Would you pay 60 dollars for an indie game like this?
I judge things based on value for money, doesn't matter if it's an indie game or not. If I'm going to get 100+ hours from a game, it's worth $60 in my eyes.
>>329808329
>Indie game actually trying to be ambitious
>No SJW agenda bullshit being pushed telling you you're a gross person if you didn't like the game
>Fucking space
Sign me up but I'm not going to pre-order.
>>329808546
This. This is the correct answer.
>>329808329
Pricing can be whatever any devs want, but considering they show jack shit of gameplay and just were spouting honey covered PR speech during years - that means they are unsure in their product.
That means that features exist only on paper to sell preorders.
So in the end there is a little chance that it'll be worth the cost.
avoid at all cost
>>329808883
>That means that features exist only on paper to sell preorders.
But this week they had an event in which people played the game and confirmed most, if not all the features the devs talked about, even describing some things thatI believe weren't known before.
>>329809074
they played what, 30 min at all? Is it really enough?
and confirmation comes from talk, not from video? From fucking shitty journalists?
yeah, sure.
>>329808546
I'd buy it if the planets aren't ugly/unappealing. The planets are the major selling point of the game, and if that is shit, then the game is automatically terrible.
>>329808329
No Man's Sky is basically just a 3d version of Starbound right?
I can't see any reason to fork over money for it unless some really good bestiality schoolgirl rape mods come out.
>>329808329
Nope. The Shitness taught me that no amount of pedigree, love, and effort put in can change an indie game into anything else.
I had a soft cap of $20 before that for indies. And rarely spent that much. Now it's a hard cap that has to look outstanding to me.
These indie pricks need to learn their place. They are going to wipe themselves out of the market at this rate. Which is fine by me.
>>329808546
You sad fucking cuck.
I want this game so fucking hard
Isn't this just another procedurally generated do-nothing game?
>>329809180
What are some examples about journalists talking about having played a game and experienced some features of it, and then it turned out that feature was never in the game and it was a complete lie?
Plus, we've seen video of the collecting, fighting, scanning and upgrading part already, which seem to be the core of the game.
>>329809213
the planets were all created by computers and algorithms. There will be interesting planets with life and resources, but a whole bunch of barren planets that have nothing of worth in them. And there are billions of planets.
The Lead designer also said it was like 9/10 planets are barren and worthless with nothing of note on them.
>>329809440
yep + hype for no reason.
>>329809481
shill, plz. It's spore v 2.0
journalists know crap about videogames. It may look ok on surface and then after few hours break apart into unworking pieces of shit
>>329809546
>9/10 planets are barren and worthless with nothing of note on them.
Wasn't that more like 9/10 planets weren't supporting life?
You've got to have something to do on planets seeing as it's a way to get money for fuel.
>>329808648
But
>Shallow/non-existent gameplay
If this winds up being the case then its DOA. It might not be pushing some agenda but if its trying to create an "experience" intsead of having deep gameplay then it still gets a strike.
>>329809617
>shill, plz. It's spore v 2.0
>journalists know crap about videogames. It may look ok on surface and then after few hours break apart into unworking pieces of shit
Alright, but how is this related to what I said? Can you answer my first question?
I don't even pay $60 for a AAA game.
$30 is my absolute limit. But usually try for cheaper or pirate.
>>329809481
>Plus, we've seen video of the collecting, fighting, scanning and upgrading part already,
All depends on how deep and rewarding those mechanics are and so far we have no idea.
>>329808329
lmao no
>>329808883
Have you done any research on the game at all?
They revealed that their drive for the player revolves around exploration and discoveries being a primary way of upgrading your ship and suit.
explore space>find resources, mysterious artifacts, and hidden secrets>upgrade/buy suit and ships>repeat cycle.
This game is being made with people who primarily love exploration in videogames. Anything else is pretty much secondary. This is why everyone thinks its either going to be amazing or a huge flop.
That why im paying 60 burgers for this game, because how they've advertised it is for the people who primarily love exploration.
Faggots.
>>329809858
Indeed, I was just responding to someone seeing the features only exist on paper.
I'm not expecting a whole level of deep to thoses elements, I just want functionality.
>>329809374
Yes how dare he have money AND find enjoyment in things
I bet that piece of shit is over 6 feet tall and has a girlfriend too
Die in a fire you fucking chad
>>329809771
I don't waste time talking with obvious shills.
>>329809870
also, FFXV-kun - I see you got parttime job, Square won't be jelly?
>>329808329
What does it matter if it's indie or not? Looks like a full sized game so yeah, it probably is worth $60 but you'll never know for sure unless you buy it and find out for yourself.
