I'm enjoying it myself. Only about 10 hours into the game though. So far I am seeing multiple ships, various aliens and you have to learn their language. Decent crafting. Lots of gathering and exploring.
I'm enjoying it myself. Only about 10 hours into the game though. So far I am seeing multiple ships, various aliens and you have to learn their language. Decent crafting. Lots of gathering and exploring.
I am totally digging your avatar
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Still ranked 20th on Steam right now. Not too bad.
Concurrent with a 38% positive Steam rating.
38% for a $60 title from a major publisher.... yeah.
That screams success.....
It's a success based on volume of sales as there is no requirement to sub, so their work is done - but, they promised to keep developing it.
Not know is the number of people refunded.
Also not known is the number of people that will not be buying another game from HG again after this fiasco.
But that number is at least one... .
Make that two, and I also got the game refunded (with a vengeance).
Exploring not your thing?
Here is how I see things related to this, not in order please read all, three seperate things I am seeing here in this
Part 1: 1. Is the game an exploration game? yes 2. Was it hyped as an exploration game? yes 3. Was there an unusually high volume of gamers hyped about this game? yes 4. does that then assume many gamers if not most like exploration games? yes 5. Is it safe to say based on the hype of this game that its a niche product? no, not at all. if it was niche the hype would not have 'stuck'
Part 2: 1. Are being being clever by mentioning they returned the game? no 2. why? because it clearly shows they bought into the hype of which many others warned them about but they bought it anyway. so not something really worth advertising.
Part 3. 1. is the game 'bad' because people feel the developer lied (regardless of if he did or not)? no. a game is good or bad based on the value of the game play peroid. not what the developers say is in the game. 2. are the reviews lower than would be otherwise because of the hype controversy? yes
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Every single player game loses the majority of its playerbase a couple weeks after launch.
that is not really accurate. I will agree it tends to happened in a larger drop when talking about AAA single player games but rarely happens in games I play. not suggesting I play better games I am just trying to illustrate that it doesnt happen enough for it to really be universal rule
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Every single player game loses the majority of its playerbase a couple weeks after launch.
that is not really accurate. I will agree it tends to happened in a larger drop when talking about AAA single player games but rarely happens in games I play. not suggesting I play better games I am just trying to illustrate that it doesnt happen enough for it to really be universal rule
It actually is quite accurate. Even take a look at Kerbal that you mention earlier on here, they only show a peak of around 4k players daily and they have double the number of owners as NMS.
Some games are anomalous, but even the games with the top concurrent players show significant drop-offs in their player bases. Keep in mind, though, that 30% of owners have played the game in the past 2 weeks which is comparable to even the most popular games. For instance, Kerbal has about 7% of owners play the game within a 2 week period. Granted, I'd say that NMS is still in its honeymoon period, but it's obvious it isn't the flop that some are making it out to be.
I am pretty convinced that all the people putting so much effort in hating NMS are just angry with themselves for falling for the hype, for getting their hopes up. Really, look at this thread alone, half doesn't even own the game but have a mighty big opinion on everything from patches, graphics, game play elements, what Sean said 4 years ago when provoked etc. etc. Look at Fable like they guy above said, look at the Age of Conan box promising features STILL not in the game.
I think NMS is awesome and delivers in spades, I have no clue what some people were expecting. And half of the ' missing' features are actually in the game as pointed out earlier in this thread. People just can't comprehend the scale of this game, 99% of the players might actually miss 99% of the implemented features with a universe of this scale.
People these days, NMS may rot in hell but dare speak evil of a game like Star Citizen and you've got hell to pay.....(hint, one of these is an actual game...).
/Cheers, Lahnmir
What the hell you talk player hyped them self Sean him self told and promised all kind of stuff that are not in game . So fucking ignorant ......people are angry because most of feature are not in place
Every single player game loses the majority of its playerbase a couple weeks after launch.
that is not really accurate. I will agree it tends to happened in a larger drop when talking about AAA single player games but rarely happens in games I play. not suggesting I play better games I am just trying to illustrate that it doesnt happen enough for it to really be universal rule
It actually is quite accurate. Even take a look at Kerbal that you mention earlier on here, they only show a peak of around 4k players daily and they have double the number of owners as NMS.
Some games are anomalous, but even the games with the top concurrent players show significant drop-offs in their player bases. Keep in mind, though, that 30% of owners have played the game in the past 2 weeks which is comparable to even the most popular games. For instance, Kerbal has about 7% of owners play the game within a 2 week period. Granted, I'd say that NMS is still in its honeymoon period, but it's obvious it isn't the flop that some are making it out to be.
So then help me understand
the starting player base of Kerbal years ago was lower than the starting player base of NMS.
The current player base of Kerbal is now at the time of this writing higher than the current player base of NMS.
How do we resolve your assertion with these facts?
p.s. this is also true for a TON of games if Kerbal doesnt work for you as an example we have plenty more we can use
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am pretty convinced that all the people putting so much effort in hating NMS are just angry with themselves for falling for the hype, for getting their hopes up. Really, look at this thread alone, half doesn't even own the game but have a mighty big opinion on everything from patches, graphics, game play elements, what Sean said 4 years ago when provoked etc. etc. Look at Fable like they guy above said, look at the Age of Conan box promising features STILL not in the game.
I think NMS is awesome and delivers in spades, I have no clue what some people were expecting. And half of the ' missing' features are actually in the game as pointed out earlier in this thread. People just can't comprehend the scale of this game, 99% of the players might actually miss 99% of the implemented features with a universe of this scale.
People these days, NMS may rot in hell but dare speak evil of a game like Star Citizen and you've got hell to pay.....(hint, one of these is an actual game...).
/Cheers, Lahnmir
What the hell you talk player hyped them self Sean him self told and promised all kind of stuff that are not in game . So fucking ignorant ......people are angry because most of feature are not in place
I think that there is a significant delta here. Actually there is a really good reddit thread which chastises the game for the so-called broken promises. However, if you go through each individual item, you'll note than MANY are 1 or 2 years old. Secondly, the quotes which are quoted are VERY subjective and if you actually go to the sources, the expanded context is like "This is something we definitely need to do." and then the source expands that to "....but it's very difficult, if not impossible." There is TONS of "...we'd like to do X..." talk that people take as being promised.
It's all right there. I'm not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is that a VAST majority of people who are angry about the game have taken a vision and projected that onto what they expect for the first iteration of the game, even though he has said what they should expect.
There are other pieces which he touches on which clearly aren't there. I don't think this is an outright lie, I think this is a scope adjustment (like attacking fleets, etc). However, there is zero allowance for any of this. It seems to constantly turn into a black and white conversation. "You said this 2 years ago. I didn't listen to anything else you said. I expect this now."
Every single player game loses the majority of its playerbase a couple weeks after launch.
that is not really accurate. I will agree it tends to happened in a larger drop when talking about AAA single player games but rarely happens in games I play. not suggesting I play better games I am just trying to illustrate that it doesnt happen enough for it to really be universal rule
It actually is quite accurate. Even take a look at Kerbal that you mention earlier on here, they only show a peak of around 4k players daily and they have double the number of owners as NMS.
Some games are anomalous, but even the games with the top concurrent players show significant drop-offs in their player bases. Keep in mind, though, that 30% of owners have played the game in the past 2 weeks which is comparable to even the most popular games. For instance, Kerbal has about 7% of owners play the game within a 2 week period. Granted, I'd say that NMS is still in its honeymoon period, but it's obvious it isn't the flop that some are making it out to be.
So then help me understand
the starting player base of Kerbal years ago was lower than the starting player base of NMS.
The current player base of Kerbal is now at the time of this writing higher than the current player base of NMS.
How do we resolve your assertion with these facts?
p.s. this is also true for a TON of games if Kerbal doesnt work for you as an example we have plenty more we can use
Check your numbers again. Besides, NMS is not only on Steam. Combine all the multiplatform players and it would not even be close.
like I said, we can use other examples if you perfer.
would Elite Dangerous be better?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am pretty convinced that all the people putting so much effort in hating NMS are just angry with themselves for falling for the hype, for getting their hopes up. Really, look at this thread alone, half doesn't even own the game but have a mighty big opinion on everything from patches, graphics, game play elements, what Sean said 4 years ago when provoked etc. etc. Look at Fable like they guy above said, look at the Age of Conan box promising features STILL not in the game.
I think NMS is awesome and delivers in spades, I have no clue what some people were expecting. And half of the ' missing' features are actually in the game as pointed out earlier in this thread. People just can't comprehend the scale of this game, 99% of the players might actually miss 99% of the implemented features with a universe of this scale.
People these days, NMS may rot in hell but dare speak evil of a game like Star Citizen and you've got hell to pay.....(hint, one of these is an actual game...).
/Cheers, Lahnmir
What the hell you talk player hyped them self Sean him self told and promised all kind of stuff that are not in game . So fucking ignorant ......people are angry because most of feature are not in place
I think that there is a significant delta here. Actually there is a really good reddit thread which chastises the game for the so-called broken promises. However, if you go through each individual item, you'll note than MANY are 1 or 2 years old. Secondly, the quotes which are quoted are VERY subjective and if you actually go to the sources, the expanded context is like "This is something we definitely need to do." and then the source expands that to "....but it's very difficult, if not impossible." There is TONS of "...we'd like to do X..." talk that people take as being promised.
It's all right there. I'm not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is that a VAST majority of people who are angry about the game have taken a vision and projected that onto what they expect for the first iteration of the game, even though he has said what they should expect.
There are other pieces which he touches on which clearly aren't there. I don't think this is an outright lie, I think this is a scope adjustment (like attacking fleets, etc). However, there is zero allowance for any of this. It seems to constantly turn into a black and white conversation. "You said this 2 years ago. I didn't listen to anything else you said. I expect this now."
see on this i agree.
more over I think the review scores are affected by this and I think they should not be affected by this. I wish gamers could better separate the game from the developer. However, without evidence my gut tells me with a lot of 'strength' that those assumptions where manufactured in such as way as to have hype while at the same time not have the developer responsible.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't think Murray cares. They made a ton of money on it because of all the hype it got.
And continues to make money. The PS4 sales have been great. Top 10 every week since release.
that would not be accurate. best we can tell its only top 1 for downloads and only from PS4 store
It is accurate. It was linked twice yesterday that it ranks 8th in overall sales for the PS4. So that includes physical sales. Nice try though.
but you said number 1 of PS4 not downloadable you did not say number 1 of downloadable games from the PS4 store (using bold here becuase I know you dont like caps but I want you to not miss it)
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Every single player game loses the majority of its playerbase a couple weeks after launch.
that is not really accurate. I will agree it tends to happened in a larger drop when talking about AAA single player games but rarely happens in games I play. not suggesting I play better games I am just trying to illustrate that it doesnt happen enough for it to really be universal rule
It actually is quite accurate. Even take a look at Kerbal that you mention earlier on here, they only show a peak of around 4k players daily and they have double the number of owners as NMS.
Some games are anomalous, but even the games with the top concurrent players show significant drop-offs in their player bases. Keep in mind, though, that 30% of owners have played the game in the past 2 weeks which is comparable to even the most popular games. For instance, Kerbal has about 7% of owners play the game within a 2 week period. Granted, I'd say that NMS is still in its honeymoon period, but it's obvious it isn't the flop that some are making it out to be.
You have to compare games at the similar time period after when they were released. So in this case, what percentage of players were lost in the first month for each game. Otherwise it's OMG did you see how many players Bioshock infinite has lost since release.
Comments
38% for a $60 title from a major publisher.... yeah.
That screams success.....
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Also not known is the number of people that will not be buying another game from HG again after this fiasco.
But that number is at least one...
Part 1:
1. Is the game an exploration game? yes
2. Was it hyped as an exploration game? yes
3. Was there an unusually high volume of gamers hyped about this game? yes
4. does that then assume many gamers if not most like exploration games? yes
5. Is it safe to say based on the hype of this game that its a niche product? no, not at all. if it was niche the hype would not have 'stuck'
Part 2:
1. Are being being clever by mentioning they returned the game? no
2. why? because it clearly shows they bought into the hype of which many others warned them about but they bought it anyway. so not something really worth advertising.
Part 3.
1. is the game 'bad' because people feel the developer lied (regardless of if he did or not)? no. a game is good or bad based on the value of the game play peroid. not what the developers say is in the game.
2. are the reviews lower than would be otherwise because of the hype controversy? yes
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
your comment however was extreemly rude
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
It actually is quite accurate. Even take a look at Kerbal that you mention earlier on here, they only show a peak of around 4k players daily and they have double the number of owners as NMS.
Some games are anomalous, but even the games with the top concurrent players show significant drop-offs in their player bases. Keep in mind, though, that 30% of owners have played the game in the past 2 weeks which is comparable to even the most popular games. For instance, Kerbal has about 7% of owners play the game within a 2 week period. Granted, I'd say that NMS is still in its honeymoon period, but it's obvious it isn't the flop that some are making it out to be.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Sean him self told and promised all kind of stuff that are not in game .
So fucking ignorant ......people are angry because most of feature are not in place
the starting player base of Kerbal years ago was lower than the starting player base of NMS.
The current player base of Kerbal is now at the time of this writing higher than the current player base of NMS.
How do we resolve your assertion with these facts?
p.s. this is also true for a TON of games if Kerbal doesnt work for you as an example we have plenty more we can use
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I think that there is a significant delta here. Actually there is a really good reddit thread which chastises the game for the so-called broken promises. However, if you go through each individual item, you'll note than MANY are 1 or 2 years old. Secondly, the quotes which are quoted are VERY subjective and if you actually go to the sources, the expanded context is like "This is something we definitely need to do." and then the source expands that to "....but it's very difficult, if not impossible." There is TONS of "...we'd like to do X..." talk that people take as being promised.
It's all right there. I'm not saying you're wrong. What I'm saying is that a VAST majority of people who are angry about the game have taken a vision and projected that onto what they expect for the first iteration of the game, even though he has said what they should expect.
There are other pieces which he touches on which clearly aren't there. I don't think this is an outright lie, I think this is a scope adjustment (like attacking fleets, etc). However, there is zero allowance for any of this. It seems to constantly turn into a black and white conversation. "You said this 2 years ago. I didn't listen to anything else you said. I expect this now."
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
would Elite Dangerous be better?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
more over I think the review scores are affected by this and I think they should not be affected by this. I wish gamers could better separate the game from the developer. However, without evidence my gut tells me with a lot of 'strength' that those assumptions where manufactured in such as way as to have hype while at the same time not have the developer responsible.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me