"This is a video critique of No Man's Sky, a procedurally generated science-fiction adventure title. It talks about how difficult it is to cram a whole universe into six gigabytes, and how well the game works mechanically and artistically."
Not a big fan of this game, but now that we are a bit past release, I'm willing to look at more than the same arguments against it over and over again. Pretty good watch.
[video=youtube;DA21NUasw5A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA21NUasw5A[/video]
That's a sorta different view on things I guess. Sorta refreshing, but still hard to get behind.
Although I have to strongly disagree that the developers promised people a universe in a bottle. They did the exact opposite. They promised a real, living and breathing universe. They literally promised us the world. Then they gave us a universe in a bottle.
He starts by saying he isn't going to be talking about the controversy, yet continuously references and waves off consumer backlash as nonsensical as part of his finishing points. That's unfair to the other side of the argument as many consumers were deceived about the product they were purchasing - not just bored with it after many hours of play and wanting a refund as he states.
This reminds me of his recent Baldur's Gate video where he discusses the fan-expansion that features the transgender character and goes on to shape it like all the fans just couldn't tolerate an LGBT in the Baldur's Gate universe, and not once mentions the "its about ethics in heroic adventuring" line which follows it.
I like Noah, but his politics are getting really apparent in videos lately and shut-out counterpoints.
An additional comment also:
He acts like NMS in this video is the first game to do this sorta thing, and doesn't once mention Will Wright's creation of Spore and its "universe in a bottle" with the same objective.
I stopped watching his videos because he can't not get political about every fucking thing, and he's not even trying to be objective about anything anymore.
I stopped watching him regularly after his Depression Quest video, but some of his videos like the FEAR retrospective were enjoyable.
I just don't like the idea of watching something that starts out as a fair critique and then suddenly [I]politics[/I].
How is consumer backlash at No Man's Sky even a political subject?
The existence of Space Engine makes most of the points of this review kind of moot in my opinion. I would really have liked to hear a comparison though.
I only watched the first 3 and a half minutes though. Sorry if it comes up later. I just wanted myself to stop shouting "but that already existed, that's not why No Man's Sky was so hyped up" at the screen.
[QUOTE=Falstad007;51049643]I stopped watching him regularly after his Depression Quest video, but some of his videos like the FEAR retrospective were enjoyable.
I just don't like the idea of watching something that starts out as a fair critique and then suddenly [I]politics[/I].[/QUOTE]
? i've watched a ton of his videos, when does he get political?
Heh, I stopped watching his videos after he called World at War an "America fuck yeah" game where you mow down the dirty foreigners with machineguns, while also calling Advanced Warfare a genuinely fun and entertaining game. Yeah, that's when I couldn't take his opinion all too seriously anymore.
[QUOTE=TheHydra;51050147]? i've watched a ton of his videos, when does he get political?[/QUOTE]
A lot.
It's largest in FEAR, wherein fear 3 it's justified, and then there's Postal where he literally goes the fuck off message like ten minutes in to rant nonsensically about how the fact that he used to be a self centered asshole is somehow relevant to the life experiences of every human being that plays video games.
[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;51049775]How is consumer backlash at No Man's Sky even a political subject?[/QUOTE]
Pro-Consumers versus Pro-Developers.
Those usually aren't political, but by dismissing consumers as the "problem", akin to how the label of "gamers" were deemed as what was wrong with videogames in the 2014 videogame journalism collusion-debacle, it becomes inherently political - especially noting that this is something that has come up in front of the U.N., national media, and even talked about by presidential candidates.
Of course it is more complicated than that with more issues being paired in the kerfuffle over time, but it is something to keep an eye on as Noah has an increasingly vocal viewpoint on such.
[QUOTE=Destroyox;51050768]Heh, I stopped watching his videos after he called World at War an "America fuck yeah" game where you mow down the dirty foreigners with machineguns, while also calling Advanced Warfare a genuinely fun and entertaining game. Yeah, that's when I couldn't take his opinion all too seriously anymore.[/QUOTE]
But WaW is exactly that, the game does nothing but revel in violence. And it's great, I love it for that. As for AW, it's not exactly fresh or new but it had me way more engaged than any recent CoD singleplayer (since blops1).
[QUOTE=SFArial;51054104]But WaW is exactly that, the game does nothing but revel in violence. And it's great, I love it for that. As for AW, it's not exactly fresh or new but it had me way more engaged than any recent CoD singleplayer (since blops1).[/QUOTE]
The opening cinematic of WaW actually features footage of real soldiers being executed and real life corpses. I couldn't believe they did that, at the time. The sheer level of violence certainly had escalated since the history-channel snippet adventures of the first Call of Duty's. Noah's opinion on that issue does have some backing in that regard.
[QUOTE=McSkinny;51057383]The opening cinematic of WaW actually features footage of real soldiers being executed and real life corpses. I couldn't believe they did that, at the time. The sheer level of violence certainly had escalated since the history-channel snippet adventures of the first Call of Duty's. Noah's opinion on that issue does have some backing in that regard.[/QUOTE]
His argument is that WaW's level of violence is visceral to the point of spectacle. Violence is inherently fascinating to humans and in the context of fiction it can be exciting and even aesthetically pleasing. No matter the intentions of the author, violence can have an unintended effect on the viewer, see: Sam Peckinpah's whole career.
If you especially consider WaW's audience, the dismemberment, torture, and burning of live human beings is less likely to get a wince and more likely to get the response of "yoooo that shit was sick". Perhaps some people with weaker stomachs might find WaW's use of violence and gore effective, but I guarantee you that the majority of players never felt that while actively playing. It's an extremely slick shooter that has to be fun, no matter what, which is direct contrast to what the atmosphere is supposed to be. This means that WaW's intended theme of "war is hell" gets converted into "war is visceral, gritty, and edgy (but still fun to play)".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.