Dual 1.8 vs. Quad 2.0
DX 9 vs. DX 11
1GB Ram vs. 2GB Ram
GeForce 7950/X1800 vs. GTX 260/HD 4870*
Win XP/Vista/7 vs. Win 7/8
*That's a 9 tier difference for the nVidia card and an 11 tier difference for the AMD card based on Tom's GPU Hierarchy.
You can play STO on a toaster, but you need a microwave for ED...
Those STO requirements are outdated. They have tacked more and more TRIBBLE on since - I defy you to run STO at an acceptable framerate on the required system.
I fact, I can do one better - I have a system close to the minimum specs - Phenom II Dual core and a 9600 GT - technically 2 in SLI but I have run STO with one disabled - similar performance to the 7950.
I know for a fact that on that system with 4gb of DDR3, I can no longer run STO in anything except older space zones at more than 30 FPS unless I crank everything down to minimum. Yes, STO ran great on it a couple years ago when it was my main gaming rig. It no longer even runs passably.
I also know for a fact that with graphics turned down to similar minimums, ED runs at a near constant 35 FPS on that system.
The effects caps have been raised, the textures have been upres'd, new zones feature new particle effects, the STO bloom effects are a constant problem, and the GUI, as I have said, can bring dual 970s into sub-20 FPS territory.
On a 5 year old system, below the minimum specs for ED, and above the minimum specs for STO, ED still runs better.
As to that - currently, STO eats a minimum of 2gb of VRAM. So, as any game, ED, Shadow of Mordor, or STO will, you are swapping textures like a bawss. Having below the minimum framebuffer will not preclude you from running any game - you will just be swapping textures in and out of memory.
Edit 2: Also, the 1gb RAM spec is actually the Windows 7 minimum - 1/2 the minimum with the x64 version - if you were to actually try to run a game on that in 7, you are going to have a bad day.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
Jorando, check out the post of the person of whom I asked the question. He was proud of the fact that he no longer played STO. Hence my question. And he's not the only one who's boasted of such a stance, and of whom I've asked the question.
So far, the only folk who have answered the question have been those like you, who still play but want the game to be so much more. As I said, I think that's rather quixotic, but who knows, you might knock that windmill down. But that's not his attitude.
Nor is it the attitude of curedmen here, who appears to be little more than a paid shill for Elite Dangerous. (And honestly, that's more than a little tiresome by this point. How many threads does he need to threadcrap in?)
Well you know, TRIBBLE always finds TRIBBLE and somehow you are always there. Funny how you think you are entitled to boast in forums as you wish and no one else should allow to do it. But thanks for your sweet words, loving ya man!
Recently I saw the trailer for Elite Dangerous which is coming real soon,and it looks really great.
The bit that particularly appealed to me,was about 400 billion star systems or planets to explore and find. I looked at the patch notes for it,and there are alot more tweaks and fixes than STO.
Alot more bugs are sorted out too.
CRYPTIC,please wake up and smell the coffee,and get something drastically done about STO,the bugs, server not responding alot, rubberbanding etc.
Cryptic need to stop living in a world of denial all the time,or it will mean many players leaving STO. Get the game sorted out properly and no half baked jobs.
Communicate with the playerbase and update them regularly.
Less players on here means less money for cryptic/pwe. think about it.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
...and depending on what I'm doing, I'm looking at anywhere between 12-30 FPS.
Layers upon layers of EWP, GW, multiple hangars of Scorpions, can kill my FPS.
You would see higher FPS in ED.
This is based on the fact that I have run it on a well-below-spec 9600 GT, which is roughly equivalent to your card if you average out the benchmarks. It does have more memory bandwidth tho, so you'd likely experience more chop on texture swapping that I see on my rig.
Edit: And the reason that ED will run on DX10 GPUs is that although it uses DX11, it uses no DX11 specific features as yet. In fact, they currently use some DX10 rigs for internal testing. That may change. So yeah, eventually you may be SOL with older cards.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
I'll have to give it a whirl - I typically have just used the ship sets and customized the tech trees and AI to run Trek SE5, and having less work to do to set up each game would be nice - although sometimes half the fun is in the setup....
And, totally nerdtastic of me, but I've added the Empire from Star Wars as AI into a few games - when it's down to my allies and me in a defensive war against the Empire and the Borg who are also bashing each others brains out, it's just pure joy in my eyes.
Heh, I once setup a fight between Goa'uld and Cylons
You don't have to care about other people's machines, but there will be STO players, however few, whose machines are too far behind for ED, who don't want to spend the equivalent of a PS4 console to catch up with EDs hardware requirements.
And one or two of them might be posting in this thread.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
What I would like to see is for STO to learn from some of the other games out there.
I love the EVE online skill system and that you don't have any classes to worry about and that it is easy to keep adding more skills for people to train without changing the core system in any way. I would love to STO to adopt that and at this point get rid of Engineer vs Science vs Tactical captains.
Just allows us to train in all the abilities and have it take time to learn them.
Another cool idea would be that once you get to max level you could reincarnate like in DDO. You would actually play through content again, you would gain some kind of bonus from doing it each time based on the class you did it as but the xp costs would rise each time.
I would love for the ships in STO to be more customizeable. I would like to see more things about our ships setups that we can change. Make it so that I can upgrade my ships internal structure, add armor to it, upgrade targeting sensors, more visual changes to the ship with different pieces. I would love to mix and match more pieces from other ships I have unlocked.
I also want to add a LOT more of those accolades that give small awards. Lets not even have a limit on them anymore just have the amount needed to unlock the next rank rise higher and higher. So the more you use beams the better you get at them, the more you use polaron the better you get at it, the more you fight the borg the better you get at it etc.
It would also be nice to make the game more 3D but I DON'T want it to be like the space fighter games since this is about capital ships not fighters. I just want to have full 3d movement available so I can go straight up or down.
The shuttle missions could learn a lot from things like space sim games though. Right now people avoid shuttle missions and they really should be a lot more fun.
Also even though it does not fit I want my own planet that I can upgrade and have it produce stuff I can use. Make it something like a colony that starfleet has assigned us to get going. It is our job to protect it, get it to grow etc but we also get things like resources from it and ship upgrades. (ie you have stopped the borg from attacking the colony but the colonists have learned from the wreckage and improved your shield adaptation by 1% or something)
So... why can't the development team here make this game have a massive increase in the number of star systems... Make travel more enjoyable.. more space style... Make the game seem bigger? It feels very claustrophobic. 'Sir we do not have permission to warp into deep space' well... you know what? On ED I CAN warp into deep space.
And while I am at it... Having fallen foul of it in the past... Maybe also address the terrible and deplorable customer service and the bug reporting brick wall. As far as MMORPGS this deserves to go down the pan. They have done nothing worthwhile keeping players aboard. If it wasn't trek it would have shut down. Cryptic insult Genes legacy...
So... why can't the development team here make this game have a massive increase in the number of star systems... Make travel more enjoyable.. more space style... Make the game seem bigger? It feels very claustrophobic. 'Sir we do not have permission to warp into deep space' well... you know what? On ED I CAN warp into deep space.
Cause different folks want different things?
For every person that wants to travel amongst the stars, there's likely going to be five folks that complain that it takes too long to go anywhere...
From those stats, yes you are swapping like crazy - run thru the entire zone (assuming you are in ESD) - every time something new pops into view and new textures load, you will experience a stutter. Since you have less VRAM than is required to hold it all, you are seeing as many textures as will fit being loaded at a time.
Not only that, you are showing a discrepancy between what STO reports and what Afterburner reports.
If I turn my view distance quality (world and character quality) down as far as yours I only see 400ish mb used when I first zone in, but after I run thru the whole ESD, it sits at above 2gb, depending on how many people in different outfits are around. In your case, your system is swapping in the new textures you need as you move around, and removing the old ones.
ED and any other game will do the same, regardless of what the system requirements are - with some exceptions, such as certain modes in the idTech 4 engine.
Anyway, I'm actually not even sure why we are debating this - many, many people have discussed STO's high VRAM usage in the past - to the point where they did modifications to make the game stop crashing cards with 3gb+ framebuffers - hence the dropdown box with framebuffer size options. Not to mention the fact that we know they have upsampled the textures at least once, at least for some ground maps.
My end point was, ED will run better than STO, on equivalent systems with equivalent settings, regardless of the stated, and in STOs case, vastly outdated system specs.
Edit: It comes to my mind that I don't know what resolution you are running at. That, and I am running at 2x MSAA, so the actual asset size of STO is probably half of what Afterburner displays. So around 1.1gb with ESD and all character assets loaded into memory.
NOTE: I am only responding to the comments that ED will not run on low spec machines equivalent to what STO will run on - not the quality of the respective games or whether or not I feel that you should enjoy either of them more or less than the other - I am making no qualitative judgments on the games themselves, only speaking to relative performance.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
The first release of Elite: Dangerous will not mark the end of development.
We intend to continue expanding the game both with new content and new features. A good example of this is planetary landings. We have an ambitious goal for landings to include new gameplay and a rich variety of worlds to explore. To achieve our goal we want the planets to come to life. We also want to add leaving the ships so you can explore space stations or board enemy vessels or even just to look around your own. We intend to release small, free updates after launch, but major expansions including rich new features will be charged for, unless you have bought the expansion pass
BTW, none of what I was talking about was Ground, it's Space. I don't worry about Ground...Ground is atrocious compared to Space. Couldn't tell you the first thing about what it is like on Ground other than it is horrible...
In comparing STO and ED, not sure why Ground would come up.
But yeah, lol, STO Ground is a heinous chugfest of FPS...it's extremely different, the performance between Space and Ground in STO.
The first release of Elite: Dangerous will not mark the end of development.
We intend to continue expanding the game both with new content and new features. A good example of this is planetary landings. We have an ambitious goal for landings to include new gameplay and a rich variety of worlds to explore. To achieve our goal we want the planets to come to life. We also want to add leaving the ships so you can explore space stations or board enemy vessels or even just to look around your own. We intend to release small, free updates after launch, but major expansions including rich new features will be charged for, unless you have bought the expansion pass
This sounds just like the beginning of STO with their Engineering Reports. We are working on this feature, but it won't become available due to it being more time consuming than we first realized. Until something becomes available to the players, then it is just the wishes of the devs.
Also, the whole pay for expansions is a mark against Elite Dangerous.
BTW, none of what I was talking about was Ground, it's Space. I don't worry about Ground...Ground is atrocious compared to Space. Couldn't tell you the first thing about what it is like on Ground other than it is horrible...
In comparing STO and ED, not sure why Ground would come up.
But yeah, lol, STO Ground is a heinous chugfest of FPS...it's extremely different, the performance between Space and Ground in STO.
You get 12-30 FPS in space? Lordy, I didn't think it could even GET that bad on a card like that. My sympathies.
I used ground simply because it is the most intensive part of STO - and it runs worse that a game with supposedly higher requirements. You can achieve the same results in some DQ space zones, but I would have actually had to work a bit in order to test the memory load maximum. As in, actually leave the ESD area.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
The first release of Elite: Dangerous will not mark the end of development.
We intend to continue expanding the game both with new content and new features. A good example of this is planetary landings. We have an ambitious goal for landings to include new gameplay and a rich variety of worlds to explore. To achieve our goal we want the planets to come to life. We also want to add leaving the ships so you can explore space stations or board enemy vessels or even just to look around your own. We intend to release small, free updates after launch, but major expansions including rich new features will be charged for, unless you have bought the expansion pass
No offense intended, but who are you? Are you an ED Dev? If so, cool! And will your game offer PvE? (Or, put differently, a way to avoid PvP). Not going to spend hundreds of RL dollars on ships that can get blown up (regardless of insurance: you'd still lose all your fancy mods).
No offense intended, but who are you? Are you an ED Dev? If so, cool! And will your game offer PvE? (Or, put differently, a way to avoid PvP). Not going to spend hundreds of RL dollars on ships that can get blown up (regardless of insurance: you'd still lose all your fancy mods).
I assume they are just some ED fanboi that didn't give reference to the dev quote. An ED dev should be able to promote their game a lot better than insulting players that might be interested in the game.
I play Star Trek Online first and foremost because it's Star Trek.
I enjoy sci-fi strategy games. Not a fan of PvP. Even in GALCIV2 + 3beta I build fed and kdf-styled ships
What keep me here is/was the community; friends and fleetmates. DR has been a negative in that regard with many of the people I like to do runs with have left temporarily or quit in disgust.
I don't see any game (star citizen, elite:dangermouse) filling the STO void.
The people on the STO forums had their chance to cry doom when TOR was in development. People had their one and only chance to convince me that their bandwagon proclaiming that TOR was going to kill STO unless Cryptic did some kind of miracle to save it from Star Wars.
I remember seeing the threads. I remember seeing the signatures. I remember seeing all the anecdotal evidence and personal opinions labelled as "undeniable fact". I remember the mockery of Cryptic and how TOR was going to not only destroy STO, but it was going to destroy WoW, and EvE Online, and every other video game ever, and then it was going to cure world hunger and get rid of every country's nukes because Star Wars is just that awesome and BioWare has the Midas Touch that allows them to turn anything they touch into gold.
That was the STO community (at the risk of generalizing)'s one chance to convince me they knew what they were talking about. It was their one chance to convince me that these were smart, educated, objective players who resembled the intellectual giants seen in Star Trek itself, and therefore credible in their clarity of foresight.
And it is because of that one chance they made that was blown, that no, I really do not care if anyone says Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, Dreadnought, or Hello Kitty Online Adventures will destroy STO unless Cryptic performs some vague, non-specific task rooted in poorly-considered logic to stop them.
Elite Dangerous isn't Star Trek Online. Therefore, Star Trek Online has the advantage. It is the only Star Trek MMO there is, and more than likely the only one there ever will be in our lifetime.
Elite Dangerous isn't Star Trek Online. Therefore, Star Trek Online has the advantage. It is the only Star Trek MMO there is, and more than likely the only one there ever will be in our lifetime.
I agree with everything except the absolute last bit - I think we will see at least one more ST MMOs in our lifetimes, unless you are over the age of 70.
The franchise is too lucrative, and STO is getting too dated, graphically speaking, for it to 1) last more than a decade without a serious facelift and revamp, and 2) not be replaced relatively quickly by another company willing to exploit the license.
If STO were to die tomorrow, you'd see another ST MMO announced by the time the next Trek film comes out.
If it dies in 5 years, I almost guarantee that within another year some other studio will announce that they have an engine that they can just plug Trek assets into for a fast release. Kind of like both Perpetual and Cryptic did.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
I agree with everything except the absolute last bit - I think we will see at least one more ST MMOs in our lifetimes, unless you are over the age of 70.
The franchise is too lucrative, and STO is getting too dated, graphically speaking, for it to 1) last more than a decade without a serious facelift and revamp, and 2) not be replaced relatively quickly by another company willing to exploit the license.
If STO were to die tomorrow, you'd see another ST MMO announced by the time the next Trek film comes out.
If it dies in 5 years, I almost guarantee that within another year some other studio will announce that they have an engine that they can just plug Trek assets into for a fast release. Kind of like both Perpetual and Cryptic did.
The franchise is lucrative. It isn't so lucrative that it's worth pouring money into the development of another MMO.
Star Trek Online is based on a franchise who was in its prime in the mid-90's. This game is a monument to a franchise who had its heyday decades ago.
Star Trek is not as popular as it used to be. It never was. Maybe in our minds it never faded from glory -- but for the people who matter (investors), Star Trek in an MMO form is not financially viable.
If STO dies tomorrow, it is a warning sign that Star Trek is not able to pull in money. Nothing more. And there will be no dark horses from out of the shadows willing to drop tens of millions of dollars into an MMO after seeing STO die despite all the work put into it.
The franchise is lucrative. It isn't so lucrative that it's worth pouring money into the development of another MMO.
Star Trek Online is based on a franchise who was in its prime in the mid-90's. This game is a monument to a franchise who had its heyday decades ago.
Star Trek is not as popular as it used to be. It never was. Maybe in our minds it never faded from glory -- but for the people who matter (investors), Star Trek in an MMO form is not financially viable.
If STO dies tomorrow, it is a warning sign that Star Trek is not able to pull in money. Nothing more. And there will be no dark horses from out of the shadows willing to drop tens of millions of dollars into an MMO after seeing STO die despite all the work put into it.
I think I will agree to disagree on this one - Trek conventions are more crowded and Trek merchandise is more common now than they were in the 90s - I have been to enough conventions to know that first hand. And it's not all old fogeys like me, and possibly you. I still see enough kids, teens, and twenty-somethings at those cons to indicate to me that there will be a solid market for a long time yet.
I'm sure your point of view is valid to some extent as well - I just believe that they wouldn't let the license lie around for that long. Especially not if some of the player metrics that Cryptic has put out over the years are even close to correct.
