|
zedprime posted:Let's be fair to Fdev here. Engineering would still be an irredeemable piece of garbage if it was more neatly organized around mining unlocking mining related engineers and providing engineering components for mining related upgrades. It's not a complete solution to unimaginative design, no, however one of the big selling points of Elite pre-2.1 was you could at least find the corner of the game you enjoyed and just do that. Before engineering dropped I'd spent about 500 hours in a small handful of systems killing NPCs over and over again, and I was pretty happy doing that. I understand their desire to force players to try out different systems, but you do that with nudges and coaxing people into dipping their toes in - I don't need to mine 500 tons to figure out if I enjoy it or not. Also that only explains the initial unlocks, because there's nothing even remotely valuable about material collection. If you got better at killing NPCs by killing NPCs that'd be simple and not particularly inspiring, but it would at least avoid the current problem which is that any time you want to level-up any area of your gameplay you have to drop what you were doing and do something completely different that usually has no gameplay or immersive merit to it whatsoever. When you're talking about treadmills here it's just the tip of the iceberg of Elite's problem. A treadmill is being asked to do [thing] X number of times before you can progress, which is boring gating. Elite not only asks you to do that, it also boxes you into a [thing] that you would never normally dream of doing, like "sit outside a station and scan wakes" for example. There's no other reason in the game to scan wakes other than getting wake scan data*. There's no other reason in the game to drop into HGEs other than to get HGE materials**. There's no reason to surface prospect other than to get raw materials. It's all dead end branches with none of the "virtuous loops" you'd expect from basically any videogame. You can accrue materials "just from playing" but only as mission rewards, ship kills/passive scans and mining asteroids and all of those reward materials in such small quantities and in such a narrow band that mat trading them in for a G5'd ship would take a frankly unreasonable (admittedly subjective) amount of time. If the difference is in the hundreds of hours, suddenly the scenic route not only seems unattractive, but actively foolhardy. There are plenty of boring treadmill games that at least have the decency to just let you keep plonking away at it and eventually level up (like all ARPGs or looter shooters or something) and while normally I'd be the last person to go to bat for that design, it'd be far preferable to what we have which is like the worst version of that from some hell universe. * I think Fdev consider adding the mechanics for something is the same as incentivising it. So the fact that you've been able to equip wake scanners since day 1 is enough for them, they never cared or considered that there's no conceivable point to doing so. ** It also shows some even more fundamental flaws in Elite's design which is the instancing and the way POIs are fed to you in supercruise. Dropping in to any USS signal requires that you deselect your current target, laboriously turn to face it, divert many minutes out of your current goal. Many of them also require specialist gear, like distress calls you need fuel limpets, but why would you carry fuel limpets if not to engage in distress calls? There's no room for it to be emergent, players have to have planned for it, be willing to lose time diverting and be willing to suspend their disbelief enough to pretend it's worth their time in any of the terms presented by the game. Edit: A player market for materials that could generate meaningful revenue for sellers would be a huge relief, as it already is with the technically-worse-but-more-ignorable Odyssey engineering. It would both incentivise and justify collection beyond what you need for your own goals and enable people who hate that mechanic to avoid it. Again, I'd rather the progression systems were just... good... but they aren't so I'll take anything I can get. Tommy the Newt fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Sep 12, 2023 |
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 06:22 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Let me explain why the game I still play constantly is terrible... I assume this is directed at me. The unwritten (and I assumed) obvious truth is that I really like Elite, it's one of my favourite games despite its many objective flaws. It's possible to be constructively critical of something and also enjoy playing it / watching it / reading it. It would be a pretty limiting world if people could only be effusive about things they enjoyed then had to gently caress off and die whenever something about it seemed worthy of revision.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
The grind is brutal for many. I've engineered multiple ships and each one takes about a full week of work to do. I guess I learned how to stop worrying and love the grind over time because I used to hate it and complain nonstop and now it's kind of fun to go around collecting the things
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 16:10
|
|
|
It wasn't directed at anyone in particular, but elite seems particularly good at generating players that have such a love hate relationship with the game that they're willing to write manifestos about it evangelizing it's strengths and weaknesses on a soap box to anyone that will listen. For me it's just a great game to play casually an hour or two at a time a few nights a week, and I'll likely continue enjoyment of that for the foreseeable future. Maybe this is normal for MMO/ live service games. I generally avoid them and play single player games. Hell that's one reason I like elite it's a single player MMO basically.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 16:12
|
|
|
A lot of my favorite games have insane flaws that get harder and harder to overlook the more I play them. Except for F.E.A.R., that game is perfect.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
smug jeebus posted:A lot of my favorite games have insane flaws that get harder and harder to overlook the more I play them. Except for F.E.A.R., that game is perfect. The nail gun in that game remains the most fun weapon I've ever used in an FPS because of how good the physics and slowmo were
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 16:27
|
|
|
Ursine Catastrophe posted:2,000 hours, not recommended https://medium.com/@caseyexplosion/...to-a7f3a291dac9
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:[...] that they're willing to write manifestos about it evangelizing it's strengths and weaknesses on a soap box to anyone that will listen. To be fair, that's the case when anyone is sufficiently invested in anything. It happens with all live service games in particular, probably because it feels like they're malleable entities. In the case of Elite, I'd argue everyone has ended up benefitting from bittervets complaining many times now, albeit indirectly. Also arguably the dedicated games sub on the internet discussion forum Something Awful is a fairly appropriate place to write about the strengths and weaknesses of games as pieces of media, although I am increasingly aware that a lot of the time people really want to drop into threads around the internet just to go 'I like this!' and have that feed back forever, which is fair enough I guess, but I've always found that pretty boring. I'm singling you out here unfairly. You're fine. It's absolutely fine and cool that you enjoy the game, so do most people reading the thread including me. It's totally fine to not care about the nitty gritty of the design. I am just on a short fuse from years of trying to discuss mechanics with people who only want to discuss feels, but can't separate the two. It happens in all online games. If you like something and feel like reading negative opinions of it will affect your enjoyment I could suggest not reading them, I'm told not participating in things you don't enjoy is a perfect solution!
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 17:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 17:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/EliteDangerous/status/1701647111769424247?t=Q22YTxbbyBvmJnWloqnC9Q&s=19 What a nice write up!
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
I love Braben and I love Elite but honestly it does get supremely frustrating at seeing what Elite Dangerous could and should have been vs what we got. So much potential just vaporized and it's the only game of its type  I'm not even bothering with Starfield because Skyrim In Space doesn't really appeal much to me
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 18:41
|
|
|
So far Starfield feels more like Borderlands than anything, the spaceships are an afterthought which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I am a bit annoyed with it because I enjoyed exploring a beautiful overworld in all previous Bethesda games, but this one is all chopped up into zones with a lot of loading screens in between. It's serviceable though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
Starfield is a space themed rpg. Like skyrim is low fantasy or fallout post apocalyptic. I'm loving it but yeah it's no space sim.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
Elite is like a game designed by old nerds who are perfectly capable, and totally nailed the flight model, but who have absolutely no clue what developments have actually occurred in gameplay in the video games genre since about... 1995 or something. It's like they never played the Rogue Squadron games or anything like them. They cannot conceive of the idea that having challenging interesting environments and obstacles and actual scenarios for your combat zones, is more interesting than just having an open blank patch of space or identical bit of endless asteroid belt, in which to do space combat. Ditto, all the other incredibly basic things that should have been in this game. Like... basic gameplay scenarios such as base attack/defence, infiltrate & assassinate missions, sabotage missions where you have to get into an enemy space station and plant a bomb or virus, escort missions, canyon/trench run racing missions... etc etc I know this is kind of hyperbole because they have the thargoid things and some capital ship stuff, and I think a couple of types of planet surface base attack scenarios? But yeah a whole bunch of this poo poo is what they needed to add. Give me cool Rogue Squadron type obstacle course environments. That sort of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
