No Mans Sky apologists on Episode 442 of the Bombcast

I don't understand where you got the idea that they were all "apologists" for this game from. Jeff specifically brought this up and issues with it. They then had a reasoned conversation with the group. This included, remember, game developers and Adam who was an executive at Sony - so he's very aware of the current anxiety players, developers, publishers, and console-manufacturers have about the all-digital-future and the current world of disk based games. Jeff left the conversation with a few less reservations on it but he still had issues with it, while the three in the game industry naturally continued with the opinion they have from being a developer. There was no group consensus on "giving the game a pass" as they had varying opinions on what about this is an issue.

The fact you only see this as a right-and-wrong issue - as if there is no grey area or discussion to be had - is really disheartening to read.

It wouldn't be as much of a concern if it was your standard day 1 patch with balance tweaks or bug fixes, but the non-patched version on the disc is just straight up broken. Upgrades make your ship worse, multiple hard crashes, etc. It's shitty

People defending the patch seems to completely disregard the impact of the actual patch, it's not even remotely accurate to compare it to average day one patches due to the amount of things it fundamentally changes about the game. On the flip side of this whole discussion, having a day one patch isn't a crime and in 2016 probably should be expected by enthusiasts. But I don't necessarily think that in itself is somehow a get-out-of-criticism free card for the game and how it has been handled and positioned.

But, more specifically on topic, I never really felt anyone on the podcast were 'apologists' for any specific viewpoint.

fixed that for you.

@yummytreesap: I don't think it was a great plan from the outset, but I also don't think antiquated is the right word for it either. There was a plan to share games with friends through something similar to the Steam family sharing plan and the always online portion boiled down to a singular login once a month the way Spotify does it. Many people prefer to purchase console games digitally now, which they aren't able to sell or share either. Like you said yourself, NMS probably should have launched as a digital download and foregone a disc copy which seems to have created more problems than anything else. In that case, if it were a digital download, every negative you mentioned would apply.

Seeing how much Microsoft is changing and evolving their business strategy makes me really wish they had gone through with that original vision just to see where we would be at now. Their "buy one copy of the game and get it for both Win10 and XB1" is a really smart and forward thinking initiative in this new age of interconnected gaming. Who knows what other solutions they would come up with as a result of this radical market shift. I'm not claiming that ir would have all been good, it might have been a complete train wreck, but now we'll never know and we're kind of stuck spinning our wheels in the same place we were at in the PS3/360 era.

Also as a side note, the antiquated system you describe is basically Steam. No game sharing, no game selling, locked to a singular account etc. My comparison was a loose one meant to highlight just how much of that always online mentality people have adopted as an intrinsic part of console gaming these days - elements of which were very much fought against a few years back.

Y'know, the OP might've not opened up much in the way of discussion with their finger pointing post, but there could be something said for day one patches that bring substantial updates. I just don't think this thread is the right place to have them.

If I could offer a bit of advise for the future: Never say that "Insert name" is an apologist for "insert product", it's almost always wrong or hyperbole, and distracts from your actual criticism. That title for better or worse made me dismiss everything you said before I had even read it.

I'm an apologist personally for using the word "disc" instead of "disk" considering I don't know many games coming out on disk these days. Not that I've bought a disc either recently.

If a game is going to need a day 1 patch to be playable, then they shouldn't sell it on a fucking disc.

What the fuck is the point of the disc if it doesn't have the fucking game on it? Just sell it digitally FFS.

@levio: Same reason SFV ended up with a story mode, people finding value in something they maybe shouldn't?

Seriously though, there's a reason that content sans disc exists day 1 and it's not from lack of responsibility.

I've mentioned this in another thread, but mostly the reason I think the situation with No Man's Sky specifically is so gross is because it's a version of the game the developers don't even believe in. The fact they told people not to watch those pre-release streams, or that they didn't send out review copies until the patch had launched says that they didn't want anybody to see that version, yet here they are charging $60 for it.

