No Man's Sky - new awesome game update 'Next'

[XenonSurf]

If you love space games or want to take a look to one of the very best games in this genre, then I bring to your attention that NMS has since a couple of weeks passed from version 1.38 to 1.57 with really huge improvements. The new update is called NEXT.


No Man's Sky
https://www.nomanssky.com/next-update/

I spend a lot of time with this one, I like the exploration and story part and the ability to build bases on exotic planets. Alas I currently concentrate on Silent Hunter V, I cannot be on all battlefronts at the same time

The update 1.57 sees all parts of the game improved and some awesome add-ons, a 3rd-person view, better missions, better planet visuals, better player interactions, more fauna, flora, better sounds, a much better sense for using freighters with a serie of defense and attack missions - you command a whole fleet now. And also the most wanted feature is now in the game: Multiplayer which allows you to play with up to 4-5 friends in the same location, doing things together for much more fun.


The game is available on GOG and Steam.


Enjoy!

[Dowly]

In other words: Two years after launch they've finally added in the features that were supposed to be in the game at launch and which they lied about being in the game at launch.

Does the company deserve your money?


As a refresher here's Angry Joe's review of the game at launch:

[XenonSurf]

I have watched Angry Joe's vid in the past, and yes, he was fully right. It was before Foundation update. Since then, the game received major overhauls with the Pathfinder and Atlas Rises updates (past 2 years). And now the 'Next' update, btw all for free.

Does the company 'deserve' my money ? I think yes, they are still in place while others fail and disappear (see the lots of dead games on Steam for the genre and the stalling Kickstarter projects that all end in Nirwana). The fact that they stay there more active than before and work on their title makes me confident about their seriousness and good results.

Angry Joe would now be pleased to see Multiplayer, a functionning combat in NMS and no crashes every 5 minutes like after release (he played on PS4 but on PC the game was as bad). That's all history, the game has really changed, I know it, I have played it for long. And I was never interested in History, what counts for me is what happens now.

I would be glad to see a newer video from Angry Joe reflecting today's state, also because he is so tallented to do videos. Or could it be that there is no reason to be 'angry' anymore ?

[Dowly]

The point isn't how the game is now, it's what Hello Games did at launch and just before it. They lied repeatedly to keep the hype going and get pre-orders before it came out and people realised at what a sorry state the game actually was in.

As Angry Joe puts it: It's Aliens:Colonial Marines all over again.

But for some reason people are willing to give them some slack in this case and I find it all a bit irritating. Come next EA controversy and the same people are there with their pitchforks, not understanding it is them who are the problem, not the company.

[Skybird]

The lesson is being taught by not buying immediately on release day, but now, two years later. Where they might not have had a great welcome back then, they now might get it - and maybe see the connection between quality (or lack of), and applaus (or lack of).



I know this kind of happening from Raceroom, one of the two racing sims I am heavily engaged with. When it was released in I think 2013, it must have been a mess, and the title earned a very negative reputation. I did not come to it before early 2015. The producer company SimBin went bancrupt. A few former employees formed a new studio, Sector3, got a financier on board (KS Suspensions), picked up the remains of the simulation and from mid-2015 on started to frequently release substantial, fantastic repair updates and upgrades. It was a long and steep uphill battle for them to make the early bad reputation forgotten by most player, at least forgiven, but they are successful, and the title today is imo one of the two or three best racing simulation titles on the market, being the benchmark in business regarding several categories by which to compare titles . Their voyage goes on and on. And I say: deservedly so.


To expel a failing company forever might be a good idea if it has a repuation to play foul, but if it is no repeated offender and lives long enough to survive the early mistakes, then delivers good quality, it should be given a second chance if players still are interested (and there is the problem: if you spoil the start, you fight an uphill battle afterwards). Else they do not just boycot the company, but also miss a game that meanwhile might have become a good game indeed.



