I actually like complex mechanisms. If anything Elite needs more of it in my opinion.
Why can we only Land on Barren Planets after almost 5 years?
- Thread starter Cosmo
- Start date
I salute you, but can I suggest that the group who want to calculate to determine if a POI they want to explore will be in sunlight when they log back in the next day is a group that would make macOS client users (when that existed) look large?
Just want to add that to the below. My ideal game would also have the complex depth of X4.
Three games - if they could somehow get together & be friends - would make the ultimate space game in my book.
I used to dream for a new Elite.
Now I dream for a game that has all the variety, gameplay, technical brilliance & fun of NMS, but with a realistic galaxy like Elite.
I 'd agree if they had a perceivable outcome to the individual player.
Difference is, E: D is science-based, and NMS is more scifi-based, with a bit more emphasis on the 'fi' part. It's not a criticism - it's a conscious approach. Much as I love both games, I prefer E: D's approach - but that's just me. I'd love there to be more realistic stuff in NMS, but it would probably jar with the feel of the game.
It doesn't answer to the OP's point that NMS has grown substantially in 3 years through amazing work by a very small team, versus Elite's ponderous and sometimes bizarre series of updates, carried out by allegedly 100s of devs. I know that's not what you were trying to do anyway, but...
I believe that's quite subjective. Blowing up an asteroid is quite perceivable in my opinion. Changing the government of a system as well. Although it would be nice if it changes more than the name and availability of services and trade goods.
NMS isn't sci-fi based at all, it's 100% fantasy based. Which doesn't need to be a bad thing.Difference is, E: D is science-based, and NMS is more scifi-based, with a bit more emphasis on the 'fi' part. It's not a criticism - it's a conscious approach. Much as I love both games, I prefer E: D's approach - but that's just me. I'd love there to be more realistic stuff in NMS, but it would probably jar with the feel of the game.
It doesn't answer to the OP's point that NMS has grown substantially in 3 years through amazing work by a very small team, versus Elite's ponderous and sometimes bizarre series of updates, carried out by allegedly 100s of devs. I know that's not what you were trying to do anyway, but...
Hmm. It's "sci-fi" in the same way as Star Wars is.
As you say, it doesn't need to be a bad thing.
Depends what you consider complex mechanisms. The whole unlocking Guardian modules puzzle via SRV guns is too much of a Rube Goldberg machine for my liking.
Or any personal experience with gravity. Seriously though, I wouldn't have mind the nonsense so much if Sean hadn't been smugly denouncing how 'other space games' were faking it while applauding the amazing realism of his star system...
True.
Yeah, like I said. Fantasy.Hmm. It's "sci-fi" in the same way as Star Wars is.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
I am still way back in the thread so someone may have already pointed it out: The latest product from FDEV made in Cobra was JWE, in 2018, which sold 2 million units in just 7 months and that is a key contributor in the estimated record annual revenue of approximately £89 million for FY19, which is more than two and a half times the previous financial year.
How´s that look for delivering a modern game experience?
What about, say, exploration?: https://www.polygon.com/features/20...worlds-2-exploration-galactic-mapping-project
Good enough? ish?
Last edited:
Spamming expectations with RNG isn't that much of a science-based approach. Nor is hiding how stuff works.Difference is, E: D is science-based, and NMS is more scifi-based, with a bit more emphasis on the 'fi' part. It's not a criticism - it's a conscious approach. Much as I love both games, I prefer E: D's approach - but that's just me. I'd love there to be more realistic stuff in NMS, but it would probably jar with the feel of the game.
It doesn't answer to the OP's point that NMS has grown substantially in 3 years through amazing work by a very small team, versus Elite's ponderous and sometimes bizarre series of updates, carried out by allegedly 100s of devs. I know that's not what you were trying to do anyway, but...
Pretty close to reality in my experience. I had to roll several times before I had enough of a car to legally leave the lot.
Personally, I’d classify NMS as space-opera, as opposed to sci-fi. It has more in common with Star Wars than it does with Heinlein. And quite frankly, science NMS strives to be first and foremost a survival game, a more realistic approach to literal world building would easily be detrimental to that core gameplay.
The fact that by faking a day/night cycle for players on the surface of planets removes a lot of the complexity that Elite: Dangerous has to bring to the table. Imagine the amount of modeling going on under the hood when flyving an SRV on a small moon. That moon is rotating in space. It is also orbiting a gas giant around a common barycenter. That gas giant’s barycenter, in turn, is orbiting a common barycenter with a second gas giant system and it’s moon. This barycenter is in turn orbiting the barycenter of a star and its planets, which is orbiting the barycenter of stellar binary.
I’m surprised that Frontier didn’t go the extra mile and model these systems orbiting Sag A*.
[QUOTE="Juniper, post: 7951434, member: 17794"It doesn't answer to the OP's point that NMS has grown substantially in 3 years through amazing work by a very small team, versus Elite's ponderous and sometimes bizarre series of updates, carried out by allegedly 100s of devs. I know that's not what you were trying to do anyway, but...
[/QUOTE]
First, it’s generally been <100, not 100s. Second, by faking it, the NMS dev team avoided the complexity that ED has to deal with on a daily basis, less a ship dropping out at a station has to watch that station race away from them at speeds of several kilometers per second.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Btw, not specifically directed to you but I have seen this strange arbitrary barrier at 10 years already in a few post, where does it say it has to be limited 10 years? I mean assuming Elite was still a reasonably profitable product by then etc then why would the developer stop supporting it exactly at 10 years?
Now that is the biggest load of garbage I've read here in awhile, sorry, but it is.
Gravity. Its a kind of gravity which doesn't work correctly. It is estimated by some math. It adds absolutely nothing to a 'sim' or indeed the game. A simple truth is, if the 'gravity' actually worked, I'd need to use delta-v and a whole lot of other calculations to get me off the planet. In Elite I point upwards and press go.
The colour is based on the start type. Well yippee do. If star == neutron set colour = blue. Yay it's a sim !
They have a correct day and night cycle. Eh, no they don't. How come one side is always darK and when you get closer it brighten up? Is by ship a sun ?
They have size of real planets. Says who? What you mean is they look big.
The Terrain is based on tectonic plates. Nope. How could they possible know the makeup of all these planets and their internal structures, plate density, plate mass etc? If you believe that you are just gullible.
Craters are placed at positions... blah blah. Were you drinking heavily or something when you posted this? Any place on a planet has an equal chance of being hit by an asteroid, unless, you want to get into quantum math and we'll start mapping every asteroid, it's lunar cycles, velocity, delta-v, density and it's chance of hitting every single planet in the known universe.
Elite Universe, while based on simple science is nothing more than guess work programmed into a generator. For sure NMS doesn't do any of that. But tell me this; When you sit down with your mates, do you tell them all about the gravitational science in Elite or do you just say you were 'playing' Elite.
How is it, if I leave my ship at 0 speed above a planet it does not get sucked down to the surface? I mean, with all your Gravity, surely... That would happen? How can I fly to the surface, but only land by using my down thrusters? Why doesn't my ship just fall to the surface?
How is it, with all these scientifically places craters, we cannot gather materials close to them other than the randomly generated materials placed at random distance apart?
Elite is just coloured balls too. Get over it.
That's a fair summation I believe.
All the extra fluff Elite added created no benefit tho did it? It's still a game wanting to be a sim and failing.
Now that is the biggest load of garbage I've read here in awhile, sorry, but it is.