My guess is "hope" keeps people not playing but posting on the forums. For others, its a path of sad realization and closure. Grieving takes time. The worst "haters" here love the game, or did at some point.
No offense intended, but who are you? Are you an ED Dev? If so, cool! And will your game offer PvE? (Or, put differently, a way to avoid PvP). Not going to spend hundreds of RL dollars on ships that can get blown up (regardless of insurance: you'd still lose all your fancy mods).
There is a solo online mode to avoid PvP. And there's an option to keep all your fancy mods at the insurance screen.
Comments
Are these minimum or recommended requirements?
Because STO played on my parent's single core machine.
Badly, mind you, very badly. But everything played badly on there.
And now they are back to that ******n old "toaster" machine because the new one is toast. Grrrrr. :mad:
Star Trek Online
http://support.arcgames.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4009/~/%28sto%29-system-requirements
Elite Dangerous
https://www.elitedangerous.com/about/
I've only got an HD4670 512MB GPU...so yeah...
Those STO requirements are outdated. They have tacked more and more TRIBBLE on since - I defy you to run STO at an acceptable framerate on the required system.
I fact, I can do one better - I have a system close to the minimum specs - Phenom II Dual core and a 9600 GT - technically 2 in SLI but I have run STO with one disabled - similar performance to the 7950.
I know for a fact that on that system with 4gb of DDR3, I can no longer run STO in anything except older space zones at more than 30 FPS unless I crank everything down to minimum. Yes, STO ran great on it a couple years ago when it was my main gaming rig. It no longer even runs passably.
I also know for a fact that with graphics turned down to similar minimums, ED runs at a near constant 35 FPS on that system.
The effects caps have been raised, the textures have been upres'd, new zones feature new particle effects, the STO bloom effects are a constant problem, and the GUI, as I have said, can bring dual 970s into sub-20 FPS territory.
On a 5 year old system, below the minimum specs for ED, and above the minimum specs for STO, ED still runs better.
So, yeah. Quote those mins again.
Edit:
As to that - currently, STO eats a minimum of 2gb of VRAM. So, as any game, ED, Shadow of Mordor, or STO will, you are swapping textures like a bawss. Having below the minimum framebuffer will not preclude you from running any game - you will just be swapping textures in and out of memory.
Edit 2: Also, the 1gb RAM spec is actually the Windows 7 minimum - 1/2 the minimum with the x64 version - if you were to actually try to run a game on that in 7, you are going to have a bad day.
Graphics: http://i.imgur.com/P0wdqNI.png
Advanced: http://i.imgur.com/GdwAvVu.png
...and depending on what I'm doing, I'm looking at anywhere between 12-30 FPS.
Layers upon layers of EWP, GW, multiple hangars of Scorpions, can kill my FPS.
Well you know, TRIBBLE always finds TRIBBLE and somehow you are always there.
Umm STO is free to play/get
Afterburner would disagree.
STO at ESD - GPU RAM usage 2751mb.
System RAM usage 6316mb, 2136 of which is the STO process.
So you are swapping like a Ferengi if you are using a 512mb card.
You would see higher FPS in ED.
This is based on the fact that I have run it on a well-below-spec 9600 GT, which is roughly equivalent to your card if you average out the benchmarks. It does have more memory bandwidth tho, so you'd likely experience more chop on texture swapping that I see on my rig.
Edit: And the reason that ED will run on DX10 GPUs is that although it uses DX11, it uses no DX11 specific features as yet. In fact, they currently use some DX10 rigs for internal testing. That may change. So yeah, eventually you may be SOL with older cards.
My character Tsin'xing
It runs on a Phenom II dual core, as well as a Pentium D 3.2gHz dual core.
Yeah, you'd be fine.
I love the EVE online skill system and that you don't have any classes to worry about and that it is easy to keep adding more skills for people to train without changing the core system in any way. I would love to STO to adopt that and at this point get rid of Engineer vs Science vs Tactical captains.
Just allows us to train in all the abilities and have it take time to learn them.
Another cool idea would be that once you get to max level you could reincarnate like in DDO. You would actually play through content again, you would gain some kind of bonus from doing it each time based on the class you did it as but the xp costs would rise each time.
