4 ms·
I really hope they succeed, but sadly, I'm seeing all the typical signals of games that fail to launch, due to gigantic scope and feature creep. When you focus
by hcarvalhoalves 14y ago
I really hope they succeed, but sadly, I'm seeing all the typical signals of games that fail to launch, due to gigantic scope and feature creep. When you focus so much on technology and your answers about the game are all "we plan to support that", that's a bad signal.
You start a game with rock solid game design - throwing procedural generation, multiplayer code, and other cool features together gives you a tech demo, not a game. The smallest changes in game mechanics deeply affect things like networking code. Mix this with a crowdfunded project (where everyone who pledged is a stakeholder and wants a different thing) that's a recipe for disaster.
- outworlder 14y agoYes, but only if they want to do everything on launch day. The part about the galaxy changes reminds me a lot of the 'real ecology' from Ultima Online, which had to be scrapped since there's no way ecology can work with players as predators.
- chris_j 14y agoI think it's been quite encouraging that, while they are talking about a whole load of features that they'd like to include in the future, they're being pretty clear about the things that they won't support in the first release (landing on planets and so on) and that the pledgers will only influence the game, rather than dictate that any feature must be done a particular way. The things that I worry about are things that were not a part of previous Elite games like networking, the multiplayer element and, above all else, making the economics and politics work. If other massively multiplayer games are anything to go by, a few large alliances will figure out how to game the rules so as to be able to dominate the game and I bet that the developers will always be playing catch up to that.