The Ars Technica Review

A great and realistic review of our beloved game. He hit the nail on the head: "And yet, in spite of how broken the game was at launch and all the ways in which it remains plagued with bugs even now after two major patches, Elite: Dangerous is so damn good that it transcends its problems."
Attention Lee Hutchinson: Thank you!
Sirius Seven
I think it's time for more secure core systems, or an Open PvE mode, so we can still have people play online together.
There is a solution: We need to band together in wings of fighters and rub out the bad pirates infesting the popular areas. We should be accompanying traders when they go on their trade runs with FDLs, Vultures and Pythons. We need to band together and show the scurvy sea dogs who is in control and show fellowship and support for our fellow CMDRS. I will never play in Solo, its too easy and my fighting skills would rust up and get soft.
 
An excellent review - I'd recommend all the development team read it and consider it carefully. I believe it succinctly and rationally echoes the views of the vast majority of players who love the game and want it to succeed.
 
There is a solution: We need to band together in wings of fighters and rub out the bad pirates infesting the popular areas. We should be accompanying traders when they go on their trade runs with FDLs, Vultures and Pythons. We need to band together and show the scurvy sea dogs who is in control and show fellowship and support for our fellow CMDRS. I will never play in Solo, its too easy and my fighting skills would rust up and get soft.

Well it doesn't help that there are people in Eravate now hunting and ramming new Steam users on sight. FD need to get a grip on this for newbie zones. Realism be damned, I'd vote for system authority vessels in high security systems to be armed with super powerful torps not available to players able to one shot any ship. Think the equivalent of calling "guards" in Ultima Online.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=134527
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=134856
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=134852
 
Last edited:
Anyone notice that in the screenshot showing the ranks, he is Harmless, Penniless and Aimless, yet is flying a ship with a rebuy cost of 1.5 Mil and a further 47+ Mil in the bank!

How is that possible???
 
Anyone notice that in the screenshot showing the ranks, he is Harmless, Penniless and Aimless, yet is flying a ship with a rebuy cost of 1.5 Mil and a further 47+ Mil in the bank!

How is that possible???

I saw that as well! My guess: as a reviewer he was given a lot of money to start off.

It was an interesting and indepth review, one that seems to cover the state of the game well.
 
Last edited:
I saw that as well! My guess: as a reviewer he was given a lot of money to start off.

No, that shot is from the Mac beta (see the version string in the lower-left). I realized that I'd forgotten to get a screenshot of my ranks and rather than reboot back into Windows to grab one, I fired up the Mac beta and snagged one in there. Right now all the ships in the Mac beta (except the FdL, looks like) are 100Cr, so it's easy to buy Anacondas for 100Cr, strip the for parts for a few million, and store them. Then you can kit out a ship with the proceeds.

Like all the post-launch betas, the Mac beta is on an isolated universe and everything that happens there will be wiped when the beta ends (and possibly before), so nothing that happens there really matters. It's just for testing.
 
It's a well written review but I can't really say that I agree with it.

What I do agree on is that the in-the-cockpit experience of flying your own darn spaceship is second to none, especially if you have an oculus rift (I can't imagine playing ED any other way at this point), and that it never gets old.

However I just honestly can't agree on the content side of things. Because honestly at this point ED is pretty much a tech demo. A very cool tech demo exactly because of the in-the-cockpit experience pointed out above but honestly a tech demo is pretty much all it is. And no there isn't a lot of things to do and no it doesn't take hundreds of hours to nooks and crannies of the content. The content consists of fetch quests, random spawns and badly written, typo filled text boxes (that sometimes aren't even in the game) detailing something that might resemble lore if there just was any sign of those things existing in the sterile and personality lacking universe the actual player sees him/herself.

ED is at its best in the first few hours when you're just learning new cool things (again about that in-cockpit experience) but once you get to the point where the main game mechanics (flying around, pew-pew, and basic mechanics for all the professions) aren't new to you anymore the whole thing starts breaking down. Because at that point what your focus is going to be on is the actual content of the game, the meat on the bones so to say, and the sad fact is that it's lacking in the extreme.

In classic MMORPG terms ED is a game with second to none movement and fighting mechanics, gorgeous graphics and an unprecedented world size but the world is a flat plain with a few trees and houses here and there, there are only 5 or so quest templates that get repeated over and over again throughout the world and 4 of those ask you to collect and deliver pig intestines. On top of this the enemy difficulty is same across the whole world, enemies are spawned randomly and the orcs and NPCs you meet are gone the next time you visit the same place. There are only 3 house models, no castles, no secret hideouts for your enemies, nothing to collect, craft, own, find, only money. There are no bosses that you dream of catching and beating, no famous difficult game zones and every faction in this world is nothing but a progress bar on some random UI element.

I mean I don't think ED needs to fix all this to be considered a good game in my eyes but I do know that adding to the width by planetary landings or station/ship internals or fps modes isn't going to help. Thargoids might though.

What really is needed is content. There needs to be something to collect (for example ship upgrades that are hard to get, trophies etc), something to find (secrets such as hidden pirate bases, mysterious phenomena etc), some characters to interact with, new looking places to visit, variety of missions that lead to different outcomes and open different opportunities, dangerous and special areas of space, more of the lore incorporated into the sterile space.

And before at least some of those happen I can't really call ED a good game. A good tech demo and proof of concept certainly, but not a game.
 
Last edited:
Great summary of the game as it stands.


I agree. It was a good choice that makes the game-play much better.

Besides, most of the ships in space opera movies don't yaw very well, either: X-wings, TIEs, Vipers, etc.

The Millennium Falcon's flight dynamic is dead simple:

- Incredible yaw rate when hovering low, then making a turn to fly off into the sunset... when flat spins would be the coolest-looking manoeuvre by far.

- Complete reliance on pitch/roll when flying at crazy speeds through Death Star internal structures... when pitch/roll would be the coolest-looking manoeuvre by far.

;)
 
A nice, well thought review, even if I disagree with some points.

It is so rare to find a decent review of anything nowadays - so many times, sadly, the reviewer is either on the publisher's payroll, or did not even play the reviewed game for more than a couple of hours, and starts drawing the most asisinine conclusions after this extensive playing time.

OP, thanks for sharing, I will be checking the ars technica articles from now on.
 
Yeah, I've been reading Ars Technica for years. They have some amazing articles on there. As odd as it sounds, their Mac OS X reviews are the best reads of the year. Though truthfully, the site is a shadow of what it once was. Most of the gaming staff moved on to other sites like Polygon and Penny Arcade a while back. And the current gaming writer, Kyle Orland, just has some very... inexperienced views when it comes to the current state of affairs in gaming culture and in what makes a truly great game.

Kyle Orland has a really bad habit of what I call "Gamer ADHD", in which he picks up a game, and develops extreme opinions about it before he bothers to get deep enough into it to become educated in the nuances and the reasons why the developer made the game that way. And that comes through abundantly in his writing. In short, Kyle never spends enough time on the games he reviews. Which is why I was VERY pleased to see Lee's name at the top of the review. He's about the only gamer I trust anymore on Ars.

I agreed with Kyle's predecessor, Ben Kuchera, on just about every review I read. But I can't remember the last review Kyle's written that I've seen eye to eye on him with.

Though the writers on the other sections of Ars are pretty much all top notch.
 
Last edited:
Excellent review, fair and balanced. A joy to read.
Other than one or two minor differences of opinion, I agree with it completely.

I don't doubt the game will go to 2020 and beyond...
 
A decent review. Shame all the comments show no one seems to realise you don't need to spend hundreds on a stick and vr to enjoy the game. I use mouse and keyboard just fine and love the game.

The only bit I don't agree with in the review is the statement that the flight model is nonsensical. The flight model makes combat so much more fun than yaw-wars.

Yeah I got by on my Xbox controller for months, i eventually got a cheap stick but still prefer the xbox controller because i can slouch with it as well as look around the cockpit easily enough!
 
Back
Top Bottom