×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

173 comments

Going to have a hard time topping modern remakes (4, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893077)

Look, I know the guy did the original and kudos to him for it (I was a huge fan myself of the C64 version, back in the day). But with modern games like X3 [wikipedia.org] and even EVE Online [wikipedia.org] , the genre has come a LONG way since the early 80's. It's not going to be enough just to re-skin the original. A modern project like that is a HUGE undertaking. I just hope this guy understands that going in. I would hate to see a remake that couldn't even live up to the many successors it inspired.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893125)

A modern project like that is a HUGE undertaking. I just hope this guy understands that going in.

His goal is 1.25 million (pounds!), so maybe he does...

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893599)

lolwut? £1.25m ($2m) is nothing for modern AAA game development. The average single platform AAA game costs $10m to make. $2m is predicated on the procedural stuff working, and as Braben admits in the pitch, they've already had some "false starts" on this project. You can bet your ass those false starts revolved around making procedural stuff that doesn't suck. This is an R&D project wrapped up in sheep's clothing. If he makes £1.25m, he's going to blow it. Ask yourself why, with 20 years and a 235-strong development staff, he can't either fund this himself, or get a publisher to do so. The most likely answer is that he's already blown all his opportunities there, by failing at this in the past, and KS is his last resort (and it is - if he blows this, he's never going to get a future Elite funded anywhere).

Spend your KS money on projects that are likely to succeed on their own merits, not on a hope that Braben can somehow pull a fantastic Elite sequel out of his ass for 1/5 of the typical budget for a AAA game when he's already spent 20 years failing to do so.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894715)

Games are a lot cheaper if you don't hire Hollywood actors to record cut-scene dialogue that I just skip anyway.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (4, Insightful)

axedog (991609) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894809)

Ask yourself why, with 20 years and a 235-strong development staff, he can't either fund this himself, or get a publisher to do so.

A developer of Braben's esteem could get publisher funding (as they have done for many other games), but he probably wants to retain creative freedom, which he can do with KS. When you have a publisher funding your project, they call the shots. If they want you to add more blood, explosions, zombies or whatever they think they'd like - it's their call and the studio must do what they're told. If they want it shipping 6 months before it's ready - it's their call. You want to add an innovative, but potentially risky feature? If the publisher isn't convinced, forget it! With KS, I'd say there's much more chance of Frontier shipping a quality game that pushes the boundaries, and won't be ruined by the type of dumbing down that dominates so much of the current crop of publisher-funded games.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

CodeheadUK (2717911) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893159)

Yep. I'm praying this doesn't become another Duke Nuke'em Forever. Some things are better in a rose-tinted rearview mirror.

However, I will be following this with everything crosssed for a good outcome.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893219)

Did you play Duke Nuke'em Forever?
What part of it was not Duke Nuke'em?

It was cheesy, it was simple and it felt like a Duke Nuke'em game. The only real problem it had was the long development cycle making everyone expect more. That and the limited weapons, but I believe they patched that.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

CodeheadUK (2717911) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893647)

No I didn't. I played Duke Nuke'em 3D to death. After the terrible reception that Forever got, I didn't want to spoil my good memories of the game. I've spoiled too many old favorites by revisiting them in emulators or playing half-hearted remakes.
Elite on the Amiga consumed around 18 months of my life. I spent every waking hour outside of work playing the games. I want this game to be great but I doubt it can live up to that level of nostalgia.

Re:Gaming Nostalgia (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894839)

Now, you gotta take the Nostalgia out of it. That's simply not fair for any game. You're applying some weird brand of "impress me now with more as much as you impressed me then with less because I knew that there simply wasn't anything better back in the day".

We old timers knew that for some 30 years computing sukked, but we liked the feel of progress happening. Easy example - a hysterical 3rd rate dev for the C64 called Keypunch Software. Every minute you played any of your titles you secretly laughed at the execrable non-quality. (Ascii characters for Player Characters?! Really?!) But it was cheap so it became "Oh, for $6 at the game store, I'll play it for a week, why not." I'm sure my lawn-owning betters would have killed for drawn backgrounds and all that. But that stuff only lived in a certain place and time when deeply subconsciously we knew that we were just too many years early, so we just self-mindwiped ourselves to like it.

My fun example of Nostalgia is Ataxx. Cute little Anti-Othello game from about 1992, well into Abandonware by this point (though watch out for the Copyright Brigade!), and I still can't beat the top two levels, and the third level ("Mushman") still scores 50-50 on me.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893949)

The part where Duke hides to regenerate his shield, I mean ego?

