It affects the Legacy galaxy, not the Live galaxy. These two galaxies will be completely separate. But both will still be online/multiplayer.
Time frames on pulling the plug?
- Thread starter jojje
- Start date
Of course the legacy galaxy will slowly diverge from the live galaxy with the eventual probability that it becomes unrecognisable to the live one. Still, with no Galnet and no CGs, it's not going to be like current events will make no sense in there as you won't see them unless you're in 4.0.
It'll probably end up being an arena for settling old BGS scores against opponents who only play in live.
so we are safe for another decade, at least…
The usual doom suspects have arrived I see.
No its not being shut down. Yes they have plans for more updates. Yes you can continue playing the old galaxy. Yes they are seperating the BGS between legacy and live.
Oh and for the 500th time. They had to pull the plug on Mac because Apple, being Apple, would not support openGL4.5/4.6.
No its not being shut down. Yes they have plans for more updates. Yes you can continue playing the old galaxy. Yes they are seperating the BGS between legacy and live.
Oh and for the 500th time. They had to pull the plug on Mac because Apple, being Apple, would not support openGL4.5/4.6.
Last edited:
I'm stunned by that one, it gives console players less than a week to shift everything to PC.Well this comment lasted for like an hour before being shot down in flames....
RIP 3.8
My console exploration alt is returning to the Bubble at max speed.
I figure I'll have to move all my carriers out of the Bubble prior to the split. Not sure if console carriers will be duplicated in 4.0 with absolutely no way to shift them, (I suppose they would become some sort of orbital graveyard...)
Good deduction. Checked out Dual Universe since I'd never heard of it. Seemed more like an NMS copy-cat though (with less polish) than anything in the same sphere as Elite. So your point stands. As long as there is nothing in the same ballpark, and FD churns out some new crumbs once a year at least, they should be able to attract some sporadic expansion purchases.
Since Elite 2 is still strong, better than Dangerous in some regard, the franschise can almost be considered timeless. Toddlers when ED launched can now clonk the keyboard on their own and have matured into potential customers even if the parents were not. Perhaps that's FD's gameplan with Elite; Just stick around as long as no one else releases a title in the field. Even if they've saturated the market, generational shifts will sustain the small remaining but constant customer base organically.
Since they're running on AWS, they can cost-optimize the running cost down close to nothing with a bit of refactoring of the backend code (if even needed). A handful of ongoing PDLC sales should cover that.
That is indeed good evidence that the cut-off point is still at least a year or two out. Thx!Elite Dangerous: In Case You Missed It | Update 14 Release Date and More!
Greetings Commanders & ED crew. I've been in the mix for just over a year now. I've tried most aspects of the game, stick to open play, got ganked and reprimanded two days ago for participating in the Kingfisher supply CG, and then managed to get through with two loads of goodies for the...forums.frontier.co.uk
Financial findings
To get some additional insight from a complementary angle, I looked at the numbers.While FD doesn't break out cost and revenue by title, they do offer some useful hints though.
Interpretation: Elite investment was significant for FD but was a financial dud (= 92% profit drop). The fault lies with the stupid players who did not appreciate the tremendous brilliance and value the team offered. To mitigate we'll mostly limit ourselves to adding low-cost "galnet tweets on player community events" going forward in terms of updates.
Interpretation: We see little future with Elite because those players don't Get It. As such we're hence going to focus almost exclusively on more run-of-the-mill genres for a different player base, since the numbers show those at least appreciate our efforts.
I do hope my interpretations are incorrect, but it doesn't look like good signs for a prolonged shelf-life of the game.
Same thing has been said since the day before ED launched, hasn't it?
It is doubtful that Frontier wish to prolong the shelf-life, as the 'live' version is only going to run on hardware that can currently handle the demands of H4.0, which, according to some forum posters are very few.... The playerbase allegedly will shrink to double digits and Frontier can shut the servers down as 'nobody is playing'
(Yes, I'm cynical, but not about Frontier)
I must have missed that. I was in the Beta and played a bit after initial launch. At that time the financials looked great. Perhaps those sort of "sayings" came later.
So from a financial perspective, I'd definitely say those numbers are conveying a new message.
Have they communicated more stringent hardware specs for 4.0 ?
Saw none of that in the announcement nor their FAQ.
EDO's system requirements are also 4.0's requirements, because they're the same client:
Odyssey: System Requirements
And Frontier, being Frontier, wouldn't support Metal
There are a lot of companies being Frontier then...And Frontier, being Frontier, wouldn't support Metal
Thanks! Seems the specs are really modest. I have a 9 yro CPU with a 7 year old GPU, and those are still rated above the recommended spec for 4.0. Could it be laptop players then that are reacting to the required specs?EDO's system requirements are also 4.0's requirements, because they're the same client:
Odyssey: System Requirements
I don't think they have a date to pull the plug. As long as there's enough active players, the servers will stay online. Ultima Online was released in 1997 and it's still available.
No, it's just that the recommended spec is incredibly optimistic considering the likely monitor that sort of PC will be paired with [1].
I have pretty much exactly the recommended spec as my desktop - slightly more RAM, slightly different CPU, same GPU - and intensive parts of Odyssey will still drop it to 40 FPS, with it barely holding at 60 in most surface situations, at 1920x1080. Graphics settings on High since it doesn't actually make any difference to frame rate over setting them to Low.
That is a lot better than the 15-20 FPS I was getting on release day in similar circumstances, or the 15-20 FPS anywhere on the surface in the Alpha, when that was also the "recommended" spec - a lot of what you see may well be from then when no-one was getting acceptable performance except David Braben, whose PC the game had apparently been optimised around.
If you're playing in Horizons mode you'll avoid most of the really heavy parts of it, though - if you're above the recommended spec you should be able to get a constant 60 in space and even Horizons-style surface bases, at reasonable resolutions and graphics settings.
[1] Which also means that you see performance complaints from people with 30x0 series cards and PCs well above the recommended spec - they would run the game perfectly well at 1920x1080, but the sort of person who buys a 30x0 card for their gaming also bought a bigger monitor, and really doesn't want to run it below its native resolution or frame rate.
That is indeed worrying. Hopefully the e.o. nov release includes a fix for that. 30x0 sounds insane. Would be really annoying to have to pull my 3090 from the work box just for gaming on a 1200p monitor :/
Ahhh the good old days sigh !!!If only braben and team can reskin the one remaining element that gave Elite 2 a bit of a soul, that would be fantastic. After that they can put both 3.8 and 4.0 into legacy mode.
Want to be able to land in London and Paris again
View attachment 333669View attachment 333670View attachment 333671