I'm currently playing NMS at 2560v1080 with FOV set to 120 (manually changed FOV in the .ini file).
The visuals are gorgeous !
I have also been lucky in that each of the four systems I've explored has had at least one very interesting planet.
I'm currently sightseeing on a planet with bright red grass fields, patches of forest with trees that have lime green leaves and large areas of water. Intermittent rainstorms that drop the temperature drastically. Screenshot heaven !
It has loads of aggressive creatures, I get attacked almost every time I leave my ship ! It also has Vortex Cubes though...
Is " the Unhyped" another term for people that choose not to believe in what a developer explicitly says what features to expect in a video game? Seems like another word for sheep or gullible.
Lot of BS without a coherent reason as to why 45% of players that bought NMS and took the time to do a review, did not like it, and a good many instituted refunds. And gave it a negative review.
Bottom line is a ton of people do/did not like NMS or think it was worth the $60.
And saying 99.9% of the people complaining about have never played it, is patently untrue, as directly evidenced by the Steam reviews.
"...a good chunk of that is from people who don't even have an hour logged in the game."
"That said, the reason for the negative responses varies quite a bit between rather unwarranted reflexive reactions to performance issues, to actual gripes that are reasonably substantiated."
ETC
Talk what you will, already used actual examples from Steam reviews and pointed out a major component of many of them that anyone can hop on steam and confirm for themselves.
Gave a few rather clear reasons. You don't have to acknowledge them if you don't want, but don't pretend the information isn't there.
As for your last statement, not certain who you even are directing that towards as not even orbitxo claimed that. The statement by them was "99.9% are actually playing the game" to which the steam reviews and other review systems can not really confirm or deny that factor. We can point out that "it was the 'non-players'. who do most of the negative posts" does have the point that most of the negative reviews don't even have an hour of time logged, as previously mentioned.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Lot of BS without a coherent reason as to why 45% of players that bought NMS and took the time to do a review, did not like it, and a good many instituted refunds. And gave it a negative review.
Bottom line is a ton of people do/did not like NMS or think it was worth the $60.
And saying 99.9% of the people complaining about have never played it, is patently untrue, as directly evidenced by the Steam reviews.
"...a good chunk of that is from people who don't even have an hour logged in the game."
"That said, the reason for the negative responses varies quite a bit between rather unwarranted reflexive reactions to performance issues, to actual gripes that are reasonably substantiated."
ETC
Talk what you will, already used actual examples from Steam reviews and pointed out a major component of many of them that anyone can hop on steam and confirm for themselves.
Gave a few rather clear reasons. You don't have to acknowledge them if you don't want, but don't pretend the information isn't there.
As for your last statement, not certain who you even are directing that towards as not even orbitxo claimed that. The statement by them was "99.9% are actually playing the game" to which the steam reviews and other review systems can not really confirm or deny that factor. We can point out that "it was the 'non-players'. who do most of the negative posts" does have the point that most of the negative reviews don't even have an hour of time logged, as previously mentioned.
I already said it before too. The vast majority of the bad reviews (especially all the 0 score ones) are from the 12th of August, the day the game launched.
People logged in, raged at bad performance, didn't bother to check the graphic settings and adjust them, logged off, asked for refund and rage on forum.
These People should stick to playing on consoles and not play PC games, if they can't be arsed to do something simple as adjusting graphic settings to tune it to your PC hardware.
People with AMD Phenom CPU's had a right to complain, as that was only recently fixed with the new patch.
Is " the Unhyped" another term for people that choose not to believe in what a developer explicitly says what features to expect in a video game? Seems like another word for sheep or gullible.
That'd be the inverse(opposite) of "sheep or gullible" if one is not buying into the hype about a game.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
I already said it before too. The vast majority of the bad reviews (especially all the 0 score ones) are from the 12th of August, the day the game launched.
People logged in, raged at bad performance, didn't bother to check the graphic settings and adjust them, logged off, asked for refund and rage on forum.
These People should stick to playing on consoles and not play PC games, if they can't be arsed to do something simple as adjusting graphic settings to tune it to your PC hardware.