@teddie: They don't want people to see it because they have a better version that's under the same $60 purchase. It's not with the disc because of what it takes to release a game on console. You're buying the complete game, if you wanna play it at it's best you need a decent monitor/tv/pc/console/internet connection/etc. Games have requirements and recommendations, it's up to you as the consumer to know if the money you spend gets you something you want.

People don't seem to understand what games going gold means. They didn't think it was a big deal on the Bombcast because they were talking with people who know how the process works. The game was finished and done when it went gold. It was a complete product and they could have left it like that. If you play that version, you can still have a wonderful experience.

Games also have to go gold a long time before they're released so the discs can be pressed. Luckily, almost everyone is online these days so developers can continue to support their games after they've been released. Hello Games has always said they were going to continue to support and improve the game after release. How is it a bad thing that they started working on it as soon as it went gold?

People also seem to be looking back on the past with rose coloured glasses. Games have always been released broken and unfinished since the dawn of time. We're just lucky to live in an era where problems can be fixed.

Day one patches that make the game not broken, or complete the features as a general concept are crappy. Their problems are not my problems, they come to me offering a product, and I'll only buy it if I know it'll work. Nowadays that usually means two months after launch for $30.

@belowstupid: If you know it works day 1 because of a patch then why wait two months? If you're one of the extreme minority that doesn't have consistent internet access then I understand the frustration if not the expectation.

Otherwise what difference does it make if the game doesn't work before you play it if you know it works by the time you can?

Does it really need to be said that going online to download a patch is not "always online"? You can just connect, download the patch, and then disconnect, you know? That's "sometimes online" at worst.

The whole thing with "always online" is not that people don't have internet connections. Yes, some people don't, but those people have had problems since before this generation started. The thing with "always online" is that people have internet connections with data caps and overage charges, or that are prone to long downtime or other instabilities, or that are just slow. Having to go online to download a patch can be difficult in those cases, but it's not like it's impossible for everyone without a constant, stable, fast connection.

@lv4monk: Plenty of games have unforseen problems post launch today. Batman was jacked in fun ways, Battlefeild 4, Assassins Creed, Just Cause 3, Witcher 3, Bloodbourne, Mgs5, Halo MCC. I'm not someone who needs to play things day one, I used to, but today it's easier for me to buy games after two months of patching and for cheap.

Only that's not the product being publicly advertised and sold to them for $60. Like @lv4monk said, I guess it's on the consumer to know the difference in the end, but it doesn't make it any less shady or gross to me when they're trying to hide the version they're actually selling from the public. Guess it just depends what "the line" is with this stuff on whether someone thinks this is a bad thing or not.

It is 2016, this isn't even a debate anymore. Who fucking cares

It's 2016.

Man... This game. I haven't really been following much on it up until recently. It's amazing to me that one guy gets a leaked copy and the Internet explodes.

While I sympathize with people who don't have access to high speed internet to download the patch (something I take for granted) it is the reality of video games now and isn't going away.

@kawiji said:

The title of this thread is gold. Pure gold.

I could watch this for hours. ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

No Man's Sky's "day one patch" is no different than every game released nowadays' day one patch. I'm sorry, but the OP is just wrong. Plenty of people who got the game early were able to play it and played before the day one patch. Yes, changes/fixes were made...just like every game released in 2016...but Brad and Alex and plenty of others didn't have a ton of issues playing the on disc version of the game...

And I'm sorry, but it's of my opinion if you want to play modern video games in 2016 you should have at least some access to the internet. Video games are a privilege not a right. There are plenty of video games you can play that don't need internet that exist. I just really dislike entitlement. I would really like a yacht...I will probably never be able to afford a yacht...and that's ok. For folks who don't have internet, there are other hobbies to pursue outside modern video games that will cause much less headaches.

Not really, most Day 1 patches are bug fixes. The Day 1 patch for No Man Sky seems to change and add a lot, greatly expanding on the game. Having an internet connection doesn't necessarily mean you could download some patches either, what with data caps that could potentially be really low or shit speeds depending on where you live. I believe they stated on the Bombcast that they added a lot to give the game some direction and to help teach people some things which is a pretty big thing, imo.

