12 ms·

No Man's Sky's update introduces billions of new stars, planets, and more

160 points by hochmartinez 2y ago

recursive 2y ago
The number of stars and planets has been overplayed from the start. Sure, there's a quintillion planets, but after you've seen a hundred, you pretty much got the gist of the scope of what's possible. Everything starts to look samey. Much more significantly, it seems the new planets use new biomes and terrain generators. If they gave all undiscovered planets a chance to use these, even if they cut the number of planets by 99%, it would still be a big improvement. The number is just so big, it's irrelevant.
talldayo 2y ago
No Mans Sky is a pretty fun game nowadays. If you're less interested in the Eve Online ideals of corporate bureaucracy in space and you just want to explore some neat looking empty planets, it's the premier game of it's kind. I pre-ordered it after watching the infamous IGN trailer[0] and was disappointed like everyone else, but today I'm very happy with where the game is and can easily recommend it at the $30 price point where it goes on sale. Game is availible natively for Windows and MacOS, supports Linux and supports multiplayer across consoles and PC clients. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLtmEjqzg7M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLtmEjqzg7M
- Ultimatt 2y ago
  Also supports VR multiplayer
rcarmo 2y ago
Is there a Switch update yet?
- joshuaheard 2y ago
  Or PC?
- jrflowers 2y ago
  I haven’t checked but it looks like this has rolled out across all platforms, not just PlayStation. https://www.nomanssky.com/worlds-part-ii-update/ https://www.nomanssky.com/worlds-part-ii-update/
ziddoap 2y ago
No Man's Sky is the poster child for turning a shitty launch into a success. You can really feel the passion of the staff at Hello Games in the current version of the game. It reminds me of the quote, which I'm about to butcher, that is along the lines of "People don't remember the problem, they remember how you dealt with the problem". If you haven't seen it, "The Engoodening of No Man's Sky" is a good review of the story. It's 5 years old now, and the engoodening hasn't stopped. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5BJVO3PDeQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5BJVO3PDeQ
- jrootabega 2y ago
  This is more a reflection of the state of online gaming discourse and youtube rambling clickbait these days. People believe what the culture tells them cool people believe, and perpetuate it to others. No Man's Sky didn't have multiplayer at launch. Now it does. That's pretty much the only indisputable improvement to the game. They've certainly managed to improve the NARRATIVE about the game, though. EDIT: I also want to call out one particularly user-hostile thing they have done: pump up the visual quality and complexity so high that the game performs very poorly on the console generation on which it was released: the PS4/Xbox One generation. This is true even on performance mode. So if you bought the game at release, you will now suffer degraded performance if you are still using your original hardware. You don't hear too much about this because when it's mentioned the person usually gets console-shamed, e.g. "get with the times, time to upgrade you cheapskate!" It's not only low framerates and ambient pop-in; it's also extremely bad pop-in of hazardous plants and structures. And you often can't land your ship on the ground until the terrain has fully generated. This can take a minute or two sometimes. Or you could try to go harvest from one of your resource collectors and have to wait something like 10 seconds for it to finally appear in front of you. And once it did, the chances of it bugging out and having no resources inside of it are way too high.
  - ziddoap 2y ago
    >That's pretty much the only indisputable improvement to the game. I'm not sure how you can possibly say that with a straight face.
zoogeny 2y ago
No Man's Sky is a bit of a litmus test for me these days. If you still hold a grudge against these guys after everything they've done, the numerous free updates, the commitment to high quality output, etc. then I will have a hard time believing you have any perspective. The disastrous launch was 9 years ago and yet here we are still talking about substantial free updates. It is totally fair to say the game isn't for you. But the team at Hello Games has blown past making up for their rookie mistake and well into the position of a shining example of how any game company should conduct themselves. If you still harbor some bitter feelings about that launch, maybe it is time to let it go.
- zen928 2y ago
  This would be a stronger point for me if the main developer had already apologized for promising things they couldn't deliver on as main tenants for bringing players to the game, but I can see looking online that this isn't the case even as of 2025. Rather than engage the community continually dismissing intentful lies as 'drama around launch', I'd rather spend my time and energy on supporting platforms that value honesty and transparency. But, I don't dismiss it as a fun videogame. I don't think cyberpunk 2077 is a bad game still either, but the reframing by these communities of legitimate problems as petty grudges turns me away from wanting to support them entirely. I don't value that type of conduct from a game company.
- micromodel 2y ago