People with AMD Phenom CPU's had a right to complain, as that was only recently fixed with the new patch.
That's a rather generalising statement to make.
What's just as likely is that people expect good performance when spending $60 on a game, with all the crashing, hitching, stuttering and so on they just couldn't be bothered to give the developers the time of day. They only have 2 hours to get a refund afterall, why would they wait longer?
They can now buy the game when it's fixed, patched up and on sale.
1. The content not worth $60
2. I'm happy i get to refund this game & buy other game.
3. More than half refund the game from 300K++ buyers. Its FACT
4. From 200K++ users online into 20K-45K users online. Its FACT
NMS is currently sitting at ~729,544 buyers with total active players at ~701,769 and average play time of 12.9 hours.
Factual statement would be that in the last 24 hours the game peaked at 47,498 users, following a week-long trend in declining concurrent user numbers.
And they updated something 18 minutes ago.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
"Factual statement would be that in the last 24 hours the game peaked at 47,498 users, following a week-long trend in declining concurrent user numbers."
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Sounds like a game for grandpa. All cosied up with his plaid blanket and flask of tea playing NMS while nodding off at regular intervals.
Nice to see devs catering for a new type of gamer.
This is what I expected from the get go really. Just a game that you can pop in. Mess around for a bit. Put some music on get some coffee/tea/beer and enjoy. Nothing to fancy, a slow pace and simple. It delivered on those aspects really and that is a good thing. No Man's Sky is for me the equivalent as just driving around in GTA. Enjoying the surrounding while messing around.
I already said it before too. The vast majority of the bad reviews (especially all the 0 score ones) are from the 12th of August, the day the game launched.
People logged in, raged at bad performance, didn't bother to check the graphic settings and adjust them, logged off, asked for refund and rage on forum.
These People should stick to playing on consoles and not play PC games, if they can't be arsed to do something simple as adjusting graphic settings to tune it to your PC hardware.
People with AMD Phenom CPU's had a right to complain, as that was only recently fixed with the new patch.
That's a rather generalising statement to make.
What's just as likely is that people expect good performance when spending $60 on a game, with all the crashing, hitching, stuttering and so on they just couldn't be bothered to give the developers the time of day. They only have 2 hours to get a refund afterall, why would they wait longer?
They can now buy the game when it's fixed, patched up and on sale.
No it isn't, because it takes less that "one" minute to adjust your graphic settings. The vast majority of performance complaints on day one were related to the default vSync=ON, gSync=ON and MaxFPS=30 (and to some degree default 1920x1080 resolution and AA=FXAA).
I had the exact same thing when logging in first time. Stutter and terrible framerates. Spend one minute tweaking graphic settings, restarted the game and it has run smooth as silk ever since! And that with Core i5, 8GB RAM, conventional HDD and GTX770.
Sorry, but if you can't even be arsed to do that, stick to playing on consoles. There you can just buy a game, pop it in your console and off you go.
PS. I am not talking about people that have an old AMD Phenom CPU. Those had all right to complain, but was fixed within couple days.
I decided to pre-order this less than a week from release on the advice of my niece. I had never seen a trailer and was completely unaware of the hype. I had no expectations of what the game would be, other than some kind of space/planetary exploration game. I am having a great time. I haven't bought a game at full price in years and years, and I don't regret this purchase. I am a grandma, though, so maybe that's it.
... This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Not a bad review but I find your rating pretty low, the game is every bit of what it promised it would be. The problem is the players that hyped this game into something it never claimed to be. I personally would have held the rating until after Monday's patch.
Aww Jeez, you didn't just go blaming the players did you?
The downfall is pretty normal for any game after release.
I'm more interested to see into what numbers it will stabilize, this is also steam alone but seeing the common share steam should represent the majority on PC.
No it isn't, because it takes less that "one" minute to adjust your graphic settings. The vast majority of performance complaints on day one were related to the default vSync=ON, gSync=ON and MaxFPS=30 (and to some degree default 1920x1080 resolution and AA=FXAA).
I had the exact same thing when logging in first time. Stutter and terrible framerates. Spend one minute tweaking graphic settings, restarted the game and it has run smooth as silk ever since! And that with Core i5, 8GB RAM, conventional HDD and GTX770.
