I believe in detailed analysis too. Analysis often reveals hidden beauty in great works, whether it's literature or games. However, to quote Sherlock Holmes-

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

To plumb the reasons you had 'fun' in a game or what made a moment in the game 'magical' is great, but we really don't have much gameplay data here to work with.
As for the devs talking about herding the players into a particular style of play, that may turn out to be actually a problem (however, elsewhere I've read and heard Sean Murray say that if there are players who decide to play in a completely unexpected, quirky way, like staying on their spawn planet and just exploring that, never getting into a spaceship, he would like to support that. He said he won't understand those people, but he would want them to have that freedom), but the devs have said that they want to support the game and add to it in the way the community might demand. So features that the community desires will be added to it by the devs. I think I also heard something about modding support(nothing heavy, but I think Sean Murray said that they won't lock things down, so code-literate players can dive into the game files and make changes and create new things.)

light487 wrote:Reminds me of the reason I hate Elite Dangerous.. it really needs hours and hours of "work" till you start to enjoy it.. well at least for me.. and yet I can boot up OOlite, with it's much worse graphics, less game mechanics and start enjoying it almost immediately.

<nods sagely>

Cody wrote:

light487 wrote:Reminds me of the reason I hate Elite Dangerous.. it really needs hours and hours of "work" till you start to enjoy it.. well at least for me.. and yet I can boot up OOlite, with it's much worse graphics, less game mechanics and start enjoying it almost immediately.

<nods sagely>

Now why doesn't that surprise me, Cody?

<chortles>

Without wishing to de-rail the thread, I think you do Oolite a disservice on the graphical front, I actually think it looks really nice but then I'm a child of the original Elite.

Back on topic, the more I read about NMS the less likely I am to buy it until I see it in action and get some folks opinions on it.

Philip Coutts wrote:Without wishing to de-rail the thread, I think you do Oolite a disservice on the graphical front, I actually think it looks really nice but then I'm a child of the original Elite.

I don't mind owning up to being "a child of the original Elite", Philip. As I've said before, it had me addicted within a few minutes of playing the game. I have no idea whether NMS will be able to accomplish the same result but I like the team behind the game and the subject matter appeals on many levels so it's a certainty I'm going to purchase it.

And will you look at that, I already have.

Children of the original Elite, eh? You young'uns... get off my lawn!

As for Oolite looking good... yeah!

Exploring, for me at least, is more than just aimlessly wandering around. When I explore, I have a set destination in mind, and I progress towards that goal in a very methodical manner. If I am going to explore in a sci-fi setting, where I have advanced technology to traverse a solar system, I'm damn well going to want to use technology to map my way. I'm damn well going to want to use technology to scan ahead and see what pitfalls and/or dangers there are over that next rise. Exploring, again to me, is a planned venture. If you get lost while exploring, it was a very poorly implemented plan. And neither is "digging upwards to the surface" a very good plan, all for reasons I've already stated. Also, as stated, it's not getting lost on the surface I'm even concerned about, but deep dark branching caves. Possibly cuz I have a thing about caves, and the dark... Don't much care for them IRL.

It's ironic I've seen several people elsewhere describe this game as "do whatever you want", but nothing is further from the truth. I cannot do whatever I want in this game. I can't build my own society, I cannot conspire to overthrow some universal monarch, I can't build my own citadel with furniture, and I cannot map my environment (other than pen & paper, which I've stated before, I refuse to do). You cannot do whatever you want to in this game, you do what the game developers want you to do.

But because I'm not happy with the implementation or lack thereof of certain features, it's not mean bitching and moaning about the game, it's not spouting off a bunch of negativity. I still plan on getting the game, and I still intend on trying to enjoy it. First time I get lost though, watch out... heh heh heh Just because someone finds a particular feature not to their liking, doesn;t mean they're being negative.

Cody wrote:Children of the original Elite, eh? You young'uns... get off my lawn!

I was a very mature "child", Cody. I don't think anyone would have describe me as a young'un physically at the time. *chuckle*

I'm still that child in many important respects though.

Victor Tombs wrote:I was a very mature "child", Cody. I don't think anyone would have describe me as a young'un physically at the time.

<grins> Silver Spacers are go!

Vartul wrote:I believe in detailed analysis too. Analysis often reveals hidden beauty in great works, whether it's literature or games. However, to quote Sherlock Holmes-

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

To plumb the reasons you had 'fun' in a game or what made a moment in the game 'magical' is great, but we really don't have much gameplay data here to work with.
As for the devs talking about herding the players into a particular style of play, that may turn out to be actually a problem (however, elsewhere I've read and heard Sean Murray say that if there are players who decide to play in a completely unexpected, quirky way, like staying on their spawn planet and just exploring that, never getting into a spaceship, he would like to support that. He said he won't understand those people, but he would want them to have that freedom), but the devs have said that they want to support the game and add to it in the way the community might demand. So features that the community desires will be added to it by the devs. I think I also heard something about modding support(nothing heavy, but I think Sean Murray said that they won't lock things down, so code-literate players can dive into the game files and make changes and create new things.)

