Deleted member 38366
D
--- Deleted ---
Last edited by a moderator:
"it will be one of the very rare times that a feature does not appear on PC or Mac first"
- Thread starter Agrar Therenus
- Start date
PC and MAC are the founding members of the Elite through the series since 84
...just ask some UbiSoft WatchDogs PC Players what they think of that statement
Woah woah woah.... calm down right there, like or hate FD it is not time to compare them to Ubisoft yet.
Damn Ubisoft, it's all their fault ... this timed XBox exclusive is Ubisoft's fault, I just know it [shakes fist at goats]
I'm less upset about a stupid deal to shaft KS backers and break promises than I am about them releasing what is basically a team deatchmatch arena in an MMO which will have no bearing on the fanfiction-tier GalNet story and will inadvertently break the game even further and add more grindy content.
I would much rather them expand on the content that is already there.
I would much rather them expand on the content that is already there.
...just ask some UbiSoft WatchDogs PC Players what they think of that statement
(Don't! You'll get torn to shreds.)
It happened more than once already and it's no secret to happen.
Thus, having an original PC lead platform and then getting ported onto Consoles always carries that risk. Remember these are ice cold business deals. $$$. Gamers play no role in these decisions. And the big-bucks Industry is a dirty business, never forget that.
If it happens with ELITE - I don't know.
So the recent GFX issues with Asteroid Fields FX going AWOL might be nothing...
PS.
Don't get me wrong - I want Console Players to get the optimum experience they deserve and pay money for. Nothing wrong with that.
But in the past, the PC platform too often suffered from being given certain "compatibility" elements (a.k.a. sneaky Downgrades) to the hardware-wise vastly inferior consoles.
It does make future development cross-platform alot easier - but comes at a price tag for the PCs losing quality along the way.
It's a common price you pay when you develop a Game for a platform that easily offers upto 10x higher performance and nearly free of less restrictions... onto a comparably small budget gaming platform like consoles full of special requirements.
I'll be REALLY happy if MS forces them to actually do some quality control and start releasing upgrades that don't have major bugs. this would be the ideal side effect of Xbox version.
I'm really tired of playing the "let's try to figure out what's working/what's not" game and what each patch that fixes something breaks something else. If MS can fix that, I'll be happy to sacrifice some "pretty" rocks.
Limiting the specs of your game to a lower common denominator rather than develop art and gameplay for several tiers of computing power simultaneously (especially a game you already know will sell more units on console than pc) is not the same as reducing the fidelity of an existing pc game to be closer to its upcoming console counterpart. Which is still not a thing that happens.
Last edited:
It's made...ish. It doesn't contain all the features that were mooted along the way though. It's also going off on tangents. If those features finally get into the game because of the extra money brought in, the great. If those features are excluded from the Mac or the PC because they can't be implemented on a console, well, that's another matter.
(OK, so apparently the Xbox controls have been contextualised to make them simpler for a controller, so can PC and Mac owners now get keybinds for everything, rather than having to use clunky menu based GUIs?).
Last edited:
Actually the kickstarters as well as alpha and beta buyers do have reason to complain when they were told they would get 1st access to any new content, so by them not getting this first that could be construed as brach of promise or false advertising
Last edited:
That wasn't promised to KS backers.. maybe alpha or beta testers, although I doubt they were "promised" anything in reality.
The Alpha & Beta testing was a pledge level reward for the game. Beta testing after the release of the game, is a privilege Frontier give us, which they don't have to.
Also, I don't own an XBox, so I can't in all good sense, beta test XBox content on a PC.
Read my updates before commenting.
I don't think you lot are fully realising also the growing trend of these stupid exclusive content/DLC deals-- just watch E3 to see a whole host of the foul things.
They are anti-consumer, because the ONLY purpose they serve is to exclude groups of audiences all for the sake 'company prestige'. It is completely ridiculous to think that having some timed content for a title is going to encourage people to switch platform. "There's going to be a couple of excuslive missions for AC Syndicate on Ps4; right, there's no point me owning an Xbox One or PC now-- I can still get the whole game on either of those platforms, but boy, all that matters is those couple of side-quests."
If any of you actually defend this then you are just company puppets, and should be dismissed off-hand.
Now that the stage has been set for this kind of thing-- don't you think that it's going to become something we'll see again (indeed, he already stated it).
I don't want PC to get content before Xbox, Mac and eventually Ps4. I think it's fair as paying customers that EVERYONE gets the content at the same time. Is that so difficult to understand?
Timed exclusivity is bad.
I don't think you lot are fully realising also the growing trend of these stupid exclusive content/DLC deals-- just watch E3 to see a whole host of the foul things.