Sorry, but if you can't even be arsed to do that, stick to playing on consoles. There you can just buy a game, pop it in your console and off you go.
PS. I am not talking about people that have an old AMD Phenom CPU. Those had all right to complain, but was fixed within couple days.
Sure it is, where's the proof to back up such a statement? All you've got is your opinion. It's great that a simple change worked for you but that only means that it worked for you, there were plenty of streamers who simply gave up after trying a myriad of changes. If it didn't work for them perhaps it was a bigger issue than you're acknowledging.
I think it's great that people got their refunds, such poor, shoddy QA does not deserve $60.
The downfall is pretty normal for any game after release.
I'm more interested to see into what numbers it will stabilize, this is also steam alone but seeing the common share steam should represent the majority on PC.
Perhaps. It's just looks a bit startling to see that in less than one week.
I like NMS, however I don't think it's worth the $60 price tag that most of us paid. While it's got a lot of potential It still feels like an Early Access game to me, it's very bare bones as it is and that's on top of the masses reporting very poor performance issues even on high end rigs.
I can't help but to think NMS would have benefited greatly from a four to six month Early Access phase on Steam to iron out the bugs/glitches and a $20-$30 price tag. I think the reviews would be much more positive.
This game is a 3, sorry but there is NO game. You collect inventory slots and that is it, planet 1 is the same as planet 60, there is no complex crafting/tech/dynamics/environment. it is GONE, promised but not delivered.
If I sold you a car and it was instead a pretty red wagon you would be ENRAGED, you would not say "this wagon lets you feel the bumps in the street and the green of the grass better! You would care about the leather seats you didn't get, the radio not working, the lack of an engine or air conditioner" We were promised a GRAND scale game, we were given a shell full of fancy nothing, there is not a single feature that evolves,improves or delivers from what that scum Sean Murray said from the early years to mere weeks prior."
Everyone should demand a refund + a time machine to get the lime lost back due to false promises.
And further, as to the complaint that people on Steam "...played for a very short amount of time and then did a bad review...", duh?
That is WHOLLY based on the refund policy, play more than 2 hours, no refund. If the time was 5 hours or 10 hours, you'd see that, but you don't.
And if the game doesn't run for people, that is plenty of time to make that determination.
That just cycles back to the point others already made about the game setting and updates for performance that's already been done to NMS. Reviews based on that as their complaint and consequently having no real time in the game are only a reflection of a segment of the userbase that have jumped reflexively at a problem that's already been addressed.
For the other issues that affect the people that are actually playing the game, you have the other reviews like the one I mentioned by Zombie XII.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Not a bad review but I find your rating pretty low, the game is every bit of what it promised it would be. The problem is the players that hyped this game into something it never claimed to be. I personally would have held the rating until after Monday's patch.
The game is everything they promised it to be? Hmmmmm, I could have sworn they promised a Multiplayer game and then changed that to a single player game a week before launch.
Comments
The visuals are gorgeous !
I have also been lucky in that each of the four systems I've explored has had at least one very interesting planet.
I'm currently sightseeing on a planet with bright red grass fields, patches of forest with trees that have lime green leaves and large areas of water. Intermittent rainstorms that drop the temperature drastically. Screenshot heaven !
It has loads of aggressive creatures, I get attacked almost every time I leave my ship ! It also has Vortex Cubes though...
"That said, the reason for the negative responses varies quite a bit between rather unwarranted reflexive reactions to performance issues, to actual gripes that are reasonably substantiated."
ETC
Talk what you will, already used actual examples from Steam reviews and pointed out a major component of many of them that anyone can hop on steam and confirm for themselves.
Gave a few rather clear reasons. You don't have to acknowledge them if you don't want, but don't pretend the information isn't there.
As for your last statement, not certain who you even are directing that towards as not even orbitxo claimed that. The statement by them was "99.9% are actually playing the game" to which the steam reviews and other review systems can not really confirm or deny that factor. We can point out that "it was the 'non-players'. who do most of the negative posts" does have the point that most of the negative reviews don't even have an hour of time logged, as previously mentioned.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
People logged in, raged at bad performance, didn't bother to check the graphic settings and adjust them, logged off, asked for refund and rage on forum.
