Efter all these years.. still ED is on top.
- Thread starter z33r0x
- Start date
For my tuppence 'haypenny, it's better than any other game out there. Only X4 really comes close, but ultimately you wind up becoming the economy in the X series and so it comes to an end. That doesn't happen with Elite, there is no end. Many have tried to exert power over the Bubble and all have failed.
As such Elite is better than every other space game out there.
As such Elite is better than every other space game out there.
moving goalposts now?? sure ill play with you.
can you get a carreir in no mans sky s tier in creative mode?? we can even do a race . ill start a fresh acount in elite and you will start in creative mode in no mans sky and we will see who hits carreir status frist?? spoiler it wont be you for sure.
btw nice try saying you can turn on creative mode and get evertyhing free . to bad that argument falls apart when you play in perma death
aight your one of tose. and yes your absolutly right a gtx 1050 ti can run dlls3 LUL....
i cant tell you dont have any of these games. you dont have no mans sky elite nor starfield.
imagin playing starfield at 20 fps with a gtx 1050 ti with fsr cutting the resolution by 50% and getting the game pixalated
nice try todd Howard
You don't have to play X4 this way. You can technically play just like you do in Elite, where you just own some ships and fly them around and make money doing simple trades, missions, etc. You can even influence the "BGS" with those trades, aiding one "faction" over another in war, etc.
That said, I totally grant you that X4 is a heavy economy sim lacking in any sort of political intrigue outside of the scripted stories. This is usually where I get bored with the game, when the universe feels like Transport Fever Space after it reaches steady state. The supply chain and economy have decent depth (more than most games), but there are no motivations behind it besides cold calculating computer logic. I wish Egosoft would build a "political simulator" that would drive the various races to make decisions beyond just "build more stations". Toss in some natural (or unnatural) disasters like the destruction of Praxis in Star Trek in order to upset the balance that the game always seems to obtain, and I might never stop playing it.
What does this have to do with Elite? The BGS and Frontier themselves do give the game a sense of evolving political landscape and intrigue. It's far from perfect, but it's there. Like the Stellar Forge, it's a strength that Elite has that I feel sets is apart from most other games (Eve is the only other one that pops in my head). So yeah, I'll give Elite the win here.
I suppose it's a hangover from X3 Terran Conflict where you had to become the Terran Economy or it deleted itself.
Once I did that it just spread across the galaxy till I was running everything...
Not sure what game this thread is about these days...
Standard hijacking, i guess...
Standard hijacking, i guess...
You don't have to play in creative mode to have your carrier...
In NMS you have your carrier at the first hour of play if you do the main mission. In E.D I still don't have my carrier after a few years of playing.
The fact is that in addition to the game modes in NMS, you can also modify different parameters of it to adjust it to what you like the most.
Thanks to the DLSS 3 + DLSS-G Mod that I mention, players are testing Starfield at 30 fps on a GTX 1050 Ti, there are several videos on YouTube testing them, also on the GTX 1660. And as I said, this was only in the first month of its launch.
Do you remember how long we had to wait for improved fps on Elite?
Friend, I honestly don't think it's a good idea to compare Elite Dangerous,
with more played games than Elite itself. Lying is not a valid argument.
Elite Dangerous has good things, but they are neither its optimization nor its grinding.
What's been produced in elite dangerous is amazing, really.
The problem is frontiers development strategy of only developing barebones skeletons (or cutting development costs) and letting their genre selection or online communities carry their lack of work.
Further, they also cruelly used silence and manufactured (sold) expectations to enjoy far longer success with elite than they otherwise would have had, which is a tangible slight on their part. How many times have people assumed something would be developed in the future to defend frontier over the last 8+ years?
That's old news though. The reason i'm posting is a really unexpected discovery of frontier making a polished, fleshed out game, JWE2. Isn't it an amazing correlation that this game makes the most money for frontier even in very troubling times? Mind blown that it could have been better for everyone if frontier instead of live servicing elite, decided to cash grab elite with dlc content sold as sequels (but in doing so giving themselves enough rope to actually build the game over time).