Well, extrapolating is great too! As I said, I get to know a bit more about my habits of playing when I have to put them into coherent sentences. I'd love to be wrong in this case though, because the art style is lovely and I like fun games :3

I'm a sucker for new and shiny things.. I'll drop the $60AUD on the PC game in the lead up to its launch in June.. Then I'll either end up playing it for hours and hours, or I'll play it for up to 10 hours and leave it..

wizaerd wrote:Exploring, for me at least, is more than just aimlessly wandering around. When I explore, I have a set destination in mind, and I progress towards that goal in a very methodical manner. If I am going to explore in a sci-fi setting, where I have advanced technology to traverse a solar system, I'm damn well going to want to use technology to map my way. I'm damn well going to want to use technology to scan ahead and see what pitfalls and/or dangers there are over that next rise.

The problem to me with this statement is that you are virtually playing the game in advance. You are basically describing how you would play a game which rules you don't know yet. It's not the player's choice to decide how to play a game.

Now I'm not saying that anything you say is wrong or that you can't play NMS in that way, or that the game doesn't give you freedom to play it in such a way because I don't know the game rules myself. But games are not meant to be played however you want. Games are a set of rules created by the game developer.

There is not obligation for a game designer to give you freedom or let you follow your own agenda. In fact, he has not obligations at all. His job is to make a good game, but his idea of what a good game is could differ entirety from yours.

I'm aware that you didn't say otherwise. I'm just manifesting my thinking through your words, not contradicting anyone.

wizaerd wrote:You cannot do whatever you want to in this game, you do what the game developers want you to do.

Exactly as is usually the case with every game, at least every good game. Is the game developer's job to tell you how to play his game. Now, how flexibly a particular game is, how many play styles it supports or how much freedom it gives you is irrelevant and is the game developer's decision. However, the most freedom it gives you, the more play styles it supports and the more flexibility it has more difficult will be to make it right, and it would make it not necessarily a better game. (More popular maybe, but hardly better.)

Flatfingers wrote: And that's where NMS starts to sound wrong to me. The descriptions of the world of the game sound interesting... but then the developers speak. Why does everything they (primarily Sean Murray) say sound like they've decided what shall be the "right" way to play the game, and no deviation from the approved behaviors will be tolerated? It's as though they're deliberately either making it utterly boring, or penalizing you for playing the "wrong" way, until you discard this dangerous notion that the game is about your enjoyment. If that description is close to accurate, I see no reason to reward that attitude with my money.

This is pretty much exactly what worries me. You sum things up very well. I don't mind getting lost - I just don't want the idea of getting lost to be purposefully used to deter me from exploring in a game about exploration. I don't want to be railroaded in an open-universe sandbox game. It's like being in the fighter class in a game and then leveling mage skills - it doesn't go well for anyone involved and just doesn't make sense. You're making a fighting game? Make fighting fun! You're making a game about exploration? Make the exploration fun! You min-max; you don't scatter everything around, and you certainly don't make the appearance of offering tons of options and then railroad the player.

The game is advertised as being about exploration. Why punish players for exploring? What if a player [wants] to fully explore a planet before heading on to the next?

Etsu wrote:

wizaerd wrote:Exploring, for me at least, is more than just aimlessly wandering around. When I explore, I have a set destination in mind, and I progress towards that goal in a very methodical manner. If I am going to explore in a sci-fi setting, where I have advanced technology to traverse a solar system, I'm damn well going to want to use technology to map my way. I'm damn well going to want to use technology to scan ahead and see what pitfalls and/or dangers there are over that next rise.

The problem to me with this statement is that you are virtually playing the game in advance. You are basically describing how you would play a game which rules you don't know yet. It's not the player's choice to decide how to play a game.

Now I'm not saying that anything you say is wrong or that you can't play NMS in that way, or that the game doesn't give you freedom to play it in such a way because I don't know the game rules myself. But games are not meant to be played however you want. Games are a set of rules created by the game developer.

There is not obligation for a game designer to give you freedom or let you follow your own agenda. In fact, he has not obligations at all. His job is to make a good game, but his idea of what a good game is could differ entirety from yours.

I'm aware that you didn't say otherwise. I'm just manifesting my thinking through your words, not contradicting anyone.

wizaerd wrote:You cannot do whatever you want to in this game, you do what the game developers want you to do.

Exactly as is usually the case with every game, at least every good game. Is the game developer's job to tell you how to play his game. Now, how flexibly a particular game is, how many play styles it supports or how much freedom it gives you is irrelevant and is the game developer's decision. However, the most freedom it gives you, the more play styles it supports and the more flexibility it has more difficult will be to make it right, and it would make it not necessarily a better game. (More popular maybe, but hardly better.)

We have been told from day one, and the recent news blasts does not contradict it, this game is primarily about exploring. So yeah, we kinda do know the game rules. We know it focuses on exploration. We also know there is no minimap. Again, it's a scifi setting, we're living in a virtual world of advanced technology. But no minimap. Regardless of these mysterious game rules you keep eluding too, the fact that there's no minimap in a technology advanced gamework makes no sense. No matter how you try to spin it.