Elite Dangerous

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
To me this is one of those differences between the funding level of the projects and the coolness factor combined with how much difference it actually makes. How much do we think those moving thrusters have cost? They had to modelled, animated, effects added and coded delays in the controls etc etc. They probably cost 200k at least to develop. Yet for all practical purposes they are useless. They look pretty, they have the cool factor but because of them the controls feel terrible. Elite doesn't have the funding to throw in stuff like that, and for it its control scheme is responsive. I think that difference and how it practically plays out is what matters.

I personally wouldn't have focussed on moving thrusters over and above the best of the game at this point. The problem is that there are more important things for SC to be making progress on. I just don't agree with how they are spending the money, especially when the end result is kind of poor. I played both these games as a kid and I preferred Elite back then, elite was actually not really something you directly controlled at all it was mostly auto targeting and mouse clicking. Funny how Elite seems to be getting this right and SC is getting it wrong and one has a lot more money than the other to experiment.

Those thrusters are both realistic and a part of game play. If you lose them or they get destroyed in combat you lose their capability. I personally think that's awesome. I love that SC is aiming for this type of realism, it's what I expect. I don't have these expectations in ED, and that's fine. Wanting both SC and ED to be like ED doesn't make sense to me, let each go their own path and appreciate/enjoy the differences.
 

JimmiG

Platinum Member
Feb 24, 2005
2,024
112
106
I've watched quite a few videos of E : D on YouTube and it looks interesting. However I'll definitely wait for the final game before spending any money on it.

It looks like it might end up being a bit repetitive. The universe is huge, but there only seems to be 3-4 different types of stations? Does the gameplay evolve past the initial "FedEx stage" that most videos seem to show?

I've gotten back into X Rebirth (playing the 3.0 beta with a few mods) after not having touched it for about 9 months, and while it's far, far from great, it does have some cool aspects such as the ability to own stations and capital ships.
 
Last edited:

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,208
537
126
i dont see it as a problem. they will just release a sp patch *when* the game dies .. in a few years. 3 years? 5 years? something like that. i think it's reasonable for a game.

You mean the same way Star Wars Galaxies did, or City of Heroes, or Hellgate: London, or <insert MMO name here>....

You make an assumption that this will happen. You don't know how a studio might fall apart. Take Hellgate: London for example. They used the game's rights as collateral for a loan to develop a new game, which flopped, and thus the lost the rights immediately, and couldn't release anything because they didn't own it anymore. These are property rights which can and will be used and auctioned off to pay creditors and there is nothing that can be done to protect the game community. Unless the new buyer sees that there is an easy profit to be made from the current property continuing, good luck with seeing anything other than a "so long and thanks for all the fish".
 
Last edited:

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
14,629
3,003
136
you couldn't make any of those games work as single player. ED doesn't need 20 man raids either. i think it's safe to assume you will get a sp patch if the game goes down - the devs working on it are competent and they are decent people.

but then again, maybe not, and you are screwed. worth it taking a chance?
 

JimmiG

Platinum Member
Feb 24, 2005
2,024
112
106
Well, the game is going to be around for several years at least, so you'll get plenty of entertainment for your &#8364;40. When people go to watch a movie at the cinema or go out drinking etc, I don't see them worrying about what will happen with their "investment" in 5 years time..."Oh, I wonder if I will still be able to regurgitate this beer in 2019...".

As long as people keep playing it they will be able to pump out DLC to finance sever upkeep. If people stop playing it, then what's the point in keeping it playable for the 5 people still interested?
 
Last edited:

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
It looks like it might end up being a bit repetitive. The universe is huge, but there only seems to be 3-4 different types of stations? Does the gameplay evolve past the initial "FedEx stage" that most videos seem to show?

Sort of. There are a couple ways to make money - trucking, mining, and bounty hunting. There is also exploring. However once you are tired of grinding money there is not much to do besides PVP/griefing. For me the main draw of E-D is the Oculus Rift, without which the game would be fairly mediocre. This is all predicated on the current beta though, they may/will be adding new features before and after release.
 

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
Sort of. There are a couple ways to make money - trucking, mining, and bounty hunting. There is also exploring. However once you are tired of grinding money there is not much to do besides PVP/griefing. For me the main draw of E-D is the Oculus Rift, without which the game would be fairly mediocre. This is all predicated on the current beta though, they may/will be adding new features before and after release.

They really need a better mission system. Just checking a bulletin board of requests is very bland and dry, there's no dialogue, no personal interaction with any NPCs beyond a sentence or two in the chat window. The game is gorgeous and all, but it definitely is missing something. There's no personality. I remember one of my favorite things about Freelancer was all the comm chatter you would hear, that little bit of detail made a big difference in immersion.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
They really need a better mission system. Just checking a bulletin board of requests is very bland and dry, there's no dialogue, no personal interaction with any NPCs beyond a sentence or two in the chat window. The game is gorgeous and all, but it definitely is missing something. There's no personality. I remember one of my favorite things about Freelancer was all the comm chatter you would hear, that little bit of detail made a big difference in immersion.

Well in beta 2 they had the whole Eranin war thing going on, I think they just need to implement game events like that better and more thoroughly. I think just adding some more in-depth non-procedurally generated missions would be a big help though. How hard is it to write a few paragraphs of text to come up with a bunch of story driven missions? Thinking of Mechwarrior:Mercenaries where the entire story was told in text of pre-mission briefings.
 

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,208
537
126
you couldn't make any of those games work as single player. ED doesn't need 20 man raids either. i think it's safe to assume you will get a sp patch if the game goes down - the devs working on it are competent and they are decent people.

but then again, maybe not, and you are screwed. worth it taking a chance?

Except they just made this game a MMO requiring constant internet connectivity to their servers to get updated universe information. Sure you can go into "single player" mode in which you will not encounter anyone else, but you will still be competing against them for doing anything (trade routes, mining, exploration). And they have flat out come out and said that it was "too hard" to implement an offline single player mode, which means, once they shutdown the servers, your game no longer works, just like all the MMOs I listed, which was the point I was making.

And as for getting a patch, see my previous post. If they go bankrupt, they won't own the game rights anymore, their creditors will. As such, they can't release a patch to make it free to play without the servers because doing so decreases the value of the property because someone may want to take the servers and change it into a paid service to continue playing, or monetize the product in some other fashion.
 
Last edited:

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
They addressed the offline questions in their latest newsletter:

Elite: Dangerous Offline Mode - Q&A
From David Braben:

Each of the &#8220;Elite&#8221; games pushed the boundaries of the technology available. With Elite: Dangerous a major new feature is playing online, and we are pushing that hard now. Offline support was not one of our original aims, though we did believe we could support it at the start of the project. We do a great deal of processing in the cloud, and this benefits everyone playing. We had considered that an online connection is a reasonable pre-requisite for a game delivered online. I am really sorry this has upset people, but we have a strong, consistent vision that we do not want to compromise.

Below we have collected common questions from backers and the press and our answers so we can be clear about the situation.

Can I still play in single player mode?
Yes. Some people have thought that dropping 100% offline play means there wouldn&#8217;t be a single-player mode - to be clear, the single-player game is already there, but it requires a low bandwidth online connection for the reasons we explained.
I&#8217;ve even played on a laptop using a tethered connection on the train.

When was the offline mode dropped?
The decision was made recently, and was not made lightly as we have been looking for ways to satisfy everyone. We announced shortly after we concluded that it wasn&#8217;t possible to create an offline mode without unacceptably compromising the game.

Offline-only support was a requested feature during the Kickstarter &#8211; why was it dropped?
Back during the Kickstarter, we were clear about the vision, to make a phenomenal new sequel to Elite in an online world, which we believe we are about to deliver. At the time we believed we could also offer a good single player experience, and base an acceptable offline-only experience off that. As development has progressed, it has become clear that this last assumption is not the case.

Why wait so long to announce this?
In retrospect we should have shared the fact that we were struggling with this aspect with the community, but we were still trying to find a solution. As features were implemented, for the best results we chose to prioritise delivery of the online single and multiplayer experiences, with a view to providing the offline version later in development. We had to make a decision for the good of the game, and that is what we did.

What would you lose in offline mode?
We have developed a multi-player game with an unfolding story involving the players, and groups collaborating with specific objectives and taking account of all player&#8217;s behaviour. This is what the game is about. Without this it would not be the rich gaming experience that we will deliver, and would be a great disappointment to all players.

Any offline experience would be fundamentally empty. We could write a separate mission system to allow a limited series of fixed missions, but that would still not be a compelling game, and is just the first step in the mountain of work that would be required.

Do you now consider Elite: Dangerous to be an MMO?
Technically, it has always been. There are already over 100,000 people playing in the same world. We believe that always-online entertainment is already a reality for the majority. We are delivering a truly huge game using the best technology and designed to stand the test of time, played for many years to come and still be relevant.

What do you say to people who backed Elite with an offline experience in mind?
Many of the conversations we have had during development focussed on backers wanting to play the game without the downside of online &#8211; griefing especially &#8211; ie a single player experience. We considered this to be the main issue and focussed on making sure we had a great single player offering. We have also ensured that the solo play mode has a minimal network requirement(about 10 kbps).

Are you confident the servers will be stable come launch day?
Yes, as confident as we can be, because we have been testing our servers throughout the development process, and continue to do so. Our servers are the same ones that Amazon uses, and can (and have) scaled up quickly to deal with demand when needed.

What is Frontier's plan for when the servers shut down?
We do not plan to shut the servers down, but understand it is a reasonable question. We are at the beginning of the game not the end and are focused on creating a game that we hope will be played for many years in the future. We do plan to take regular archives of the game and the servers, to preserve the game for the future.

Could the server code be released publicly some day when the servers are shut down?
Yes. This is something we would do if for whatever reason we cannot keep the game going.

Will offline mode ever be implemented? Why not create a second "offline galaxy" with different secrets than the online one?
It is not out of the question we will create a cut-down game that is offline only, but this is not currently in our plan. It would still be a big undertaking to do well.

Will you give people refunds?
We have started responding to requests where there is a clear outcome:
- Those who have pre-ordered an Elite: Dangerous release version from our online store and have therefore not yet played the game are eligible for a refund.
- Those who have already been playing the game online in the Alpha and/or Beta phases, regardless of whether they backed the project via Kickstarter or purchased access to Alpha and/or Beta through our online store, are not eligible for a refund.

We want to make sure we treat each person's situation with the thoroughness it deserves, and have contacted each of them to ask that they bear with us over the next few working days if their circumstances do not fit either criteria above as we look into individual requests.

Is offline mode an impossible problem, or just unfeasible?
It is a creative decision, not wanting to produce an empty game. It is technically possible, but it would be a largely separate game development.

Why not delay the decisions and put extra resources on this after the release?
We will review the decision after release, but our priority is moving the game forwards for the great majority of players, and are wary of producing a sub-standard game.

Was this because offline players are less likely to get involved in microtransactions? Is this just about the money?
No. We have been clear and consistent. This is about the game experience. I have always been against &#8216;pay to win&#8217; &#8211; in a game like Elite: Dangerous there are a great many opportunities we could have taken already that would have amounted to &#8216;pay to win&#8217; but we have chosen not to.

This whole issue comes down to what the vision is of the game we are making, and whether people trust us to make the right decisions. We made this decision with heavy hearts but for the right reasons.