Why not just insta-delete all posts that are not full of lavish praise altogether.
Oddyssey Abandoned In Favor of Colonisation
- Thread starter ozrix84
- Start date
If Odyssey had sold better - not to the "most loyal community" who'll buy anything, but more generally to the hundreds of thousands of other players - they'd probably have done more on that side.
But in terms of what the "community" actually responds to by playing the game more?
- Thargoid war: yes, at least for the first six months
- Engineering updates: yes
- Powerplay rewrite: yes
- extra Odyssey content: not noticeably
There's been changes and content for Odyssey in the Thargoid, Engineering and Powerplay updates, of course - and it's likely that Odyssey settlements will have a use in Colonisation too - but the community has spoken and is clearly not all that interested in the on-foot content.
Both Jurassic Worlds brought in more money in their first two years than Elite Dangerous managed in its first five. Four years of Planet Zoo brought in as much money as Elite Dangerous got in six. When the "side projects" each bring in more income in half the time for well under half the cost, the ED community may be loyal but that's not the same as large.
Meanwhile, in terms of ongoing spending, Elite Dangerous has had basically every pound it brings in reinvested into further operations and development for the last six years, while the various management sims instead produce large surpluses to fund new projects with.
Well, you know, there was a multi hundred million dollar movie franchise acting as free advertising material, so the fact the Jurassic World brought in more money than Elite Dangerous, which was arguably a niche game to start with isn't a surprise, that's not a good argument.
A much wider potential audience there as well, from children to adults.
Not sure they were side projects in any meaning of the phrase, but anyway that's how it rolls, ED is much more fitting for the description side project than either of those.
Not a good argument for what?
(No, really, what did you think I was arguing for where "yeah, and management sims have a wider audience and more franchising promotion" is a rebuttal rather than an extension of my point?)
Yes, that was my point (with "side project" being in quote marks to pick out its use in the original post) - at least in financial terms, ED is the "side project" kept going for sentimental reasons (though that is also of course an unfair characterisation of its importance to Frontier more generally)
Some evidence Ian? I've not been able to get that amount of financial detail from their published reports.
Haha, that wasn't supposed to be directed at you at all lol, I'm tired and just bollixed up my entire response to your posts, sorry! Better yet, just forget I posted at all, none of it makes sense in the way I responded!
I wonder how popular foot content would be if I also got drowned in cosmetics, ludicrous payouts, 'care' packs for doing foot stuff. 
I understand most of your other points and partly agree with the "Odyssey abandoned" sentiment (I would have loved on-foot thargs to show up!), but this is a point I have to disagree.
First, we don't know whether or not colonization will tie into the on-foot part, there is too little info for that, and I bet FDev don't even know themselves yet.
Second, if you say that PP2.0 doesn't integrate with on-foot, you have never played it. There are two important additions that make on-foot tie quite nicely into PP, even if there is not much additional game-play: power data and power goods. They have not been there before, and the connection to PP is clear and important. So much so, that I'd recon it to be a superb source of merits for many Odyssey players. Also don't forget that the most presented effects of PP on the game world are for on-foot scenarios: station cosmetics.
BTW: PP care packages always deliver on-foot mats, even if you play Horizons-only. Can be seen as a bug, but it demonstrates that the feature had on-foot content in mind from the get-go.
The spire stuff was the best new content Elite has done in years while also having elements of odyssey. It should be a blueprint for other stuff.
Odyssey content probably is the least engaged with, except for exobiology which people do for the money, not because they find it intrinsically fun. To fix that they'd also need to fix the FPS/shadows issues, jank with disembarking, C&P, multiplayer desyncs and possibly other stuff on top of adding the new stuff that would attract players.
Asking for new odyssey content is kinda legitimate now that it's been out for a few years, but the same goes for new space (combat) content and most other forms of content that don't rely on fixing a bunch of bugs first.
The investor presentations are the source for per-product earnings. From 2024:
- https://frontier-drupal.s3-eu-west-...ntier-FY24-Financial-Results-Presentation.pdf (graphs on pages 4 and 5)
- https://frontier-drupal.s3-eu-west-...rontier-fy24-interim-results-presentation.pdf (graphs on pages 13 and 14)
I am sure a lot of people do it for the money indeed, new players specially, but once you hit that first 50b the credit hunt just doesn't seem so urgent anymore. Now arguably it's not the fastest way to make money, but it is the easiest and safest way, so if people are looking for relaxing money making with little or no danger then exo is the way to get. It's rare for me to drop in for bio scanning these days, I will always drop in for new codex entries though.
I thought the Spires were on atmospheric worlds so were entirely Odyssey.
I and doubtless others find exobiology fun that it pays well is nice but I enjoyed it and was doing it before they changed the payments.
It would be nice if there was more non mission stuff to do in Odyssey.
Yes but making unfounded claims about a part of the game not even released yet is less legitimate even if it is good click bait.
I for one appreciate the sweet buttery irony of me hoping for years that they’d start allowing ship activities to give Odyssey mats and vice versa so each world wouldn’t be totally partitioned from the other…followed by PP 2.0 care packages showering me with Odyssey mats to the point where I’m having to sell them just to make room. “Let me earn more of the things! No, not that much more of the things!”
Hi
I understand what you're saying, yes...it makes one wonder, though quite a few players (me included I think at some point), have suggested something like this would be an interesting gameplay feature. There again, other (I won't say promised though it was hinted at) players would also like to experience a more detailed planets feature, clouds, water etc. etc. that sort of thing, which again I've also expressed my hopes that these other features could be expanded upon.
I'm wondering whether, for example that the concept of Colonisation is / was easier to apply to the game than more detailed atmospherics or planet topography, or even the other items you mention.
...I wouldn't have the foggiest, I just try and play the damn thing!
Seriously...It does make one think what direction Frontier are hoping to achieve with Colonisation...we'll eventually get to see this next year so I'm hoping it's going to be a positive step, there might be other aspects (hopefully in a good sense) that's not immediately apparent at the moment so...
Yep, I've got to agree on this one. As some other posters have pointed out (and the OP) there's quite a few areas of the game currently that need a bit of 'tidying' up, which to my way of thinking isn't going to do the Colonisation project many favours if left unattended when it's initially released.
I'm a realist in as much as 'our' game goes...it is after all a joint effort between the developers and perhaps the more dedicated players amongst us. I don't mean what I'm about to say in any derogatory sense, far from it, but from the very nature of the game design and implementation the gameplay here, and gameplayers (and not to mince words) are never really out of the 'beta / gamma stage'...at least that's my own personal view.
It just stands to reason that....
(just trying to think of a good description) Ah! got it!..."it's no good thinking that you should have drained the swamp when you're up to your A*** in alligator's"
That's it really, I'm under no illusions that Colonisation is going to be bug free on launch, so any other outstanding bugs is just going to compound the situation, it's not needed, so correct the game as much as possible before introducing a plethora of other 'programming glitches'.
It's a possibility, errm......but Frontier haven't mentioned that aspect in any of their recent livestreams, as far as I'm aware?...though it would be a nice surprise if that should be another new featured part of Colonisation.
Jack
I understand what you're saying, yes...it makes one wonder, though quite a few players (me included I think at some point), have suggested something like this would be an interesting gameplay feature. There again, other (I won't say promised though it was hinted at) players would also like to experience a more detailed planets feature, clouds, water etc. etc. that sort of thing, which again I've also expressed my hopes that these other features could be expanded upon.
I'm wondering whether, for example that the concept of Colonisation is / was easier to apply to the game than more detailed atmospherics or planet topography, or even the other items you mention.
...I wouldn't have the foggiest, I just try and play the damn thing! Seriously...It does make one think what direction Frontier are hoping to achieve with Colonisation...we'll eventually get to see this next year so I'm hoping it's going to be a positive step, there might be other aspects (hopefully in a good sense) that's not immediately apparent at the moment so...
Yep, I've got to agree on this one. As some other posters have pointed out (and the OP) there's quite a few areas of the game currently that need a bit of 'tidying' up, which to my way of thinking isn't going to do the Colonisation project many favours if left unattended when it's initially released.
I'm a realist in as much as 'our' game goes...it is after all a joint effort between the developers and perhaps the more dedicated players amongst us. I don't mean what I'm about to say in any derogatory sense, far from it, but from the very nature of the game design and implementation the gameplay here, and gameplayers (and not to mince words) are never really out of the 'beta / gamma stage'...at least that's my own personal view.
It just stands to reason that....
(just trying to think of a good description) Ah! got it!..."it's no good thinking that you should have drained the swamp when you're up to your A*** in alligator's" That's it really, I'm under no illusions that Colonisation is going to be bug free on launch, so any other outstanding bugs is just going to compound the situation, it's not needed, so correct the game as much as possible before introducing a plethora of other 'programming glitches'.
It's a possibility, errm...
