No Man's Sky loses 90% of its player base.

[The3rdWalker 1,279]

http://steamspy.com/app/275850

[The3rdWalker 1,279]

I guess providing a game with no missions, growth as a character, or a story means people get bored pretty easy. "and that's... why you don't pre-order games" -- the one armed man

[J4MES OX4D 10,183]

2 hours ago, PlasticGaming said:

I guess providing a game with no missions, growth as a character, or a story means people get bored pretty easy. "and that's... why you don't pre-order games" -- the one armed man

What didn't help No Man's Sky was that a string of USP features that were talked about for the last 3 years and just weeks before release were strangely omitted from the game. It meant that users after a few hours had seen absolutely everything on offer and that there was nothing left to play for apart from a mundane grind based on algorithmic generation leading to nothing. Sean Murray has been outed as a compulsive liar and he then stuck the knife in by doing a u-turn with paid DLC to further screw players who were ripped off in the first place. What was advertised up until June was a £40/$60 game but what was released was a pissy early access alpha indie and gamers have been let down big time. 

People pre-ordered in good faith expecting to get what was advertised but this is probably the most sorriest scam in gaming and shockingly even worse than anything EA and Ubisoft have pulled in their dirty histories. Surprised a lawsuit hasn't been started against Hello Games as there's multiple violations in place against them. 

Good review here

 

[GazzaGarratt 11,163]

The first few minutes of Angry Joe vids always get a good giggle from me

Most players need goals and targets. Mission based games have succeeded hugely, just look at Destiny and Warframe. I really still like the look of it but without missions I think I'd be a little lost.

[tronic44 3,642]

38 minutes ago, GazzaGarratt said:

The first few minutes of Angry Joe vids always get a good giggle from me

Most players need goals and targets. Mission based games have succeeded hugely, just look at Destiny and Warframe. I really still like the look of it but without missions I think I'd be a little lost.

Completely agree, the thought of playing a game for so long with nothing to aim for seems pointless to me. I think the idea itself is brilliant but maybe they should have considered having more than 12 people working on it. 

Past games have shown that even something as simple as going to skins will give the gamer something to work on. If the expected time playing this game was around 10 hours then maybe it would survive but the thought of playing something like this for hundreds of hours is not tempting in the slightest.

Actually, thinking about it, even multiplayer might have given this game a little more life time. Just something.....anything! 

[phil bottle 9,947]

With multiplayer the modding community could do wonders with this game.

I play DayZ (originally a mod of a military simulater) which technically has no mission other than to survive but it's the interaction with other players that has seen me clock up hundreds of hours on the mod and now standalone. 

Shame.

[Rumelylady 188]

I think his review is a pretty accurate assessment. It's nice in small bursts, but could have so much more to it. It's a $20 games that we paid $90 for, and that honestly annoys me far more than anything. I knew nothing about the game beyond getting to go to different planets and explore, so not having all the promised content doesn't bother me in the same way. It just should not be the price it is for what you get to do. Unravel was only $20 and even though it's a much shorter game, it feels like there's more to do in it for the few hours of gameplay.

That being said, probably will hold on to it for a while to play in small bursts... until something new comes out and we want to trade it in.