Patrick Klepek weighs in on the backlash: (Gaming)

by cheapLEY , Thursday, August 18, 2016, 20:01 (2811 days ago) @ Kahzgul

All I can think of is "if you see a mountain in the distance, you can go there." That sentence got me so hyped for Destiny, and the final product was incredibly disappointing in that respect. It's hardly an open world at all. No Man's Sky, on the other hand, is an open GALAXY. How can people not be completely flabbergasted by the scale of the thing?

Opening the star map, flying around in it, and realizing what that means still blows my mind.

I really find myself in a very middle-of-the-road position on No Man's Sky. I enjoyed it immensely for 15 or 20 hours, then I completely abandoned it. I don't regret buying it or playing it. I had a blast. But, as Cody is so willing to point out, procedural generation can only take you so far. Each planet seems unique upon first sight, but it doesn't take long for it to lose it's magic (for me, obviously) when you just encounter the same four or five buildings over and over again. Heck, even the "puzzles" you solve to unlock the computers in those buildings repeat after less than ten encounters. It desperately needs some unique, hand-crafted elements or at least something more interesting to do in order to pull me back in again. And if that happens, I'll be totally down to jump back in. If it doesn't, I won't be mad or disappointed--I had my fun with the game, and I'm okay with letting it go.

This is one of times where I can totally, completely understand both sides of the argument. I think No Man's Sky is incredible for it's technical achievement alone, but I also see how folks can play it and be totally underwhelmed compared to what we were shown and told about it in advertisements.

At the end of the day, all I can really do is shrug my shoulders, say "meh," move on, and keep an eye on how the game develops from here.