  Haha, I'll bite. I don't hate NMS or HG. And it doesn't upset me that people are enjoying it. However, what bothers me is that people have been talking about it for 5+ years as if it had been fixed up to be at least as good a game as was originally promised. And that's just not true. This gets missed in all the conversations about this game. Like, originally someone offered to sell you a fully self-sufficient farm on multiple acres of land. You buy it, and what you actually get is a CSA box of vegetables at your doorstep. Vegetables are cool, but that's not what you bought. Over time, the quality and variety of the vegetables went up. You got access to the farm. You saw it didn't actually have any grazing animals or compost management or energy generation, but, you know, they were building a greenhouse. After a few years they started building a composting toilet! Well, ok, just a regular outhouse, not a composting toilet, that was too complicated. You still don't own the farm. It still isn't close to self sufficient. But they're doing some neat things, they have chickens now, and you're entitled to as many vegetables as you can eat. That's all fine, but you were in the market for a built-out farm. That's what it feels like. Many of the promised features will likely never exist. (And not unreasonably - they'd be massive undertakings.) I've gone back to the game twice to check it out after huge updates and saw: - They added features like vehicles that I never wanted - Most of the new features were extremely limited in scope and felt half-baked, like character customization - The ugliest and most irritating/boring parts of the original game weren't being improved Now, all that said, this is Worlds 2 and I hadn't even heard about Worlds 1. My information is several years out of date. Since I already own it on PS4, I'm willing to take another look! Some of this stuff sounds really cool! But if they haven't resolved any of the failures in the core gameplay mechanics, I don't know if it's ever going to be a great game. I saw the "Engoodening" video when it came out and while I get it, there's a lot of praise due to a team that will spend 5 years, let alone 9, making big mechanical improvements to games for free... it's not like it's unprecedented. Paradox Interactive has been doing that for decades, and they've often done it better (although they've had their own huge missteps, they're largely debatable, and the delta between promise::delivery has never been near the scale of NMS) (and admittedly the free updates are usually only about half of the content,the rest being paid DLC). And further, every time I get suckered into checking again, NMS boots up and just feels like a cheap, poorly thought out toy again. So yeah maybe I'm someone who "holds a grudge for 9 years" in your eyes, but I feel like I'm actually just the only reasonable person in the room. I think being wary of NMS updates is far more rational and honest than telling people it's better than it was ever promised to be, when it's just clearly not. People who enjoy it now should say they enjoy what it is, not that it has surpassed expectations, because expectations were originally set impossibly high. --- An additional point is that the behavior of the (CEO? Lead Dev?) around launch was downright shit, and that was never addressed. Direct lies, even after launch. Silence for months. No mention ever of the missing features.
claudiulodro 2y ago
It is wild how much content the team has continued to add years and years after the launch and without even making any of it paid DLC. The commitment is super impressive, and I applaud them for it, but I am curious how the economics of it work. Is there a wave of people that buy the game when these huge updates are released? How is it possible to keep building this long for a game that is a one time purchase?
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  New purchasers, subscription products like Game Pass... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Man%27s_Sky#Sales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Man%27s_Sky#Sales > After the game was added to the Xbox Game Pass service in June 2020, Hello Games reported a month later that No Man's Sky had seen more than one million new players.
- bombcar 2y ago
  Depending on how they do it, and how many people they need working on it, it might only need to keep a relatively small trickle of new sales going. It also now marks it as a "great value" so people are more likely to pick it up even if they don't end up playing. Depending on pricing, you can even just sell to people upgrading or changing consoles (this is one area that really helps Stardew Valley, albeit with a low cost). After all, even if you've sold millions of copies, there's way more people who have NOT bought it.
- juancn 2y ago
  Besides all the revenue from things like Game Pass or PS+, I think the long game is building a game engine for procedurally generated games. They're working on a fantasy title too (https://lightnofire.com/ https://lightnofire.com/) which uses the same engine to build a whole planet, but Earth scale. Improvements in the engine for one, translate to the other.
  - saturn8601 2y ago
    Man, its too much effort to explore this actual Earth and see as much as possible. I can't even fathom the energy and commitment needed to explore a virtual Earth like planet however awesome it sounds. How do you guys stay committed to something like this?
buran77 2y ago
> With Worlds Part II, we added billions of new star systems and trillions of new planets to the universe I played the game at launch for a few days and coincidentally just last week again. So assume basic knowledge of the gameplay. Can someone explain how trillions of planets in the game (I mean the number specifically) changes the experience in game? I get improving the level of variety on a planet and between planets can improve the gameplay. But trillions of anything makes me think most of the content will never be touched by any human. Am I missing something?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- shikon7 2y ago
  As I understand it, they add a new set of planets with the new features, and keeping the old planets untouched. The increased variety is not because trillions of planets are added, but because the new planets will have more varierty than the old ones.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- Synaesthesia 2y ago
  What they really mean is there is more variety when you land on different planets, they added more variables to the procedural generation. And I gotta say it did improve over time, they have become more varied and interesting, but still with that "procedural" feel.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- variaga 2y ago
