Cautiously hyped for Light No Fire from the No Man's Sky team at Hello Games

Mind you, science fiction usually means "modern North America with a few specific tropes largely derived from Star Trek, Star Wars, and Andre Norton" which seems consistent with my understanding of No Man's Sky.

Even if I completely agreed with that, the things you listed here already seem a lot more diverse than LotR/D&D.

Example: it would seem ridiculous to put the Klingon Empire in NMS. Put dragons in light no fire... oh wait, they did that lol


Last edited by ExpandingMan on 9 December 2023 at 6:35 pm UTC

Example: it would seem ridiculous to put the Klingon Empire in NMS. Put dragons in light no fire... oh wait, they did that lol

To be fair, dragons in fantasy stories might just slightly precede LotR and D&D. I mean Gilgamesh fought one, and that story was written something like four thousand years ago.

Your comparison is more meaningful if you can find Hobbits and Ringwraiths in the game.

Mind you, science fiction usually means "modern North America with a few specific tropes largely derived from Star Trek, Star Wars, and Andre Norton" which seems consistent with my understanding of No Man's Sky.

Even if I completely agreed with that, the things you listed here already seem a lot more diverse than LotR/D&D.

Example: it would seem ridiculous to put the Klingon Empire in NMS. Put dragons in light no fire... oh wait, they did that lol

Dragons are a thing vaguely on par with "spaceships", or "handguns that shoot beams", not "The Klingon Empire". And how many SF games have "A warrior race prone to violence, optionally with odd notions of honour, who are physically implausibly identical to humans except for slightly different faces, hair and variations in build"? No, they don't call them Klingons; Klingons are intellectual-property-protected to hell and back. But they fill the same roles.

Don't get me wrong--I'm a science fiction fan. I've been reading SF since before I saw the first release of Star Wars in theatres and thought it was fun, but kind of bad SF. But it's just as cliche-prone as fantasy. Pretending otherwise is an attempt to create a false objective basis to personal taste.

(I actually picked up and read the book "Star Wars", saying on the cover "Soon to be a major motion picture!" a few months before the movie came out. I was like, sure, sure, major motion picture, like that's going to happen.)


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 9 December 2023 at 7:55 pm UTC

Don't get me wrong--I'm a science fiction fan. I've been reading SF since before I saw the first release of Star Wars in theatres and thought it was fun, but kind of bad SF. But it's just as cliche-prone as fantasy. Pretending otherwise is an attempt to create a false objective basis to personal taste.

I don't entirely disagree, and the only reason it's possible for these things to be genres is that they have these tropes, they're just significantly narrower in fantasy than in sci fi.

I don't entirely disagree, and the only reason it's possible for these things to be genres is that they have these tropes, they're just significantly narrower in fantasy than in sci fi.

You're thinking of high fantasy which is only one of the subgenres. Understandable, as that's what almost anyone thinks of when they hear the genre mentioned. And even that subgenre is likely to be more varied than you give it credit for.

Fantasy spans the spectrum from Beowulf to Alice in Wonderland, Discworld and (shudder) sparkly vampires. Just like sci-fi has more to offer than just spaceships and lasers and suspiciously humanoid aliens. Basically, if the story builds on magical elements and/or creatures, you can call it fantasy.

Don't get me wrong--I'm a science fiction fan. I've been reading SF since before I saw the first release of Star Wars in theatres and thought it was fun, but kind of bad SF. But it's just as cliche-prone as fantasy. Pretending otherwise is an attempt to create a false objective basis to personal taste.

I don't entirely disagree, and the only reason it's possible for these things to be genres is that they have these tropes, they're just significantly narrower in fantasy than in sci fi.

I'm thinking that because you don't much like fantasy, reasonably enough you don't read much of it. And since you don't read much of it, you don't have much awareness of what is actually out there.

But theoretically, fantasy is much broader, since science fiction embraces everything that is possible (OK, plus a few things we agree to pretend are possible, like FTL travel), whereas fantasy allows both possible and impossible things. And actually existing fantasy uses more of that territory than you would think. Jasper Fforde writes about a heroine who learns to enter books by "reading herself into" them, thwarting a villain who plots to ruin Jane Eyre by going into the original manuscript and changing the plot, in a Britain which includes the People's Republic of Wales, which smuggles dangerous cheese into England, and a prime minister running on a platform of developing "anti-smote" devices to prevent God from smiting England if He gets annoyed.

You're thinking of high fantasy which is only one of the subgenres. Understandable, as that's what almost anyone thinks of when they hear the genre mentioned. And even that subgenre is likely to be more varied than you give it credit for.

Well, it was foolish of me to try to get into this conversation without trying to define the genre, that's for sure.

Regardless, what I see in this trailer does not look to me like a clever or interesting setting, it looks a lot like the kind of thing that you're criticizing me for stereotyping fantasy as.

You're thinking of high fantasy which is only one of the subgenres. Understandable, as that's what almost anyone thinks of when they hear the genre mentioned. And even that subgenre is likely to be more varied than you give it credit for.

Well, it was foolish of me to try to get into this conversation without trying to define the genre, that's for sure.

Regardless, what I see in this trailer does not look to me like a clever or interesting setting, it looks a lot like the kind of thing that you're criticizing me for stereotyping fantasy as.

Could be.
I don't think we really have enough information to be sure, but it's not unlikely--I'd say games, especially at the higher budget end, tend to lean fairly heavily on the most, ah, classic imagery, whether in F or SF.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 9 December 2023 at 10:42 pm UTC

It's all speculative fiction - there, done! No need to argue anymore!

If there is no running water I'm going to be pissed.

Static water bodies feel so damned lifeless in NMS - needs waterfalls and rivers.

If there is no running water I'm going to be pissed.

Static water bodies feel so damned lifeless in NMS - needs waterfalls and rivers.

That and the exceptionally shallow seas. I think they made them a *little* deeper, but they're still basically wading pool a few dozen metres deep.

Don't get me wrong--I'm a science fiction fan. I've been reading SF since before I saw the first release of Star Wars in theatres and thought it was fun, but kind of bad SF. But it's just as cliche-prone as fantasy. Pretending otherwise is an attempt to create a false objective basis to personal taste.

I think this is because Star Wars isn't SF per se, it just uses a SF setting. Rather, it's a pastiche of a number of genres that were familiar at the time -- Samurai flicks, Erroll Flynn swashbucklers, WW I dogfighting movies, and so forth, that just happened to be set in space. Likely because one of the elements was old Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon serials, and they used a SF setting. If you were going to categorize it, I think the old term "science fantasy" is more accurate, although a lot of the later stuff and fan-made material moved the idea closer to "proper" science fiction. But if you were looking for Asimov or Clarke, you wouldn't find them there.

But back to talking about the preview itself, am I the only one getting more of an Irish "fae" vibe rather than the typical Tolkein-derived style?

Personally I find NMS to be a complete grind fest, and i have tried really hard to 'get through it' wonder if this will be any different. I guess time will tell.

Trying to "get through it" is likely why you found it a grind. It's a sandbox game like Minecraft, just with lasers and spaceships - there's a lot of making your own entertainment involved.

I just don't enough time right now in my life to 'make my own entertainment' in a game, i purchase them to entertain me from the outset as much as is possible. (i am wiling to learn and put a good few hours in before i sense it's not really working out though don't get me wrong).

This is fine, i can avoid Minecraft type games if i want. But initially and i don't think even even today, NMS was advertised as a minecraft clone type of game even if it essentially has that possibility. You can put that down to the terrible launch & poor marketing though. It was more 'explore random planets and look at weird creatures whilst scanning plant forna'

But just like Subnautica, it's a grind fest for me. Maybe you have lots of spare time or get really invested in sandbox title's idk. The reality, at least for me is that these types of games could make things easier for the beginner/time constrained and have a well developed time/reward curve + a big inventory slot space, but they don't. They have a neat concept, fancy graphics to lure you in and then they give you a minuscule inventory and requires you to 'research' and find one material to make another material, to make a final material which loads up you inventory and then you need to build a storage container, which requires traveling to the opposite end of a solar system / ocean where by you run out of fuel.. but you can't fit the fuel cell in your load out without dumping the thing that's needed to make the container..etc. I call that grinding, but you may call that fun.

Each to their own. Im more of a pick up and play style gamer, Fallout for example has the possibility to build and play sandbox, but does not limit you in the process, it's just a nice added extra to the core gameplay.


Last edited by Lofty on 10 December 2023 at 5:46 pm UTC

Personally I find NMS to be a complete grind fest, and i have tried really hard to 'get through it' wonder if this will be any different. I guess time will tell.

Trying to "get through it" is likely why you found it a grind. It's a sandbox game like Minecraft, just with lasers and spaceships - there's a lot of making your own entertainment involved.

I just don't have time in my life to 'make my own entertainment' in a game, i purchase them to entertain me from the outset (i am wiling to learn and put a good few hours in before i sense it's not really working out though).

Yeah, NMS probably isn't for you.

The onboarding prices of teaching you the survival systems by guaranteeing that you need to use the survival systems, and encouraging exploration with the limited inventory space (you can buy a new slot at each new star system), isn't really for everyone. The big thing that tends to rub people the wrong way is that the whole game is set up to make it pointless to spend a lot of time on any one planet - you're shunted into a space hobo life. Perhaps just having the one planet in the new game will address that? Time will tell.

Before watching the trailer, or even clicking into this article, I didn't want to be interested. But that trailer was too fantastical for me to resist. I'm drawn in to that setting! I want to play in that world! So, now my anticipation is to see how the writing and game design marries with the world.

Noted and infamous con-man launches new scam, attempts to gain confidence from abused and battered gamers.

I think this man earned his redemption, he got the backslash he deserved but he lowered his head and kept working on the game to fulfill what he promised and more, without implementing any microtransaction bs for ships or whatever. And to be honest I think a big chunk of the responsibility of the NMS fiasco relies on Sony.

But back to talking about the preview itself, am I the only one getting more of an Irish "fae" vibe rather than the typical Tolkein-derived style?

Well, in Tolkien, dragons are gigantic, crafty, eldritch horrors, more like forces of nature than creatures, capable of devastating entire cities or kingdoms almost unstoppably, with human-level or higher intelligence, having the ability to bewitch people just with the sound of their voice or the glance of their hypnotic eyes, including amnesia so powerful it can make them forget everything about themselves. A single live dragon is always dangerous, a major liability, and a wildcard that everyone in a large radius must tread lightly around and avoid rousing.

Here they appear to be docile, tamable beasts of burden and conveyance. So yeah, not seeing much resemblance.

(Also, unless these dragons don't breathe flame, I don't see how you're supposed to fulfill the injunction in the title. )

But back to talking about the preview itself, am I the only one getting more of an Irish "fae" vibe rather than the typical Tolkein-derived style?

Well, in Tolkien, dragons are gigantic, crafty, eldritch horrors, more like forces of nature than creatures, capable of devastating entire cities or kingdoms almost unstoppably, with human-level or higher intelligence, having the ability to bewitch people just with the sound of their voice or the glance of their hypnotic eyes, including amnesia so powerful it can make them forget everything about themselves. A single live dragon is always dangerous, a major liability, and a wildcard that everyone in a large radius must tread lightly around and avoid rousing.

You gotta throw in the Shadowrun style of dragon, my all time favorite of all those mentioned!

There definitely some Valheim vibs in there. I expect more than graphic to let me engaged.

We'll see what they do with this title. I liked the idea of NMS on paper but the game just feels dead to me, even with all those additions they've made. Every update feels like a re-skin of previous features (i.e. shops were added for multi-tools: --> just go talk to alien a, figure out what they want for it and compare to your current one) and I just can't get into it past a couple hours.

Through time they addressed the main complaints that people had, which was not enough customization and lack of content when exploring. All those cool looking ships we saw on trailer, the "pre-made" planet that wasn't procedural, the excessive amount of running around with no vehicles, these were some of the few problems that made the game stale and initially helped with gameplay but the core functionality is already there.

I don't think anything they add will change the core component of the game: go there, read text, get reward (new word, new recipe, new item, etc.) and move on with your exploration. Something is just missing; to me it seems that they wanted to both give the experience of loneliness in outer space while at the same time fill that void with "content" to have something to work towards.

Anyways I still wish them the best and still love my space ship I got from the pre-order. I hope this one succeeds.