Fully agree Drew on all points, I rarely bother with GalNet and am eagerly looking forward to the Codex. Personally I wish the Codex is better than is being touted. Apart from what FD write in it, I would much prefer if the individual users could add to it, whether it be public or private comments. The game needs a mechanism where the player can jot down notes about whatever he finds in the game, no matter out obscure, inane or important others might thinks. How nice would it be to check the Codex to see what you found on a specific planet 4 months ago, where it was easy to get around and where you found a lot of mats. If done correctly the Codex could add a lot to the game, and it needs to be IN-GAME!
No Man's Sky recent success is good sign for Elite and future Space games/sims
- Thread starter DoppelGanger
- Start date
Fully agree Drew on all points, I rarely bother with GalNet and am eagerly looking forward to the Codex. Personally I wish the Codex is better than is being touted. Apart from what FD write in it, I would much prefer if the individual users could add to it, whether it be public or private comments. The game needs a mechanism where the player can jot down notes about whatever he finds in the game, no matter out obscure, inane or important others might thinks. How nice would it be to check the Codex to see what you found on a specific planet 4 months ago, where it was easy to get around and where you found a lot of mats. If done correctly the Codex could add a lot to the game, and it needs to be IN-GAME!
The Codex may or may not do what the player base is hoping for, but if it doesn't, then all Frontier would need to do is add a Pinned section to GalNet called Mysteries (or something). In this pinned section is the starting breadcrumb for the various story arcs and set-piece locations that have been discovered. All of them, and it's updated regularly when new things are found. As an example, it would not say go here to see Jameson's crashed ship - it would send you to the listening post (or whatever it was) that was initially used to find it. New Commanders would benefit greatly from this, and there would be no more reliance on things outside the game to see and experience the things in the game, unless you want the short-cut.
I wouldn't think that this would be terribly difficult, or time-consuming to create and maintain.
Riôt
Don't talk like you've seen the source code. You haven't. You don't know what tech Hello Games uses.
Do you have some source code to back that up ?
Look, I appreciate your commitment to the game : given the number of trolls we have on the forums, we need guys like you to emphasize the great features of what is my favourite game of all time. But honestly, IMHO, you're pushing it.
The whole procedural generation David Braben's speech (video here) seems pretty far away when I look at the dull missions board, the dull X Y Z star system, the dull CG or the dull RES of the week.
Not white knighting NMS here : I own the game (and SC too) but I have yet to launch it. But frankly, if ED in its current state is the best PG can do, this is an epic fail.
Last edited:
i have to say it, sorry, but me and my son, aint played elite in over a week, no mans sky has been so much fun. multiplayer with space legs, my kids 10, he got the frigate, and has made rooms on the ship for me and his uncle. we mess about helping each other out, exploring places, finding ancient ruins, and having to excavate to find keys for chests an stuff. and the battles against the sentinels can be quite manic both on planet and in space.
im sure ill play elite again, and really want to, but too busy having FUN.....
im sure ill play elite again, and really want to, but too busy having FUN.....
NMS-Next is a success, acknowledged. Let us just call them different games of different preferences. No need to use NMS' resurgence as some stretch on a limb fuel to "blame'n'shame" FD & ED when frankly, FD will still just follow their own schedule for those waiting patiently for new updates in the ten year plan. Frontier is a growing successful and up and coming major player in the gamesim genre with three well received games during the time HG made and "fixed" NMS. ED doesn't have spacelegs yet, but their version will probably be quite different in style and tone. I'd just call it HG "wins" this round on the steamcharts, and move on, with good expectations for the rest of ED's Beyond and great things to come after.
Last edited:
Honestly, I don't believe ED will ever get spacelegs. I know they've mentioned it in the early days but every time they are asked about it in recent memory it seems to me that they make it sound like it would be really difficult to do. I don't think they're that keen on the idea tbh. Having said that, I don't believe ED needs spacelegs. I don't see what it would bring to the game, at least not in its current form. It works in NMS because a lot of the action takes place on planet surfaces, but ED doesn't and I fail to see what spacelegs would bring to the table given the development effort it would require.
