If this is the case, why is Frontier not hyping this future content?
Lower your Expectations for ED
- Thread starter Cosmo
- Start date
Because Chris Roberts hasn't bought the Co yet?
They've said in a couple of press articles that one advantage of 4.0 is easier future development compared with Legacy, and that's probably all the hints we're getting that they do intend to actually do some future development.
That said, there is a livestream tonight which they're hinting might include some hype for next month's U15, which is currently "future content"...
In any case - ED's updates don't screw you up so hard you couldn't log in any more. They might goalpost the gameplay behind new grinds but they dont break the game at Frontier. Only your back.
For reference, one of my most active periods playing Elite was before the launch of Fleet Carriers, shortly after they were hyped as future content. You know, the great LTD mining rush. Long live Borann 2, the greatest "community goal" ever! Granted, fleet carriers required a lot of prep work, so maybe this isn't the best example of hype-fueled player engagement. Still, telling the world that "We're currently experimenting with scoopable gas giants and more dense atmospheres" would be a real boost to people's interest in the game.
I'll have to take your word for that - for me, knowing that they might be looking at some future features that might come out in a few years time (FCs were announced as Squadron Carriers 2.5 years before they managed to finally release them, for example) might be interesting in a more general sense - and obviously the implicit "we're not abandoning the game" might reassure a few of the more nervous players - but I don't think it would get me to play the game any more right now.
A few weeks before release I could understand people coming back / increasing their play time because they might want to make sure their ships were near a suitable gas giant to try to get "first scooped" tags, but 6-36 months ahead?
they wish they ware for some reason . dosent matter game still is goan get updated still they are gona add some new stuff.. doom posting is enttertainement but gets stale after awhile . elite is the best space game bar none. )or atlest till starfield comes out)Not completely true. A lot of people compare it to No Man's Sky as well. That's where a lot of the grumbling comes from I think. NMS did feature X, why hasn't ED got it. It must be easy if NMS has got it in.
To be honest, when you compare it on steam charts to some of the other 'Big Players' in the space genre, Elite is doing quite well.
1. NMS is at the top. Firstly, because there's a new update which always makes the numbers shoot up for a month or two as everyone checks out the new content and, secondly, Steam is the only platform where you have access to multiplayer functionality on PC, so there are a lot more Steam owners. It normally settles down to about an average of 1000 players higher than elite.
2. SWTOR :- That remains consistently about 1000 players higher.
3. Elite Dangerous :- Still remaining about the 4000 players per day average.
4. EVE :- That appears to run between 500-1000 average players lower than Elite Dangerous
5. X4 :- That's normally 2000 player less than Elite Dangerous but it has had a major update last month so the numbers will spike over the next month or so.
The way some on this forum act ED numbers are close to zero, or maybe they wish they were.
just wait till the people who complain about elite buy starfield .and the minium requierments for that is gona be a rtx 2070 16 gigs of ram dd4 and a 6 core cpu lul..... theres poeple here who think the game should run on a dual core or pentium 4 cpu lolYea, whoever think they can play a modern game on a 7-8 years old pc, will be in for quite a surprise
same complains were when they launched JWE2 (dx12 only, 4gb vram as requirements, much more steep than JWE1 - and a lot of JWE1 players expected to play JWE2 on the same old computers they were enjoying JWE1)
And i see quite a number of complains from people trying to play The Last of Us on ultra using GFX cards with less than 8gb vram
In Odyssey, I have absolutely no issues regarding stability or performance - it's simply rock solid (1090p, ultra+, 60fps locked)
And performance is more than decent even when i dual-log 2 instances of EDO (1080p, ultra+, 45+ FPS, settlement action)
Do you think they are in the habit of hyping future content? Mostly they are either delaying something or very excited about something in the immediate future.
Edit: There was some small hype today for a new thargoid ship in update 15.
