Elite Dangerous in the Media thread v 2.0

[LeetNoob]

That's your story and you stick to it. I definitely would not hire this reviewer to review any game because he showed lack of objectivity when he predicted the future. He should have left that part out entirely. The fact he didn't shows lack of objectivity. Objectivity is imperative if you want a critical writing to be taken seriously.

It’s not my story. The review is terrible, but so would a review based on stuff they might be in the game in the future. It wouldn’t make sense, it would be an article about something not even made yet.
He's right, in this game, for what you buy, you will never get out of your ship. If they bring that out in the future you will be expected to pay more money for it. So if you only buy this game, you won't get out of your ship.

 

[hunvagy]

Just another day and another dollar in the life of a self professed "Word mercenary"...

Mil-spec work available in PC PowerPlay system - Patron's Principles - 340.000 Cr
Target: 1 Word Mercenary
Time: 5H22M
Combat Rank Required: Keyboard Warrior


Sorry, couldn't resist

 

[ianw]

Mil-spec work available in PC PowerPlay system - Patron's Principles - 340.000 Cr
Target: 1 Word Mercenary
Time: 5H22M
Combat Rank Required: Keyboard Warrior


Sorry, couldn't resist

Like it!

 

[vinnyph]

Don't be so patronizing. A game review will review a game on current content. Not possible future content.

Disagreeing with what you say and spending the time to show the reason behind it is not being patronizing just to be pedantic. The game reviewer has not spent any time investigating Elite Dangerous and made a number of errors. For what the Developers are going to achieve I do believe a much greater investment of his time should have been spent rather than just getting a review out quick so he can earn some money which you must agree is the case.

Edit
In fact because Elite Dangerous is a multi year multi year venture and always has been from the start it needs to be reviewed for that and not just its current state.

Seems like you don't like the review yourself but still try to defend it. Cannot understand why you would do that.

 

[LeetNoob]

Disagreeing with what you say and spending the time to show the reason behind it is not being patronizing just to be pedantic. The game reviewer has not spent any time investigating Elite Dangerous and made a number of errors. For what the Developers are going to achieve I do believe a much greater investment of his time should have been spent rather than just getting a review out quick so he can earn some money which you must agree is the case.

It wasn’t the fact he disagreed. It was the “Surely you realise that a game needs to be actually programmed”
Thanks, but yes I realize a game has to be ‘ actually programmed’ .

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

But I really can’t stand the defense of this game based on what might come out in a few years. The game is what it is now. Not what it may be.

What might come in December you mean, when we can leave the ship in a buggy?

You can make valid points and do a bit of strawman while you’re at it

When the upcoming Horizons update is on the .... well .... Horizon, and you typify the response you're getting as "you can’t criticize this game because FD promised me it will be perfect years from now” then you are arguing against an argument no one is making.

So any point you make against your imaginary counterpoint on this may be valid, but it's also perfectly irrelevant.

 

[vinnyph]

It wasn’t the fact he disagreed. It was the “Surely you realise that a game needs to be actually programmed”
Thanks, but yes I realize a game has to be ‘ actually programmed’ .

Your original statement was this

I know that. He's reviewing a game as is. A promise of leaving your ship years down the line in development is not something he can include in the current review.
Again, I agree it's not a very good review and he brings up a different game and bigs it up for no reason which is weird, but all this 'it's in the plan' crap counts for nothing right now. It a ridiculous point. .

Could I ask what you meant from this because I can only see that you meant that you were inferring that it should be completed already?

 

[LeetNoob]

What might come in December you mean, when we can leave the ship in a buggy?

When the upcoming Horizons update is on the .... well .... Horizon, and you typify the response you're getting as "you can’t criticize this game because FD promised me it will be perfect years from now” then you are arguing against an argument no one is making.

So any point you make against your imaginary counterpoint on this may be valid, but it's also perfectly irrelevant.

