Javert
Volunteer Moderator
You're right. This is the thin end of the wedge. Next thing you know they will be introducing a solo mode where you can impact the game world without seeing any other players.
News Announcement: Elite: Dangerous coming to Xbox One
- Thread starter David Braben
- Start date
You're right. This is the thin end of the wedge. Next thing you know they will be introducing a solo mode where you can impact the game world without seeing any other players.
I am yet to get any technical evidence on this. Everything in this game except ships and stations are done PG - why you shouldn't be able to have same game but different graphical fidelity?
They don't have enough MMO content to go for a subscription model, besides nowadays most subscription models tend not to work. Except on consoles curiously, where paying for online still seems like a normal thing. Maybe Microsoft will give them a bonus for every xbox one player that gets a subscription because of ED...
Port is done by different people. As porting to Mac is done by different people.
Yes, they have their own engine team to do that. Game companies, go figure, some of them actually plan ahead.
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
The minimum PC specs are for the current game. They might not apply the same to paid expansions, which may need higher specs.
I'm sorry but no, they are not the same, not even close.
Ranks fit in with the Elite spirit of the game and have been here since day one.
Achievements are horrible things for people who need to be hand held and told what to aim for all the time (and no, I'm not saying all console users are like that)
Earning a new trading rank is one thing, but a message popping up saying for example "Congratulations, you docked successfully, 10 gamer points" is quite another.
Some are exactly like these...
Is there really a difference in practice between:
1. Congratulations on reaching Starblazer in exploration Commander!
2. Achievement unlocked! X systems scanned!
Both are basically bragging rights with the only difference being how they are described. We even get decals for reaching these ranks.
Yes, let's hope the more ridiculous ones are left out, but we already see people in the forum putting themselves on the list of people of visiting the Sagittarius A black hole in the middle of the galaxy (and other similar activities). Achievements like that fits perfectly well into the current way people are playing the game.
You know full well what he meant, will you please stop doing this.
"Gratz Commander, you have docked 5 times", "Gratz Commander, you fired a cannon", etc...
First: See above.
Second: I'll promise to stop as soon as you stop automatically assuming the worst as soon FD makes a statement about something you slightly disagree with. No? Not gonna do that? Well...I guess we are stuck with each other then.
Not seeing that happen. There's nothing DX10 can't do already which would require higher end PC - except for adding more fidelity.
But why would it bother you if you play on PC?
Optimisations won't be enough. You say it like the pc games from 2005 looked the same as these from 2014... diffrence much bigger. There is just no other way - console and pc versions will be totally different or there will be compromises to make it playable on consoles in the long run. One good thing about this is $ for FD (I hope) and more $ for the developer will most likely affect the game in some good way (and people working on it... new ferraris for all!)
Another thing... shared universe by pc/console versions won't work well without fully functioning cross platform gameplay. Nobody wants to have invisible ghosts affecting their universe. We already have too many (solo players).
Achieving Mostly Harmless rank is well, Achievement. There's no buts about it. I am with Tinman here.
However as I said, if you are worried about platform Achievements then they usually don't appear in games - they are unlocked at platform level and platform API handles this. So I doubt ED will be any different.
Them being on the Xbone doesn't bother me, them being added to the PC version does!
I'm not saying they will be, I'm just saying please don't do it
Well, EVE has raised the minimum system requirements over the years. But ok, they've been there for a long time.
As for the Xbox version, while I don't have any problem with that, I must say I share the concerns about the cross platform problem, if it is confirmed. How can we co-exist in the galaxy, and alter it by our actions, but never actually meet? If such is the case, I strongly believe that the PC and Xbox galaxies should be completely separated.
Last edited by a moderator:
Could well be, it's just the sort of thing that would appeal to the console mass market.
Personally, I hope its meaning 'power' as in the political aspects of the simulation, system takeovers, factional war etc.
It baffles me, how many people don't get this, but rather jump into conclusions and defend all wrong development decisions. People keep screaming about current graphics, menus and how console version was practically announced in the beginning of the kickstarter. Yeah, we get that.
Here is the thing:
We, the pc gamers are upset, because we know we could have gotten a potentially much better game vs the one we now have, if it would have been developed for pc all the way from the beginning.
After the pc version was ready, it could have been ported over to consoles. Now pc gamers would have a game, that utilizes all the power modern computers have to offer + consoles would get a game, converted to suit their performance levels.
Instead, what we get now is a game build for consoles all the way from the beginning, while pc's much greater potential is largely ignored.
To make things worse, David "Peter Molyneux of space sims" Braben comes out and addresses console crowd, how their version will not be dumbed down. I ain't hearing anyone saying that for the pc version of the game. Rather easy to interpret, which crowd is more appreciated (or feared). I'm not saying this is necessarily true, but that is how it appears.
Granted, it wasn't specifically stated in the kick starter site, that the game would be developed for pc, utilizing all the power available and then ported to consoles, but raising money through a kick starter to develop a game for pc, kind of insinuates just that; People getting a pc game, not a console port. Otherwise Frontier could and in my opinion should have asked funding for a console game in the first place...
So, the whole thing boils down to communicating clearly about your intentions. We all know Frontier has never been very good at this. People complain about it all the time. This is why you shouldn't act all surprised when this kind of a thing happens. People react badly and with emotions over their favourite hobby.
