There is no game in development that intends to do what ED does. People seem to oscillate between putting huge expectations on a game, getting disappointed and then just moving the same expectations over to another game, for some more disappointment. It wont work well. There will be new games that do some things ED dont do, but wont do things ED does. ED will improve in some ways, but not in others. The 'dream game' as originally promised by SC is simply not going to happen, neither by CIG, FD or any other company. And it has nothing to do with willingness.
Atmos Planets for us explorers
- Thread starter RealPuPpEt
- Start date
- Status
There is no game in development that intends to do what ED does. People seem to oscillate between putting huge expectations on a game, getting disappointed and then just moving the same expectations over to another game, for some more disappointment. It wont work well. There will be new games that do some things ED dont do, but wont do things ED does. ED will improve in some ways, but not in others. The 'dream game' as originally promised by SC is simply not going to happen, neither by CIG, FD or any other company. And it has nothing to do with willingness.
verminstar
Banned
Which could work out well in the long run considering Im not even remotely interested in all the stuff this game does either...just some aspects which I play hard. That wont last forever, but its doing the job fer now...as in "placeholder". Its funny when ye think how ironic that is...many have been saying fer ages that many the disjointed features introduced in the past are simply placeholders, and now so many have been added that the whole game has literally become a placeholder.
Unless the much hyped qol features are the "glue" that binds everything together, then the clock is ticking down while others take their time to do it right before its launched. I think of this game as technically being an open ended beta type experiment...it has some really cool ideas and a whole raft of utterly senseless ideas and everything thrown into a single melting pot. And then ignored by the chef fer six months to go work on something that all of a few hundred diehard fans wanted 4 and half years ago that makes no sense to anyone else.
As much as I love certain aspects like exploration and the genuinly inspiring way in which the stellar forge has been done, the near revolutionary flight model from a first person perspective, shared bgs with 3 different platforms...thats all really cool stuff, but the rest of the filler is mediocre at best and the pvp aspect is just embarassingly pointless and inane.
Ill spend a year plugging away exploring whats here happy as a pig in the brown stuff...would be happier if beigification was fixed but only time will tell...but after Im done exploring, there really is absolutely nothing else in this entire game that has been refined enough to be enjoyable. Thats a personal point of view only. Those few who do know me from other games can tell ye Im normally a hardcore pvp only player...thats how good exploration is in this game to have converted me so utterly into a carebear.
But even that has limits and wont last forever if not developed further...tick tock tick tock...
Last edited:
Holy, I skipped this thread thinking it was just another atmo-puleez post but I'm glad I poked my head in.
That eyecandy SC video got a couple "oohs" and "damns" out of me. I'm also impressed how they have that pseudo-news to keep the backers up to date with the goings ons. It really gave me an insight to what Braben & Co. are up against. No trivial task indeed.
Comon, FDev. Make me proud.
That eyecandy SC video got a couple "oohs" and "damns" out of me. I'm also impressed how they have that pseudo-news to keep the backers up to date with the goings ons. It really gave me an insight to what Braben & Co. are up against. No trivial task indeed.
Comon, FDev. Make me proud.
While I am hopeful for atmospheric worlds like the one shown in the video, somehow I have a fear that it may end up being very similar to No Man's Sky kind of worlds....
But even so, even with NMS-like kind of worlds, I still wouldn't mind ..... too much...
I'd expect people will fill the forums up whining about how same-y every planet is. As usual.
But even so, even with NMS-like kind of worlds, I still wouldn't mind ..... too much...
I'd expect people will fill the forums up whining about how same-y every planet is. As usual.
Last edited:
Most of this can be accomplished using physics and systems already in the game.
Im not suggesting its something that would take a weekend of overtime to introduce, but its not years away like some have suggested and given that other games already do this kind of thing its honestly not ground breaking technology.
Slowly building up from basic thin Martian like atmospheres (minus global dust storms) towards more complex and dynamic chemistries shouldnt be years of development, especially in a game that already has polished foundations like ED does.
Fdev apparently already have planet surface colours being dictated by the worlds particular chemistry and the Star its orbits (the beigening) in game so 'ammonia clouds' would build on this, and light refraction physics already exist in game.
Alot of people would be very happy with thin atnospheric landings with unremarkable chemistries to begin with before gradually heading into Rain covered canopies on Earth like jungles.
People say there are other priorities in ED before this kind of development is needed, but i disagree. ED for me is primarily about exploration and getting lost in its beautiful enviroments entranced in the majesty of some random cosmic vista, feeling like i am actually there. Planetary landing in ED contributes a huge amount to that immersion and fleshing out this mechanic to include more world types with atmospheres would add a huge chunk to the existing play scape.
We play this game with our imagination fueling 'self made content' which adds to the hours we play. Atmospheres in game would greatly enhance this.
Last edited:
verminstar
Banned
Would be a cool feature, but its really not a simple job of making it look right...making it look right is the easy part, and when I say "easy", I mean in the context of the other aspect which is harder to code...the physics and how it feels and plays. Id be wanting re entries that if not calculated right, would reduce me and my ship to pretty fireworks in the sky. Or come in too shallow and simply bounce off back into space...those sorta mechanics. An over simplication of how it works in real life but...games.
That would be a headline feature and after multipew, I can understand their hesitation. Its one of those things that either have to work almost flawlessly, or it becomes their worst nightmare. Nobody else has got it right yet...loads of demos that make it look nice but like I said...making it look nice is the easy part ^
That would be a headline feature and after multipew, I can understand their hesitation. Its one of those things that either have to work almost flawlessly, or it becomes their worst nightmare. Nobody else has got it right yet...loads of demos that make it look nice but like I said...making it look nice is the easy part ^
Odd, I thought this was an Elite Dangerous forum.
Please stop posting demos of SC-tech. It doesn't exist and it isn't in any form of playable demo.
Once it IS in their 'game', running at a minimum of 60fps on a 1060, with an actual game behind it... then it would be a valid comparison. However, none of the previously mentioned exists, therefore it's irrelevant.
Please also remember folks, that currently, planets only barely work on console, let alone a PC. Cranking up the detail levels on even a 1080ti makes the Cobra engine weep. So don't expect anything else like clouds and weather for a VERY long time. It has never been slated for 3.0, and I suspect it will NEVER turn up, at least not in the way you folks are imagining it.
Please stop posting demos of SC-tech. It doesn't exist and it isn't in any form of playable demo.
Once it IS in their 'game', running at a minimum of 60fps on a 1060, with an actual game behind it... then it would be a valid comparison. However, none of the previously mentioned exists, therefore it's irrelevant.
Please also remember folks, that currently, planets only barely work on console, let alone a PC. Cranking up the detail levels on even a 1080ti makes the Cobra engine weep. So don't expect anything else like clouds and weather for a VERY long time. It has never been slated for 3.0, and I suspect it will NEVER turn up, at least not in the way you folks are imagining it.
verminstar
Banned
Ok Ill bite...stop with the anti console crusade...its getting boring now. The beigification is a bug and absolutely nothing to do with this topic. Planets work very well on consoles otherwise, and this bug was not caused by consoles as yer trying to suggest on the other thread.
This has been explained many times that it has absolutely nothing to do with consoles whatsoever...by several devs...and still ye wont let it go. So...do ye have anything more substantial than some tin foil hat theory to back this belief up with?
ED can't afford to not add atmospheric landings and improved exploration. If there's one thing SC will be better than elite at (if CIG ever stops milking the backers pyramid and releases the damn thing), it's gonna be combat and PVP. FD should focus on what sets ED apart from SC and not where SC is stronger.
Yep. To me it looks like SC is catering to exactly that kind of hi-octane "I just injected 50 Red Bulls into my eyes" kind of PVP space gaming. If it comes out before the end of Western civilization.
man you guys can be so salty sometimes.
I hope FDev can approach something that looks like these demos. More importantly, I hope they offer an improved gameplay experience over what we have now. Because let's be real: If driving around and shooting rocks or watching sunsets is all there will be to do on atmospheric worlds, they can keep it. I don't need water, rain, snow, and vegetation just for the sake of having it. It needs to have landing gameplay well above and beyond what we have now.
Feels literally years away if it's going to be done right.
I hope FDev can approach something that looks like these demos. More importantly, I hope they offer an improved gameplay experience over what we have now. Because let's be real: If driving around and shooting rocks or watching sunsets is all there will be to do on atmospheric worlds, they can keep it. I don't need water, rain, snow, and vegetation just for the sake of having it. It needs to have landing gameplay well above and beyond what we have now.
Feels literally years away if it's going to be done right.
You could stop believing him and just go about your life until one day you read "SC RELEASED! INTERNET BREAKS"
I've found that, if I want something to arrive, I ignore it and try to forget about it until it does; because eventually, you do forget and then time passes and suddenly, it's out.
So far I haven't like anything you've said on any forum I've read, but I'll rep you for this, lol. I feel the same way, that's why I'm not following SC closely, I love the concept of the game, limited size but still huge in scope, buttloads to do, and amazing visuals? What's not to like! But I can't with them... I just can't.
I'm pretty sure this is what they've been doing the entire time. Elite has been and, hopefully, always will be Elite, the standard in space games and "Sims". While I'm not on board with all of their ideas, whoever's idea it was to let players shape 100% of the world should go sit in the corner, I still find it to be without a doubt the best space game I've ever played.
It certainly does look great.
It's disheartening to see the mild salt in the posts here about ED's development. I think videos like this one from SC is precisely a big part of the problem. The gameplay with ED and horizons is already well worth the initial cost. So many things already done on the massive scale of hundreds of stars systems if not counting the billions and the changing skybox. I think the SC videos make some think FDev are just dragging their feet when it was already reported 200+ staff are constantly working on the game. What FDev have accomplished is what has been possible so far in a completed game with realistic hardware and software limitations, and I think it's unfair to say the whole game is a placeholder. Try playing FFE and see how much higher the bar had been set with ED. Hard to believe people are still falling for the 20 different tech demos with scripted engine showing off their latest texture artists work in these SC videos in order to keep the funding ponzi going. If they released whatever they had now, it would be a mess of demos probably not covering more than a couple moons and part of a planet where it might as well have been just another Mass Effect: Andromeda clone where there are just added features of being able to go to a kiosk store and purchase different rifle weapons plus their recent features trying to copycat ED. Sure it looks prettier on their use of licensed engines or whatnot, but I bet in time with FDev improving the "core" gameplay, it can look almost just as good.
I think maybe what FDev could do is show videos of their old behind the scenes work, and only old design videos so as to not get caught up in the forever promises game CIG plays. Show how the designers worked on the cobra, the cutter, the horizons bases, the textures etc., and the modeling software used. Only show the old design process so folks can finally realize how much work they actually put into it. And it'll be easily seen just like Flight Simulator X and all its addons, it takes a lot of effort to bring content to a game of their respective massive scopes.
I think maybe what FDev could do is show videos of their old behind the scenes work, and only old design videos so as to not get caught up in the forever promises game CIG plays. Show how the designers worked on the cobra, the cutter, the horizons bases, the textures etc., and the modeling software used. Only show the old design process so folks can finally realize how much work they actually put into it. And it'll be easily seen just like Flight Simulator X and all its addons, it takes a lot of effort to bring content to a game of their respective massive scopes.
Last edited:
Star Citizen has minimum requirements that will make poor PC gamers cry. A poor PC gamer is a rich console gamer. Frontier decided to support the Xbox One and it's almighty 1.3tflops of compute power. How are we going to expect procedurally generated weather, with volumetric cloud effects, reflections, and lighting that is once again, procedurally generated with no weird tricks and shortcuts like in No Mans Sky?
The game already took a hit with it's planet variations, weather effects, lighting when they wanted feature parity with the Xbox release. Frontier isn't selling $10,000 digital spaceships to rubes to fund exclusive PC development. They have an actual product, and the economics of that points to a game that is torpedoing technical advances like atmospheric planets. I would be surprised if it's their next season. It's probably aliens and combat stuff as that sells to Sony and Microsoft gamers.
Happy to be wrong though.
The game already took a hit with it's planet variations, weather effects, lighting when they wanted feature parity with the Xbox release. Frontier isn't selling $10,000 digital spaceships to rubes to fund exclusive PC development. They have an actual product, and the economics of that points to a game that is torpedoing technical advances like atmospheric planets. I would be surprised if it's their next season. It's probably aliens and combat stuff as that sells to Sony and Microsoft gamers.
Happy to be wrong though.
Elite Dangerous works on low-end PCs (with low graphics settings). The system requirements were increased for Horizons. So it'll probably increase again for season 3. High graphics settings with such features are possible on high-end PCs and upcoming consoles like the Xbox One X.
Older consoles like PS4 and Xbox One would have to settle with lower graphics settings due to system limitations.
I don't mind if Frontier uses weird tricks to make it look as good (or close) as the tech demo of SC.
Last edited:
And Macs were left behind with planetary landings in 2.0, FDev could conceivably leave the current generation of consoles behind in a similar way for future updates. I've already upgraded my PC since buying ED, I'd do so again in the minimum requirements change again. I guess if I had a PS4 I'd consider buying a PS5 (or whatever) to be able to use ED season 3 (or whatever).
The vid in the OP does look impressive, it's an excellent presentation of a game with a considerably higher budget than ED.
True. I don't think PS4 and Xbox One will be abandoned in seasons 3 or 4, but they'll play on lower quality settings than PC.
To me that video is nothing more than a tech demonstration. Like all of CIGs other videos, they always make these to impress people, but it's not an actual game yet. We already know that their customized Cry-Engine (or whatever they call it) is capable of fancy graphics.
It will never look like that video on a medium PC, and it won't work on a Xbox One or PS4.
Frontier must have something similar under-development though. Because right now, the biggest things ED lacks is 1. space legs and 2. landing on atmospheric planets in some capacity.
Last edited:
- Status