. There are no large valleys, huge mountain peaks, no giant volcanos, all terrain is uniformly similar across planets.
The grinding which makes up most of the game is not only boring, but frustrating due to the completely messed up inventory management.
You don't have a sense of scope / scale to your journey. In the galactic map you can see other stars but there's no sense of where you are in relation to the center of the universe. Likewise you don't have a way to track where you were. No mapping or history, waypoints or other ways of tracking your progress. There needs to be a way to see how you're progressing and also give some meaning to how far you've gone.
The interface is absolutely atrocious. It's amazing that it can be messed up this bad, the fact that we need a mod just to remove the requirement that you have to hold each click for a second speaks volumes. You need to load up a menu to do anything, and the menus are terribly designed and completely unintuitative.
The game is a technical mess. It looks like ass yet runs with all sorts of framerate issues.
The traveling on foot is insanely slow and tedious. There should have been a buggy or car, or at least some sort of fast jet pack like in Tribes.
It fails as a survival game since nothing in the game leaves you threatened. Each planet is seeded with abundant resources, and the few things that do attack you are easily defeated. Compare to minecraft where there's a very definite risk / reward system to exploring a deep cave system. Nothing really threatens you in a meaningful way.
It fails as a chillout game as the interface and warnings are constantly annoying you. Every 3 minutes you get a "Life Support Systems Low" warning when its at 75%. You are constantly pushed to mine more in order to fill out your life support system, it's nothing like Journey or Abzu where you chill out. And the "Milestones" interrupt you almost non-stop, taking away control to play a pointless milestone cutscene.
The different minerals and resources don't really matter. Since most of the upgrades to explore the universe are yours within the first hour / two hours all the rest are kind of nice add ons.
There's no challenge to exploring. There's very little combat and what combat there is is very boring.
You never actually feel you are discovering any planet, every single planet and moon has been colonized. They all have outposts everywhere. Every system has a space station. You never truly go where no one hasn't already settled.
Inside a solar system there's no way to decide if a planet is interesting or not without actually visiting it. There should be some 'classification' of the planets e.g. class M, class X, etc that allows you to say a certain type of planet might be safe vs unsafe.
All planets are accessible right from the start of the game. I was excited about the idea of acid planets, radioactive planets, cold planets ... I was thinking that in order to explore a radioactive planet you'd need to craft some special gear. There was a pretty obviously gameplay loop where the dangerous planets had better minerals / ruins / whatever but were very hard to explore. Instead every planet is basically just a copy of the others.
The constant need to recharge things, which don't really serve a purpose. It makes the game very grindy without any positive feedback. Instead of feeling free to explore the world around me I feel annoyed that if I see something cool it means 30 seconds of tedium while I mine the abundant plutonium. I end up not landing and exploring because of how annoying it is that to take off again I have to enter a menu and recharge my ship.
None of the aliens interact with each other or have any sort of AI other than 'walk around a bit'. There's nothing to sit and watch. An occasional ship will fly overhead but they don't do anything. You never really see a battle take place or the ships acting in any sort of interesting manner.
The ending is straight up insulting. It's the worst ending in any game I have ever played.
This is a textbook case of why hype culture is cancerous to gaming, it leads to companies looking to hype as many people into preordering then sitting back and releasing a shallow, broken game. This game is completely empty and lifeless, with nothing to do but go around looking at things you've already seen copy pasted for the millionth time.
with more features planned
But maybe you should tell Oli he might have Recommended a £50 dud to a lot of people without actually playing it fully.
It feels strange to say it so soon after launch, but I think I'm about done with No Man's Sky.
Exemplary support from the dev (and publisher), BF4 is a fabulous online shooter, I think one of the best ever.
"I think it's pretty certain that Titanfail just "shit the bed" as a franchise."
Just think of the games EG could be informing us about instead of trumpeting another pointless mod for a years old game.
I'm teetering on the edge of thinking this site is irrelevant these days.
PlayStation Now, the streaming service that lets folks play select PS3 games for £12.99 a month, is coming to PC tomorrow in the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands
Or like in every thing else in games, you mean
To be fair to the review, I think it was a quite in-depth article that makes it quite clear that it isn't without issues and might not be what everyone wanted out of it.
And now you can see why they didn't have low level flight. The pop in is absolutely terrible.
Draw distance is still absolute cack though as is the ugly fade in/dithering effect which sees trees and buildings magically moving about as the scenery is created while flying at speed. Also, I see far too many floating buildings, crates and trees, which are clearly not positioned correctly, to ever believe that any of the planets I go to are real places.
No Man's Sky got off to a bumpy launch on PC, but developer Hello Games is confident that it's solved "around 70 per cent" of current support requests with the remaining 30 per cent being dealt with as we speak.
As for the current fixes, they should help anyone whose game failed to save until they died, spawned on a space station without the means to fix their ship, or had their save data corrupted.
Common crashes have been fixed as well, so the game should no longer freeze when warping, scanning, receiving a blueprint, or setting too many waypoints in the galactic map.
Furthermore, Hello Games stated that "a better waypoint system is coming". Thank god!
There's a new PS4 patch as well, though it's unclear if it fixes the same issues as its PC counterpart.
I think this conversation is over, don't you?
No. It's the least best bit, but you still can't find something that does it better. Keep up.
Again, no, I didn't say it's the best procedurally generated game. I said it has a very ambitious procedurally generated world that sets new standards for scale, diversity and aesthetics.
And it's not a screensaver, and therein lies the flaw in whatever the fuck it is you think you're presenting - basically that you have a very narrow perception of what a game can be and don't understand why people like things like NMS.
You're just playing it wrong!
'Fun' as in everyone is taking the piss out of them in hilarious youtube videos. And yet no-one can point to something that does it better.
The creatures are the obvious figure of fun, the easiest target I could present to you, and so I challenged you to point out a game that procedurally generates creatures better. You won't, because you can't. You know this. I know this. Why bother?
Or move the goalposts again onto some other aspect of the game other than the one we we talking about, which was procedurally generated worlds.
I mean, take the biggest point of fun: the animal life. We all know how terrible that is, right? Hilariously, embarrassingly awful. Roll the comedy accordion music.
Who does it better?
Why did people who were interested in the multiplayer stuff still buy the game after that statement, especially as the multiplayer thing was vague and unlikely in the extreme anyway. Who on earth does that absence ruin your enjoyment of the game. It's utterly ridiculous
Firstly, stop talking total crap. There are not 'loads' of games that do procedurally generated worlds like this. You know that's a lie, I know that's a lie, why bother?
Murray noted that more help is on the way. "Even though less than one per cent of players have raised support issues, we're going to resolve roughly 70 per cent of them this week," he said.
"It's pretty crazy for us how many people are playing. And how large a number even one per cent of that user base is."
My only concern with the single player is the AI. If the enemies act like the grunts in multiplayer they won't be much fun to engage with.
No Man's Sky is a fine example of one type of game (but many people were expecting another)
No Man's Sky is a fine example of one type of game and if you don't like it, well, you're just playing it wrong.
Oh fuck off! So sick of "anti-consumer" being used as an excuse by idiots who are apparently incapable of taking responsibility for their purchasing decisons.
That new graphical style is an abomination.
Utterly irrelevant. You would have to buy games for anything, be it a PC, console, or peripheral of this nature. What I was talking about was the price of hardware admission. For me, £500+ is too much for a niche peripheral when it's more than most consoles at launch
Comparing the headset prices PSVR is still a bit cheaper.
£550 compared to £350 (£400 if a camera is required).
For me the novelty will never be worth in excess of £500. PSVR on the other hand is much more competitive, albeit, not as high end.
"We're still making a lot of tweaks and changes to the renderer, the game, and effects so we haven't run the game through the hardware compatibility lab yet to detect and handle a large variety of hardware - video cards, CPUs etc.," Zampella explained. "Quite frankly, we aren't ready to deal with that yet, we are still making the game better. We also haven't done enough work to fully support our 'Min Spec' on PC yet. "
When you mine rock or material there is no physics in play, it just floats
I can't wait for the hype to die down so the people that love the game can chat about it without the constant hate from people that don't get it.
What? Selectively quoting the negative parts of the review and ignoring the positive doesn't make the latter disappear
Why don't you put it directly to Oli to respond?
Some disappointment is inevitable once you've visited a handful of planets and started to see the limits of the algorithm. The parameters of weirdness in No Man's Sky have been quite strictly defined, and it gets repetitive. Look, here's another world of dog-things and dinosaur-things and little lumpy green groundhogs, of rock arches and caves of glowing minerals
While its structure is meandering and obscure, and its gameplay is unconventionally weighted
If you're not, then it may frustrate or bore, especially since it also comes with some of the severe restrictions of survival games like DayZ.
when it comes to long-term goals, it is elusive to the point of aimlessness.
No Man's Sky struggles to resolve one central contradiction. The game was built to be infinite, and in practical terms it is. It's an endless, edgeless field possibilities. And yet it needs an endpoint, or at least a set of waypoints, to give purpose to your journey - to give you somewhere to be headed
Battlefield 4 (PC)