Okay this is my pitch for why Frontier Development or someone else should be developing a new FFE type game right now 
Apart from Frontier and FFE, since the 90s there has not been one semi-realistic space sim developed. Perhaps one could consider Orbiter as realistic but unfortunately it only modelled our inner solar system and had no real or immersive gameplay attached.
Since Frontier was released we have discovered much more about our universe. In the early 90s we had not yet discovered the first exoplanet, and the idea of a Galaxy map - as in Frontier/FFE - with planetary systems was technically still a fantasy. Of course, many space/astronomy enthusiasts logically assumed that our solar system was not unique and there were planets orbiting other stars but there was an absence of observational evidence until about 2000.
As of yesterday we have 270 confirmed exoplanets; mostly hot jupiters for the simple reason they are immense, closely orbiting their native star making them much easier to spot. However Gilese 581 c and d are said to be no bigger than 5 and 8 Earth masses. So soon we are getting closer to spotting earth sized rocky planets within their star's habitable zones.
What has this all to do with Frontier/FFE? Well for a start it legitimises both games and their modelling from the perspective of reality. The Galaxy map in both games created a real world, real stars, real distances with real physics, and almost real planets. One can forgive Braben & Co not including gas giants.
Today we also have a slowly burgeoning commercial space industry, with 100s of private space companies developing their own propulsion and space applications. For instance, the hook up between Branson's Virgin and Scales Composites (the team behind Spaceship1) is a good example of what the future of space exploration holds for mankind.
We can also see that a new space race has emerged and this time there are multiple players such as the EU, US, China, Russia, India and perhaps other nations which will only quicken the pace of space exploration even further. All this competition is great from a human's point of view. We thrive on competion and outdoing eachother in achievements etc...
So where is the space sim to herald this great coming of age? In the time since Frontier and FFE were developed there has not been one *realistic* space sim released - not one IMO.
Frontier/FFE were classics because of the realsitic nature of the uniiverse protrayed, and the dynamic capability to do what you wanted to do when you wanted to do it.
Im sure NASA and other space organisations have excellent space sims which model planetary gravity; but other than Frontier and FFE, no other space *games* have delivered on the reality of gravity. Gravity is a frightening force of nature and should be modelled as it is. Space sims where you turn on a dime are a joke and dumb down the whole games market by fantasising about the physics of our universe - only so a few lazy people wont get too bored before they switch off.
Another unique factor which I challenge anyone to find in another space sim is the realistic sense of distance portrayed in Frontier/FFE. Okay so the idea of a hyperdrive is fantasy but we know now that space is warped around very large masses so the idea of warping space is theoretically legitimate. Leaving aside the hyperdrive as an exception to the rule, Frontier and FFE model distances more or less correctly, and the fact that without the stardreamer one would take days and weeks to travel multiple AUs delivers a real sense of the massive distances seperating stars from stars, and even planets from their stars.
In my opinion its these reality factors which made the Elite series games so popular. It made space travel an endeavour and something to be taken seriously, measuring how much fuel was needed for jump to x, then to y, and finally to destination z. There was a sense of accomplishment by not using the stardreamer on the final lap of an inward journey so that one had to work out de-acceleration when approaching a planet - or risk smashing into it.
Another factor unique to the Frontier/FFE was the random generator for stars and planets. For some odd reason developers have a problem with random generators these days. They feel they have to handpick every nook and cranny in regards to the physical universe/space in a game, so that it looks *nice*. Thats not how nature works. Nature's basic rule of indeterminsm is evidenced by what we understand about quantum fluctuations and the uncertainty principle. Nature didnt build this galaxy by hand but that did'nt stop earth being a beautiful place. And no-one has of yet outdone Nature and the physics of the universe for beauty and dynamics.
My point being the random star and planet generation in Frontier/FFE was accurate and another unique factor creating real world immersion. Again this hasnt been done since those two games.
But what has been done alot and is not unique is pretty graphics. The fact is that in our part of space for hundreds of lightyears it is pitch black. In our neighborhood the cosmos are not decorated with artlike floating nebulae. In Frontier/FFE - depending on your graphcs settings - when you came out of jump you were in deepest darkest space. It was only when nearing a planet that one began to see colours etc - which again is totally in keeping with space in our solar system.
So why hasnt there been a genuine realistic space sim since FFE? I just cannot understand it and considering that astronomy has actually confirmed that the galaxy modelled in Frontier/FFE were reasonably legitimate it is even more perplexing.
How much money can it cost to model real world space physics and the effects of planetary gravity? The figures, scales and matrix for all these calculations have already been done a thousand times over. If it could be done as well as accomplished by Braben & Co back in the early 90s using C and C++ then surely it cannot be too difficult to do the same again today.
So I can only assume that its the graphics and expectations of graphics which hold back development of a new Elite, or FFE clone. I think that people who liked those games did not play them for the graphics; it was for the realistic and immersive qualities which hooked people who had more than a few moments concentration span.
There are too many games to count which are based on fantasy worlds and beautiful graphics. We have all these virtual world games which are boring because they are virutal worlds with severe limitations. They have graphics which are prettier than the real world! How ridiculous is that.
I hope that the new Elite or whatever its called sticks to the original foundation of what made the Elite series special, and almost eternal from a playability point of view.
I joined this forum just to have my rant. Time for lunch ..bye
Apart from Frontier and FFE, since the 90s there has not been one semi-realistic space sim developed. Perhaps one could consider Orbiter as realistic but unfortunately it only modelled our inner solar system and had no real or immersive gameplay attached.
Since Frontier was released we have discovered much more about our universe. In the early 90s we had not yet discovered the first exoplanet, and the idea of a Galaxy map - as in Frontier/FFE - with planetary systems was technically still a fantasy. Of course, many space/astronomy enthusiasts logically assumed that our solar system was not unique and there were planets orbiting other stars but there was an absence of observational evidence until about 2000.
As of yesterday we have 270 confirmed exoplanets; mostly hot jupiters for the simple reason they are immense, closely orbiting their native star making them much easier to spot. However Gilese 581 c and d are said to be no bigger than 5 and 8 Earth masses. So soon we are getting closer to spotting earth sized rocky planets within their star's habitable zones.
What has this all to do with Frontier/FFE? Well for a start it legitimises both games and their modelling from the perspective of reality. The Galaxy map in both games created a real world, real stars, real distances with real physics, and almost real planets. One can forgive Braben & Co not including gas giants.
Today we also have a slowly burgeoning commercial space industry, with 100s of private space companies developing their own propulsion and space applications. For instance, the hook up between Branson's Virgin and Scales Composites (the team behind Spaceship1) is a good example of what the future of space exploration holds for mankind.
We can also see that a new space race has emerged and this time there are multiple players such as the EU, US, China, Russia, India and perhaps other nations which will only quicken the pace of space exploration even further. All this competition is great from a human's point of view. We thrive on competion and outdoing eachother in achievements etc...
So where is the space sim to herald this great coming of age? In the time since Frontier and FFE were developed there has not been one *realistic* space sim released - not one IMO.
Frontier/FFE were classics because of the realsitic nature of the uniiverse protrayed, and the dynamic capability to do what you wanted to do when you wanted to do it.
Im sure NASA and other space organisations have excellent space sims which model planetary gravity; but other than Frontier and FFE, no other space *games* have delivered on the reality of gravity. Gravity is a frightening force of nature and should be modelled as it is. Space sims where you turn on a dime are a joke and dumb down the whole games market by fantasising about the physics of our universe - only so a few lazy people wont get too bored before they switch off.
Another unique factor which I challenge anyone to find in another space sim is the realistic sense of distance portrayed in Frontier/FFE. Okay so the idea of a hyperdrive is fantasy but we know now that space is warped around very large masses so the idea of warping space is theoretically legitimate. Leaving aside the hyperdrive as an exception to the rule, Frontier and FFE model distances more or less correctly, and the fact that without the stardreamer one would take days and weeks to travel multiple AUs delivers a real sense of the massive distances seperating stars from stars, and even planets from their stars.
In my opinion its these reality factors which made the Elite series games so popular. It made space travel an endeavour and something to be taken seriously, measuring how much fuel was needed for jump to x, then to y, and finally to destination z. There was a sense of accomplishment by not using the stardreamer on the final lap of an inward journey so that one had to work out de-acceleration when approaching a planet - or risk smashing into it.
Another factor unique to the Frontier/FFE was the random generator for stars and planets. For some odd reason developers have a problem with random generators these days. They feel they have to handpick every nook and cranny in regards to the physical universe/space in a game, so that it looks *nice*. Thats not how nature works. Nature's basic rule of indeterminsm is evidenced by what we understand about quantum fluctuations and the uncertainty principle. Nature didnt build this galaxy by hand but that did'nt stop earth being a beautiful place. And no-one has of yet outdone Nature and the physics of the universe for beauty and dynamics.
My point being the random star and planet generation in Frontier/FFE was accurate and another unique factor creating real world immersion. Again this hasnt been done since those two games.
But what has been done alot and is not unique is pretty graphics. The fact is that in our part of space for hundreds of lightyears it is pitch black. In our neighborhood the cosmos are not decorated with artlike floating nebulae. In Frontier/FFE - depending on your graphcs settings - when you came out of jump you were in deepest darkest space. It was only when nearing a planet that one began to see colours etc - which again is totally in keeping with space in our solar system.
So why hasnt there been a genuine realistic space sim since FFE? I just cannot understand it and considering that astronomy has actually confirmed that the galaxy modelled in Frontier/FFE were reasonably legitimate it is even more perplexing.
How much money can it cost to model real world space physics and the effects of planetary gravity? The figures, scales and matrix for all these calculations have already been done a thousand times over. If it could be done as well as accomplished by Braben & Co back in the early 90s using C and C++ then surely it cannot be too difficult to do the same again today.
So I can only assume that its the graphics and expectations of graphics which hold back development of a new Elite, or FFE clone. I think that people who liked those games did not play them for the graphics; it was for the realistic and immersive qualities which hooked people who had more than a few moments concentration span.
There are too many games to count which are based on fantasy worlds and beautiful graphics. We have all these virtual world games which are boring because they are virutal worlds with severe limitations. They have graphics which are prettier than the real world! How ridiculous is that.
I hope that the new Elite or whatever its called sticks to the original foundation of what made the Elite series special, and almost eternal from a playability point of view.
I joined this forum just to have my rant. Time for lunch ..bye
