Why can we only Land on Barren Planets after almost 5 years?

Can you post a link to Flight sim 19, have genuinely never heard of it. Cheers.

I also said 'Was' a flightsim advisor, for a few developers on A320 projects, also ran the beta test/support team for Airsimmer Advanced (Study sim) that was a few years back.

Never worked on X-Plane, didn't they use sprites? Even DCS couldn't produce realistic weather, no idea if things have changed. Am also not claiming that is the only reason for delays, it is a monumental task for a number of reasons. If they wanted to chuck out an SC version of atmospheric planets, we could have that very quickly, along with a lot of disappointed customers.

Btw I think SC's planet's look amazing, but the weather effects (clouds/storms) are non-existent right now, for a very good reason, it would require heavy optimization. Most of these desktop flightsims only need to draw small areas, max cruise altitudes are between 41,000 - 60,000 ft Dynamic weather is localized, divided up by Metar stations.
Actually, I meant FlightSim 95.. I also play (when I want to relax) FarmSim 19. I messed up :) mia culpa. Never the less, my points are still valid. Clouds are not an issue and if they are, then Frontier have severe problems.

I'd ask more about the A320 project but that would really be going off on a tangent :)
 
Actually, I meant FlightSim 95.. I also play (when I want to relax) FarmSim 19. I messed up :) mia culpa. Never the less, my points are still valid. Clouds are not an issue and if they are, then Frontier have severe problems.

I'd ask more about the A320 project but that would really be going off on a tangent :)
Ah I remember that one, quite a few years back. Am pretty sure those where sprites though? Sadly Airsimmer went bust, doubt I'd get in trouble for saying it was for Avianca airlines (ground school) they funded it through developing a stripped-down version for desktop simmers. I still have it on my old rig, the advanced was an amazing piece of tech and very accurate, a shame only the beta testers got to keep it.

Was a big drama when the company went bust, many customers bought the basic version expecting a discount on the Advanced.
 
Ah I remember that one, quite a few years back. Am pretty sure those where sprites though? Sadly Airsimmer went bust, doubt I'd get in trouble for saying it was for Avianca airlines (ground school) they funded it through developing a stripped-down version for desktop simmers. I still have it on my old rig, the advanced was an amazing piece of tech and very accurate, a shame only the beta testers got to keep it.
Sprites back then for sure... But Unity et'all have to be around now for a decade or more?
 
Clouds are not an issue and if they are, then Frontier have severe problems.
Clouds... Hmph! I'm still waiting for Frontier to get something as simple as shadows right. :p

I suppose they could give us completely overcast atmospheric planets, and then they won't need to worry about shadows!
 
Elite Dangerous launched in December 2014. It had many major free and paid updates that exponentially improved the base game. However, aside from the desired space legs, there's one aspect that disappoints the most. We can only land on desolate, barren planets. We've waited almost 5 years for more lively planet types.

A certain other game launched 1 1/3rd years after ED and has 10000 times more variety in land-able planets. It has many different kinds of alien creatures, vegetation, you can even travel underwater in a submarine. The procedural generation of planets in ED is very basic comparatively.

We want more than simplistic planets covered with monotonous dirt and rocks! ED's planets have endless sand, dirt and rocks as far as the eye can see. Sometimes, if we're lucky, we find a little primitive flora. We want more natural features, explore alien forests, jungles teeming with life. If Frontier plans to take another 10 years to release more land-able planet types, that's too slow.

So why is ED very primitive with procedural planets? Why aren't there more terrains, creatures, plants etc? It seems that Frontier is focusing too much of their resources on other IPs (Planet Zoo, PC and JWE).
Other content has been release that isn't non barren planets.
 
Clouds... Hmph! I'm still waiting for Frontier to get something as simple as shadows right. :p

I suppose they could give us completely overcast atmospheric planets, and then they won't need to worry about shadows!
The problem as I see it is one of too much focus on the easy and not enough on the real stuff.

The procedural generation is/was old hat. It had been done before, and all Frontier had to do was implement it in their Cobra engine. But they then ran away with them selves with 'oh, oh oh, lets add this, lets add that', never standing back to look at the overall picture. Producing an engaging game.

What we're left with are the remnants of a polling of ideas which they never managed to implement entirely or successfully. I do believe as someone said above, Elite is no more now than a plaything to jack cash out of. I'm sure whatever they produce for 2020 will look nice.. I highly doubt it will work right.
 
Let's not go down the 'non sensical' route :) Elite has plenty of their own non-sensical stuff..
True, but the galaxy in Elite has always been mostly reasonable...
If you want to compare the effort it takes to develop procedurally generated planets in Elite and NMS you also need to take the scope of both games into account. NMS doesn't need to bother with habitable zones, atmospheres, gravity, minerals and stuff. They just randomly chose a colour and it looks cool. That's great, but it isn't comparable.
 
B tier team is B tier, they are no blizzard nor rockstar but a team that has been pushing licensed bargain bin titles for kids for a decade and they bit more than they could chew with elite... the engine is already on its knees and the network architecture is severely lacking which limits and hinders any progress

Then David decided that company growth>Elite, changed his jumpers to suits, bought himself fancy glasses and here we are....

We should have all listened to Ian Bell

But just you wait... because the new era is upon us... face-melting stuff i tell you, I`m very very excited, I`m sure that this time 80% of impressive stuff won`t end on the cutting room floor because our team has done a wonderful job...
 
Last edited:
True, but the galaxy in Elite has always been mostly reasonable...
If you want to compare the effort it takes to develop procedurally generated planets in Elite and NMS you also need to take the scope of both games into account. NMS doesn't need to bother with habitable zones, atmospheres, gravity, minerals and stuff. They just randomly chose a colour and it looks cool. That's great, but it isn't comparable.
I'd mostly go along with that.. But to be fair... Creating a sim and pushing it as a 'blaze your own trail' was kinda not the way to go... While NMS appeals tot he masses because it is a game, Elite falls down between two stools not knowing whether its a game or a sim and doing neither right.

What it does do exceptionally well however is graphics and flight model.
 
I'd mostly go along with that.. But to be fair... Creating a sim and pushing it as a 'blaze your own trail' was kinda not the way to go... While NMS appeals tot he masses because it is a game, Elite falls down between two stools not knowing whether its a game or a sim and doing neither right.
True. I am probably lucky because I bought the game at release and knew exactly what I would get. I can understand why the development was disappointing for some of the early backers and also for people who bought later without informing themselves first.

What it does do exceptionally well however is graphics and flight model.
You missed sound, apart from that I fully agree!
 
By the way:
3 years ago...
A: 'Where are atmospheric planets?!'
B: 'David Braben always said he has enough ideas to support the game for 10 years and that the most exciting additions would come towards the end of development...'
A: 'The ten years plan is a myth, they are going to abandon the game tomorrow!!!'

Today...
A: 'Are they going to take 5 years to add atmospheric planets or what?!'
B: 'Whatever...'
 
ED and NMS are very different beasts...both have their place on my PC and I like them both for different reasons.

ED is trying to be more realistic with it's depiction of our galaxy and the procgen is designed using known parameters for how solar systems are formed...how accurate that is, well that is debatable but they are going for realism.

NMS is pure fantasy....the two cannot be compared.

That being said, I do find the whole planetary aspect of ED disappointing however. Driving around rather bland barren worlds shooting rocks does not constitute engaging gameplay for me and I actively avoid it where possible. The fact that they implemented landable planets without any real gameplay to go with it speak volumes about their development philosophy. Yes, in the bubble there are skimmers to shoot and the odd crashed ship to loot or magically appearing RNG settlements to hack data from from but it's anemic and repetitive to say the least.

It comes down to "what is ED?"...if it's a sim then barren planets and bland gameplay is probably about right...boring but right. Or is it a game...in which case it needs to have gameplay which is where FDev clearly struggle.

There are still so many aspects of ED that remain undeveloped...planets are one of them, I'd love to see more variety of terrain and gameplay in this area.

What I will also say is that HG have developed NMS at a much quicker pace than FDev have developed ED. HG are more open with their plans despite the horrific car crash of the launch and resulting backlash which dwarfs any criticism FD have ever faced. Neither team are that big or have huge AAA budgets but HG is making regular measurable progress with NMS and are active in squashing bugs, as for FDev...well who knows.
 
Someone thought engineers would be a great idea and there we are.
The thing is, Engineers could have been great. When David Braben was describing them, it sounded like a good way to introduce an element of risk/trade-off in order to get the best for a specific ship. As it is, you can 5 times over-tune any module with no negative effect so people get in to the grinding materials and uber-engineering everything.

If ED had a proper wear and tear mechanic so that module health deteriorated over time and engineering increased that rate of wear and tear, then Engineers could have been more challenging and not everyone would go for class 5 everything whenever they could.

Then again, Braben has spoken about big-game hunting, flying in the atmospheres of gas giants and a raft of other stuff that is yet to materialize. We do have 3 park sims though, with more probably on the way...
 
Elite Dangerous launched in December 2014. It had many major free and paid updates that exponentially improved the base game. However, aside from the desired space legs, there's one aspect that disappoints the most. We can only land on desolate, barren planets. We've waited almost 5 years for more lively planet types.

A certain other game launched 1 1/3rd years after ED and has 10000 times more variety in land-able planets. It has many different kinds of alien creatures, vegetation, you can even travel underwater in a submarine. The procedural generation of planets in ED is very basic comparatively.

We want more than simplistic planets covered with monotonous dirt and rocks! ED's planets have endless sand, dirt and rocks as far as the eye can see. Sometimes, if we're lucky, we find a little primitive flora. We want more natural features, explore alien forests, jungles teeming with life. If Frontier plans to take another 10 years to release more land-able planet types, that's too slow.

So why is ED very primitive with procedural planets? Why aren't there more terrains, creatures, plants etc? It seems that Frontier is focusing too much of their resources on other IPs (Planet Zoo, PC and JWE).
I would hazard a guess that to do those kinds of planets well, will take time, unless you want them to look like NMS.

As to other IP's it is my understanding that they have their own development teams. ED's from what I can tell is just over a hundred which is relatively small for a game such as ED, which could be why things take time.
 
TBH, I believe that the probability of featured, fleshed-out planets happening is pretty small.

The game has issues doing what it does now, adding a significant burden on its mechanics may just not be feasible. I'm not a programmer/developer, just an end-user, so it's an impression.

Maybe the game just wasn't designed to be more than shoot, scoop and fly and variations on that theme.

All in all, I've gotten my money's worth and more from the game. We shall see.
 
Top Bottom