They are anti-consumer, because the ONLY purpose they serve is to exclude groups of audiences all for the sake 'company prestige'. It is completely ridiculous to think that having some timed content for a title is going to encourage people to switch platform. "There's going to be a couple of excuslive missions for AC Syndicate on Ps4; right, there's no point me owning an Xbox One or PC now-- I can still get the whole game on either of those platforms, but boy, all that matters is those couple of side-quests."
If any of you actually defend this then you are just company puppets, and should be dismissed off-hand.
Now that the stage has been set for this kind of thing-- don't you think that it's going to become something we'll see again (indeed, he already stated it).
I don't want PC to get content before Xbox, Mac and eventually Ps4. I think it's fair as paying customers that EVERYONE gets the content at the same time. Is that so difficult to understand?
Timed exclusivity is bad.
Last edited:
I am a KS backer, and I agree with you.
You could have stopped at "Thank you", actually.
But, but, but ... The Cobra engine already has support for all sorts of different levels of details where you need to select appropriate levels for your hardware. No matter what people may say about the power of an XBox, it is essentially a PC, and has a spec higher than the minimum spec requirements for E: D. They don't have to change a thing, detail wise....just ask some UbiSoft WatchDogs PC Players what they think of that statement
(Don't! You'll get torn to shreds.)
It happened more than once already and it's no secret to happen.
Thus, having an original PC lead platform and then getting ported onto Consoles always carries that risk. Remember these are ice cold business deals. $$$. Gamers play no role in these decisions. And the big-bucks Industry is a dirty business, never forget that.
If it happens with ELITE - I don't know.
So the recent GFX issues with Asteroid Fields FX going AWOL might be nothing...
PS.
Don't get me wrong - I want Console Players to get the optimum experience they deserve and pay money for. Nothing wrong with that.
But in the past, the PC platform too often suffered from being given certain "compatibility" elements (a.k.a. sneaky Downgrades) to the hardware-wise vastly inferior consoles.
It does make future development cross-platform alot easier - but comes at a price tag for the PCs losing quality along the way.
It's a common price you pay when you develop a Game for a platform that easily offers upto 10x higher performance and nearly free of restrictions... onto a comparably small budget gaming platform like consoles full of special requirements.
Now, I accept that if FD were to start to trim those higher level details for some reason (not sure what that reason might be), then that would be a very bad thing.
Many of us are. Personally, I think they released the game before it was ready, and have been piling shiny stuff (or what the think we would think is shiny stuff) on top without doing the basic housekeeping stuff they need to do. Building on a foundation of sand is not a good idea. Even for a sand box game. I fail to see what the fuss is about, really. We knew they were working on an Xbox version. We knew it was going to come with an exclusive content deal (but not what that content might be). Why are we throwing toys out of prams now? I am absolutely fine with an exclusive content deal that brings in a pile of extra dosh (especially, I might add when the content is something I have no interest in).
Sure you could. Cobra is a cross-platform engine. I would be amazed if FD did not already have a PC build with it working being used for internal testing - we know they have been testing it for months. 'All' they would have to do is make that build available for beta testing. Remember this is not 'Xbox content' but multi-platform content available to all platforms the game runs on. Once they release it, anyway. Now, I have no expectation that we will get a PC beta to test, but it is not impossible.
Crowdfunding originally covered 1/5 - 1/4 of all financing needed for 1.0 (sans expansions).
So while backers input has been enormously important, this is really getting ridiculous. No, you didn't backed game enough to call the shots.
A game is made, certainly. But not really the game we were sold. So I can understand people getting irate about shiny new stuff that was said by FD to 'not be something we want in our game' appearing, without them doing all the stuff they sold us. Legally, I suspect we do not have a leg to stand on: FD never said, nor even hinted, that the game would be fully complete at release, indeed, they made it clear there would be free and paid content appearing later. So as long as the stuff arrives eventually, they will have satisfied their promise. If anyone sued for failing to deliver what the promised, all FD would have to do is say it is coming.
Nevertheless, asking for FD to deliver against their promises is not asking to be pandered to.
Last edited:
Cradle2Grave
Banned
Sorry. I had a hangover.
I don't think is is even close to as high as 25%. Last dev cost number I read was 8 Million, kickstarter was 1.5 Million (and revenue is over 17M).
Nevertheless, I think it IS fair to say that the game would not have been built without the kickstarter. Without that 'proof' that there was a market out there for the game, who knows if the IPO would have worked? Without that money (which funded most of the game) the game certainly would not have been built (or would have taken much longer to build).
I totally agree that as far as new features are concerned, the opinion of a kickstarter, even one who pledged a fortune, is no more important than someone who bought the XBox version at a discounted price last week. Nevertheless, I do feel that FD have an obligation (moral if not strictly legal) to deliver what they promised in the kickstarter to those that kickstarted it. I do not see that reminding FD of those promises is attempting to 'call the shots'.
Last edited: