Yes. Big DLCs like that have major problems, of course, as Odyssey showed:
1) They take up almost all the development funding while ongoing, so for the duration the existing game stagnates. The 2.5 years of Odyssey development had just one significant feature release to the live game (Fleet Carriers)
2) Because people have to buy them separately, they have to be
really good. Importantly, sales to long-term established players alone (aka the people who'll buy anything) are not sufficient to fund them. Pinning down the combination of sales projections and how long it will take to develop on an ED project that large is something Frontier are not good at.
I think it'd be pretty much a prerequisite for any new DLC of that nature:
- Frontier's series of three management sims all do well (PC2 has started reasonably strongly, JW3 should be a safe bet too)
- the current development strategy keeps ED income and new player recruitment strong throughout 2025-2027
- there isn't another general economic crisis
At that point they might have the cash reserves and risk appetite to give another ED DLC a go (which would probably mean targeting a 2029/2030 release). Anything goes wrong on any of that and at best it gets put back further.
1. Yes, the risk of stagnation is there, but if they learned from previous mistakes - there are ways to mitigate it to a degree. If Colonisation CMS game is good, and there is a new story/events/narrative, with minimal development it could pull through. Obviously only if initial preparation and development is there for Colonisation and narrative. maybe a new ship once/twice a year, or at least SRV.
2. Not only good, but also have features that would turn eyes towards it, otherwise there would be only insignificantly small chance to attract new audience. And again, if Frontier would learn from past mistakes (who is there or by hiring, consultants) projections and planning could succeed. I understand that it is a big if, and that there is a baggage of the past, but they've been doing really good lately, so it's a reasonable if.
Company has to do good, so there is no push and pull on resources, current and currently in development feature has to do good, hopefully there won't be a general economic crisis, hehe. All that is very reasonable, and why I've mentioned - Right now it looks like Elite is going back to good health. If that is to continue, eventually...
Not sure about the time frames, as it would heavily depend of a set of features, some longer, some easier, and if there any work toward something is happening with what is worked on currently. Generally - yes, don't expect anything game-changing happen this or most likely even the next year.
Powerplay hasn't. There are even a bunch of new Powerplay ship textures - simple ones, sure, but they look decent if you just want a plain colour which isn't beige and it'd be nice to have ships in your Power's colours - but you can't buy them.
The Thargoid war didn't get anything much either until the very end (with the "final attack" prebuilt ships)
FC Interiors have zero monetised customisation options
I'm not sure I can see what they could directly monetise with Colonisation, from what they've described so far.
Nothing on the engineering rewrite.
SCO+the 4 new ships is about the only thing they've directly tried to sell addons for.
I knew I should have put "during 2024" in there.
I wasn't present for all of 2024, but from what I've found - every big patch had something to sell. EA Ships, Paintjobs, Ship Kits. PP had these banners and a Mandalay. Engineers were rebalanced, and not a new feature, SCO is - but it's main meta function - was to make game more accessible and/or remove the part that pusher player away, and it was accompanied with pre-built ships. Then the main Thargoid event with more pre-built ships and Mk5, more PJs and Ship Kits.
Looks like everything that could've been monetized - was, never said all of it was good, heh
Frontier's income from the ARX store is tiny compared with the income they get from new sales of the base game. The free Ascendancy update and battle for Sol made Frontier considerably more money on new base game sales than all four early-access ships sold combined, by the looks of their latest investor presentation. It's maybe nice for them if they can monetise a feature further, but it's mostly irrelevant to whether the feature itself is going to be profitable to develop.
Yes, attracting new players to a B2P game do that, and Frontier did a great job at that. But since we already established that next B2P thing is long away - there is a need to make extra options for the revenue, as the pool of potential new players for a game with current features (without adding new major game-changers) is not limitless.
Ascendancy mostly attracted old players, while Battle for Sol - new, as it was that something that got out to a wider media and was cool/significant enough. But there is nothing like that left, as main features for that event were created years ago. Btw, there were a lot of posts/threads on forums, reddit, etc. with new and old players talking about pre-built ships they've bought to participate in the event. There were lots of them in the game. Both, attracting and monetising, work.
Plus every player who plays - cost money in monthly (or however they count) expenses. They are obviously experimenting with ARX and how to roll with it, in any way - it is a good revenue, with potential for more, and it is something that adds to the possibility of that bigger and better feature in the future, even if it is just by covering monthly expenses as a worst case scenario.
Of course, from any point of view - attracting new player to the game is the best thing and approach. But you need to attract them with something. There were two years to shoot titans, but only a Battle for Sol attracted these new players to join. In the immediate future - Colonisation could attract more. But then what? New ships - mostly for players who already playing. New big features require time/money. Event that could trump the "Earth under Attack" - don't know what it could be, as Thargoids or Guardians don't really mean anything to a wider audience of potential new players. All that is also one of the reasons to have that extra with ARX.
True, though if we're restricting consideration to NPC ships (so that it's not necessary to implement more than a few of them in the first wave), and we're assuming magic boot gravity because even the ship cockpits/bridges we can already see don't make much sense without it, the difference between "in space" and "on the ground" is mostly just what you can see out the windows, if any.
True. Magic boots has to be. But the point is - how would a player get to a NPC ship/wreck/derelict from their ship in space without going out of the ship and EVA? As the difference from a PoV of magic boots in space or on the ground doesn't exist, but the difference from a PoV of the player exploring a derelict in space with all appropriate interactions and on the ground with exactly how it is now - is huge. Interiors and corresponding systems/mechanics/interactions are just a stepping stone, something required, to get to what actually matters - gameplay. I really can't see how a "ground test" can provide a possibility to see if players like a possible gameplay of actual implementation of interiors as a space feature - that is something that can go further into boarding, etc., not what we can already do on the ground.
Basically, ground/crashed/abandoned ships could be used for initial modeling of the interiors, but for actual test of the feature and how players like it - it has to be in space.
"Boarding limpets", for ships in space
Very, very good! Now we're talking the same language, haha.
Yes, that would be very good to test things, and even some of the gameplay options (more than just scavenging) could be done to have a more accurate test for the feature. As the same limpets could be used for the rescue, once aboard there could be other activities (data, combat, sabotage) even if not initially, but gradually added.
I can see this approach working nicely. The only worry would be - it'll forever stay a "Black screen -> Blue circle", with all the consequent limitations for gameplay/interactions/etc.
("EVA" seems like the perfect "when we said ship interiors, we obviously actually meant ship exteriors" post-release disappointment rationalisation)
EVA is a mechanic to utilize being in space as a commander to the fullest, and to utilize every possibility for the gameplay ship interiors could provide - as the gameplay, interactions and immersion it provides - is the main thing why to do all that in the first place.
That was not in the KS description.