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

Firethorn (177587) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894877)

Let's see:
1. Maps on rails. In DK3D, you often had to search around for where you needed to go. There were secrets all over the place. Forever? In comparison the maps are a straight line. You never really wonder where to go.
2. Limited weapon selection - I think they increased it to 4, but I'd since moved on. Also lacks the shear variety of weapons present in the original.
3. Regenerating Health, IE 'Ego'. This is stolen from Halo mechanics.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41895125)

I thought DNF was fine. It wasn't as good as DN3D, but like you say, it was a Duke Nukem game. The only real gripe I had was the weapon carry limit.

Prayer is too late. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893379)

I'm not holding out for anything useful. Elite: Frontier bollixed the entire thing up for me, and I have no faith he has a clue how to write a game.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (3, Interesting)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893181)

The problem with X3 and Eve are their learning curves. They're vertical cliffs.

What I would hope is that the new Elite game has is a reasonable learning curve so it introduces players in a reasonable manner that doesn't scare them off.
Ultimately Elite 2 was a massive improvement over Elite and Elite 3 was more a refinement of Elite 2. I'm holding back judgement because every Elite game thus far has been great.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (3, Informative)

Hatta (162192) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893217)

The problem with X3 and Eve are their learning curves. They're vertical cliffs.

As was Elite.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

dintech (998802) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893431)

Having actually played both, I can assure you that there's a huge difference in the learning curve and complexity of Elite compared with that of X3.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893513)

The guy is over 10 years late considering some crazy icelanders decided to make an elite mmo.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893873)

I played Elite as a child... though 8 galaxies and back again.

I played X3 and EVE as an adult and made it a few systems before giving up.

Personally, not only are they vertical cliffs of learning they're also dotted with underhangs of incomprehensibility.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (2)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894637)

The main problem for me in the original X : Beyond the Frontier was a lack of patience.

Elite included the device that let your ship skip boring bits by default.

In X, you have to buy it, so you have to sit through an interminable amount of waiting before you can buy this thing... which then puts you back to square one because it just consumed all your capital.

I found the combat in X terrible as well - it really needed decent ship handling, but didn't have it.

Braben made the same mistake with Frontier as well - the combat was no fun, because of the insistence on Newtonian mechanics.

The combat in EVE is of course, boring point-and-clickery.

Wing Commander was all about great dogfighting, which is why I have hopes for Star Citizen - if Roberts can include the same living economic systems as X3 or EVE, but keep the combat intense, enjoyable, and above all, based on your own skill rather than that of your character sheet, well, that's the game that gets my vote. It already sounds like he's going for the i-War kind of level of pseudo-realistic flight, so here's hoping...

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894893)

X3 (and I think X2) you get the time accelerator from the start.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893263)

X3 is one of the most god-awful games in existence. So sterile. Voice acting in the campaign is TERRIBLE. It's full of bugs. It's annoying as hell to play. It's spectacularly craptastic in every conceivable way.

Windows XP was full of bugs too. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893815)

But, like X3 et al, they were fixed in patches.

Patches that also gave you a bit of bonus content.

Where they've fooked up (apart from the eternal auto-pillock exacerbated by you losing reputation because some barnturd using a gopher on a stick to find out when to turn slams into your ship) is in the "balancing" of the ships.

TLs can no longer hold TS ships. So your new complex out in the sticks has to have a sheperding of TSs to fill the damn thing. Why was that removed from X2? Because they found your elephant with 14 TSs held more than your Mamoth with 5. So, rather than *balance* it by making the Elephant carry fewer ships, they nerf it. Frigging brilliant.

M6 slowdown (extreme compared to M1/2) and, worse, the removal of the M5 that made the M6 the best player ship. Why? Because they didn't want a "best ship". Wel, why the FECK did you make the M6 more expensive than the M3 if it wasn't going to be worth more, fatheads????

They also screwed the pooch, though I figure a lot of this is the blame of others, including the otherwise wonderful community who all bought into that Star Wars bollocks of "Capital ships should be 20 miles long!!!". BSG (the original) was a battlestar and only about 350m long. Teladi Phoenix is just a destroyer (no carry capacity) THREE MILES LONG. WHY??? Think about it, if you had to walk from the engine room to command, that would be an hours brisk walk. What on earth are they putting in there?

Along with autopillock going right up to the paintwork before going "Oh, look, there's something there!" and stopping and turning, this means your ship not only catches traders like bugs on the windscreen, you have NO CHANCE of getting through, for example, Cloudbase SW because every time your autopillock starts moving, it finds a rock in the damn way.

Really.

TLs given they hold entire stations (though what are they doing in there? There's a lot of space in those that doesn't seem to have any need to be there) may be the right size at about a mile long. Though the teladi needs to be the most capacious at nearly two and a half miles long and the boron at two miles not far behind. Or make the smaller TLs SMALLER.

M6 should be about half the size. 80-120m long.

M7 about 200-250m long.

M2 about 350-450m long

M1 about 400-800m long.

But they put the Phoenix and Albert Ross at two of the biggest ships in space but give them either the slowest (what? Didn't use that space for ENGINES?) or among the smallest cargo spaces.

But look at the scale between the Boron M1 (Shark) and the M4 Buster You could easily fit a few thousand of the M4 in it. WHY SO FREAKING HUGE?

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (2)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893925)

Ultimately Elite 2 was a massive improvement over Elite and Elite 3 was more a refinement of Elite 2.

I take issue with that - they were dreadfully dull.

I spent many more hours playing the 8-bit, black and white (Electron version, less capable than the full BBC version), original Elite than I did both Frontier and First Encounters put together.

== Combat ==

Strict Newtonian mechanics does not make for an entertaining game. Even Braben acknowledges this on the Kickstarter page. Neither do laser weapons in a dogfight. In both games the combat boiled down to two ships desperately trying not to crash into each other while jousting like two marbles on the end of a rubber band.

Elite got away with this because you had to dogfight to bring your weapons to bear on your target ; even so, most of my fights in Elite were won at long range, picking off my targets when they were still a cluster of four pixels. Only groups of four or more ships were a challenge because it took the first three to overheat your laser, allowing the remainder to close on you. In a game with no dogfighting possible, hitscan weapons with a long range reduce the combat to exploding a pixel in the distance all the time.

Whichever ship had the most mass usually won, because they were tougher. Only the ships with enough mass for shields were viable combat vessels, because systems damage was only repairable in dock - and you could get systems damage from any hull damage. Systems damage was very bad - because the fly-by-wire couldn't compensate for thruster damage, and neither could the autopilot (if it wasn't damaged anyway). If your atmospheric shields were destroyed and your only option for refuelling was planetside - tough luck, you're dead.

The lack of in-flight repair made most of the fighter class vessels lousy for combat, because they had light hulls and no space for shields. What they were great for was evasion, because their high-G drive meant they could outrun anything with a slower drive. So until you built up enough capital the only viable way to play the game was to chicken out from as many fights as possible. Because you had no cargo space to speak of, you just ended up being a courier. Like the real world, the open world of Frontier was mostly closed by your opportunities, until you were very rich.

== Navigation ==

The autopilot was terrible ; it used the puny front engine for deceleration, which makes sense if you wanted fuel economy, but not for best speed, where you want to be accelerating and decelerating all the way to your target at the most Gs you can pull. The autopilot was also great at crashing you into things and dreadful at piloting ships near planets, especially ones with strong gravity - you had to ascend on manual thrusters if you didn't want to be a smear on the runway. But it was all but essential to navigate anywhere. It was also trivially easy to destroy... and weighed a whole tonne, occupying a vast quantity of valuable hull space in the smaller ships, even though it should just have been a program for the onboard computer, given the ships were fly-by-wire anyway.

Having to budget your reaction mass was an interesting problem for some of the ships ; you ended up flying in on manual and using the autopilot for the final approach in the larger systems where the transit would drain your propellant reserves very rapidly otherwise.

The multiple-G acceleration available on most of the ships engines was totally outside the human experience and is something that requires extensive training for elite astronaut pilots to get used to, which was a problem for manual navigation and also the combat (above).

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (2)

mcvos (645701) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894325)

I disagree. I thought the Newtonian mechanics in Frontier were awesome. I spent ages simply orbiting planets at max speed. I'm sad to hear that that aspect isn't going to be in the new Elite.

Newtonian physics also made fights a lot more challenging (at least in First Encounters, where speeds weren't homogenized at the start of the battle), but with how easy combat was in Elite, I consider that a good thing.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

Carewolf (581105) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894913)

Strict Newtonian mechanics does not make for an entertaining game.

Sorry I have to call bullshit on that.

In Newtonian mechanics the absolute speed is IRRELEVANT, some users might get confused by the absolute speed-o-meter, but it has absolutely no impact on the dog-fight. You can subtract the common speed shared between the crafts and just pretend to be operating at low speeds, because this is how Newtonian mechanics work. Everything works the same no matter the absolute speed, and thus the absolute speed is irrelevant and having a unlimited absolute speed does not change ANYTHING in dog fights (though it does make it the occurance of it slightly more unrealistic than it already is, but that is a necessary plot-hole of the genre like suicide bandits in Fallout).

If you have trouble imagining this, then imagine a cmmon dog-fight happening in the skies of earth while the earth is moving at an incredible speed around the sun, does that high speed affect the dog-fight, no? Well no common shared speed affects anything in Newtonian mechanics.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (2)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894953)

Strict Newtonian mechanics does not make for an entertaining game. Even Braben acknowledges this on the Kickstarter page. Neither do laser weapons in a dogfight. In both games the combat boiled down to two ships desperately trying not to crash into each other while jousting like two marbles on the end of a rubber band.

