No Man's Sky

[Elim Garak]

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.

I didn't say shit about interviewer.
Yes means yes at the time of the interview. The relative future is unknown. Hindsight is irrelevant. There were no lies.

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

Do you see said features in the final game? No? Therefore they were cut.

And off to ignore list you go.

[Vespian]

I didn't say shit about interviewer.
Yes means yes at the time of the interview. The relative future is unknown. Hindsight is irrelevant. There were no lies.
And off to ignore list you go.

Sorry to burst your huge bubble, but multiplayer requires a certain amount of network coding, which you do in the framework of your game. It's not something you can add later, if none of your systems support it. So get this; A month after the last interview where he claimed it has multiplayer, it didn't have multiplayer.

Nothing was cut, it was never there.

That's called lying.

[unholytestament]

I didn't say shit about interviewer.

No you didn't. You just kept going on and on about how Sean Murray saying it's in the game means it's in the game at that point in time and we have to believe him despite him not showing us the features he is being questioned about and him not actually making that distinction.

Clearly it must fall to the interviewers to make the distinction then? Clearly instead of saying "is this in the game?" they must instead ask "will this be in the release version of this game, No Man's Sky, which is releasing on August 9th, 2016?" so as not to confuse the Sean Murray?

Do you see said features in the final game? No? Therefore they were cut.

I require proof. This is a leap in logic.

[Elim Garak]

Sorry to burst your huge bubble, but multiplayer requires a certain amount of network coding, which you do in the framework of your game. It's not something you can add later, if none of your systems support it. So get this; A month after the last interview where he claimed it has multiplayer, it didn't have multiplayer.

Nothing was cut, it was never there.

That's called lying.

You made plenty of claims and provided plenty of nothing to support them.
Seems like the burst of my huge bubble's gonna burst the immensity of yours.

A month is a huge amount of time to cut something. You can cut multiplayer in a day. Most probably they were trying to make it work properly most of that month and then cut it, by simply switching to the branch without it and then merging any side changes made in the multiplayer branch (that were not related to multiplayer) back into it.

Though considering that preview build had less bugs than the release one, they didn't merge anything at all, just rolled back a version, made the gold master and then were working on the day 0 patch like crazy.

Indy, right?

[Vespian]

You made plenty of claims and provided plenty of nothing to support them.
Seems like the burst of my huge bubble's gonna burst the immensity of yours.

A month is a huge amount of time to cut something. You can cut multiplayer in a day. Most probably they were trying to make it work properly most of that month and then cut it, by simply switching to the branch without it and then merging any side changes made in the multiplayer branch (that were not related to multiplayer) back into it.

Though considering that preview build had less bugs than the release one, they didn't merge anything at all, just rolled back a version, made the gold master and then were working on the day 0 patch like crazy.

Indy, right?

Look, mate..I'm not the one that has to live with you. You are the one that has to live with you. I just laugh my balls off and discuss this jokingly with my colleagues, but take my advice. Less kool-aid, more thinking.

It doesn't matter that he lied. It's not the end of anyone's life, but his own. It has no bearing on your situation and it does not make you stupid for buying into it. We're perfectly fine with people buying into lies of developers. It becomes annoying when people bend over to another few for heck of it. That's called 'a cult'. Someone lies to you and you're going to any lengths to defend them, because somehow it's defending yourself. I've never seen that logic.

So just take a breath and consider that you've been lied to and it's okay. It's completely okay.

As for the part that I quoted; It does not work that way. 1 month is way, way! too little time to make such extensive changes. Exactly because it's an Indy developer, they don't have multiple versions of the games with their own individual feature set. How everything interacts in a solo and multiplayer game is vastly different. He lied. There's no point arguing.

[Lord Pebbleton]

I don't think this game is something worthy of getting everyone on each others' throats.
I bought my PS4 with three games included: Uncharted 4, Bloodborne, No Man's Sky.
Uncharted: amazing. Bloodborne: incredible. No Man's Sky: played for one hour before getting bored.
The game falls short on many aspects. It is Minecraft with a bigger scale and slower times, and thus, it is a worse version of Minecraft. (I like Minecraft)
The developers, as I gather, were shady about a lot of stuff; this isn't acceptable behavior and they lost the trust of much of the potential playerbase, and that's it.
If someone likes the game, I admire their standards.

[Elim Garak]

It doesn't matter that he lied.

Because he didn't until you prove he did.

So just take a breath and consider that you've been lied to and it's okay. It's completely okay.

Who lied to me and about what?

As for the part that I quoted; It does not work that way.

It does

1 month is way, way! too little time to make such extensive changes.

There's nothing extensive about it. It just takes a couple of clicks and some downloading time - if you are lazy and don't want to refactor it out manually and if you have a version to roll back.

Exactly because it's an Indy developer, they don't have multiple versions of the games with their own individual feature set.

Lol, the fuck being indy has to do with having internet, lan and git/svn? Even before git/svn there was VC. fuck. Getouttahere. They have all that and more.

How everything interacts in a solo and multiplayer game is vastly different.

