Elite: Dangerous

[DraQ]

frontier with more missions, more weapons, more ships, maybe some minor faction and better sound and graphics.
am i asking too much?

No, you are asking too little.

Personally I want Frontier with fun combat and a 3D map so you can actually plan the route for a timed mission. I remember how infuriated I was with the 2D map. Often two stars would be very close to each other on the Y and X axis, but then it turned out they were far apart on the hidden Z axis, something I often would discover only after several hours of boring space combat that felt more like a jet fighter simulation where you spend 99% of the time trying to align your ship to get the enemy in your sights and then have an opening of a few seconds to shoot or launch a missile as the planes/ships whizz past each other in glorious newtonian speed.

You do know you can freely rotate your view in map mode, right?

As for the combat, more and more diverse weapons would certainly make it more interesting.

 

[Trash]

Some very early gameplay footage of a chase through an asteroid field.



Looks like Elite. Nothing like Frontier. I don't mind. In fact, I think it's neat to finally see another space game after the decade of nothing that followed Freelancer.

 

[potatojohn]

Looks like shit.

This thread seriously needs some incline. Here we go.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQfllAxBwCc

 

[Tzaero]

Just because it doesn't look good isn't really relevant, what matters is it able to simulate a whole solar system.
It looks like they got the scale right, and I wonder what new mechanics will be brought in.

 

[bonescraper]

Looks like shit.

This thread seriously needs some incline. Here we go.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQfllAxBwCc

Looks even worse.

 

[Volrath]

Braben is about to make you his bitch.

 

[Runciter]

Looks like shit.

Why do you think that? It looks more realistic than any space game since I-War 1: there is high contrast between light and dark and space is black. If anything, the galaxy in the background is way too bright. In reality you'd have to look away from the starlit parts of the asteroids and the star itself in order to see it.

The Apollo astronauts couldn't even see stars unless they turned down their internal capsule lights.

That's incline to me, not decline.

This thread seriously needs some incline. Here we go.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQfllAxBwCc

Sure, the combat mechanics are better in I-War 2, but that game never lets you feel like you're in space, more like on drugs in central London.

 

[potatojohn]

Why do you think that? It looks more realistic

I wasn't talking about the graphics.

But why does a game set in the year 3000 need to look 'realistic'? In that time everyone is going to be a transhuman cyborg and 'early human' will simply be one of the vision modes for nostalgiafags.

than any space game since I-War 1:

So it's less realistic than a 1997 game. That's a good sign.

Sure, the combat mechanics are better in I-War 2, but that game never lets you feel like you're in space, more like on drugs in central London.

Yeah nothing says 'space' quite like spaceships that handle like arcade ww2 dogfighters.

 

[Tzaero]

This is a kickstarter for an Elite game not a frontier, it sorta was to be expected this would happen in addition to a lot
Of other concessions to be made in order to get the cash.

Also when I first heard about multiplayer I was reminded of this,
http://www.indiedb.com/games/ensign-1

 

[DraQ]

Looks like shit.

This.

Unless the guys are using some heavy flight assist that can be turned off (impossible to rule out, since they are flying pretty slowly and at constant speed and the trails are placeholders, meaning they probably don't even reflect actual engine activity) the physics and combat looks pretty shit.

Now, the stuff guy talked about seems pretty hot, and going with projectile weapons is also likely to improve combat, but it won't help if the combat is going to be uninspired arcade shit.

 

[bonescraper]

Since when this so called "realism" makes or breaks a space game? Tie Fighter was fun, no? The whole idea of dogfighting in space is retarded. Fuck, the whole genre is just bollocks, newtonian physics or not. Those games are 90% pure fantasy anyway. It's way more fun emulate naval/aerial warfare. Because that's what we all want and expect. You wouldn't like to be one shotted from 5000 kilometers, or to be unable to catch a capital ship in your sluggish "space interceptor" that shoots its fancy-shmancy laser cannons which somehow are as sophisticated as a WWII machine gun

Cut the shit, gentlemen.

 

[DraQ]

Those games are 90% pure fantasy anyway.

Even in fantasy games there is still place for realism. For example I'd rather have fairly realistic swordfights in sword and sorcery games.
In space games, that are about fucking space I'd prefer to have space be space.

It's way more fun emulate naval/aerial warfare.

Then why not make a game about naval or aerial warfare if it's more interesting? Or, I don't know, airships? Or dragons? Or flying as dragon and busating airships and huge magical towers? It beats going pew pew around empty skybox with a few rocks.

Space is uninteresting as background for arcade combat anyway. It's too big, too empty, it doesn't have any associated movement mechanics of interest if you take out Newtonian (or Einsteinian) stuff.
If you're not going to make it actual space, then you're just doing a boring arcade plane game, with mostly uninteresting static backgrounds, slow speed and lack of stalling or advanced manoeuvres.

Because that's what we all want and expect.

We don't.

You wouldn't like to be one shotted from 5000 kilometers, or to be unable to catch a capital ship in your sluggish "space interceptor" that shoots its fancy-shmancy laser cannons which somehow are as sophisticated as a WWII machine gun

So maybe make a space GTA instead of all out warfare game?

Space high level symmetric warfare would be boring - RKV spam and everyone dies.

OTOH being a pirate in a newly colonized system and whacking miners with cheap, jury-rigged weaponry to take their stuff, or being a miner retrofitting mining lasers and charges to whack pirates trying to whack you, and asymmetric hide-and-seek with police/corp security could be mighty fun.

 

[bonescraper]

Even in fantasy games there is still place for realism [...] I'd prefer to have space be space.

Oh yeah, but in the same time...

Space high level symmetric warfare would be boring - RKV spam and everyone dies.

Picky bastard, aren't you?

It all boils down to "I wan't my game to be "realistic" where *i* specifically want them to be. This should be the standard that all future games should adhere to from now on!".

Then why not make a game about naval or aerial warfare if it's more interesting? Or, I don't know, airships? Or dragons? Or flying as dragon and busating airships and huge magical towers? It beats going pew pew around empty skybox with a few rocks.

Space is uninteresting as background for arcade combat anyway. It's too big, too empty, it doesn't have any associated movement mechanics of interest if you take out Newtonian (or Einsteinian) stuff.
If you're not going to make it actual space, then you're just doing a boring arcade plane game, with mostly uninteresting static backgrounds, slow speed and lack of stalling or advanced manoeuvres.

Blah blah blah. Ok, direct me to the game where capital ships don't behave like submarines.

So you didn't like Freespace, Tie Fighter, Wing Commander etc. But you... consider yourself to be a fan of the genre?

We don't.

But you do. You just want your space Spitfires/Mustangs/Messerschmitts/Zeros/*insert your favorite WWII fighter* to behave slightly different. That's all.

BONUS:

For example I'd rather have fairly realistic swordfights in sword and sorcery games.

Yet you love Morrowind

 

[potatojohn]

Blah blah blah. Ok, direct me to the game where capital ships don't behave like submarines.

Starshatter?

 

[circ]

I just want an insanely large galaxy(ies) with a functional economy where I can smuggle drugs for huge profits and cops gunning me down. Screw this MP bore.

 

[bonescraper]

Blah blah blah. Ok, direct me to the game where capital ships don't behave like submarines.

Starshatter?

Interesting. I'm gonna check it out asap.

It still doesn't make or brake the game for me. Just like shrugging off a shotgun blast to the face didn't make me dislike quake. Leave realism to games which specifically want to be perceived as such. Otherwise, don't use that word in order to make stuff look dumb. Those are still games we're talking about. And this is a Elite remake, not a wannabe simulator.

 

[DraQ]

Even in fantasy games there is still place for realism [...] I'd prefer to have space be space.

Oh yeah, but in the same time...

Space high level symmetric warfare would be boring - RKV spam and everyone dies.

Picky bastard, aren't you?

It all boils down to "I wan't my game to be "realistic" where *i* specifically want them to be.

No, I want my game to be realistic specifically where it can still be a game - RKVs hit, everyone dies doesn't make for a good game, spasim or not.

This is also why I mentioned highly asymmetric and/or low-level space violence, which has conveniently been the focus of the entire Elite series so far.

Blah blah blah. Ok, direct me to the game where capital ships don't behave like submarines.

I-War?

So you didn't like Freespace, Tie Fighter, Wing Commander etc. But you... consider yourself to be a fan of the genre?

No, I consider myself fan of the majority of the Elite series so far, and respectful of the role the remainder of the series played in the history of gaming.

But you do. You just want your space Spitfires/Mustangs/Messerschmitts/Zeros/*insert your favorite WWII fighter* to behave slightly different. That's all.

Slightly.

Yet you love Morrowind

I also love PS:T.

Unfortunately I expect neither rich, multi level backstory, nor epic personal quest stretching beyond planes and death itself from E4.

 

[bonescraper]

But you do. You just want your space Spitfires/Mustangs/Messerschmitts/Zeros/*insert your favorite WWII fighter* to behave slightly different. That's all.

Slightly.

Oh yes. Slightly.

It's still an arcade shooter with a different set of movement mechanics. Because, you know, you can actually simulate a WWII fighter pretty accurately. There's nothing to simulate in a game where you get to fly a nonexistent spacecraft made out of nonsense and lazors. I'm stating the obvious here, but you're the one who pulled the arcade card.

 

[DraQ]

It's still an arcade shooter with a different set of movement mechanics. Because, you know, you can actually simulate a WWII fighter pretty accurately. There's nothing to simulate in a game where you get to fly a nonexistent spacecraft made out of nonsense and lazors. I'm stating the obvious here, but you're the one who pulled the arcade card.

So by your logic all forms of speculative fiction can be dismissed because it's all just "nonsense and lazors".

Nevermind that we have pretty clear understanding of much of the physics involved or at least the upper bounds of what's possible according to it even in technology far outside our grasp, nevermind that with technologies involving exotic physics we can still predict what would be needed to allow certain type of technology, and what implications would it have. No, it's all nonsense and lazors.

 

[bonescraper]

You can't simulate something that's unknown and nonexistent. So your exotic physics might work... in arcade games only. And that's fine with me, as long as it's speculative fiction. Fucking force shields, how do they work?

Just pretend your amazing spaceship generates an exotic force with its exotic forcefield generator that lets it emulate WWII fighters in combat. You know, just like the antigrav tanks or some other crap. Because you still disregard other, more realistic and efficient concepts of space combat, just to suit your gamey needs, even if that kind of technology is already within our grasp.

So once again, shit doesn't make or break the game when it's all based on speculative fiction anyway. Especially, when you're so picky about what should and what should not be included. That, my friend, is pretentious.

I prefer realistic physics, but enjoy both kinds of games. Because i think there's just something more to these games than just different movement mechanics. And let it be fancy skyboxes, if you so desire

 

[Blaine]

Apparently, some imbecilic Kickstarter user has been shilling for Elite: Dangerous Reddit upvotes. His comments were made an example of in an /r/games mod announcement about vote-stacking:

Spoiler

 

[DraQ]

Just pretend your amazing spaceship generates an exotic force with its exotic forcefield generator that lets it emulate WWII fighters in combat.

At which point less advanced spaceship without such generator will just spin on a dime and blast the superadvanced one into pieces while flying backwards when it tries to get on its tail.


Fucking. Awesome.

Citing wonderful Atomic Rockets page:

How would you react to a game that purported to be about, say, Marines and their tactics and utilizations that insisted that the best formation for them to attack in was walking on their hands, with their rifles clenched between their knees, shoulder to shoulder, in tight formations, through beaten zones for artillery strikes and into machine gun kill zones?

Would you accept it if I told you that this was the result of a heretofore unknown doctrinal innovation made at some point 600 years in the future?

I'd rather have my Sci-Fi of kind, rather than kind.

Spasims of the former kind are rather scarce, though, so I'd be happy to have sequel of two such spasims also be game.

 

[bonescraper]

Just pretend your amazing spaceship generates an exotic force with its exotic forcefield generator that lets it emulate WWII fighters in combat.

At which point less advanced spaceship without such generator will just spin on a dime and blast the superadvanced one into pieces while flying backwards when it tries to get on its tail.


Fucking. Awesome.

No, it wouldn't, 'cause it's just an explanation why every goddamn ship in the game behaves that way. I just thought you needed one, since you're into all that exotic science stuff We are still talking about video games, remember?

And god fucking damn, if you want to play a game of what's retarded with me, then a capable space commander wouldn't even consider engaging his enemies in a ridiculous space dogfight. He would blast your puny fleet from thousands of kilometers without a second thought.

Citing wonderful Atomic Rockets page:

How would you react to a game that purported to be about, say, Marines and their tactics and utilizations that insisted that the best formation for them to attack in was walking on their hands, with their rifles clenched between their knees, shoulder to shoulder, in tight formations, through beaten zones for artillery strikes and into machine gun kill zones?

Would you accept it if I told you that this was the result of a heretofore unknown doctrinal innovation made at some point 600 years in the future?

I'd rather have my Sci-Fi of kind, rather than kind.

Spasims of the former kind are rather scarce, though, so I'd be happy to have sequel of two such spasims also be game.

What. The. Fuck?

Can't you see the glaring irony here?

You're the one who wants to watch those Marines with their fancy tactics and military technology, trying to stab each other with pointy sticks in hand to hand combat 600 hundred years in the future. It's amazing how you find *that* more You're still focusing on one single aspect in an ocean of implausibility and fantasy.

You constantly want to pretend that space combat games contain, or/and should contain elements of simulation...

So once again, you can't SIMULATE a purely fictional spacecraft, which is supposed to be made with some unexplained future technology (which in many cases contradicts science), designed by an art student, who has no idea about engineering. There's nothing to simulate there, therefore all those "spasims" are still as sophisticated as Ace Combat. They're just set in space and some of them happen to have different movement mechanics.

Now stop being so pretentious about it, play some glorious Tie Fighter and just deal with it.

 

[Blaine]

It's entirely feasible to create a truly hardcore space simulation, but aside from real-world orbiter (space shuttle) simulations, no one ever has. Interstellar space vessels may be imaginary at the moment, but scientists can predict and calculate how an interstellar vessel would behave according to the Standard Model, and also how they might be built. Adding in a few fantastic elements (hypersleep/warp drive to pass time quickly and an infinite or highly efficient/easily replaceable fuel source) for the sake of playability wouldn't render the whole implausible.

However, the amount of scientific man-hours required to create a realistic but purely theoretical interstellar space vessel simulator, complete with gauges, buttons, switches, MFDs, thrusters, moving parts and so on would be enormous. All current hardcore sims are based upon vehicles or vessels that have already been designed, built, and extensively tested in the field, and are probably also indirectly or directly derived from professional-grade simulation software that cost tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars to develop and test.

 

[tuluse]

The problem is that if such a ship was made, the only form of combat would be shooting missiles from thousands of miles away.

This is boring.