Elite: Dangerous

This is looking great. Braben, for all his programming talent, has never been a deal-closer. But it really does seem, after decades of stagnation, that he's going to deliver something cool here. Fingers crossed.

 

manual docking is awwright but not when you do it a 100th time.

 

Ideally though, it should be significantly faster than the autopilot if done correctly, in order to reward skill... if you're being pursued, for example.

 

You could also make it so that something like smuggling deliveries have to involve manual docking. Doesn't make much sense to have your computer interact with the station's systems for clandestine activity.

 

More Scott manley. It's pretty neat how, towerds the end, his canopy gets busted. And the HUD only works on the bits of glass remaining.

 

https://twitter.com/DavidBraben/status/471717110679220224/photo/1

 

Guess now I have to get in the market for a new joystick.

 

downloadan premium beta nao!

 

Apparently, I paid 10 quid less than I needed to for the first phase of beta. I thought I'd donated more than that... must have gotten my projects crosswired. I was probably tired of ejaculating hundreds of dollars per project by then. Though, I'm sorely tempted to buy the game again given what I've seen people saying about it.

From all reports across the Intertubes, a flightstick is by far the preferred control peripheral.



Commence M&K tears.

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

 

That should happen with slower than light travel. Faster than light travel is impossible so there is nothing to be said about what it would do to light.

 

Perhaps you mean "It is impossible to physically propel oneself through space at speeds exceeding 0.99 C using means understood to current science," in which case you're almost certainly correct.

 

Hmm, but cruising faster than light would mean you'd be unable to see anything behind you. I wonder if they'll think of that.

 

FTL or causality, pick one.

 

I pick you stop pretending to be a scientist in space sim threads.

 

Doesn't exactly take a scientist to know more physics than you

 

If you're completely ignorant of hypothetical methods of faster-than-light travel, then you need to get back to reading Popular Science, watching the Discovery Channel, or wherever else you get your information from. In the meantime, even Wikipedia is more learned than you are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster-than-light

Your atrocious shitposting in these threads borders on autistic. This is the last time I'll be responding to you unless you have something constructive to add, lest I be drawn into another fifty-reply argument about the definition of "space sim," or yet another dick-measuring contest to see which layman knows the most least about physics.

 

In other words, it's written by crackpots. What's next, you're going to cite timecube.com?

 

u r dumb

Obviously an object can't travel faster than light, but you can bend space-time so the distance you travel is less than light would actually take. This doesn't break causality.

 

Thanks for the recommendation. I got mine in the mail yesterday.

 

That's not faster than light, obviously

 

You travel between two places faster than light would on it's own.