I like comparing the NMS stats on Steam with Subnautica stats.

NMS has dropped catastrophically, of course, from 200k+ to less than 1000.

Subnautica has risen gradually, and has more people than NMS. And Subnautica has been explicitly stated to be single player (due to engine and years of work to make it MP) and it still very much in Early Access. On a single, static map, which is pretty large and quite deep, but built and not generated.

Still sinking...
Number 231 on steam with 515 current players.

Oh, and to the guy who suggested that steam players might be playing offline.
Why would they bother? It's extra work to put steam offline to play for no reason.

..if they're like me, and are too nice to not reject random friend requests, you might want to play either invisible or offline on something like this. Happened a few times that I'm getting messaged by someone who thinks I really want to hear about some other people's opinion about my taste in games, as well as receive more general advice on life, when I'm actually not. You basically just start the game from the shortcut, and click offline. End of.

Also have been a very large amount of hangs turning up with the Steam overlay active, popups in the corner, etc.

Meanwhile, just the thought of finding the "SHITGAME AHAHAHA!"-system, with five hundred plants and species named after homonyms of pig genitals also might want to make you avoid playing online.

Not that I don't think a lot of people on Steam stopped playing the game after, for example, school started again. Or that other games with an always online requirement, like Elite, probably will have inflated online player numbers compared to a game that doesn't have an online requirement. And so on.

And not that I don't think a lot of people are waiting for a content update that might very well never turn up.

But I sort of doubt that the statistics here suggests some sort of unusual trend, that happens to prove all assertions people are making on reddit, and so on.

A little bit skeptical about that. Just a tiny bit.

A few more posts and I might not resist the urge to send you a friend request XD

But I'm probably not "social" enough because I like to enjoy my games at my own pace following my curiosity. And I read texts and watch cutscenes.
That's why KotOR was frustrating for me ... I had sworn myself to never buy an MMO yet with the scarcity of good SW games ... I should try it out again some time, if I'm not mistaken they've made some SP improvements. (sorry bit OT here)

I also like NMS because I've not gotten involved in that promises-thing and YT stuff much though I'm sad that some people's promised expectations haven't been fulfilled and the (non-existent) communication from HG is really problematic.

Anyway, I see NMS with the eyes from the end of the Commodore and i386/i486 thus I appreciate the achievements in procedural generation. I also wish younger people would be more aware of the importance of math also in AAA FPS titles just simple 3D is a math cosmos of it's own.

I like learning about the backstory of the NMS races and their languages. That captivated me from the beginning where Elite Dangerous in the contrast left me with raised eyebrows about the purpose.

But anyway as an X-Wing/TIE Fighter "veteran" I support all three, Star Citizen, ED and now NMS just to show support for the spacesim genre. Same as I do support adventure projects which is my top favorite genre.

:) maybe we can request a "space-game group" on the gogforums instead. "You must be this /---/ serious about space-sims to post here (Derek Smarts not allowed)".

But it is really weird to see where the games-industry has ended up. Developers who were uniquely innovative with programming techniques, or created incredibly interesting tools, they used to be the ones dominating the narratives in games-media. Even if the articles weren't extremely technical, you would always have the perspective of someone who was genuinely interested in creating either simulations, or craft narratives, or nest together digital content in a way that only could be done with computers. Even the most superficial writer would have some awareness of the link between "what appears to me as a gamer", and "what is being crafted mechanically" - and so on some level understand that the AI in Civilization would be doing, and that this would be different from what you experience when playing the game. Or understand the difference between static scenes being played back during a scripted transition, and dynamic scenes created as you play the game. To be able to say something sounding half-clever about immersion and interactivity.

The only exceptions to that were people who liked Myst.

And now it's basically the other way around in the press. "Emergent gameplay" is some sort of buzzword that apparently is taken to mean "what we can trick you into believing is real, before and after the game is made". While something is only technically impressive if it has full-scene filter that blurs every object further away than the tip of the game's penis-compensator. And the biggest technical achievement seems to be the longest cutscene and quick-time event. The most hailed achievement in interactive narratives is a system that recycle bosses, who literally remember the last time you murdered them. Ways to render things is reduced to some "visual science" mishmash of framerate, ram-size and resolution, etc.

The only exceptions to that are staff-writers who enjoy stuff like No Man's Sky.

And I guess it's partially the developers fault in a sense. Since what really does sell, to the point where it dwarfs everything else, really is flappy bird and pokemon. While the sales-pitch that works isn't targeted at scifi and tech-nerds any more, but a different type of gaming community altogether. Which is an audience that isn't secretly ashamed of their hobby, etc. And are very vocal about the things they expect to see in games, and what they find appealing. It's kind of recent, too, that we've gotten this cult-thing around consoles, where liking and really hyping games - that make publishers a lot of money - is genuinely argued by some to be the way to "save gaming". When in reality it just creates a slightly bigger market of super-niche buyers compared to before.

Very curious stuff, really. Because that situation is the opposite of what the "experience pieces" type of games-press was supposed to create. Where games were deliberately not reviewed from a game-technical angle, but from that "what I see as a player" angle. With the implicit suggestion that games have generally become so freed from obscure control mechanics and conventions that it's no longer necessary to review games from the angle of how difficult they are to play, etc.

But instead we get a sort of baseline where nothing can be successful unless it can be controlled with one button. And even then, if it's too challenging either spiritually or mechanically, the "experience" is somehow difficult to sell. Unless it fits an established convention, in which case even the most obscure and finicky mechanics are just fine, and not necessary to mention.

Let someone who have never played a video-game before try to play COD, for example. Disaster right away.

But somehow there's no room in the gaming press to write about the technical aspect of a follow-cam that for the entirety of the game is actually completely unnoticed - because it's implemented so well. Or an angle on animation tech that draws off the curtain on why models with different heights can walk on tilted ground outside cutscenes, and how this small thing almost alone gives you the illusion of that what you are watching is believable. Or how relatively complex math is reduced to static functions, so they can execute in a prepared environment at speeds that enable a believable lighting model. And so on.

*shrug*

A lot of those spots that NMS has fallen have been replaced by single player games, for which there are similar arguments for why people would want to turn steam offline.
As well as the fact that its slip in rankings has been from a previous spot where there is also equal justification for why people would choose to play it offline.

Short version... people playing offline doesn't explain its relative sinking with respect to other single player games or even itself.

Seriously, trying to explain away it's disasterous slump by claiiming people are putting steam offline is sad.

I don't think anyone was suggesting the ONLY reason for falling numbers on Steam was people playing off-line only, i certainly was not. I was just wondering how many people like myself are out there enjoying the game and not wanting to go on-line at all.

I know its currently the in-thing to do this, gloat over falling Steam numbers, but why do it in this thread. Did you read the thread title? Are you so consumed with hate you have to spread it everywhere you go? Why not be happy in life, why not allow other people that enjoy the game (even as it we got it) to do that without throwing negativity at it? You got lots of threads to do that in. Is it making the game better? Is it encouraging the devs to WANT to make the game better? You probably do not care about that, well done, how selfish of you.

As for why play offline (steam or GOG or PS4 even (can you do that on PS4?)) mostly it is so i can avoid the stupid and dumb names people will give planets and creatures. That stuff (online MP stuff in general) is a total game immersion breaking problem (in all MP games i find). I much prefer the games odd procedural naming system than any internet low-brows lame half arsed attempt at humour or anything really. Stay out of MY game losers. That kind of thing :)

I know Sean had best intentions about sharing the experience and allowing others to notice other real gamers in the game universe, and all that, but in general the gaming community has been a toxic dump for a good decade now, so i think he was mostly coming at that lite MP aspect with rose-tinted glasses for when people were actually pretty polite to one another for the most part back in the day. Just see the reaction and verbal hate spewed about NMS for proof of what a toxic lot the 'gaming community' now really is imho.

---------------------

In more positive news there is a great thread i discovered over at RPS for people posting their positive experiences of playing NMS, and also i found a few other links to share that show there are indeed people out there having a great time with the game, release warts and all, so here are some of those links for others in this thread about enjoying the game (hint: read the thread title before posting) rather than throwing hate around (hint: read the thread title perhaps?):

RPS thread:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/showthread.php?52157-The-No-Man-s-Sky-enthusiasts-thread

Jeff Minter Post:

http://minotaurproject.co.uk/blog/?p=380

The only Reddit worth following (well that and the modding one):

https://www.reddit.com/r/nomanshigh/comments/4yhudh/nms_information_compilation

-----------------------

I'm having a blast, and that sort of surprised me. I'm someone that loves depth and detail in my sandbox games, but the sheer beauty and perfect delivery of those sci-fi book cover worlds (Jeff Minter goes into that in his link above) and the variety of them, how they function in terms of gameplay, to be what NMS is mostly about for me. I can take the grindy mining and upgrade game and place it in lower importance to the general walking around enjoying the views that this game generates. This is not a high pace adrenalin junky game, it's much more relaxed, and sort of perfect after a hard day at work.

I do play with mods (listed in the mods thread) and they certainly help me get over some of the games 'console' annoyances and add some nice things. But yeah, considering the stuff i would have loved (planet physics etc) being dropped in the release version, like Jeff Minter, i'm finding NMS the perfect exploration sci-fi art game, and a lot of fun in that, so much so it is the only game i currently really want to play each day :)

-----------------------

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKi51fOX7_M&feature=youtu.be

A cool 'short' film (6mins) of a rather amazing looking world on the un-modded game :)

Oh dear.
Number 270 now.

Pretty sad when a game with this much hype gets beaten by titles like civilization 3 which came out in 2001.

Guess more people are going offline!

As a suggestion for those who think it might be worth buying this game....
There are some pretty good visual effects you can get from some media players. Very pretty to look at, and they are about $60 cheaper than NMS with about the same level of gameplay.

Some screen savers are pretty good too.
Then again, you can save electricity and watch clouds.

Pretty interactive and awesome 'screensaver':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdtyfcM3cjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCtNdlsW8vE

Mods make a big difference to the gameplay and look, if you are interested in improving the game rather than simply hating on it?

I'm over 100 hours into it and still having a great time exploring these incredible worlds :D

Hehe, better than the real trailers :D

But seriously, really well done.

edit: sort of makes you wonder what it would look like now without the .. erm.. "graphics upgrade" on the close lod, doesn't it.

I usually wait some months after release before trying big mods.
That's because I'm afraid they could interfere with post-release patching phase, which can be tricky.

This is especially true for NMS, because some issues are addressed tweaking data files, which are the same overridden by mods.

So, I think sticking with vanilla and a couple of focused mods to see what happens isn't a bad idea.
That's a matter of personal choice of course and I think mod builders and users are both essential for a game to reach its full potential.

And these videos are really awesome!

I hope they'll make some unsatisfied player change its mind, showing that in a way or another the game is/will be worth their money.
If not, at least he will learn that a game can't be judged by merely watching trailers...

I doubt they will change anyone's mind sadly. It's almost a state of psychosis that the wider internet has fallen into in relation to the opinions on NMS. NMS is not a perfect game, not the best game ever, was definitely released too soon, but it has huge potential. Sadly once you have decided to hate on NMS, that takes over to such an extent it dominates all further discussion about the game. It might be the first game to have this psychological effect on such a wide scale (people have always liked or disliked various games in the past, but this is different!).

The main reason i post 'positive' stuff is because this is a thread for discussing the positives, rather than the negatives, so if i see people doing the 'normal' junk-posting hate in a thread it does not belong in, i just post something positive about NMS.

The game may well never get more updates (Hello Games might decide to move on in the face of over-whelming negativity), but eventually (like years down the road from now) some modders will salvage something of worth from NMS :)

Made me think of Freelancer by Microstf

Oh please.....
People hate this game and its developer because they lied and falsely advertised a lemon and charged $60 for it.
I'll give you your physchoanalysis right now.... "people don't like being scammed". Go and analyse that fanboi.