I beg to differ.

When I played IWar2, I modded the hell out of it. One of the tweaks was to make it even easier to ignore the "maximum" throttle position, meaning you got exactly what you described above. Coupled with some tweaks to the armoring systems - a single lucky shot could cripple you (every hull strike did damage to internals, so if you got unlucky that shot might (temporarily) offline your thrusters) ... and I loved it.. Graphics and sound are very important for this though. Play it on mute with crap graphics and it quickly loses it's appeal. It's the missile proximity alarms, hull impacts etc...

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893941)

EVE definitely has a steep learning curve if you try to learn it in isolation, but for the love of all things spacey please don't do that!

There are numerous excellent organisations in game whose whole purpose is to teach newbies how to have fun in the game, with courses from basic piloting to some fairly advanced PVP doctrines and economics. Agony Unleashed, EVE University and to a lesser extent Red vs Blue are all good places to start, then look for a corp or alliance that is interested in the same kind of things you are.

People that try to play EVE in "single player mode" will find it very hard and very disappointing; people that interact with other players will discover that as big as the game of EVE is, it's nothing compared to the player-created metagame around it.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894313)

Actually, if he really wants to stand out, maybe he should do a console version. In the PC realm, he would be competing against a number of established titles. But if he could make Elite into a console MMO (or even single player), he would basically have the playing field all to himself. AFAIK, there isn't a single space trading game on a console. The only challenge would be the interface. And with built-in voice chat and 16 buttons on a modern controller (with any number combos possible in addition to that), I think it could be done.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (3, Interesting)

somersault (912633) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893187)

He's not an idiot [computeran...ogames.com] . Sounds like he was considering an MMO before WOW and EVE existed.

"I was very wary that we would be trailblazing and one of the ways we were planning to do it was to put a piece of hardware in every single phone exchange, so it was a much wider plan to achieve the very short ping times that you need to play the game we wanted to do. So we put that essentially on indefinite hold at that point because I knew it wasn't going to work well. And I'd rather not do it, than do something that didn't work well."

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

TheMathemagician (2515102) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893457)

Not surprising as there were MMO games already up and running in the UK in the 80s as long as massive includes "a few dozen" and you don't mind the fact they were text only. It was an obvious step to include graphics but the bandwidth simply didn't exist

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893443)

You should also mention Vendetta Online [vendetta-online.com] , which I think is a lot closer to the original Elite series than EVE. It features twitch-based combat and is strongly (player) skill based. Its main problem seems to be its user base, which is very low for an MMORPG, and its economy, which is geared towards PvP and cheap death and does not really reward trading and mining so much.

I've not played X3, but it sounds interesting.

Is anything known about linux support? I think this kind of games has a relatively large user base among linux users, from what I've seen on Vendetta quite a number of the players there are linux based...

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (4, Interesting)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893541)

The biggest misconception that people have about Eve Online is that it is a game. It is not a game; It is a second job.

Once you've made it above Frigate-class ships (Rifter FTW!), you need to spend an exponential amount of time learning skills and making money, and a lot of the skills for serious money-making (industrial skills like mining, research, and production) are not combat-based. Sure, you can make money as a pirate, or hire out your pilot skills as a mercenary or fleet escort, but it's dangerous work. The stress is, IMHO, equivalent to any full time job.

Personally, I like games to be fun. Eve is rewarding, but that's not the same.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (5, Funny)

ifrag (984323) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893543)

I'm thinking it's generous to even label EVE Online as being a game. Needs reclassified as something like sci-fi online job simulator.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893559)

you can play the original mon the beebdroid emulator on android phones. it is a full bbc model b emulator

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893637)

X3 and EVE have nothing on frontier when it comes to vastness, yet frontier fitted on a floppy.
freelancer is in the same boat with x3 and eve - and eve itself is in different boat, being more like trade wars than elite really.

flying into planets. full planets. in real size. that's what frontier was - that's what procedural generation gets you.

if you want a bag of full blown crazy mod check this out http://www.frontierastro.co.uk/Hires/hiresffe.html [frontierastro.co.uk]
frontier first encounters in d3d with updated models.

how he'll combine flying, time compression etc into multiplayer though.. that's going to be interesting.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

T_Tauri (883646) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894099)

His plan is to replace time compression with "local hyperspace" to speed up travel in order for multiplayer to work.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

Carewolf (581105) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894965)

X3 and freespace are both space-themed aquarium simulators, you jump between small transparant limited boxes that are obviously filled with water since you for some reason have a top-speed...