You play on PC, right? How many PC ports do you want to be absolute dumpster fires and just stay that way?
I too wish that things could be like it was with the PS2-era, but things just don't work that way anymore, because of a whole lot of factors. Games are more complicated, stakeholders are more demanding, and release dates give less and less wriggle-room.
You are always free to vote with your wallet by the way. Cancel your pre-order, take a stance against this practice!

Also, it's the current year. We call people shills now. Apologists is such a last year term.

people play games without the day one patch? That is just silly.

What's the overlap for people without internet but with a PS4 buying No Man's Sky? At a certain point it's just a numbers decision. Delay the game for the vast majority of your audience just for the few unfortunate people without internet? It just needs to come out eventually. I'm sure every developer would love the opportunity to work on a game as long as they like, fixing 100% of bugs, adding every feature and idea that pops in the break room, and releasing a game as perfect as possible. That's not the reality. This is a business. They need to actually ship games and make money eventually. If 95% of your audience can enjoy the game in a way that might be less than ideal for 5%, well... do what you gotta do.

I want all people to be able to play all games, but as things change... as hard as it may be to say... modern gaming may not be ideal hobby if you don't have internet by now. I know it's not a choice for some people, but hey... that's your reality. I'd like to get into many things that my current reality doesn't allow for.

The main thing this highlights for me is that they need to stop announcing games so damn early. If we learned about NMS a year ago, another delay would have been no big deal. They'd also have a better idea of what they'll be able to actually accomplish and maybe not hint at things like being able to run into other people.

@teddie: It's the product they've been talking about for the last three years and what was sent out to reviewers. There's been zero advertising about the patch except for them saying that there's a patch that fixes some things.

If you actually played the game, you'd see that the patch really doesn't do anything except some minor improvements and adds a little more direction at the very, very beginning of the game. It's not some major game changer that completely changes the experience.

Developers can continue to improve their games after launch and we should praise them when they do instead of vilifying them.

Well, yeah, but, come on. Just go online and download the dang patch. I don't understand how this is even a problem. If you have no internet connection, get one. If you can't then... that sucks. It's like not being able to have a phone, almost impossible these days. In a decade or two it will be as baffling as not having electricity.

The reason that I think this is getting a pass is because in this day and age, with the cultural awareness and popularity surrounding videogames in our society right now, you're either aware that most games will require patches, and that you should have your console plugged into the internet, or you should be doing enough research to know that if you don't have internet then it might be a problem. It's your responsibility to find out if you're going to like a game or not, which you obviously have done, which means you're getting annoyed on behalf of other people, which seems silly. If you haven't, if you've randomly bought a physical copy of this game without doing any research beforehand, then I believe you have nobody to blame but yourself, and your entire criticism sounds like one of those amazon DVD reviews from someone who is either trolling or, unbelievably, had no idea what they were watching.

Games require patches now. We live in the digital future, where the internet is so heavily ingrained into our society that it's weird if you don't have it. Where people catch pokemon outside, on their phones. You're welcome to try and fight that reality, but you're not going to win.

Also I love the irony of you making this argument on a forum on a videogame website.

Jeff literally said "I'm not giving them a pass" when Adam mentioned the team size.

These sort of things happen regardless of whether developers strive to maintain a higher standard or otherwise. You can avoid it by not pre-ordering or buying stuff on launch. Be an informed consumer is the best defense against being shafted.

I kind of find it ironic that people on the Internet somehow find a way to complain about not having Internet.

Unfortunately a very small population of people will suffer from not having access to online patches.......for the rest of us this is a non issue. Having a reliable internet connection while gaming is as much a necessity now as having a tv or monitor.