I agree that people should not fall for advertising and early buying, myself I have two examples of very good Early Access programs at Steam on mind (Dirt Rally and Assetto Corsa), which worked flawlessly well, were completed in a reasonable timeframe, had a clear timetable and plan, and both were kept month for month, no matter what. Superb execution. But there also was one disastrous experience, Wreckfest, which took several years to complete, over four years it were, I think. It now is a good, solid game, yes - but I would be cautious to ever buy into Early Acess software by them again.

[XenonSurf]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The point isn't how the game is now, it's what Hello Games did at launch and just before it. They lied repeatedly to keep the hype going and get pre-orders before it came out and people realised at what a sorry state the game actually was in.

All this may well be true, for sure it's true that the game was rushed-out with a lot of promised features missing. But please consider: Hello Games were dependent on Sony Corporation and their contractual decision to realease the game at some point, I think Sony didn't care about the state of the game, the 'Hype' was enough for them to make business, it's a questionable practise but certainly profitable as for a marketing decision. At some point, I think, Hello Games were confronted to release the game within a few days, and this 'instruction' came out-of-the-blue.
You can easily protect yourself from all that: I never pre-order any game, I rely on youtube videos, especially 'Let's Play' videos, or written reviews and I can very quickly see if there are major flaws or contradictions with the initial trailers or promo videos (which I never give much credits anyway, a video for selling a game cannot be exactly informative, it's just a 'promo'.) Besides, what do I gain by pre-ordering? I cannot play the game anyway, so I don't see any point doing such a stupid thing, and I cannot impede others to be idiots and lament later...


Despite the blattant extracts of Angry Joe's video seeing Sean Murray (main author of No Man's Sky) responding to very generic questions of journalists (or kind of), I think that he was answering by memory relying on what was in the game *at that time* before release. So it's difficult and inappropriate to just say he lied. The decision to take out features of a game is a practise of ALL major games and have different very practical or legal reasons, the FSK (youth protection), bugs in the game that could hamper future sellings, features not working as intended, copyright reasons and whatnot else, all valid reasons to put things out. At the time of Sean Murray's interview he could not exactly anticipate his actions, also maybe he was a bit naive and simplistic in his responses, so one can be obset because of that, but making him a lyer is just another sort of bad hype, nothing more. Nothing to do with the real situation at the office of HG or in SM's mind.

Besides of all that, if you would like to buy the game today, then the point IS about how the game fares now. On GOG and on Steam, you don't have to pay the full price if you are so patient to wait for sales that can go down -50% of the release price. So the monetary aspect, the game's price is neither a good argument against the game, and never is anyway.


It seems that the lesson to be learned about all this is: A game developer also ought to be a good entreperneur, a good businessman and marketing expert, also a profound psychologist anticipating people's reactions other than a charismatic appearing Leader... A bit too much, isn't it ? Let's not fly away but keep our boots on the ground of reality, please.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by XenonSurf

Despite the blattant extracts of Angry Joe's video seeing Sean Murray (main author of No Man's Sky) responding to very generic questions of journalists (or kind of), I think that he was answering by memory relying on what was in the game *at that time* before release. So it's difficult and inappropriate to just say he lied. The decision to take out features of a game is a practise of ALL major games and have different very practical or legal reasons, the FSK (youth protection), bugs in the game that could hamper future sellings, features not working as intended, copyright reasons and whatnot else, all valid reasons to put things out. At the time of Sean Murray's interview he could not exactly anticipate his actions, also maybe he was a bit naive and simplistic in his responses, so one can be obset because of that, but making him a lyer is just another sort of bad hype, nothing more. Nothing to do with the real situation at the office of HG or in SM's mind.

Then what would you call it if not lying? Sean Murray repeatedly said certain features will be or already are in the game. Game footage of a different build was shown all the way until the release of the game. At no point was it conveyed to the consumer that what they're seeing/hearing is not what they're getting.

