But your friends can buy EDO or you can still play in Horizons 3.8 with them..
4.0 | Now Live
- Thread starter sallymorganmoore
- Start date
Someone will need to explain this to me. Why is it scummy?
Pretty much, yeah. With any decent dev team having what they now call “Horizons 4.0” would have been a release blocker.
@Jack Winter has already explained why limiting disembark function can be problematic.
I suggested using access to Odyssey suits limit as better soft-lock for Odyssey content, which would potentially not have those issues. But as said that doesn't solve problem with age rating (if it is real as I didn't see it was confirmed by FDev).
Walling DLC content off from people that haven’t bought it is, obviously, normal. Walling people that have bought the DLC off from people that haven’t and using that to bully them into buying said DLC isn’t.
It's horizons, so it should have the same PEGI7 rating
Nobody is really supposed to be playing on horizons 4.0. As loath as I am to admit it, Old Duck was right. It's effectively shareware. It's not a paid branch.
If anybody wants to play with their friends, they can play in either horizons (old school) or odyssey. If they don't own odyssey, they can buy it (it's cheap) or play on horizons as before.
Does a company need to resubmit for a new rating if the product isn't for sale? You're probably right it inherits the same rating though, as its the same game in effectively a new engine.
But again it isn't for sale.
So before today people who hadn't bought Odyssey could not instance with people that are playing Odyssey, this remains exactly the same. What has changed is that people that didn't buy Odyssey have been given a courtesy copy to try the new tech and to experience more of the narrative they didn't pay for. I fail to see how this could be considered underhanded by the evil and greedy company..
Dear god, why did I even step into this storm in a teacup discussion!
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
this notion has only come up the last few days bowever. it is a massive copout and flies in the face of the build up to the horizons merge to the Odyssey engine and FD categorically stated that once the console proble. was sorted EDO and EDH players would be able to play together in the new build. I think it was you who mentioned earlier than plans change.Nobody is really supposed to be playing on horizons 4.0. As loath as I am to admit it, Old Duck was right. It's effectively shareware. It's not a paid branch.
perhaps so but really FD should be honest about it and admit it rather than intimate that the EDO players got the wrong end of the stick and are being unreasonable.
and some players (not FD) are absolutely trying to rewrite history by calling the EDO players entitled for even expecting to be able to log into EDH 4.0
I suppose it is indeed for sale, as if I buy a copy of Horizons tonight, I'll get access to Horizons 4.0 too...
I agree the plans (pre console cancellation? cant remember) were for instancing to be compatible by now.
The change to not having instancing has been known for a while though, and from the moment 4.0 Horizon was announced very recently - it was in that thread - that it wouldn't now mean instancing between 4.0H and 4.0EDO. 4.0 Horizons isn't even something anyone thought would exist, until they announced it.
Yes however - yes, the explanation of WHAT 4.0H was supposed to be was missing. It's what Bruce explained, and Sally updated this thread to explain. And it's perfectly reasonable.
Last edited:
Only in the sense that if I bought a copy of Amiga Power I might have got a demo of Cannor Fodder for free. But I didn't buy the demo, or the full Cannon Fodder.
I think this analogy was a mistake.
But Elite Dangerous (i.e. Horizons) is on sale and has a PEGI 7 rating ( https://www.frontierstore.net/games/elite-dangerous-cat/elite-dangerous.html )
(EDO is PEGI 16)
Sure, but I mean if the game is for sale and is then also ported to a new version of the engine, and that version is given away to owners for free, I've no idea if it inherits the rating or if the very fact it exists and is public requires it to be rated itself.
I don't know the answer, just wondering aloud.
I think I'd sell my left crystal ball for a PEGI-18 Elite game!
Who do you think paid for that courtesy copy? The same people who now can't have it!
I don't want two ED clients on my PC just to satisfy FDev's need for scummy marketing tactics. Client 4.0 can run in both modes, as has been shown. All it takes is a corresponding launcher entry. Client 4.0 was promised to be a replacement for client 3.8 on all platforms, and now it looks like client 3.8 will occupy those extra 20 GB forever.
It's scummy, and FDev deserves to be called out for it.
And don't get me started about that nonsense of calling EDH 4.0 a tech demo. EDO has most of its performance issues in planetary settlements, and none of those are showcased in that "tech demo". People who think their PC is ready for EDO because EDH 4.0 runs OK will experience a nasty surprise once they set foot in one of those settlements.
I think you will find that it does, it was sold as conforming to PEGI7 - you can't then change it to violate the limitations of that, through updates, upgrades or anything else that doesn't specifically require the consent of the owner to be exposed to that. So can you imagine the mess of having a PEGI7 EDH and a separate PEGI16 EDH having to be maintained?
why are we caring about PEGI ratings? did we run out of actual software bugs and developer direction to complain about that we're discussing irrelevant ratings that only matter to lawyers and bureaucrats pushing a label based on arbitrary rules that dont actually accomplish anything? Like any person playing games cares or anyone "protecting children" is doing so when they have access to the internet or live around other people who do.
Would you mind trying a RES, and sharing your findings?