So my argument is invalid the? Where's the Nic Cage bird hair picture?
Horizons doesn’t have walking around, it has planetary landings lite. I’m just saying you can’t expect a review not to say you’re stuck in your ship, because you are. And maybe I’m being picky but I see the magic transfer from the seat in your ship to the seat in your buggy to be still stuck in your ship, just one with wheels this time. The review was terrible, but he’s right with one thing, you’re stuck in your ship in this game.

- - - Updated - - -

Your original statement was this



Could I ask what you meant from this because I can only see that you meant that you were inferring that it should be completed already?

I'm not saying it should be completed already, I'm saying until it is, don't expect half baked reviews on the internet to say anything but what the game currently has.

 

[ianw]

So my argument is invalid the? Where's the Nic Cage bird hair picture?
Horizons doesn’t have walking around, it has planetary landings lite. I’m just saying you can’t expect a review not to say you’re stuck in your ship, because you are. And maybe I’m being picky but I see the magic transfer from the seat in your ship to the seat in your buggy to be still stuck in your ship, just one with wheels this time. The review was terrible, but he’s right with one thing, you’re stuck in your ship in this game.

- - - Updated - - -



I'm not saying it should be completed already, I'm saying until it is, don't expect half baked reviews on the internet to say anything but what the game currently has.

I've seen some goalpost moving in my time but this one has the makings of a classic.

So now a buggy is a ship?

Roger that.

 

[vinnyph]

It is already in the development plan to walk around as well.

 

[Straker]

All I want to say is that I supported (and still do) Elite Dangerous being released when it was and more things added (and still to be added) over time. This is a great development model that benefits everyone and I congratulate FD on this!. The PCPowerPlay article didn't mean a great deal to me, though I understand it will to others.

 

[vinnyph]

I'm not saying it should be completed already, I'm saying until it is, don't expect half baked reviews on the internet to say anything but what the game currently has.

I have seen many other reviews that have included the fact that Elite Dangerous will take many years to complete because they realise how much effort is required. The reviewer in those cases has spent the time to investigate and given Elite the benefit of the doubt.

My belief is FD are the team that are making it happen so I think they need full backing for what they are achieving. FD deserve more than half soaked reviews with incorrect information but you agree with that already I think.

It will take Star Citizen many years to complete as well but I still believe it will need a complete rewrite of their game engine and game in order to actually implement all what they list.

 

[Cmdr Cheese Wedge]

Wrong impression. Just look at the caveat Sandro puts on top of his threads. Yes there was lots of handwaving discussion, but after all the discussion FD came back with what they described as their intent - with caveats about plans changing. It is just that for over a year now their plans have changed so much, that the DDA has been largely ignored: CCGs: not in the DDA; Wings: in the DDA, but only a small proportion implemented; Powerplay: Not in the DDA; CQC: Not in the DDA.

That's cool never really followed the DDF anyway, like I said seemed to be more of a sounding board to me.
I'm not terribly fussed as I'm happy with how things are progressing anyway, still early days yet.

 

[BEKTOP 3APEMOB]

The article looks like it's done by someone who didn't want to spend time doing research about the game - when author compares ED combat to SC arena he needs to compare it with CQC part and then he won't be able to say these things (but it's in beta now, so I think this time period was the last moment he could post this article without having to rewrite it)

But I absolutely agree with what he says about ED combat in the main game - combat needs to move toward CQC fun and fast encounters instead of Shield Cell bank popping competition. And he, like me, sees placeholders allover the place (when he mentions missions not changing as you progress, no consequences no matter what type of activity you prefer - no one in the game will start calling you a slaver if you trade slaves for example. Yes, you will have a drop in relations with Alliance if they caught you with slaves, but nothing else and it feels very placeholdery/unfinished)

Overall it's an unjustified article, but it points to some big problems within ED

 

[LeetNoob]

My belief is FD are the team that are making it happen so I think they need full backing for what they are achieving. FD deserve more than half soaked reviews with incorrect information but you agree with that already I think.

