60 people found this review helpful
5 people found this review funny
Recommended
0.0 hrs last two weeks / 3,474.9 hrs on record (120.8 hrs at review time)
Posted: Jul 3, 2016 @ 3:48pm
Updated: Jul 3, 2016 @ 3:49pm

So after 85 hours of play, I've only scratched the surface of the game. I was thinking I would wait to see more of the game before writing a review, but then I realized I already got my money's worth out of it.

I can't believe this game only has 65% good reviews. Sure, it's not perfect, it has problems, a few bugs... But seriously? 65%? From my experience with other Steam games, it should be at least 85-90%.

As you may have read in other posts, this game isn't for everybody. If you're looking for an easy game that will hold your hand and give you clear objectives so that you can actually finish it, then this game isn't for you.
If like me you're a space simulation lover, a science-fiction enthusiast, if piloting is in your blood, if you've always dreamed of exploring the galaxy and visiting strange worlds, and putting your name on a star, then this is for you!

Being a hardcore space enthusiast, I would have bought it just for the exploration part. I read beforehand that the game took place in our galaxy where you could visit 400 billion stars. I thought to myself "meh, how difficult can it be to code a galaxy with 400 billion random stars"? Then I realized it's not random, it's an actual model of our galaxy with what we know as of today (at least star-wise, I guess they make assumptions about the planets).
After a few hours of exploring, I was thinking to myself "they just put regular stars, they let out dwarf stars". Then I see one. "Oh, nevermind." Start thinking the same thing about neutron stars, then I find one. Black holes, proto-stars, nebulas, dark regions, you name it...

If exploration is not your thing, the game has so much more (trading, mining, combat, development...).

A lot of people seem to complain about the update, but I really felt like not being able to land on planets was missing from the original version. Driving around in your rover, enjoying the perks of low gravity, getting lost and losing your ship, falling into a kilometer-deep crevasse, not being able to get out, then realizing you have an option to call your ship to pick you up on auto-pilot, and flying out of there full-speed Death Star trench-like... Again, definitely worth it, without even mentioning all the other planet-based things you can do other than explore.

The game will punish you for being too greedy, for making mistakes, for not being prepared, for hoping for the best, for accidentally shooting your weapons in the vicinity of a space station or forgetting to ask permission before docking... It will punish you for rebinding your "jettison all cargo" key so that you confuse it with your "silent mode" key... three times :-(. Still, definitely worth it. What can I say? I guess I like being punished :-/.
Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny Award
7 Comments
quiknsilva Aug 3, 2016 @ 11:32pm 
A dynamic galaxy shaped by combined player actions is what was promised. Anyone naive enough to expect this offline should be mocked. They must be who all the "do not operate toaster in the bath or drink bleach" idiotproofing warning labels are for.

Still, we might get a respite for a bit. Most of the idiots will probably be busy for the next few weeks on the No Man's Sky review comments hating Sean Murray because their space giraffe is the wrong shade of purple.

And heaven help Christ Roberts if Star Citizen doesn't come with a free girlfriend and let them step into their PCs like in Tron.
quiknsilva Aug 3, 2016 @ 11:31pm 
Chip, Braben has better things to do than read Steam comments. Spending money, most likely. But I digress.

What I said is true.

You talk "empathy" - a mob that grabs pitchforks and spews second-hand bile so they can get a vicarious justice boner doesn't care, they just want to feel important.

There were some who backed from the middle of internet blackspots somehow. The legit complainers couldn't fill a phone booth, and most got refunds.

Others wanted to play the beta (online), then grab last-second refunds for spurious reasons and grab copies through nefarious means. They couldn't, so they grew Chips on shoulders and raged about injustice, like a scammer who got caught dropping a dead fly in their soup bowl and presented with the restaurant bill.

As for bringing up WOW et al - I'd rather play Goat Simulator MMO. That captures the traditional MMO experience offline. Hey, perhaps you should haunt that game's reviews for a bit!
Six Aug 2, 2016 @ 12:05pm 
What say you guys have an old fasionhed duel...?
Chip Patton Jul 31, 2016 @ 9:28am 
@katakislives! Are you David Braben's alternate account? Funny because you spin doctor and play mental gymnastics about as well as he does.

"salty they couldn't get a free copy" - Nice spin over FDev breaking a promise to Kick Starters, and it not having an offline mode.

"too thick" - Again that narrative is right out of Braben's playbook -- "and some reviews just can't be helped" is what he said.

"stay as entertaining as the first week's play" -- yes, actually, it should if you are allowed to play with friends and achieve things together, how else do you think WOW and EverQuest has remained major players in the MMO arena for over 10-(almost)20 years?

"and some just hate frontier because other people do" -- Yeah, when frontier screws someone over, that tends to cause a lot of people to show this thing called empathy and dislike frontier because of it. Again nice play but ultimately you failed there.
quiknsilva Jul 27, 2016 @ 8:10pm 
Why so low-scoring? Some people are salty they couldn't get a free copy via bittorrent. Some can't pilot a ship to save their lives. Some are too thick to get what's going on, give up, and call it "boring". And some have played it for 10 hours a day for months on end, still play it, and give it a bad review because they feel that the game should somehow stay as entertaining as the first week's play. And some just hate Frontier because other people do.
Six Jul 26, 2016 @ 2:47am 
Thanks for the clarification.
Chip Patton Jul 25, 2016 @ 11:37pm 
If you read the negative reviews more than half (likely closer to 90% of them) base their reviews on failed promises by the devs.

Its really hard to overlook this or even challenge those reviews when the CEO (Braben) of this publisher was caught on video telling his investors that his customers are "non-recourse money".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs6lN6um30c @11m43s

What does this mean? It is investor-speak for "We have all this money and we now have zero liabilities", even simpler, "we don't have to keep our promises" is exactly what it means.

So, if you want to know why the reviews are so bad, its because a LOT of us knows we've been promised things we simply have not and will not get.

Do you seriously think they will deliver 4.4 before December 31 while they're still bug-fixing 4.1?