Wait, is No Man's Sky going to cost $60?

[kitler53]

You're doing the grammar nazi thing more than he is.
You're focusing on 1 aspect of what he's saying and then resaying the other part of it while acting like he's against it.  
This seems to be what you think he is saying "NMS is unimpressive, scale is unimpressive, bad game!"
Really he is saying "why is everyone focusing on the scale?  There are bigger games.  Can't we talk about all the other cool stuff in the game?"

Legend wants to see more, and to some extent he's giving a technical run down of the game.  We don't know how repetitive the game is going to be.  At that scale it absolutely has to be procedurally generated and the question is how well does it do this?  

Are there like 10 general planets?  Where all the others are just combinations/variations of these 10?

Age of Empires 2, there might be like 100,000 maps of each type, but they are still to a type.  You pick gold mine, oasis, islands.  At some point there isn't that much variation.  

How many types of maps are there in NMS?  

Legend wants to get to facts, not just string around the scale like a new buzz word.  

@bold - name them.

@rest - legends started this thread calling nms only worth $20 title while calling vizioneck a steal at $20 clearly implying his title is more impressive than nms.  he then went one to say the scale is irrelevant because it's just a set of complex functions.  nothing in this thread from OP to response is a technical rundown of nms,.. it's a downplaying of nms as not being worth full price.

My point is that NMS's scale alone is not worthy of a high price tag, since this thread is about the games release price. If you're excited by the scale, cool. I'm not on a mission to make everyone hate it. Also I'm pretty sure you took my comment backwards. NMS is infinite and bigger than ridiculously large.

nms's scale is exactly what makes it worthy of high price tag.

in software never confuse the cost to implement to the value to a consumer.  when you truly give a user what they want software can have ridiculously high returns on investment and and when you don't you can be very negative.

[Legend]

legends started this thread calling nms only worth $20 title while calling vizioneck a steal at $20 clearly implying his title is more impressive than nms.  he then went one to say the scale is irrelevant because it's just a set of complex functions.  nothing in this thread from OP to response is a technical rundown of nms,.. it's a downplaying of nms as not being worth full price.

No I made the thread since I had always just assumed it was $20 like most indie games and since their last game was $15. I never said it was only worth $20. I hate breaking games down into "worth" and firmly believe price!=worth.

I was also never even remotely implying VizionEck is more impressive than NMS. Only reason I brought VizionEck into the thread was because it's another indie game that we all know about. When I said "Would $60 feel like a fair price for VizionEck?," all I was trying to do was pinpoint how different people perceive game prices in relationship to NMS. It was not meant to start a short discussion about how much VizionEck should cost. I've got that covered and any VizionEck vs NMS talk should be later, if not never.

nms's scale is exactly what makes it worthy of high price tag.

in software never confuse the cost to implement to the value to a consumer.  when you truly give a user what they want software can have ridiculously high returns on investment and and when you don't you can be very negative.

So if NMS only had 1,000 planets, it would not be worth $60 in your opinion?

For the console market, perceived cost to implement is pretty directly associated with how much games are sold for. People like getting their monies worth. It's why the new $40 price point has opened up for platformers and other cheaper to make games that traditionally cost $60.

[the-pi-guy]

@bold - name them.

@rest - legends started this thread calling nms only worth $20 title while calling vizioneck a steal at $20 clearly implying his title is more impressive than nms.  he then went one to say the scale is irrelevant because it's just a set of complex functions.  nothing in this thread from OP to response is a technical rundown of nms,.. it's a downplaying of nms as not being worth full price.

Minecraft?  27$ on PC.  20$ on everything else.  
It's also procedurally generated.
There are tons of games that are procedurally generated.
 Procedural generation is not a new thing in the slightest.  
The second Elder Scrolls was procedurally generated.  It was bounded to be small, but it was still much much much much larger than any of the other titles.  

I think we read different threads.  I actually know what he meant.
He wasn't downplaying the value of NMS, while upping his own game.  
His statement was because even though it's a huge game, its still an indie game.  He wasn't trying to invalidate the price of NMS.  (Which we don't even know the price of it).  

[Dr. Pezus]

Holy hell, MC is $27 now??

[the-pi-guy]

Holy hell, MC is $27 now??

It's been that much on PC for a while.