I will be paying the $60.
Get blazed and lost in space. Sign me the fuck up.
>literally buying a universe
>60 DOLLARIEDOOS TOO RICH FOR BY DONGERINO
grow up /v/
Honestly I wouldn't pay $20 for it.
Just looks like more procedurally generated horseshit. The only reason Diablo got away with it is because Blizzard had the budget and production values to back it up. Indies can't do procedural generation without making it extremely repetitive, they just don't have the money to make enough assets.
>>329809546
This is actually a great way to approach space exploration.
Seeing to many empty planets is going to make the ones with life seam a lot more interesting.
This is starting to give me hope that every planet will not be walking around with slightly different looking freaks of nature.
I don't pay 60 dollars for any game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGXDCV9HiZ4
Reposted from last thread
>Going from one planet to another without using jumpspeed (which need fuel) takes literal hours
If this game turns out to be worth a purchase I'll aim for a planet, tape the key/stick down, and then work on some other stuff until I arrive, occasionnaly glancing to see the planer growing bigger and bigger through my ship's cockpit.
>>329808546
What if the novelty of walking around and starting at retarded animals wears off sooner than that?
I haven't really followed NMS, but doesn't Space Engineers already sort of have what NMS promises to have? Planets and shit I mean, though at the moment they're rather poorly optimized in SE.
No way I'm going to be paying 60€ for it on release day though. Better wait for user reviews first.
>>329809991
>I don't waste time talking with obvious shills.
All I did was ask a question about journalists pretending features exist in games close to release. I don't see how I've been acting like a so-called shill in any way.
If you have no way of backing up your claim, why do you post them?
60 is a bit too much, call me when it's more like 20-30.
I'm not a shitposter asking to have everything in this game, just enjoying a ride in space is enough for me but come on, 60 fucking bucks ?
>>329808329
Yup. I've paid ~$100 when Wing Commander 3 came out. I've paid way more for that blasted P133 to play games in SVGA.
The game looks fun. Even if it turns out to be a borefest, I'm genuinely curious and don't mind paying to see if that curiosity is justified.
Games nowadays are cheap as shit anyway..
>>329810368
you either new if you honestly believe that or shill who get paid to waste everyones time. no point interacting with you.
>>329810310
it doesn't have NMS'es hype
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLtmEjqzg7M
>>329810559
>you either new if you honestly believe that
Believe what?
I don't believe anything. This is why I asked for example in the first place.
>>329810638
then No Man's Hype will be your first experience, newfag
enjoy buyers remorse.
>>329809672
They'll have resources, but other than that they'll be useless.
The fact that 9 out of every vast, huge planet won't even be worth exploring, and only 10% of the planets in the game will have anything, honestly just makes me more amazed. So much planets will go ignored... damn, that really makes the game's size apparent.
>>329811025
out of every 10* vast, huge planet
oops
>>329810749
Clearly you are shitposting or stupid. You can't ask me to blindly believe something you have no proof of and then act like you've proven yourself right.
>>329811187
>You can't ask me to blindly believe something you have no proof of and then act like you've proven yourself right.
yet somehow you still believe journalists who spend whole 30 minutes (gasp) in controlled by devs enviroment. and will believe sweet honey layered PR talk.
sure, knock yourself out. your money and time wasted, not mine
>>329811025
>The fact that 9 out of every vast, huge planet won't even be worth exploring,
Well, maybe not worth in terms of any boni for gameplay's sake. I think the technology behind the game itself is fascinating, I can see myself having a look at 'empty' planets just to see if I come across funky details or irregularities.
The game seems to offer a shitton to explore, I can see how this is not everyone's cup of tea.
>>329811358
>and will believe sweet honey layered PR talk.
Excpet my comment was never about the quality or depth of thoses features, simply that they existed.
And why shouldn't I believe them? You have given me literally no reasons to think they aren't 100% honest. Yes, I ain't that naive, this isn't the case, but you're not helping your point at all.
>>329811585
>And why shouldn't I believe them?
cause gaming journalism is complete trash for last decade and exists only as additional promotional material for upcoming games to make you preorder game before it's out?
>>329808329
the only game play for no man's sky is to fly around, and nothing else
>>329812220
Objectively wrong.
>>329810247
The game sounds really good like the perfect Star Trek game.
NMS being a indie game is not even a problem itself, but the game is 80% procedurally generated, I ain't paying 100000 yen for Elite pasted over Minecraft.
>>329812279
explain what "gameplay" the game has
>>329813525
you can do ANYTHING
https://youtu.be/Pv61yEcOqpw
