Minus hype and years of waiting, this would have been an AMAZING 20-40$ indie title. It's not going to be good enough to support the AAA hype and 60$ price point.

I still think it will be a great tech demo to pick up and mess around with when it hits a lower price.

Sure it's a result of the hype, but it's also a result of the console market's increasing interest in the indie game scene. Expect all their indie exclusives to be $60/90/150 affairs with $60 DLC bundles that includes 3 of the 5 $25 DLC packs and lets not forget the $350 'No Man's Sky' PS4 skin!

SpectralMeat wrote on Mar 4, 2016, 10:21:
Yeah I was bit surprised by the price tag also.
Best of luck to them I guess.

The price is a direct result of the hype. Sites like Kotaku or PC gamer did week-long multipart series on the game. Does seem a bit high for what so far looks like a tech demo made by 10 people.

jdreyer wrote on Mar 4, 2016, 00:27:
Yeah, it definitely feels like they put the cart (world-building) before the horse (gameplay).

Still, at least they have a shipping date, unlike *some* space games.

I know right, it's the same reason you can't teach a horse philosophy. You just can't put Descarte before the horse.

This game feels like Spore. I was so hyped for that game and then completely disappointed with the final product. However NMS could end up being a great game, so I'm not going to make any judgement calls until after its release.

Burrito of Peace wrote on Mar 3, 2016, 20:57:

This game is a joke. "Look, you discovered a plant! You can name it! Look, you discovered another plant that looks almost exactly like the last plant you just discovered except it's a different color. Isn't this exciting? Isn't this revolutionary?"

Pathetic.

No, but how is this different from the original Elites? Back then it was the same gameplay and people praised it for being revolutionary....but it played the same. So no not revolutionary, compared to Elite 1/2 but honestly games have been cookie-cutting for a looooong time.

Yeah I was bit surprised by the price tag also.
Best of luck to them I guess.

i thought it would be 15-20 also

60 is a fucking joke

Still looks like a $20-$30 PSN game...

It reminds of minecraft and even in the beginning I don't think that was ever more than $30. Maybe at release on consoles because they overcharge for everything but prices today are about $20 on every platform for minecraft.

Giving it the ole 100% markup because it's new still doesn't get you to to $60 price point. Seems like they're shooting themselves in the foot with that price.

Assuming it's going to support Playstation VR that could be a big deal for many people. Buying a playstation VR thing is probably going to be the lowest cost option on the market and so if this game is one of the few available maybe it will do ok in that respect.

I'm guessing this will drop to $40 by end of August, if not much sooner.

.

This comment was edited on Jul 22, 2019, 11:56.

Cant wait to see this fail hard.

Bub wrote on Mar 4, 2016, 07:34:
The only thing unique here is that you get to name things you find first and the name sticks for everyone.

I believe the name of the pilot who discovered the planets will be indicated but you do not get to name planets.
At least that is what I thought how it works.
Otherwise the naming will go way out of hand not to mention coming up with new names after a few million planets have been named.

The_Pink_Tiger wrote on Mar 3, 2016, 19:18:
I dunno; the tech of this game is undeniably impressive, as is the art style but there still doesn't seem to be much of an actual game behind it all. It doesn't seem as if there is much longevity to this title; it's something you'll fool around with for an hour or two and then move on to a game where you can actually accomplish something. As such, I'm not sure it's worth its current price point and definitely is not something I'd risk a pre-order on. It's a shame because the concept seems sound; it's just the actual implementation that appears lacking.

+1

The only thing unique here is that you get to name things you find first and the name sticks for everyone.

Boy will those 12 year olds have fun with that. BiggusButtas, a large gas giant, etc...

If the game is entertaining, I'm happy for it to be whatever it is.

That said, preordering without knowing if it's entertaining isn't something I'll be doing, especially at that price.

The_Pink_Tiger wrote on Mar 3, 2016, 19:18:
I dunno; the tech of this game is undeniably impressive, as is the art style but there still doesn't seem to be much of an actual game behind it all. It doesn't seem as if there is much longevity to this title; it's something you'll fool around with for an hour or two and then move on to a game where you can actually accomplish something. As such, I'm not sure it's worth its current price point and definitely is not something I'd risk a pre-order on. It's a shame because the concept seems sound; it's just the actual implementation that appears lacking.

NO. please god no. there's a million other games out there that rely solely on a small-scale quest system to make up the "content". fuck that shit. give me PvP, arena, some sort of galactic campaign with all the other players, daily/weekly/monthly objectives to do, other than that just let me explore. It's possible to have things hidden, for there to be all sorts of secrets to uncover, new mechanics to uncover by exploring, upgrading tech, your ship etc, now global faction plots.

but please god, no more fucking questing. that shit needs to die.

Maybe this is the Sci-Fi version of Minecraft. Seem's Minecraft is doing ok for itself.

rudra wrote on Mar 3, 2016, 21:02:
nobody has even begun to tackle any kind of "procedural" storyline generation or quest structure... and that would not be impossible - just extremely difficult to figure out - thats why they always go for the low hanging fruit: the environments, items, creatures, etc.

Actually, procedural storytelling is Ken Levine's current project.

actually i think the limit theory kid was trying to do that but he lost his mind or something and has been spinning his wheels for a few years on that.. last i heard it was "just about to be finished!!" as usual

Yeah, Josh is pretty bad at estimating deadlines. I'll give the 23 year old a break tho. He did have some kind of mental breakdown, but has come back and work on the game continues apace. After the breakdown, he stopped working at home and moved into an office in a tech park. Recently he had to give a presentation to the board:

Had to give a presentation to the 'board' today at work to be 'officially' accepted into the Tech Park (despite the fact that I've had an office and been working there for...a long time now...would have been pretty awkward had they say 'nah, get out' ).

They were very pleased with what they saw Apparently several wanted to be on my advisory team, so I've now got some serious businessfolk who will be helping me structure the timeline / work / everything else as we get closer to release (I can almost feel the communal sigh of relief at the thought of Josh having some form of 'project management' team!)

anyways, the real business would be some kind of procedural AI that makes NPCs that react with each other and the world and the player, and do it in a somewhat convincing way - honestly with the bullshit storylines that these dumbfucks come up with these days, a computer algorithm cant do much worse... probly improve on it quite a bit

Yeah, I'd be down for that, but it'll be a couple of decades before we get something decent.

The_Pink_Tiger wrote on Mar 3, 2016, 19:18:
I dunno; the tech of this game is undeniably impressive, as is the art style but there still doesn't seem to be much of an actual game behind it all. It doesn't seem as if there is much longevity to this title; it's something you'll fool around with for an hour or two and then move on to a game where you can actually accomplish something. As such, I'm not sure it's worth its current price point and definitely is not something I'd risk a pre-order on. It's a shame because the concept seems sound; it's just the actual implementation that appears lacking.

Yeah, it definitely feels like they put the cart (world-building) before the horse (gameplay).

Still, at least they have a shipping date, unlike *some* space games.

rudra wrote on Mar 3, 2016, 21:02:
nobody has even begun to tackle any kind of "procedural" storyline generation or quest structure...

Except Skyrim 5 years ago with its radiant quest thing. Boring as hell but it was there.

"Procedural storylines" is just approaching it in the wrong way. Games like Crusader Kings 2 and Dwarf Fortress are all about generating stories, and they're amazing. But people usually think of "stories" like in movies or novels, like you need characters with motivations that they communicate in speech and so on. That's what's hard to do with games. But I can't figure out why anyone wants that shit in games. Games already do amazing things (see above examples) but everyone wants them to be more like movies.