Depends on the architecture, there's really no point in making it vastly different. Since NMS is online game and their multiplayer was not instanced - all the multiplayer stuff must have been server side anyway and client was none the wiser whence the attributes come, npc or another player state. it just needs to know whether to run AI or sync in "real time" with server.

He lied. There's no point arguing.

There's until you prove he lied.

[Selastan]

Jesus dude, it hurts when I put such dedicated and effort into a post, just to have people quoting it without even reading it, it truly hurts my feelings, ya know =(

But I understand, it highly reminds me when Trials of Ascension project fan-base caming into this forum to accuse people of being “haters” and “naysayers”, who were “bandwagoning” against the project out of jealously and whatnot, all this because people here dared to criticize the ones behind the project for taking their money under while giving them the idea that they were experienced game developers working on a MMORPG with playable dragons, raising a huge amount of red-flags all over the place in doing so (spoiler alert; it turns out that none of them actually knew jackshit about game development).

What I mean is, tagging everything as just simple “hate” is a cute and really basic way to attempt to discredit any valid criticism made towards something you like, while it may be true indeed that some people do so, to the point of even doing ridiculous dumb ass shit such as sending them life threats and all, it’s not really what’s going on in this thread, at least, not for the most part.

What I was referencing was just your second paragraph, I was too lazy to cut it out =)

But the haters are real in this thread. It isn't just criticism anymore, this has been going on for AGES now. If it was criticism it would be a much more positive thread by now since the only ones who care enough to visit would be the ones actually playing and enjoying the game. It really seems like people took the No Man's Sky thing as personal insult and seek to destroy any positive opinion the game as revenge against Hello Games. I guess a lot of people REALLY like multiplayer or something...

[rhorle]

(which is highly unlikely, considering that some of those interviews were pretty close to the release date and multiplayer is not something that one can simply remove entirely from a game without leaving any traces of, traces that data mining show no indication of…) it would be still be considered a lie, by omission, considering they were only clear about it on the day of release by twitting that if multiplayer is what you were looking for, than the game was for you while tagging the game on steam as a single player.

Actually they can through branching. Multiplayer could have been developed in its own branch to later be integrated into the main branch. When they weren't able to finish it (or fix whatever bugs) they could have just deleted the Multiplayer branch and have no trace in the main code. Or they could have removed what little trace was there. Remember that NMS is not your traditional game and much of what powers it is based off of formulas. This is why even their patches can be small in size but change a lot.

So if they told people about it on the day of release it can't be a lie by omission. If you have to keep creating different rules for what makes it a lie then chance are it really isn't a lie. First they lied, then they lied because you can't just remove all traces of code, then they lied by omission even after saying it didn't contain what they lied about because it happened to close to launch. BTW the tweet was saying that multiplayer is not part of the game. https://twitter.com/NoMansSky/status/762688708764135425

[Selastan]

Great, now we aren't discussing whether or not there was a lie, but instead what KIND of lie was told.

So has anyone ever encountered running water in this game? Every time I see water on a planet, it is only lakes or oceans. Are there any planets with a river system?

[Deleted]

I didn't say shit about interviewer.
Yes means yes at the time of the interview. The relative future is unknown. Hindsight is irrelevant. There were no lies.


Do you see said features in the final game? No? Therefore they were cut.

And off to ignore list you go.

By your logic I could make a trailer of the most beautiful 1st person shooter ever. Dinosaurs, big monsters, mechs, explosions, everything. When people ask me if it has multiplayer I say yes, and I say a lot more things about my game.

However, no-one will ever play my game or see the source code before release.

Everyone pre-orders it.

On release, I give them a singleplayer version of Pong, because 'oh I actually cut those features...I planned for all of those things to be in the game, sorry!'...and according to your logic...the customer is at fault and the developer didn't lie?

[rhorle]

On release, I give them a singleplayer version of Pong, because 'oh I actually cut those features...I planned for all of those things to be in the game, sorry!'...and according to your logic...the customer is at fault and the developer didn't lie?

Did your actual store page, and any descriptions, contain the cut, lied about, information?

[Elim Garak]

By your logic I could make a trailer of the most beautiful 1st person shooter ever. Dinosaurs, big monsters, mechs, explosions, everything. When people ask me if it has multiplayer I say yes, and I say a lot more things about my game.

However, no-one will ever play my game or see the source code before release.

Everyone pre-orders it.

On release, I give them a singleplayer version of Pong, because 'oh I actually cut those features...I planned for all of those things to be in the game, sorry!'...and according to your logic...the customer is at fault and the developer didn't lie?

Except that's not what happened with NMS. Good try though.

You need to change a couple of bits:
First of all you only show in the trailer the things you have in the game at the moment of trailer creation.
The store page for pre-order should show correct information about the game.
If you remove from the game any thing that is stated on the store page - you inform people about it.

[1001]

First of all you only show in the trailer the things you have in the game at the moment of trailer creation.

I'm genuinely curious if you have ever heard of the term "Vertical Slice" and the misleading way they have been used by game studios.

[Elim Garak]

I'm genuinely curious if you have ever heard of the term "Vertical Slice" and the misleading way they have been used by game studios.

