Poll

Which game is objectively better?

Elite: Dangerous
Star Citizen?
*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #20 on: August 20, 2014, 04:31:28 AM »
I like the blockier ships. They look robust enough to travel through space at several times the speed of light. A lot of Star Citizen's ships look too over-engineered and fragile to me.

Simple and elegant. Nobody is going to use the sillhouette of an RSI Constellation for their intimidating alliance logo, because it would look like messy poo. The Anaconda, on the other hand, has an easily identifiable and iconic shape. It looks imposing, rather than confusing.

Anyway, that's obviously a matter of personal preference, so we don't have to go on about it forever. Apart from that, what do you prefer about SC?

I prefer SC's "everything where it belongs" gameplay. If I want to play in the open-end universe, I can, but if I just want to do some arcade dogfighting, I can just boot up the dogfighting module, rather than wait in space for hours looking for things to shoot (see: Eve Online).

Other than that I also prefer SC because it is using CryEngine. The game itself looks absolutely gorgeous so far and I daresay it will only get better. The attention to detail in the dogfighting beta is astonishing. I don't know how E:D does it, but SC calculates damage to a craft based on real location. If a bullet hits your rear shield, it does damage only to the rear shielding, and if it hits your rear thruster only that thruster takes damage. Your ship only explodes if your power plant takes catastrophic damage.

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #21 on: August 20, 2014, 05:13:46 AM »
I prefer SC's "everything where it belongs" gameplay. If I want to play in the open-end universe, I can, but if I just want to do some arcade dogfighting, I can just boot up the dogfighting module, rather than wait in space for hours looking for things to shoot (see: Eve Online).

Other than that I also prefer SC because it is using CryEngine. The game itself looks absolutely gorgeous so far and I daresay it will only get better. The attention to detail in the dogfighting beta is astonishing. I don't know how E:D does it, but SC calculates damage to a craft based on real location. If a bullet hits your rear shield, it does damage only to the rear shielding, and if it hits your rear thruster only that thruster takes damage. Your ship only explodes if your power plant takes catastrophic damage.

CryEngine looks great, but I don't think it's the best choice for a space sim. There's no easy way to present huge areas or dynamic environment features like planetary rotation or orbits.

Locational damage is also a feature of Elite. You can breach an opponent's cargohold to spill its contents, destroy their canopy and force them to rely on their suit's limited oxygen supply, destroy their shield generators, thrusters, weapons, etc.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #22 on: August 20, 2014, 05:18:18 AM »
CryEngine looks great, but I don't think it's the best choice for a space sim. There's no easy way to present huge areas or dynamic environment features like planetary rotation or orbits.

They've hired multiple Cryengine developers to work out any kinks and have already rebuilt the entirety of Cryengine's atrocious netcode.

Locational damage is also a feature of Elite. You can breach an opponent's cargohold to spill its contents, destroy their canopy and force them to rely on their suit's limited oxygen supply, destroy their shield generators, thrusters, weapons, etc.

Ah, I haven't played the E:D beta so I didn't know.

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #23 on: August 20, 2014, 06:04:12 AM »
I'll talk all day about how E:D blows Star Citizen's tits into tiny space bits, but ultimately I'm really glad both of these games are being made. It's interesting to see the two original giants of the space sim genre return at around the same time.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

Ghost of V

Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #24 on: August 20, 2014, 06:27:00 AM »
It's starting.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 2985
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #25 on: August 20, 2014, 06:13:26 PM »
After seeing my brother wear a little pin depicting the logo
Your brother is so cool.

Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #26 on: August 20, 2014, 09:34:49 PM »
400 Billion star systems?

I can see that as being really hard to keep track of.

"Hey dude, mine at star system XD-382901  Or is it XD 382910.  One is good, one is full of high level pirates."



*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #27 on: August 20, 2014, 11:46:14 PM »
400 Billion star systems?

I can see that as being really hard to keep track of.

"Hey dude, mine at star system XD-382901  Or is it XD 382910.  One is good, one is full of high level pirates."

It's an unrealistic number. One only has to look at Eve Online to see that once you have thousands of star systems, human interaction among the outlying systems starts getting pretty scarce. They probably mean "up to 400 billion." Regardless, anyone can generate an unlimited amount of procedural systems given enough resources. A baseline game engine called Space Engine proves this, because they procedurally generated every star in every visible galaxy in the universe.

I'll talk all day about how E:D blows Star Citizen's tits into tiny space bits, but ultimately I'm really glad both of these games are being made. It's interesting to see the two original giants of the space sim genre return at around the same time.

Well, I'd say as it stands E:D is better, but SC will be better. E:D is in late beta and SC is only early alpha on a single module. I'll probably end up playing both regardless.

« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 11:48:28 PM by Irushwithscvs »

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #28 on: August 20, 2014, 11:59:23 PM »
400 Billion star systems?

I can see that as being really hard to keep track of.

"Hey dude, mine at star system XD-382901  Or is it XD 382910.  One is good, one is full of high level pirates."

It's an unrealistic number.

It's a very realistic number. That's the whole point.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2014, 12:03:39 AM »
It's a very realistic number. That's the whole point.

It can be realistically generated, not realistically played. I wasn't implying that generating 400 billion is unrealistic, otherwise I would not have noted one can generate unlimited amounts of something. Did you even read the whole post?


Anyway, the idea that people will play/explore 400 billion worlds or that it is even relevant to gameplay is nonsense. Like I said, Eve Online has a few thousands worlds with hundreds of thousands of players online at once and it can hardly obtain 1 person per system.

It is better to have very interesting primary systems than lots of boring empty ones.

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #30 on: August 21, 2014, 12:05:41 AM »
It's true, not every system will be visited. Even if the game were played for thousands of years that would still be true. I don't see that as a problem, and neither do the developers.

It is better to have very interesting primary systems than lots of boring empty ones.

Why not both?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 12:07:39 AM by Alexandyr »
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #31 on: August 21, 2014, 12:07:44 AM »
It's true, not every system will be visited. Even if the game were played for thousands of years that would still be true. I don't see that as a problem, and neither do the developers.

Quantity over quality. Isn't that what made Daggerfall an awful game?

Why not both?

Did I say something about not having both?

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #32 on: August 21, 2014, 12:18:06 AM »
It's true, not every system will be visited. Even if the game were played for thousands of years that would still be true. I don't see that as a problem, and neither do the developers.

Quantity over quality. Isn't that what made Daggerfall an awful game?

The majority of Elite's players, I suspect, won't ever leave human space. Human space comprises a few thousand systems (exact number unknown) near the rim of the galaxy. I'm guessing it will be about the same size as EVE's galaxy. These are the systems that will be hand developed.

Quote
Why not both?

Did I say something about not having both?

Yes, you implied it. Then you explied it by using the phrase "quantity over quality", which is used to describe a set that is numerous but lacking in quality.

Your brother is so cool.

 :-B
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 12:20:15 AM by Alexandyr »
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #33 on: August 21, 2014, 06:29:36 PM »
The majority of Elite's players, I suspect, won't ever leave human space. Human space comprises a few thousand systems (exact number unknown) near the rim of the galaxy. I'm guessing it will be about the same size as EVE's galaxy. These are the systems that will be hand developed.

I hardly doubt they're putting much effort into the hand developed galaxies, considering they didn't even bother to advertise them. What restaurant would make prime rib, then advertise that it has 400 billion cold ham & cheese sandwiches? A restaurant that doesn't have prime rib.

Yes, you implied it. Then you explied it by using the phrase "quantity over quality", which is used to describe a set that is numerous but lacking in quality.

I did neither of these things. Perhaps you should try reading my words and spend less time pondering on their greater meaning. I'll give you a hint: there isn't one.

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #34 on: August 21, 2014, 06:40:47 PM »
The majority of Elite's players, I suspect, won't ever leave human space. Human space comprises a few thousand systems (exact number unknown) near the rim of the galaxy. I'm guessing it will be about the same size as EVE's galaxy. These are the systems that will be hand developed.

I hardly doubt they're putting much effort into the hand developed galaxies, considering they didn't even bother to advertise them.

Not galaxies. I'm not sure what you mean, though. Frontier has been very clear that most of the action will take place in the human systems. From the FAQ:

Quote
Most of the action will take place within the human populated core systems of the major factions[...]

Quote
Yes, you implied it. Then you explied it by using the phrase "quantity over quality", which is used to describe a set that is numerous but lacking in quality.

I did neither of these things. Perhaps you should try reading my words and spend less time pondering on their greater meaning. I'll give you a hint: there isn't one.

What did you mean when you used the phrase "quantity over quality" to describe Elite's design, if not that detailed and interesting core systems cannot coexist with numerous mostly empty ones?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 06:43:18 PM by Alexandyr »
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

Saddam Hussein

Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #35 on: August 21, 2014, 08:45:10 PM »
Why do you keep chomping down on every feeble "i no sumthing u dont no" he tosses out?

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #36 on: August 21, 2014, 08:54:29 PM »
I'm simply asking for clarification.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #37 on: August 22, 2014, 12:00:41 AM »
Not galaxies. I'm not sure what you mean, though. Frontier has been very clear that most of the action will take place in the human systems. From the FAQ:

Quote
Most of the action will take place within the human populated core systems of the major factions[...]

FAQ=/=advertising. Advertising is something that seeks people out and draws attention, not inform people actively searching for information. They're advertising 400 billion systems as if it is an integral part of the game when it is at most a shoehorned back-burner feature. In fact, the ad video showed hardly any useful information whatsoever. I hope the development department is better than the marketing department.

What did you mean when you used the phrase "quantity over quality" to describe Elite's design, if not that detailed and interesting core systems cannot coexist with numerous mostly empty ones?

I was describing what was apparently an integral part of the game. It is never a good thing to have lots and lots of something worthless, even if it is only to augment base features. The mere mention of 400 billion systems is a number grab to make the game sound big and amazing, when all it tells me is some dev pressed the "generate" button quite a few too many times.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
  • Videmus Omnia
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #38 on: August 22, 2014, 12:49:08 AM »
Quote
     There is an inherent flaw with the premise of close combat space flight, leading to endless turreting and circle-strafing especially in PVP multiplayer, due to the lack of terrain features in mid space, compound that with the fact that Elite also features lightspeed pulse and beam lasers making this issue even more apparent.

    Elite: Dangerous deals with this by limiting the yaw rate and enforce an optimum corner speed by by way of thruster placement and limits in the flight control computer, forcing to roll and then pitch to get the most efficient turn rate (less efficient, but most comfortable for a human pilot), in addition there is a G-LOC system, a preliminary version can be seen here.

So I was reading upon the E:D FAQ, even contemplating a beta purchase, when I started reading this. Now I'm not sure I understand the flight model, so I need to ask, why is yaw limited?


In space, one shouldn't have to fight like a WWII plane. Therefore, I assume I am fully capable of letting the ship rotate freely in space on any axis. This should only be limited to the power output of my thrusters, not artificially limiting how fast I can turn.

Star Citizen does limit how fast you can turn, but let's you turn it off (doing this may also cause you to kill yourself if you're not careful, turning too quickly and applying too many g's to your pilot means you're dead). Does E:D have a similar flight model?

Quote
There is an inherent flaw with the premise of close combat space flight, leading to endless turreting and circle-strafing especially in PVP multiplayer, due to the lack of terrain features in mid space, compound that with the fact that Elite also features lightspeed pulse and beam lasers making this issue even more apparent.

Oh, I see. Apparently they think rotating your ship to fire at opponents is overpowered. E:D has a lot of good features, but I don't agree with forcing players to act like they're flying jet planes in space.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 12:52:59 AM by Irushwithscvs »

*

Offline Particle Person

  • *
  • Posts: 2768
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Elite: Dangerous
« Reply #39 on: August 22, 2014, 01:15:39 AM »
Not galaxies. I'm not sure what you mean, though. Frontier has been very clear that most of the action will take place in the human systems. From the FAQ:

Quote
Most of the action will take place within the human populated core systems of the major factions[...]

FAQ=/=advertising. Advertising is something that seeks people out and draws attention, not inform people actively searching for information. They're advertising 400 billion systems as if it is an integral part of the game when it is at most a shoehorned back-burner feature. In fact, the ad video showed hardly any useful information whatsoever. I hope the development department is better than the marketing department.

Well, yeah, "400 billion systems" is a lot more attention grabbing than "a few thousand developed core systems". Are advertisements now better sources of information than FAQs?

Quote
What did you mean when you used the phrase "quantity over quality" to describe Elite's design, if not that detailed and interesting core systems cannot coexist with numerous mostly empty ones?

I was describing what was apparently an integral part of the game. It is never a good thing to have lots and lots of something worthless, even if it is only to augment base features. The mere mention of 400 billion systems is a number grab to make the game sound big and amazing, when all it tells me is some dev pressed the "generate" button quite a few too many times.

Good job, you cracked the case. Frontier wants there to be a realistic number of systems to help the player feel as though they're in an actual galaxy. They aren't totally worthless, though, since you'll be able to discover valuable resources in deep space and profit by selling the coordinates or through some sort of claim system. I don't think the full details of that system have been released yet. Aliens will also be added to deep space at some point. The vastness of deep space won't detract from the detail of the core systems. As you say, all they had to do was press the "generate" button, so their attention is now almost entirely focused on human space. So again, I ask,

It is better to have very interesting primary systems than lots of boring empty ones.

Why not both?

Quote
There is an inherent flaw with the premise of close combat space flight, leading to endless turreting and circle-strafing especially in PVP multiplayer, due to the lack of terrain features in mid space, compound that with the fact that Elite also features lightspeed pulse and beam lasers making this issue even more apparent.

Oh, I see. Apparently they think rotating your ship to fire at opponents is overpowered. E:D has a lot of good features, but I don't agree with forcing players to act like they're flying jet planes in space.

You can rotate your ship to fire at opponents, regardless of your direction of thrust. You just have to turn flight assist off.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 01:38:15 AM by Alexandyr »
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.