I 100% agree with that. The review is poorly written. Even if I had never played Elite I would have dismissed the review anyway. Especially as he talks about playing a completely different game halfway through.

I just find it strange the first thing people had picked up on was the one thing I agreed with. You are stuck in your ship, and to me whatever may be eventually down the line doesn’t matter in a review. Especially if it will be paid expansions. Because it’s a review and not a preview.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So my argument is invalid then? Where's the Nic Cage bird hair picture?

Boy, you really do like your strawmen don't you?

Horizons doesn’t have walking around, it has planetary landings lite.

Walking around?

A promise of leaving your ship years down the line in development is not something he can include in the current review.

You will never leave your ship, or know the touch of another human being.

Leaving you ship will be possible come next December.

 

[Brimstone]

The article looks like it's done by someone who didn't want to spend time doing research about the game - when author compares ED combat to SC arena he needs to compare it with CQC part and then he won't be able to say these things (but it's in beta now, so I think this time period was the last moment he could post this article without having to rewrite it)

But I absolutely agree with what he says about ED combat in the main game - combat needs to move toward CQC fun and fast encounters instead of Shield Cell bank popping competition. And he, like me, sees placeholders allover the place (when he mentions missions not changing as you progress, no consequences no matter what type of activity you prefer - no one in the game will start calling you a slaver if you trade slaves for example. Yes, you will have a drop in relations with Alliance if they caught you with slaves, but nothing else and it feels very placeholdery/unfinished)

Overall it's an unjustified article, but it points to some big problems within ED

It is a terribly researched article that loses it's focus halfway through to talk about SC. See my previous post on page 3.

Yeah, CQC is in beta right now, but it's in open beta. Jason could have spent time playing it, and would have been able to compare Arena Commander (which is still in alpha I believe?) to CQC instead of Elite Dangerous as a whole.

But that would have been too difficult.

 

[KellyR]

It’s not my story. The review is terrible, but so would a review based on stuff they might be in the game in the future. It wouldn’t make sense, it would be an article about something not even made yet.
He's right, in this game, for what you buy, you will never get out of your ship. If they bring that out in the future you will be expected to pay more money for it. So if you only buy this game, you won't get out of your ship.

I didn't ask for a review based on what's going to be in the future. Just that he not make predictions of what will or will not be in the game in the future. But he did that. He predicted that FD will not follow through on their walking around stations statement when he said "and you never will". I think the review would have been honest and a decent (even if I disagree with it) review if not for that. That one statement made me question everything in the review because it showed he was not objective. I'm sorry. You only get one chance to make a good first impression and he failed with that one statement.

 

[ZeeWolf]

Yeah. I don't think any quality journalist would begin to write a first impressions piece and spend half the article comparing it with an isolated module in development for a risky venture like Star Citizen. He didn't even mention getting involved in P2P combat in the first few paragraphs which involved him taking off and flying randomly into an asteroid field. Then suddenly we're at the 40 hours played mark and time to innocently see what Star Citizen were up to and then make pretty subjective comparisons of flight models without even discussing his first impression P2P encounters in ED if they indeed occurred.

The article isn't first impressions then is it? There is absolutely no way this guy is making a fresh comparison with Arena Commander, anyone who starts pulling apart flight models of fantasy space games spends too much time on the forums like the rest of us. There is no serious correct way to do flight models and space combat concerning manned ships shooting fixed lasers at each other anymore than there is to compare the realistic feel of wizards firing magic bolts at each other.

So yeah, if you want to make an article that specifically goes out to compare the random deep space encounters of ED or CQC with work in progress confined P2P combat of Arena commander that's not bad journalism, simply declare it as your intent - full marks if you declare yourself as a fan boy of either game from the outset in my books. If you set out to do a first impressions of game article then stay on track and keep your personal opinions about other games in the same genre (that are still in progress that you just don't feel will stand up on their own merits if they aren't immediately mentioned as superior) - to yourself.

 

[Cmdr Cheese Wedge]

Call it for what it is.
The editor should flush it down the crapper.