Elite Dangerous Odyssey has FAILED :D

Well if we're talking semantics, EDO is not a DLC, it's a full fledged* expansion :)

Think free DLCs for Witcher 3 vs the 2 major expansions.

*or meant to be full-fledged via updates and additions
Same difference really... expansion or not both are downloadable content (DLC). Just like cosmetic tat is DLC, regardless of whether it's paid or not.

And Odyssey still requires Horizons to be able to play it so either way Max's is not a fair comparison (and you'd have to really factor that into the full price if you don't already own Elite and want to play EDO from the get go).

As for Witcher 3, those 2 DLCs/expansion packs are top quality indeed (I actually bought the complete edition for 30 Euros a few years back, have completed all but Blood & Wine at this stage), from a quick google Blood & Wine initially cost $20 and Hearts of Stone a tenner, just to point out for reference.
 
Last edited:

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
Same difference really... expansion or not both are downloadable content (DLC). Just like cosmetic tat is DLC, regardless of whether it's paid or not.

And Odyssey still requires Horizons to be able to play it so either way Max's is not a fair comparison (and you'd have to really factor that into the full price if you don't already own Elite and want to play EDO from the get go).

As for Witcher 3, those 2 DLCs/expansion packs are top quality indeed (I actually bought the complete edition for 30 Euros a few years back, have completed all but Blood & Wine at this stage), from a quick google Blood & Wine initially cost $20 and Hearts of Stone a tenner, just to point out for reference.

Oh wow, I didn't realise they were that cheap! Nice for CDPR. Granted, they were one-offs, rather than "as a service" and updated for months to come, like Odyssey. The main point was that Odyssey is not a small content DLC, that most games would have, but a full expansion with content being added to it after the release as well.

Not sure what we could compate it to, to remain objective. Maybe something like an MMO game expansion? I don't really play any, so not sure. Elder Scrolls Online? That's the only ongoing paid MMO that releases new content that I know of.

::EDIT::

The latest Elder Scrolls Online expansion is mere 50 GBP :p But it does contain the base game too, which is 15, so let's say it's 35 GBP. That's 5 quid more than Odyssey then.
 
Last edited:
Oh wow, I didn't realise they were that cheap! Nice for CDPR. Granted, they were one-offs, rather than "as a service" and updated for months to come, like Odyssey. The main point was that Odyssey is not a small content DLC, that most games would have, but a full expansion with content being added to it after the release as well.

Not sure that argument holds much water, since every patch since Odyssey's release has (so far) been an attempt to fix the broken release.

If the Witcher DLCs had been released in a similar state, we would still expect patches.
 
Oh wow, I didn't realise they were that cheap! Nice for CDPR. Granted, they were one-offs, rather than "as a service" and updated for months to come, like Odyssey. The main point was that Odyssey is not a small content DLC, that most games would have, but a full expansion with content being added to it after the release as well.

Not sure what we could compate it to, to remain objective. Maybe something like an MMO game expansion? I don't really play any, so not sure. Elder Scrolls Online? That's the only ongoing paid MMO that releases new content that I know of.
Me neither - CDPR did well there considering the quality of the product they delivered, but there's other studios who don't go all-in on the cash grab front in fairness (mind you, they're becoming rarer given it's clear what the industry can get away with these days, in part thanks to people like myself).

MMO expansions are probably a better comparison, though I don't dabble in those so no idea what they cost normally and what comes with them.

I didn't actually want to get into an argument over whether £30 (I happened to have paid 47 Euros for Odyssey but that's my own fault - should've waited until release instead, lesson learned) is good value for money in this particular case. I don't believe it is but I'm sure others will disagree i.e. it's subjective.

I wouldn't pay 60 Euros for a single plane in DCS either, but I can appreciate the work that went into it (and base-DCS is free). Comparison with full games is wrong though as EDO ain't that - and if I'm perfectly honest the bulk of its gameplay is still carried by Horizons and the framework that that provides (ships, space, planets). Once we remove planet tech, I don't really think the additions that Odyssey brings are that substantial. But again, YMMV and I'd rather not get into that debate again.

I also remember when Horizons came out it was like £40 or something? I wasn't impressed, but ended up buying it anyways because it's Elite. Still think Frontier sells their products at a premium (which the product can't quite match in terms of quality, their cosmetics being a prime example), but because there's little competition they can still get away with it.

::EDIT::

The latest Elder Scrolls Online expansion is mere 50 GBP :p But it does contain the base game too, which is 15, so let's say it's 35 GBP. That's 5 quid more than Odyssey then.
I suppose it depends what comes with the expansion, maybe it's so meaty in terms of content that it's worth it, but it does seem like a lot to me. I'm not familiar with ESO, but seeing that BethSoft have the audacity to ask me for 15 Euros to "upgrade" to their latest version of Skyrim (as an owner of the Special Edition) I'm not overly surprised.
 
Last edited:
The software is a mere pittance compared to what I've spent on hardware to run Elite...

I got my XB One S specifically to play Elite. The XB Live Gold subscription followed suit rather shortly after i got the Console.
But since i got the Minecraft special edition version of the XB1S, i played Minecraft for about a month before diving into Elite :)
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
Not sure that argument holds much water, since every patch since Odyssey's release has (so far) been an attempt to fix the broken release.

If the Witcher DLCs had been released in a similar state, we would still expect patches.
True, but EDO also receives new content (some very nice stuff already, like improvements to ground CZ's with ship combat, 4-man MC etc. and very cool stuff in the works, like the new SRV or FC interiors) and I'm pretty sure that if not for the time spent on the broken stuff, we'd get more of it by now.

Thargoid foot combat is almost guaranteed I think, but we'll need to wait for console release for that.

Don't get me wrong the state EDO released was quite unacceptable and there is no way anyone can defend that, but hopefully once they fully fix it and expand on it, EDO will be worth its price. It's werid though, as they were supposed to move away from "pay now, get stuff later" seasons model and release more complete expansions, but it seems it didn't quite worked that way. We don't have "Odyssey Season" anymore, but we still have to wait for the expansion to be... well, expanded upon after we've paid the full price for it.

Some of it is warranted by the specifics (like, Tharhoid foot combat probably was not going to be in at the release anyway, due to storyline progression), but the bits that are not dependant on the story, like the new SRV, still are being added after we've paid for it and are not in at the release.

I'm probably definitely biased as LEP-per though and I think it's important to keep that in mind that to a lot of the people the price doesn't really matter, as we've already paid for it as part of LEP.
 
Yeah, sorry I seem to have caused this tangent. I don't think the price is an issue, I haven't seen anybody complain that it's too expensive - once Odyssey actually works as it should.

The problem wasn't Odyssey's price at launch, it was Odyssey's state.
 
Heck, I'm triggered just by the terrible shadows I see in everyone's videos and pictures (and I'm talking about the pics / vids that are pro-EDO). It's PS4 shadows all over again! Add all that other stuff in your list, and it's a big fat NO for me.

However... I am interested in the potential of EDO. Not enough to Kickstart it (that is, buy it now in its current state), but enough to keep an eye on how it's progressing, both in fixes and future content. The fleet carrier bridge alone is very enticing to me, and that wasn't on the original roadmap IIRC. Who knows what the future may bring? For now I'm pretending this is a paid beta, and that the gold master will be released sometime next year. Since I don't do paid betas, I'll keep watching from the sideline and see where it goes.
I still play EDO over Horizons, but often wonder why. I guess it's a form of FOMO, I want to play the new content which sounds good on paper, and while the aforementioned issues still distract and irate to some extent, they don't stand in the way of playing the game anymore at least.

But this also means while I play the game more again, the shortcomings of EDO's overall design and gameplay loops on a more granular level are more visible now, and I think they do not lend themselves well to repetition in the same way the Horizon bits are. Because unlike visiting several types of stations, outposts, planets, bases, megaships, asteroid rings, stellar phenomena etc. etc. i.e. all the locations you can visit and interact with in your ship, on-foot options are rather limited in comparison.

And the progression path is very much mutually exclusive between Horizons and Odyssey which is something I really don't understand from a game design perspective (other than the obvious - being easier to manage from FDev's perspective). I can't pick up a material on foot, I can't scan a plant from my SRV, I can't use Odyssey engineering mats for my ships and vice versa, just a few examples but there's plenty more. I'm currently building up my fleet and keep asking myself why I should do any on-foot stuff as it's not adding anything at all to that particular progression path (bigger, better, engineered ships and eventually a FC) - where I wonder why don't I just boot up Horizons which plays and looks better ... until the above FOMO kicks in.
 
Last edited:
And the progression path is very much mutually exclusive between Horizons and Odyssey which is something I really don't understand from a game design perspective (other than the obvious - being easier to manage from FDev's perspective). I can't pick up a material on foot, I can't scan a plant from my SRV, I can't use Odyssey engineering mats for my ships and vice versa, just a few examples but there's plenty more.

Because Horizons players are going to get the Odyssey client eventually (they were meant to get it at launch until that was pushed back), and the easiest way to keep them out of the Odyssey content is to grey out the Disambark button and not give them the advanced planetary approach suite - basically, a couple of boolean variables.

All of the rest of the game can then remain identical.

If they entangle all the Odyssey and Horizons stuff they're just creating a whole bunch of places where the code has to figure out if the commander owns Odyssey, or is playing in Horizons mode, and then alter the UI and interactions in every single case.
 
