400°

No Man's Sky gets a huge surge of users thanks to Starfield effect

Starfield's launch appears to be having a positive effect on No Man's Sky's own player numbers.

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
jznrpg243d ago (Edited 243d ago )

It’s a really good game now. A lot different when I played it at launch. It wasn’t bad at launch but they added a LOT to make it much better than I thought it could be. VR makes it even better

northpaws243d ago

Amazing game, the only problem is it crashes a lot during MP sessions :( hope that will get fixed soon

Snookies12243d ago

Is that issue on console only? I've played a decent amount of multi-player on PC and hadn't had any issues. Maybe I just lucked out?

northpaws243d ago

Yes, I was playing on console, and whenever me and my friends (a group of 4) trying to do those weekly Nexus missions, at least one of us crashes or have some of errors that prevent us from finishing it.

MrDead243d ago

If you're on PC turn off Windows Game Mode, I can't play NMS for more than 30mins without a crash if that setting is on.

Click start > Settings > Gaming > Game Mode.

MrNinosan243d ago

I played NMS since release, and since Multiplayer patch I've spent over 1500 hours across PS4 and PS5. Never had a crash as I can remember

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 243d ago
darthv72243d ago (Edited 243d ago )

..."now" being the key word.

If we are to treat games equally regardless of who makes them, then the same holds true for Starfield. Only it likely wont need as much added content to make it "a really good game" as it already is... now. It already ships with more content than NMS had at launch.

The improvements Bethesda will make over time will be minor quality of life improvements. Performance...maybe a new mission here or there but much like 76 (which also lacked at the start and was later redeemed with a flood of content), Starfield was built to last a long time and benefit those who put in the effort to really want to explore the stars.

It's definitely the type of game for those with a creative and explorative mind with time on their hands.

Christopher243d ago

***If we are to treat games equally regardless of who makes them***

"If we treat 4 people in 2016 the same as over 400 in 2023..."

IRetrouk243d ago (Edited 243d ago )

"It already ships with more content than NMS had at launch."

Like?

raWfodog243d ago

"...Starfield was built to last a long time and benefit those who put in the effort to really want to explore the stars.
It's definitely the type of game for those with a creative and explorative mind with time on their hands."

Ehhh, personally I think you lost me on that last part about 'explore the stars' and 'creative and explorative mind with time on their hands'. Not saying that you don't like exploring or that Starfield doesn't have exploration, but that somehow it's MORE of an exploration game that NMS.

NMS is built around space and planet exploration and I believe that is an objective statement that many people would agree on. With access to an ungodly amount of planets (18 Quintillion), all fully explorable, where you can fly anywhere and everywhere, you could play the game for the rest of your life and not visit 1% of the available locations. I believe that Starfield is a good game and definitely plan on playing it one day so I'm not trying to downplay it's enjoyment. I even think all of the very low scores that it has received may not be fully deserved, even though there are some fair criticisms of the game. I just think it's unfair that many people keep trying to pit the two games against each other because they are really two different types of games.

refocusedman243d ago

so youre saying indie developer hello games should be compared to bethesda/micro$oft. it really does matter who makes them because one company has basically unlimited resources and the other company doesn't.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 243d ago
Sonic1881243d ago (Edited 243d ago )

I actually like it better than Starfield. Especially the exploration part. Starfield has no sense of exploration
Very data characters, feels like a 10 year old game because of the game engine
Maps suck
Inventory sucks
I found the quests very boring and mediocre as well.
Oh and loading screen after loading screen. Now we know why Bethesda didn't give out review codes to everyone. Don't get me wrong it's a good game, but it's not great

fr0sty243d ago (Edited 243d ago )

Everyone wants to see what they're missing out on when they bought into the hype of a game that claimed to be NMS meets Skyrim, but failed to deliver.

crazyCoconuts243d ago

I'm playing it lately since the PSVR2 patch that just came out, nothing to do with Starfield.
It's quite a game in VR when it looks good, people have no idea

spoonard243d ago

I've spent hours in flat AND VR multiplayer and have had a flawless experience.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 243d ago
Terry_B243d ago

No wonder..they want to experience what they can't do in Starfield ;P

Abnor_Mal243d ago

With all the updates and expansions this game has gotten over the years how many gigabytes is the game now with everything.