  Unequal distribution, basically. While most planets will never be observed by a human, it turns out players congregate in certain parts of the galaxy, particularly near the galactic center. (The game starts you at a random location near the edge and there's literally a 'reach the galactic center' quest, so most players end up near the center eventually.) So yes, there are trillions of stars, but there's only so many of them within $RADIUS of the center. In practice every planet 'near' (for some definition of 'near') the center has already been discovered and the 'good' planets are likely to already have bases. There are also spots that get their locations published in the forums or advertised in-game (good drops, cool bases, things like that) that also end up 'locally' crowded. I found there were basically two experiences in NMS - "the outer rim" which was, frankly, lonely - you almost never encounter any signs that other players even exist and "the core" where it feels like everything has already been done - sure it's new to you, but you're never the first. Finding a middle zone where you can see evidence of other players, but there's still stuff to discover was rare in my experience.
CashWasabi 2y ago
This game has the biggest comeback story of any game in gaming history. I'm really looking forward to their next title and how much of "new" tech they will be showing in it. As far as I understand it will be the same engine as No Man's Sky. But there might be even more content and also this time it seems to be only one big planet?
rkagerer 2y ago
While we're talking space games, did Star Citizen ever get properly released? I crowdfunded it 10 years ago and am still waiting for delivery or access to play. Emailed them a few times in the interim and never got any response.
- aprilnya 2y ago
  It’s been out in Early Access for a bit… weird that as a backer you wouldn’t have access to it
  - rkagerer 2y ago
    Thanks for the answer. Was there an email that went out or something? If I recall I didn't back on Kickstarter, but directly with the company. (Also is it ever going to leave Early Access? Are they asking for more money?)
rkagerer 2y ago
The game has a 60% discount on Steam right now [1], but not on GoG [2]. Is the Steam version DRM-benign? e.g. Is it similar to Kerbal Space Program where you could just copy the folder out to another location (or a new PC) and play it without Steam having to be installed? [1] https://store.steampowered.com/app/275850/No_Mans_Sky/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/275850/No_Mans_Sky/ [2] https://www.gog.com/en/game/no_mans_sky https://www.gog.com/en/game/no_mans_sky
- lukan 2y ago
  Steam games you cannot just copy and play. GoG is like this. (with steam you can sort of export it, but then need another steam client to install it)
  - rkagerer 2y ago
    What you said is not the case for all Steam games. KSP is one, several more are listed here: https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/The_big_list_of_DRM-free_games_on_Steam https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/The_big_list_of_DRM-free_g...
jader201 2y ago
NMS is a technical marvel, and at first, the game is quite fun. But for me, it just falls flat after a while. The planets just feel functionally the same, just with a different "skin" (which is cool, just doesn't add to the fun). I've gone back to it 3 or 4 times, and may/may not explore it again after this update. But it's always the same: it feels cool/new for a few hours, then I realize it's still very repetitive. And I hold no ill will about the launch -- I don't really care, and I think the continued efforts and free updates are very admirable. But it comes down to the gameplay, and at the end of the day, there's not enough depth to keep me playing (e.g. compared to something like Factorio, where I can play this for months and it never gets old).
- jrootabega 2y ago
  It's not only as shallow and boring as you describe, but also thoroughly unpolished and buggy.
- 31carmichael 2y ago
  A large reason is that the game is procedurally generated. Your brain notices this and knows that it is unnatural. Like you said, it's fun at first, but then it is repetitive. It is amazing though, if somehow you don't notice the weirdness.
Kye 2y ago
Has the building system improved any since 2023? I did a playthrough back then: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7oYF3lDf4g&list=PLfFb7mAGQzKbIPzsq4WSCuaoaVrBkAGb- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7oYF3lDf4g&list=PLfFb7mAGQz... But decided I wanted to focus on building, only to discover it was extremely glitchy.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Yeul 2y ago
Personally I prefer content with story and characters. Which is why nobody has beaten Mass effect yet.
shaggie76 2y ago
I started playing a week ago having letting it "cellar" for a few years; I was quite enjoying it but today, after downloading 20GB of free update, I reliably crash on boot :( Edit: deleted C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\No Man's Sky\Binaries\SETTINGS and I can boot again. Edit 2: crashed again after playing for a bit; back in the cellar it goes -- needs a bit more time to mature I think.
lexa1979 2y ago
With a VR headset: with Alyx, it's one of the best game I enjoyed playing :) You ARE in space. That feeling when you hop in your spaceship, take off, point to the sky and come up in space... Sure, after a hundred hours of playing, I came to the conclusion I had enough, I had seen everything that was to see in the game - even without completing it, never reached the center of the galaxy - but it sure was worth its price.
Havoc 2y ago
Played it for a bit. Say 20 hrs. It’s okay. Think the entire premise is flawed though. The average user is going to see maybe 20 or 50 worlds. So 30 hand crafted worlds would be better than a billion bland procedural ones. More generic volume is not a plus for games
Saris 2y ago
I would love to see some more detail added and variety of structures and whatnot. The planets are cool but I just end up feeling so bored after awhile with the same random structures every so often. I think I would rather play on maybe 100 planets that are partially random but have a lot of manual work put into the detail of the surface and structures.

160 points by hochmartinez 2y ago

The number of stars and planets has been overplayed from the start. Sure, there's a quintillion planets, but after you've seen a hundred, you pretty much got the gist of the scope of what's possible. Everything starts to look samey. Much more significantly, it seems the new planets use new biomes and terrain generators. If they gave all undiscovered planets a chance to use these, even if they cut the number of planets by 99%, it would still be a big improvement. The number is just so big, it's irrelevant.

talldayo 2y ago

No Mans Sky is a pretty fun game nowadays. If you're less interested in the Eve Online ideals of corporate bureaucracy in space and you just want to explore some neat looking empty planets, it's the premier game of it's kind. I pre-ordered it after watching the infamous IGN trailer[0] and was disappointed like everyone else, but today I'm very happy with where the game is and can easily recommend it at the $30 price point where it goes on sale. Game is availible natively for Windows and MacOS, supports Linux and supports multiplayer across consoles and PC clients. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLtmEjqzg7M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLtmEjqzg7M

Ultimatt 2y ago
Also supports VR multiplayer

rcarmo 2y ago

Is there a Switch update yet?

joshuaheard 2y ago
Or PC?
jrflowers 2y ago
I haven’t checked but it looks like this has rolled out across all platforms, not just PlayStation. https://www.nomanssky.com/worlds-part-ii-update/ https://www.nomanssky.com/worlds-part-ii-update/

ziddoap 2y ago

No Man's Sky is the poster child for turning a shitty launch into a success. You can really feel the passion of the staff at Hello Games in the current version of the game. It reminds me of the quote, which I'm about to butcher, that is along the lines of "People don't remember the problem, they remember how you dealt with the problem". If you haven't seen it, "The Engoodening of No Man's Sky" is a good review of the story. It's 5 years old now, and the engoodening hasn't stopped. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5BJVO3PDeQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5BJVO3PDeQ

