Appreciate you posting this from your other thread, thank you. And yes, the background simulation is one of the biggest disappointments and not anywhere near the vision that was spun for the Kickstarter.
Just don't feel like logging in...
- Thread starter Altissimus
- Start date
Appreciate you posting this from your other thread, thank you. And yes, the background simulation is one of the biggest disappointments and not anywhere near the vision that was spun for the Kickstarter.
Sadly, you could be right. But its strange if thats the way its going to be.
Looking and the amount of cash SC can haul in on promisses alone, ED *could* haul in double if the finished product was any good. The market certainly seems to be there.
Badly implemented multiplayer killed the whole game with lame compartmentalized instancing design. It's like 1000 steps backwards from the open galaxy in the originals, the whole thing that made the games so awesome. Now we have a lame multiplayer game with weak design all over.
I agree that the forced multiplayer is the biggest problem. Its weird design decision since I'm getting the impression FD is not ready to really manage massive online galaxy in the meaningful/immersive way.
It was never designed to be "massive" in the online sense. 32 player instances in a huge galaxy made up of little compartmentalized pockets will never amount to anything but a limited pew, pew experience. Especially not if the player base starts dwindling due to lack of compelling content. On top of that, not everyone playing is even interested in multiplayer. Many people play solo. The game is all over the place and failing to satisfy either end of the player spectrum.
Good for you then. Games must be like human love, there's someone for everyone out there
Good luck with that one, it's probably the worst definition of "gameplay" I've encountered. It's a very broken element of ED, and frankly pointless. There was no thought to the design at all, I'd have had more respect if they didn't include it at all for now until it was sorted.
But they needed to check the feature box. See, see everyone! We have mining!
Ok Ziggy. So you don't want to add anything constructive to this thread. I'd rather keep this post on the rails.
I swear I've heard that one before. You can find the answer you seek if you explore my post history. Funny how people always take a dig at my username when arguments fail. It works like a little red flag triggering the inner bull of some people. But I can assure you that was never the intention to begin with.
Edit: If I did not care about the game getting more content and getting better, I would indeed just paddle off into the sunset. But I do!
I do like a lot of the core of the game. It just needs a massive amount of love to really become a game and not an empty shell housing the elusive dream of a game.
Last edited:
No argument
I used "argument" in the sense of argumentation against the proposition that mining as it stands is simply a minimum "checking the list" effort in terms of implementation. Excuse me if that wasn't clear. English isn't my native tongue, so sometimes I lack the finer nuances in my ramblings.My excuse is that I'm a blithering idiot
As am I! But I have to live with being me, so I tend to just look past the fact.
Something I have seen used to great effect in other software development (case in point the Renoise tracker software and I believe is now being used in Unreal engine development too) is a method of community involvement where the developer lays out a huge list of potential design concepts that are intended to make it into the project somewhere along the line and then polls the community to help a create a development priority list. It's a win/win situation. The community feels involved and the developers get to see easily where their customers would appreciate development focus without having to try to guess.
Didnt they do that with the DDF for Kickstarter ? Or it sounds broadly similar in concept. In any case, people here seem more concerned with flash like walking on planets and making it their version of 1984 than flesh. But it would be a good thing to suggest and at least see where it took Frontier and Elite Dangerous as a trial. My issue would be that it could easily turn into the adage "a camel is a horse designed by committee."
Yeah; that was the 'DDF'. Did that and still doing that.....
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure what you are trying to say, looks liek little more than an unprovoked and entirely unnecessary personal attack to me. But anyway, moving on...
The DDF was discussion around the design goals with the intent being to improve the design with community input. I am not suggesting that, I am suggesting polling (keyword there) the community to create a development priority list. No mention of discussing anything at all.
Example: Provide a survey to players listing design goals and invite players to number the top ten things they want to see in game as a priority with 1 being the highest. Collate the results and pick the top 5 responses to use in tuning the development process. Publish the top 5 results so the community knows what is going on. Once those 5 things are in-game poll again with remaining items. Hardly nonsense...
I tried that but the cat keeps interdicting me and griefing me about cat food!