Oh , spacelegs can bring a lot to ED. It can help with the feel of scale for one. One could see through the viewports of their own ship, or in the corridors of the rotating sections of stations as depicted in one of several pre-concept paintings of ED of people in stations, among scores of other gameplay and perspectives available with the fpv of spacelegs. One could visit the imperial palace or other famed Elite lore structures, or enter in the door of those small outposts for some mission to take back to the ship as an example. The terrain planetoids are already there with their specific gravities and a lot of physics already in as well as new textures, lighting, etc. yes, FD probably ran into challenges where they couldn't get spacelegs in yet, but their job listings of the last months hinted at upgrading the cobra engine as well as the network infrastructure so that it seems hopeful Frontier (especially with a successful JWE launch under their belt now) is investing more into upgrading aspects of ED's scope significantly. They've also made a few hints about new things they can't talk or announce yet about until it's really "ready". o7
Last edited:
Yeah but let's be honest, what gameplay would it bring to get out of your ship and walk around, or even walk around inside your ship? I love submarine simulators and I'm particularly fond of the Silent Hunter games. The last incarnation gave us "submarine legs", where you get out of your sub and walk around and can walk around inside your sub and talk to the crew. It's a monumental pain in the backside and most players really don't like it. I think it would pan out in a very similar fashion in ED, which is very reminiscent of a Sub Sim, given the feelings of being isolated with an extremely hostile environment behind a few inches of steel.
![[VR] Merkir](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
Digging out a 2 year old review of the game, in a thread talking about the success of the latest release. Nice try.
You could at least have made it past tense, "This dude knew his onions", oh but wait, he's a paid shill for a competitor so you can't even say that.
Hahaha... the thread that keeps on (mis-)giving.
Yeah. Elite Dangerous still has a lot of untapped potential. For example DLC with Space Legs (EVA in ships and walking on planets) + DLC for Atmospheric Worlds with procedural alien landscapes and creatures would attract a large amount of new players.
ED would be the more mature, realistic version of what No Man's Sky Next offers.
Frontier has to maintain a certain momentum so that people stay engaged and interested in ED. The major DLC for Space Legs and Atmospheric Worlds should not be a long ways off. It should already be under development and come after Beyond as a series of DLC.
Last edited:
Considering the sheer number of posts on this topic, the op's questions is easily answered. YES, fdev can learn a lot from nms. We can debate what they can learn, who the better developer is, which game is better ad nasuem but the number of posts and replys say it all. There are many things fdev can learn from nms good and bad.
For context I've been 160k ly in elite, did Colonia and sag a * and bought nms at launch. Thought it was absolute crap. Bought it again after NEXT update and am enjoying it throughly. Flight model of elite is far superior, comabt, science based Galaxy etc., but being able to actually land on alien worlds and experience a sci fi wet dream is fantastic. Nms is far, far, far from perfect but breaking through the atmosphere and actually seeing something instead of a cold dead rock to drive around on is great. Building a base is totally unnecessary, but it satisfys the basic human desire to create, build, and claim.
Why do so many people, myself included do the engineering grind in elite ? To create , build, and claim. To mark this thing as my own. I still enjoy elite, but they absolutely can learn a lot from nms in terms of gameplay. I've spent 4 years playing elite, and I've enjoyed it, but it could be so much better.
Nms: I sat down on a lush planet, just one among quintillions , a distant sun hung in the sky and a ring world impossibly close, I built a simple base with a viewing platform, and I stood and stared, gazing across an alien valley full of plants and animals, and a massive ring world. Issac assimov, Kurt vonegut, it's certainly not perfect but it feels so alive and makes me feel like all the heros of all the sci-fi adventures stories I've read over the years.
Oh, and the flight model in space compared to elite is total rubish.
For context I've been 160k ly in elite, did Colonia and sag a * and bought nms at launch. Thought it was absolute crap. Bought it again after NEXT update and am enjoying it throughly. Flight model of elite is far superior, comabt, science based Galaxy etc., but being able to actually land on alien worlds and experience a sci fi wet dream is fantastic. Nms is far, far, far from perfect but breaking through the atmosphere and actually seeing something instead of a cold dead rock to drive around on is great. Building a base is totally unnecessary, but it satisfys the basic human desire to create, build, and claim.