Some can't, they have extraordinary situations (I think one of them wrote into the Beastcast about living in the tundra of Alaska and things like gig downloads take enormous amounts of time). The unfortunate thing is that they're not a large enough segment to impact sales, so hopefully they take that into account and are savvy consumers.

If you can't get outraged about your own petty problems, find someone you can get outraged FOR.

Yeah I don't know. The whole game kinda has left a bad impression on me. Worst part is the whole "universe is too big to see other players" bullshit. Why didn't they just go out and say you'll never see any other players. 18 imagillion planets sure is a lot to have all by your lonesome.

The whole concept comes crashing and burning once you have the idea in your head that the planets are being created by a fucking algorithm.

@frostyryan said:

"the planets are being created by an algorithm" was the concept from the first announcement.

No Man's Sky is amazing in my opinion.

@frostyryan: ...that's literally the entire game pitch and has been from the start. What are you even saying?

I think the divisive nature of this game shows its importance. No Man's Sky isn't for everyone and I feel that makes it more special. I have a game that was pretty much designed for me and doesn't cater to everyone.

The release day patch is unfortunate with the fact that they said that Playstation Plus isn't required. It does present two different narratives for certain consumers. At the same time this has always had a Minecraft feel to it which is a heavily updated title. It's also a procedural universe and of course that is going to need to be patched. I mean....How could it be perfect right off the bat?

I would argue that it has a lot to do with what games you are comparing it to. On PC, you have massive selection of similar early-access crafting&survival games to choose from, many of which have much more gameplay depth and features than No Man's Sky for way less money. If you are asking for full retail price, your customers are going to expect to get a full game. Minecraft certainly wasn't perfect right off the bat, but that's why it was sold at significant discount ($5), like pretty much every other early-access game on Steam.

My concern with banking hopes on future updates and content on No Man's Sky is that it doesn't have mechanics or multiplayer component that would help build a community around it and extend it's lifespan.

Fair enough. I would say without a doubt No Man's Sky is a full game. It's insanely full. Sure there are survival games with more depth but they don't come close to comparing to the scope of No Man's Sky. It's a brilliant game that does a lot of really smart stuff. It's artistic and contemplative and focuses on big ideas rather than refinement. The games that are getting the most acclaim right now, from fans and critics alike, focus more on depth than breadth. I think No Man's Sky will have a huge impact on the industry and down the road we're going to look back on it more fondly than the initial buzz we're witnessing now.

The games pretty good. It's a nice change of pace. *shrug*

It sounds tough, but I can't find a reason to be upset for the people who bought No Man's Sky on disk, and were still in a position to not be able to get that patch. I understand that not every area has internet, much less good internet. But, there's absolutely no reason everyone else needs to be hamstrung by this. Modern gaming needs internet connections to work well. That is just a fact. So much of the improvements to games now is increasingly being based on connectivity. Online modes, Online co-op, free updates so at least if a game is buggy it can be fixed, instead of being messed up and buggy forever like games that came out before online connectivity, are all things we wouldn't have if we had to constantly cater to people who can't get with it and get internet. The internet is a great utility and service and to voluntarily live somewhere you can't get service and still complain (except, how do you complain? You have no means of complaining.) about it is some kind of crazy I can't understand. If you really want to play games without an internet connection, go get anything PS2 or older and you'll have a great time. But don't expect to buy these new consoles, that are built on the promise of utilizing internet connections to your advantage, and expect me to be sympathetic when it inevitably doesn't work out for you on a handful of occasions. It's just crazy, if you have the option, to not have internet. I can't even count the ways that internet has made my life so much easier that it would seem silly for me or anyone else to argue that not having it is better than having it. And if you can't get internet, like it's not even an option, that is actually a really hard situation. At that point, I think your better off taking up a better hobby. There are tons of things you can do that don't need the internet and are still fun. As far as I can tell this is a minor issue, the larger one should be that what is even on the patched version maybe isn't the game people wanted, and in some respects, isn't the game we were promised. But as far as disk based folks not getting the patched version, All I can say is, "That's too bad. But you really should have internet.".