I bought this game day one on PS5 but quickly stopped playing because I started off on a planet where the atmosphere was poisonous and my oxygen would run out fairly quickly, which kept me from really exploring because I always had to get back to the ship to replenish my oxygen reserves.

I also quickly learned I really did not like any kind of resource gathering and management kind of games.

Abnor_Mal243d ago

Thanks I might reinstall it on PS5 and try the game on PSVR2.

Markdn242d ago

That's what shows up most games is the fact with all the content it's only 15gb.NMS gives you what you want based on your level of involvement, I login sometimes land on a planet, put on the vr headset and just explore. Some days I'll hook up and do missions with friends, and then some days I'll feel restless and start a fight in space,. NMS should not be compared to Starfield.

execution17243d ago

🤷‍♂️ thats how I started off day 1 on ps4. Got a hot one on day1 ps5 and switch I got an ice planet

Abnor_Mal243d ago

Yea if I go back and play I’ll just restart a new game and hopefully get a better starting planet.

I couldn’t even go far to mine for minerals and stuff so I couldn’t even build anything to help my situation.

Snowb420243d ago (Edited 243d ago )

You'll always get a planet like that at the start.

Edit: It'll always be really hot, toxic, radioactive or cold.

Abnor_Mal243d ago

Oooooh, okay good to know. I guess if I can’t handle the starting planet then I wouldnt be able to handle space and alien planets

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 242d ago
Brazz243d ago

No Man's Sky's is better than Starfield.

sagapo243d ago

Maybe now (depending on personal preference to what you look for in these type of games) but definitely not compared with launch NMS,

aconnellan243d ago

They’re just different games that scratch different itches, it’s really bizarre that they’ve been pitted against each other

TriniOutsider243d ago

Not surprised, No Man's Sky is gonna pick up again for sure.

Show all comments (63)
210°

No Man's Sky Is Easily One Of Gaming's Greatest Comeback Stories

Despite No Man Sky's rocky launch, Hello Games managed to turn it into one of the best space exploration RPGs out there.

darksky2d ago

HG could have stopped after making 3-4 updates and the debt would have been paid to those why are crying about paying full price. However, they have continously provided free updates for the last 6-7 years. No other developer in hostory has ever done this and probably never will.
There are many AAA games that disappointed but the devs normally move on or close the studio rather than fix the game.

-Foxtrot3d ago

I hate the whole concept of "comeback story" because at the end of the day it doesn't remove the core issue we had in the first place, that we were lied to, it was disappointing and it launched with bare content to what was promised for years.

Any bad game can have a comeback story if it's supported enough after launch but for me if you launch in a terrible state then you had your chance. I can applaud you for what you've done after but at the end of the day there's not much of a choice since most gamers would blank your next product if you ditched your last game so fast, it's not about repairing the game but spending your time repairing gamers trust before you launch your next product otherwise it would be dead on arrival.

With these stories and the games being updated, the only way is up most of the time so of course it's going to improve the game and feel better over all, getting better and better as time passes. No Mans Sky, Sea of Thieves, Fallout 76 etc but then you have games like Anthem, Suicide Squad, Redfall and The Avengers where the devs just clearly moved on, now if they have another product people won't be as exited for it, I mean hell Guardians of the Galaxy was a great game but because of the Avengers it didn't help its sales since people were obviously still sour at that point.

I still think despite the improvements to games like No Mans Sky and Cyberpunk along with being better now overall the games are still not up there to what was promised and hyped as for years.

If we keep celebrating these “comeback stories” then unfortunately it only strongly supports the concept that these studios / publishers can continue to push half arsed broken products out for the sake of quick sales instead of waiting until they are fully finished. We need to condemn this awful behaviour or sadly we lose all voice and power as consumers.

