No Man's Sky

[Elim Garak]

Not confused at all. You said that because they said it existed it must therefore have been true despite there being no evidence to back that up. You need to substantiate that claim, the onus is not on me to prove a negative.
If it was true then they would have showed it along with all the other stuff they demoed (but didn't make it into release).

You ARE confused. You are to prove a claim not a negative. You claim they lied. Prove it. I'm not even making any claims.
The default state: developer of the game says they have things in the game - therefore they have things in the game UNLESS PROVEN OTHERWISE.
But you know all that. It's just internet and you cannot accept being wrong.

Not good enough

It's good enough. Go to the steam page of the game and find me some multiplayer mentions in the game description.

Naught wrong with my logic, it's pretty clear that you're the one being willfully ignorant, or probably just trolling.

Projecting much?

[unholytestament]

The default state: developer of the game says they have things in the game - therefore they have things in the game UNLESS PROVEN OTHERWISE.

Current state: They're not in the game when the developer said they would be. The game was released at full price and not as an early access title and the developer provided no excuse for why they aren't in the game.

Conclusion: Developer lied.

[Elim Garak]

Current state: They're not in the game when the developer said they would be. The game was released at full price and not as an early access title and the developer provided no excuse for why they aren't in the game.

Conclusion: Developer lied.

Even if we take your premise as true there's still no way you can arrive at that conclusion. There's a gap in your logic that needs to be filled with evidence that will lead to the conclusion.


And now to your premise:

They never promised any of those features to be in the game by release. They were talking in present tense as if they were in the game or were in development. Not that they WILL be in the game by release.
No excuses are required as the game was not advertised having those features in any promotional materials.
It might be not cool of them to not provide any, but not providing excuses doesn't make them liars.

Lying would be if they didn't have or were not developing them and were not even planning to, but still said that they are.

This is what you MUST prove before calling them liars.

[Deleted]

They never promised any of those features to be in the game by release. They were talking in present tense as if they were in the game or were in development. Not that they WILL be in the game by release.

Anything mentioned about the game during production is advertisment. They could have let everyone know pre-launch what the deal was but they went ahead to cash in on false advertising. You are infact defending criminal activity, you naughty boy.

[Nazrark]

First infraction since I made the account. Worth it.

But there are plenty of things that are promised but are never given to us. I am thinking because it happened to be Sony that was putting out the product is why everyone was up in arms over it. Like your subconscious telling you that the console war needs to continue.

[Elim Garak]

Anything mentioned about the game during production is advertisment.

Nope. Only advertisement is advertisement.

They could have let everyone know pre-launch what the deal was but they went ahead to cash in on false advertising. You are infact defending criminal activity, you naughty boy.

They did. On the store page and on their site in the section of the game description, since pre-orders.

[Deleted]

Nope. Only advertisement is advertisement.

Discussing your product is advertising. Infact, that's how advertisement works. People mention their product. Doesn't always have to feature a red price tag.

They did. On the store page and on their site in the section of the game description, since pre-orders.

Alright then.

First infraction since I made the account. Worth it.

This forum needs a sort of Batsignal to summon me.

[Elim Garak]

Discussing your product is advertising. Infact, that's how advertisement works. People mention their product. Doesn't always have to feature a red price tag.

No it is not if you want to talk LEGALLY about it. An interview with a developer is not an advertisement unless developer paid for the interview to happen in the first place. Otherwise even game reviews would be advertisements, even the BAD ones. Not to mention let's plays and "Sean lied" videos...

[1001]

You ARE confused. You are to prove a claim not a negative. You claim they lied. Prove it. I'm not even making any claims.

As I said, you claimed it was there because the developers said it was there, despite having no proof to confirm that. If you want to put the burden of proof on me then I'm simply going to do the same to you.
The facts of the matter is that despite them saying multiplayer (of a fashion) was a thing, it turned out not to be a thing, and they did not make that clear.

The default state: developer of the game says they have things in the game - therefore they have things in the game UNLESS PROVEN OTHERWISE.
But you know all that. It's just internet and you cannot accept being wrong.

Again with the stupid prove something did not exist claims. Unless there is evidence it existed in the first place why would you take someone's word for it especially when there are so many examples of them lying. That is illogical.

It's good enough. Go to the steam page of the game and find me some multiplayer mentions in the game description.

It's not good enough at all. Either link something backing it up or accept that your going to be called out for trolling.

Projecting much?

I'm trying to be objective, the basis of your argument is to set the burden of proof beyond what is accessible, regardless of whether you're right or wrong.

[rhorle]

Anything mentioned about the game during production is advertisment. They could have let everyone know pre-launch what the deal was but they went ahead to cash in on false advertising. You are infact defending criminal activity, you naughty boy.

They did by not having in on the store page, the game being listed as single player, and not being mentioned on their official website in the launch day blog post about the game. They were also cleared of false advertisement and criminal activity.

[Selastan]

Criticizing something doesn’t necessarily translate into hate, you know?

I’m aware that believing that game is shallow and dull, not worth the triple A price tag is just my opinion about it, an opinion that just happens to be shared by the majority, but just an opinion nonetheless.

However, denying that Sean Murray misled, or even bluntly lied about the project all over the pre-release interviews he gave is simply ridiculous, it’s fine that you don’t really care about it, even if you care, it shouldn’t stop you from playing the game if you enjoy it despite everything. Sean Murray wasn’t the only one who worked on it and it’s a shame that the entire team ended up by taking the heat because of him doing a disgraceful PR job, he is an awkward and nervous person, getting him into such under a huge spotlight was a huge mistake.

Do I hate him for that? Nope, I’m not losing any sleep over it, believe me. Do I think that he done it purposely in a malicious way? Possible, it did end up by increasing the numbers of pre-orders by quite a lot, although I have my doubts about it, more likely that he is just that typical cliché awkward nerd that when thrown in front of anything with boobs just stutters all over into saying dumb shit.

Still, whatever may be his excuse be, he still fucked up big time and wasn’t even able to assume his mistakes, he just stuck his head on the ground and prayed for this to just blow over…

This thread has gone on so long I'm pretty sure the haters have gotten their "AAA Price Tag" worth of enjoyment just from hanging out here bashing NMS and Hello Games. Seriously, if they put in the time they spent on this thread complaining into actually PLAYING the game they would say they got their money's worth. So, in a way, No Man's Sky really did provide hours of entertainment, hell, even PRECIOUS MULTIPLAYER/ssince only about 70% of these forum members are robots.

[unholytestament]

They never promised any of those features to be in the game by release. They were talking in present tense as if they were in the game or were in development. Not that they WILL be in the game by release.

When someone asks "will we be able to do <thing>?" and Sean Murray responds "yes", he's talking about the game that exists at that moment in time that the person asking the question has no way of ever playing?

Tell me how that logic works.

[Elim Garak]

Criticizing something doesn’t necessarily translate into hate, you know?

It does, if you go on and on and on for months criticizing the same thing over and over again knowing full well you are wrong on all accounts besides one: you didn't like the game.

When someone asks "will we be able to do <thing>?" and Sean Murray responds "yes", he's talking about the game that exists at that moment in time that the person asking the question has no way of ever playing?

Tell me how that logic works.

1. Give me a direct quote of the question that starts with "will" and the answer given
2. I already explained how it works
3. I already told you what you must do to call them liars.

[Post]

Seriously, if they put in the time they spent on this thread complaining into actually PLAYING the game they would say they got their money's worth. So, in a way, No Man's Sky really did provide hours of entertainment, hell, even PRECIOUS MULTIPLAYER/ssince only about 70% of these forum members are robots.

By that logic it speaks to how bad the game is, if they'd rather spend their time typing posts on the forum than playing the game.

[unholytestament]

1. Give me a direct quote of the question that starts with "will" and the answer given

So you're again going to hide behind semantics, ignoring that interviewers are asking about the game as a finished product because no one cares about something they will never be able to play?

I'm just curious what other messages are hidden in Sean Murray's answers that turn every "yes" he says into an obvious "no" as it relates to what people are actually asking about.

[Vespian]

He's still in denial about the multiplayer thing? Jezus...how?

[unholytestament]

I'm just amazed that Elim Garak believes the onus is on the interviewer and not the developer to specify they're talking about the release version of the game and not some mythic version that might exist at that point in time but the developer need provide no evidence of existing.

[Vespian]

I'm just amazed that Elim Garak believes the onus is on the interviewer and not the developer to specify they're talking about the release version of the game and not some mythic version that might exist at that point in time but the developer need provide no evidence of existing.

You mean..alternative facts, right?

[Elim Garak]

So you're again going to hide behind semantics, ignoring that interviewers are asking about the game as a finished product because no one cares about something they will never be able to play?

No. It doesn't matter how the question is asked - will or can - even if the answer is yes - doesn't make it a lie if it doesn't make it into the final game in the end.
I just wanted you to give me examples. Because I don't remember any relevant questions that start with "will".

I'm just curious what other messages are hidden in Sean Murray's answers that turn every "yes" he says into an obvious "no" as it relates to what people are actually asking about.

Not a single "yes" is turned into "no". It's "yes" at the time of the answer. You are here claiming they lied - prove it. Prove that every yes is actually a "no" at the time of the interview, i.e. a lie.

This is the third time (that I remember) when I ask you to prove it. Yet you dodge. Each time. Next dodge will lead you to ignore list.

[unholytestament]

It's "yes" at the time of the answer.

Which is an effective "no" in relation to the release version of the game, which is what people care about. But you, in your infinite pedantry, believe that the interviewer has to specify that and not the developer.

This is the third time (that I remember) when I ask you to prove it. Yet you dodge. Each time. Next dodge will lead you to ignore list.

You still never proved your claim that the features were cut.