...but Frontier haven't mentioned that aspect in any of their recent livestreams, as far as I'm aware?...though it would be a nice surprise if that should be another new featured part of Colonisation. Jack
Quite a few comments here about "balancing priorities" and what constitutes a minimum product but none of them mention a very important dimension here: on-foot Odyssey content is more difficult to develop than Horizons content.
The Settlements gameplay is an example of where FDev simply ran out of resource, focus, and possibly talent, and a lot of the storytelling needed to make those game loops appear deeper than a teaspoon was simply not done at the time. And then they ran into a ton of issues with FPS on the surface because that is a hard problem. And then they just got to a point they elected to ignore both problems, I assume because the options of the ED development stream were VERY resource limited.
And then they dropped some resource. And continued with the Thargoid programme at the original pace (I'm going to assume that is a bit different though, as a lot of that content was likely already built so they "only" had to manage the release of it.)
So when you are asking "how do FDev decide what to do next" you have to understand that doing anything in the Odyssey space is hard and the default will therefore always be away from that; and this year in particular they simply didn't have the resource to hit their own timetables even on this non-Odyssey content. So there was zero chance of you getting on-foot asset-heavy Odyssey-only content; not least that it would put everything new and interesting behind the Odyssey-only paywall. (And then everyone would be on this forum complaining that they did that.)
None of this explains why they then built PP 2.0 to be similarly complicated in terms of gameplay logic, which has led to multiple really very obvious quality escapes and zero bandwidth to fix them. I can only assume there is a 2025 bunch of stories coming that need that complex logic.
TL;DR it is not "Odyssey v non-Odyssey" 50/50 for the same resource, but a lot of you in this thread have been talking as if they could do either with equal facility. That's simply not true. New Odyssey content would be harder and more expensive than PP 2.0 by a long chalk, even if you assume the Odyssey game engine is free of tech debt.
The Settlements gameplay is an example of where FDev simply ran out of resource, focus, and possibly talent, and a lot of the storytelling needed to make those game loops appear deeper than a teaspoon was simply not done at the time. And then they ran into a ton of issues with FPS on the surface because that is a hard problem. And then they just got to a point they elected to ignore both problems, I assume because the options of the ED development stream were VERY resource limited.
And then they dropped some resource. And continued with the Thargoid programme at the original pace (I'm going to assume that is a bit different though, as a lot of that content was likely already built so they "only" had to manage the release of it.)
So when you are asking "how do FDev decide what to do next" you have to understand that doing anything in the Odyssey space is hard and the default will therefore always be away from that; and this year in particular they simply didn't have the resource to hit their own timetables even on this non-Odyssey content. So there was zero chance of you getting on-foot asset-heavy Odyssey-only content; not least that it would put everything new and interesting behind the Odyssey-only paywall. (And then everyone would be on this forum complaining that they did that.)
None of this explains why they then built PP 2.0 to be similarly complicated in terms of gameplay logic, which has led to multiple really very obvious quality escapes and zero bandwidth to fix them. I can only assume there is a 2025 bunch of stories coming that need that complex logic.
TL;DR it is not "Odyssey v non-Odyssey" 50/50 for the same resource, but a lot of you in this thread have been talking as if they could do either with equal facility. That's simply not true. New Odyssey content would be harder and more expensive than PP 2.0 by a long chalk, even if you assume the Odyssey game engine is free of tech debt.
Clearly it won't come with Colonisation on release, but I think at some point in 2025 there's now a better chance of more planetary types appearing. It makes some sense to allow greater amounts of types planets to be colonised and to increase exploration.Hi
I understand what you're saying, yes...it makes one wonder, though quite a few players (me included I think at some point), have suggested something like this would be an interesting gameplay feature. There again, other (I won't say promised though it was hinted at) players would also like to experience a more detailed planets feature, clouds, water etc. etc. that sort of thing, which again I've also expressed my hopes that these other features could be expanded upon.
I'm wondering whether, for example that the concept of Colonisation is / was easier to apply to the game than more detailed atmospherics or planet topography, or even the other items you mention.
Seriously...It does make one think what direction Frontier are hoping to achieve with Colonisation...we'll eventually get to see this next year so I'm hoping it's going to be a positive step, there might be other aspects (hopefully in a good sense) that's not immediately apparent at the moment so...
Yep, I've got to agree on this one. As some other posters have pointed out (and the OP) there's quite a few areas of the game currently that need a bit of 'tidying' up, which to my way of thinking isn't going to do the Colonisation project many favours if left unattended when it's initially released.