I would love for the ships in STO to be more customizeable. I would like to see more things about our ships setups that we can change. Make it so that I can upgrade my ships internal structure, add armor to it, upgrade targeting sensors, more visual changes to the ship with different pieces. I would love to mix and match more pieces from other ships I have unlocked.
I also want to add a LOT more of those accolades that give small awards. Lets not even have a limit on them anymore just have the amount needed to unlock the next rank rise higher and higher. So the more you use beams the better you get at them, the more you use polaron the better you get at it, the more you fight the borg the better you get at it etc.
It would also be nice to make the game more 3D but I DON'T want it to be like the space fighter games since this is about capital ships not fighters. I just want to have full 3d movement available so I can go straight up or down.
The shuttle missions could learn a lot from things like space sim games though. Right now people avoid shuttle missions and they really should be a lot more fun.
Also even though it does not fit I want my own planet that I can upgrade and have it produce stuff I can use. Make it something like a colony that starfleet has assigned us to get going. It is our job to protect it, get it to grow etc but we also get things like resources from it and ship upgrades. (ie you have stopped the borg from attacking the colony but the colonists have learned from the wreckage and improved your shield adaptation by 1% or something)
http://i.imgur.com/V8QQFeE.png
And while I am at it... Having fallen foul of it in the past... Maybe also address the terrible and deplorable customer service and the bug reporting brick wall. As far as MMORPGS this deserves to go down the pan. They have done nothing worthwhile keeping players aboard. If it wasn't trek it would have shut down. Cryptic insult Genes legacy...
Cause different folks want different things?
For every person that wants to travel amongst the stars, there's likely going to be five folks that complain that it takes too long to go anywhere...
Yes? I'm not sure why you are posting that...
From those stats, yes you are swapping like crazy - run thru the entire zone (assuming you are in ESD) - every time something new pops into view and new textures load, you will experience a stutter. Since you have less VRAM than is required to hold it all, you are seeing as many textures as will fit being loaded at a time.
Not only that, you are showing a discrepancy between what STO reports and what Afterburner reports.
If I turn my view distance quality (world and character quality) down as far as yours I only see 400ish mb used when I first zone in, but after I run thru the whole ESD, it sits at above 2gb, depending on how many people in different outfits are around. In your case, your system is swapping in the new textures you need as you move around, and removing the old ones.
ED and any other game will do the same, regardless of what the system requirements are - with some exceptions, such as certain modes in the idTech 4 engine.
Anyway, I'm actually not even sure why we are debating this - many, many people have discussed STO's high VRAM usage in the past - to the point where they did modifications to make the game stop crashing cards with 3gb+ framebuffers - hence the dropdown box with framebuffer size options. Not to mention the fact that we know they have upsampled the textures at least once, at least for some ground maps.
My end point was, ED will run better than STO, on equivalent systems with equivalent settings, regardless of the stated, and in STOs case, vastly outdated system specs.
Edit: It comes to my mind that I don't know what resolution you are running at. That, and I am running at 2x MSAA, so the actual asset size of STO is probably half of what Afterburner displays. So around 1.1gb with ESD and all character assets loaded into memory.
NOTE: I am only responding to the comments that ED will not run on low spec machines equivalent to what STO will run on - not the quality of the respective games or whether or not I feel that you should enjoy either of them more or less than the other - I am making no qualitative judgments on the games themselves, only speaking to relative performance.
The first release of Elite: Dangerous will not mark the end of development.
We intend to continue expanding the game both with new content and new features. A good example of this is planetary landings. We have an ambitious goal for landings to include new gameplay and a rich variety of worlds to explore. To achieve our goal we want the planets to come to life. We also want to add leaving the ships so you can explore space stations or board enemy vessels or even just to look around your own. We intend to release small, free updates after launch, but major expansions including rich new features will be charged for, unless you have bought the expansion pass
https://store.elitedangerous.com/eur/elite-dangerous.html/
1440x900 resolution
BTW, none of what I was talking about was Ground, it's Space. I don't worry about Ground...Ground is atrocious compared to Space. Couldn't tell you the first thing about what it is like on Ground other than it is horrible...
In comparing STO and ED, not sure why Ground would come up.
But yeah, lol, STO Ground is a heinous chugfest of FPS...it's extremely different, the performance between Space and Ground in STO.
This sounds just like the beginning of STO with their Engineering Reports. We are working on this feature, but it won't become available due to it being more time consuming than we first realized. Until something becomes available to the players, then it is just the wishes of the devs.
Also, the whole pay for expansions is a mark against Elite Dangerous.
You get 12-30 FPS in space? Lordy, I didn't think it could even GET that bad on a card like that. My sympathies.
I used ground simply because it is the most intensive part of STO - and it runs worse that a game with supposedly higher requirements. You can achieve the same results in some DQ space zones, but I would have actually had to work a bit in order to test the memory load maximum. As in, actually leave the ESD area.
No offense intended, but who are you? Are you an ED Dev? If so, cool!
I assume they are just some ED fanboi that didn't give reference to the dev quote. An ED dev should be able to promote their game a lot better than insulting players that might be interested in the game.
I enjoy sci-fi strategy games. Not a fan of PvP. Even in GALCIV2 + 3beta I build fed and kdf-styled ships
What keep me here is/was the community; friends and fleetmates. DR has been a negative in that regard with many of the people I like to do runs with have left temporarily or quit in disgust.
I don't see any game (star citizen, elite:dangermouse) filling the STO void.
I remember seeing the threads. I remember seeing the signatures. I remember seeing all the anecdotal evidence and personal opinions labelled as "undeniable fact". I remember the mockery of Cryptic and how TOR was going to not only destroy STO, but it was going to destroy WoW, and EvE Online, and every other video game ever, and then it was going to cure world hunger and get rid of every country's nukes because Star Wars is just that awesome and BioWare has the Midas Touch that allows them to turn anything they touch into gold.
That was the STO community (at the risk of generalizing)'s one chance to convince me they knew what they were talking about. It was their one chance to convince me that these were smart, educated, objective players who resembled the intellectual giants seen in Star Trek itself, and therefore credible in their clarity of foresight.
And it is because of that one chance they made that was blown, that no, I really do not care if anyone says Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, Dreadnought, or Hello Kitty Online Adventures will destroy STO unless Cryptic performs some vague, non-specific task rooted in poorly-considered logic to stop them.
Elite Dangerous isn't Star Trek Online. Therefore, Star Trek Online has the advantage. It is the only Star Trek MMO there is, and more than likely the only one there ever will be in our lifetime.
Get used to it.
I agree with everything except the absolute last bit - I think we will see at least one more ST MMOs in our lifetimes, unless you are over the age of 70.
The franchise is too lucrative, and STO is getting too dated, graphically speaking, for it to 1) last more than a decade without a serious facelift and revamp, and 2) not be replaced relatively quickly by another company willing to exploit the license.
If STO were to die tomorrow, you'd see another ST MMO announced by the time the next Trek film comes out.
If it dies in 5 years, I almost guarantee that within another year some other studio will announce that they have an engine that they can just plug Trek assets into for a fast release. Kind of like both Perpetual and Cryptic did.
The franchise is lucrative. It isn't so lucrative that it's worth pouring money into the development of another MMO.
Star Trek Online is based on a franchise who was in its prime in the mid-90's. This game is a monument to a franchise who had its heyday decades ago.
Star Trek is not as popular as it used to be. It never was. Maybe in our minds it never faded from glory -- but for the people who matter (investors), Star Trek in an MMO form is not financially viable.
If STO dies tomorrow, it is a warning sign that Star Trek is not able to pull in money. Nothing more. And there will be no dark horses from out of the shadows willing to drop tens of millions of dollars into an MMO after seeing STO die despite all the work put into it.
I think I will agree to disagree on this one - Trek conventions are more crowded and Trek merchandise is more common now than they were in the 90s - I have been to enough conventions to know that first hand. And it's not all old fogeys like me, and possibly you. I still see enough kids, teens, and twenty-somethings at those cons to indicate to me that there will be a solid market for a long time yet.
I'm sure your point of view is valid to some extent as well - I just believe that they wouldn't let the license lie around for that long. Especially not if some of the player metrics that Cryptic has put out over the years are even close to correct.
Centurion maximus92
12th Legion, Romulan Republic
12th Fleet
=\/= ================================ =\/=
There is a solo online mode to avoid PvP. And there's an option to keep all your fancy mods at the insurance screen.
Centurion maximus92
12th Legion, Romulan Republic
12th Fleet
=\/= ================================ =\/=