|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Sept 13, 2015 12:41:03 GMT
Mostly I'm just curious. I have Star Citizen but don't play it much, and I also have Elite: Dangerous and play it... well, when I'm not busy, so not much nowadays. Still, I'm curious as to just who else here plays these games.
I'd have put this post in the general gaming thread, but we have a whole board for games and it looked lonely.
|
|
SaintB
2000+
Is very sensative
Will die in his sleep on August 6th 2075 at 3:09am. 8/6/75 3:09
Posts: 2,359 
|
Post by SaintB on Sept 13, 2015 13:34:22 GMT
No but star citzen sounds like a game I'd like.
|
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195 
|
Post by TSM on Sept 14, 2015 22:18:42 GMT
lol star citizen is never coming out and nerds just keep finding ways to justify spending more and more money on a game that doesn't exist
|
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on Sept 14, 2015 22:47:49 GMT
On this sort of theme (but far more retro) I'm wondering whether to dig up my copy of Stars!, and see if it still includes the couple of licence keys it came with. (The intention was to have an out-of-the-box ability to have PBeM play between you and a friend, but I think I only ever played against the AI.) I was also very into Elite (and First Encounters), back in the day, but Elite: Dangerous looks a bit too overspecced for what I'm capable of joining in with. |
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Sept 14, 2015 23:13:13 GMT
Elite actually runs really well on lower-end computers, with the right graphics settings. I can play it on my laptop with no problems.
I've actually tried the original Elite (They're giving it away for free on their website now), but I didn't get very far. Games spoil me these days, with their menus and control schemes. Really impressive what they managed to do with as little memory as they had.
Personally, between the two, I prefer Elite as it is right now. The only gameplay in StarCitizen at the moment is round-based PvP, and if you haven't bought one of the really expensive, fancy ships, there's basically no point playing that. I'm waiting until the persistent universe comes out and I can make my money through trade and mining and such.
I actually really have fun playing Elite, especially with friends (I somehow managed to get into a faction of pirates called "The Code"), I just haven't had much time to do it lately. Really looking forward to their "Horizons" expansion, in which they'll be adding planetary landing.
|
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on Sept 15, 2015 0:25:13 GMT
Network latency is probably the biggest problem 1. I remember when it was announced that it would have an "online-only single player mode"... Seriously? (Bear in mind that on top of an amount of 'real world' data for the galaxy, which is surely better bundled on the game DVD, it's bulked out by reproducible procedural generation anyway. Even if 'deltas' are occasionally released online, SFAICT there's no gameplay necessity for hogging an online connection.) Anyway, although obviously this is not going to work for me, similar ('inspired by Elite') games you might want to look at for similar experiences are Infinity and No Man's Sky. (And, as it happens, I've been playing around with procedurality, myself, for a while. Not that they've gotten anywhere near the same level of eye-candy, never mind gameplay. I tend to sideline projects when I learn that someone else has been pursuing the same idea. Not least because I don't want to be thought of as being a copycat, rightly or wrongly. Although the above shows that this doesn't seem to stop many other people.  ) 1 Actually, I just checked. "OS: Windows 7, Windows 8; CPU: Quad Core CPU (4x 2GHz); RAM: 4GB RAM; VIDEO: Nvidia GTX 260 / ATI 4870HD; HDD: 7GB Available Space" No machine I have fulfils all of those, and I'm not about to rearrange to mix-and-match. Looks good, but then everything always does, these days. At least the "best settings" screenshots from non-console versions. |
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on Sept 15, 2015 0:34:38 GMT
Forgot to add... for that old-skool Elite (#1) experience, yet with a number of ways to update it with everything from fancier eye-candy to additional challenges and opportunities, there's always Oolite. Single-player, as per the original, of course. Unless someone's managed to hack a workable multiplayer mode into it as well, since I last checked... |
|
|
|
Post by wiskeyweasel on Sept 15, 2015 4:03:18 GMT
lol star citizen is never coming out and nerds just keep finding ways to justify spending more and more money on a game that doesn't exist The PU isn't going to happen anytime soon. Not for years, and it will be far less impressive then the hype. I'm a diehard Star Citizen Fanboy and I realize this. But Squadron 42? A.K.A. The single player campaign, otherwise known as the reason I backed, and the reason most of my Org mates backed the project during the original pledge campaign will however be happening late this year or early next year. Erin Roberts is a better developer and much more grounded in reality than his brother. |
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Sept 15, 2015 4:20:20 GMT
Network latency is probably the biggest problem 1. I remember when it was announced that it would have an "online-only single player mode"... Seriously? (Bear in mind that on top of an amount of 'real world' data for the galaxy, which is surely better bundled on the game DVD, it's bulked out by reproducible procedural generation anyway. Even if 'deltas' are occasionally released online, SFAICT there's no gameplay necessity for hogging an online connection.) The main reason for that is the background sim, though. Most of the information stored on the galaxy isn't the procedurally generated stuff, like stars and planets and such. The majority has to do with things like dev-driven community goals, and the background economic simulation with supply/demand and all that. If there was a singleplayer, it would have to have an entirely disconnected economy, and as a result, disconnected in-game commodities, ships, and so forth. Very different from the current solo mode, which lets you drop in and out as you please. I mean, they could have (and should have) added a proper offline mode, but there is a reason they didn't, and that reason is more than just DRM. Network latency isn't really an issue in the solo mode anyway, since all the physics simulation and such is done by you. It just contacts the sever occasionally to update the background simulation and send your modifications to it to the server. |
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195
|
Post by TSM on Sept 15, 2015 8:16:23 GMT
Network latency is probably the biggest problem 1. I remember when it was announced that it would have an "online-only single player mode"... Seriously? (Bear in mind that on top of an amount of 'real world' data for the galaxy, which is surely better bundled on the game DVD, it's bulked out by reproducible procedural generation anyway. Even if 'deltas' are occasionally released online, SFAICT there's no gameplay necessity for hogging an online connection.) Anyway, although obviously this is not going to work for me, similar ('inspired by Elite') games you might want to look at for similar experiences are Infinity and No Man's Sky. (And, as it happens, I've been playing around with procedurality, myself, for a while. Not that they've gotten anywhere near the same level of eye-candy, never mind gameplay. I tend to sideline projects when I learn that someone else has been pursuing the same idea. Not least because I don't want to be thought of as being a copycat, rightly or wrongly. Although the above shows that this doesn't seem to stop many other people. ) 1 Actually, I just checked. "OS: Windows 7, Windows 8; CPU: Quad Core CPU (4x 2GHz); RAM: 4GB RAM; VIDEO: Nvidia GTX 260 / ATI 4870HD; HDD: 7GB Available Space" No machine I have fulfils all of those, and I'm not about to rearrange to mix-and-match. Looks good, but then everything always does, these days. At least the "best settings" screenshots from non-console versions. Those are insanely low system requirements. |
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on Sept 15, 2015 14:30:41 GMT
1 Actually, I just checked. "OS: Windows 7, Windows 8; CPU: Quad Core CPU (4x 2GHz); RAM: 4GB RAM; VIDEO: Nvidia GTX 260 / ATI 4870HD; HDD: 7GB Available Space" No machine I have fulfils all of those, and I'm not about to rearrange to mix-and-match. Looks good, but then everything always does, these days. At least the "best settings" screenshots from non-console versions. Those are insanely low system requirements. For someone who buys new equipment more regularly than me... {spoiler for some uninmportant retrogeekery that really adds nothing}
This computer (my web-browsing one) is an Intel Celeron CPU 3.2Ghz 1GB, no special graphics card (onboard Intel one) and serves me well enough in the job it's asked to do. Although it's recently had a new PSU, after a failure of the old one. I have a higher-powered 'gaming' one (not quad-core, though, and graphics card is perhaps about half a decode old), but it never seemed worthwhile to connect it to my feeble internet connection so I've also tended to stop at the levels of, say, Sims2 and GTA:San Andreas, when their successors started to be so much more awkward. (And, yes, all games are valid; I'm not afraid of online DRM and understand why they've started to use it.) Oh yeah, and Steam. Apparently that has improved vastly, but that always seemed far too pernicious to me. When it worked.
But, anyway, my stock also goes all the way down to a machine (in constant use) with 64Mb of RAM (Windows 2000, might have originally been an ME or 98 machine, but I happened to have a spare licence when I needed a handy always-on server of that variety). I think I've mentioned that before, once or twice, though.
I've long-standing plans to get a 'modern' gaming-strength PC put together (actually primarily for use with my own processor-intensive programming projects, that always tend to use up far too much memory), but it's not a priority. I really need to uncover that spare Windows 7 licence that I put to one side when it became obvious that I was going to hate Windows 8 and would again have to be my own OEM to get a piece of equipment that I would actually be happy working with. |
|
TSM
5000+
Ableist Kinkshamer
Posts: 5,195
|
Post by TSM on Sept 15, 2015 18:56:36 GMT
Windows 8 is totally fine if you install a start menu replacement and there's really no excuse aside from legacy apps not to switch. It's faster, more power efficient, and it will receive security updates for longer.
Now Windows 10? That's glitchy as fuck and I don't plan to upgrade anytime soon.
Anyways, the point I was making was that you really don't need a gaming computer to run elite dangerous with those requirements. CPU reqs are notoriously loose, and so long as you have an i - series intel from Nehalhem on you ought to be fine, and they came out in 2008.
A 260? That was a mid range card in 2008 when it released, and literally any system with a dGPU should run it fine.
also man steam is rad. Incredibly convenient and I've never had a glitch or problem with it once.
Now, the PCs you have may not meet those requirements and that's an entirely different thing, but the requirements themselves are fairly light.
|
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Sept 15, 2015 20:28:13 GMT
Unless, of course, you were talking about playing Star Citizen. The running joke with Star Citizen is that it requires technology that is still ten years in the future to play on max graphics.
|
|
|
|
Post by kanabia on Jan 15, 2016 13:02:01 GMT
I play E:D, not really buying into the Star Citizen hype till Squadron 42 comes out.
|
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jan 20, 2016 9:59:43 GMT
I play E:D, not really buying into the Star Citizen hype till Squadron 42 comes out. I'm more-or-less on the same boat, but boy does Squadron 42 look good from what we've seen so far in the behind-the-scenes stuff. Really, I'm more looking forward to the persistent universe release (and a boatload more stability). I only have the starting Aurora package, so I don't play the dogfighting module (it'd be pointless since people with bigger wallets would blast me out of the sky repeatedly). I guess I'm moreso interested in the persistent universe because it will give me something to do besides dogfighting. I like Elite because, if I so choose, I can spend my time mining or exploring or trading. Combat is entirely optional, and when it does happen it has real consequences. Star Citizen will be like that when the persistent universe comes out (hopefully), so it'll be nice to have more than one game to play of that sort. |
|
