I wouldn't be surprised if both were being worked on in some way. I am pretty sure that the guys that work on planetary surfaces will not be the same guys that work on the rest of the game.Hey you are preaching to the choir in my case! I don’t mind space legs either but I personally much rather see gas giants and atmos in general with some weather effects etc first.
Now, having said that I reckon that space legs is prolly a much more complex and difficult challenge than atmo effects and therefore can totally understand if FDEV decides to prioritise tackling legs first.
But, as someone wiser once said... Why not both?
I can see different types of atmospheric planets being released in parts as buyable DLC in the not too distant future while the next major expansion will be space legs. Which could possibly expand what can be done on said planets.
It's a possibility that I like the sound of. We will see what happens.
There's plenty of time to change a million things. Most projects I was involved in were planned and developed within a year, and here they have more than a year, so there's time enough to refocus on whatever management seems fit.
Kindly disagree.
You know what, even though I've seen a good amount of videos, and heard about it, I have not. Maybe I'll remedy that this upcoming weekend. I heard the orbital/flight mechanics are (maybe annoyingly so) more accurate - but from what I've seen in the videos the EVA seems like it'd be quite tense. Thanks for the recommendation!
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Segmented Quotes are usually a very bad sign in any Discussion.
I don't feel like competitive re-quoting and answering of any statement, it always turns out into meaningless hair splitting in less than 3 iterations.
If you're an experienced Forum Mod, you should know
Heh. Nah, I disagree
I think that it helps enormously in focusing the discussion on the main arguments. Especially when responding to large posts. Readers can very easily go to the source if needed.If I am not mistaken, and as far as I can tell, AirWarrior is more akin to WarThunder than Elite, i.e. a scenario or arena based multiplayer game. I was obviously referring to persistent world MMOs such as EVE, WoW etc.
And yet, even server based games that are not P2P (but that are also twitch based cockpit simulation experiences like Elite), such as WarThunder or DCS cough their lungs out when you have more than 20-30 players in a multiplayer battle. Twitch based simulations require a much higher amount of information transmitted in real time (or as close to it as allowed by current tech) than mouse point and click based games that even may allow mechanics like time dilation (EVE) and that are not so preoccupied for the real time twitch accuracy skills required in sims.
As far as I am aware, Elite is the only (unless exception found) persistent world MMO using a twitch based cockpit simulation experience to drive it. Most of the main persistent world MMOs out there (unless exception found) are mouse point and click experiences that do not need those more demanding twitch requirements on network.
As impressed as I am about you referring to wikipedia
the reality of many business is that people move on at some point or anther. Thankfully those companies do not need to start from scratch every time that happens. Knowledge, best practices, processes, tools, lessons learned etc are all kept in those companies and maintained precisely to allow them to continue in business and to even refine and improve their core activities.
Last edited:
I'm curious. What game was that? Didn't know there were MMOs already using analog modems. Did you connect to some server hub or something?Hm, Cockpit based MMOs aren't new (?). Heck I played one in the 90's via Analog Modem (and a ton that I didn't play later)
Agree. Keep on segmenting the quotes. I think it's a better way of communicating specific answers and ideas.Heh. Nah, I disagree
Last edited:
Deleted member 110222
D
Whoever the leaker is, you're a legend man.
Do you ever wonder if it might be intentional? The best way to create a hype is to make it look like a leak.
And plausible deniability if the release isn't up to what was planned.
Why do you say that?
Do you ever wonder if it might be intentional? The best way to create a hype is to make it look like a leak.
And plausible deniability if the release isn't up to what was planned.
Only really works if the long-term roadmap is false. There's no way they'd actually reveal it. Tells the competition too much info, messes with share valuation (which gets you a wrist slap if not done via official channels, I believe), screws up marketing hype cycles etc.
They are being very laissez faire about it for sure
. Could just be that they don't have much choice though.Sending test balloons is very common, corporated or political, so yeah could be.Do you ever wonder if it might be intentional? The best way to create a hype is to make it look like a leak.
And plausible deniability if the release isn't up to what was planned.
I've thought that this is the case since this started. The whole thing seems a little ham-fisted to me. "Oi, it's me...totally a friend of a dev, not an actual dev, though...and like, here's an internal document to show that I'm super cereal, bro. No cap." It's all just a little too neat....like the cop that tries to buy weed at the party that totally isn't a cop but that everybody knows is totally a cop.Do you ever wonder if it might be intentional? The best way to create a hype is to make it look like a leak.
And plausible deniability if the release isn't up to what was planned.
Deleted member 110222
D
If it means we're finally getting information I don't care how it comes.
So my comment stands.
So my comment stands.
I’m pretty sure this is all just Frontier screwing with us. Leaks generate hype, and keeps the monkeys throwing their poop at one another.