The only thing wrong with ED...

[Shurdist]

This sums it up:
"I've written before about how EVE's single-shard design leads to more cohesive communities and makes actions in the game world much more meaningful, and I still believe that's true. Territorial warfare in EVE is significant only because there's a single copy of each star system to fight over, and piracy is an actual threat only because you can't bypass it by switching instances. News of wars and other player events are also a big deal to EVE players because they all happen on the same server and so are relevant to every single player. Elite's heavily instanced nature means it currently isn't capable of that level of interaction, which I think makes the gameplay a lot shallower."(Drain 2014)

linked from:
http://massively.joystiq.com/2014/12/21/eve-evolved-eve-online-vs-elite-dangerous/

 

[xaccers]

e:d isn't Eve, doesn't need to be, and hopefully never will be.

 

[Tacheel]

Unfortunately the shard limit is a technical limitation based on the peer to peer model being used. It's unlikely to change unless there is a massive U-turn on the network and funding model. Changing it would also go against the gamestyle they have sold it under 'play it your own way'.

Also: Despite the sharding, the background simulation is still the same for all players. The same wars are going on, players are still drawn to the same systems and more likely to encounter other players should they choose to.

 

[TheArtist]

Unfortunately the shard limit is a technical limitation based on the peer to peer model being used.

Not exactly. Rather because its real-time fighting in opposition to the RTS-fighting in most MMOs and Eve.
In a real-time environment (like most FPS games) lag kills the cat. RTS-systems are less prone to that. ED is real-time combat, hence you cant scale it very well. Bullet precision and lag dont get along very well. (also needs very much more network traffic). If you scale it up with tons of players you run into issues pretty fast. And yes, Planetside did a good job, but still - those who played it know about this limits.

 

[Brakespear]

This is the only multiplayer game I have ever played and felt so isolated, and while I don't see how Eve's system could work here, the current system doesn't work here either.

Still, in many days of gaming, I have not spoken to a single human being. I have not been spoken to by a single human being. I have not *observed* communication between human beings. I have not interacted with anyone in any natural manner, except to run the hell away when they tried to interdict me. And this is in the dense "starter" regions where you can't go five meters without seeing multiple hollow contacts (and note, I'm a miner/explorer, always on the look out for some jolly cooperation).

Quite frankly, it's not a multiplayer game at the moment, because it has absolutely no in-game community whatsoever (and no, the occasional scrap of interaction with a lone stranger is not "community").

Neither is the persistence of background lore a foundation for community - if it was, then we could consider any singleplayer game "multiplayer" on the basis that lots of people are playing it.

I wouldn't have a problem with any of this if the emphasis was not so firmly on it *being* a multiplayer game.

 

[Shurdist]

So it is essentially it’s a technical limit which would require better technology, or would it just need different server architecture?

 

[Tacheel]

Not exactly. Rather because its real-time fighting in opposition to the RTS-fighting in most MMOs and Eve.
In a real-time environment (like most FPS games) lag kills the cat. RTS-systems are less prone to that. ED is real-time combat, hence you cant scale it very well. Bullet precision and lag dont get along very well. (also needs very much more network traffic). If you scale it up with tons of players you run into issues pretty fast. And yes, Planetside did a good job, but still - those who played it know about this limits.

Indeed, thanks for going into the technical stuff i bypassed.