jrootabega 2y ago
This is more a reflection of the state of online gaming discourse and youtube rambling clickbait these days. People believe what the culture tells them cool people believe, and perpetuate it to others. No Man's Sky didn't have multiplayer at launch. Now it does. That's pretty much the only indisputable improvement to the game. They've certainly managed to improve the NARRATIVE about the game, though. EDIT: I also want to call out one particularly user-hostile thing they have done: pump up the visual quality and complexity so high that the game performs very poorly on the console generation on which it was released: the PS4/Xbox One generation. This is true even on performance mode. So if you bought the game at release, you will now suffer degraded performance if you are still using your original hardware. You don't hear too much about this because when it's mentioned the person usually gets console-shamed, e.g. "get with the times, time to upgrade you cheapskate!" It's not only low framerates and ambient pop-in; it's also extremely bad pop-in of hazardous plants and structures. And you often can't land your ship on the ground until the terrain has fully generated. This can take a minute or two sometimes. Or you could try to go harvest from one of your resource collectors and have to wait something like 10 seconds for it to finally appear in front of you. And once it did, the chances of it bugging out and having no resources inside of it are way too high.
- ziddoap 2y ago
  >That's pretty much the only indisputable improvement to the game. I'm not sure how you can possibly say that with a straight face.

zoogeny 2y ago

No Man's Sky is a bit of a litmus test for me these days. If you still hold a grudge against these guys after everything they've done, the numerous free updates, the commitment to high quality output, etc. then I will have a hard time believing you have any perspective. The disastrous launch was 9 years ago and yet here we are still talking about substantial free updates. It is totally fair to say the game isn't for you. But the team at Hello Games has blown past making up for their rookie mistake and well into the position of a shining example of how any game company should conduct themselves. If you still harbor some bitter feelings about that launch, maybe it is time to let it go.

zen928 2y ago
This would be a stronger point for me if the main developer had already apologized for promising things they couldn't deliver on as main tenants for bringing players to the game, but I can see looking online that this isn't the case even as of 2025. Rather than engage the community continually dismissing intentful lies as 'drama around launch', I'd rather spend my time and energy on supporting platforms that value honesty and transparency. But, I don't dismiss it as a fun videogame. I don't think cyberpunk 2077 is a bad game still either, but the reframing by these communities of legitimate problems as petty grudges turns me away from wanting to support them entirely. I don't value that type of conduct from a game company.
micromodel 2y ago
Haha, I'll bite. I don't hate NMS or HG. And it doesn't upset me that people are enjoying it. However, what bothers me is that people have been talking about it for 5+ years as if it had been fixed up to be at least as good a game as was originally promised. And that's just not true. This gets missed in all the conversations about this game. Like, originally someone offered to sell you a fully self-sufficient farm on multiple acres of land. You buy it, and what you actually get is a CSA box of vegetables at your doorstep. Vegetables are cool, but that's not what you bought. Over time, the quality and variety of the vegetables went up. You got access to the farm. You saw it didn't actually have any grazing animals or compost management or energy generation, but, you know, they were building a greenhouse. After a few years they started building a composting toilet! Well, ok, just a regular outhouse, not a composting toilet, that was too complicated. You still don't own the farm. It still isn't close to self sufficient. But they're doing some neat things, they have chickens now, and you're entitled to as many vegetables as you can eat. That's all fine, but you were in the market for a built-out farm. That's what it feels like. Many of the promised features will likely never exist. (And not unreasonably - they'd be massive undertakings.) I've gone back to the game twice to check it out after huge updates and saw: - They added features like vehicles that I never wanted - Most of the new features were extremely limited in scope and felt half-baked, like character customization - The ugliest and most irritating/boring parts of the original game weren't being improved Now, all that said, this is Worlds 2 and I hadn't even heard about Worlds 1. My information is several years out of date. Since I already own it on PS4, I'm willing to take another look! Some of this stuff sounds really cool! But if they haven't resolved any of the failures in the core gameplay mechanics, I don't know if it's ever going to be a great game. I saw the "Engoodening" video when it came out and while I get it, there's a lot of praise due to a team that will spend 5 years, let alone 9, making big mechanical improvements to games for free... it's not like it's unprecedented. Paradox Interactive has been doing that for decades, and they've often done it better (although they've had their own huge missteps, they're largely debatable, and the delta between promise::delivery has never been near the scale of NMS) (and admittedly the free updates are usually only about half of the content,the rest being paid DLC). And further, every time I get suckered into checking again, NMS boots up and just feels like a cheap, poorly thought out toy again. So yeah maybe I'm someone who "holds a grudge for 9 years" in your eyes, but I feel like I'm actually just the only reasonable person in the room. I think being wary of NMS updates is far more rational and honest than telling people it's better than it was ever promised to be, when it's just clearly not. People who enjoy it now should say they enjoy what it is, not that it has surpassed expectations, because expectations were originally set impossibly high. --- An additional point is that the behavior of the (CEO? Lead Dev?) around launch was downright shit, and that was never addressed. Direct lies, even after launch. Silence for months. No mention ever of the missing features.

claudiulodro 2y ago

It is wild how much content the team has continued to add years and years after the launch and without even making any of it paid DLC. The commitment is super impressive, and I applaud them for it, but I am curious how the economics of it work. Is there a wave of people that buy the game when these huge updates are released? How is it possible to keep building this long for a game that is a one time purchase?

ceejayoz 2y ago
New purchasers, subscription products like Game Pass... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Man%27s_Sky#Sales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Man%27s_Sky#Sales > After the game was added to the Xbox Game Pass service in June 2020, Hello Games reported a month later that No Man's Sky had seen more than one million new players.
bombcar 2y ago
Depending on how they do it, and how many people they need working on it, it might only need to keep a relatively small trickle of new sales going. It also now marks it as a "great value" so people are more likely to pick it up even if they don't end up playing. Depending on pricing, you can even just sell to people upgrading or changing consoles (this is one area that really helps Stardew Valley, albeit with a low cost). After all, even if you've sold millions of copies, there's way more people who have NOT bought it.
juancn 2y ago
Besides all the revenue from things like Game Pass or PS+, I think the long game is building a game engine for procedurally generated games. They're working on a fantasy title too (https://lightnofire.com/ https://lightnofire.com/) which uses the same engine to build a whole planet, but Earth scale. Improvements in the engine for one, translate to the other.
- saturn8601 2y ago
  Man, its too much effort to explore this actual Earth and see as much as possible. I can't even fathom the energy and commitment needed to explore a virtual Earth like planet however awesome it sounds. How do you guys stay committed to something like this?

buran77 2y ago

> With Worlds Part II, we added billions of new star systems and trillions of new planets to the universe I played the game at launch for a few days and coincidentally just last week again. So assume basic knowledge of the gameplay. Can someone explain how trillions of planets in the game (I mean the number specifically) changes the experience in game? I get improving the level of variety on a planet and between planets can improve the gameplay. But trillions of anything makes me think most of the content will never be touched by any human. Am I missing something?

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
shikon7 2y ago
As I understand it, they add a new set of planets with the new features, and keeping the old planets untouched. The increased variety is not because trillions of planets are added, but because the new planets will have more varierty than the old ones.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Synaesthesia 2y ago
What they really mean is there is more variety when you land on different planets, they added more variables to the procedural generation. And I gotta say it did improve over time, they have become more varied and interesting, but still with that "procedural" feel.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
variaga 2y ago
Unequal distribution, basically. While most planets will never be observed by a human, it turns out players congregate in certain parts of the galaxy, particularly near the galactic center. (The game starts you at a random location near the edge and there's literally a 'reach the galactic center' quest, so most players end up near the center eventually.) So yes, there are trillions of stars, but there's only so many of them within $RADIUS of the center. In practice every planet 'near' (for some definition of 'near') the center has already been discovered and the 'good' planets are likely to already have bases. There are also spots that get their locations published in the forums or advertised in-game (good drops, cool bases, things like that) that also end up 'locally' crowded. I found there were basically two experiences in NMS - "the outer rim" which was, frankly, lonely - you almost never encounter any signs that other players even exist and "the core" where it feels like everything has already been done - sure it's new to you, but you're never the first. Finding a middle zone where you can see evidence of other players, but there's still stuff to discover was rare in my experience.

