Post by marc122 on Nov 28, 2016 3:48:47 GMT -4
I might've gotten some things wrong in the process, so feel free to point them out and I will gladly correct them ASAP.
You may (or may not) have heard this: No Man's Sky has received its first major update: the Foundation Update. It adds a feature that the studio has promised to add back in August: base-building. Unfortunately, it doesn't cut much of the bad press it (reasonably) got.
Yes, NMS had hype: people pre-ordered, thought it was gonna be the best game ever, and there was talk about No Man's Sky's features from both sides: the gamers and the development company behind the game, Hello Games. Vast promises, including 18 quintillion planets to explore, multiplayer, everything. But the problem is, it was overhyped. It didn't help that some of the features that were promised did not end up in the actual game at all, and it instead came with several technical problems in place of those features. The once-major fans of the game got burnt out and turned into its harshest critics, finding every flaw they could in NMS. The biggest problems they identified at launch were the awkward procedural generation, repetition, broken promises, bugs and glitches that overshadowed the already-shallow "gameplay", and the hype surrounding No Man's Sky.
Then Hello Games went silent. Gamers took that action as not only shutting themselves from public, but reluctance and coward-like behavior. They began refunding just as fast as when they bought the game. They thought HG is too busy taking baths in money-filled tubs while their smashed phones rotted in trash cans, and called them thieves and liars. But the real reason Hello Games and Sean Murray didn't talk to gamers was because they were busy working on the Foundation Update. They just didn't let gamers know.
But what if Hello Games tried to follow Square Enix's example of remaking a badly-received game? Well, chances are, they might either succeed, or fail. And judging by the current reputation of the game, it would seem to lean more towards the latter. But why? Here's a couple reasons.
Final Fantasy XIV is a different beast. Alpha and Beta tests were initiated, so players could get a taste of what the final game will be. And first impressions were mixed. but at launch, the reactions were negative, because the problems that were pointed out in both alpha and beta weren't addressed. Some, if not most, players agreed with gaming journalism sites on the game's problems: the gameplay, UIs, stability, and pace. SE worked day and night to improve the game, but at the end, they just gave up and remade the game from scratch. Well, sort of. The remake/sequel hybrid was called Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn, and it was received much better than what the original version got, due to fixing many of that version's problems, and it has a different storyline.
No Man's Sky was received much less favorably, at least from gamers. Yes, I said it before, but now I'm going to restate it with more detail. They pointed out that much-anticipated features, like multiplayer, base building, etc., weren't implemented, and thought that they skipped QA to get it out the door as soon as possible. At the same time, the game's procedural generation limits and flaw were exposed and flashed in front of their eyes. Bugs and Glitches were enough to disrupt the gameplay, which they saw was lacking. They then described the "gameplay" as "land on planet, name it, explore planet, do stuff, get back in ship, and the cycle repeats". And they aren't going to forget the launch problems anytime soon.
But why wouldn't they let the game's launch, and the controversy surrounding NMS as a whole, fade? Because, as George Santayana put it, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". They don't want another No Man's Sky, just in different form. They're willing to take more caution in purchasing games, as well as hyping them, at this point. And NMS would be soon remembered as a possible textbook example of what not to do in game development. Yeah, Hello Games and Sean Murray can still formally apologize, start development on a remake, take the original No Man's Sky off sale, launch alpha and beta tests for No Man's Sky: Director's Cut, or whatever it would be titled, and eventually launch it, but the game likely won't sell as much as GTA V/the original NMS/FFXIV:ARR (arr!)/etc. thanks to the controversy surrounding the original launch.
In the end, Hello Games can do almost nothing about No Man's Sky. They can't keep updating it forever until it has all the promised features, or it ends up better than what was initially promised. They can't just remake the game like SE did with FFXIV either. The only real thing they could do other than update it is to take it off sale for good, unlike Warner Bros with Arkham Knight PC. No more money from the mess that's NMS. Just slowly rebuild their reputation and, hopefully, come back with something actually good and worthwhile. But we don't have the power to look into the future to see, so let's just wait and see what will happen to NMS.
You may (or may not) have heard this: No Man's Sky has received its first major update: the Foundation Update. It adds a feature that the studio has promised to add back in August: base-building. Unfortunately, it doesn't cut much of the bad press it (reasonably) got.
Yes, NMS had hype: people pre-ordered, thought it was gonna be the best game ever, and there was talk about No Man's Sky's features from both sides: the gamers and the development company behind the game, Hello Games. Vast promises, including 18 quintillion planets to explore, multiplayer, everything. But the problem is, it was overhyped. It didn't help that some of the features that were promised did not end up in the actual game at all, and it instead came with several technical problems in place of those features. The once-major fans of the game got burnt out and turned into its harshest critics, finding every flaw they could in NMS. The biggest problems they identified at launch were the awkward procedural generation, repetition, broken promises, bugs and glitches that overshadowed the already-shallow "gameplay", and the hype surrounding No Man's Sky.
Then Hello Games went silent. Gamers took that action as not only shutting themselves from public, but reluctance and coward-like behavior. They began refunding just as fast as when they bought the game. They thought HG is too busy taking baths in money-filled tubs while their smashed phones rotted in trash cans, and called them thieves and liars. But the real reason Hello Games and Sean Murray didn't talk to gamers was because they were busy working on the Foundation Update. They just didn't let gamers know.
But what if Hello Games tried to follow Square Enix's example of remaking a badly-received game? Well, chances are, they might either succeed, or fail. And judging by the current reputation of the game, it would seem to lean more towards the latter. But why? Here's a couple reasons.
Final Fantasy XIV is a different beast. Alpha and Beta tests were initiated, so players could get a taste of what the final game will be. And first impressions were mixed. but at launch, the reactions were negative, because the problems that were pointed out in both alpha and beta weren't addressed. Some, if not most, players agreed with gaming journalism sites on the game's problems: the gameplay, UIs, stability, and pace. SE worked day and night to improve the game, but at the end, they just gave up and remade the game from scratch. Well, sort of. The remake/sequel hybrid was called Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn, and it was received much better than what the original version got, due to fixing many of that version's problems, and it has a different storyline.
No Man's Sky was received much less favorably, at least from gamers. Yes, I said it before, but now I'm going to restate it with more detail. They pointed out that much-anticipated features, like multiplayer, base building, etc., weren't implemented, and thought that they skipped QA to get it out the door as soon as possible. At the same time, the game's procedural generation limits and flaw were exposed and flashed in front of their eyes. Bugs and Glitches were enough to disrupt the gameplay, which they saw was lacking. They then described the "gameplay" as "land on planet, name it, explore planet, do stuff, get back in ship, and the cycle repeats". And they aren't going to forget the launch problems anytime soon.
But why wouldn't they let the game's launch, and the controversy surrounding NMS as a whole, fade? Because, as George Santayana put it, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". They don't want another No Man's Sky, just in different form. They're willing to take more caution in purchasing games, as well as hyping them, at this point. And NMS would be soon remembered as a possible textbook example of what not to do in game development. Yeah, Hello Games and Sean Murray can still formally apologize, start development on a remake, take the original No Man's Sky off sale, launch alpha and beta tests for No Man's Sky: Director's Cut, or whatever it would be titled, and eventually launch it, but the game likely won't sell as much as GTA V/the original NMS/FFXIV:ARR (arr!)/etc. thanks to the controversy surrounding the original launch.
In the end, Hello Games can do almost nothing about No Man's Sky. They can't keep updating it forever until it has all the promised features, or it ends up better than what was initially promised. They can't just remake the game like SE did with FFXIV either. The only real thing they could do other than update it is to take it off sale for good, unlike Warner Bros with Arkham Knight PC. No more money from the mess that's NMS. Just slowly rebuild their reputation and, hopefully, come back with something actually good and worthwhile. But we don't have the power to look into the future to see, so let's just wait and see what will happen to NMS.
