Do you want ED 2 or an Expansion?
- Thread starter Cosmo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ed2 elite dangerous 2 sequel
- Status
An expansion won't be happening. Building anything on Odyssey's sagging foundation is a lost cause. If they can't even fix the anti-aliasing issue and get the performance where it should they won't be adding ship interiors, planets with real atmospheres, or anything else on the want list. And that's assuming that the Cobra engine is up to the job which is highly doubtful.
Neither will a complete rewrite be happening. Things would be different if Elite was posting some solid revenue but as it stands it's barely bringing enough to keep the lights on and justify what little work is being done. Companies in FDEV's situation clear the decks of everything except what's making money. For them, that's their management games. They've written some good and successful games in that genre and that's where they'll be focusing their efforts from now on. They won't be in a position to attempt another space game of any kind for at least two to three years.
Neither will a complete rewrite be happening. Things would be different if Elite was posting some solid revenue but as it stands it's barely bringing enough to keep the lights on and justify what little work is being done. Companies in FDEV's situation clear the decks of everything except what's making money. For them, that's their management games. They've written some good and successful games in that genre and that's where they'll be focusing their efforts from now on. They won't be in a position to attempt another space game of any kind for at least two to three years.
At this point ED successfully failed.
Software as a building must be designed once and for all.
As we can see the attempt of adding features(dls or call them what ever you want) gradually has been failed here.
Sure any code is not a building, you can rewrite it, but things might (and they usually does if it comes up to something more than a "hello world!") become very complicated and take much more time than can be expected/afforded.
Last edited:
You know what I would like to see is a prequel to Elite... something dated in the early days before Elite 1984/first encounters..etc.. back to the early early days of exploration. Just a few small original ships with minimal jump range, but with the opportunities to engineer and improve them of course. Unsupervised witch space jumps and many other dangers.
Expansion of course, ED has a solid foundation, and if what stuff in the game looks like, an overhaul of the in game assets isn't going to take any longer than creating said assets from scratch using a new engine, however it's strongly a matter of opinion that the current in game graphics are poor compared to current games.
Broken record: what is "Dangerous 2", it would be "Elite 5: <subtitle>".
Yep. The problems with ED are not the graphics. There are successful games with lofi graphics. Minecraft, NMS. Sure it's nice not to have NMS level graphics but EDs visuals are more than adequate for it's purposes. The only 'graphics' issue it has is that it runs like molasses. It's not like making high quality textures is a challenge, putting them in a game without everything grinding to a halt is the challenge.
And if it was that easy there would be plenty of space sims with hifi graphics right? NMS? No, cartoony? SC? only 0.45 of one system after 11 years, never mind a galaxy. Wonder why?
ED's problems are creative and imaginative. Don't need to employ the handful of people that can write a commercial game engine from scratch to fix that. There are heaps more people around that can make engaging games than can write game engines. The entire game engine industry relies on that.
There’s nothing stopping FD making an ED2, they did take out an IP for the title ‘Elite-Deadly’ some years ago.
As someone in business for decades and with contacts in the game development industry, I could presume the only reason for doing so would be fiscal incentives, and as a business one would have to assess the consolidated risks and resources required to do that, in comparison with what exists currently.
For a ED2 to work presumably they would have to scrap everything they have already and rebuild a ground up (granular) dynamic engine - that’s a huge amount of work, That means investing in a dedicated crew for a number of years. It’s effectively a gambit.
ED worked because it was promoted as an individual personal concept, expanding upon the existing nostalgia of its predecessors, not a market driven gambit.
Remember also many if it’s brilliant elements work because brilliant people built them, who aren’t with FD anymore. It also was in skunk works upto 10 years prior… so a lot of dedication.
Eg the VR was built by 1 person, it wasn’t really planned and FD were surprised by it; the galaxy was built by a Professor and a dedicated team. If FD had to rebuild all that I think it would be a poor replacement.
Other space games work because currently they rely on their existing and established IP, but they know they too can copy the working elements from ED or expand upon that nostalgia to make profit. FD don’t have that luxury anymore IMPO.
Odyssey was a gambit, which failed remarkably IMOP, it was not ‘space legs’ - it was a just a FPS, they tried to corner the ‘shooter’ market rather than being clever. it lost them a lot in shares, and killed off their consoles market- 30%, personally I suspect that had more to do with following market trends than following what makes ED ‘ED’ which is its nostalgia.
FD franchise works due to having multiple IPs running side-by-side, ED is their spearhead but it’s not their primary concern.
So personally I don’t believe it’s a wise move to re-launch ED2, as it carries too much bad PR, you would be reliant upon a total IP rebrand and build, you’d effectively kill off most of your existing hard-core fans, unless you really invested and involved them in an open development program.
Personally I suspect FD considers ED as a working IP which generates cash with minimal resources.
They are more likely to take the short straw and build new content, 4.0 was effectively ED2, its a new engine.
Personally I’m done with FD, I love ED, but I don’t trust FD business plans, they sold us a red herring and strung us out for 10 years, I accepted that several years ago, I got my money’s worth but made sure never to waste cash in ARX.
If FD released a new update, I’ll get it for free, with my backers pledge, IF it were amazing eg interiors etc, I might be tempted to part with ARX… but I would not buy an ED2, not unless it was gods trousers…
Recent developments and various games have shown technically nothing has changed in regards game development in 10 years, Devs still follow a limited and narrow ‘game logic’. I do have personal friends in the industry, and it’s really just about money, not creativity. Most follow what works, and what’s cheap to build, customers are not individuals, they are a market trend.
ED had promised something ’new’ early on because FD promoted the idea of ‘intelligent’ game mechanics, instead FD fell into a redundancy of imagination, because they ditched many of the grand ideas which hooked many of us…to save money, there are many examples on line from previous devs who promoted some great concepts, saying there was no obstacle except ‘time’. So they could have achieved something different… my point being, if they were to put out an ED2 it’s equally likely to be unimaginative.
Personally - I still play ED, don’t buy ARX, don’t play EDO, I’d love a new update that adds interiors and NPC mechanics such as crew management etc, and I think FD could make cash of unique skins etc, but nope, not interested in an ED2, that horse has sailed, I have zero faith in FD abilities to build something that’s totally new, all that original talent is long gone, and I don’t think it’s a sensible fiscal decision.
As someone in business for decades and with contacts in the game development industry, I could presume the only reason for doing so would be fiscal incentives, and as a business one would have to assess the consolidated risks and resources required to do that, in comparison with what exists currently.
For a ED2 to work presumably they would have to scrap everything they have already and rebuild a ground up (granular) dynamic engine - that’s a huge amount of work, That means investing in a dedicated crew for a number of years. It’s effectively a gambit.
ED worked because it was promoted as an individual personal concept, expanding upon the existing nostalgia of its predecessors, not a market driven gambit.
Remember also many if it’s brilliant elements work because brilliant people built them, who aren’t with FD anymore. It also was in skunk works upto 10 years prior… so a lot of dedication.
Eg the VR was built by 1 person, it wasn’t really planned and FD were surprised by it; the galaxy was built by a Professor and a dedicated team. If FD had to rebuild all that I think it would be a poor replacement.
Other space games work because currently they rely on their existing and established IP, but they know they too can copy the working elements from ED or expand upon that nostalgia to make profit. FD don’t have that luxury anymore IMPO.
Odyssey was a gambit, which failed remarkably IMOP, it was not ‘space legs’ - it was a just a FPS, they tried to corner the ‘shooter’ market rather than being clever. it lost them a lot in shares, and killed off their consoles market- 30%, personally I suspect that had more to do with following market trends than following what makes ED ‘ED’ which is its nostalgia.
FD franchise works due to having multiple IPs running side-by-side, ED is their spearhead but it’s not their primary concern.
So personally I don’t believe it’s a wise move to re-launch ED2, as it carries too much bad PR, you would be reliant upon a total IP rebrand and build, you’d effectively kill off most of your existing hard-core fans, unless you really invested and involved them in an open development program.
Personally I suspect FD considers ED as a working IP which generates cash with minimal resources.
They are more likely to take the short straw and build new content, 4.0 was effectively ED2, its a new engine.
Personally I’m done with FD, I love ED, but I don’t trust FD business plans, they sold us a red herring and strung us out for 10 years, I accepted that several years ago, I got my money’s worth but made sure never to waste cash in ARX.
If FD released a new update, I’ll get it for free, with my backers pledge, IF it were amazing eg interiors etc, I might be tempted to part with ARX… but I would not buy an ED2, not unless it was gods trousers…
Recent developments and various games have shown technically nothing has changed in regards game development in 10 years, Devs still follow a limited and narrow ‘game logic’. I do have personal friends in the industry, and it’s really just about money, not creativity. Most follow what works, and what’s cheap to build, customers are not individuals, they are a market trend.
ED had promised something ’new’ early on because FD promoted the idea of ‘intelligent’ game mechanics, instead FD fell into a redundancy of imagination, because they ditched many of the grand ideas which hooked many of us…to save money, there are many examples on line from previous devs who promoted some great concepts, saying there was no obstacle except ‘time’. So they could have achieved something different… my point being, if they were to put out an ED2 it’s equally likely to be unimaginative.