These People should stick to playing on consoles and not play PC games, if they can't be arsed to do something simple as adjusting graphic settings to tune it to your PC hardware.
People with AMD Phenom CPU's had a right to complain, as that was only recently fixed with the new patch.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
That's a rather generalising statement to make.
What's just as likely is that people expect good performance when spending $60 on a game, with all the crashing, hitching, stuttering and so on they just couldn't be bothered to give the developers the time of day. They only have 2 hours to get a refund afterall, why would they wait longer?
They can now buy the game when it's fixed, patched up and on sale.
2. I'm happy i get to refund this game & buy other game.
3. More than half refund the game from 300K++ buyers. Its FACT
4. From 200K++ users online into 20K-45K users online. Its FACT
Factual statement would be that in the last 24 hours the game peaked at 47,498 users, following a week-long trend in declining concurrent user numbers.
And they updated something 18 minutes ago.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
https://steamdb.info/app/275850/graphs/
"Factual statement would be that in the last 24 hours the game peaked at 47,498 users, following a week-long trend in declining concurrent user numbers."
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
This is what I expected from the get go really. Just a game that you can pop in. Mess around for a bit. Put some music on get some coffee/tea/beer and enjoy. Nothing to fancy, a slow pace and simple. It delivered on those aspects really and that is a good thing. No Man's Sky is for me the equivalent as just driving around in GTA. Enjoying the surrounding while messing around.
No it isn't, because it takes less that "one" minute to adjust your graphic settings.
The vast majority of performance complaints on day one were related to the default vSync=ON, gSync=ON and MaxFPS=30 (and to some degree default 1920x1080 resolution and AA=FXAA).
I had the exact same thing when logging in first time. Stutter and terrible framerates.
Spend one minute tweaking graphic settings, restarted the game and it has run smooth as silk ever since! And that with Core i5, 8GB RAM, conventional HDD and GTX770.
Sorry, but if you can't even be arsed to do that, stick to playing on consoles.
There you can just buy a game, pop it in your console and off you go.
PS. I am not talking about people that have an old AMD Phenom CPU. Those had all right to complain, but was fixed within couple days.
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Aww Jeez, you didn't just go blaming the players did you?
The downfall is pretty normal for any game after release.
I'm more interested to see into what numbers it will stabilize, this is also steam alone but seeing the common share steam should represent the majority on PC.
Sure it is, where's the proof to back up such a statement? All you've got is your opinion. It's great that a simple change worked for you but that only means that it worked for you, there were plenty of streamers who simply gave up after trying a myriad of changes. If it didn't work for them perhaps it was a bigger issue than you're acknowledging.
I think it's great that people got their refunds, such poor, shoddy QA does not deserve $60.
Perhaps. It's just looks a bit startling to see that in less than one week.
As of right now, you apparently aren't aware of Elite: Dangerous.. NMS has potential, but it has a long way to go.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I can't help but to think NMS would have benefited greatly from a four to six month Early Access phase on Steam to iron out the bugs/glitches and a $20-$30 price tag. I think the reviews would be much more positive.
If I sold you a car and it was instead a pretty red wagon you would be ENRAGED, you would not say "this wagon lets you feel the bumps in the street and the green of the grass better! You would care about the leather seats you didn't get, the radio not working, the lack of an engine or air conditioner" We were promised a GRAND scale game, we were given a shell full of fancy nothing, there is not a single feature that evolves,improves or delivers from what that scum Sean Murray said from the early years to mere weeks prior."
Everyone should demand a refund + a time machine to get the lime lost back due to false promises.
That is WHOLLY based on the refund policy, play more than 2 hours, no refund. If the time was 5 hours or 10 hours, you'd see that, but you don't.
And if the game doesn't run for people, that is plenty of time to make that determination.
For the other issues that affect the people that are actually playing the game, you have the other reviews like the one I mentioned by Zombie XII.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
The game is everything they promised it to be? Hmmmmm, I could have sworn they promised a Multiplayer game and then changed that to a single player game a week before launch.