You mean apart from the thread with over 3500 posts on it?
SC Flightmodel Discussion
- Thread starter Mobius
- Start date
- Status
You mean apart from the thread with over 3500 posts on it?
Well, I have frequented the SC forum on occasions & your statement that they are not talking about ED, is totally wrong, some good, some bad comments. So your reasons about the SC forums not even talking about ED, seems anti-elite full-stop, otherwise why would you make up such a fabrication, surly not just because of the ED campaign.
The Sidewinder is smaller than the Hornet.
Looking at pure numbers the Sidewinder certainly is smaller than I thought but I still think it's bigger than the Hornet, at least in total volume.
Sidewinder: 21m by 15m by 5m
Hornet: 21.8m by 22.5m by 6m
So by those numbers the hornet is a bit bigger but but that's just the wides/longest points. The Sidewinder is almost a box with those dimensions. The Honets volume and probably mass is a lot less.
..you got that right.. this forum has an very ugly moderator ethic,and one can only assume it's explicitly engendered by the admins... or else all the mods are suffering a Napoleon complex.
It's ugly tho... (winces in anticipation of imminent ban)
Yep, the hornet has wings, and other sticky out bits....
But I suppose my point is, ED doesn't really seem to have a playable dedicated fighter.... at least not from what we have seen
Last edited:
Michael Brookes
Game Director
..you got that right.. this forum has an very ugly moderator ethic,and one can only assume it's explicitly engendered by the admins... or else all the mods are suffering a Napoleon complex.
It's ugly tho... (winces in anticipation of imminent ban)
That's easily arranged, but play by the rules and there's no need for one.
Michael
Currently SC's flightmodel is terrible. It looks as if the ship is fixed on a stick when it moves and turns. This is especially noticeable in 3d person. The ship appears to have no mass/inertia at all.
I was planning on buying this game too, so I hope it will be improved. I believe it will. Chris Roberts is no fool.
Uhh? But we do.
I was planning on buying this game too, so I hope it will be improved. I believe it will. Chris Roberts is no fool.
Uhh? But we do.
Last edited:
Hi Fromhell,
it's good to see a bit of working gameplay, thanks
! I watched the reveal live on twitch, and it did the graphics no favours . SC certainly has potential, and I 'm pretty sure my $40 will be money well spent, if only because SC will have a strong narrative campaign. I'm not too keen on the overly busy cockpit, or the incredibly old fashioned weapons, but that's a design choice I'm happy to live with.In answer to your question, the entire ship is moving like someone moving their head (just look around the 1 minute mark for example). I.e., the supposedly multi-ton ship has no sense of mass (or more accurately inertia). Thus, the SC flight model is considerably more arcadey than the FD model right now.
Last edited:
..you got that right.. this forum has an very ugly moderator ethic,and one can only assume it's explicitly engendered by the admins... or else all the mods are suffering a Napoleon complex.
It's ugly tho... (winces in anticipation of imminent ban)
I'd have to disagree. Most would say this forum is a nicer place than SC forums & many other gaming forums, but if you'd like to create a new thread (as this is all getting way off topic to this thread) with links to examples within this forum, which actually verify your point, I will happily concede.
..you got that right.. this forum has an very ugly moderator ethic,and one can only assume it's explicitly engendered by the admins... or else all the mods are suffering a Napoleon complex.
It's ugly tho... (winces in anticipation of imminent ban)
Seriously? This is one of the best boards I've ever been on. I love people complaining about not having free speech and the like here whilst actually... having the free speech to actually do that. The only thing that isn't tolerated is continued and serious personal insults.
It was early, and a fan boy show.
My being in the entertainment industry, I say I'm surprised it wasn't either programmed or check pointed to make sure it doesn't crash.. its just bad presentation practice to have things go bad.
-- other note, I was going to start a posting on how the blue displays and cramped cockpit is very different with its military feel, where the orange feels like a car dash board, and very civilian.
I was wondering about the range of ship displays (based on the ships, not the displays) of the federation fighter vs cobra, vs what will ultimately be the freighters.
The ED ships feel like flying Winnebago's, and that's what I want in an explorer / civilian ship, but, at no point would a proper space fighter feel anything but military.
There will be differences? I mean more than another seat and a place for a potted plant.
I read somewhere they were having to do some engine overhauling to make the areas as large as they wanted, so they're working on that. Not sure how big they will eventually be, though.
The ships in Elite are starships, now Zeros and Wildcats in "space". The single seater light fighter in the style of Starfuries and TIE-fighters are indeed the Condor it's imperial rival (and I expect to see more such small craft later). Those are very limited for actual gameplay, so I'm happy to fly my "torpedo boat" Cobra instead.
This from somebody whose happiest early teenage experience was the original Wing Commander btw
I agree. It should be a clear difference between civilian and military spacecraft. Orange is fine for civilian ships,but i can't see this work in a military ship. Orange is to "warm" color for a military ship,and should instead go for something like maybe "iceblue" if you know what i mean?
- Status