I already sold my copy of Witcher 3 - poor graphics and dull gameplay
..............LOL
You have to be kidding me.
Frontier, you guys should play the Witcher 3...
- Thread starter Shaamaan
- Start date
..............LOL
You have to be kidding me.
I agree, when there are planet landings; Comparing apples to oranges...Also multiplayer to singleplayer; obvious different design decisions.
Urgh. I *wanted* to like this. I watched Scott Manley power up the ship and certain parts of it I really enjoyed. Crawling through the ship with emergency lighting was really cool. Strapping into the cockpit and having to push a few buttons to get the basic lights on was okay.
That's where it lost me though.
There are just so many switches for things that have no business not being automated. It entirely ruins my immersion to have to cycle through fuel cells and such one at a time. The only reason to have to do that should be if the ship is damaged and you have to help the onboard computers troubleshoot it. In fact, that would be REALLY FUN! Take some battle damage and have to rush around the ship flipping switches and connecting wires to restore power or juryrig a critical system... it'd add a new element to the genre. Depending on the problems you run into, you'd have to decide if you need to do a spacewalk to get to something outside the ship, continue on with the damage, limp straight back to a dock, or send out a distress signal and try to conserve air.
Instead, the gameplay is looking like sitting down with a really long checklist and just going through switches that a simple logic circuit could handle. I'm really hoping he shifts the focus.
*editted*
Agreed. I enjoy the plot, but would rather be a nameless/voiceless character who fights alongside Geralt instead. I feel like I'm just living out a story that's already written instead of being able to make up my own.
That's not to say I didn't play Witcher 3 compulsively from start to finish and already planning my next playthrough.
Last edited:
Tar Stone
Banned
Yes, this Scott Manley video here -
[video=youtube;vziIgAtD66s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vziIgAtD66s[/video]
A study level space sim for simmers who are into DCS, FSX, IL2 and even Falcon 4.0. And maybe for those who are into Kerbal and want something more immersive. You have to time burns to travel between planets, awesome. Oh and Orbiter fans as well I think would be well into it.
Still, it's getting my money because:
1 - I want to play it
2 - The guy making it seems like a really nice chap
3 - It's single player
4 - The guy making it seems like a really nice chap with a vision and talent
5 - ED has put me right in the mood for a proper space sim
6 - (edit) a planned proper dynamic campaign generated from assets in play, just like Falcon 4.0 does
Last edited:
Interesting. I find the opposite. The more actual control I have to manage the spacecraft, the more immersive it feels to me. Now, I don't of course mean at the expense of gameplay. What I mean is, for instance, where Elite fails for me in that respect is most of the time I'm not really flying the ship, but the game tries to give me the illusion that I am with patronising mechanics, like in Supercruise with the countdown game. On a long Supercruise, I often point the ship at the station, hit 75% throttle, and Alt-Tab out to browse the web and then pop back to see if I need to adjust the ships course a bit, or be ready to hit the button to jump out of SC.
I've never done that in a game before in my entire life. In a relatively simple sim, like say FSX, where I'm doing a flight from London to Rome, it may seem like a similar boring ferry flight where nothing happens, but you are managing the aircraft all the time, all its avionics and systems, air traffic control instructions, and navigation even with the help of the autopilot, planning and controlling your approach and landing. Of course, you can adjust how much complexity there is according to difficulty setting, buit those things are what make the process of going from A-B fun and interesting, and make the time you spend doing them worthwhile in and of itself.
In Elite, there is nothing simialr to do during such journeys between stations. No skill of controlling your space craft to master, no navigation rules to adhere to, no realistic docking procedures, the landing is even done for you once you get to within the pad's capture point. It's all pretty monotonous and boring after the first few times you do it as there's no challenge in it. Therefore, it would simply be better if they had an autopilot to do all that for you, or change the mechanics to speed up that faux-flying so you can get to the part where you actually play the game.
Last edited:
Tar Stone
Banned
Same here. Doing a hop from Dublin to Glasgow in FSX is totally engaging and challenging when you are doing your own navigation and managing the systems in flight. The startup in Rogue System isn't any different from a startup in an A320 or 737, or a cold start in Falcon 4.0 BMS.
Rogue System is targeted at the sim community, which is a massive market. A part of me wishes he'd gotten £1.5 million and Frontier didn't, but that's just me.