The problem is frontiers development strategy of only developing barebones skeletons (or cutting development costs) and letting their genre selection or online communities carry their lack of work.
Further, they also cruelly used silence and manufactured (sold) expectations to enjoy far longer success with elite than they otherwise would have had, which is a tangible slight on their part. How many times have people assumed something would be developed in the future to defend frontier over the last 8+ years?
That's old news though. The reason i'm posting is a really unexpected discovery of frontier making a polished, fleshed out game, JWE2. Isn't it an amazing correlation that this game makes the most money for frontier even in very troubling times? Mind blown that it could have been better for everyone if frontier instead of live servicing elite, decided to cash grab elite with dlc content sold as sequels (but in doing so giving themselves enough rope to actually build the game over time).
Last edited:
Depends on your opinion really . Search top space games on PC you will find it ranging from 2nd to not even in the top 10 and that's Elite Dangerous ( no mention of EDO)so all thrown in together which is disappointing .
Last edited:
No, it's a discussion. A normal everyday verbal discussion is liable to go anywhere, and so do online ones...
When you say "almost there" what is missing for you? For me it's landing on Earth like planets and/or water worlds, visiting populated areas or scanning animal and plant life on the surface and in water. I'm no dev but I would imagine this is very difficult to do properly, even if we had the hardware.
With that said, I am very, very happy with what Frontier has achieved with Odyssey. If they release more content (as in a major update), I'm buying, but I feel they have finished the game which is now the greatest of all time, in my opinion.
Very much this.
I wouldn't go that far, but it's certainly high up there as far as space games go. It should be higher, but I've been playing since the Alpha, and a few of the decisions Frontier made between Alpha and release knocked it down a tier, then deciding to double down on those mistakes over time knocked it down a second one.
By all rights, ED should be an "S" tier space game in my books, but it's currently ranked a "B." If they fixed their economic sim, and then add the obviously missing Odyssey content, maybe it can rejoin Kerbal Space Program at the top. But I'm not going to hold my breath until that happens.
The mechanics of this game should be a lot more fun and interesting than they are. Those are not technical limitations....
I recently happened to come across some youtube video about how ED is "dead" and how it sux, and there were a lot of people ranting in the comment section. From what I skimmed through, the two major complaints seemed to be "unlocking engineers requires grinding", and "I have played the game for 10 billion hours, but since Frontier didn't add all the features they promised I stopped playing, the game sux".
I understand if some gamers don't like "grindy" games, but many of these people expressed how they had played the game for significant amounts of time (hundreds, even thousands of hours), but their gripe was that engineers in particular require grinding. Because, as we all know, nothing else in the game requires grinding. Only the engineers. Sheesh.
I also kind of fail to understand how failing to add some feature makes a good game (good enough to play for hundreds if not thousands of hours) a bad game. One would think it's the other way around: If you add a detrimental feature it may ruin a game that was otherwise good. But the sentiment seemed to be that a game that started good became bad because... something was not added to it. I kind of fail to understand the logistics of this.
I understand if some gamers don't like "grindy" games, but many of these people expressed how they had played the game for significant amounts of time (hundreds, even thousands of hours), but their gripe was that engineers in particular require grinding. Because, as we all know, nothing else in the game requires grinding. Only the engineers. Sheesh.
I also kind of fail to understand how failing to add some feature makes a good game (good enough to play for hundreds if not thousands of hours) a bad game. One would think it's the other way around: If you add a detrimental feature it may ruin a game that was otherwise good. But the sentiment seemed to be that a game that started good became bad because... something was not added to it. I kind of fail to understand the logistics of this.
It seems fashionable to express hate on the Internet.. 
Personally I think it all somewhat ridiculous.
Personally I think it all somewhat ridiculous.