Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 02:28:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  Gaming  |  Topic: Elite: Dangerous 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 70 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Elite: Dangerous  (Read 662277 times)
Count Nerfedalot
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1041


Reply #455 on: August 07, 2014, 10:07:17 AM

I understand the sense that something will be missing with the empty open play mode. That hurts anyone, PvE or PvP inclined, who is looking for some social interaction.

Frankly, I thought original EQ and AC had pretty good solutions to this. Both types could coexist in the same world, and self-flagged to choose which playstyle they experienced.  Everybody could still see and talk to each other, you just couldn't kill each other unless you both flagged for it.  But it still left lots of other avenues for griefing and PvPers seemed to absolutely hate it anyway. ED is putting a different spin on that but it's not perfect either because of the loss of serendipitous encounters as the price paid to avoid being ganked. Another possibility would be a fourth mode besides solo, group or open. No clue what to call it but essentially it would be Open PvE, with hopefully lots of players but no killing. But that has obvious "reality" issues (in a spaceship game with FTL! LOL) plus who knows what other risks of griefing behavior to consider so there's plenty of reasons for not including it.




Yes, I know I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #456 on: August 07, 2014, 10:12:06 AM

I also think that the spectre of PVP griefing that most people fear would become far less scary if there were ways to reduce the risk of the loss of, for instance, a fully-loaded cargo vessel being as catastrophic as it currently can be. Again, time will tell.

That maybe in the works.

Quote
We totally understand that when the game fails and nukes your career it's horrible.

Unfortunately, the fact is that whilst we are working on making the game, this can and does happen unintentionally - it's the bane of pre-release software and also one of the things that beta testing specifically help us track down and fix, making release that much better.

We don't have all the systems for softening ship destruction operating yet either. There's a creditor system we want that will allow Commanders to sink into debt but retain their ship (this also adds hooks for missions and events).

There are the ranking systems that should help Commanders gauge the risk of each encounters.

There's the wing formation to allow Commanders to group up for added security.

There's a new ship insurance policy feature we're considering that will reduce or remove the cost of ship destruction for a set period.

And there's various ongoing updates to make sure that the game play spikes less often and more predictibly.

The bottom line is that I hope you guys don't give up, we're trying to make something that's a little different, very cool, and fun.

Risk is a big part of that for us - the risk is what makes success so satisfying, but we're not indifferent to the issues you testing folk are encountering - that's what this pre-release period is all about, testing our theories, tweaking them, changing them into something we feel gives the best result for the game.


A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #457 on: August 07, 2014, 10:35:13 AM

Not really interested in getting into all of them, but a lot of you are using examples that just don't seem to 'fit' terribly well here.  It's almost like this is a FRPG MMO discussion rather than one about an extremely large universe with FTL travel.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
WayAbvPar
Moderator
Posts: 19268


Reply #458 on: August 07, 2014, 10:36:48 AM

I find it interesting that so many people characterize pro PvP players as 'never looking for fair fights' when the PvE players are exactly the same. They don't want to enter a fight they can't win, so they play versus the utterly predictable NPCs.

When speaking of the MMOG industry, the glass may be half full, but it's full of urine. HaemishM

Always wear clean underwear because you never know when a Tory Government is going to fuck you.- Ironwood

Libertarians make fun of everyone because they can't see beyond the event horizons of their own assholes Surlyboi
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #459 on: August 07, 2014, 10:58:21 AM

All I know is if I can't dip my toe into some Player Versus Player ship combat, what's the fucking point ?  I may as well just fire up an emulator.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15157


Reply #460 on: August 07, 2014, 11:29:40 AM

Eh, the PvE discussion is kind of the same, though. It's why I hate highly choreographed boss fights and love stuff where there's a more unpredictable AI involved, or some kind of terrain that leads to different kinds of outcomes and a bit of luck depending on how you move and what you do.

The thing in any big-scale game that you hope to play repeatedly over a long period of time is that there needs to be a constantly renewed source of contingency and unpredictability. Players *and* environment can provide that, but not by accident.
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #461 on: August 07, 2014, 12:49:58 PM


A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42628

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #462 on: August 07, 2014, 01:10:31 PM

Well, I don't actually think of E:D as being an MMO either, no matter how open universe it is.

Look, the wolves in this case seem to be a just a bit right - if the switch to offline protects people from unwanted player interactions, then the open world will be empty of most PVP except for the people who are actively out looking for it. It will become Pirate Universe - and that seems a real shame. But I absolutely think the game should allow that switch that says "don't fuck with my shit."