Indeed, I think niche markets are under appreciated by the general gaming world when it comes to financial analysis. It's the smaller hardcore that can keep projects alive for years, decades even. I mean X has been around since the late 90s with sequel after sequel of a deeper space game. Flight and racing car sims have a loyal and consistent userbase that always buys the new expansion or the next version. Even the modding scene for other kinds of games tend to keep old titles alive with new content and even total overhauls.
Elite's always been a similar niche product, with a particular hybridisation of sim, strategy and arcade game in the space genre. It was really built on promisingly with FE2/FFE, but Dangerous has taken a big step back. If they wanted to make Space Trucker Tycoon meets Risk, they should have just taken that pitch to Microsoft 3 years ago rather wasting the faith of the Elite fans in the Kickstarter.
You mean apart from the spells, parrying, countering, the crossbow and potions with different effects? And ignoring the fact that you need to use very different tactics for different enemies (on the higher difficulties at least)? Yeah, apart from that it's just two types of attack and dodge... pitiful
On topic: Elite kinda needs the money from the OST and skins to keep the servers running, so I get why they can't/won't just hand them out like Witcher 3.
Contentwise... I've actually thought the same, but it's really difficult. TW3 feels like it has so much original non-repetitive content, because it is a single player experience where they could put time into creating lots of meaningfull quests with decisions and consequences. FD could do the same, but even if they do 100 uniquely built quests, in 100k populated systems they'll feel few and far between. Also, they can't easily make those quests have lasting consequences in an MMO.
I personally hope that the next patch 100% concentrates on missions; new types, and new "building blocks". Like complications - for example, you find the stolen goods you where looking for, but a pirate has just scooped them up and you have to chase them down to complete the mission. A lot of building blocks like that, with like a 10% chance of happening on any given mission, would add SO much diversity to the missions.
Yes, the wonderful paradox of we want a really in depth system then automate it
You ship in Elite goes through a 107 point pre-flight start up when you click "launch", it is just automated in the background
I've been playing W3 since 1.3 broke my profession.
I've found there's more meaningful content in the "find a goat by ringing a bell" quest than there is in the whole of ed.
The beauty of ED to me is multiplayer interaction but so many of the game mechanics regarding player interaction are just plain broken. The pve content is just plain bad.
I've found there's more meaningful content in the "find a goat by ringing a bell" quest than there is in the whole of ed.
The beauty of ED to me is multiplayer interaction but so many of the game mechanics regarding player interaction are just plain broken. The pve content is just plain bad.
Precisely this.
Last edited:
I find ED is what you make of it. I would have agreed with the OP before Wings/Power-Play but now I think the game is rocking and many of the things that bugged me have been addressed content wise. Not to say that there isn't room for improvement but these things take time.
My biggest bug bear atm is the poor instancing system.. It can make enjoying the game with friends and other players hard work at times but for the most part I find ED an awesome experience and spend an unhealthy amount of time playing it.
My biggest bug bear atm is the poor instancing system.. It can make enjoying the game with friends and other players hard work at times but for the most part I find ED an awesome experience and spend an unhealthy amount of time playing it.
Last edited:
That's not what he's saying, but on the point, ED has more in common with Witcher than it does with DCS. Frontier couldn't hope to be compared to the quality of Eagle Dynamics' products.
Last edited:
Dear, half this thread.
OP is comparing ED and TW3 as products, not as games.
Stop bringing up the whole "they are nothing alike" argument. It is not valid in this context.
The Witcher 3 delivered as a product.
Elite hasn't delivered fully yet, I think we all can all agree.
I still believe that Frontier will yet make a great game. I wouldn't be here otherwise.
OP is comparing ED and TW3 as products, not as games.
Stop bringing up the whole "they are nothing alike" argument. It is not valid in this context.
The Witcher 3 delivered as a product.
Elite hasn't delivered fully yet, I think we all can all agree.
I still believe that Frontier will yet make a great game. I wouldn't be here otherwise.
He didn't really put it too well, I'll admit.
But obviously its not a direct comparison as the genres and styles are totally different. I think the 'comparison' is one of two open world games, and their relative quantity and quality of content and gameplay. You could really, just as well use any other one as an example, like Fallout, GTA, Just Cause, for that particular point. At least, that's how I interpreted what he meant.
Last edited: