Can't it be both?Elite is a galaxy simulation and not a space flight simulation.
I like flying my ships, I like having reasons to fly them. I like having a realistic approximation of our actual galaxy to fly them around in too.
Why do FDev deliver half measures? And please fix the firing glitch already...
- Thread starter Miko
- Start date
I like flying my ships, I like having reasons to fly them. I like having a realistic approximation of our actual galaxy to fly them around in too.
Sorry which part of the post you linked to are you referring to? I like flying the ships (ie the flight model is great fun), and I like that we are flying in a realistic (realistically scaled) representation of our galaxy.
I think you are nitpicking to find differences when there is a great deal of common ground between what you, I and Mike Evans thinks about the game.
All the forums are the same, right guys?
As AP would be optional it would satisfy both sides, ones who wants it and also ones who doesn't.
So its clear that reason is bots.
Theres interesting thing in previous singleplayer Elites and that's ability to speed up time. That I miss here so much, also it would be fun to speed up time for all other Commanders online lol.
As AP would be optional it would satisfy both sides, ones who wants it and also ones who doesn't.
So its clear that reason is bots.
Theres interesting thing in previous singleplayer Elites and that's ability to speed up time. That I miss here so much, also it would be fun to speed up time for all other Commanders online lol.
I refer to this part: "Finally realism has played no part whatsoever in any of our design discussions about the flight model. "
My apologies for my telegraphic messages, which leave much space for (possibly) wrong interpretation. I am not nitpicking. As you read it yourself, Elite's flight model is not realistic, and therefore isn't a simulation. I also agree that the flight model is great fun, that's one of the reasons why we like this game so much.
Judging by posts in this thread, at least some players would be much happier if a really realistic flight model would exist as well.
Of course it isn't realistic, it's a thousand years in the future. A Roman chariot racer would think a fighter jet wasn't realistic
I suspect we almost entirely share the same view.
Personally I'd roll back the additional module slots and add the various auto-pilot options as standard, we even have the control panel for this - no problem.
I appreciate I'm likely in the minority in this - at least in terms of module roll-back.
Generally though I'm in favour of adding what are essentially QoL enhancements fairly generously and giving people the option of whether to use them or not. If we want penalties make these more about efficiency of play rather than things like messing around with loadouts.
In a similar vein I still believe we'd be best served with a universal limpet controller built in to all ships - lets anyone try their hand at anything. Make it rubbish though so as soon as you've decide there is a particular thing you want to be doing then you start buying dedicated modules to give that capability. Locking out gameplay behind the faff of finding and installing the right limpet controller is just annoying - let people at least try then give them the option of doing it quicker, better, longer if they decide it is their cup of tea.
With respect to my move quick and break things comment, perhaps too subtley implied is that I believe they are currently both moving slowly and breaking things...
If they are going to move slowly at least be sure it all works before punting it out the door... I'm pretty forgiving of bugs but there seemed rather a lot added this time round, some I'd say where very obvious - so really not sure what is going on there at all.
Nonono, we're speaking about spacecraft propulsion engines and a Roman chariot racer could say a lot about medieval chariot racing, just as we can say a lot about the realism of the propulsion engines used in ED.Of course it isn't realistic, it's a thousand years in the future. A Roman chariot racer would think a fighter jet wasn't realistic
I suspect we almost entirely share the same view.
thanks both for bringing up this juicy detail:
"I'm almost certain that other developers just implement those features because they've been so prevalent rather than actually reassessing whether the game needed them or could be even better without them!"
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/increase-yaw.29623/page-7#post-609596
that's a pretty bold and arrogant statement right there, and explains one of the major problems with this game's production: the 'not invented here' syndrome combined with a lack of expertise in a few key areas. well, better luck next time.
They made a very good remake of the '84 version and after that things went wrong. Partially because they made features that they like the way they like ("we make the game that we like to play"), partially they made features we like, but the way they like. We feel that we're not heard, (I guess that) they feel that their work isn't appreciated.
well, they did get a lot of things right, imo, and the flight model is actually one of them (although there is much overhyping in his description of what is basically dogfighting on rails, you just like it or not or go faoff or play something else, there are many good flight models out there). i also have to say that much of that thrill comes from the incredible sound and, in my case, a transducer under my rear
, it's not really the same in total silence. and yes indeed, as a remake of elite 84, dangerous is a luxury but that's not a very high bar, it's been nearly 30 years and, actually, i think the hovering flight model of zarch was far more sophisticated and fun (and groundbreaking at the time) than that of the original elite and could rival the current one (considering the wild differences in scope).but the flight model is actually good. and that's the prerogative of the author, completely agree. but then there's the rest of the world and ... compromise. flight model isn't all and the same attitude can have very bad outcome when it's just not your area of expertise which was my point. think networking, multiplayer, dynamic universes and multi media narratives, open world game loops ... i think a bit of humility, openess and lookahead of what others did in those areas would have gone a long way into getting way past the 'glorified remake' bar.
Thing is, that comment in context is specifically about the flight model, and it's from the initial 2014 release when things were ... simplerwell, they did get a lot of things right, imo, and the flight model is actually one of them (although there is much overhyping in his description of what is basically dogfighting on rails, you just like it or not or go faoff or play something else, there are many good flight models out there). i also have to say that much of that thrill comes from the incredible sound and, in my case, a transducer under my rear
but the flight model is actually good. and that's the prerogative of the author, completely agree. but then there's the rest of the world and ... compromise. flight model isn't all and the same attitude can have very bad outcome when it's just not your area of expertise which was my point. think networking, multiplayer, dynamic universes and multi media narratives, open world game loops ... i think a bit of humility, openess and lookahead of what others did in those areas would have gone a long way into getting way past the 'glorified remake' bar.
I'm not sure the things that we can all criticise since then apply to what the then designer was saying at the time.Thing is, that comment in context is specifically about the flight model, and it's from the initial 2014 release when things were ... simpler
all true indeed. it just stood out when reading that old quote.
oh, yes i can, i just did! it's easy and it's free!
Can't argue with that!oh, yes i can, i just did! it's easy and it's free!