There hasn't been an Elite like game since.. well Elite and possible the first of the Privateer games.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

the_arrow (171557) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893699)

The goal of £1250000 is for the minimum game, the trend (yeah, only first day and all that) is for it to end over £5600000 at the moment, which definitely puts it if not in AAA territory so at least close. And they say in the blurb that they already have some of the critical parts "already in place".

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894013)

True, but an updated Elite on smartphones and tablets would be pretty cool. The existing mobile games in the genre are a bit too limited, and something like X3 with a very complex economy is probably too resource intensive.

On the other hand, X3 on a tablet would be awesome, if someone could pull it off.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (3, Informative)

mcvos (645701) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894207)

A modern project like that is a HUGE undertaking.

But this is David Braben. He's the undisputed master of making huge things small. Original Elite put thousands of unique planets in 32K. Frontier put the entire galaxy on a floppy disk. The Raspberry Pi gave us a USB-stick sized general purpose computer for $35. If anyone can make something huge manageable, it's him.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (4, Interesting)

gsslay (807818) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894301)

Dear gaming world;

You cannot recapture your youth and the fun you had on ancient games simply by re-making an old classic for new technology.

It's never the same and it's always ends as a big disappointment. Why? Because gaming isn't the same as it was and neither are you.

Leave it as a happy memory, for pity sake, and move on.

Re:Going to have a hard time topping modern remake (1)

stevencbrown (238995) | about a year and a half ago | (#41895119)

absolutely right on the money.

Elite was a huge achievement for the time, of which Braben can be justly proud.

He's spent the years since heading up a development studio who seem to have cranked out years of bargain bin pish, and is now seeking some sort of relevance again.

Nothing about his track record suggest this has a high probability of even being average...

Eli-- (3, Insightful)

arth1 (260657) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893109)

Without Ian Bell either on the team nor getting credit, count me as disinterested.

Re:Eli-- (1)

Hozza (1073224) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893283)

Not exactly a full credit, but he does at least get a mention in the very first paragraph of the Kickstarter page.

Re:Eli-- (2)

mcvos (645701) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894445)

Why? As far as I know, Ian Bell hasn't been involved in software development in decades. Last thing I heard was that he was doing something with glow-in-the-dark body paint. And Braben still mentions him regularly. It's not like he's trying to claim that glory all for himself.

Re:Eli-- (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894925)

Count me out too.

Braben killed Elite - The New Kind [christianpinder.com] , a faithful, open-source PC clone of the original Elite.

Braben is a successful entrepreneur. I'm buggered if I'm going to fund his effort to further line his own pockets.

Right On Commander (1)

stx23 (14942) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893155)

Due to a combination of bitterness from buying the unplayable First Encounters and their most recent output being part of Star Wars Kinect I wouldn't give him anything to be part of this beta test.

Re:Right On Commander (1)

ledow (319597) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893471)

It seems that a lot of the greats go downhill quite quickly. Peter Molyneaux used to be a god, not anymore. The other Elite programmer now has nothing to do with computers any more. Hell, even the Romero's and Carmack's of this world were in decline decades ago.

If anything, as I get older I understand that the secret to a hit game or a hit movie is nothing but sheer luck, and even pushing tripe until you get lucky. I mean, Angry Birds - it's a damn Scorched Earth clone with not-very-good graphics and a physics engine that's in a ton of 2D games and not very accurate.

And if game development is just hit-and-miss like that, with no real link to a particular designer's / programmer's actual talent (beyond being able to get the thing off the ground), then it pretty much follow than any / all "remake" attempts will come to a floundering halt with some absolute tripe (Duke Nukem Forever!).

I never really played Elite (I was too young, it was too difficult) but *always* loved the way it was programmed, what it could do, and the differences it explored in gameplay. But I don't think you can replicate that. Any Elite remake will be yet-another-space-game.

Re:Right On Commander (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893601)

It seems that a lot of the greats go downhill quite quickly. Peter Molyneaux used to be a god, not anymore. The other Elite programmer now has nothing to do with computers any more. Hell, even the Romero's and Carmack's of this world were in decline decades ago.

Gabe Newell is still Jesus, God and Richard Dawkins all rolled into one though [flamehaus.com]

ObFatjoke.goes here

Re:Right On Commander (1)

dropadrop (1057046) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894241)

So you are saying that if luck is involved in making a hit game it's the only thing that counts?