Oh and ironically, the very people who fails to see that this is the reason why pc gamers are unhappy, happens to be Console gamers and white knights, at least based on the post they are making in this very thread. And then you guys wonder why someone laughs at you.
Tl;dr: Pc crowd is disgruntled because of ignored potential of their favourite platform and lack of content. Not because Elite: Dangerous is ported over to consoles. Also white knights and fanboys are dumb...
Here is the thing:
We, the pc gamers are upset, because we know we could have gotten a potentially much better game vs the one we now have, if it would have been developed for pc all the way from the beginning.
After the pc version was ready, it could have been ported over to consoles. Now pc gamers would have a game, that utilizes all the power modern computers have to offer + consoles would get a game, converted to suit their performance levels.
Instead, what we get now is a game build for consoles all the way from the beginning, while pc's much greater potential is largely ignored.
To make things worse, David "Peter Molyneux of space sims" Braben comes out and addresses console crowd, how their version will not be dumbed down. I ain't hearing anyone saying that for the pc version of the game. Rather easy to interpret, which crowd is more appreciated (or feared). I'm not saying this is necessarily true, but that is how it appears.
Granted, it wasn't specifically stated in the kick starter site, that the game would be developed for pc, utilizing all the power available and then ported to consoles, but raising money through a kick starter to develop a game for pc, kind of insinuates just that; People getting a pc game, not a console port. Otherwise Frontier could and in my opinion should have asked funding for a console game in the first place...
So, the whole thing boils down to communicating clearly about your intentions. We all know Frontier has never been very good at this. People complain about it all the time. This is why you shouldn't act all surprised when this kind of a thing happens. People react badly and with emotions over their favourite hobby.
Oh and ironically, the very people who fails to see that this is the reason why pc gamers are unhappy, happens to be Console gamers and white knights, at least based on the post they are making in this very thread. And then you guys wonder why someone laughs at you.
Tl;dr: Pc crowd is disgruntled because of ignored potential of their favourite platform and lack of content. Not because Elite: Dangerous is ported over to consoles. Also white knights and fanboys are dumb...
To a lot of us there's a big difference, that's the point.
I think you actually understand this but, like me, enjoy arguing, or playing devil's advocate, for the sake of it sometimes. not sure that I'm happy with this news, its obviously going to detract from PC development of the game. Getting it ready for xbox one compatibility. This is obviously about money and not about the game itself.
Yes wings is being announced but that was being worked on before this announcement. I think we are going to have another Godus here where the PC platform of the business will be left for a more profitable xbox one platform and more Kickstarter promises broken by Frontier!
Stelly
Yes wings is being announced but that was being worked on before this announcement. I think we are going to have another Godus here where the PC platform of the business will be left for a more profitable xbox one platform and more Kickstarter promises broken by Frontier!
Stelly
Them being on the Xbone doesn't bother me, them being added to the PC version does!
I'm not saying they will be, I'm just saying please don't do it
Sorry, maybe I misinterpreted your post.
I can't imagine they'd even consider adding achievements to the PC version. Absolutely no reason to whatsoever.
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
All,
The question of whether players will see each other in the game between Xbox and PC, and the question of how upgrades and updates will be done, may be related to each other.
If the instancing and live netcode is the same and players can see each other, any changes to that code need to be rolled out simultaneously on all platforms. Anything that needs to work in an integrated way between the platforms, the updates have to be rolled out together.
If it's only the high level galaxy state being shared, this leaves more scope to make some changes to the PC version without breaking the xbox version. Of course some of the code would be critical to both versions, but if we have shared instancing, it will be a lot higher proportion of the code that has to be cross controlled across all platforms.
To put it another way,
- Any change that impacts only the client software, and has no impact on the server / client interface can be rolled out separately.
- Any change that impacts the interface between server and client, has to be rolled out concurrently on all impacted clients.
- If the netcode of live instancing is not dependent in this way, it can be updated independently on each platform. If not, everything must be done in a coordinated way.
On thinking about it, I wonder if this is one of the technical issues that FD are grappling with. It would actually be a really good selling and marketing point if players could share the same space, but I think it carries some significant technical drawbacks...
The question of whether players will see each other in the game between Xbox and PC, and the question of how upgrades and updates will be done, may be related to each other.
If the instancing and live netcode is the same and players can see each other, any changes to that code need to be rolled out simultaneously on all platforms. Anything that needs to work in an integrated way between the platforms, the updates have to be rolled out together.
If it's only the high level galaxy state being shared, this leaves more scope to make some changes to the PC version without breaking the xbox version. Of course some of the code would be critical to both versions, but if we have shared instancing, it will be a lot higher proportion of the code that has to be cross controlled across all platforms.
To put it another way,
- Any change that impacts only the client software, and has no impact on the server / client interface can be rolled out separately.
- Any change that impacts the interface between server and client, has to be rolled out concurrently on all impacted clients.
- If the netcode of live instancing is not dependent in this way, it can be updated independently on each platform. If not, everything must be done in a coordinated way.
On thinking about it, I wonder if this is one of the technical issues that FD are grappling with. It would actually be a really good selling and marketing point if players could share the same space, but I think it carries some significant technical drawbacks...