Elite 4 interview from 2004, PC Gamer

[marx]

While I was going through some old discs, I found a scan of the Elite 4 article in PC Gamer, 2004. July. I've heard it referenced every now and again, but couldn't find it uploaded anywhere these days: so, here it is. I have no idea who scanned it originally, but whoever you were, thanks!
Here it is then:


"Release Mid 2006". Yeah, that didn't age well.

And now, we can add flattening cities to the requested features that were "promised" once in ancient times. Because it would have been such a wonderful idea in a persistent multiplayer game.

Also, time to mine this for Raxxla clues

 

[Fizzatron]

Great find!

I think most people don't see what it is about Elite that is unique: that getting that degree of freedom in a game is a huge challenge.

I think that still holds true to this day tbh.

The major difference is that now you're a person, not a spaceship.

That's another one in the eye for those who are/were never-legs, and/or think that Frontier were copying Star Citizen..

It's also interesting that the explicit mention of Chris Roberts & Wing Commander is in parenthesis, which may indicate that it an editorial clarification on PCG's part.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

How time changes. Braben probably has modified his view of the X franchise today. It was always trying to model a dynamic economy. Today X4 has very little in common with Elite. Just like ED doesn't have much in common with Elite. Both franchises evolved. One wanted to recreate the milky way, the other tried to simulate complex economic cycles.

 

[marx]

How time changes. Braben probably has modified his view of the X franchise today. It was always trying to model a dynamic economy.

Not the first game, X: Beyond the Frontier, which was what was mentioned here. The focus there was on the story, and to be frank, it was a rather mediocre game. However, by this interview's time, first the much better X-Tension was released, and that was when the series started to pivot towards a larger focus on the economy and much more open gameplay instead. (If not for those, I don't think there would have been a series.) By this time, X2: The Threat was also released, so it's odd that Braben would mention only the first one... but I guess he was no longer paying attention to its sequels.
Also, I vaguely remember some folks being rubbed the wrong way by the "Beyond the Frontier" name: it wouldn't surprise me if at the time he held such a view too. Bear in mind that the second and third Elite games were named "Frontier: Elite 2" and "Frontier: First Encounters".

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Not the first game, X: Beyond the Frontier, which was what was mentioned here. The focus there was on the story, and to be frank, it was a rather mediocre game. However, by this interview's time, the much better X-Tension was released, and that was when the series started to pivot towards a larger focus on the economy instead. (If not for that, I don't think there would have been a series.) By this time, X2: The Threat was also released, so it's odd that Braben would mention only the first one... but I guess Braben was no longer paying attention to its sequels.
Also, I vaguely remember some folks being rubbed the wrong way by the "Beyond the Frontier" name: it wouldn't surprise me if at the time he held such a view too. Bear in mind that the second and third Elite games were named "Frontier: Elite 2" and "Frontier: First Encounters".

The stations all produced in real time in XBTF. And they had their specific in- and outputs. You could build them and you were tied to only 1 ship. It featured soundtracks that would carry far beyond the initial release. The X games always had a story and narratively tried to find a proper way to express it. But Biz - trading and production and logistics - real time simulated down to each fab and the freighters carrying goods was one of the key components. Factions were fixed, it took the franchise until X4 when they were able to nudge them into dynamic states.

 

[Fizzatron]

How time changes. Braben probably has modified his view of the X franchise today. It was always trying to model a dynamic economy. Today X4 has very little in common with Elite. Just like ED doesn't have much in common with Elite. Both franchises evolved. One wanted to recreate the milky way, the other tried to simulate complex economic cycles.

The main differences between Elite and Elite: Dangerous are due to many of the same differences between Elite and Frontier: Elite II.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

The main differences between Elite and Elite: Dangerous are due to many of the same differences between Elite and Frontier: Elite II.

You can say that. I think those two cemented the intention to shape a procedural believable replica of the galaxy. Likely with the idea to have that in MP environment. The gfx is normal evolution.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The biggest differences between Elite (including later variants like ArcElite, Elite A, PC Elite) and FE2/FFE are I think:
- realistic astronomical scale (obviously)
- variable jump range

The biggest differences between FE2/FFE and ED are I think:
- multiplayer (obviously)
- primarily destination-based rather than travel-based gameplay
- possibility and expectation of owning and operating multiple specialised ships

I'm never sure how much the changes other than the really obvious ones were intended to be as significant as they've ended up being.

 

[Darkfyre99]

The biggest differences between Elite (including later variants like ArcElite, Elite A, PC Elite) and FE2/FFE are I think:

• realistic astronomical scale (obviously)
• variable jump range

You forgot the ability to land on a variety of worlds, including Earthlike worlds with clouds and cities that you could fly through. Which is also one of the the biggest difference between FE2/FFE and ED.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

You forgot the ability to land on a variety of worlds

I was including that within "realistic scale", since while technically impressive it didn't really change the gameplay much from what was available in space.

EDIT: though arguably I should be including "independent surface modules" like the SRVs and suits as a significant FE2/FFE -> ED change (yes, technically there was the MB40)

including Earthlike worlds with clouds and cities that you could fly through. Which is also one of the the biggest difference between FE2/FFE and ED.

Well, sort of.

ELW in the FE2/FFE sense was mainly represented by a particular shading on the heightmap - the only gameplay difference between an ELW and a no-atmosphere or unbreathable-atmosphere world was that the ELW landing pads were Odyssey-style open air ones - and the cities were no larger than the Horizons planetary bases are.

Clouds I think were FE2 only; by FFE using those sprite billboards would have jarred a bit with the new 3D terrain. Obviously the same consistency-of-graphic-detail issue is why we're much more limited in planetary options in ED. They could have given us FFE-style ELWs with Odyssey but we wouldn't have been impressed ... I wouldn't consider the number of landable planet types to necessarily be a major difference in the same way as the other points.

 

[marx]

The stations all produced in real time in XBTF. And they had their specific in- and outputs. You could build them and you were tied to only 1 ship. It featured soundtracks that would carry far beyond the initial release. The X games always had a story and narratively tried to find a proper way to express it. But Biz - trading and production and logistics - real time simulated down to each fab and the freighters carrying goods was one of the key components. Factions were fixed, it took the franchise until X4 when they were able to nudge them into dynamic states.

Like I said, the focus in XBtF (not later games in the series) was on the story. What you wrote was mostly there, but the game was all about doing the campaign, in an entirely linear fashion. The economy with factory ownership? It was there, but only as a passing thought - the game had no tools to manage your assets remotely, and not even a world map. Basically, your assets were there to plop down, get money from it until you upgrade your ship and move on, and if the campaign takes you that way again later, load up on some more money too.
However, what EgoSoft did really well was that with the X-Tension sequel, they looked at the economy instead, and realised they had something there, so they went and focused on that instead, plus went for a non-linear gameplay approach too. They also saw from Hardwar (released a year before XBtF) that the whole thing of a dynamic game world and mostly open-ended gameplay with just a minimal story can work out well, so with X-Tension, they went and adjusted their focus to exactly that. The rest is history. I think that if Braben had played X-Tension at the time, he probably wouldn't have said this.

The biggest differences between Elite (including later variants like ArcElite, Elite A, PC Elite) and FE2/FFE are I think:
- realistic astronomical scale (obviously)
- variable jump range

The biggest differences between FE2/FFE and ED are I think:
- multiplayer (obviously)
- primarily destination-based rather than travel-based gameplay
- possibility and expectation of owning and operating multiple specialised ships

I'm never sure how much the changes other than the really obvious ones were intended to be as significant as they've ended up being.

I think you are leaving out the core gameplay changes: combat. Which was what people tended to complain about in FE2/FFE (well, aside from bugs, especially in the latter), how many felt it changed for the worse. After all, it went from a (mostly) dogfighting game to a (mostly) aiming-focused game. Some mods made evasion much more important, but well, those came years later. ED on the other hand went back to the original style, and improved on it a lot too. Flight was better than the previous three(!) games, combat was better too. I'd say this was the biggest difference, then followed by the rest. Although I would put FE2 and FFE adding generated missions there as well.

You forgot the ability to land on a variety of worlds, including Earthlike worlds with clouds and cities that you could fly through. Which is also one of the the biggest difference between FE2/FFE and ED.