I'm not sure I'm following your logic... Sure, some great games have flopped, and some shitty games have made it big. Luck was surely a great factor here, but I find it hard to believe it's the only one. A good game with sloppy programming could fail. A well programmed game with a sloppy concept could fail. A well programmed game with a good concept but graphics that don't work could fail... And when you get everything right you could still fail! But even then it could be marketing or bad pricing. I'm not a big angry birds fan despite having a lot of friends working there. It was fun for an hour, but I did'nt feel an urge to return to it... Still I bought it and bought the space version too. Why? My kids asked me to, and at 79c I can't think of a lot of reasons not to. And while it's not my favorite game, it's surely my favorite game out of the ones my 4 year old child enjoys.

Better late than never? (1)

bhaak1 (219906) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893157)

I don't have high hopes that Braben can repeat the success of Elite. He's been talking about it for years, with small hints here and there but nothing has come from it.

So I'm mildly anxious that this time it will be for real.

But OTOH I don't expect it to be a big succes. In the best case it will be something along the lines of the recent XCOM remake and I would be quite content with such a game.

For those who don't know what Elite was (5, Informative)

MSBob (307239) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893169)

Here's a very interesting read (long but worth your time) about how the original was conceived: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2003/oct/18/features.weekend [guardian.co.uk]

Re:For those who don't know what Elite was (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894505)

It's also worth noting here that Ian Bell, a.k.a. "The Other Guy", has an online archive of all things "Elite" here:

http://www.iancgbell.clara.net/elite/index.htm

The file archive in particular includes some entertaining additional oddities, such as all the manuals (which might be helpful to the poster below who complains that "Oolite" lacks manuals), some old reviews, & a copy of the novella "The Dark Wheel" that came with the original BBC Micro version of the game. There are also a couple of press releases, FAQs, etc. that cover the Braben/Bell parting of the ways that make for interesting reading.

Also, "Elite: The Musical" ! :-)

(Captcha: "slaver")

No comments on oolite yet? (5, Interesting)

vlm (69642) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893191)

No comments on oolite yet?

http://www.oolite.org/ [oolite.org]

Its a popular genre... we could post different links to remakes for hours, probably.

Re:No comments on oolite yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893393)

Yeah I was thinking about that too, as well as Pioneer (http://pioneerspacesim.net/) which is shaping up to be a good remake of Frontier Elite 2. Although they do need to stop focusing on the graphics and start working on the game play.

Re:No comments on oolite yet? (2)

yotto (590067) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893569)

Oolite was a very nice distraction for a couple days. Maybe a week. It took me back to a time when I got my money throwing newspapers on porches, and a $50 video game had to last me a year. But it suffered from being a moderately reskinned exact copy of a game with a smaller memory footprint than the pictures my phone takes. On the front camera.

The original Elite was a fantastic piece of computer history, but that's where it belongs. If Braben can hit the same amazingness but with current tech? *THAT* will be something truly amazing. Do I think he can do it? No. That's why I'm not funding it. Do I hope he does? You bet your ass I do.

Re:No comments on oolite yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893741)

The problem with oolite is there is a complete lack of instruction manual or in-game hints as to what to do. I tried it and found there was no indication of what I was supposed to be doing. no missing, no hints on the keys to use, no tutorial. Unless someone has played Elite there is no way of knowing what oolite is or how the player should operate.

Re:No comments on oolite yet? (1)

alaos (2768579) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894171)

I spent a while playing Christian Pinder's "Elite - The New Kind" which is basically Elite reverse-engineered, but with better graphics. Google "elite new kind", a nice dose of nostalgia.

Re:No comments on oolite yet? (2)

Smivs (1197859) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894397)

Sorry, I was too busy playing Oolite to read /. for a while :P
The thing about Oolite is the customisation options...you can make the 'Ooniverse' into pretty much any kind of experience you want to.
And as for the lack of instructions, well you get a reference sheet with the (free, open source) download, and the Wiki [alioth.net] is excellent as is the Forum [aegidian.org] .

As soon as I actually get some money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893259)

I'm donating.

With i-war physics (1)

Ice Tiger (10883) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893273)

Would win, else just go Play EVE Online as that has the immersion only one universe populated with players can bring.

Re:With i-war physics (2)

somersault (912633) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893567)

EVE has a cool universe, but the point and click flight mechanics are boring as hell in my opinion. I purchased a joystick a few months ago and tried out some space and flight sims. EVE was a huge disappointment.

Re:With i-war physics (1)

vlm (69642) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893705)

I purchased a joystick a few months ago and tried out some space and flight sims. EVE was a huge disappointment.

Did you try lunar flight? Its a relatively cheap steam game with real newtonian physics (not the psuedo submarine like freespace or descent or eve). Learning curve is a bit steep, but the first time I successfully landed on a distant base I was pretty pleased with my piloting skills. You really need two sticks, one for rotation and one for translation.

