No Man's Sky: An open universe game.

[Username taken]

Eighteen quintillion times zero is still zero.

LOL. True.

I've actually seen the end of games videos on youtube, I don't want to spoil but it was pretty awful.

Honestly, Hello games really sold the game very well. People's expectations were sky (no pun intended) high.

[Panfoot]

Exactly this.

It just seems there isn't that much to do in the game.

Despite the 18 quintillion planets.

There really isn't much. Every planet is pretty similar, mostly just a different color, with a subset of plants that you will probably see all of within an hour of two of playing, the same 4 or 5 different type of buildings that are on every single planet in the game, and animals that generally don't tend to be that different from each other(I've seen a lot of jaguar looking things so far). The only reason to even bother exploring is to get more resources to fuel your ship to explore another planet to get more resources to fuel your ship to etc...

I don't mind games with limited/almost no gameplay(I happily payed full price for Dear Esther and Gone Home) but...this game is just so incredibly shallow.

[CraigTheCylon]

Exactly this.

It just seems there isn't that much to do in the game.

Despite the 18 quintillion planets.

Haven't actually played this, but I've been following the fallout (and the escalating hype train before that) from a safe distance, and, yeah, that seems to be a pretty accurate assessment. Each new planet is just a depository for rocks that must be shot with science to power up your ship and take you to the next planet. There's a lot of space to run around but little reason to bother.

I'm not the first one to say it, but I'd much rather play an NMS that had only 50 (or even less) planets where each one is designed to be different. There's so much you can screw around with, starting with basic geography - are there hills or valleys? Are there substantial bodies of water? Does the water have any noteworthy properties? What about the ground? Is it tectonically unstable? Will some of it swallow you up like quicksand? How about the air? Is it breathable or do you need to worry about your life-support aparatus? Do you need special gear to deal with temperature extremes? Is there snowfall? Acid rain? Enormous rocks thrown into the air by frequent volcanic activity? What's gravity like? Low enough for moon jumps, or so high it's life-endangering and demands a powered exoskeleton to move around in? How fast is the day/night cycle? Does that affect the weather? All those aspects that could be tweaked, just off the top of my head, and that's before getting into actual native lifeforms.

Instead, so far as I can see, almost none of that changes from planet to planet. It's just the colours that differ. Doesn't matter how many worlds there are if there's no reason to go past the first.

i love to explore and find things but i understand if people want a story. sometimes there is no story and gamers refuse to understand that not all games have to be story driven.

I see the point you're making but I think you've overlooked something.

A game can get by without a story, but only if its gameplay is strong enough that it doesn't need one. Most puzzle games and 2D shmups don't have or need stories because they're engaging your mind so intently that a story would just get in the way. And of course, on the flipside there are plenty of games carried by their stories, with the entire point-and-click adventure genre the forefather of modern 'walking simulators' and the like.

Right now No Man's Sky simply isn't strong enough on a gameplay level to support itself. A stronger narrative fleshing out your journey and the universe you're in might actually help it, by giving contextual weight to all the exploring and resource-gathering. Sadly, I fear it's too late to make a difference here.

[Derek Metaltron]

I think if nothing else this game has shown the ambition of someone to create something impressive and grand like this, but not able to match the hype. Ultimately the fact it was made by fifteen people is in itself impressive. Just glad I had other things to play with when I got my PS4.

[simbob4000]

I think if nothing else this game has shown the ambition of someone to create something impressive and grand like this, but not able to match the hype. Ultimately the fact it was made by fifteen people is in itself impressive. Just glad I had other things to play with when I got my PS4.

There isn't really anything ambitions, impressive, or grand about the final product as is from the sound of it. The original idea as talked up, and shown over the years could kind of be called those things...but that isn't what was released. This just seems to be color swaps on a bunch of similar looking rocks with randomly generated wildlife that doesn't always seem to work out quite right, and a bunch of nothing to do. Star Citizen and Elite Dangerous seem way more ambitious, grand, and impressive than this. Minecraft seems more impressive with what it lets you do on the ground than this. Mace Griffin Bounty Hunter back on the original Xbox, with itself seamless transitions from first person space ship combat to on foot first person shooting seemed more impressive. The stages in the cancelled Battlefront 3 with its ground to sky to space transitions looked better than whats in No Man's Sky, and those actually had things going on from ground to space.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Think the youtube channels have been rough on No Man's Sky ? The reddit forum for it was closed due to a toxic atmosphere of anger and frustration from players. And now its gotten worse as once the reddit came back , it had more anger !

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2016/10...edium=facebook