Yea, it is. I've encountered only a couple of graphical glitches. Nothing too bad. But it crashes twice an hour and I tend to get <30FPS at times, which is laughable, compared to Elite's stable 120FPS.
NMS vs ED
- Thread starter IndigoWyrd
- Start date
- Status
Yea, it is. I've encountered only a couple of graphical glitches. Nothing too bad. But it crashes twice an hour and I tend to get <30FPS at times, which is laughable, compared to Elite's stable 120FPS.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Just because you're inept with a controller doesn't mean it is not a viable input device for flight games. Yes, a good flight stick setup with a capable pilot is better (and way more immersive) but you can do amazing things with a controller and ED's flight model.
I'd also argue that the disadvantage the controller is at is in no way as big as it is against mouse and keyboard for fast paced first person shooters and that a good controller player will beat an average flight stick player more often than not.
Either way, ED's flight model is awesome even with a controller and I doubt NMS comes close.
Last edited:
I'd say the only real main advantage of a stick is the directly proportional and position holding throttle. Not as easy to control that on a controller as effectively. This is overlooking the multi-axes issues I mentioned, as that isn't actually an issue for all gamepad style controllers, just most of the contemporary ones.
Indeed. I sadly missed out on getting a Lifetime Pass, but I knew *exactly* what I was getting when I pre-ordered Elite: Dangerous back in July of 2014. So far that promise has not been broken (though this year's delays sometimes feel like they're *bending* the promise a bit
)Sole Hunter
Banned
boring, we should have a pokemon vs yu-gi-oh thread.
It really depends what you want from a game. If space combat is your thing then ED can scratch that itch. NMS is more of a space survival/exploration/resource gathering game. I'm not a fan of the cartoony graphics, but ED can't even come close to landing on planets with lifeforms, aliens, artifacts, structures, etc... All of which you can interact with, or not. The procedural generation can get a little samey, but I expect it will be improved upon with updates. I even think I read that HG isn't charging for DLC. The ships looks like they are also proceduraly generated which is also very cool and unexpected.
Whether you love it or loathe it, NMS is pretty impressive coming from such a small developer.
Whether you love it or loathe it, NMS is pretty impressive coming from such a small developer.
The ships are PG - Sean Murray said so on one of the many streams months before launch.
After spending hm, a good 9 hours binging on NMS, I'm happy with my purchase. Is it comparable to ED? Not really. ED has a much better flight model, particularly if you have a HOTAS, as much as people might want to argue it has a better model on an XBox controller, no. The answer is no, it sucks on an Xbox controller and it's always -going to suck- on an Xbox controller, you're deluding yourself if you think you perceive any significant difference between ED on a controller and NMS on a controller. If you think you do, that's because you're likely playing on a system not capable of running NMS at the full 60 frames per second.
I can, and since I can run roll, pitch and yaw on the pad, the differences are minimal (after finding the invert flight control option), the AI in ED definitely puts up more of a fight, and you have more buttons to fiddle with in ED than in NMS (fights basically boil down in NMS to who has the bigger guns and deeper shields in a much more simplistic manner, there's no subsystem targeting for instance) but the broad strokes are the same. It's line up lead reticule, unload hot melty death, move on to next target. Rinse, repeat.
On the topic of ships, here's a scary thought, the ships are proc-gen, and they all have different cockpit interiors, what's more, you can actually get some really interesting canopies pretty early on, I'm tooling around in what I'd class as a heavy fighter/ light multipurpose (probably equivalent to the Cobra Mk 3) and the layout is radically different, though much like ED the core UI elements are consistent from one ship to the next. Multitools come with their own little touches and you can get some pretty wild configurations (you're not stuck with the default dinky pistol), and I've got my hands on a 19 slot behemoth which looks more in keeping with a thermal lance as opposed to something you'd probe a bit of ore with.
So, after those nine hours, where am I in terms of my thoughts concerning ED and NMS?
ED -needs- to step up it's game. Not because of NMS *directly* (because like most here, I agree NMS and ED are different enough that they don't warrant a direct comparison) but because between NMS, SC and other games not even space related, ED will invariably suffer a death by a thousand cuts.
NMS has proven beyond any form of reasonable doubt that not only is it *possible* to do an offline version of a space exploration and trading game, but it's *profitable* and you don't lose the so called "mysteries of the universe" by handing over the client to the customer.
All of the reasons Braben provided for wanting the BGS and the always online side of things basically got blown a hole in, and that's what NMS has done, people will look at ED and go "Wait, why does this need a connection? I can play NMS whenever I want and my crappy internet won't shower me with outages when I'm playing it." If SC then goes and proves beyond a reasonable doubt that there's a -competent- space flight model that offers a reasonable alternative to ED then the things ED has going for it will start evaporating *really* fast.
In short, ED needs to make a choice, go full online and offer real persistence in the universe to players, or allow them to go full offline and stop with this instanced client side P2P nonsense that enables cheating and in the end doesn't benefit the consumer one bit.
I can, and since I can run roll, pitch and yaw on the pad, the differences are minimal (after finding the invert flight control option), the AI in ED definitely puts up more of a fight, and you have more buttons to fiddle with in ED than in NMS (fights basically boil down in NMS to who has the bigger guns and deeper shields in a much more simplistic manner, there's no subsystem targeting for instance) but the broad strokes are the same. It's line up lead reticule, unload hot melty death, move on to next target. Rinse, repeat.
On the topic of ships, here's a scary thought, the ships are proc-gen, and they all have different cockpit interiors, what's more, you can actually get some really interesting canopies pretty early on, I'm tooling around in what I'd class as a heavy fighter/ light multipurpose (probably equivalent to the Cobra Mk 3) and the layout is radically different, though much like ED the core UI elements are consistent from one ship to the next. Multitools come with their own little touches and you can get some pretty wild configurations (you're not stuck with the default dinky pistol), and I've got my hands on a 19 slot behemoth which looks more in keeping with a thermal lance as opposed to something you'd probe a bit of ore with.
So, after those nine hours, where am I in terms of my thoughts concerning ED and NMS?
ED -needs- to step up it's game. Not because of NMS *directly* (because like most here, I agree NMS and ED are different enough that they don't warrant a direct comparison) but because between NMS, SC and other games not even space related, ED will invariably suffer a death by a thousand cuts.
NMS has proven beyond any form of reasonable doubt that not only is it *possible* to do an offline version of a space exploration and trading game, but it's *profitable* and you don't lose the so called "mysteries of the universe" by handing over the client to the customer.
All of the reasons Braben provided for wanting the BGS and the always online side of things basically got blown a hole in, and that's what NMS has done, people will look at ED and go "Wait, why does this need a connection? I can play NMS whenever I want and my crappy internet won't shower me with outages when I'm playing it." If SC then goes and proves beyond a reasonable doubt that there's a -competent- space flight model that offers a reasonable alternative to ED then the things ED has going for it will start evaporating *really* fast.
In short, ED needs to make a choice, go full online and offer real persistence in the universe to players, or allow them to go full offline and stop with this instanced client side P2P nonsense that enables cheating and in the end doesn't benefit the consumer one bit.
I've been reading https://www.reddit.com/r/nomansskythegame for a while now, and the impression I've got is the complete opposite.
I really don't get how everyone is having so many issues. I've had no crashes. None. I've had a lock on 60 FPS, no drops, it's been buttery smooth. Granted, as I smugly remind my friends, I have a "magic" PC, I was able to run Arkham Knight when it was busily wrecking everyone else's computers. I've had indies ask -me- to run stuff as a testbench because my system stubbornly refuses to *die*. Windows 7 has an uptime that makes the Linux nerd in me proud. It's enough to warm my cold, stone heart, just a little.
So my guess? People need to stop chasing all that 3D-mark nonsense, rig their systems for stability and proper cooling, and make sure their drivers are nice and stable.
Alright. I will also contribute.
Bugs and glitches (that will be squished, eventually, I believe) aside- NMS is cool. I wasn't aboard the hype train, but I considered it a possible "hobby game" (as opposed to a full-time job which is Elite.
It didn't disappoint. Actually everyone who watched the presentations with their own eyes, instead of the pink hype-tinted glasses, will get exactly what they promised.
Everything from the flight model to same-y but cute procedurally generated life and planets was advertised right and was delivered exactly that way.
So NMS is one of the best survival/crafting games I've played (Currently second behind Subnautica). Plus there's space a little. I think it's cool and I will give it an hour or two, now and then. It's that kind of the game that you will understand in an hour, master in eight and get bored of in forty.
My only real beef with it is - it should have cost twenty bucks tops.
Subnautica is damn awesome, everyone should own that game.
I haven't tried NMS yet because I refuse to pay £40 for an indie game but I so believe it has more content than ED does at the moment, it might not look as pretty but the mining, crafting, gathering, combat, exploration, upgrading, sight seeing is all there, on day one and it's exactly how Hello Games described it.
If the reddit roadmap is right, we could be waiting up to 5 years for life on planets in ED!
To me that will be too little too late....
- Status