Sonic18813d ago (Edited 3d ago )

I feel the same way about Cyberpunk 2077. I'm glad you mentioned that. I'm not a fan of comeback stories as well. But No man sky developer was a small indie team compared to CDPR. It's worse when it's coming from a AAA developer

Nacho_Z3d ago

"Any bad game can have a comeback story if it's supported enough after launch"

You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not. After release Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone. That's not normal.

The reason NMS and HG are held in such high esteem and calling them liars is a weak stance is the amount of work they've put into it, for free. They're not chasing a quick buck, they've dedicated their lives over the last few years to giving their fans the game everyone wanted.

-Foxtrot3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

They are liars though...

We are not revising history here, I'm sorry but we're not

They built this game up for years and they launched it knowing full well it wasn't up to scratch to what they originally showed off or hyped it up to be.

"They're not chasing a quick buck, they've dedicated their lives over the last few years to giving their fans the game everyone wanted"

And like I said above most of that comes from the fact that if they had just moved on straight away nobody would have supported their next game. They've washed most of that sour taste away after supporting No Mans Sky so now they are doing a new game which more people feel like they can support and get excited for.

Anyway how can you say "You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not" and then make the point that "Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone"

This means that if a small team like this can turn a game around then big AAA games like Suicide Squad, Redfall, Anthem and the like should have been able to do it no problem, oh but that's right they didn't want to put the time or effort into it. They can do it but some people just decide not to.

Blad3runner003d ago (Edited 3d ago )

"You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not. After release Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone. That's not normal."

People paid for the game at launch and got lied to. Now the game is what it SHOULD have been from the start (what people paid for) and we should be happy they aren't charging EXTRA? Its free because people ALREADY paid for the game at launch.

People PAID for what the game is in its current state (what it should have been at launch), not what it was when it released. Charging people AGAIN would result in even more backlash.

anast3d ago

"You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not. After release Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone. That's not normal."

They already charged for the full price game. All of that work is owed because it was already paid for.

JackBNimble2d ago

Fox ... sure HG made a huge mistake, but they have also done more then any development team that I have seen to fix the problem and go way beyond in supporting the game. And every update has been free, so I don't really get why you are holding on to this grudge.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2d ago
milohighclub3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Whatever happened at launch is in the past. By your logic they could have supported it for a year got it to the project they promised then stopped but they didn't. They're still supporting it to this they, they've released more content post than pretty much any game I can think off. More than most MMOs. They didn't have to go this far but they have and don't have any plans of stopping. All for free too.
Yeah they had a shit launch and they've apologised, learned and more than made up for it. I was pissed off at them at launch, but not petty enough to keep slandering them 7 years later.
You have much bigger studios releasing half assed games and fixing it later or even worse not even bothering.

anast3d ago

The DLC costs money. But yeah, people are hanging on to this one longer because of their previous reputation.

TheCaptainKuchiki3d ago

And it doesn't change the fact that the game is a boring procedurally generated environment in which your repeat the same actions over and over again with no real purpose. I hate when they say that the game became good.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2d ago
thorstein3d ago

I really enjoyed it at launch and had every trophy by August 2016.

The experience I had is no longer in the game: It was just me and my ship. It was a survival game and the feeling of loneliness in the universe was pervasive. There was no way to ruin too far from your ship and, in an emergency, you grenaded a hole in the ground to survive.

I miss that aspect, but since then, I love what they've done.

Hugodastrevas3d ago

I'd say it's THE definitive comeback story

TheGamingHounds3d ago

Final Fantasy 14 takes that one imho

CrimsonWing693d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Yep and the way they actually did it where Bahamut destroyed the original FF14 and the realm was “reborn” seals it as the best way to do something like this, lol.

jwillj2k43d ago

Oh great another story about the cleanest shirt in a bin of dirty laundry.

Show all comments (26)
80°

Latest No Man’s Sky update adds ship customisation, space station overhaul, and more

Orbital update drops today, also bringing with it engine improvements and UI refresh.

Read Full Story >>
blog.playstation.com
Zeke6842d ago

The game that keeps on giving 🦾🥳✌️

Christopher42d ago

The support they've given this game only makes me more interested in their next game.

Zeke6842d ago

Agree, curious what they are cooking up for that one?!

180°

The 10 PSVR 2 Games You Should Own

If you're looking for 'must have' PSVR 2 games then look no further. These are the 10 titles every PSVR 2 owner should have in their library.

Read Full Story >>
xrsource.net
kevco3352d ago

If you're wanting more PSVR 2 support, you should probably buy all of these games.

Speak with your wallet!

Profchaos52d ago

Bit rich to have to buy games you don't want because you want Sony to support the expensive headset they sold us which cost as much as the console it runs on beyond paying third partys to support it.
Seriously in terms of first party we have horizon on day 1 and a gt 7 vr mode.

They seemingly have made little effort to support it beyond paying Capcom to make re games in VR or a second party studio to make firewall which was mismanaged.

I'm a day 1 psvr2 user and the only thing I'm excited for right now is PC support.

I commented recently this bespoke VR game development model we have right now clearly doesn't work

crazyCoconuts51d ago

On the one hand I feel like there's been plenty of smaller non-AAA games to play and occupy me as a supplement to my flat screen gaming.
But I agree that Sony has done nothing to elevate this beyond the niche it's in and into the mainstream where it would be economical to create AAA games for it.

Babadook751d ago (Edited 51d ago )

Most of these games are worth owning for most people; I own all but 2 of them in fact. So I agree with kevco33. I think you're crazy if you downplay this list quite frankly. Sony can't keep funding software if people don't buy any of it, the ball is squarely in OUR court.

Sony has spent a lot on 3rd party stuff this gen like RE.

phoenixwing52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Saving up for the headset is my first hurdle. Let alone buying games I don't want lol

mudakoshaka51d ago

People downvoting you for not having enough finances...what a world we live in, haha

phoenixwing51d ago (Edited 51d ago )

@mudako
They feel affronted at the very thought that I don't plunk down 500 immediately lol I have a little over 900 games in my backlog I've been buying games instead of hardware ever since I got my PC and ps5. I just don't know if vr is really for me honestly. Every time I have a couple hundred allocated to video games it makes more sense to buy a bunch of flat games instead of vr ones

mudakoshaka51d ago

I have 9 out of these 10 games. I try to buy all the VR games I like to support the advancement of VR!

TheEroica51d ago (Edited 51d ago )

I spoke with my wallet after watching the first headset get weak support. Easy pass until Sony earns my money. Feel bad for those who parted with 500 bucks, falling for the hype that Sony was actually gonna support this thing.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 51d ago
Neonridr52d ago

I own 7 of these titles off the list, lol.

NotoriousWhiz52d ago

I'm trying to decide if it's worth holding onto my psvr 2. I enjoy what it has currently, but it seems unlikely to get anything else. Might be better off just waiting for something with more support if that ever comes.

Profchaos51d ago

As a fellow psvr2 owner the question seemingly comes down to do you own a PC.

I think I'm all in I have a habit to hold onto my systems anyhow I still have my psvr1 to hell I still have my NES.

But while it's still worth something yeah you could sell it and if Sony turns the ship around you should be able to buy another one for less than you soldmit for I feel like we won't see any fix for the headset for the next 2 years rumours show that Sony has no current first party VR games in active development after they closed London studios

The whole psvr2 situation has left me feeling a little burnt on PlayStation as a whole to be honest. The first psvr felt experimental but it was supported far more than this superior headset

MIDGETonSTILTS1752d ago

GT7 surprised me, because I hate racing games, but i poured 100 hours into it way too quickly.

I’m looking forward to the Metro VR game this year, and I hope that WW2 dogfighter game releases eventually.

talocaca52d ago

I have most of them 😅

Waiting for a sale on Synapse and Arizona Sunshine 2.....also Metro coming this year looks great.

Show all comments (31)