Roadmap leaked??

I might have missed a few pages but I dont recall anything about vr or not being contingent on my continuing to play the game.

What I did say was though that if the 2020 expansion is any good i'll play it and if its not I wont bother, VR has nothing to do with it.

off off topic has anyone tried Stellaris? It's so good. No VR though :D
Now you've totally lost me here. Where did I say anything about VR that was related to your post I quoted (besides not using VR myself)?
Maybe you are a bit confused? Maybe the "son" wasn't that far fetched in which case you must be 80 at least?
In this case, my apologies, Daddy. :ROFLMAO:
 
I have read, on this forum, statements that a VR headset was bought solely to play ED, which seems totally odd - but folk are what they are - but my VR library contains many more titles than ED and I'll certainly be playing other games, in VR, when the attraction of this game has faltered. No paperweight, sorry :)

That said, of course, should next year's expansion be taking us down the road of FPS than I'll be skipping that one, thanks, that would be immensely boring for me.
 
You’ll have to help me here, my pondering can’t differentiate between control schemes for solo or multiplayer FPS?
For cross-play with 2D players, stuff like:

  • Teleport is pretty much out. Having a tranche of the populace zipping instantaneously between cover would be ludicrously OP, and not something 2D players would accept as the norm for themselves.
  • For PC servers, does stick aiming dis-advantage VR players excessively in PvP vs K/M.
I'd expect those to be the key design considerations for a basic FPS implementation.

(It's kinda theoretical though, because no one's done a 'cross-play' VR/2D PvP format successfully that I know of. I seem to recall at least one trying, and bombing horribly though).


True, a lot of gamers suffer from VR nausea when they try it, but I’d posit that a lot of VR gamers don’t. Bit of a Darwinian system, really. I think if the current crop of puke-solutions don’t work for a player, then they’re a bit stuffed with VR, unfortunately.
This is something devs take seriously, because they want as much uptake as they can. And the numbers for nausea are significant. Back in CV1 days Oculus had it as:

  • 20% of the population doesn't get motion sick
  • 20% of the population gets motion sick and always gets motion sick
  • Maybe 60% of the population gets better over time
Game design improvements seem to have improved the odds there, probably in that 60% block in particular. This reddit poll, although doubtless swayed by a more 'hardcore' sample, suggests teleport & 'onward style' techniques have opened the first person gaming up to more players.

Guys in the 20% often don't get this issue, but it's one dev houses definitely consider. Current game output definitely suggests some norms are settling into place in terms of accessible design.


Edit: the only controls difference I have in VR games using controllers is that the right thumb stick changes from ‘look up/down/left/right’ to ‘flickturn left/right’ as the look functions become mapped to the HMD.
Ugg, head-look for direction of travel? Blerg, I've always found that really 'anti-VR', removing freedom of headlook etc. But it's definitely functional sure. And partially a preference thing.

Edit: the only controls difference I have in VR games using controllers is that the right thumb stick changes from ‘look up/downWhen I played DoomVFR on the PS it was smooth locomotion, the only teleporting was for tele-frag finishing moves.
Ah ok cool, my bad.

I think the nausea attached to smooth locomotion may explain why it didn't storm it on the sales front though maybe (compared to their Skyrim + F4 output). Or could at least have played a role.

It'd be interesting to see a round up of the locomotion options available over time in releases. My impression is that alternate approaches to smooth turning have been deployed with increasing frequency (with 'Onward style' motion cropping up everywhere, under different names, for FPS style gameplay).

Edit: the only controls difference I have in VR games using controllers is that the right thumb stick changes from ‘look up/downFurther edit: again, I’m interested in seeing what the varied locomotion options look like in the next NMS update - will the players using teleport be showing the sort of movement usually displayed by wet-haired Japanese girls who crawl out of televisions? Or will they look like they’ve got really crappy internet?
Yeah, will they go teleport (will they go PvP). Will it look ludicrous. Gonna be interesting ;)

EDIT: Ah ok, on locomotion, there's teleport, and some form of smooth loco.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, will they go teleport (will they go PvP). Will it look ludicrous. Gonna be interesting ;)
I believe Arizona Sunshine allows for both movements types in coop mode, I've not played in coop but from what I have read it is pretty seemless, i.e the teleporting player doesn't look odd from the stick locomotion players perspective.
 
Last edited:
For cross-play with 2D players, stuff like:

  • Teleport is pretty much out. Having a tranche of the populace zipping instantaneously between cover would be ludicrously OP, and not something 2D players would accept as the norm for themselves.
  • For PC servers, does stick aiming dis-advantage VR players excessively in PvP vs K/M.
I'd expect those to be the key design considerations for a basic FPS implementation.

(It's kinda theoretical though, because no one's done a 'cross-play' VR/2D PvP format successfully that I know of. I seem to recall at least one trying, and bombing horribly though).




This is something devs take seriously, because they want as much uptake as they can. And the numbers for nausea are significant. Back in CV1 days Oculus had it as:



Game design improvements seem to have improved the odds there, probably in that 60% block in particular. This reddit poll, although doubtless swayed by a more 'hardcore' sample, suggests teleport & 'onward style' techniques have opened the first person gaming up to more players.

Guys in the 20% often don't get this issue, but it's one dev houses definitely consider. Current game output definitely suggests some norms are settling into place in terms of accessible design.




Ugg, head-look for direction of travel? Blerg, I've always found that really 'anti-VR', removing freedom of headlook etc. But it's definitely functional sure. And partially a preference thing.



Ah ok cool, my bad.

I think the nausea attached to smooth locomotion may explain why it didn't storm it on the sales front though maybe (compared to their Skyrim + F4 output). Or could at least have played a role.

It'd be interesting to see a round up of the locomotion options available over time in releases. My impression is that alternate approaches to smooth turning have been deployed with increasing frequency (with 'Onward style' motion cropping up everywhere, under different names, for FPS style gameplay).



Yeah, will they go teleport (will they go PvP). Will it look ludicrous. Gonna be interesting ;)
I wonder if the completely stationary periods a VR teleport player has in between the zippy bits will balance out any advantages? The accuracy of headlook aiming I find to be similar, if not better than, mouselook (for me).

I tended not to use headlook for direction of travel when I was limited to 2 Oculus sensors; left thumbstick for fwd/back/strafe, right thumbstick for 30deg flick-turns when my vertebrae got to creaking mixed with physical turning.

I think NMS Beyond will be a good thing for ED, to see what works and what problems become apparent (even though it’s not a PVP game).
 
I have read, on this forum, statements that a VR headset was bought solely to play ED, which seems totally odd - but folk are what they are - but my VR library contains many more titles than ED and I'll certainly be playing other games, in VR, when the attraction of this game has faltered. No paperweight, sorry :)

That said, of course, should next year's expansion be taking us down the road of FPS than I'll be skipping that one, thanks, that would be immensely boring for me.
I bought a vr hmd solely for ED. The Lenovo Explorer without controllers was €100, some have spend more on cosmetics or hotas just for ED. Now I have it I use it for other games as well (project cars, subnautica, Skyrim) but I didn't plan that. :)
 
I got a DK2 mainly for Elite (though I'd try whatever else would work, like Quake and a Jedi game and Subnautica and etc), but I upgraded to a CV1 cuz the roomscale motion controlled games looked awesome.

Elite also looks better in the CV1 so it was a nice ugprade for Elite alone (plus I have played a lotta Elite), but there's a lotta really fun VR games. I would've felt fine if I bought a VR headset just for Elite though, I love the experience in VR, and a Lenovo Explorer costs the same as my T16000 HOTAS (that I only use for Elite since I got it) and I'd say the Rift brings a lot more enjoyment and I'll use it in a lot more games than my flightstick.

My CV1 was also cheaper than the fancier HOTAS setups people get, and I don't think it'd be weird if someone got a fancy setup for Elite alone.
 
I believe Arizona Sunshine allows for both movements types in coop mode, I've not played in coop but from what I have read it is pretty seemless, i.e the teleporting player doesn't look odd from the stick locomotion players perspective.
Ah ok interesting. I can only dig up and old 2016 vid showing teleport externally. Seems like it was kinda jumpy still back then. Poss has improved.

I guess there is still a window for ED to deploy TP which could be both functional and immersive (& cheap to deploy ;)). IE if they were to allow 'Holo Me' holograms to TP, and apply that to 2D players as well as a 'defecit' of using that form (conferring higher risks/rewards on being somewhere in person).

Wouldn't zap all the VR considerations (how would VR players walk in the flesh etc), but I've often wondered if telepresence stuff had an eye on future Legs practicalities (especially death scenarios / respawns etc).


I wonder if the completely stationary periods a VR teleport player has in between the zippy bits will balance out any advantages? The accuracy of headlook aiming I find to be similar, if not better than, mouselook (for me).
I guess it would depend on the use of cooldowns etc. In Rec Room for example the cooldown is really short, so the top guys pretty much spam it perennially and it's pretty daft, in my experience. They seem to outplay 'walking' variants now that mixed-mode games are available too. (Although the argument about whether it's OP seems to rage perennially too ;)).

Yeah on headlook I'm basically showing my biases. It's definitely functional potentially in a PvP environment, & fitting in a sci-fi one. (I've just got a total preference for head and hands being in game, and primarily left free to act 'as normal'. It's just a more transporting experience).

I think there's an argument to say: If it's not super hard to reach that quality bar, why not? (And some evidence that developers are leaning that way).

But the VR ecosystem is pretty fluid, who knows what the meta will be in a year :D

I think NMS Beyond will be a good thing for ED, to see what works and what problems become apparent (even though it’s not a PVP game).
They don't seem to have defined exactly what the multiplayer expansion involves. Would be an intriguing test case if it did involve PvP possibilities. (IE it'd mirror the explore / trade / zap disciplines of ED too, which presumably will surface in the Legs take too).
 
They don't seem to have defined exactly what the multiplayer expansion involves. Would be an intriguing test case if it did involve PvP possibilities. (IE it'd mirror the explore / trade / zap disciplines of ED too, which presumably will surface in the Legs take too).
I’ve not met up with any other NMS players (I’m on the GOG version which has only recently got multiplayer, and also it’s a big galaxy) but I think that you can PVP already, there’s just no reason or reward to kill other players and it’s very much a coop game anyway.

I seem to remember reading about being able to kick griefers from your game, so I guess it exists. Once VR is introduced, I’m hoping someone’s going to do some pew pew testing!
 
While I'm as keen as the next person for updates and news, leaking confidential information as an employee who's signed an NDA is an absolute no-no. Absolutely zero respect for these people. It's another thing being a whistleblower exposing bad/dangerous practices within an industry or institution when all other procedures have been exhausted.

Once the leaker is identified, that person will be practically unemployable in any position which requires any confidentiality.
 
Though the new Lego Star Wars is still being made by TT, I’m curious about the Microsoft E3 announcement of the Lego expansion to Forza 4 - perhaps the “leak” is something similar, not an actual full-blown game, but an expansion to one of FDev’s existing games? Lego Legs & ED’s flight model, anybody? :)

I also raised an eyebrow at the announcement on the next Xbox being released at the end of next year, 4x the power of the current xbonex and now both next-gen consoles are confirmed as having real-time raytracing. Awfully convenient timing on FDevs part, to release at the end of next year...
 
Well we can discount one of the leaks.

https://twitter.com/TTGames?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Not being made by Frontier.
Eh? The leak talks about a Real Time Strategy variant on Lego Star Wars. IE:

Project Marconi - A real time strategy game. Man v Machine and Lego Star Wars are both being worked on.
That looks like a classic TT Lego platformer, of the type they've always done.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Disney / Lego might farm out their IPs even further. If someone else launches a Lego SW RTS then yeah, that'd definitely discount that bit of the leak ;)
 
Frontiers getting into the publishing now....

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-06-12-frontier-signs-first-deal-as-third-party-publisher.

Might not pertain directly to the leaks but its better than starting a new thread.
Yep, we've known about FDev's plan to become a third-party publisher since this time last year:

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-06-29-frontier-we-want-to-become-a-third-party-publisher

Haemimont Games is an interesting first client: they make Real-Time Strategy and City Builder games, for a variety of publishers: Surviving Mars (Paradox Interactive), Tropico 3 to 5 (Kalypso Media), are their most well-known titles.
 
Haemimont Games is an interesting first client: they make Real-Time Strategy and City Builder games, for a variety of publishers: Surviving Mars (Paradox Interactive), Tropico 3 to 5 (Kalypso Media), are their most well-known titles.
:unsure: A synergy perhaps ... maybe that's how they closed the deal .... "yes, we do that too."
 
The leaker has become awfully quiet since the last update from the company mail address. I guess it's still true: Loose lips sink internships.
 
Top Bottom