FE2/FFE-like landable ELWs, clouds and cities? FD could do all of those again right now... and they'd be ridiculed if they did, rightly so. Water (oceans and seas) was just blue terrain (that you could land on), clouds were only present in FE2, same as craters (which you could fly through, no collision), "cities" were a scattering of small buildings around spaceports, in about the same size as planetary ports now. No life on the surface either, unless you count trees which were only part of spaceport decoration. In gameplay, none of these really mattered; the only atmospheric effect modelled was a mostly-negligible slowing of speed.
This was fine in 1995, but almost twenty years later, doing the same again and calling them Earth-like worlds wouldn't fly. Especially not when the landable planets we do already have are much more complex and better realised than what was there before.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

I think you are leaving out the core gameplay changes: combat. Which was what people tended to complain about in FE2/FFE (well, aside from bugs, especially in the latter), how many felt it changed for the worse. After all, it went from a (mostly) dogfighting game to a (mostly) aiming-focused game. Some mods made evasion much more important, but well, those came years later. ED on the other hand went back to the original style, and improved on it a lot too. Flight was better than the previous three(!) games, combat was better too. I'd say this was the biggest difference, then followed by the rest.

Flight model is certainly a very significant change across all three, but it's not quite the same sort of change I was thinking of in that list.

My list of changes between the games was thinking of "what is the game trying to be and what types of gameplay or scenario are included or excluded by this" whereas the flight/combat model to me is more "how good a game of that type is it?"

e.g. you could drop the ED flight and weapons model into FE2/FFE mostly intact (with a little bit of hand-waving to distinguish in-combat manouevres within a reference frame from the Newtonian thrust which moves your ship's reference frame) and what you'd have is a more fun FE2/FFE; conversely you could switch ED over to non speed-limited Newtonian thrust (with no laterals and only laser weapons + torpedoes) and what you'd have is a worse ED.

Although I would put FE2 and FFE adding generated missions there as well.

That - and similarly the addition of mining and exploration as more detailed professions in ED - is certainly another big change. Though again with those I go back and forth on whether it's "change of what the game is" or "change of how good it is at it". They certainly expand the range (and to an extent purpose) of gameplay significantly.

 

[Jumpin' Jack Flash]

Hi All

Also, I vaguely remember some folks being rubbed the wrong way by the "Beyond the Frontier" name: it wouldn't surprise me if at the time he held such a view too. Bear in mind that the second and third Elite games were named "Frontier: Elite 2" and "Frontier: First Encounters".

I agree, I think it was obvious that Egosoft played a bit on the 'Frontier' moniker, and lets look back here, there were many players of Frontier First Encounters that were hoping for another sequel, but it just didn't happen. Well, not until Elite Dangerous arrived, many, many years later.
I personally have always had the impression that maybe David Braben was more than a little miffed (again, just my personal view) at the choice of title for Egosoft's new space adventure. Thanks for the OP's above post content. it's reassuring to see I wasn't too far out in my assumptions.
I certainly took the bait, and bought the game after reading some of the reviews for it in the gaming press magazines. I've got to admit that after playing Egosoft's Beyond the Frontier I joined the games early Forum (It was in it's infancy in those days) and became a regular poster on those forums.

There was a kinda void surrounding space games in those times. Bernd Lehahn must've seen the opening and went for broke!.
Most of all the 'X' series I've played (for years), and thoroughly enjoyed them. That was until Egosoft decided to change the basic format and released X Rebirth with new major features and gameplay. There was a lot of controversy surrounding that release, ironically in much the same way as when Elites Odyssey was.
I bought the game (X Rebirth) and persevered with it, but I found that the change of gameplay so (excuse the pun) alien compared to previous titles, it just wasn't my 'thing' anymore.

Odyssey on the other hand (although another controversial subject) added to the general Elite Gameplay, it hasn't radically altered the BGS in a major negative way (imho) and it's a feature that has many positive attributes rather than negative ones.
I think it was always intended that Elite was going to include 'On Foot' features, early game interviews with David Braben mention this, so I was expecting (hoping) this feature would eventually be implemented. (Warts & All).

Great find!


I think that still holds true to this day tbh.


That's another one in the eye for those who are/were never-legs, and/or think that Frontier were copying Star Citizen..

It's also interesting that the explicit mention of Chris Roberts & Wing Commander is in parenthesis, which may indicate that it an editorial clarification on PCG's part.

Nah! ... there's no way Frontier were / are copying Star Citizen imho, there are always features in a Space Adventure that are similar with one or another, it's inevitable, but Elite's BGU (background Universe) is unique for obvious reasons.
That's why I'm still playing this game and not X4. That's not to say X 4 is a bad game, it's just omitting features and introduced features that I personally don't find interesting anymore.

Jack.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Well, sort of.

ELW in the FE2/FFE sense was mainly represented by a particular shading on the heightmap - the only gameplay difference between an ELW and a no-atmosphere or unbreathable-atmosphere world was that the ELW landing pads were Odyssey-style open air ones - and the cities were no larger than the Horizons planetary bases are.

