I am a single player with two accounts and neither are through Steam now seeing I am a single player how many other players are there like me?
The epic fail of Beyond
- Thread starter Marcus Tullius
- Start date
- Status
I am a single player with two accounts and neither are through Steam now seeing I am a single player how many other players are there like me?
OK, my turn. No, no, no.
Steamspy statistics DO NOT represent the entire pool of ED owners/players. Not even close.
PS bring back GameSpy! Sream sucks!
Better yet... how many players bought the game before it was even released on Steam, and aren't vocal in the forums because they're happily playing the game and don't participate in "forum-fu"? This is where the answer always fall short. Steam in no way accounts for a majority of players- therefore the stats don't either.
FD knows for sure. And FD isn't worried, as you can tell. If they were in "trouble" financially, they sure as hell wouldn't plan a year's worth of updates to the game for "free".
But of course, dooooooooommmmm! all you like.
Probably since English is not my native language. What exactly is curious?
According to Kickstarter, FDev could only do a remaster of Elite in the given period of time.
I would not ask that question, I think it is more down to to game design and mechanics. Both have been evolved since 1984. While not everything is fine, which was developed till now, the industry surely learned at lot since then. And then ED comes along, it lacks a lot of basic things other game devs are very aware of. Threads demanding those basic things are prove of that. Like the question why important lore videos are not presented in the game or limited player communication and interaction. Regarding the MP aspect it is still mind-boggling to me, how they created a PvE game without any specific coop mechanics, beside the most basic ones like money sharing. I think people where fine with the first iteration having CZs and RESs or A to B trading during that period in time, by today`s standards it is lacking. Especially with multiple CMDRs in an instance.
Making the player wait to archive his goals regularly, even so long he starts to question himself, in different game loops without any indication how long he should wait, is a big no-go in game development, because it is not fun. FDev is obviously working on that, but I can't understand the motivation releasing such game loops in such a basic state, like mission target in SC, SS for Engi mats, outpost POIs. In general most tasks in ED do not reward skill. Those are just a few examples. I mean look at the threads and filter the demand for nonsense (at this point in time) like "space legs" out.
Regarding COD: Sales figures aren´t the best indicator for product quality. Especially COD is actually stalling regarding game mechanics since part 2 and 4.
Nintendo on the other hand carefully perfects Super Mario game mechanics and also carefully designs transitions like from 2D to 3D.
Last edited:
No, it's very clear that Steam sales are the minority. For a start, many people had bought E: D before it ever released on Steam. There are also Xbox and PS4 players. It would appear to be yourself disregarding numbers. Tell me, what are the total Steam sales? And how many copies of E: D have been sold in total (as per the latest information we have)? Both these pieces of information are readily available, and prove your statement false.
Hey, don't go bringing more facts into this! They're not done lighting the torches yet!
Philip Coutts
Volunteer Moderator
Yeah you have to remember when ED first launched it wasn't available on steam for a fair while. It was only sold on Frontiers web-site and of course through the Kickstarter campaign
Well, I'm one.
I've also bought two copies for others (via Frontier). And when friends have bought it, I always tell them to buy it through the store too (as I presume that FD get more money that way).Hey, don't go bringing more facts into this! They're not done lighting the torches yet!
Oh, it's ok. I've recently discovered that the more facts you give people, the more pitchforks they find...
So... has Beyond failed yet?
That's very funny. I wonder, do you know any of the history of Elite? In 1984, pretty much every games publisher at the time refused to publish the game because it didn't have three lives or fit in with the standard template for games of the time. One company (Acornsoft) didn't follow what " industry knew", and published the game. It was a massive hit.
The same applies today. E: D is not a standard game, which is why it confuses a lot of people. And it's why FD knew they had to publish it themselves. And... Guess what? Just as in 1984, it has been an incredible success.
Incidentally, the above are facts. Any game that sells over 2 million copies can be called a success, surely?
Well... YMMV but I'm still waiting for the beta on the 25th... we're only two weeks into the new year and people seem to have a crystal ball reaching into November.
I knew that already. It is an interesting story.
Depending on the production cost, but sure. But as I said, sales figures don´t necessarily indicate the quality of a game. Also ED hit a market dry of space flight games.
You think it is a story? Because if you knew that already, doesn't that rather invalidate your first post that I responded to?
Quality is subjective. Personally, I believe E: D is top quality. As can be seen from these forums, there are some that believe it is tripe. That's fine.
In its genre, there is currently no competitor to E: D at all if you use VR.
The answer has to be no Beyond has not failed as it is not even out yet and the beta only starts on the 25th of this month to which no one has played yet and even once we've been through the beta then the FQ update a lot of us will still be playing and of course waiting for the next update to be reviled.
That's actually a fair comment and very logical. Unfortunately you're wasting your time being logical and reasonable in, what is in effect, yet another worthless troll thread.
Exactly and all this year we can expect different stages of Beyond being released. FD said it last year and they said it again this year, but we are dealing with a part of the human race that just simply do not listen.
The restrictions on basic movement are the main reason i can't play ED. Can't suspend disbelief that i'm in a 'space ship' with a 'space speed limit' in all planes and axes. Besides which, there's no point anyway because those restrictions preclude any chance of fun, excitement or skill. It's not "Elite", and it's not my kind of game.
Few here seem to have a sorry clue what Elite always was, before ED. The original Elite was as realistic as arcade space sims could get, given the restrictions of the 8-bit hardware. You traded your way towards ship upgrades whilst fighting through hordes of enemies. And i do mean swarms of them. Pirates, police, both at once, thargoids launching thargons, anacondas launching worms, bounty hunters in fer de lances, rock hermits defending their claims, etc. etc. When not under attack, you were likely attacking something else. Quiet runs were relatively rare. It was hard-slog arcade action almost every inch of the way.
Elite 2 and 3 were the same as before, now as real as you could get in 16-bits. Almost no restrictions at all, seamless without transitions, atmospheres and gravity and cities, road and river networks, bridges, sprawling suburbs with white picket fences and churches with cemeteries and working clock towers, domed habitats and agriculture, mountains, craters, clouds, air density, resistance and frictional heating, proper inverse-square of radius gravity, the ability to fly and mod all ships, all of which are animated to varying degrees (working undercarriages, external hardpoints etc.), and again, shed-loads of combat; "exploration build", you say? Pfft good luck with that...
2 & 3 were awesome in all the same ways as the original, only cranked up to 11. They retained the decent UI and function-key mappings for the various systems screens (was a bit messed up in FFE but still usable).
And you played them the same basic way - trading your way up while fighting off hordes of attackers. The better equipment was usually worth it. That was how you progressed.
In ED all that's thrown out the window. I tried to play it the traditional way, trading up to bigger ships, but was only ever attacked on three occasions, and simply 'boosted' away each time. Zero combat experienced. And you quickly realise there's zero point in any of the upgrades since all the ships have the stupid space speed limit. No matter how much money you make, you're never going to be free to experience the fun of basic unfettered spaceflight. ED is intrinsically incompatible with that. The equipment upgrades make absolutely zero sense, but again there's zero point in trying to work it out because there's almost zero chance of needing any of it anyway - if you do get attacked, just run away.
So my experience of ED was basically like playing Euro Truck Simulator; launching, dot-tracking through the supercruise minigame without autopilot or external views, then docking, trading, or more often, not, since i could rarely find any reliable margins on anything i'd stocked up on, there isn't even a basic BBS system at any of the stations and the "duh, missions!" board and "passenger lounge" are so toe-curlingly dumb and wooden i can only cringe at every offering, its neurotic conditions and spurious rewards.
I don't want "experience points" or "reputation points" or "engineering materials", i just want to be free to fly the damned ship without restrictions, find reasonable trade routes and fight other ships with mainly fixed beam weapons, shields and missiles / ECM's, in zero-G free space - just the basic minimum features we had in the previous games. Just flying a ship, in "real space", with full control, defending my precious cargo of whatever against relentless waves of pirate clans and police.
ED is nothing like that. In comparison, it's a slide-show, trying to tempt you into playing more by flashing an ankle of possibilities it can never actually fulfill. It's a drag queen. An imposter. The real Elite must be tied up in the janitor's closet in its underwear. It looks Elite-ish, but doesn't play anything like it... and the things it's missing are where all the fun was in the previous games. Full flight control, no nerfs, and merciless waves of assaults on almost every flight.
ED is not Elite. It's a completely different type of game, abandoning the freedom and scope that made its predecessors so compelling.
Its basically a space-trucking arcade game with Jumpgate-like instanced 'combat zones', space speed limits and transitions for the transitions... and as such, an anathema to this lifelong Elite fan..
Few here seem to have a sorry clue what Elite always was, before ED. The original Elite was as realistic as arcade space sims could get, given the restrictions of the 8-bit hardware. You traded your way towards ship upgrades whilst fighting through hordes of enemies. And i do mean swarms of them. Pirates, police, both at once, thargoids launching thargons, anacondas launching worms, bounty hunters in fer de lances, rock hermits defending their claims, etc. etc. When not under attack, you were likely attacking something else. Quiet runs were relatively rare. It was hard-slog arcade action almost every inch of the way.
Elite 2 and 3 were the same as before, now as real as you could get in 16-bits. Almost no restrictions at all, seamless without transitions, atmospheres and gravity and cities, road and river networks, bridges, sprawling suburbs with white picket fences and churches with cemeteries and working clock towers, domed habitats and agriculture, mountains, craters, clouds, air density, resistance and frictional heating, proper inverse-square of radius gravity, the ability to fly and mod all ships, all of which are animated to varying degrees (working undercarriages, external hardpoints etc.), and again, shed-loads of combat; "exploration build", you say? Pfft good luck with that...
2 & 3 were awesome in all the same ways as the original, only cranked up to 11. They retained the decent UI and function-key mappings for the various systems screens (was a bit messed up in FFE but still usable).
And you played them the same basic way - trading your way up while fighting off hordes of attackers. The better equipment was usually worth it. That was how you progressed.
In ED all that's thrown out the window. I tried to play it the traditional way, trading up to bigger ships, but was only ever attacked on three occasions, and simply 'boosted' away each time. Zero combat experienced. And you quickly realise there's zero point in any of the upgrades since all the ships have the stupid space speed limit. No matter how much money you make, you're never going to be free to experience the fun of basic unfettered spaceflight. ED is intrinsically incompatible with that. The equipment upgrades make absolutely zero sense, but again there's zero point in trying to work it out because there's almost zero chance of needing any of it anyway - if you do get attacked, just run away.
So my experience of ED was basically like playing Euro Truck Simulator; launching, dot-tracking through the supercruise minigame without autopilot or external views, then docking, trading, or more often, not, since i could rarely find any reliable margins on anything i'd stocked up on, there isn't even a basic BBS system at any of the stations and the "duh, missions!" board and "passenger lounge" are so toe-curlingly dumb and wooden i can only cringe at every offering, its neurotic conditions and spurious rewards.
I don't want "experience points" or "reputation points" or "engineering materials", i just want to be free to fly the damned ship without restrictions, find reasonable trade routes and fight other ships with mainly fixed beam weapons, shields and missiles / ECM's, in zero-G free space - just the basic minimum features we had in the previous games. Just flying a ship, in "real space", with full control, defending my precious cargo of whatever against relentless waves of pirate clans and police.
ED is nothing like that. In comparison, it's a slide-show, trying to tempt you into playing more by flashing an ankle of possibilities it can never actually fulfill. It's a drag queen. An imposter. The real Elite must be tied up in the janitor's closet in its underwear. It looks Elite-ish, but doesn't play anything like it... and the things it's missing are where all the fun was in the previous games. Full flight control, no nerfs, and merciless waves of assaults on almost every flight.
ED is not Elite. It's a completely different type of game, abandoning the freedom and scope that made its predecessors so compelling.
Its basically a space-trucking arcade game with Jumpgate-like instanced 'combat zones', space speed limits and transitions for the transitions... and as such, an anathema to this lifelong Elite fan..
Last edited:
Interesting. You declare that people don't know what Elite was, and then describe it inaccurately. Even in 1984 you could run away from fights and concentrate on trading instead. In fact, until you had military lasers, this was the best plan... I had several pads of notes for trade prices and other things.
Your English is clearly more than adequate for communicating here. What's curious -- 'curious' here in the sense of 'odd' -- is your apparent suggestion that something about the 1984 Elite is somehow incompatible with modern gaming. That Elite, for some reason, simply can't be adequately modernised. I don't see any reason to accept that idea.
Perhaps. That's obviously what we got originally. What they do with it as time goes on, beyond the expansions and updates we've already had, we'll have to wait and see.
I'd agree with all of these points. What I wouldn't draw from that is that there's something inherently preventing them from putting these things into ED; or that these things had to be included if they decided to start with a relatively basic remastered version of Elite 1984.
Why? As in, why filter out the demand for 'space legs', or dismiss it as nonsense? I'd say it'd make your point at least as well as the features you're talking about. A lot of people want their characters to be able to get out of a ship and walk around, meet each other, and so on. Why's it unreasonable for them to imagine that as a feature built into the game from day one? After all, as you say, gaming has evolved a lot since 1984; technology has changed and expectations have changed with it.
If anything, your dismissal of this particular feature shows one of the problems that comes up over and over on these forums: people confuse what they want with what's essential; and what they don't want they assume nobody wants or can't possibly work or could only harm the game.
Don't take this the wrong way, but I don't really care how well COD is doing. My point was that COD has been very popular, it's long been a staple of the FPS genre, and yet that whole genre is, as I said, really nothing more than an update on Operation Wolf. What I mean is that there's nothing about the old game that's prevented it being effectively updated into what we see now.
I'm in absolute agreement with this. I can't say I don't like ED: I like it very much and find it great fun and weirdly absorbing. I love the graphics, the sound design and -- outside of the ridiculously arcadey flight model -- the feel of the ship controls (I love that they've managed to give the ships a sense of mass). But there is certainly a quiet part of me that's really very disappointed that FDev took the direction they took with it, creating a remake of the original Elite rather than a sequel to First Encounters. When I look at how flight simulations have come on in the same time -- when I look at Orbiter, and SpaceEngine, and wonder how they'd look merged together -- I can only imagine what a proper, next-gen Elite 4 could have been like.
Success story, event you know what I mean.
Why would it invalidate my post? The market had a need for space games and there was no competitor (as it is now), hence people will buy it anyway, even if there are flaws in the game.Only up to a certain point quality is subjective. There are objective criteria to game design nonetheless. Fun and frustration is effectual investigated. Hence you can pinpoint bad game design pretty precisely. However, as I observed on this forum mostly, there are people, who find the random RESs shooting (with friends) the pinnacle of computer gaming. It is obvious they ignore or are completely unaware of the last 25 years of computer gaming.Quality is subjective. Personally, I believe E: D is top quality. As can be seen from these forums, there are some that believe it is tripe. That's fine.
Regarding bugs and game design, I would rate ED certainly not as "top quality".
True!
It seems to me, like I stated earlier, FDev tries to be competitive in a modern 24H race in a vehicle designed in the 1940s.
What FDev tried to do is, converting a single player game from 1984 to a modern MMO. And as you can see in the recent "is this game a MMO thread", people beg to differ and call this game a "singleplayer game you can play alongside others".
It is especially unreasonable to think FDev can implement "space legs" in a meaningful way any time soon (or even day one). Gaming has evolved as have (most) gamer´s standards. Adding "space legs" with actual game mechanics behind it, is more than developing a new game, because it has to incorporate all ED currently has. Reviewing the past development process (and the statements by FDev) tells me demanding or believing "space legs" will be ready in the nearer future is on the verge of delusion. Since this game is full of bare bone features (the existence of Beyond proves that), we and FDev certainly don´t another construction site.
Some seem to do that, yes. I hope my above reasoning makes clear I am not one of those.
You have to go into the details to see major differences in the game play. Just compare it to multiplayer in Battlefield 1942. Both game only share the "shooting at people" theme, that is about it. ;-)
Last edited:
- Status