I may play NMS when it comes out, but it will never replace ED for me. NMS will be a bit of fun, a diversion, a change, but is not in ED's league when it comes to realism or immersion.
Engineers Why is Elite Failing (in my opinion)? Negative Feedback Loops - An Analysis
- Thread starter Colonel Kenney
- Start date
Good publicity and creatures - didn't we all go mental for the creatures on that first big trailer?
But yeah they're a daily reminder of how little market penetration Elite got.
Elite's weather systems aren't just a texture btw, they like the planet surfaces are figured out - our systems are far from random - our planets won't be "rainy 25% of the time" all over their entire surface like NMS's ones. Which is fair enough - he readily admits it's not trying to really simulate space. But that's why it will appeal to different people and all those buying NMS wanting to go visit their star sign's stars, cross the Milky Way or see Betelgeuse will hopefully find their way here
edit> didn't meant to track too far from game theory - just pointing out that because game theory exists doesn't mean all games should be the same or there isn't space for different styles
Last edited:
I strongly believe Elite will deliver as well, and to me, patience is something that seems lacking in many, BUT I can't really fault people for lacking patience, they are used to 'grand' games big and such having fairly quick output in new stuff and such. What many do not understand that for all the 'grand' and free roaming games that have existed, Elite's scale goes far, far far beyond that, which includes complexity as well. Yes, Elite has flaws, but it is flaws that can be worked with, unlike other games where the flaws are because they can't get something to work right, Elite's flaws are maybe more design in nature, and you can always redesign, but you getting a broken engine to work as many other games have to deal with, well, we've seen how that never really happens.
TLDR
OP:Good analogy but to me it seems like ED is trying to be more than the sum of its parts. For example Elite: Dangerous is Elite 4 for me its a follow on from Elite, Frontier, FFE but its trying to be its own game instead of pooling the best bits of the previous three games and making them more refined FDEV are chucking random fads at the userbase to see what sticks and what they can get away with.
Dont get me wrong I like ED but tbh I havent even fired it up this week and didnt miss it, when Elite 2 came out and I played that I couldnt get enough of it I was there playing even with the physics etc. Elite 1 was the same but sadly ED seems to be something else yet to earn the name Elite to me its just Dangerous. FDEV in my opinion should move to actually getting more of the Elite game in there and not adding more and more fads to see if we will jump up and down and go 'yay'. Powerplay and Engineers are fads they really are nothing really to do with the Elite universe but they seem to be in there purely to throw a spanner into the comfortable peoples playtime works so we now have to look out who we attack.
OP:Good analogy but to me it seems like ED is trying to be more than the sum of its parts. For example Elite: Dangerous is Elite 4 for me its a follow on from Elite, Frontier, FFE but its trying to be its own game instead of pooling the best bits of the previous three games and making them more refined FDEV are chucking random fads at the userbase to see what sticks and what they can get away with.
Dont get me wrong I like ED but tbh I havent even fired it up this week and didnt miss it, when Elite 2 came out and I played that I couldnt get enough of it I was there playing even with the physics etc. Elite 1 was the same but sadly ED seems to be something else yet to earn the name Elite to me its just Dangerous. FDEV in my opinion should move to actually getting more of the Elite game in there and not adding more and more fads to see if we will jump up and down and go 'yay'. Powerplay and Engineers are fads they really are nothing really to do with the Elite universe but they seem to be in there purely to throw a spanner into the comfortable peoples playtime works so we now have to look out who we attack.
Well said - its junk they are throwing out there that we didn't ask for. Although "looting and crafting" was a great idea I have no idea why they actually didn't do either part. A) There is no LOOT of any value and B) You actually do not get to do any crafting, someone else done. C) You gotta grind to even get a 5% increase in anything!
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Hey I know that bottom pic!
I for one can't stand the Nickelodeon graphics of NMS...
When will you guys learn - Eye Candy != a good game.
Look at all the indie games with great gameplay HIGHER ON THE LIST with MORE PLAYERS and MORE FUN that have far less graphics. Hell there are 8 bit games like Terraria still 10x more popular than ED because it has GOOD GAME DESIGN.
There is no reason why that sort of graphics couldn't work with the same system as above in NMS where you have POI you can scan and visit.
What he said. They sacrificed size for things that actually matter - gameplay.
I want good graphics. Graphics that catches my eye. It's the first I see and the first aspect of a game that might appeal to me. If it looks good, and is my kind of genre, I'm interested. Now I'm not saying it's everything, but it's very important. Games like Ethan Carter, Mind: Path to Thalamus, Ori and the Blind forest etc, all have wonderful graphics that are backed by great stories and/or fantastic gameplay. Elite Dangerous sure is beautiful at times but it also lacks a lot of stuff...
It seems interesting to me that you'd make that claim, especially if you aren't a designer yourself....
That said, a ton of games have RNG, what I might agree with is they mask it behind some fluff, but what is every MMO loot mechanism if not RNG? want that sweet legendary sword that drops at x location? grind grind grind. So yeah.
I'm guessing Frontier's designers are probably the best designers around here.
That said, some choices they make are a complete mystery but I'm guessing that a lot of the stuff they really want is impossible due to netcoding or budget. Or both. And yes, games do have RNG. Frankly I'm not bothered by RNG that much. Like you said, most MMORPGs have it and I've been grinding my way to full epic in every WoW expansion up to Cataclysm. Maybe I change my opinion though after really delve into the whole Engineers stuff. Right now I just hate the fact I must grind to get access, and then grind to get materials. But that's a whole other discussion.
Maybe I change my opinion though after really delve into the whole Engineers stuff. Right now I just hate the fact I must grind to get access, and then grind to get materials. But that's a whole other discussion.
if you are hunting for materials you will become insane like the rest of us, my advice is either to aim for rank 3 only for time and sanity saving, or just play the regular game till you gathered max materials and then see what you can do with them and keep doing that for months until you got a decent ship...
yea...
because everything we've been flying thus far has just been useless?!?!?
perspective.
Last edited:
You missed the rest of my sentence ?
Think carefully about what you're saying here - you're implying they should only implement what we ask for, at which point this isn't a FD game, but a game designed by a user community.
There's nothing too wrong with that by itself, but while I'm happy to give my feedback, I'd like to leave game design to the professionals in general. Especially in FDs case - that's why I paid them to design this game rather than ignoring it and playing a community made game instead.
The two aren't mutually exclusive - some games are fun without needing graphics. Some games are fun with good graphics. Genre of game can have a huge influence on how important graphics are.
Don't worry about frostypaw, I think the 'perspective' comment is just to reaffirm to all and sundry that his perspective of Elite's gameplay mechanic is that it is 'da bomb' and anyone offering an alternate perspective should really see things his / her way. 'Cos we're wrong of course...because pointing the nose of your ship at a planet for 10-30 seconds = 'exploration' and the 'realism and immersion' of non-newtonian space flight is so...uh...real (it's fun I'll give it that, but real? c'mon, really?).
I have made an observation in the past that the people who seem to get the most out of E D are space buffs: they want to visit Sag A or Betelgeuse because of...space is cool. While they are honk scanning and facing their 50th Icy world they think that somehow everyone should see this as 'Gameplay'. Personally I don't get it and I think a lot of people think the same way to different degrees. What could be done to make it better? There have literally been crap-tons of suggestions that would not be overly difficult to implement if FD set their minds to it but it seems they are locked into 'content' release schedule that doesn't seem to allow for concentrating on fixing what is already there (they are fixing things, albeit very slowly). Colonel Kenney's suggestion to re-look at game design philosophy certainly couldn't hurt and might make a better product for everyone. Except those that think the current game is fine: can't help you, sorry.
@frosty: a couple of points re your anti-NMS views:
1. 'Core to No Man's Sky is that its virtual universe, including the stars, planets, lifeforms, ecosystems, and the behaviour of the space-bound factions are all created through procedural generation...' Source: Google ecosystem NMS procedural
2. Polar Ice Caps - If you had bothered to google it you would have seen that it was a design decision based on gameplay (see what I did there) so ecosystem / biome diversity was spread across many planets
3. Google is your friend, antagonistic writing style is not...
Try and keep an open mind: NMS will not have the same graphics / features as E D but it is certainly a viable alternative, and judging from the many videos I have watched I judge that its 'gameplay' elements are more polished than E D's. That's what we are discussing here: Gameplay.
I don't think it's nearly as complicated as people make it out to be. The main problems with engineers are we don't have enough material space and no ship storage...we are missing 2 very simple things that would make everything infinitely easier.
Meanwhile, the forums is shouting about a million different things, and everyone crying about the RNG and the "grind" when really what they should be crying about is the lack of inventory space for materials and lack of ship storage.
Meanwhile, the forums is shouting about a million different things, and everyone crying about the RNG and the "grind" when really what they should be crying about is the lack of inventory space for materials and lack of ship storage.