I'm quite sure you don't know what it is considering the bold part. The purpose of a vertical slice is to demonstrate the near final quality game or portion of the game (think demo) that is being developed to see if it's fun, visually appeasing, etc (gather a bunch of random people from the right street and playtest it) and if it is - to show it to the public in promotional materials or even let some people play it to get their feedback (invite some reviewer to the studio and let them play) - if it isn't - scrap the game or remake it, because it is the current state of the game being developed.

Very misleading indeed.

[1001]

I'm quite sure you don't know what it is considering the bold part. The purpose of a vertical slice is to demonstrate the near final quality game or portion of the game (think demo) that is being developed to see if it's fun, visually appeasing, etc (gather a bunch of random people from the right street and playtest it) and if it is - to show it to the public in promotional materials or even let some people play it to get their feedback (invite some reviewer to the studio and let them play) - if it isn't - scrap the game or remake it, because it is the current state of the game being developed.

Very misleading indeed.

Wow, don't you talk a complete load of bollocks..

A vertical slice that does not accurately represent the game is no different than bullshots, and no different than HG's E3 2015 demo. They exist to give the impression that a project is going to look like X and function like Y when none of those things are assured. All well and good if the viewer is made aware that what they are seeing is prototype software but half the time that's left as an unspoken thing, as with the case of NMS.

Further reading if you're interested in educating yourself http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-...be-misleading/

[Elim Garak]

Wow, don't you talk a complete load of bollocks..

A vertical slice that does not accurately represent the game is no different than bullshots, and no different than HG's E3 2015 demo. They exist to give the impression that a project is going to look like X and function like Y when none of those things are assured. All well and good if the viewer is made aware that what they are seeing is prototype software but half the time that's left as an unspoken thing, as with the case of NMS.

Further reading if you're interested in educating yourself http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-...be-misleading/

Wow, don't you talk a complete load of bollocks..

A vertical slice that does not accurately represent the game is no vertical slice. Period. Vertical slices are given (as working builds that they are) to Publisher/Execs for evaluation - you cannot bullshit them with a bullshit trailer. DUH.

A E3 (or whatever) Demo has nothing to do with vertical slices. It can be one, but doesn't have to.

A vertical slice doesn't guarantee that the final game will be exactly like it. It's the entire purpose of a vertical slice to figure out how the final game is gonna be. DUH. Because a vertical slice is made based on theory, it's an experiment that will either prove the theory or raise some issues with it. And if there are issues (and most of the times there are) changes will be made and the final game will differ. There's nothing bad in that. And no one goes: "let's do this super vertical slice but the final game will be entirely different and we will be like rich". That's just plain stupid. If you can create a super vertical slice - GO WITH IT and become super rich.

[1001]

Wow, don't you talk a complete load of bollocks..

A vertical slice that does not accurately represent the game is no vertical slice. Period. Vertical slices are given (as working builds that they are) to Publisher/Execs for evaluation - you cannot bullshit them with a bullshit trailer. DUH.

Complete and utter bullshit. Read the PCGamer link I posted. Vertical slices can (and do) contain content and systems built solely for that vertical slice, they exist purely to make the vertical slice function.

Another link discussing vertical slices and how they are used to intentionally decieve the public http://uk.ign.com/articles/2014/06/0...ally-deceptive

A E3 (or whatever) Demo has nothing to do with vertical slices. It can be one, but doesn't have to.

Good god... let me put this to you, if it doesn't qualify as a demo then what is it?

A vertical slice doesn't guarantee that the final game will be exactly like it. It's the entire purpose of a vertical slice to figure out how the final game is gonna be. DUH. Because a vertical slice is made based on theory, it's an experiment that will either prove the theory or raise some issues with it. And if there are issues (and most of the times there are) changes will be made and the final game will differ. There's nothing bad in that. And no one goes: "let's do this super vertical slice but the final game will be entirely different and we will be like rich". That's just plain stupid. If you can create a super vertical slice - GO WITH IT and become super rich.

Well done for stating the obvious, of course is isn't a guarantee that the final game will be exactly like it. Nobody said that, but if you demonstrate a demo or a vertical slice then you should really be making your viewers aware of which they are viewing, otherwise you're potentially giving them false representation of your project. Which is exactly what Sean Murray did, tried to make out that his vertical slice was playable content that reflected the current state of the game.

[Elim Garak]

Complete and utter bullshit.

If you prefer to be ignorant and misinformed by some pcgamer - that's your prerogative. That article says the same thing I do about vertical slices at the base only from a perspective of an outside observer who doesn't know shit - covering it all with a stupid opinion.

No one makes vertical slices specifically for E3.
The purpose of a vertical slice is the same as of a scientific experiment. A proof of concept. Results differ obviously. But the experiment must be ran. A negative result is a result too.

And of course marketing department will use vertical slices for promotional materials, there's nothing sinister about it, because public itself demands things to be shown. Without vertical slices they will have to FAKE shit. And it is expected from public to not be idiots in the modern age and understand that a game under development is a game under development and will change by the time it is released.

You are on my ignore list now so don't bother responding. No response is needed anyway other than "thank you for explaining what vertical slices are"

[Deleted]

this thread summed up: