Ah, that one. How did I forget? I even made a bug ticket about it.
Ironically, might be the only bug that most players wouldn't complain too loudly about. Unless they are purists, like me.
Efter all these years.. still ED is on top.
- Thread starter z33r0x
- Start date
Ironically, might be the only bug that most players wouldn't complain too loudly about. Unless they are purists, like me.
Yes, somewhat amusing that ObsidianAnt most popular video of late is the one where he thinks Elite is probably toast. Then he gets loads of comments (more than most of his other videos by a long chalk) saying how he is right.
This is how the consumer internet (mostly) works: Cickbaits, scandals, etc.. Few people care about neutral or positive stories.
For myself, I can only say that Starfield isn't my cup of tea. I have tried it, I understand why many like it but Elite's is giving me so much more fun to actually fly a ship. Yes, there are so many things which I would love to see improved (exploration, branching and connected missions, wing mechanics, fauna and atmospheric worlds) but I rather live with ED's shortcomings than not having it at all.
Bitter ex-Elite players who've jumped out of the supposed fat and into the Star CitizenYes, somewhat amusing that ObsidianAnt most popular video of late is the one where he thinks Elite is probably toast. Then he gets loads of comments (more than most of his other videos by a long chalk) saying how he is right.
I pledged to SC years ago, it was only the price of a 'standard' game, so not exactly a fortune. I have no confidence in it ever being finished, but am grateful for a piece of software (it isn't a game yet, after all) that is even more time-consuming to set up then either DCS or ED, that always makes me feel better!
Brilliant, the perfect comparison
I think it's very arrogant to say Elite is the best space game (or any variation of that opinion). Not only do different games cater to different wants, but sooner or later a better game comes along. Someone at some point will make a better space game than Elite, it's only a matter of time. If you think X4 or No Man's Sky or Star Citizen or Starfield is better than Elite, then you are not wrong, but someone saying Elite is better than any or all of those games is also not wrong.
My opinion is, Elite is a classic example of "what could have been". Frontier by now have a history of not wanting to make Elite the best game it could be. You could say they are more focused on their other games, like a kid with a new toy, whatever is the current flavour of the month gets the most attention. The F1 community found that out the hard way, and many in the Elite community still cling to hope. Should they give up? No, but reality needs to set in sooner or later.
My opinion is, Elite is a classic example of "what could have been". Frontier by now have a history of not wanting to make Elite the best game it could be. You could say they are more focused on their other games, like a kid with a new toy, whatever is the current flavour of the month gets the most attention. The F1 community found that out the hard way, and many in the Elite community still cling to hope. Should they give up? No, but reality needs to set in sooner or later.
Last edited:
I'm not exactly sure what you (and I'm using the plural "you" here, to refer to all people who express this same sentiment) would want from the game, so that it would be what it currently "could have been".
Because it seems to me that no matter what the devs add to the game, it's never enough. That elusive "what could have been" is always farther away than that. It's always the greener grass on the other side of the fence... a fence that apparently just keeps on moving farther and farther away as new features are added.
After all, consider how much of a leap Odyssey was. I was not here back then, but I would assume that in the pre-Odyssey years people wouldn't have even imagined that one day you could just exit your ship and freely walk around space ports and planetary surfaces and settlements, shooting people with guns. And I'm sure people were excited when it was announced that this would be the case.
Yet, people still seem unhappy. It appears that we have still not achieved that "what could have been". What else do you want? Landable ELW's full of forests and animal life, just like in No Man's Sky? Full-scale cities that you can walk around and interact with people? Ship interiors? I may be wrong, but somehow I get the feeling that even if all that is added to the maximum extent, some people would still complain about "what could have been", and how Fdev has just abandoned the game. Maybe I'm wrong, and people would finally be fully happy with the game with those additions, but somehow I doubt it.
This has always been the way.
Some of us call it "dreams.txt", as it would never be fulfilled (in any game, not solely ED/O)
The oceans will always be just the wrong shade of pink...
"what could have been" is a classic symptom of modern gaming - or, more precisely, of modern gamers. It does not really matter how good, plentiful or enjoyable the content of a game is, there will always be a very vocal part of the gaming community who will call out a game as "failed", "low effort", "below expectations", "lackluster" et cetera. The "if only" of the internet backseat game developers is very strong.
Part of it of course is the over-hyping done by the publishers, the gaming press, and last but not least the "influencers" and content creators. Seems a bit like every game is the next coming of Christ these days. And then, when reality hits and a game is "just good", all hell breaks loose.
Look back at the Cyberpunk release. Yes, it had technical problems. But that was only a minor part of the outrage I noticed; a lot had to do with what people had dreamed up Night City to be during the previous seven years. For gods sake, people actually complained that they could not play on the damn Pachinko machines in Japantown. Do we really need games within games within games? I played through Cyberpunk twice right after release, back to back. Both times over 100 hours. I had tremendous fun, and the content and story was really well done. Yes, as someone who owns a VR capable player I was not cursed with a lot of technical or performance issues. But aside from those, it was a great game. But the instant reaction was: Lackluster content, dumb story. It is okay to not like a story; it's another thing to degrade it just because it's not your cup of tea.
Same thing with Starfield; it was a solid, good release (completely unexpected for a BGS title), and it has loads of great content, and pretty much ticks all the boxes for a BSG game as well as does pretty much everything they promised. Yet a part of the community: Meh, bad game, lackluster content, lazy devs, trash game.
Gamers' expectations are often very ridiculous, and probably very hard to fulfil. Someone will always complain very loudly and very publicly, and more fools with gather around them.
(Yes, I recognize this is borderline an old man rant.)
Part of it of course is the over-hyping done by the publishers, the gaming press, and last but not least the "influencers" and content creators. Seems a bit like every game is the next coming of Christ these days. And then, when reality hits and a game is "just good", all hell breaks loose.
Look back at the Cyberpunk release. Yes, it had technical problems. But that was only a minor part of the outrage I noticed; a lot had to do with what people had dreamed up Night City to be during the previous seven years. For gods sake, people actually complained that they could not play on the damn Pachinko machines in Japantown. Do we really need games within games within games? I played through Cyberpunk twice right after release, back to back. Both times over 100 hours. I had tremendous fun, and the content and story was really well done. Yes, as someone who owns a VR capable player I was not cursed with a lot of technical or performance issues. But aside from those, it was a great game. But the instant reaction was: Lackluster content, dumb story. It is okay to not like a story; it's another thing to degrade it just because it's not your cup of tea.
Same thing with Starfield; it was a solid, good release (completely unexpected for a BGS title), and it has loads of great content, and pretty much ticks all the boxes for a BSG game as well as does pretty much everything they promised. Yet a part of the community: Meh, bad game, lackluster content, lazy devs, trash game.
Gamers' expectations are often very ridiculous, and probably very hard to fulfil. Someone will always complain very loudly and very publicly, and more fools with gather around them.
(Yes, I recognize this is borderline an old man rant.)
Last edited:
In the words of one of the greatest philosophers of our time:
I think we need a "mauvy shades of pinky-russet" paintjob.Douglas Adams said:
I expected that to happen. Because that was actually in the KS as one of the 2 planned expansions. Unlike other things I could mention....
I find life better being content with what I have, instead of being unhappy about what I don't (of course one can always strive for more and better). With games even more so, if I like and am happy playing a game, why should I moan about what the game doesn't give me...
It's not arrogant for someone to think that at all. It's more arrogant to try to suggest that being of that opinion is somehow wrong, which by calling them arrogant it seems to be pretty much what you're saying.
I think we all realize that different games suit different tastes and there can never be the one best game evar. I hope that wasn't too arrogant to suggest either?
Sadly, having an opinion that differs to another's, on this forum (and other game fora) equates to being "wrong", particularly if it is a positive opinion...
Now, if you had suggested the "Gaem iz Dedd!!!", you'd have gotten a heap of likes...
Yeah... the usual names are predicting further DOOM!!! as the share price is 205 today and it will affect development, or something else DOOMY!!!Oh noes
Doom
Just another slow Thursday on the forum...