Last edited:
We can say things like this to make ourselves feel better all we want. It doesn't change the fact that they've raised over 1/2 a billion dollars for it, nor does it change the fact that it is technologically vastly superior to Elite Dangerous. The most recent update completely broke SC, and the entire game needs to learn how to walk again. People couldn't even log in for a while, and we can expect major problems like that to continue into the future. But all you need to do is look at the graphics, the salvaging and combat mechanics, the fact that you can travel from one ship to another by floating through space between the two vessels, the richly detailed and colorful planets, the expertly designed ship interiors and cities and settlements, the crisp and smooth interfaces, and so on, to realize that it is undeniably the future of space sims.
I mean, I have yet to see any gameplay footage of SC that doesn't make me wish that I was playing it right now, but I've refrained from doing so because I simply don't have the time for the wipes and resets and total collapses. When those cease, there won't be any logical reason for me to not cough up the $40 for a basic starter ship and begin my new life in space over there.
I love ED. I still play it. But this game is a relic, and recent attempts to keep it current have not met with critical or financial success. Its features are old and busted, and Frontier never improve them or fix what's clearly wrong with them. This is just demonstrably true. And while SC is essentially still just a tech demo at this point, there's a reason why some of ED's most prominent content creators and personalities - Kate, The Pilot, and key members of BRC to name a few - have all jumped ship for it.
Last edited:
Ah.
I think you really need this thread:
Game Discussions - Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
That is fighting talk Sir, and I demand satisfaction either with beans with my full breakfast, or you buying another Idris covered in beige gravy. As long as there's no unscrupulous mention of grits with it... During my life, I've eaten most things on this earth that either swims, runs, crawls...
forums.frontier.co.uk
Last edited:
What does that thread have to do with this discussion?
If SC was a game and had in game graphics like their demos, then I'd love to play it. Since they still wipe saves and the demo is still full of bugs I have no inclination to waste much time with it..
I guess it was a reference to this
. i mean really, look at all the bugs and issues SC has after 1.2bn raised and 10+ years of development and you still wish to experience those bugs?I specifically mentioned that its lack of stability is why I don't play it at the moment. That said, you can't simply turn a blind eye to all the gameplay footage of XRG racing and Jumptown battles and all of Citizen Kate's gameplay videos, and say "Yeah, those don't count, because there's also a lot of bugs... we just don't see them in these particular instances". I know there are bugs. It's an absolute mess at the moment. But if you read my post, you'll see that I acknowledge this while also mentioning my belief that SC is the future of space sims. The tech and design work that has gone into it is staggering. Pretending that it isn't just doesn't fly with me.I guess it was a reference to this
With successful financing I don't see that they have any incentive in publishing anything at all. Apparently punters are content to finance them as is, so no need to change anything.
Agreed. There's no way they could possibly justify the budget if the game went to market in the next few years. It doesn't change the fact that the "game", even in it's current deplorable state, is leagues ahead of what we have here.
I mean... our ships just instantaneously poop us out onto dull, lifeless planets to shoot at npcs with placeholder AI... and Odyssey is a full-on final release digital product. I find that to be even more embarrassing than the current state of SC.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Last edited:
This is a thread about lowering expectations for ED. People other than myself have mentioned its competitors. I have responded to them. Please stop insisting that people divert any mention of other games in the context of a thread like this. It reeks of wanting to silence open discussion about comparables.
Other games mentioned in this thread: EVE Online, X4, No Man's Sky, SWTOR, and so on. I don't understand the issue we're having.
Last edited:
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Many opinions about other games are highly and easily debatable including yours. It could be very easily argued that we should have even lower expectations for SC, especially given its current highly broken state and track record with exactly zero products delivered in gold after 10+ years with an alleged 600 millions in funding and 800+ developers working on it these days.
Despite those facts I happen to have my personal opinion too on the matter though. I could also actually even respond to you about SC and continue the discussion here in depth but that would highly likely divert the thread too much into discussing SC. Much better to do that in the SC dedicated thread imo.
Same rational can also apply to other games of course. I personally have not many issues with a bit of comparison talk. Always interesting. But if the discussions about those risk diverting the exchange too much into those other games specifics then better go to their dedicated thread if there is one.
Last edited: