Its inspired design absolutely fantastic the best of all possible worlds with no drawbacks at all. Choice is good, so is pre purchase reading.
Article: "Elite’s Distant Worlds 2 expedition proves the game is wildly unbalanced, and that’s OK"
- Thread starter StuartGT
- Start date
- Status
Its inspired design absolutely fantastic the best of all possible worlds with no drawbacks at all. Choice is good, so is pre purchase reading.
Ok just did the math. We've killed 28% of the gankers active fleet. If we keep up this rate past colonia, you guys won't last much past Sgr A*.
I hope you know that I'm only teasing you; I know you're doing a good job. Just keep in mind that most of the guys you've encountered so far have been in mass-murder ships where jump capability has been prioritized over combat efficiency, so you can expect that after Sag A* (where we all know the real hunt begins) you can expect to see much greater parity between combat ship types between both sides. Personally, I'm playing the long game and very slowly bringing a nasty little piece of work with godawful range but hardly any compromises out there.
Last edited:
Elite got some nice coverage in New Scientist, thanks to Distant Worlds. 1 million readers worldwide. I bet a certain Mr. Braben was quite pleased with that
But yeah, its a niche game otherwise, and it takes something pretty epic to make waves outside of its own bubble.https://www.newscientist.com/articl...angerous-players-embark-on-epic-space-voyage/
Last edited:
Not at all the balance they're talking about, but definitely an issue.
My worry is that while agile is a fine way to develop software and constant iteration has made Elite into a much different (and better) game; along the way we players are now in a position that everything/anything significantly new will be trivialized or be unable to be implemented
A few examples:
* Engineering has ruined zero-day balance. Back in the day most traders set upon while packing default armour/shields had a decent chance of fleeing or fending off an attacker. Engineering has ruined that balance. Now a engineered ship will devastate it in seconds.
*** Not only is engineering not going anywhere, but the originally proposed feature of randomly engineered modules appearing in black markets never happened. So vanilla players will never be equal.
*** Players would riot if engineering were balanced to be less impactful. Heck, there are still countless legacy modules floating around in the game.
* In the beginning having a Anaconda was was something to work towards over months, maybe years. Seeing a player in was awe inspiring, as opposed to the default. Credits are so easy to grind now a player could have one in a week or two. Any knock to the massive credit influx is howled down by the community.
*** Years of gold rushes, from early slave trading, through stacking massacre missions, to Sothis and scanning multiple planet bases at once and stacking passanger missions - players who exploited a gold rush were as a massive advantage are rarely was there any attempt to penalize those who used them.
*** Engineering avoids using credits for anything now, because it would trivialize it.
*** Credits only hurt for newer players that don't know the 'tricks'. For those players a rebuy can be devastating. Broadly speaking, you shouldn't need a trick to progress - you should be able to do so via bounty hunting, trading, exploring or mining equally.
* We've learnt a lot about space in the last five years. Now we even doubt the shape of our galaxy.
** That can't really be factored into Elite's galaxy without breaking everything.
** Changing anything would 'unexplore' systems, cause planetside objects to move or vansih... all annoying explorers.
There's so much baggage now, I'm not sure there can ever be balance or significant changes without a community uprising.
I think that, at the end of the day, they should maybe call ED "done" and create a Elite 5 that forces everything to start from scratch (maybe offer it as free to lifetime pass holders).
It would be the only way to actually balance the experience.
Sure... why should reading the article be a prerequisite to having an opinion about it?
I have to admire your persistence, if not your taste in exploration mechanics...
So basicly the whole thing? Dont worry lots of people feel the same.
"Lots"
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Closed pending review.
.... and re-opened again.
Please discuss the topic rather than the participants. Failure to heed this warning may result in the closure of the thread or further Moderation.
.... and re-opened again.
Please discuss the topic rather than the participants. Failure to heed this warning may result in the closure of the thread or further Moderation.
Last edited:
The only coverage of Elite that was ever relevant was not published by Polygon, and NASA are more interested in Kerbal Space Program.
[video=youtube_share;aLzW0dl87JY]https://youtu.be/aLzW0dl87JY[/video]
Polygon is to games journalism what sciatica is to a good night's sleep.
I don't have preferred publications, I tend to judge the articles on their own merits (or lack of them).
That's fine, and we all have our preferences. For example, I prefer my journalism served without ideology, activism, or partisanship.
Last edited:
That's a fairly tall order, many years ago I used to create posters of various press cuttings alongside more factual sources specifically to demonstrate how wildly inaccurate/biased all the various publications were as a training aid the lesson being "don't believe anything in the press".
So my own concern is more with accuracy than preachiness as all press is inevitably skewed one way or another. Read a few articles about the same thing and make your own mind up whilst ignoring opinions works for me.
That's more relevant to non-gaming publications though.
But sometimes it is very much worth reading an article written by a partisan in order that you can better understand the partisanship and also point out the lack of partiality and fairness, etc...
This works for me and is the reason I'd never ever, for instance, block anyone on a forum who tends to have opposing views on something.
Yours Aye
Mark H
Love that review, always one to rewatch.
Also like Upisnotjump's VR review.
[video=youtube;Fa0b2Kd2xhU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa0b2Kd2xhU[/video]
That's patently untrue. Reviewing anything is inevitably going to come with a matter of inherent opinion, but that opinion doesn't need to include judgement of the audience that thing is for, political opinion, or ideological filters through which the review is constructed. I am actually a journalist, and I went to university to get a proper degree for the job, a BA in communications majoring in journalism and PR, and a proper Masters in journalism as well. While I was studying, I learned how NOT to insert my politics into things like movie reviews, and how NOT to base my movie reviews through ideological lenses. Now, it appears to be the rule rather than the exception, and people like yourself are lead to the unfortunate belief that this is 'normal'. It's not. And there are quite a few outlets doing it right. The problem is, they aren't popular, because they don't pander to a political point of view, so they don't pass anyone's political purity test.
Last edited:
Any recommendations for a straight news site? Genuine question. Every single one I visit is chock full of bias, misdirection and outright, blatant lies. Right now I tend to read at least three versions of any story- one mainstream, left leaning, one mainstream, less left leaning (as there are no right leaning news outlets in the UK any more) and one from the 'alternative' media. The saddest thing is that one man/woman/they sites are often far less biased and much more accurate than supposedly professional outlets... [sour]
My newest game is fact checking fact checking sites! The things they concentrate on are usually trivial, but they still can't get even basic details right. Often they'll strawman or aunt Sally a position they're hoping to knock down, but then utterly fail to keep their bias out of it. It's amusing, but in a slightly tragic way. Like listening to a compulsive liar. You indulge them in their minor fantasy, but you can't help feeling that you really ought to be doing something to help instead of having a guilty chuckle at their expense... [sad]
The only time I see polygons is when I'm modeling in Max.
Out of curiosity, how do you find this site for determining bias in journalism and which sites to follow?
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/
I often refer to this when people start using extremely biased sites, but would like to know what you think of its reliability.
They explain their methodology here: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/
That depends, what is it that you're looking for in your news? Reporting, or opinion? Most news is just fine, with nothing but reporting. Your BBC news is very impartial. BBC's morning talk shows, documentaries, etc, they aren't news, so they are not reporting. SKY is another good one. The problem is, the rush to put out this reporting can often result in mistakes as a result of poor fact-checking, and it makes it look biased.
The problem isn't entirely with the sources, though. It's chiefly with people who are LOOKING specifically for 'right leaning' or 'left leaning' news. That creates a demand, so what's a news outlet to do? Provide the supply. After all, the news isn't a charity. You want good news? Start giving your money to people doing it right, and right now, the fairest reporting is being done by a fellow named Tim Pool on YouTube. The right will tell you he's 'left wing', the left will tell you he's 'right wing'. That's how you know you've got a winner. To the partisan, impartiality always looks like the other side.
Here in Australia, we have the ABC. It's constantly being accused of bias by the left and the right, but it's actually very impartial, and often takes the entire political spectrum to task in its investigative journalism. They've certainly had a few.... incidences. But overall, damn good quality journalism, and I would argue, some of the best in the world.
For gaming, I like The Escapist, and VG247.
Last edited:
They seem pretty fair. But the moment I see '.com' I wonder who's paying for said .com. At first glance, they do have donation links, which tells me it's crowdfunded without looking any deeper. I may do that later and get back to you with a DM.
This is something you can learn to do yourself, though. Learn to identify ideological filters and partisanship, especially your own, and remove them from the equation. As soon as you learn how to look at things unfiltered, you'll know what impartiality looks like. As an example: I'm an explorer in this game. I've done a little PVP but I wouldn't call myself a PVP'er. I've been ganked, and it's made me angry. However, if I let that anger determine how I deal with being ganked, I'd be applying an emotional filter to my thoughts on the matter. When I remove that filter, I can consider it more objectively, which means I can more accurately analyse why I got ganked, and what I can do about preventing said ganks in the future. By realising that I could mitigate my own risk, I've done that and never felt the need to complain about ganking on the forums, because the fact I can evade/avoid ganks myself means the game is not unbalanced by proxy of providing me the tools to take care of my own safety in space.
I think the easiest way to measure impartiality, though, is to find out what partisans think of something. If partisans, left and right, are all referring to a source as oppositional, then it's probably impartial.
This probably isn't a discussion for these forums though, now that I think about it. so I'm going to leave it there
The only thing I don't like is the need to slow to a virtual stop to use it. Other than that, I love it. By "normal", I can only assume Burke means an impatient "Can I haz a "I winz" button" person.
Ok just did the math. We've killed 28% of the gankers active fleet. If we keep up this rate past colonia, you guys won't last much past Sgr A*.
I'd like to point out that any kills you've made have likely come from combat near the Omega Mining Op or in Rohini. I took fights out of boredom in Rohini in my explo/ganker Phantom that I would not take further out. Of course, I won't have to worry about those fights further out because the lawfuls will no longer have PvP kit FDLs when we're 20kly from the nearest station.
Like, I know it's a Gunship because it's you.
But...
Deep down...
I want it to be the Battleuga Galactica.
You could multicrew with Goose and dish out sick memes while you murder.
- Status