Actually, in Spore the closer you got to the center of the Galaxy the more Grox you ran into… Those borg like little buggers that keep attacking you and become the games primary antagonist / enemy force. (At least for me, I always found a way to piss them off) I can’t recall… google… ahh yes, I remember now… here some info. http://spore.wikia.com/wiki/Badge_Outta_Heck
1 Like
Ye, they kinda became the main threat. My biggest problem with spore however was that your own forces were literally useless. The game would have been way more fun if you could actually build up a fleet of ships that could defend your systems (just add maintenance costs to balance). Spore mostly boiled down to you having to personally return all the time to one of your planets because someone is attacking it and they are totally useless when defending.
Though with no mans sky we probably won’t have such a problem, it will just get progressively harder the closer to the center of the galaxy we come. It would be nice to get some kind of hint or something to what can possibly be in the middle though, I for one was DEEEEPLY disappointed when reaching the middle of the galaxy in spore. Goddammit that item was useless… you literally have millions of planets and I get a staff that can terraform 42 planets into class 3 terras… the Grox themselves have 2.4k SYSTEMS! Most useless “ending” I’ve ever felt that I’ve gotten. Could at least have gotten me like an infinite warp drive engine or a superweapon that has a long recharge time.
1 Like
Are you sarcastic? … Because that’s how you win Spore. By reaching the galactic core.
1 Like
I was serious. I didn’t stick with Spore long enough to even be aware that was the plan. Boring game.
So we’ve got a Spore clone.
NMS is as much of a Spore clone because the goal is to reach the center of the galaxy as you are a zombie because your profile pic is a bloody eye. 
The fact that you must be in Windows OS to play to nearly every games, and a lot of other things (Intel compiling favoritism, component compatibility forced to what they want, OS forced for constructor if they want to survive …)… Of course they didn’t anger PC gamers who don’t care about what PC game market could be, just PC gamers like me who’d love not to be forced to have a Windows OS at home just to play PC games.
see above, and if needed, I’ve a developer near me that is directly concerned because a founded a few years ago a company specialized on cybersecurity at the silicon valley, and the list of its examples is limitless 
(but it’s also my boss I can’t tell him to go on this forum for that), I can give a new example every week but we need a topic for that 
calm down, this was not my intentions at all… nothing personal.
this pseudo-fight between PC and console you seem to live is going to die with time…
For NMS, you can’t await from it to generate things that developer couldn’t predict… it’s just non-predictable associations of defined things… that’s why he couldn’t be surprised at E3…
Wait… what?
OK, yes, you need a Windows OS for most games because most game makers don’t bother with a Unix version. Why don’t they bother with a Unix version? Because DirectX is simply better for some things than the alternatives. And since it’s Microsoft who makes it, probably spending the money they make from Windows, it’s not been officially ported to any other operating system, and frankly Wine is just not very good.
Well, that and because not enough gamers actually want them to. I mean, sure, I’d love to be able to switch completely to Ubuntu, except games are only one of the things stopping me. Plenty of websites, some of which by law I need to be able to access, don’t support any browser but Internet Explorer. Peripheral hardware almost always support Windows out of the box, plug and play, unless it’s a PlayStation controller. Since I’m not switching, I don’t particularly care if developers spend time and money (which, in the end, the consumer will have to pay) making their games playable on other systems.
Oh yeah, and even if there was another PC OS that did gaming as well as Windows, are we sure that’d be a good thing? I mean, look at PlayStation vs. Xbox: the sheer amount of exclusive bullshit happening there is staggering. Imagine having to dual boot just to be able to play the games you enjoy! (“Not as bad as having to buy 2 consoles” until a license to dual boot the other OS costs more than one).
Disclaimer: By “plenty of websites” I mean that there’s a large number of websites like that, and that I’m forced to use some of them; not that there is a large percentage of websites worldwide that do it, or that I’d be willing to use any of them if given a choice.
So… what’s your point? The money isn’t real if it comes from the government? Pretty sure you got that backwards 
Business is business. If it makes a return on the investment, it’s good business (albeit perhaps not Good business).
An idealist might care that the money he’s making comes out of the tax of others, which would indicate that Elon Musk has indeed left idealism behind in favour of funny gadgets such as his very own space program to make a dime off NASA’s choice to retire one set of spaceships before having the next set ready.
Game makers go where there is player. Players are on Windows OS because Windows OS has been forced all over the world. It’s not a technical choice.
And if we could have two OS, why should they have compatibility problems ? It’s not obvious. Microsoft can make the same OS run on PC, tablets, smartphones and XBox 360.
My point is corporations exist to make money, no matter where the money comes from. This idea that they exist in principal to aid humanity is naïve and idealistic IMO. If you believe corporations exist to better humanity, you’re playing right into their marketing IMO.
1 Like
From INS IndieDB description :
The only space combat experience I loved was the first Wing Commander, so I’m not a huge fan of this genre. But your description makes me more confident for the Kickstarter than what I felt before reading that. That’s sounds great.
Ah, my mistake, I mistook your tone of writing as somewhat argumentative rather than just a reiteration of my points. Glad we agree, for future reference these forums have a Like button precisely to avoid this situation.
1 Like
It hasn’t been forced. It was pre-installed etc, but people are free to switch. If Microsoft paid Intel to make processors that only ran Windows then that would be different.
If the situation was reversed and the majority of the world used a paid-for Linux distro and the majority of games used OpenGL, then MS came along and made Windows and DirectX and gamers could freely download and install Windows, then serious game developers would make their games for Windows and DirectX because it’s the better platform for their product.
Do you disagree?
Now that you mention that i recall that SPAZ had similar goal … the center of the galaxy … or was it the zombies… 
Yes, it has been forced, and people are, in absolute, free to switch, in context, not at all. And game makers went where there was a more important part of market, that’s logical, and not technical. Nvidia also disagrees with you because DirectX chip is a huge problem in terms of electronic supports. Why do you think there’s no DirectX implementation/support on smartphones ? Even in Windows tablets, there’s only an emulation of DirectX because ARM makers refused to take count of the DirectX chip (and Microsoft couldn’t forcde anything because of their little part of market).
So, your big problem is that Team kamui’s Favourite OS hasn’t won the market? Here, let me compose something for you on my nanoscopic violin. That’s so totally the same as, or even worse than, developing and purposefully distributing viruses to their customers.
I’m not really sure your favourite OS holding too small of a fraction of the market for game developers to accommodate it counts.
Does one of their examples include developing and silently installing viruses on customers PCs?
What was your intention, then? Because…
is saying nothing short of “I don’t care, so you shouldn’t either”.
Considering I’m primarily a console gamer, you’re going to have to rephrase that. Acknowledging an issue isn’t the same as waging a war.
I said that PC gamers have long memories of Sony screwing them over, and you extolled the virtues of Sony’s console offerings. Neither you, nor Sony, have addressed PC gamers concerns, and that’s why some PC gamers continue to harbour some resentment toward the company.
Again, none of which I have seen here.
nanoscopic violin ? Team kamui’s favourite OS ? what is worse than what ?
What the hell are you talking about ? I’ve no team, no favourite OS, I just say that Microsoft forced the market to rule like they wanted… why your reaction is so important ? It’s just a discussion …
I’ll skip the other comments on this style, because I didn’t understand what was your point, and I don’t want to enter in an aggressive exchange.
No, it says, if A is possible, B should be too, with A > B. As I said, nothing personal, just trying to give objective arguments…
Sorry, but : who am I, for you ?
And you said that Sony made stupid things on the past, ok, I said that you permanently use products of a company who made worse things, and A LOT of worse things.
And because I said “you seem to live” and not “you live”, I’ve nothing to reprhase, but you can re-read me if you need.
Your cynicism is showing, Gene. Note that you started with “corporations exist to make the shareholders a better life”. Now “corporations exist to make money.” Neither is true.
Public corporations exist to engage in business remaining accountable to their shareholders. If the shareholders want them to be environmentally responsible, then that’s what they’re supposed to do. If the shareholders insist that they increase the dividend, then that’s what they’re supposed to do. In principle, anyway. The board and CEO will do what they’re going to do, but the board can lose their jobs in the next shareholder vote. The CEO can be outed if the board gets unhappy with the decisions being made.
As most people just buy shares for financial reasons, many CEOs do whatever they must to keep the dividends flowing, or to bump the share price.
As for this entire subtext, I started with an observation that corporate law is unethical. That doesn’t mean that corporations must exist “purely for the betterment of society”. It means that corporate law is unethical. The law needs to change to produce corporations that act for the betterment of society. Not charity. Not humanitarian aid. Just the betterment of society. That’s why we have capitalism in the first place - it helps society. Ideally, the shareholders should be clamoring for the social benefits, but being responsible to shareholders is obviously not enough because the shareholders think like you do - corporations exist to make money. And because the laws don’t produce the needed result in the society in which they were drafted, they are unethical. If you don’t like “unethical”, then read that as “wrong”, or “bent”, or “need tweaking”.
If you want an extreme to illustrate the point, consider monopolies. They were perfectly legal. They followed the tenets of capitalism to the letter. And they were inherently bad for society. So monopolies were made illegal. I assert that public corporations as structured are inherently bad for society. Did monopolies have no redeeming values? Of course not. But they focused on self enrichment, and that’s why they became so extreme and so unhealthy for the community at large.
This isn’t about goodness and light and fairy dust. It’s about productive outcomes. If nobody ever worried about this stuff, we wouldn’t have democracy and some other nice toys that we enjoy.
3 Likes
In the current context, you are the sum of your posts in this thread, which as far as addressing PC gamers concern with Sony is very little. They will remain a company I trust not at all until they either show a change in attitude towards PC gamers that’s beneficial to me personally or I become a console gamer, neither of which I believe are likely to happen any time soon.
PS4 exclusive titles are an excellent example of something that does not regain my faith in Sony.
Is Microsoft literally the devil? Yes.
Does anyone - anyone at all - make an OS and graphics API that is better for PC gaming? No.
I use the products of a company that makes the best things in their category. I forgive Microsoft for Windows 98 and Vista and putting an unencrypted keylogging functionality in the Windows 10 beta because a portion of the profits from those products have been used to make my experiences as a PC gamer prettier.
The same can not be said for StarWars Galaxies, PlanetSide 2, or Bloodborne.
1 Like
In the current context, I’m not the sum of my posts in this thread at all, but the sum of understanding and misunderstanding every reader personally makes of my posts. My sentences, even if my english is bad, are more precise than you seem to think.
And, again, Microsoft OS and DirectX Chip is not technically better than others at all. And if DirectX API is better, it doesn’t count more than “where are the players ?” for game makers, that’s what I say.
Sorry double post but : you really shocked me dude
Capitalism helps society ? Really ? If you can read french, I suggest you to read some articles or books of Frederic Lordon (french economist-philosopher), or if you don’t, you can read some articles and books of Noam Chomsky (american Linguist doctor (known for the transformational-generative grammar), specialist of USA history. I find their arguments really interesting, maybe you could appreciate it too
I think this topic is going to die… to prevent it : I think NMS is great ! I hope that the gameplay will be good enough. Anybody has an idea of why you must reach the center of the galaxy ? I thought that any galaxy cames with a big black hole on its center, it sounds dangerous to go there
1 Like