This is not news. Given what was touted by the developer, the time-frames involved, the delays on top of delays, the back-stepping by the developers I have to agree Odyssey is a failure at release on an NMS scale.
 
If they entangle all the Odyssey and Horizons stuff they're just creating a whole bunch of places where the code has to figure out if the commander owns Odyssey, or is playing in Horizons mode, and then alter the UI and interactions in every single case.

Mix interactions will happen on non-atmospheric planets where Horizons players in SRV can meet on-foot players
Ground CZ would be interesting. I wonder if a Horizons player can join one in the ship or in SRV...
 
Because Horizons players are going to get the Odyssey client eventually (they were meant to get it at launch until that was pushed back), and the easiest way to keep them out of the Odyssey content is to grey out the Disambark button and not give them the advanced planetary approach suite - basically, a couple of boolean variables.

All of the rest of the game can then remain identical.

If they entangle all the Odyssey and Horizons stuff they're just creating a whole bunch of places where the code has to figure out if the commander owns Odyssey, or is playing in Horizons mode, and then alter the UI and interactions in every single case.
That's what I meant with my caveat in brackets in my post, but from a gameplay point of view it's not great at all. So, nice and easy from Frontier's perspective, less so from the player's pov and it certainly reeks of MVP.

Other games handle this a lot more elegantly, and I still don't see any reason why my Odyssey CMDR isn't capable of interacting with Horizons assets while on-foot (and vice versa), because that is what makes the Elite-legs part of the game feel so ring-fenced and, to me at least, more "optional" than it should be. Not to mention the fact that none of the Horizons assets got any EDO treatment whatsoever (such as the EDH settlements, or Thargoid/Guardian sites, would have adding a few interactive objects been such a big deal?).
 
Ummmnnn... Is that supposed to be funny? Sarcasm? Because I find comedy to be missing here.

You see, I think the game is mediocre at best, I feel the lighting is horrible, so bright it washed out my HUD, making activities like deep core mining almost impossible at times.

And yes, my computer runs it very badly, and the only thing that is even close to 12 years old on my system is my heavily modified case, everything else is quite new with the exception of the GTX 1080. In fact, my computer runs Horizons in VR at higher settings than Oddity does on a flat screen.

As for new content, I got burnt out on it so quickly it wasn't funny... The little bit I actually liked. The grind wall for upgrades and engineering wasn't worth it and was the worst I've ever seen. Not being able to swap attachments on weapons is beyond comprehension.

You can have it.
 
I feel the lighting is horrible
This, next to performance* and no on foot VR, is my biggest issue. It's utterly destroyed all immersion in the game for me (playing in VR really highlights how broken the entire lighting system is), with dancing, broken shadows, planets plunging into darkness then light at a slight tilt of your head, the flat white light down on planets surface, the washed out or too dark cockpits, the SRV bouncing headlights...

* Update 8 is not the huge jump in performance that certain people are claiming. It's better but I've noticed they're just cutting back on FX and other things (like NPC navmesh and random rock etc LOD), not actually improving the engine.
 
I'd be playing Odyssey even if i wasn't interested in the new ground based missions and other elements because of the new planetary generation. Planets look so much better now.
It's true that I prefer new planet tech over the old at this point. The cost is just pretty high (in terms of EDOs negative effect on Horizons content i.e. 75% of the game - lighting and performance, but I also find that ship handling is less fun after a recent bout in my Courier in Horizons) and it also still feels like it never left the Alpha stage. It performs and looks still very rough in motion.
 
It's true that I prefer new planet tech over the old at this point. The cost is just pretty high (in terms of EDOs negative effect on Horizons content i.e. 75% of the game - lighting and performance, but I also find that ship handling is less fun after a recent bout in my Courier in Horizons) and it also still feels like it never left the Alpha stage. It performs and looks still very rough in motion.

They changed the flight model? Can't say i've noticed a difference.
 
They changed the flight model? Can't say i've noticed a difference.
I wouldn't go as far as saying they changed the model as such.

I notice it a lot more when switching from Odyssey to Horizons - the latter feels more nippy/responsive kind of hard to describe it. I've read others report the same so I don't think it's just me. I wonder if Odyssey introduced some form of input lag, as that is sort of how it feels.
 
I wouldn't go as far as saying they changed the model as such.

I notice it a lot more when switching from Odyssey to Horizons - the latter feels more nippy/responsive kind of hard to describe it. I've read others report the same so I don't think it's just me. I wonder if Odyssey introduced some form of input lag, as that is sort of how it feels.
Yeah, might be connected to the performance problems.

One example that I experience all the time: In a ground CZ quite often it feels like let's say the first four hits don't register on the target and then with the next shot all five hits register at once. Especially common with the AR-50. But maybe that's to be expected. Ground CZs are still a performance nightmare for me.
 
Top Bottom