CashWasabi 2y ago

This game has the biggest comeback story of any game in gaming history. I'm really looking forward to their next title and how much of "new" tech they will be showing in it. As far as I understand it will be the same engine as No Man's Sky. But there might be even more content and also this time it seems to be only one big planet?

rkagerer 2y ago

While we're talking space games, did Star Citizen ever get properly released? I crowdfunded it 10 years ago and am still waiting for delivery or access to play. Emailed them a few times in the interim and never got any response.

aprilnya 2y ago
It’s been out in Early Access for a bit… weird that as a backer you wouldn’t have access to it
- rkagerer 2y ago
  Thanks for the answer. Was there an email that went out or something? If I recall I didn't back on Kickstarter, but directly with the company. (Also is it ever going to leave Early Access? Are they asking for more money?)

rkagerer 2y ago

The game has a 60% discount on Steam right now [1], but not on GoG [2]. Is the Steam version DRM-benign? e.g. Is it similar to Kerbal Space Program where you could just copy the folder out to another location (or a new PC) and play it without Steam having to be installed? [1] https://store.steampowered.com/app/275850/No_Mans_Sky/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/275850/No_Mans_Sky/ [2] https://www.gog.com/en/game/no_mans_sky https://www.gog.com/en/game/no_mans_sky

lukan 2y ago
Steam games you cannot just copy and play. GoG is like this. (with steam you can sort of export it, but then need another steam client to install it)
- rkagerer 2y ago
  What you said is not the case for all Steam games. KSP is one, several more are listed here: https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/The_big_list_of_DRM-free_games_on_Steam https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/The_big_list_of_DRM-free_g...

jader201 2y ago

NMS is a technical marvel, and at first, the game is quite fun. But for me, it just falls flat after a while. The planets just feel functionally the same, just with a different "skin" (which is cool, just doesn't add to the fun). I've gone back to it 3 or 4 times, and may/may not explore it again after this update. But it's always the same: it feels cool/new for a few hours, then I realize it's still very repetitive. And I hold no ill will about the launch -- I don't really care, and I think the continued efforts and free updates are very admirable. But it comes down to the gameplay, and at the end of the day, there's not enough depth to keep me playing (e.g. compared to something like Factorio, where I can play this for months and it never gets old).

jrootabega 2y ago
It's not only as shallow and boring as you describe, but also thoroughly unpolished and buggy.
31carmichael 2y ago
A large reason is that the game is procedurally generated. Your brain notices this and knows that it is unnatural. Like you said, it's fun at first, but then it is repetitive. It is amazing though, if somehow you don't notice the weirdness.

Kye 2y ago

Has the building system improved any since 2023? I did a playthrough back then: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7oYF3lDf4g&list=PLfFb7mAGQzKbIPzsq4WSCuaoaVrBkAGb- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7oYF3lDf4g&list=PLfFb7mAGQz... But decided I wanted to focus on building, only to discover it was extremely glitchy.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Yeul 2y ago

Personally I prefer content with story and characters. Which is why nobody has beaten Mass effect yet.

shaggie76 2y ago

I started playing a week ago having letting it "cellar" for a few years; I was quite enjoying it but today, after downloading 20GB of free update, I reliably crash on boot :( Edit: deleted C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\No Man's Sky\Binaries\SETTINGS and I can boot again. Edit 2: crashed again after playing for a bit; back in the cellar it goes -- needs a bit more time to mature I think.

lexa1979 2y ago

With a VR headset: with Alyx, it's one of the best game I enjoyed playing :) You ARE in space. That feeling when you hop in your spaceship, take off, point to the sky and come up in space... Sure, after a hundred hours of playing, I came to the conclusion I had enough, I had seen everything that was to see in the game - even without completing it, never reached the center of the galaxy - but it sure was worth its price.

Havoc 2y ago

Played it for a bit. Say 20 hrs. It’s okay. Think the entire premise is flawed though. The average user is going to see maybe 20 or 50 worlds. So 30 hand crafted worlds would be better than a billion bland procedural ones. More generic volume is not a plus for games

Saris 2y ago

I would love to see some more detail added and variety of structures and whatnot. The planets are cool but I just end up feeling so bored after awhile with the same random structures every so often. I think I would rather play on maybe 100 planets that are partially random but have a lot of manual work put into the detail of the surface and structures.