No worries, I just thought you were being a bit silly and looking at things rather one-dimensionally. Makes no difference to me either way though.
Good luck.
Last edited:
> Enters post
< Leaves post
Holy hell, yes.
TL;DR but "attitude problem" and "entitlement" spring to mind from the first 25 posts or so.
I'm off to wash my eyes out and try a different thread....
Right.
No more Star Citizen discussion - there is a nice cosy thread for that in the Off Topic section.
And no more "Console Conspiracy" posts either - we are all one big happy ED family!
Please stay on the OP topic of 'Improvements to Exploration or else...'. Thanks.
Three things to start with. If you don't do these... that's it.
1: The debeigeifacation.
2: Add reflectivity from orbit.
3: Add transparency to ice worlds and shine to metallic worlds. Along with the lighting effects.
At the moment this is a cartoon game. When I look at a pizza, it has more 3d ness than a typical world. Everything is totally matted. Get rid of that first. Because you know what? EVERY world that is in horizons looks like a cartoon. We pay extra to land in blended soup. Try and fix it. Please.
Is there at least an option to keep light level...zzzz. Nope. Not in the menu, and not in the beta.
That's my first and as I consider it... Absolute prerequisite after the scripted thargoids come along.
Multiple light sources and reflectivity from orbit and below. EASY. Don't even try to fiddle with exploration before you have done that. Ill pass the flame to the others now. Those guys who genuinely love the game... and want to see the smallest of touches. - lads - hit them hard. Keep it simple as can be.
That is not entirely true. Missions are getting better.
While I do sincerely respect the jobs of moderators, in some cases discussing Star Citizen is relevant in exactly the same way that discussing No Man's Sky or any other game that has Elite-like elements might also be relevant.
No-one can deny that it bears relevance in terms of comparing game elements, and the posts I've seen here do mostly compare and discuss game elements that are specifically and directly linked to Exploration - i.e. planets, and the rendering thereof and the fact that SC may well look better, but it's not actually a game yet since it's still in development, those all seem very salient points to me.
While I completely disagree with the Op, and not just what he's saying but the way he says it, I also respectfully disagree that discussion of those specific elements of SC should be off-topic in this case.
Well, this is a novel variant of Open Letter and Kickstarter![]()
I want to thank you for replying Dale, and openly admit to everyone here that I was hammered last night. The stress that im under at the moment seems to be showing itself more and more angrily when im on the bottle. And, I am a complete tool when im drunk. I requested less morning shifts as I simply cant keep waking up at 3:30am and going until 7pm. Im too old for that jazz. I need more willpower at the moment and gotta eat during the day. So APOLIGIES TO EVERYONE. Ill try and keep in line.
You want molten liquid worlds?
Fair point.Does anyone not?
'Core improvement' has become a completely meaningless term. We have a faster and longer route planner and better mission boards, but some will argue it isn't 'core'. Its a bit like discussing 'depth' or 'immersion'. Just fluff terms.
...So, yes, we're aware of the issues that the exploration community currently has, or at least the more pertinent points of contention. I've been talking to a number of these folks and taking a whole bunch feedback from threads in said forum section for the design team to consider.
...We have a faster and longer route planner and better mission boards, but some will argue it isn't 'core'...
Great news Dale - here's hoping the whole of the core Elite experience gets a really nice buff - thanks for listening and posting.
Really, where's your proof, or is this purest madeupium? And in any event, even if some may say this, some people dismiss climate change. And they are palpably stupid and wrong. So, merely having an opinion doesn't make it valid or worthy of discussion.
I hope you're not offended by the fact that this made me chuckle. A couple of times earlier in the thread I was this >< close to asking if you'd had a few scoops, mainly because your angry tone and increasingly staccato punctuation started to remind me of the e-mails I used to find in my Drafts folder (never in Sent, thank the maker) the morning after I'd been on the sauce.I want to thank you for replying Dale, and openly admit to everyone here that I was hammered last night.
While I do sincerely respect the jobs of moderators, in some cases discussing Star Citizen is relevant in exactly the same way that discussing No Man's Sky or any other game that has Elite-like elements might also be relevant.
No-one can deny that it bears relevance in terms of comparing game elements, and the posts I've seen here do mostly compare and discuss game elements that are specifically and directly linked to Exploration - i.e. planets, and the rendering thereof and the fact that SC may well look better, but it's not actually a game yet since it's still in development, those all seem very salient points to me.
While I completely disagree with the Op, and not just what he's saying but the way he says it, I also respectfully disagree that discussion of those specific elements of SC should be off-topic in this case.
While I do agree that exploration is extremely lacking, and overall having a 1:1 recreation of the milky way seems like a waste in a game where exploration bogs down to just staring at empty things (which in turn got nerfed meanwhile), I must say that the overall tone of this OP does not help the exploration cause at all.
At the moment this is a cartoon game. When I look at a pizza, it has more 3d ness than a typical world. Everything is totally matted. Get rid of that first. Because you know what? EVERY world that is in horizons looks like a cartoon. We pay extra to land in blended soup. Try and fix it. Please.
transparency to ice worlds