Please don't reinvent the wheel.

[Armour]

In other words,

Where "other" = "totally wrong"

the suggestion forum and other suggestion threads are really just a way of venting our frustrations and isn't even being taken seriously. The ONLY reason we got the debug camera was that people paid extra for their paint jobs and wanted to see it themselves (as you would). Any other suggestions you may have are going to be binned along with the rest of the trash.

Yes, because when the backers lobbied for the inclusion of Supercruise, rather than in-system jumps as the original design specified, the developers said "you'll get what you're given and like it". That's why Supercruise was never implemente...oh.

 

[bAdbUd]

I hadn't thought about it that way. I apologize for thinking otherwise.

I just recently noticed I can control the station menu with my joystick's hat that's bound to vertical / horizontal thrust, and trigger is enter. Hats off to the brilliant design

Have to disagree with this for the following reasons:
1) Magic dividends to pay wingmen to protect a trader - just so its "easier" to quickly group up and share profit - kills any would be in game immersion from trying to find security ships that are willing to undercut another security ships protection costs, never mind the fact that were supposed to believe a station is willing to pay over the odds for your goods just because you travelled there with 3 other people in your wing....How and Why does this make any difference to the station buying your good? McDonlads don't charge me less for my meal because I have passengers in my car do they?
2) debug camera instead of camera drone - nothing kills immersion more than flying ethereal cameras that don't actually exist.
theres probably more that I cant think of off the top of my head atm too.

I'm sorry if this sounds very negative it's not intended to. But, There's always a But.

Every single forum posting I've read of your's has ALWAYS been negative, against FDEV, Against the OP. Against mostly anything anyone else says.

I have never read a positive post by you!

NOTE:
I don't use the word NEVER lightly, which is why I stated, posts that I've read.

 

[The.Doover]

+1, even as a pc-only gamer: please never ever add mouse support for the pilot interface. It's amazing how it is.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



+1, even as a pc-only gamer: please never ever add mouse support for the pilot interface. It's amazing how it is.

Yep, agreed it's awesome. After a while, it's quite impressive how you find yourself flipping through menus, as naturally as breathing... with the added bonus I can play on my sofa if I want

 

[AndyC77]

In another thousand years we will probably have a full network neural interface technology that will meld our bodies with our ships which we will control with our thought alone. There would be no need for a mouse, or buttons or any physically interfaces whatsoever. But designing a game along the same lines is impossible.

Frontier approach is 100% correct in a my opinion.

Sorry to break it to you like this but its most likely the human race won't be here in a thousand year.

 

[Iskariot]

No it wasn't. It was designed to be used without a mouse, that's all. More specifically we didn't want you using an operating system interaction method to control the ship's functions when you're supposed to be pretending to be a pilot handling a ship with a bunch of HOTAS like controls. Thus everything was designed to be done through HAT switches and buttons. We did not want a mouse cursor on top of the screen in space flight as that's the exact opposite of how a pilot in this universe would interact with their ship.

And I am glad you guys did it this way. I especially invested in a new HOTAS for the sake of immersion. Your design works!

Having said that I would not mind a few tweaks here and there.
- A rear view cam, like we had in Frontier would be nice for example.
- I also like op's suggestion of displaying the number of jumps left in a planned chain.
- I also would like to be able to store my current trade route so I do not always need to go in the universe map.

 

[steevaavoo]

Tell me, when did you get back from the future?

OSD with touch/mouse cursors? Why not?

Tell me, when did you write a better game with a better control mechanism. Also, when were you announced as the canon authority on the Elite Dangerous universe? (Which is what I believe Mike is referring to here) - seriously dude, if you wrote a better game I have £50 here and it's all yours.

Forgive me (or not, I honestly don't care), but this attitude that is repeatedly given to the developers who are working on a game that is their passion, who spend many of their waking hours on creating something that many of us quite enjoy, frankly sucks.

I'm not normally one to bother arguing, and I'm sure the developers can stick up for themselves, or ignore such vitriolic nonsense, but for the love of all that is fun - stop it.

I may have totally gotten the wrong end of the stick here - if so, I am genuinely sorry, I truly meant no offence.

If, however, I'm bang on the money, the above sentence is an example of respect.

 

[Gogster]

Tell me, when did you write a better game with a better control mechanism. Also, when were you announced as the canon authority on the Elite Dangerous universe? (Which is what I believe Mike is referring to here) - seriously dude, if you wrote a better game I have £50 here and it's all yours.

Forgive me (or not, I honestly don't care), but this attitude that is repeatedly given to the developers who are working on a game that is their passion, who spend many of their waking hours on creating something that many of us quite enjoy, frankly sucks.

I'm not normally one to bother arguing, and I'm sure the developers can stick up for themselves, or ignore such vitriolic nonsense, but for the love of all that is fun - stop it.

I may have totally gotten the wrong end of the stick here - if so, I am genuinely sorry, I truly meant no offence.

If, however, I'm bang on the money, the above sentence is an example of respect.

Well you certainly have got the wrong end of the stick.

I'm neither for or against mouse cursor control, my comment was about dismissing usability over "that's how we saw the game," sometimes, in my work, I believe I have the perfect solution, only for clients and stakeholders to change all that and demand a different approach. This changes your way of approaching users. You learn to listen to their suggestions and evaluate them, you may not see the intrinsic value, but they do.

 

[Vincent Starson]

I'm sorry if this sounds very negative it's not intended to. But, There's always a But.

Every single forum posting I've read of your's has ALWAYS been negative, against FDEV, Against the OP. Against mostly anything anyone else says.

I have never read a positive post by you!

NOTE:
I don't use the word NEVER lightly, which is why I stated, posts that I've read.

I'm sorry that you feel that way. Not all of my posts are negative, and I'm not sure why you see my post as negative there. I was apologizing for my earlier criticism of the UI and complimenting the UI at the same time.

Positive posts are often ignored, see my thread here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=122353
and I had one successful positive thread here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=117019

 

[Narius Cen]

No it wasn't. It was designed to be used without a mouse, that's all. More specifically we didn't want you using an operating system interaction method to control the ship's functions when you're supposed to be pretending to be a pilot handling a ship with a bunch of HOTAS like controls. Thus everything was designed to be done through HAT switches and buttons. We did not want a mouse cursor on top of the screen in space flight as that's the exact opposite of how a pilot in this universe would interact with their ship.

It works for the most part, but could use a couple of tweaks to improve flow between the various interface screens (mainly the maps).

 

[Tryst]

Yes, because when the backers lobbied for the inclusion of Supercruise, rather than in-system jumps as the original design specified, the developers said "you'll get what you're given and like it". That's why Supercruise was never implemente...oh.

You contradicted your own statement. BACKERS! Now that the game doesn't require backers any more, they can do what they like. Other players like me are just people who bought the game as-is, so our voice means nothing. Now, instead of creating more content to flesh the game out more and debugging the stuff they already have, they are concentrating on porting it to Xbox and PS4 so we can have loads of console kiddies playing. If you think complaints on the forums are bad now, wait till they arrive.

There have been a few empty promises like the single player offline version that never happened. I personally wouldn't care if it didn't update from the online version, I never wanted an online game and bought the game purely for the offline version that I found out would never happen. A pseudo server that could never go online to become a multiplayer version would suit us fine so long as we can play offline, just release the compiled server code with the IP fixed to 127.0.0.1 so it can't act as an online server. But considering that, 10 years ago DB broke his promise for the Elite 4 release (remember The Elite Club web page?), it shouldn't really surprise me that he's done it again.

 

[ixobelle]

just release the compiled server code with the IP fixed to 127.0.0.1 so it can't act as an online server

torrent/piracy is why this isn't done.

 

[Fangrim]

This has probably already been said, but the "show how many jumps left in route" has already been added in 1.2

Where exactly do you see this info?

The only way I can find is to manually count the amount of jumps, by following the line in the Galaxy Map.

 

[Sanderson]

Because that's not how we wanted the Elite future to be like.

Epic/micdrop

 

[MahdDogg]

No it wasn't. It was designed to be used without a mouse, that's all. More specifically we didn't want you using an operating system interaction method to control the ship's functions when you're supposed to be pretending to be a pilot handling a ship with a bunch of HOTAS like controls. Thus everything was designed to be done through HAT switches and buttons. We did not want a mouse cursor on top of the screen in space flight as that's the exact opposite of how a pilot in this universe would interact with their ship.

That's it folks, nothing to see here. Move along, move along, we'll be putting cold water on the burn shortly.

+ A Bajillion Rep.

Yes, that is totally a number.

 

[Goilveig]

I'm neither for or against mouse cursor control, my comment was about dismissing usability over "that's how we saw the game,"

Not having mouse cursor control over the UI is good usability. Forcing the user to change input devices to accomplish tasks is not usable.

About the only major thing I don't like with the UI is the lack of speech to text in the communications system (to 'type' hands free), although I understand licensing fees could be prohibitive.

 

[Gogster]

Not having mouse cursor control over the UI is good usability. Forcing the user to change input devices to accomplish tasks is not usable.

About the only major thing I don't like with the UI is the lack of speech to text in the communications system (to 'type' hands free), although I understand licensing fees could be prohibitive.

You have misread too. I'll avoid chastising you and risk another warning from Judge Moderator. I said "I'm neither for nor against", that said I'll pick you up on your "good usability" comment. "Good usability" is often achieved by giving users choice, not by restricting it.

 

[Armour]

BACKERS....empty promises...offline...never wanted an online game...10 years ago..

Supercruise wasn't even proposed until well after the Kickstarter campaign was ended (this post from the DDA seems to be the first inkling that intra-system jumps were not as desirable as the devs thought). So the BACKERS had already done their job, the total was met, the campaign was over, and their suggestions could henceforth be safely disregarded in favour of the dev team's own. Except some of them weren't...which contradicts your conception of them as slick, uncaring hucksters.

Anyway, more importantly...you were waiting for DECADES, yet you couldn't be bothered to pony up the dough to become a backer? Sounds fishy. And, given that you never wanted an offline game, why didn't you quietly pass your account on to someone who might want it, and move on to other games instead, games made by trustworthy folks like Ubisoft, EA, or something by Peter Molyneux, perhaps?

 

[Mu77ley]

"Good usability" is often achieved by giving users choice, not by restricting it.

I refer you to this old post by Mike Evans: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=36280&page=2&p=692803&viewfull=1#post692803

 

[TheEponymousBob]

I'm sorry that you feel that way. Not all of my posts are negative, and I'm not sure why you see my post as negative there. I was apologizing for my earlier criticism of the UI and complimenting the UI at the same time.

I don't believe that was directed towards you, but rather RingoD123 who was also quoted in bAdbUd's post. I think he was agreeing with you.

You contradicted your own statement. BACKERS! Now that the game doesn't require backers any more, they can do what they like. Other players like me are just people who bought the game as-is, so our voice means nothing. Now, instead of creating more content to flesh the game out more and debugging the stuff they already have, they are concentrating on porting it to Xbox and PS4 so we can have loads of console kiddies playing. If you think complaints on the forums are bad now, wait till they arrive.

Last sentence (arguably) aside, every word of the above is demonstrably false.

 

[Sanderson]

I shouldn't have popped in and said that but, in my defense, that was an Epic/Micdrop moment. No offense towards any single person intended though