Please not with the grandiose promises again hello games, not again.
Right? You’d think he’d wise up lmao
They had a solid redemption arc post-release from No Man’s Sky. Sean Murray may be riding that high and lost track of the lesson he should’ve learned, which is scary for them, since he himself claims in the article that Light No Fire is a much more difficult premise to make than No Man’s Sky, and they only pulled that off after an incredibly extended development cycle, and just by the skin of their teeth.
And if Sean is saying it’s much harder, than the reality is likely terrifying.
Sean Murray may be riding that high and lost track of the lesson he should’ve learned
Oh hell no. He learned his lesson very well, that being that you can lie through your teeth, sell unfinished garbage, spend a decade implementing a fraction of what you promised, and become one of the most beloved studios in the business as a result. He’s doing the same thing again because it worked like magic the first time.
The “but the game is good now” people are the ones who showed him he can do exactly the same thing again without any serious repercussions.
He should have gone the star citizens route and just sell DLC for a game that never gets made.
It worked the first time. Why would he?
Yeah. I don’t know why devs talk about features of a game that is years out. Bums me out to hear about Witcher 4, as a massive Witcher fan. Like, why are you hyping this game up? Do you not remember CP2077 release? Do they not remember NMS release?
Promise of what though? Boring “gameplay”?
STOP. SHUT UP. DO NOT MAKE HUGE CLAIMS ABOUT WHAT THIS GAME WILL BE. Please learn from your mistakes.
What mistakes? They got rich with No Mans Sky.
-
Overpromise
-
Sell
-
Shut the fuck up during the outrage
-
Update game
Seemed like a winning formula for them.
-
They also created reputation for themselves full releasing incomplete games and then only fixing it years later.
So now gamers will learn. Don’t buy that games until about 4 to 5 years after release.
Except I’ve seen people all over the place getting hyped for LNF because those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Well it will be few of people every time.
Is that really a huge claim though? A big mountain you can climb over isn’t particularly exciting in the current realm of technical possibilities.
He’s just good at making it sound cool, I guess.
It’s both a huge claim and an unimportant one, and that’s why it’s a problem.
Claiming you have “taller than Mt. Everest” mountains in your game is easily verifiable, and a ton of work. Because you need a map that fits a mountain that size, and need to do all the artwork, make it an interesting place to be. It’s not impossible, just a lot of work.
At the same time, it’s not very important. When I’m looking for a next game, I don’t care how high the mountains are. I want an interesting place. Skyrims High Hrotgar for example is an interesting place with an interesting story. It felt very high and a long walk (7000 steps), but it probably pales in comparison to Mt. Everest.
So promise us a great story, interesting characters, or challenging gameplay. A good game, not a technical masterpiece that will be empty.
Yeah, that’s a fair point. It would be more exciting if it wasn’t procedurally generated, and that those mountaintops actually have something important to the gameplay or story explicitely placed there.
Then it would at least make a bit more sense to talk about how climbable those huge mountains are.
I find this all very amusing. Haven’t even played No Man’s Sky yet.
I see Sean Murray has learned nothing from the No Man’s Sky hype cycle. I don’t want grandiose promises about the scope and scale of the world, I want to know what exactly I’ll be doing in it. They’re promising role-playing depth, but the whole part about “building, survival, and exploration” just makes me feel like it will be another survival sandbox game with some RPG elements.
You also can’t have that much roleplaying depth with a procedurally generated world. There’s only so much that we’ll be able to do on RNG alone.
That’s why the likes of STALKER and Subnautica stand up in my mind in terms of survival, exploration, and adventure. Hand-crafted worlds and quests are hard to beat.
Will the mountains be as boring as NMS?
No, these ones will be taller.
Fun fact: you can climb mountains that are miles high, taller than Everest already in no man’s sky. Is it fun? No it really isn’t.
This game looks cool but it’s probably going to be boring as hell
It is exceedingly boring
Idk, NMS is bloody amazing!
When does it get amazing? I get so tired of managing my resources just so I can stay alive.
What difficulty are you playing it at?
For real! I tried playing it after it was “fixed”, and it was just not a fun experience for me. I spawned on a planet that had none of the resources I needed to progress, so I would just die after slowly suffocating. After the third or fourth time it happened in a row, I just gave up on it.
Having life or death based on RNG within the first 10 minutes of the game is not a good experience. I’m sure some people got luckier with their spawns and are having a great time with the game, but several bad spawns in a row really soured it for me.
To be honest, it really is a boring game. I don’t understand why people like it.
It’s way too grindy and there’s way too many resources to keep track of. I get that it’s a survival game and it needs resources but they just make it ridiculous. in order to make something you have to craft a thing into X then Y then Z - you can’t just directly craft into Z, so they’re just artificially padding out the game because there isn’t actually that much in the way of content.
From the start. I mean survival is part of the game. What did you expect?
I wish I could agree but it’s so so boring.
I don’t know, after they fixed everything I’d say the game is pretty neat for me rather than amazing but I’m glad you’re getting that much fun out of it!
Seems like Sean Murray went to the Peter Molyneux School of Videogame Marketing.
deleted by creator
Next in my bingo card, I have “it’s Skyrim with guns”.
Nope, I can’t see any problem coming from this claim at all. It’s not like they have a history of over promising and then under delivering or anything like that.
I should work in the games industry. Apparently you don’t need to be very bright.
The comparison is moot. Most of us have never seen Everest. I mean even in their last game, I’m sure if they just pulled some world mesh above the clouds and made sure there was a path you could do the same Everest climb. We went to space without a loading screen lol
Every time I read about Everest, I can’t not think about how the base camp is already higher than anything that exists in the alps
Crazy
Why?
Running straight up mountains mashing a jump button is fun, but it does get old after a few minutes. Not aure why you’d make a huge mountain.
I get the skepticism but I think that after they got humbled into providing free DLC for 7 years, they aren’t going to make the same mistake. I’m cautiously optimistic in other words.
I’m not sure that’s something I want. It takes days to climb Everest! I don’t want to play for days just to climb a procedurally generated mountain that probably doesn’t have anything on top of it. Or at best has some random shit that you can find everywhere else.
Why?
Not really selling it