Re:With i-war physics (1)

somersault (912633) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893937)

Haven't heard of that one - I'll add it to the list of Steam games that I've bought, but haven't had a chance to play yet! Thanks :)

Grannar (0)

rossdee (243626) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893347)

That should read "The BBC reports "

The BBC is a singular noun'

Elite was a good game, but that was like nearly 30 years ago

I had it on the 64 , and the sequel on the Amiga. I was tempted to donate the sequel to that international health relief organisation
"Medicins sans Frontiers"

Re:Grannar (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893473)

The BBC is a singular noun'

It's another American/British difference. Americans view corporations and companies as singular nouns. The British view them as plural nouns.

The BBC aren't immune from grammar errors, but this isn't one.

Re:Grannar (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41893943)

From the horse's mouth [bbc.co.uk] . "The BBC reports" is definitely correct (only one BBC is reporting); "The BBC report" is almost certainly incorrect. But "The BBC are having a party" is acceptable (the BBC as a collection of people are having a party).

Plus, give the guy a break, his last joke was awesome.

Unless it's talking about A report from the BBC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894273)

In which case "the BBC report" would be correct. There's only ONE report. A report. The report. Written and produced by the BBC.

The BBC documentary on...

Re:Unless it's talking about A report from the BBC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894307)

FFS, "report" is a verb here.

Re:Grannar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894327)

I submitted the story, and I was pissed off as soon as I noticed the error. Several AC comments with no mistakes - and then I screw up my first ever story submission. I'm from the UK, hence my confusion.

Re:Grannar (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894015)

It's another American/British difference. Americans view corporations and companies as singular nouns. The British view them as plural nouns.

As a Brit, I disagree, and so it seems would the BBC. Here's a few quotes from some recent BBC pages:

Japan's Suzuki Motors ... continues to struggle

Prudential UK has been fined £50,000 by the Information Commissioner.

Marks and Spencer, the UK's biggest clothing retailer, has posted pre-tax profits...

Re:Grannar (2)

timftbf (48204) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893629)

Many nouns referring to a group of individuals are plural in English where they are singular in American, for example band names. English is always "BandOfYourChoice *are* playing at...", never "is".

"The BBC" is debatable, I think - is it the singular Corporation, or the collection of people who make it up? I'd tend towards the latter, in the same way I'd expect (in English) to see "Apple are launching the new iThing 47 next week". I'd only really expect it to be singular when it's the object of the sentence - "the BBC was formed by SomeActOfParliament in XXXX..."

Remakes, sequels, and formulas (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893401)

And I bet most of those who contributed are among those that whine, gripe, and complain when yet Hollywood defaults to yet another remake, sequel, or formulaic movie or TV show... while demonstrating in abundance why the entertainment industry repeatedly does so.

Cashflow? (1)

undulato (2146486) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893405)

I played Elite on the BBC B back in the 80s and I loved it. Out of some misty eyed loyalty I will probably back this Kickstarter to some degree and look forward to a potential release. However I wonder how much of this money will be used as cashflow for Frontier Development Ltd [companycheck.co.uk] and how much it is about Elite itself. The published accounts for last year don't make pretty reading. This might not of course tell the whole story but it might have some bearing on it - and they are certainly asking for a lot of money.

Presentation is key (1)

virgnarus (1949790) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893451)

There's previous Kickstarter projects like this one [kickstarter.com] that have failed to produce feasible support merely because of how it was presented. Even though it was evident they involved reputable people working at it, and to many people it'd appear that would be enough to garner it enough trust and reputation from the masses, but in reality it dropped because people were not given assurance just what they were putting money towards. With the DFA [kickstarter.com] they kicked it off (no pun intended) with videos and other material providing solid evidence of what they wanted to accomplish and how. Planetary Annihilation [kickstarter.com] was also exemplary at this, with an initial video that already demonstrated the art and gameplay direction they had for the game with a pre-rendered trailer of what they expect to create. Displays like this show an already existing dedication towards the goal before funding even comes in, which will encourage people to contribute towards it.

Elite may end up getting the funding it desires, but I wonder just how much more an impact they'll gain had they of started with an appropriate presentation. Unless it's a script for a movie, you don't go selling your project to any publisher with nothing more than a bunch of words and hype, and neither should you do the same to the public.

linux (1)

Janek Kozicki (722688) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893639)

I'm donating, and I want linux support.

Re:linux (1)

Loki_666 (824073) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893851)

Pioneer is only alpha, but has linux, Mac, and Windows binaries. And its already awesome, just wait for the final release... schedule unknown, but hell, even alpha is playable.

http://pioneerspacesim.net/ [pioneerspacesim.net]

Re:linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894409)

Yeah, I was going to say its kind of irrating when kickstarter people (even if they originated the ideas) are trying to do things that are already out there. Pioneer looks really cool and could be awesome. Maybe the guy making it is holding it back, maybe not. Ide like to see it be a smooth and brilliant success.

I mean, what if someone put a "dwarf fortress" clone on kickstarter. WTF... I swear I could design a better UI and create more content, but I doubt I could build the rest of the game to Tarns standards.

Kickstarter description should be much shorter (1)

Zdzicho00 (912806) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893785)

For me it would be enough to be just "I'm David Braben, please give me your money"

Re:Kickstarter description should be much shorter (1)

mcvos (645701) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894519)

And I would. I got way more value out of Elite than it cost. My copy of Frontier was an illegal copy, and I think I borrowed First Encounters. So I still owe him money.

Memories of Elite (2)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893885)

The original Elite was such a great space game for it's day, I played it on the C64 when I was in my twenties. The game used a unique copy protection, a clear plastic prism-like lens that you had to hold up to the screen at just the right distance, which made the obscured code understandable to be typed in to start the game loading. What a huge pita it was to use! I lost the lens and drove to the company's New Jersey office, walked right into the second floor offices (there was no need yet for security in the 80's), where about 20 smiling, happy people were using actual modern IBM computers in a very pleasant office enviornment. I explained to the manager why I was there, was given a little tour of the place, and he reaches into an open cardboard box that had hundreds of those precious decoder lenses, and gave me two of them, in case I lost another. I hope they can live up to the original when they do this remake, but please, lose the "lens based" copy protection!

Re:Memories of Elite (1)

Zaiff Urgulbunger (591514) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894159)

Ahhh... the Lenslok [wikipedia.org] It seemed to work better with some software than others. I had one for Art Studio on the Spectrum and it worked okay, but I recall loads of people complaining about them. I think the cleverest thing about it was that they made it to fit inside a regular compact cassette box.

Re:Memories of Elite (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894829)

Ahhh... the Lenslok [wikipedia.org] It seemed to work better with some software than others. I had one for Art Studio on the Spectrum and it worked okay, but I recall loads of people complaining about them. I think the cleverest thing about it was that they made it to fit inside a regular compact cassette box.

The "Lenslock"!!! Thank you! I was mentally kicking myself for not being able to think of the damned name. Made for a great torture device, that thing.

There are already a lot of modern Space Sims. (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about a year and a half ago | (#41893987)

Unless he gives me a reason to believe he has a particularly interesting spin or the ability to create the most polished space sim experience yet, why should l I care?

Will it be less buggy than the last sequels? (1)

Goth Biker Babe (311502) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894063)

Elite II and Elite Frontier were buggy as hell. I loved Elite on my BBC Micro (and lost almost a year playing it) but I never got on with the sequels and when I did they would bomb out. I hope what ever he produces now will be of better quality.

Personally I think a PC is the wrong target. As others have said there is already games like Eve on line and its ilk. Why not a hand held multi-user?

Wrong space trading game (1)

dv8ed (697300) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894195)

If we're going to remake a space trading game, I'd much rather it was M.U.L.E. ...ok, different type of trading, but still...

Slightly OT: what game was this? (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894383)

Back in the late 90s I played an online Elite-like game that was completely web-driven. I think the client was an applet or some kind of browser application. As I recall, it was also MMO. Does anyone remember this game?

Trying to cash in on what Chris Roberts has done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894421)

He has made and surpassed his goal....I wouldn't be surprised that star citizen doesn't get 4M by the time its done.

It's your money (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894485)

If you think it makes sense to pay someone to write Yet Another proprietary engine, instead of hiring artists and mission writers to fill in, say, Naev or Vega Strike, that's your business.

But you'll sure look dumb, if anyone finds out you did it. So don't tell anyone.

Kickstarter is a neat idea but this type of game doesn't need any kickstarting; there are already projects which you can contribute to. You can even fork 'em, if for some weird reason, you hate their current maintainers.

And the other half of the team... Ian Bell? (1)

Stolpskott (2422670) | about a year and a half ago | (#41894585)

Elite was brought to us by David Braben and Ian Bell.
Braben on his own (well, with assistance from others, but without Bell) brought us Frontier and Frontier 2 as continuations of the Elite story - ok games in their own right, but more "realistic" and mathematical simulations than Elite, which was an entertaining game which sacrificed realism in favour of gameplay.
So if David Braben is looking to retool Elite without Ian Bell, I would expect either a reskinning of the old Elite game (which will probably be a nice walk down nostalgia lane, but with no long-term appeal), or a new version of Frontier (which imo was not as good a game as Elite).

Already Been Done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41894717)

It's called Freelancer / X3 (delete as appropriate to your preference in steepness of learning curve)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...