Why do so many people, myself included do the engineering grind in elite ? To create , build, and claim. To mark this thing as my own. I still enjoy elite, but they absolutely can learn a lot from nms in terms of gameplay. I've spent 4 years playing elite, and I've enjoyed it, but it could be so much better.
Nms: I sat down on a lush planet, just one among quintillions , a distant sun hung in the sky and a ring world impossibly close, I built a simple base with a viewing platform, and I stood and stared, gazing across an alien valley full of plants and animals, and a massive ring world. Issac assimov, Kurt vonegut, it's certainly not perfect but it feels so alive and makes me feel like all the heros of all the sci-fi adventures stories I've read over the years.
Oh, and the flight model in space compared to elite is total rubish.
Galaxy Simulation with gamified flight engine and RNG grind that's just gotten worse over 4 years - doesn't have the same ring to it
Wow, I get why Fdev asterisk soon now, since two and a half years later and still no sign...from old thread said:
And yet ED is factually a space sim, so I don't need to care about your opinion. I started playing flight sims 20 years ago.
Still waiting on what your criteria of a fanboy and how it applies to me.
I understand you won't go for anythig less due to your history in this forum....everybody is entitled to their own opinion
I could agree ED being space sim from some aspects as i said earlier, but not space flight simulator!
20y old flight sims are irrelevant due to it's limitations by that time and tech, now we have very detailed flight sims these days which make standards regarding flight sims.
Also i'm perfectly fine with ED in those aspects and i don't expect it being flight simulator, it's FM is very good for this kind of game.....just need variety of landable atmo planets and exploration mehanics to make it top notch!
NMS nor SC can't match it in that category, sadly devs don't see it that way!
I think the reason why we struggle to find the correct term for ED is because its very nature as hybrid: a game that offers as many sim aspects as possible for still being perceived as game. Quite a clumsy description, that's why we all try to nail it down to either game or sim. Both is factually wrong and true, depending on your viewpoint and preferences: The galaxy for instance comes quite close to a simulation that is possible with our current knowledge and machines. The flight physics are an ingenious mix of game/fun/sim and certainly a strong point towards "hybrid".
Of course theirs always enough room for white or black knighting... or just nitpicking.
I agree 100%!
It need to be that way to reach as much players it can and that's fine....a little bit of something for everybody!
I'm hardcore flight simmer not playing anything else, still ED is quite acceptable to me regarding space games....no better alternative currently (nor on horizon), just need those atmos and a bit more danger, survival and suprise from space phenomena itself to fulfill it's galaxy size potential and to drag me into it on a long run.
At the end it doesn't matter should we call it game or a sim as long as it please our gaming needs.
I'll say anything you like for four billion dollars.
The physics are real, but the flight model is artificially constrained.
Damage model is fairly basic (and has actually become more basic over time), but not to the extent some are claiming. Hull integrity itself is just a health bar, but impact vectors, penetration depths, and independent module hits are accounted for.
As for it being a simulation, I'd argue it still is, even if some details are heavily abstracted. The game isn't trying to be a hard core spacecraft simulator, it's trying to be an accessible simulation of a space pilot in the Elite universe. It falls short in a lot of ways, but the damage model is far less of a hole in it's simulationieness than the lack of an economy, for example.
Sound doesn't travel through empty space in ED; those sounds are simulated by the flight computer to improve situational awareness and most of them vanish or become significantly muted if the canopy is breached. Were the sound actually being produced at the source of the event and carried through space, losing the canopy would increase their volume, not remove them.
With our current understanding, all FTL is a fantasy, but I'm not sure what you mean by "propulsion alone" in this context, as ED's FTL doesn't rely on thrust. Your third point is also only applicable while in supercruise, which is fantasy FTL that is disrupted by gravity wells. In normal space, you accelerate toward gravity wells.
It's one thing to criticize the game for it's myriad flaws, but you should at least make an effort to know what you're talking about first.
Also, a simulation doesn't need to be one of this reality to be a simulation.
WWII aircraft only have one of five thrust axes ED ships have, and ED's flight model only resembles WWII aircraft if you are an atrocious pilot in ED or you don't have most of your flight controls bound.
We already did. The ship detects the explosion and plays multiple audible cues to let you know it happened.
This is flatly incorrect. Plenty of hypothetical proposals for FTL drives wouldn't result in instantaneous travel times and ED's supercruise is explicitly described as the bending of space.
How would you know how gravity would interact with fantasy frameshift drive?
No FTL system can, because FTL isn't real.
The physics we have in normal space however are quite realistic, up until you reach the limits imposed by the omnipresent flight assist.
Have to pick you up here lad. Let's talk randomness in Elite shall we and see if your statement holds any credibility what-so-ever;
Combat; Random generated ships, with random loadouts rewarding random amounts.
Resource Extraction sites; Random generated asteroidal mining objects rewarding random amounts. With random NPCs of random loadouts and modules.
Planetary Materials; Randomly generated as you land, with random rewards.
Missions; Random missions selected from a master list offering random rewards to deliver random goods of random amounts to random stations.
Spacial Objects; (USS) randomly generated containing random items/object.
Do you want me to go on?
Further;
Lol Whut? You don't have the game yet feel you are well placed to offer facts about it? That's called hyprocisy. And, your facts are wrong.
Additionally;
More hyprocisy?
There is plenty of room for game titles. While both can be classed as 'space games', they both differ in their Graphical Delivery and flight models. The rest, trade, missions etc is simple database and menu systems. Any coder could produce it.
The difference from a game play and leaving aside graphics and flight model, is how the game is presented.
Elite attempts to force the player at every possible point to go through hoops, while NMS on the other hand says 'here you go, there it is, do whatever you want'. Likewise, Elite rewards sucks big cahoonas, while NMS again says, well if you can make money be our guest. Additionally, like it or not, be your 'cup of tea' or not, NMS offers the player much more freedom of movement. Both in the literal sense (boots on the ground) and in the sense, that if it's there and you can choose it, then go ahead knock your socks off.
In my opinion, NMS gives me the 'blaze your own trail' feeling way more than Elite Dangerous does. For me Frontier developments cages me and doesn't reward me. It talks a great story but just doesn't deliver. NMS while a little cartoony offers me way more enjoyment and freedom. From freighters, to base building, to boots on ground to interplanetary fast travel, I can do whatever I want. Of course there is grind, but for that grind, I feel rewarded. In Elite for the grind I feel they're doing their best to not reward me.
I also play Eve and pay it's subscription. In relation to ELite vs NMS, I'd give my subscription to NMS. I just wouldn't pay for Elite. It's a graphical extravanza, let down by poor game-design.
All personal opinion.
The difference from a game play and leaving aside graphics and flight model, is how the game is presented.
Elite attempts to force the player at every possible point to go through hoops, while NMS on the other hand says 'here you go, there it is, do whatever you want'. Likewise, Elite rewards sucks big cahoonas, while NMS again says, well if you can make money be our guest. Additionally, like it or not, be your 'cup of tea' or not, NMS offers the player much more freedom of movement. Both in the literal sense (boots on the ground) and in the sense, that if it's there and you can choose it, then go ahead knock your socks off.
In my opinion, NMS gives me the 'blaze your own trail' feeling way more than Elite Dangerous does. For me Frontier developments cages me and doesn't reward me. It talks a great story but just doesn't deliver. NMS while a little cartoony offers me way more enjoyment and freedom. From freighters, to base building, to boots on ground to interplanetary fast travel, I can do whatever I want. Of course there is grind, but for that grind, I feel rewarded. In Elite for the grind I feel they're doing their best to not reward me.
I also play Eve and pay it's subscription. In relation to ELite vs NMS, I'd give my subscription to NMS. I just wouldn't pay for Elite. It's a graphical extravanza, let down by poor game-design.
All personal opinion.