Tommy the Newt posted:words. For what it's worth, I think you're right, and maybe my exploration-focus makes it impossible for me to see eye to eye here. My exploration-ships tend to be over-engineered to the point a Thargoid needs only to look at them to let them burst into flames, while my combat-engineering rarely goes above lvl. 3.  quote:No. Sorry, I outright reject this concept and I'm sick of seeing it thrown around in half-assed defence of awful game mechanics. Certain players will always seek to optimise games while others will just mill about doing random poo poo. That's not interesting to point out, it's been the case since the dawn of time and no amount of moral judgement over others' level of engagement will excuse a game being poorly designed. It's 100% the job of a game developer to protect players from themselves by building mechanics that naturally promote enjoyable gameplay. Some players will always find ways to slip through the cracks and break systems, and usually that's fine, that's the foundation of speedrun communities and a lot of people get significant pleasure out of it after all. Elite is a game where engaging with the progression mechanics in earnest on Fdev's own terms is dreadful. If you are the type of player who's unaware of it, or willing to just smile and overlook it, more power to you, but 'victim blaming' players for expecting the game's design to be conducive to a good time is not helpful. Thousands of players have complained about engineering since day 1, some of the complaints resulted in changes that were universally welcomed. Dismissing those players as having "the wrong mindset" while also praising the fruits of the criticism, or even using it to shut-down further criticism, is particularly irritating. So, yeah, nah. If you wanna argue in favour of engineering you're going to need to discuss the mechanics themselves and not just light a few incense sticks and blame my problematic desire for games to make loving sense. See, I think it's impossible for a game developer to actually protect players from themselves, the only 100% way I could think of would be a software that burns down your PC, preventing you from playing any games. But so far, CCP is the only developer who pulled this off. This weird idea of players as agency-less slaves of their games was always very off-putting to me, to be honest. You're allowed to not play a game when it's dumbassery gets too annoying. Frontier could sure as hell do a lot better than they're doing right now, though
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 22:06
|
|
|
I'm not suggesting players should have no agency, I'm suggesting that if you design a game in such a way that the optimal way to play it is unfun, you have a badly designed game. It really is like, rule 1 of game design and not that complicated. Your sentiment that people are playing it wrong is fairly specific to this game, although yes it crops up in other places. You don't have entire forums full of posts claiming that Factorio players are playing it wrong, for example, but that is a game full of agency. 'Civilization players caught playing wrong, the mugs! Developers shake their heads and shrug.' Nah, design the game better. Edit: https://youtu.be/QHHg99hwQGY?si=Y0wESC0grzIlP-Rc Shine posted this video in the thread before and while I'm not a mtg player, I found it really interesting. It also has a lot of points that can be directly applied to Elite, as well as some explanations for why different types of player struggle to get along. It's long but it's a good watch imo. (#13 at 39ish minutes and #15 at 43ish minutes are both particularly relevant.) Also this video is shorter and not very thorough but has an interesting example of the point we're discussing: https://youtu.be/7L8vAGGitr8?si=4Ch9bwlRl8iNxV93 Tommy the Newt fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Sep 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2023 23:06
|
|
|
The fun of the game is flying the ships, and that’s true across all domains in the game. What isn’t fun for a lot of people — I’d guess most, but it’s SA — is that the grind of the game sidelines that for activities that range from briefly entertaining to dull from the outset, horrific after the 100th time. Which you’ll do it that many times if you want to fully outfit your ship. If I could get engineering mats in sufficient quantity without having to cheese re-logging etc, the current way wouldn’t be so bad. I like the SRV, I don’t mind the tractor mini game in space, hell even the stupid SRV puzzle for the jump range extender wasn’t terrible the first time. It’s that you have to repeat the same exact thing dozens of times that makes people disengage. You can do these things without cheesing them, sure, but people ain’t got time for that. e: and none of this addresses that the bulk of the information you need to do any of this effectively, even without cheesing it, is far more easily found external to the game than it is discovered organically.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 01:21
|
|
|
Libluini posted:For what it's worth, I think you're right, and maybe my exploration-focus makes it impossible for me to see eye to eye here. My exploration-ships tend to be over-engineered to the point a Thargoid needs only to look at them to let them burst into flames, while my combat-engineering rarely goes above lvl. 3. This is another one of the peeves I have with the game - you're incentivised to hyper-specialise your ships, and a specialised ship is hugely more capable in its field than a generalist. It leads to situations like you mention, where a specialised explorer or trader has no chance in combat against a specialised combat ship (or NPC designed to be a challenge for specialised combat ships). I much preferred how Rebel Galaxy Outlaw did ship design (ships have slots, you put things in the slots to get capabilities and bonuses, leaving a slot empty gives no advantage), where stuff like jump range was static, and while a trading ship tended to be big and slow compared to a fighting ship, it also tended to have tons of armour and turrets compared to a fighting ship. It meant you could have combat capabilities without compromising the core function of your ship, and arming your trader to fight off pirates was normal instead of a fool's errand.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 09:57
|
|
|
TheWorldsaStage posted:Starfield is a space themed rpg. Like skyrim is low fantasy or fallout post apocalyptic. I'm loving it but yeah it's no space sim. Yeah, the space parts are very low-key, but boy did they absolutely nail the modular ship building, tying up the visual look of the ship, its interior(!) layout and its stats. It's refreshing to have an actual system calculating ship performance instead of Anaconda-jumps-further-because-reasons and local
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 11:36
|
|
|
Tommy the Newt posted:I'm not suggesting players should have no agency, I'm suggesting that if you design a game in such a way that the optimal way to play it is unfun, you have a badly designed game. It really is like, rule 1 of game design and not that complicated. Don't get me wrong, being optimal can definitely be part of it - but there's more to it than that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 12:48
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:I'm not sure this argument holds, because as far as I'm concerned, being the most optimal isn't the only reason to play games. In that case the suboptimal method should be fun, or part of something you were doing already. Most engineering may collection doesn’t fall into that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 13:44
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:I'm not sure this argument holds, because as far as I'm concerned, being the most optimal isn't the only reason to play games. I think I see the problem here and understand why people are reacting negatively to this idea. I don't mean "optimal" in the specific sense of "build a meta ship and play the game the same way I do". I'm absolutely not saying "everyone should minmax". I'm talking about game design in a broader sense: playing a game according to the rules it lays out should be fun, you should not have to ignore the goals and exercise will to make your own fun, while you remain at all times perfectly free to do so. Let's simplify. If we're talking about a game of chess, the rules of the game are established in order to make it a challenging, enjoyable experience for players. Playing chess "wrong" would be not following the rules, shoving the pieces up your rear end or using them to build little towers, right? That's not chess's fault, if you enjoy that go nuts, if you don't you broke the rules so don't compain to Mr Chess. (This is something a lot of players try to do with videogames, there are whole channels on youtube dedicated to deliberately messing up games to produce outcomes that amuse them and I have nothing against that, whatever floats your boat). But the rules and explicit goals of the game of chess should be designed to make playing chess a good experience if you choose to follow them. Each player can make different moves within that ruleset, but I'm talking about the ruleset here. Let's use a different word rather than optimal - I used that word just because that's what the game designer said in the video I posted, which you should watch because it makes this point better than I can. Let's instead say "playing the game well". Playing a game well according to its ruleset should not be a poo poo time. If I have to exert willpower to play less-well that means the game has a design problem. I really encourage you to watch the links I posted, because I feel like this isn't that complicated an idea but I must be explaining it poorly because people keep thinking I mean something I don't. Edit: fwiw I also play Elite 'badly' on the regular, for fun, I'm capable of whimsy as I think most people are. Please don't conflate an individual player's capacity for whimsy in a sandbox with an excuse for Fdev having made a bad game. Me building a Keelback and spending 2 hours posting baseball quotes in system chat for my own amusement doesn't mean Elite doesn't deserve criticism for its incredibly lovely progression systems. Tommy the Newt fucked around with this message at 14:29 on Sep 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:11
|
|
|
too many words to say that engaging with the non-flying part of the game are mostly a chore, and only get worse when you make an effort to engage with them
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:14
|
|
|
krispykremessuck posted:too many words Never! I agree, but I'd like to add there should be room for people who just like numba-go-up, though, like if people just want to plug away hauling biowaste from place to place while semi-AFK, more power to them. What irks me most is that none of the feedback loops are virtuous and we're all expected to do the same asinine poo poo to make any progress rather than having multiple viable paths for different tastes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:23
|
|
|
I upgraded my PC recently and I keep wanting to get back into this game again. I haven't touched it since the Odyssey launch and I feel intimidated to get back in and do stuff. I miss my T10
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:34
|
|
|
Fatrick posted:I upgraded my PC recently and I keep wanting to get back into this game again. I haven't touched it since the Odyssey launch and I feel intimidated to get back in and do stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
The T10 is a hard ship to miss, in more ways than one
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:40
|
|
|
smug jeebus posted:The T10 is a hard ship to miss, in more ways than one It's stunning in its beauty. It's the spoiler that does it really
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:42
|
|
|
It always comes down to the itch for some space truckin', and this game is the best tool to scratch it with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 14:45
|
|
|
El Grillo posted:They cannot conceive of the idea that having challenging interesting environments and obstacles and actual scenarios for your combat zones, is more interesting than just having an open blank patch of space or identical bit of endless asteroid belt, in which to do space combat. Man if they had a Combat Zone in an actual asteroid belt, I'd be over the moon. Combat Zones are the content I do the most when I actually play Elite, because it's the most straightforward way to help frogs but it is also the most bland thing ever. The combat is great. The flying is great. But it's just, you are in space and some ships are flying around in a circle for reasons. Maybe sometimes a big ship shows up but mostly some stupid spec ops fly in. That's it. And they'll never change it because Frontier thinks it's fine. I think that is the main issue with a lot of a Elite, if you asked them about x or y feature they'd say "oh that's fine". It's the video game equivalent of MVP. Minimum Viable Product.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
Cutedge posted:some ships are flying around in a circle for reasons. I'll have you know that galactic coordinates R: 52.913 / l: 30.231 / b: -41.953 are of supreme strategic importance. That's where we go to have arguments about modern jazz, and we're very set in our ways.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
They had some combat zones around space installations for some CG ages ago. Wish they’d allow that for regular ones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 17:24
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:It always comes down to the itch for some space truckin', and this game is the best tool to scratch it with. That and her cousin, Some Space Travellin', are the main events. Attempts to move beyond this have been disastrous. Best game of the entire last two gens tho. Let's go for three. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 17:25
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:It always comes down to the itch for some space truckin', and this game is the best tool to scratch it with. it's funny you mention that because this cowboy-bebop-rear end space truck thing is coming out next year at some point and I'm real curious how it ends up playing
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Gort posted:This is another one of the peeves I have with the game - you're incentivised to hyper-specialise your ships, and a specialised ship is hugely more capable in its field than a generalist. It leads to situations like you mention, where a specialised explorer or trader has no chance in combat against a specialised combat ship (or NPC designed to be a challenge for specialised combat ships). While I like having the ability to specialize my ship how I want to, Frontier really didn't think things through on their hand. They really wanted a 1:1 replica of the real galaxy, but also really low jump ranges to prevent people from going anywhere "too fast". And the entire system of exploration-engineering, like light-weighting your modules, grew out of a weird desire to find a compromise between players wanting higher jump ranges and developers wanting the exact opposite, but grudgingly giving way. This lead to weird extremes where a pure combat ship can barely make it to Alpha Centauri when jumping from Earth, while my dumbass, not even fully min-maxes Phantom can use all the weird add-on mechanics to potentially reach hundreds of light years of jump range. It would be an easy fix to just set a far higher base jump range, something like 25-50 for combat ships, 50-75 for trading ships and 75-100 for explorers and then giving some sane barriers like walking light-weighting engineering back (either limiting it to a maximum of level 3, or adjusting the numbers to be overall less extreme), plus making it harder to profit from undersizing equipment, maybe by e.g. reducing the influence mass has on jump range massively. This would leave enough room for specializations, without luring players into dumb traps by incentivizing the exact wrong things. If you adjust other parts of the game in a similar way (e.g. giving weapons higher base damage and range, but massively nerfing the higher levels of engineering, to give less incentive to spend hundreds of hours on a part of the game you may not even like), you'll eventually end in a nice, mellow medium were explorers have high jump range and are nimble without exploding in fireballs every time a dust mote touches their hull, and combat ships can hold their ground and move around without being stuck as basically STL-ships you only move via ship transfer The kicker is that Frontier is suffering purely from self-inflicted pain here, you could make game balance 10x better just by adjusting existing numbers to be less insane. But the devs really don't like the idea of people going somewhere fast, because that may mean they have fun in a non-approved manner  Fake edit: On a lighter note, at the start of the year I bought a new flight stick because my old Logitech only needed ca. 2 years to develop dead zones larger than Jupiter, but since eye problems kept me from playing eye-intensive games like space sims, I only now noticed I managed to buy a really fancy replica of a real flightstick. From an airplane that doesn't have a stick for three axis control. So not only did I have to order an emergency replacement Thrustmaster with both at least the same number of buttons and a third movement axis for my lazy rear end, until it arrives I have to control yaw with buttons. (It works, but it feels sooooo dumb.) Anyway, now I have this fancy-looking, but ultimately pointless Airbus-replica flight stick sitting on my desk. I guess I could keep it as an emergency replacement for when I inevitably break my new flight stick two years from now. Or use it in a game where having full three axis control isn't as important, like Starfield, ha ha 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
Did the source code ever get released for the og? Because I think thats what we're left with. That or they just turn a small team loose to do whatever while this thing is on life support and they take it to heart.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
Cutedge posted:Man if they had a Combat Zone in an actual asteroid belt, I'd be over the moon. Combat Zones are the content I do the most when I actually play Elite, because it's the most straightforward way to help frogs but it is also the most bland thing ever. The combat is great. The flying is great. But it's just, you are in space and some ships are flying around in a circle for reasons. Maybe sometimes a big ship shows up but mostly some stupid spec ops fly in. That's it. And they'll never change it because Frontier thinks it's fine. I think that is the main issue with a lot of a Elite, if you asked them about x or y feature they'd say "oh that's fine".
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 18:51
|
|
|
gently caress it would be so cool if we could land on thick atmosphere planets. Or hang out in the upper reaches of a gas giant. It really sucks we will never be able to land on full atmo planets, let alone ELWs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 18:57
|
|
|
The other thing that was bizarre to me was, exploration is a significant feature of this game but even Space Engine, which was made by one random russian nerd in his free time, has a far greater variety of stellar phenomenon eyecandy to look at when you're flying around in space. Stuff like comets, planetary aurorae, accretion disks, all sorts of poo poo. I think I remember hearing Braben grognarding out about how every natural phenomenon in the game had to be 100% physically accurate and simulated which is probably why there isn't more, which is of course fully idiotic. (I also prefer the adaptive exposure lighting mode you can get in Space Engine where you don't always see a super-bright colourful galactic nebula type skymap always in the background as you do in Elite - instead the lighting adapts naturally so when you're in space near a bright object like a planet, you actually get that black void of space behind the planet and because of that it looks 100% more 'real' than Elite, imo... but this is just personal preference I know)
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 06:22 |
|
|
El Grillo posted:It's just mental. Used to drive me crazy how much of a wasted opportunity the game is. The flight model and combat are so good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2023 19:15
|
|