Clouds I think were FE2 only; by FFE using those sprite billboards would have jarred a bit with the new 3D terrain. Obviously the same consistency-of-graphic-detail issue is why we're much more limited in planetary options in ED. They could have given us FFE-style ELWs with Odyssey but we wouldn't have been impressed ... I wouldn't consider the number of landable planet types to necessarily be a major difference in the same way as the other points.

FE2/FFE-like landable ELWs, clouds and cities? FD could do all of those again right now... and they'd be ridiculed if they did, rightly so. Water (oceans and seas) was just blue terrain (that you could land on), clouds were only present in FE2, same as craters (which you could fly through, no collision), "cities" were a scattering of small buildings around spaceports, in about the same size as planetary ports now. No life on the surface either, unless you count trees which were only part of spaceport decoration. In gameplay, none of these really mattered; the only atmospheric effect modelled was a mostly-negligible slowing of speed.
This was fine in 1995, but almost twenty years later, doing the same again and calling them Earth-like worlds wouldn't fly. Especially not when the landable planets we do already have are much more complex and better realised than what was there before.

While I don’t disagree with what you both wrote, the inability to fly through the atmospheres of, and land on, at the very least, terraformed worlds is to me a major feature missing from ED, that I sorely miss to this day. And you correct, I do indeed want them to do it right. Even though it might mean another ten years until that paid expansion is (rushed to) releeased. I very much want to fly through the bright skies of Emerald on approach to Fort O’Brian, with Jade low on the Horizon. I want to Barnstorm beneath Golden Gate Bridge. I want to watch Aster ruse behind the domed cities of Merlin.

But much like the ship interior enthusiasts, I’m very impatient, and more than willing to accept current gameplay if I can at least stop staring out the window of MacKenzie Relay, and set foot upon the world of my character’s birth in-game, and relocate her fleet much closer to her home.

 

[Fizzatron]

Nah! ... there's no way Frontier were / are copying Star Citizen imho,

It is still surprising to me that there are a lot of people who play games in this genre who have no idea that Elite is the game that inspired Wing Commander etc. I do really hope that this 40th/30th/10th anniversary celebration year really fixes that. The fact that Frontier have hired a marketing/pr firm is a major positive move, more so that it might initially appear, especially if they are a good fit for the brand.

 

[Arioch]

Clouds I think were FE2 only; by FFE using those sprite billboards would have jarred a bit with the new 3D terrain.

Bézier curve polygons, with ground shadows to match. I wished they’d made it into FFE

No life on the surface either, unless you count trees which were only part of spaceport decoration. In gameplay, none of these really mattered; the only atmospheric effect modelled was a mostly-negligible slowing of speed.

Forest were included in random surface clutter on ELWs - simple green shapes (either a circle or tear-drop) in a number of triangle-shaped “fields” - which along with new clusters of clouds would infrequently spawn.

Spoiler

Top speed below 20km altitude was around Mach 6.

As you note, practically no realistic effect on gameplay but interesting to see these things actually in-game (there was also a slight drift to the side in unpowered flight, possibly as a suggestion of wind?).

 

[Cosmo]

I think it was always intended that Elite was going to include 'On Foot' features, early game interviews with David Braben mention this, so I was expecting (hoping) this feature would eventually be implemented. (Warts & All).

Yes the first person gameplay, walk on planets & inside stations, fleet carrier. It still has a lot of untapped potential (base building, ship interiors, EVA).

 

[Wotthe Dickens]

The biggest differences between Elite (including later variants like ArcElite, Elite A, PC Elite) and FE2/FFE are I think:
- realistic astronomical scale (obviously)
- variable jump range

The biggest differences between FE2/FFE and ED are I think:
- multiplayer (obviously)
- primarily destination-based rather than travel-based gameplay
- possibility and expectation of owning and operating multiple specialised ships

I'm never sure how much the changes other than the really obvious ones were intended to be as significant as they've ended up being.

I think one difference that I hadn’t considered is that I’m now 40 odd years older than when the original Elite came out and however many years older than when FFE came out and I basically don’t have the same amount of time or priorities as I had then

 

[CMDrAdam]

look at this

 

[CMDR ROGER]

But much like the ship interior enthusiasts, I’m very impatient

Naaah, don't be hard on your own expectations. I'm doubtless that ELW landings could have been done by now with better management.