[Haukka81]

VR support please and i will throw my money to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skybird]

Having watched both videos, liking the first better than the second, I think it comes down to this, for me at last:

they should have released it under the Early Access label back then. Then all what was missing would have been interpreted as almost expected part of the show: Early Access means the thing is in development, is in constant change, is not complete. Players buy this at usually recued prices, for whatever their individual motivations are, and the producers get early feedback that still can find its way into the development or makes them aware where they err. Both sides win.

Instead they sold it as the finished package without warning, and this is where they went amiss and got Flak, and rightly so. Plus they sold it at full price. Double fail.


Their behaviour afterwards just should serve as a warning for everybody considering to do business with them. If you do, don'T trust their words, make sure you get all what you pay for: not in two years, but at the time you pay for it. If you cannot, stay away from them.



A serious, trustworthy business partner looks different.

[XenonSurf]

When I buy a game or whatever in a 2-figure price range, I'm not looking for a business partner but for features I'm interested in and like to play. All the side story doesn't bother me.
Now, for example, I play Silent Hunter V without knowing who the devs in Ubisoft are. Should I now investigate if they are all ethically right and throw away the game if not? I think I have a collection of hundreds if not thousands of games. Should I now repeat this investigation for all of these games? Methink not.


With today's media one can make profound decisions about what to buy - or not buy. For No Man's Sky I realize that most of those who relentlessly are lamenting are those who have pre-ordered the game or blindly bought it without getting further information. They are stucked in a loop...And these are the people to be blamed, not Hello Games, not Sean Murray. SM was right to sell his game to people who pre-ordered it, it's what these people wanted, so he would have been stupid not to do so.


(...)
11. Thou shalt not follow hype
12. Thou shalt not pre-order
13. Thou shalt not complain if you do and get pissed on
14. Remember the Update and Patch day to keep it holy.

[Skybird]

That he took an opportunity anbd got away with it doe snot mean he did right. It only means he got away with it while playing foul.


It seems to be fact that they advertised features that were not there, and did not tell they were not there. You said you look, when buying a game, for features you like. Many of those features you may have read about, where not there. Why you defend this, is beyond me. You certainly contradict your own statements, in parts. I find this fascinating: how people can cheat on themselves. Ethics behaviour, you mentioned, and your lack of care for it. Well, its not so much a thing for an ethics commission. Selling something on grounds of false advertising, telling customers they get somethign that in fact they get not, the law simply calls: fraud. Correct it would have been if they said two years ago the game is not complete. Thus I mentioned they should have sold it back then as Early Access, for reduced price. They still would have found their buyers. There always are.



The man tried a coup and ran, and he got away with it, fine. But that does not make it right.

[XenonSurf]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You said you look, when buying a game, for features you like. Many of those features you may have read about, where not there. Why you defend this, is beyond me. You certainly contradict your own statements, in parts.

That's wrong, but how do you come to such a conclusion? For your information:

There was the catastrophical first release which I was fully aware of (and all the Reddit ****storm about it), I have been discussing this game on SpaceSimCentral long before it came out, making suggestions and warnings. Then, my review of the game (published on SpaceSimCentral and GOG) did give the game a good rating for its originality, but a clear minus for the lack of overall playing features in relation to its price, basically saying it was a release half of a tech-demo and half of a game, so I wasn't very gentle on it (just in case you think my judgment is biased).

After first release there was 'Foundation' update which added DLC worth buying features (enough for me, so I bought the game and didn't regret it), then 'Pathfinder' DLC worth buying features (the state in which I did my game reviews), then 'Atlas Rises' DLC worth buying features, and now 'Next' DLC worth buying features.
And these new features are all added for FREE. So this cuts things straight short for any hyper-negative critics.

For a player who is interested in space games, I will recommend this game because of its current state, and I will not bother him with some horrifying stories about the private life of the game's developer, his mental state, his ethical attitude or whatnot else. He ain't to be a saint, and I'm not here to make a better world, i'm here to LIVE in it.