I've yet to see an open-world type of game that allows open PVP where the life of a "murderer" is made harder than the life of a "law-abiding citizen." Piracy should be a risky business where the pirate is unable to get ship repairs, can't afford better ships and equipment than his prey, and is hunted by authority enough that just getting a full night's sleep is rare. That requires the robust structure of civilization. All too often, open world games don't have that structure of civilization, so the pirate is actually better off being a pirate than being a square. It's a mixture of the anonymity of the player killer, the lack of active law enforcement, the reluctance of anti-PK player organizations as well as the huge advantage of first strike in the game mechanics (whether that be from stealth or ambush). I'm speaking specifically about PK banditry or piracy, since that's the form of PVP we're talking about.

It seems PVP players like me want more war-style (two organized sides fighting) PVP and less bandit-style PVP (lone murderers mugging people). One of those should be encouraged, the other should be discouraged with game mechanics that make virtual life hard on a pimp pirate.

Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15157


Reply #463 on: August 07, 2014, 06:04:53 PM

Well, I don't actually think of E:D as being an MMO either, no matter how open universe it is.

Look, the wolves in this case seem to be a just a bit right - if the switch to offline protects people from unwanted player interactions, then the open world will be empty of most PVP except for the people who are actively out looking for it. It will become Pirate Universe - and that seems a real shame. But I absolutely think the game should allow that switch that says "don't fuck with my shit."

I've yet to see an open-world type of game that allows open PVP where the life of a "murderer" is made harder than the life of a "law-abiding citizen." Piracy should be a risky business where the pirate is unable to get ship repairs, can't afford better ships and equipment than his prey, and is hunted by authority enough that just getting a full night's sleep is rare. That requires the robust structure of civilization. All too often, open world games don't have that structure of civilization, so the pirate is actually better off being a pirate than being a square. It's a mixture of the anonymity of the player killer, the lack of active law enforcement, the reluctance of anti-PK player organizations as well as the huge advantage of first strike in the game mechanics (whether that be from stealth or ambush). I'm speaking specifically about PK banditry or piracy, since that's the form of PVP we're talking about.

It seems PVP players like me want more war-style (two organized sides fighting) PVP and less bandit-style PVP (lone murderers mugging people). One of those should be encouraged, the other should be discouraged with game mechanics that make virtual life hard on a pimp pirate.

I think this pretty much gets it just right. Being a pirate should be the hardest thing that can happen in a world like this. The thing that most often has you living on the edge, scared of losing your stake, but in it for the thrill and the score. It should be like Firefly. Or like a lot of 16th-17th C. piracy. I was just reading the other day about a guy who was a pirate, a naturalist and an early scientist (his observations of tides and nature and environments were more important to him than the money he got, and he protected them more carefully in a tube he wore on his back). A lot of the time, he and his guys lost money or were at very serious risk of their lives. They were gnats buzzing around the edges of a big system. Every once in a while, they got the big score, but they were never safe or secure or rulers of the system.

If you want pirates and open-world PvP, that's what it has to feel like: the riskiest thing in the whole system, occasionally leading to great satisfaction, but most often to tears and failure.
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #464 on: August 08, 2014, 02:18:33 AM

I find it interesting that so many people characterize pro PvP players as 'never looking for fair fights' when the PvE players are exactly the same. They don't want to enter a fight they can't win, so they play versus the utterly predictable NPCs.

No we're not calling 'pro PvP players' (whatever that may be) that. I can't even remember anyone in this thread putting pro and PvP and player right next to each other. We're not talking about the 'let's all meet in Crossroads and do battle' crowd or the Arena crowd or the 'this universe is not big enough for both of our corporations' crowd etc.. We'tre talking about all of the low life griefers that PvP also attracts in large numbers. They are the bane of every PvP focused online experience, because it's easy, because the risk invoolved is negligable because it's 'fun' to grief players and get their reactions. The highwaymen of the online gaming world just without the risk of being shot or beaten to death by an angry mob. The people even pro PvPers wish would simply go away.

Look if I play Eve I know exactly what I get myself into and even that game evolved into an experience that tries to minimize the impact all of that background low-level griefing has on players. So even the players in one of the most successful PvP experiences out there (in a 'it's a dog eat dog, high risk and high rewards, every man for himself' way) basically said 'fuck this shit' and actively work against it. That is OK and occasionally fun and a testament of just how great gaming can be. It's just not what I look for in a game. That's why I no longer play Eve.

It kind of thwarts the theme of escapism and 'winding down' after a long day at work if online games are just 'work 2.0' where I still have to play a security guard or accountant and worry about taxes and bills and people mugging me in a dark alley.

Therefore I like it really really much that I can opt out of the whole thing. I therefore won't be bothered by it and I also won't be the guy that is constantly whining about it on the forums and trying to deprive PvPers of their way to play. I can play Elite like a single player game and I'm content with that.
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #465 on: August 08, 2014, 02:31:58 AM

Not really interested in getting into all of them, but a lot of you are using examples that just don't seem to 'fit' terribly well here.  It's almost like this is a FRPG MMO discussion rather than one about an extremely large universe with FTL travel.


Why? Because the galaxy might be so large that you might simply not encounter another player for days? Maybe, if not you'll get basically the same amount of low-life cockmunchers you have in every other online game.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #466 on: August 08, 2014, 03:59:09 AM

Yes, that's part of it certainly.  Also, having AI Police enabled on less dangerous star systems with a rising presence scale, also the ability to hit Hyperspace and get the Fuck Out Of Dodge.

I just don't see it following the usual 'Trammel' or 'Tarran Mill' pattern of hardcore I cannot Get Away I Need To Be Here Gankage.

Not unless, as previously discussed, Bad Development happens.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #467 on: August 08, 2014, 11:32:43 AM

Isn't it still like in the original? Where you can't jump or boost when there are other ships around or you are too close to a planet?
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #468 on: August 08, 2014, 11:35:06 AM

Yes, and different ships provide different amounts of "mass lock", depending of course on their mass.

Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #469 on: August 08, 2014, 12:30:45 PM

I find it interesting that so many people characterize pro PvP players as 'never looking for fair fights' when the PvE players are exactly the same. They don't want to enter a fight they can't win, so they play versus the utterly predictable NPCs.

 swamp poop

NPCs, won't someone think of their feelings?

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #470 on: August 08, 2014, 12:40:51 PM

I find it interesting that so many people characterize pro PvP players as 'never looking for fair fights' when the PvE players are exactly the same. They don't want to enter a fight they can't win, so they play versus the utterly predictable NPCs.

 swamp poop

NPCs, won't someone think of their feelings?

I don't think that was the point.
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #471 on: August 08, 2014, 01:27:34 PM

I'm pretty sure Ingmar hit it dead-on there.

But let me belabor it for you. 

-Classic "wolf" stereo-type is a sociopath that enjoys (or otherwise derives a sense of self-worth by) killing players that are unable to mount an adequate defense and are frustrated by that experience.
-WayAbvPar artfully skews comments from "wolf" to "pro PvP" because he's evil and derives pleasure from dropping one-line posts that seem to bring up a good point, but are really just word bombs.  Diabolically clever, honestly.  Kudos to you, sir. 
-He then posits a correspondence between players that that enjoy (or otherwise derives a sense of self-worth by) killing NPCs that are BY DESIGN unable to mount an adequate defense and are incapable of thought or feelings.
-Ingmar points out that his post is  swamp poop  because NPC are designed to suck and have no feelings.
-You fall into Way's trap.  How does that feel?  You were largely defenseless.  I'm betting he derived a sense of self-worth from this little forum tempest (ok, tempest is pure hyperbole, but I'm amusing myself here, cut me some slack).

Clearly Way is a forum "wolf" and a mod.  Just doesn't seem right.
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #472 on: August 08, 2014, 03:35:14 PM

Nothing meaningful in today's weekly newsletter, except that we'll get little ship models for sale soon.

Well, at least when David Braben sells you a ship for real money, it's a "real" ship.  why so serious?






Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #473 on: August 08, 2014, 07:17:55 PM

Beta is $75?!
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #474 on: August 08, 2014, 09:13:00 PM

It would be pretty rude to their backers to charge less for the beta than the cost of the Kickstarter tier that got people into beta. That's normally why these beta/early access things cost so much.

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Hutch
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1893


Reply #475 on: August 08, 2014, 09:37:56 PM

Wait for the Steam sale.

Plant yourself like a tree
Haven't you noticed? We've been sharing our culture with you all morning.
The sun will shine on us again, brother
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #476 on: August 09, 2014, 01:13:42 AM

What Ingmar said. Plus, Braben said multiple times he aimed for betatester "quality" over "quantity", meaning he wanted to keep the numbers of people into the beta low by inflating the price but at the same time making sure those who bought in were dedicated and hopefully less immature. That is why the first stages of alpha were 300$.

Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #477 on: August 09, 2014, 08:27:33 PM

Wait for the Steam sale.

That.

The rest makes sense. But only if you drink their kool-aid. Good on them, but man, might as well just say it's a closed beta. Keep the early adopters even happier in their investment instead of pretending to open the flood gates.
ajax34i
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2527


Reply #478 on: August 09, 2014, 09:04:55 PM

I find it interesting that so many people characterize pro PvP players as 'never looking for fair fights' when the PvE players are exactly the same. They don't want to enter a fight they can't win, so they play versus the utterly predictable NPCs.

I think you're right; none of the players are looking for fair fights, but the most fun games seem to be those where the developers only allow for strictly fair fights.  For example, it would be cool to be able to outfit my bulk transport ship as a flying fortress, and, to use the real world example, flying fortress planes were clearly vulnerable to fighter attacks, but did pose a threat to the attackers.  I'd love to see that in a game, and am disappointed by EVE's completely disarmed and very vulnerable transports.  If the devs give the wolves plenty of firepower to have fun and dominate, they have to let the sheep fortress up enough to have their "I survived" fun, too.  Fair fights all around: neither PVP'ers nor PVE'ers get what they want (no easy ganks, no guaranteed safety, outcome of encounters is chaotic).

Devs keep designing diminishing returns into their games, when in fact they should put in chaos theory.
Hoax
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8110

l33t kiddie


Reply #479 on: August 10, 2014, 10:15:26 AM

Not designing around pvp is stupid for this type of game, always has been always will be.

If you don't have pvp then "the world" must provide all the content. Problem is that the world cannot provide all the content because a) pve content is always too easy or too hard for the majority of players and b) pve content will always be consumed faster than it can be created.

ajax's point is a good one as is what people were saying about how murdering lawbreaker has historically been the easiest and most profitable profession in so many games. It would be nice to see game devs move away from those mistakes.

Designing systems that facilitate, fairer, more fun, more robust player interactions take a shitton more vision and balls than making a foozle factory for players to camp and kill. So considering how bad game devs often are at the foozle factory part its no surprise that the pvp stuff is often a big debacle.

A nation consists of its laws. A nation does not consist of its situation at a given time. If an individual's morals are situational, then that individual is without morals. If a nation's laws are situational, that nation has no laws, and soon isn't a nation.
-William Gibson
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #480 on: August 10, 2014, 11:12:57 AM

EDIT: Never mind.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 11:24:07 AM by DraconianOne »

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Stormwaltz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2918


Reply #481 on: August 10, 2014, 08:36:26 PM

If you don't have pvp then "the world" must provide all the content. Problem is that the world cannot provide all the content because a) pve content is always too easy or too hard for the majority of players and b) pve content will always be consumed faster than it can be created.

The world can provide all the content if the developers focus on creating systems that procedurally generate experiences rather than one-shot, hand-crafted, consumable content.

I typed a lot more, but fuck it: the TL;DR is that thanks to WoW, people have been brainwashed to think PvE = hand-crafted story. PvE can be GTA, or Skyrim, or Dwarf Fortress. Pathfinder Online's PvE mob escalation system is something I thought of nearly ten years ago, spinning my wheels on UO's abortive ecology and AC1's random spawn system.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2014, 08:39:19 PM by Stormwaltz »

Nothing in this post represents the views of my current or previous employers.

"Isn't that just like an elf? Brings a spell to a gun fight."

"Sci-Fi writers don't invent the future, they market it."
- Henry Cobb
Hoax
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8110

l33t kiddie


Reply #482 on: August 10, 2014, 09:58:37 PM

I play a good amount of ARPG's and fully appreciate procedural content and frankly consider it to be much more interesting than hand crafted shit that can only be interesting and new once.

But we are farther away from game devs creating a gameworld that fights back and lives and changes based on player inputs than we are on devs not fucking up pvp balance. Which is to say we don't seem to be close to either of them on a good day.

The first game that makes a good honest attempt at delivering such a system will have my money for sure. There once was a MMO that didn't get past concept art and design devblogs called Charr: The Grim Fate or something like that. I still remember it to this day because they wanted to create a world where the npc's were 90% from a hostile opposing faction that was at war with the human (PC) settler faction. It sounded amazing in theory but it was even less of a real game than Star Citizen is.

A nation consists of its laws. A nation does not consist of its situation at a given time. If an individual's morals are situational, then that individual is without morals. If a nation's laws are situational, that nation has no laws, and soon isn't a nation.
-William Gibson
Khaldun
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15157


Reply #483 on: August 11, 2014, 04:58:18 AM

God, yes, to systems that procedurally generate content. And to some NPCs with autonomous AI that has a Maslowe hierarchy of needs/objectives. Mix that in with some hand-crafted stuff and you can have a large world that feels perpetually fresh and surprising. But nobody seems to want to get anywhere near this.
palmer_eldritch
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1999


WWW
Reply #484 on: August 11, 2014, 07:05:40 AM

I'd like to be a space trucker, hauling bits and bobs from one star system to another in a laid back and leisurely way. And doing this in a universe with hundreds or thousands of other people doing their thing would be pretty cool. I'd also like to be fairly confident of not getting blown up, as long as I manage to dock successfully. Elite as a sort of flight simulator. And maybe there would be some sort of big battle somewhere and I could read about it on the intergalactic news while I was hauling stuff.
tmp
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4257

POW! Right in the Kisser!


Reply #485 on: August 11, 2014, 09:14:29 AM

I typed a lot more, but fuck it: the TL;DR is that thanks to WoW, people have been brainwashed to think PvE = hand-crafted story. PvE can be GTA, or Skyrim, or Dwarf Fortress. Pathfinder Online's PvE mob escalation system is something I thought of nearly ten years ago, spinning my wheels on UO's abortive ecology and AC1's random spawn system.
For that matter the original Frontier had procedural/random missions generated as one of its system, iirc.
DraconianOne
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2905


Reply #486 on: August 11, 2014, 01:45:43 PM

God, yes, to systems that procedurally generate content. And to some NPCs with autonomous AI that has a Maslowe hierarchy of needs/objectives. Mix that in with some hand-crafted stuff and you can have a large world that feels perpetually fresh and surprising. But nobody seems to want to get anywhere near this.

I might be missing something but what you're describing is what Frontier are trying to achieve with Elite. Obviously time will tell whether they succeed or not but here are their design overviews for

Background Simulation

Persistent NPCs

Injected events

And as for this:

Elite as a sort of flight simulator. And maybe there would be some sort of big battle somewhere and I could read about it on the intergalactic news while I was hauling stuff.

See Newsfeeds

How much of this all will be ready for release, I have no idea (sorry Falc, stealing your line here!)

A point can be MOOT. MUTE is more along the lines of what you should be. - WayAbvPar
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #487 on: August 12, 2014, 02:50:12 AM

Worth reposting the constantly updated list of stuff that will be added for launch, scheduled in about 6 months.


Also, relevant to the PvP discussion, here's some Devs words about PvP interactions in supercruise and interdictions.

Quote
- It certainly requires some level of player skill to interdict. Current intention is that the the defending player has multiple options to evade & avoid, otherwise if the interdiction is successful you both drop to normal flight with varying levels of disruption.
- Yes you can screw it up (or be defended against) & let the other pilot escape while you plummet.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2014, 02:57:38 AM by Falconeer »

apocrypha
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6711

Planes? Shit, I'm terrified to get in my car now!


Reply #488 on: August 12, 2014, 11:10:46 PM

Another episode of Witchspace Diaries. Testing a Hauler out in combat  awesome, for real

Still with the bloody audio issues too, driving us round the bend.

"Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1915.
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #489 on: August 16, 2014, 01:45:21 AM

Finally got around to play for a few hours last night.

It's already pretty fun and immersive even for a beta. It also has quite a learning curve. It took me three restarts until I successfully managed to pull off a docking maneuver. I had to watch a few youtube tutorials to get a feel for the controls (the manual is pretty basic at this point) and after the third jump between a few federation systems I got interdicted by three Kraits and died because I couldn't escape or kill them with my two measly pulse lasers on my sidewinder.

God is this game gorgeous though, even on lowest settings. 55 systems already feels to small, I just want to explore all of it. I'd also probably play it on the biggest display I could find or use a VR solution. This game just feels like you want it to play on an Oculus Rift. I'll also pretty much have to invest in a hotas system.

The interface is a bit clunky still but it's already got the original elite feel so I'm confident.

I love what they've managed to achieve though.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 70 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  Gaming  |  Topic: Elite: Dangerous  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC