Sorry Yamiks and all naysayers, but Odyssey is BETTER than Horizons

[CMDR Sophie Joanne]

Low expectations

Nope - it's knowing my 1050ti is old tech and needs replacing. I'd be stupid to think on-foot stuff can be rendered as quickly as space stuff (there are orders of magitude more poly's to draw!).

How bad was Horizons for you? Other than a very occasional disconnect I can't say I had issues with Horizons (I don't multi-crew).

I used to get scarlett kraits after a few hours in Horizons. Odyssey I can leave on for 8+ hours without a single disconnect.
EDIT: I did change internet package (same supplier) around the time of Odyssey launch, so that might be a contributing factor.

Fdev have acknowledged a large number of bugs.

Yes, because other people are experiencing and reporting them. I'm not saying any of the bug reports are 'made-up' - not at all! I'm just saying that, personally, 90% of the bugs either haven't happened with me, or I just never noticed when they did (top tip - never employ me as a QA tester )

Low expectations - again Fdev have acknowledged serious issues with planet tech.

They've acknowledged alot of people dont like it and "certain things aren't working as they shoud" - ie LODs not loading properly. The terrain formations are how they were planned to be.... (although it may change if people still don't like it after they fixed the bits that aren't working properly) is what I understood the situation to be

Low expectations

Nope, not really. The in-ship missions aren't very involving, so the on-foot missions are following that. If anything, the on-foot missions take more 'doing' than the ship missions.

I'm not suggesting you aren't pleased with Odyssey, just that some of your statements are 'good - but' .

There are definitely gameplay things I would change if i was "managing" Odyssey development and more things I would add (mission variety, again), but the mission designs aren't fundamental, so can be tweaked, added to, etc etc etc at a later date (my main gripe with missions (Horizons missions too) is they way they are "go exactly here", where I would like to actually do a bit of searching and investigating, for myself, to find the location...)
I'm not saying anything they've done is groundbreaking (apart from the flight model and Galaxy, but they aren't new....), but the parts of the game I like to play have been improved over Horizons, IMO.
I also kinda feel I have to put a 'but', or I'll be jumped on as "white-knighting" or "paid by frontier", to a degree...

Had a great meal out, the service was brilliant but the food was late. The building has been condemned, but I didn't notice any problems. The quality of the food was good (apart from the steak was all gristle but I expected it to be a little worse than the other place). I loved the menu, but there was a lack of choice. So all in all I recommend it for a great night out....

I really don't like going out to eat - my first choice is always take-away noodles!

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

I just thought about this... is it appropriate for a thread title to be calling out another forum member directly over their opinion of the game? I get that it isn't offensive specifically but it opens the door for less diplomatic members to think it's OK to call out forum members directly in thread titles, which isn't ok.

Perhaps it would be better if the Name of the forum member was removed from the title of the thread, in the name of Diplomacy of course

 

[PRORABBIT67]

I think there are a lot of people who think Yamiks should be deleted.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Low expectations

How bad was Horizons for you? Other than a very occasional disconnect I can't say I had issues with Horizons (I don't multi-crew).

Fdev have acknowledged a large number of bugs.

Low expectations - again Fdev have acknowledged serious issues with planet tech.

Low expectations

I'm not suggesting you aren't pleased with Odyssey, just that some of your statements are 'good - but' .

Had a great meal out, the service was brilliant but the food was late. The building has been condemned, but I didn't notice any problems. The quality of the food was good (apart from the steak was all gristle but I expected it to be a little worse than the other place). I loved the menu, but there was a lack of choice. So all in all I recommend it for a great night out....

I see this in almost every game forum. Say you like X, and someone comes along saying you need to have higher standards or some such.

I dunno man. All the people who tell me so seem so chronically dissatisfied. It's just not my kinda vibe I suppose.

 

[Raliel]

I think there are a lot of people who think Yamiks should be deleted.

Just too much for my fragile state

 

[babelfisch]

I think people are a bit optimistic about "what happens next". I'm assuming Odyssey has to be a pretty huge success to justify doing any more major things for ED. With the current reactions I'm guessing they'd just be adding pretty minor things from now on.

I guess it's more complicated than that. First, I believe David Braben is still enthusiastic about the game. If they wanted to abandon Elite they could've done that before spending major resources on the development of Odyssey. To some people Odyssey seems 'cheap', but if you look more closely you can see that considerable effort went into it. Creating a linear level for CoD is easy, having scripted scenes as well. There is nothing ground breaking about it, especially if you are basically doing the same thing since 2000. Odyssey is much more complicated than that, you could even say it's revolutionary. That doesn't mean people need to like it, but not many other developers would be willing or able to achieve something similar. Which is true for the entire game by the way.

It's a pretty good base for more features, if they are delivered via free updates or paid DLC, nobody knows. Personally I guess they need to add some free stuff first if they want to sell something to the disgruntled player base / get new customers.

The other problem is that Odyssey is probably going to be a financial disaster if they don't manage to improve it. I seriously doubt that the sales currently cover development costs. And there is no way they are selling millions of units unless people give the game more favourable reviews, not even when it's on a discount. The only way to get out of that situation is to fix the issues first and then giving us some new stuff.

They managed to improve Horizons which initially was a major failure just like EDO. I don't know if you remember, but at release Horizons was like a standalone game with its own Steamcharts and the number of Horizons players was way lower than the base game.

Spending some time on more content can only improve the situation, and since all the basics are already there it shouldn't be that much effort.

In the end, Elite is still their most successful franchise, with a very active and loyal player base. If they don't do something to keep us interested the doomsayers will finally be right, and I seriously doubt that they are giving up their best horse just because it had a bad start. The game was in worse situations before.

 

[babelfisch]

How bad was Horizons for you? Other than a very occasional disconnect I can't say I had issues with Horizons (I don't multi-crew).

Sorry if I sound like a snob, but your forum account was only created this year. You have no clue how bad it was unless you were there to witness the burning forum and pitchforks over the last seven years.

Personally I always managed to expect very little which is why I was pleasantly surprised with most updates. But I've seen the riots...

 

[Raliel]

I guess it's more complicated than that. First, I believe David Braben is still enthusiastic about the game. If they wanted to abandon Elite they could've done that before spending major resources on the development of Odyssey. To some people Odyssey seems 'cheap', but if you look more closely you can see that considerable effort went into it. Creating a linear level for CoD is easy, having scripted scenes as well. There is nothing ground breaking about it, especially if you are basically doing the same thing since 2000. Odyssey is much more complicated than that, you could even say it's revolutionary. That doesn't mean people need to like it, but not many other developers would be willing or able to achieve something similar. Which is true for the entire game by the way.

It's a pretty good base for more features, if they delivered via free updates or paid DLC, nobody knows. Personally I guess they need to add some free stuff first if they want to sell something to the disgruntled player base / get new customers.

The other problem is that Odyssey is probably going to be a financial disaster if they don't manage to improve it. I seriously doubt that the sales currently cover development costs. And there is no way they are selling millions of units unless people give the game more favourable reviews, not even when it's on a discount. The only way to get out of that situation is to fix the issues first and then giving us some new stuff.

They managed to improve Horizons which initially was a major failure just like EDO. I don't know if you remember, but at release Horizons was like a standalone game with its own Steamcharts and the number of Horizons players was way lower than the base game.

Spending some time on more content can only improve the situation, and since all the basics are already there it shouldn't be that much effort.

In the end, Elite is still their most successful franchise, with a very active and loyal player base. If they don't do something to keep us interested the doomsayers will finally be right, and I seriously doubt that they are giving up their best horse just because it had a bad start. The game was in worse situations before.

I suspect (and only suspect) that ED and its iterations generally markets at an age range slightly older than the classic game model, which may be why trying to make it a first-person shooter (in many ways) and to focus on that end of the product was a mistake, perhaps, it would have been better to focus on the exploration and single-person exploration and combat elements first, and to try to add depth of story or meaning to gameplay. I love what EDO adds to the game, I would not stick around if I did not, but I really want it to be meaningfully mixed into the whole game, and I would love it if there was less obfuscating about what is going on from the developers. It is so Tantalisingly close to what could be a new epoch of gaming, yet falls so inches away

 

[Sapient6]

I suspect (and only suspect) that ED and its iterations generally markets at an age range slightly older than the classic game model, which may be why trying to make it a first-person shooter (in many ways) and to focus on that end of the product was a mistake, perhaps, it would have been better to focus on the exploration and single-person exploration and combat elements first, and to try to add depth of story or meaning to gameplay.

Hey now, old folks can like a shooter, and we might even be a better target for Odessey's shooter mechanics: the FPS games we maybe played in our twenties were all pretty straightforward "shoot the stuff" games, without all this new fancy stuff the kids are doing these days. And while I sure would have preferred legs to focus on exploration stuff, does FDev even know how to do that? Because CITATION NEEDED.

 

[Celedon]

I just thought about this... is it appropriate for a thread title to be calling out another forum member directly over their opinion of the game? I get that it isn't offensive specifically but it opens the door for less diplomatic members to think it's OK to call out forum members directly in thread titles, which isn't ok.

Perhaps it would be better if the Name of the forum member was removed from the title of the thread, in the name of Diplomacy of course

If you've made yourself a public figure and influencer in regards to the game then yes I believe it is appropriate.

To a point obviously.

 

[Ronzer]

I have no idea how anybody can listen to Yamiks for more than three seconds.

Let me try this reply in my best Yamiks impersonation...

"It's easy, you hit play....then count 1....2... and so on and so forth...ah sh*t...even I cant do it...Burr Pit it is.."

 

[dewelcodex1]

Now that bugs have been fixed, and even if everything is not perfect yet, I can say it with some confidence. Some stuff dosen't work, yep, SRV still lags, yep, but IU is actually better once that you've figured it out, the game has more to offer, and perf-wise, well, it will get better (it already had) but if you haven't upgraded you PC since Horizons in 2015 and you expect to play Odyssey 60FPS in 2021, I mean, wake up... Also, myself I had a lot of reservations against the game at first, before realizing that actually what I had in mind existed, simply iI haden't noticed (like the toggle-switch in equipment IU to avoid selling your old equipment). The more I play it, the more I realize that most issues we had simply don't exist, but people (Latvia anyone?) don't want to plainly admit that.

Sorry CMDR Duanes, but it's not better!

 

[babelfisch]

I suspect (and only suspect) that ED and its iterations generally markets at an age range slightly older than the classic game model, which may be why trying to make it a first-person shooter (in many ways) and to focus on that end of the product was a mistake, perhaps, it would have been better to focus on the exploration and single-person exploration and combat elements first, and to try to add depth of story or meaning to gameplay.

I am going to look at this from a few different perpectives, not saying you are wrong but as always things are more complicated:

You are right that Elite players are older than the average player, but I know several older people who enjoy FPS. Some of them are over 70 and still play the original Half-Life. Doom was released 1993. Duke Nukem in 1991. Castle Wolfenstein was released in 1981 (!). Sure, that one doesn't count as FPS but you get the idea.

Anyway, I wouldn't even say that Odyssey is that much focused on combat. In fact, it's probably the smallest part of the expansion. Sure, most missions do involve shooting a few scavengers, but I spend way more time with scavenging, breaking into buildings, sneaking around, distinguishing fires, etc. Odyssey offers just as much combat as the base game (which also sends pirates after you for every mission you do, for every mineral you mine and for every ton of cargo you carry). I do agree that the exploration gameplay loop should be expanded though. On the other hand, exploration originally consisted of honk, scoop and point into one direction. Everything they added to it is universally (pun intended) hated by the exploration community.

In my opinion EDO launch failed for two reasons:

First, the game was rushed and needed more development time. The alpha was good, skipping the beta and turning it into a live release was a very bad decision.

Second, the diversity of the player base. We argued in countless threads (we could fill books about it) if Frontier should focus on atmospheric planets (the real ones, not the tenuous stuff we got with Odyssey) or on walking around. Half the community was always for atmos and the other half was for legs. And even the legs camp was divided between walking on planets and ship interiors (which now seems to be the holy grail despite the fact that thousands of people said it would be a waste of time). So even if they had managed to release Odyssey in the most awesome way, there would still be 75% who don't like it.
The former could've been avoided, the latter not.


Obviously nothing of what I just said devalues all the justified criticism.

I love what EDO adds to the game, I would not stick around if I did not, but I really want it to be meaningfully mixed into the whole game, and I would love it if there was less obfuscating about what is going on from the developers. It is so Tantalisingly close to what could be a new epoch of gaming, yet falls so inches away

Fully agree.

 

[StevieG]

I agree with the OP however 18months of no galnet news or community goal can never be justified or forgiven.

 

[simulacrae]

I think there are a lot of people who think Yamiks should be deleted.

And alot of people like his content. But ya there do seem to be quite a few who wear their dislike for him as some kind of badge… I just assume they are the armband wearing type.

 

[Erei]

And alot of people like his content. But ya there do seem to be quite a few who wear their dislike for him as some kind of badge… I just assume they are the armband wearing type.

There is a big irony in the fact that the CMDRs who hates Yamicks so much, are negative toward him because he is negative toward the game.

You can't make that up.

 

[PRORABBIT67]

I neither like or dislike him I just have no use for him.

 

[Erei]

I neither like or dislike him I just have no use for him.

 

[Sysmon]

There is a big irony in the fact that the CMDRs who hates Yamicks so much, are negative toward him because he is negative toward the game.

You can't make that up.

Not hating them, just not a fan of the style. It loses credibility, especially when subjectively wrong.

S

 

[Mogen Teras]

It loses credibility, especially when subjectively wrong.

I hope you realize the contradiction of what you just said.