Roadmap leaked??

What's wrong with you? If you don't like the thread how about go away?
Sorry no intention to offend anybody, but anything in this thread just does not make any sense, just another space legs/atmo-planets arguement at best again.

We all (should) know limits of the game engine, P2P and instancing will most likely make any kind of base building impossible.

Atmo-planets would be far more realistic aim (lighter version DLC for modern consoles, equal to PC version for next gen consoles), it would close the circle between first Elite/Elite 2 and FFE (Elite 3, that had planetary landings and stuff we have already now like mission boards, assassinations and passengers on board from stations/cities).
 
Disappointing if true, all of it. A lot of games based around JWE??

Also, base building in Elite - why and what’s the purpose? I’d rather see planetary landings.

We won’t have long to wait - if Zoo isn’t announced then we know this is **.

Also - what’s wrong with JWE at the moment?

If FD don’t deny this, then this roadmap could well be true. Some graphic artist is looking for a new job!
NMS was doing rather poorly and base building came along and now it's a healthy game again. There is a huge player group for base building games that hasn't been tapped.
 
We know P2P and instancing mechanics could not handle any kind of base building with this engine (as I have understood, correct me if wrong), players building bases would just make a mess on other players clients.
There are plenty of ways it could be done - in theory, I have no access to any roadmaps, either fake or real - that would only use capabilities already demonstrated in the current release of Elite Dangerous.

If they only allow bases to change state weekly, they've had that capability since 2.0 for surface, 2.3 for space, and demonstrated the principle as part of the Thargoid station attack cycle.
 
I think you guys are losing sight of the fact its obviously just a wind up.
It is 4chan. But it's also not outside the bounds of possibility. Which means we get to have fun with it until franchise reveals nix it (or take it nuclear ;))
 
Last edited:
Its fake.

I just don't see this as a real life chat.

"Hi!"
"Hi!"
"How are you?"
"Busy with work at FD."
"Doing what?"
"Let me tell you - in detail - everything we're working on for the next 5 years..."

I hope its fake. IMO there's more gameplay to be gained from atnospheric planets than space legs. Given the wait until the end of 2020 I'd expect both space legs and atnospheric planets to be delivered by then.
 
NMS was doing rather poorly and base building came along and now it's a healthy game again. There is a huge player group for base building games that hasn't been tapped.
Space building vs. atmo-planets then...?
Can´t have both I doubt.

Are you not already bored/frustrated out of your mind visiting stations orbiting planets so beautiful and/or intresting you just wish you could visit, but can´t...
 
You'd be surprised how much people enjoy doing busy work like building and crafting in games. The potential to grow new player crowd is huge with such feature.
Myself though is not that great fan of it. It's a cool feature to have but I don't think I will do much with it. But I KNOW others will go nuts on it.
I dont think the crowd that like survival base building games will enjoy the rest of ED enough to invest the time.
If they dont have ED already for its spaceship aspects, then shoehorning in Base build mechanics wont change that.

ED is a spaceship simulator. Base building is off tone for this game.
 
It is 4chan. But it's also not outside the bounds of possibility. Which we means we get to have fun with it until franchise reveals nix it (or take it nuclear ;))
The problem with rampant theorycrafting is the people who subsequently decide its the word of god and then spend years moaning about being totally wrong about imaginary things FDEV fooling them.

If you wrote out a list of bullet points that are popular gripes/desire then joined them up with a half baked attempt at a roadmap with some secret squirrel names thrown in you'd have the "leak".

I'm not buying it.
 
I'm not buying it.
Not saying you should. I am saying the franchise reveals will be interesting though. Because they're a decent acid test for the claims.

Ruling the 'leak' out completely prior to that seems a bit excessive ¯\(ツ)
 
Not saying you should. I am saying the franchise reveals will be interesting though. Because they're a decent acid test for the claims.

Ruling the 'leak' out completely prior to that seems a bit excessive ¯\(ツ)
Nope, I've seen the same attempt at least twice before even the sentence structure was the same. Grab a quick list of popular buzzwords work them into a lazy roadmap and then post it at gullible types just for giggles.

I called out the last two as fake and was right. They were both in the SC thread IIRC.

I'll drop you 100 mil in void opals if I'm wrong, no need for a counter offer.
 
Not saying you should. I am saying the franchise reveals will be interesting though. Because they're a decent acid test for the claims.

Ruling the 'leak' out completely prior to that seems a bit excessive ¯\(ツ)
Trust me, without atmo planets both space legs nor your own buildings have absolutely no purpose to fill (where else outside our ships we could use "space legs" but at atmo-planets, and we can already "adopt" npc faction with outposts, stations, cities, depots etc. or ask/make our own faction, without need to build anything), at worst just more bugs..
 
On the scope of what is easiest to develop, would it be alien ecosystems within atmosperic environments or modular subterranean bases? Walking about ships, hangars, base modules would be much, much easier - and have vastly greater opportunities for monetization. Customization of build spaces, doodads for bases and hangars. It is absolutely the lowest hanging most profitable fruit to go for.
 
On the scope of what is easiest to develop, would it be alien ecosystems within atmosperic environments or modular subterranean bases? Walking about ships, hangars, base modules would be much, much easier - and have vastly greater opportunities for monetization. Customization of build spaces, doodads for bases and hangars. It is absolutely the lowest hanging most profitable fruit to go for.
I would be happy to see both, but just still need to say that I have no understanding on programming, but actually developing based on this (P2P) engine multipple constantly changing modular bases might actually be much more complicated than design and code with PG (procedural generation, that will produce unlimited amount of alternatives after put in enough variables).

Actually some algorithms on code like simple planetary formations, trees/weed/plants/desert and even animals from smaller area and replicate it on different forms on different planets might require much less work than nursing what and where ever players deside to put their base in (and if choices are possible, in what form?).
 
Last edited:
Nope, I've seen the same attempt at least twice before even the sentence structure was the same. Grab a quick list of popular buzzwords work them into a lazy roadmap and then post it at gullible types just for giggles.

I called out the last two as fake and was right. They were both in the SC thread IIRC.

I'll drop you 100 mil in void opals if I'm wrong, no need for a counter offer.
Ok Watson ;)

(PS would be interested in seeing the debunked leaks if you can find them easy enough. Would be interesting to compare the styles. I only remember one in recent times, posted here in DD, but that one had a different cadence & was super transparent off the bat).
 
Trust me, without atmo planets both space legs nor your own buildings have absolutely no purpose to fill (where else outside our ships we could use "space legs" but at atmo-planets, and we can already "adopt" npc faction with outposts, stations, cities, depots etc. or ask/make our own faction, without need to build anything), at worst just more bugs..
Did a technical artist tell you this?!!?!!

Sounds legit ;)
 
Top Bottom