I'm a realist in as much as 'our' game goes...it is after all a joint effort between the developers and perhaps the more dedicated players amongst us. I don't mean what I'm about to say in any derogatory sense, far from it, but from the very nature of the game design and implementation the gameplay here, and gameplayers (and not to mince words) are never really out of the 'beta / gamma stage'...at least that's my own personal view.
It just stands to reason that....
That's it really, I'm under no illusions that Colonisation is going to be bug free on launch, so any other outstanding bugs is just going to compound the situation, it's not needed, so correct the game as much as possible before introducing a plethora of other 'programming glitches'.
It's a possibility, errm...
Jack
Then again I'm usually wrong so you can forget it
Hi
Is there any specific reason why you won't be doing colonisation?...I'm just curious.
Just as an explanation why I was curious, I don't participate much at all with the recent Thargoid features, but obviously the feature does figure a very small amount in my gameplay, I can't give you a specific reason why (Apologies to the Frontier Devs!
) I would rather interact with Thargoids (as a race) in a more constructive manner. I like some combat, but it's got to have some genuine / interesting purpose...sort of.
I like walking around some of the time on planets, or in the station concourse areas to deliver bio data or other trade / exploration centric stuff...or sometimes just to look around and experience the stations graphical features or just the general interaction. I don't participate in ground combat much at all either, so horses for courses...there's plenty of other stuff that interests me, so it's more than ok!
I'm looking forward to Colonisation, I'm thinking it should interest me as I like making a personal mark in the game galaxy. Whether it's what I'm expecting and what it actually is, is another matter!
Jack
Is there any specific reason why you won't be doing colonisation?...I'm just curious.
Just as an explanation why I was curious, I don't participate much at all with the recent Thargoid features, but obviously the feature does figure a very small amount in my gameplay, I can't give you a specific reason why (Apologies to the Frontier Devs!
) I would rather interact with Thargoids (as a race) in a more constructive manner. I like some combat, but it's got to have some genuine / interesting purpose...sort of. I like walking around some of the time on planets, or in the station concourse areas to deliver bio data or other trade / exploration centric stuff...or sometimes just to look around and experience the stations graphical features or just the general interaction. I don't participate in ground combat much at all either, so horses for courses...there's plenty of other stuff that interests me, so it's more than ok!
I'm looking forward to Colonisation, I'm thinking it should interest me as I like making a personal mark in the game galaxy. Whether it's what I'm expecting and what it actually is, is another matter!
Jack
System Colonisation (SC) could be great if it has enough depth and customization. It should be more than grind commodities and place facilities. This feature could bring all the player careers together, increase cooperation and competition. It also adds depth to the "end-game" phase which is currently Fleet Carriers and highly engineered ships.
I don't know what you were promised but Fdev has delivered most Kickstarter goals by now. Exceptions are ship interiors, offline mode, hunt wild game. Braben mentions interiors in the ED Development Plan video (14 Dec 2012).
Seconded. They should release another DLC / Expansion with new planet types, because that's what lots of players want. To land there would require a Planetary Approach Suite (DLC). The DLC could include more on-foot activities and new facilities (colonization). I guess they'll keep selling new ships (maybe other vehicles) for ARX in the coming years.
Last edited:
Every time I read someone complaining about Odyssey's lack of integration with the game have either forgotten or never experienced the opposite criticism levelled at Frontier for the previous paid expansion - Horizons.
It's a valid criticism, however it demonstrates that sometimes no matter what Frontier does people will complain.
Horizons added (among other things) synthesis and engineering, and those people who did not pay for the upgrade could not access those enhancements, but were still playing in the same universe with, and importantly against, players who had access to very powerful upgrades. That time the very valid criticism directed towards Frontier was effectively how integrated the new expansion was.
I think I prefer the choice Frontier made with Odyssey. The separation of gameplay features means that people who choose not to upgrade (or cannot), suffer no disadvantages.
It's a valid criticism, however it demonstrates that sometimes no matter what Frontier does people will complain.
Horizons added (among other things) synthesis and engineering, and those people who did not pay for the upgrade could not access those enhancements, but were still playing in the same universe with, and importantly against, players who had access to very powerful upgrades. That time the very valid criticism directed towards Frontier was effectively how integrated the new expansion was.
I think I prefer the choice Frontier made with Odyssey. The separation of gameplay features means that people who choose not to upgrade (or cannot), suffer no disadvantages.