Agreed. It's the one foot in, one foot out approach of Fdev that continually hamstrings the game.
ED has next 2 Years of Content Mapped Out
- Thread starter Cosmo
- Start date
Can only agree there. They’re quite annoying [when they don’t work]. Particularly as an explorer but also generally…
Or poor (and too extreme) reactionary balancing [then extremely slow corrections to the issues posed by said response] that makes something which is supposed to look like a threat completely negligible background noise. One major criticism I have of the Titan incursion is that it became just another thing happening somewhere in the Bubble after a few months, with not enough ‘disruptions’ like Shinrarta’s invasion occurring, and overall I thought the Sol incursion while well-intentioned, was just a bit… ‘meh’, as someone who was around for all two years of it and the leadup.
Sure it was better than “Cocijo explodes like the other Titans after taking out many procedural Col 285 systems” but like, it would’ve been far more engaging if we’d had to batter it down over a longer period of time as it properly entrenched in Sol, than one week of invasions and then back to business as usual because it was waited for until the end of November to have it do anything at all.
Or if they’d made Raijin and Cocijo go upstart mode and head for the respective locations they supposedly affected… (Shinrarta’s invasion was attributed to Raijin by UI, but this may have been a mere technicality over any lore, since it wasn’t commented on specifically which Titan the attack may have originated from)
Now we’ve been waiting six months without so much as a hint when that content might return (or might not and take an entirely different shape instead).
Fdev want everything to be optional, but if something is optional, it has no stakes, and if it has no stakes, well that takes the wind out of the sails of things sold as emergencies, like the thargoid titans. Things that happen need to have consequences.
While I (also) agree with that, there is really plenty of space (even in the pre-colonization Bubble) to have major things happen in important locations without completely disrupting all other gameplay loops elsewhere. So I wouldn't have perceived it to be an obstacle. Even when Shinrarta was attacked there is another station like it, just a surface port at 20% markup instead of 10% discount, in the Brestla system, which was even mentioned as a backup while the disruption occurred.
Post-colonization expansion? Even less excuses with the extent of available space that people can go put the faction(s) they may have an interest in* - BGS wise, as it's not quite so simple in terms of Powerplay - even if the core territories that are more lore relevant overall or just sentimentally (Hutton Orbital, or the 1.0 version) are heavily affected by whatever comes next. I can only hope Frontier makes use of it in that regard, but I'm not sure I should expect it. However a repeat of an assault on the fringes would be rather uninteresting narratively, and that would likely pull down any associated gameplay with it as well.
*With the added caveat that colonization would have to be made more appealing than it just being one giant hauling contest as the main feature after the 'multi-discipline' Thargoid War concluded, and was in no way a replacement for it (nor was Powerplay, for that matter). You'd figure having something which makes use of a variety of gameplay loops to contribute would have something similar follow, but instead we got Trail "dump your cargo hold" blazers.
Last edited:
Based on previous similar events, ten minutes!
You do know this isn't something new, the Zurara in the Formidine Rift, all the listening posts, they all worked like that, and the problem with stuff like that is it's basically a one time event, it gets solved in minutes, someone posts it on the forums, the end.
I'd also like to see some breadcrumb trails. One (not the only) way to achieve this:
FDev would need to create many (a lot) small mysteries (a bit like the beacons in Maya), maybe procedurally generated which all feed into a larger story. Pilots would get an individual message to follow that small story.
To give an example:
- Main and overarching story is the Guardian AI threat but it is not another invasion but the AI poses a threat to technology and civilisation. Space flight becomes more dangerous because of glitches in navigation and ship reliability.
- To avert the threat, humanity needs to find information, technology, materials to build countermeasures (machines, computers, perhaps a virus superweapon).
- The small stories and tasks for us players would be to locate above technology/materials/info. Missions would spawn individually so that there isn't a single path through the overarching story but we players can contribute and every one of us experiences their own little adventure. Players can choose if they go more on scouting, exploring or staying closer to the bubble.
I'd argue the opposite. I play it on a beefy system and can run it on max settings with 2x SS at 1440p, and the game still manages to distract with flickering shadows, an awfully dark and flat (ever since the 4.0 "upgrade") colour tone, even in direct sunlight (compared to the 3.8 client), draw distance issues like shadows dis- and re-appearing, rough LoD transitions, and despite the aforementioned SS still some AA problems (most notably night vision - boot up Legacy and observe the difference).
And it's gotten gradually worse over the last few years, presumably in an effort to bring the framerate up by any means necessary. Though the shadow issues are the worst offenders, they've completely put me off travelling planetside, or go mining or bounty hunting in the belts - those are two key game environments I always enjoyed spending time in. And given how long they've been a problem now I can't see that change anytime soon either.
Elite has got to be the only game in my entire gaming 'life' where an upgrade to the graphics engine resulted in inferior results. It's pretty sad knowing how pretty it could be when it wants to.
Last edited:
Star citizen huge ? 1 system, 4 planets, 12 moons
And that's not what I wrote. I wrote Starfield was hyped as Skyrim in space. You know... by the same kind of players that make up their own mind about upcoming releases and now expect the Panther Clipper to have size 9 cargo rackis.
Realism doesn't demand micromanaging, and vice versa.
(Edited because words is hard, and properly quoting is even harder)
Last edited:
The graphics were fine if some of it wasn't broken. It's all a matter of taste of course, but I really like the look of 4.0 in general, much more than the look of Legacy. Personally I don't think "high fidelity" (whatever that means) graphics cranked to the max make a game. A game can be good with dated graphics, and can be crap with top notch ones. And, also personally, I dislike the overpolished over-atmospheric bloom-and-particles-everywhere look of modern games, including what I have seen of SC.
I am not too much up to speed, but didn't they expand to a second system recently?
Yes, pc gaming is saved
Thank god for thatYes, pc gaming is saved
.An overhaul / fixing of ED graphics would be something, I'd desire. I just don't expect too much in that area because a) it can't be monetised without releasing a new version of the game (Elite Deadly) because who would want to pay for a 'better graohics DLC' and b) complaints about system requirements would rise again
I am just hoping for some incremental improvements in the area of graphics.
I am just hoping for some incremental improvements in the area of graphics.
And just to pile up on that, I've heard and read the excited phrase "Skyrim in space" from both gamers and the online gaming press (psuedo or real) long before the actual release of the game, and when it dropped people were actually disappointed it wasn't Skyrim in space as it lacked the "depth" people expected.
In this little corner of the internets people were sure that Starfield would be the ultimate ED killer, mostly because "ship interiors". Turns out it wasn't. Gamers are a funny bunch.
Raises hand
I would pay for improved VR support -- call it "early access", if you must -- I know we're a small niche, and will do my small part to help cover the expense.
I would personally also pay for raytracedAO global illumination and shadows, and parallax mapping replacing normal mapping on terrain, because these things is something this particular game, due to its nature, has always sorely needed, and it should have quite an impact even without any (EDIT: ...further) asset upgrades. Of course, I am an unabashed graphics glutton.
(EDIT2: Cosmetics and ever more ships I will never use, on the other hand, I have zero interest in.)
Although... I am sure one of the things FDev are likely tracking, to decide on how they proceed, is pretty much assured to be the median hardware capabilities in the game's player base, and hardware is not in a good pricing situation these days.
EDIT: /Me always looked as Starfield as Fallout-minus-the-humour-in-space, rather than Skyrim-in-space...
I would pay for improved VR support -- call it "early access", if you must -- I know we're a small niche, and will do my small part to help cover the expense.
I would personally also pay for raytraced
(EDIT2: Cosmetics and ever more ships I will never use, on the other hand, I have zero interest in.)
Although... I am sure one of the things FDev are likely tracking, to decide on how they proceed, is pretty much assured to be the median hardware capabilities in the game's player base, and hardware is not in a good pricing situation these days.
EDIT: /Me always looked as Starfield as Fallout-minus-the-humour-in-space, rather than Skyrim-in-space...
Last edited:
It was supposed to be, people were hyped as heck for the release. Bethseda spent a fortune on it, had a track record of Skyrim, and the trailers looked really good.
Sure like a McDonald's burger advert, reality did not live up to the expectations but you can't blame people for being excited at the prospect of something good and then diosappointed by the soggy floppy ploppy that was delivered.
Broken bits aside, I just find it strange how the game has a distinctively darker or at the least subdued colour tone on almost all planets, even on those that should be blindingly bright. And I remember very well how Arf at the time responded to many complaints about how extremely dark the game was in the beginning - "some of you feel the game appears darker" (to the extent that the skybox was barely visible - and some posters here defending even that, stating space is black etc etc).
I do miss the B (?) star purple/pink hues (Taygeta et al) from the 3.8 engine - sure, the way they handled the colouring of the entire skybox depending on the star was pretty lame from a science perspective, but it did give systems a more distinct character. Now, all systems have the same white light beyond a few dozen Ls out., regardless of star type.
I don't disagree that games with modest graphics can be good, but Elite being one that relies heavily on visuals to convey its environment. The biggest problem with 4.0 is the inconsistency. It's interesting you mention a dislike for OTT modern effects - what do you think of the light exposure effect they introduced with 4.0? Despite them toning it down somewhat over the years, it still turns day into dusk at the press of the ship/SRV/torch light switch.
I don't blame people to get excited, I blame people for getting overhyped and transforming hype into fact. Same happens here all the time, like when people were absolutely sure PP would be open only, or that we for sure would get base building (and don't argue with me, colonisation isn't the base building people expected, even if some quickly said "see? we got base building!!!!111!!"
).Or maybe I am just the only one who got exactly the Starfileld I expected - a typical Bethesda RPG, this time space themed, unable to live up to the legacy of Skyrim. Note that I didn't say it was good. I found it very bland. But I didn't expect a masterpiece.
People, gamers especially, but to much emphasis on hype, legacy and track record. Happens all the time - just look how Outer Worlds was hyped just because it was made by Obsidian. The game was.... fine, and kind of fun, but it too didn't live up to the hype.
TL;DR: Hype bad, mkay
I hate that, although I have to say it's not as much of a problem in VR as it seems to be on the flat screen. But more often than not, I turn off the lights to be able to see proper.
Yet hype seems to be what drives player engagements, which in turn makes products sell more and gives reasons for the developer to add more content to a game.TL;DR: Hype bad, mkay
As for "story", I've seen some parts and reviews of Starfield which was enough to put me off. Bethesda's modern storytelling is allergic to player agency and the feature NPC characters feel just about as sentient as Elite's concourse crowds.
Also about the streaming platform stuff, you can scuff at viewer metrics for streaming platforms but that's an indicator of players taking a deeper interest in the game or looking for reasons to come back.