- Status
Correct they can add an expansion that requirs a subscription. The original game is a seperate product, you can research this yourself.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah it's both.
Preparing to mail your expansion... Do you think we need a bigger box for this?
[video=youtube_share;2XID_W4neJo]https://youtu.be/2XID_W4neJo?t=19s[/video]
I know you're all for extensive research before buying something. I admire you for that. You obviously go to a lot more effort that the vast majority of purchasers. But your example is taking things to the extreme a little.
Let's say I phone for a pizza and ask for ham and pineapple. I can't really complain about the toppings (assuming I get ham and pineapple) because that is what I believed I was getting. But what if I thought that they had been a little stingy on the ham? Can I complain now? What if my pizza arrived and all of the pineapple was on one side leaving very little on the other? Can I complain now?
The pizza company says, "No. That is the correct amount of ham, and we generally put all our pineapple on one side." I can complain that I don't think it's right. Others may counter that they prefer having their pineapple all to one side. At the end of the day, I still purchased a ham and pineapple pizza and that is what I got. I just feel that the pizza would be better if it was made differently.
Now... if someone pipes up and tells me, "You should have known what you were buying," how is that actually useful? I did know what I was buying. I was buying a ham and pineapple pizza. But when the pizza arrived, I had a few comments to make on the way it was made.
Please note: I use the term "I" here. But as I have said, I actually support modes and I'm not complaining about them. :/
I don't see how PC gaming is any different from anything else. People complain about anything and everything these days.
Maybe, who knows what They mean buy multi role assaults. It may mean it's just easier or more fun, it may be impossible to do solo they haven't said.
So... er... what are you complaining about?
Yeah, but that's the sales pitch. KS may very well hold a grudge, after that, people knew it was not going to happen with a budget that small. "Stunning visuals" sounds to me like a fidelity that Star Citizen is now and slowly beginning to achieve. And the gameplay/flight mechanics have been dumbed down to allow for inclusion of multiplayer elements, which could also be derived.
In the end, it stays a remake, with added multi-player elements. If you look at it like that, it's perfectly fine, and it's a fun game. But it is not a game-changing game introducting new technologies that will revolutionize gaming and take it back to the current tech level.
The biggest letdown still remains the abolishment of the single player offline mode in combination with the forced updates (a player cannot just rollback if serious gameplay bugs occur) and poor server performance.
Last edited:
Also... I do seem to remember that it might be possible to buy those hovering thingamajigs for yourself at some point... Have two of them backing you up as you drive in...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
How does this affect those players who pledged to a tier sufficient to include all major expansions? They made one "purchase" with a single contract and will receive all major game expansions as part of that original contract. Same goes for those who bought the LEP at the first or second time of offering.
I actually think we are wasting our time not lobbying for this expansion, it probably needs a catchy name though.
And it's going to require a clever tos, there will be tons of bloodshed when customers open the boxes.
Again read the tos. But I'm speaking hypothetically here, the backlash is what prevents it. And arguably forcing a settlement is the bigger risk for them. But it's a 10 year development. They can easily add expansions outside that scope. CQC is a good example even though it is free.
- - - Updated - - -
What do you mean? As I pointed out prior, there are projects such as SC that are doing proper R&D, rather than just delivering a remake. Of course, that takes longer.
So.... Elite: Dangerous is not Star Citizen. I don't get the point.
- - - Updated - - -
You should know by now not to drink hot drinks when reading this forum!!!
That's only relevant if you then make the assumption that multiplayer means separate modes or assume that it means PvP is king, or any number of other assumptions people make when buying the game without checking it first.
I mean, i understand the points people have made pointing out the problems with comments like "You should have checked what you were buying", but that is exactly what i do when i make a purchase. The information given on Steam and other places is pretty limited. And anyone with half a brain cell knows the blurb was written by the marketing department.
I know multiplayer might mean coop only, or multiplayer like shared servers or different "shards". It can mean a ton of different things.
So, if you understand that, you then, before buying, set out to determine what it actually means by multiplayer. Only after you have checked into everything that is important for you to make a purchasing decision, then you make the purchase.
If they didn't think about looking into something before buying, then either it wasn't something the person considered important, or they made an assumption.
Multiplayer - Can more than one person play in a single instance and interact with each other? Yes. Then it's multiplayer.
Or am I missing something?
Or am I missing something?
And I still don't get your question.
I pointed out that Elite was a remake of the old Elite games with outdated tech (compared to other parts of the software industry) that was readily available at development time. Khelder disagreed and posted an excerpt form the KS page.
Now who should have promised me a moon?
Yes. The software technology to implement current hardware and best practices (e.g. OS independence) doesn't currently exists in gaming. Hence most projects have even been stuck at 32bit for over a decade now. Only few titles have proper multi-screen support (FSX, DCS ..) and the graphics look almost consistently bad, where they are not helped by the community (e.g. Skyrim modders have far outperformed the Bethesda graphical arts team).
If you haven't realized it yet - gaming is doing very poorly from a technological standpoint. Something, that would seem inconceivable back in the days, where game devs would be able to squeeze the last bits out of a given hardware with dirty assembler tricks.
Last edited:
I was complaining about people attempting to shut down conversations by saying, "He should have known what he was buying" (usually in a condescending manner).
I can't believe I am going to discuss Pizza, but there you go !
if all the description you got was 'Ham and Pineapple' yes, I agree but so far as ED is concerned the information available, at least certainly when I bought before the launch of premium beta was right there on the page, pretty clear exactly what it was and how it worked. In that case anyone having a rant about it after the fact is not right imo. I don't think you are having a rant, instead it seems (to me at least) that what you are attempting is to suggest changes based on what you feel would make the game better. That's fair enough but the evidence continue to pile up that FD like this model and aren't about to drop it regardless of the on going suggestions. I suspect that due to the way the game works- instancing etc, it would be all but impossible to achieve anything meaningful by separating modes, forcing open, or any of the other slightly more nuts suggestions that have come out in these threads. I know this discussion isn't going to die the death it is long overdue any time soon but it should, that's my view anyway, accept it, enjoy it, move on to other things.
- Status