If you need it explained maybe you are not in a position to decide anyway.
If you need it explained maybe you are not in a position to decide anyway.
-Space simulation should represent space enviroment and physics as close as possible.
-space flight sim or flight sim at all should represent or tend to be realistic as possible in FM.
ED lacks in both!
But ppl these days call everything a sim!
It's a game
According to who? Are you and the OP a flightsimmer by any chance? Only time I hear this kind of nonsense being spouted.
-Space simulation should represent space enviroment and physics as close as possible.
-space flight sim or flight sim at all should represent or tend to be realistic as possible in FM.
ED lacks in both!
But ppl these days call everything a sim!
It's a game
In your opinion. The gaming world disagrees with you and is doing so since more than 30 years.
No, the problem is just that you refuse to understand what space sim means.
Also there is no argument. You are factually and evidently wrong, that's not an argument but displaying ignorance.
Last edited:
Citation needed
Why do you need to be a fanboy to support this argument? Is the whole gaming press made of fanboys of ED?
Edit: IamMe: With this attitude, I would like you to post the same arguments on the Project Cars 2 forums. Let us know how it went, please.
Last edited:
Fanboy is just another word for 'I know that you are right but can't admit it'.
You do realize CoD is considered a combat sim? You need to get it out of your head that the term simulator is reserved for training platforms.
Like I said, it is usually flight simmers that get hung up over this nonsense. I have to remind them that their precious study sims like DCS are far from accurate regarding flight modelling, even those million dollar simulators throw out garbage if you try to do something beyond the coded flight envelope. I can remember those old L1011 Tristar full motion simulators, GTA today has more realistic flight dynamics. Those sims where used to train zero hour crews.
You can't even train stall recovery on LVL-D sims, only approach to stall, that is because they are not capable of replicating realistic behavior.
Last edited:
Sure, but where do you draw a line? Like the latest IL-2 has engine management mostly automated. Is not a flight sim because of that? Or is maybe more of a flight-combat-simulator?
Which elements would these be?
The hyperspace loading screen? Sorry they don’t have interactive loading screens. You can leave your stuff in my bin on your way out.
The flying from place to place? Again sorry you have to play one part of the game to get to another. Again my bin is open.
Anything else? Did I miss something?
The hyperspace loading screen? Sorry they don’t have interactive loading screens. You can leave your stuff in my bin on your way out.
The flying from place to place? Again sorry you have to play one part of the game to get to another. Again my bin is open.
Anything else? Did I miss something?
Not sure I follow, really.
If you want "realism" (based on 21st century standards, at least) then space-flight is 75% mundane drudgery.
I don't mean to be sarcastic but it seems like ED's pretty-much nailed this perfectly.
I absolutely don't mean to be critical of astronauts but the vast majority of the "flying a spaceship" stuff they do is pretty mundane.
After that, they spend their time acting as postmen, mechanics, lab-technicians, data-processors or whatever other roles a mission requires.
It's only when things don't go according to plan that their skill and expertise becomes meaningful.
Which, again, is stuff that's fairly well reflected in ED's gameplay.
Oh, you haven't seen the sim racing community. Endless discussions about physics and what is the best simulation.
It's true... And consider, Elite is set in 3304...this isn't a few years or decades into the future, nor even a century or so like Star Trek. This is a whole millennium in the future. Control tech for then will be to us as our tech would be to an ancient Roman or Greek sailor. We'd not even recognise the tech.
If you want realism, then I doubt any apart from reenactors or archaeologists have ever been within half a mile of a cockpit.
Which is hilarious since even the backroom types in F1 racing struggle to accurately model the cars. They get damn close compared to even a few years ago... But its still obviously not real..
^All there is to it... Not that realism dictates if something is labeled a sim (unless you are a flight sim fan)
The Autolpilot was invented in 1920, look at the tech we now have in 2018... People banging on about realism in a space sim set in 3304
Last edited:
I might be able to help here, once and for all
Speaking as one who has actually been to the future and back, for realz, I can conclusivley say that whilst it is true that ED is not 100% accurate, it still does a damn fine job at simulating space flight circa 3300.
/Case
Speaking as one who has actually been to the future and back, for realz, I can conclusivley say that whilst it is true that ED is not 100% accurate, it still does a damn fine job at simulating space flight circa 3300.
/Case