Personally - I still play ED, don’t buy ARX, don’t play EDO, I’d love a new update that adds interiors and NPC mechanics such as crew management etc, and I think FD could make cash of unique skins etc, but nope, not interested in an ED2, that horse has sailed, I have zero faith in FD abilities to build something that’s totally new, all that original talent is long gone, and I don’t think it’s a sensible fiscal decision.
Last edited:
Fdev made some unappealing game design choices that turned ED into a dull grind. Such as the engineers, a lack of proper story missions with voice acting, the bullet spongy NPCs in FPS mode, no immersive city settlements, no walking inside ships, no NPC companions, no Ship Builder to custom design ships with parts, no HUD customization: only 1 orange HUD for every ship, no base and station building, no macro-level Tycoon management, no territory control with guilds.
ED's popularity declined a lot. For example a comparison:
Twitch
- Starfield has 3000 viewers
- Eve Online has 825 Viewers
- Star Citizen has 631 viewers
- No Man's Sky has 494 viewers
- ED has 83 viewers
- Starfield has 61,223 In-Game
- No Man's Sky has 8,654 In-Game
- ED has 1,778 In-Game on Steam
Pouring resources into an expansion would delay ED 2 and I doubt it'll change the decline. Fdev should save and repackage all the good stuff for a sequel.
Last edited:
This is at least the consensus.
What I would like FD to do is to release fewer but higher quality games. I think the last few years have seen some flops, where the bare minimum was included in something like the F1 manager and then support was dropped. This, I believe, is a main contributor to the 2023 game not selling well.
ODY suffers from some of the same things.
In short, maybe they should seek to commit more to what they are doing.
Yes that's what we are all hoping for with an expansion. If they rewrite with a new game engine, basically start everything from scratch, learning the engine and all, remaking the galaxy entirely, you think that's going to be faster and better than an expansion building on a solid base they already have? I don't think so, we may get more atmospheric planets and life with an expansion, but I think a new game based on a new game engine is dead in the water, isn't going to happen.
I also am happy with the game, can't wait for the next big expansion, not the small updates we have been getting this far, I bet they are working on something big in the background but they aren't letting out a peep because of peoples unrealistic expectations and the hype monsters and doom mongers on the forums.
Odyssey didn't sell as much copies as Fdev hoped and the (initial) reviews were negative. ED's popularity has declined so much that it's not financially worth it to make another big expansion for ED.
Last edited:
There is a lot said there.
At the present, I have pretty much completed my play time with Elite/Odyssey. To get my attention again, a good few of the things in the quote above would be 100% required.
The very most fundamental aspect would be gameplay mechanics which are not grind/RNG/progress bar based. I strongly dislike these types of designs. I played Elite because there were ways to play which minimized my contact with these elements. For certain, this type of play misses out on a good bit of what Elite/Odyssey offers. But what remained to play, I found a good many hours of fun.
The reality is that much of what I always dreamed to see in Elite, just isn't what Elite has ever been about. What Elite has done, for me personally, is spur my imagination during play. Situations of "wouldn't that be cool?" as I play... but imaginations of stuff that isn't really "Elite". I've wondered at whether the imaginations were perhaps better than the reality could ever be. Best of both worlds, and seriously engaging these past few years.
I'd tend to agree, either it's sunset, or continued slow development, or some day another DLC.
A rewrite would be years away..
And what engine would they use? As far as I understand there is no other engine than Cobra that could possibly replace it.
And quite honestly ED looks and runs very good at 4k (x2.25 DLDSR) on my 48" OLED powered by 12900k+4090. Yes there is some aliasing with certain shaders/textures in certain lighting conditions, but I'm not convinced that this is a general anti-aliasing problem, but rather a problem with certain shaders.
Personally I'm enjoying the crap out of the Odyssey content, it's come a long way and IMO doesn't deserve the bad reputation it's gotten, nor the constant negativity from some posters. Of course YMMV, I mean after all we're talking about a game and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
I thought about this problem as programmer for some time.
Atmo is chaotic system, i.e. any small change into one of hundreds initial variables leads to huge difference in result AND it is not possible to track back (i.e. if you know current state, it is not possible mathematically to find states before and track to initial variables).
From other side, it should be "procedural" i.e. everybody should see the same picture. If 1 CMDR stays on planet 3 days online, while another CMDR just landed they both must see the same.
I don't think it is possible to do with current CPU powers, even on Earth today we use super computers to predict weather for 3 days at most.
Some tricks could be applied though, for example CMDR who sits 3 days acts like a server, and uploads current state to the new coming one. But will you agree to spend your SSD/traffic for that?
So in result I highly doubt it will happen with current CPUs/GPUs.
- Status