Petition to bring back the DDF/DDA and get back on track.

[Iskariot]

Petition to bring back the DDF/DDA and get back on track.
I, for one, raise my hand to petition FD to bring back the DDF/DDA and to USE it.
Who's with me?

I do not care much about the DDF.
I feel that FD will make the game it wants to and is also very capable of doing so and they also seem to keep an eye on the forums anyway and listen to what is said in the discussions, which of course is not the same as obediently doing everything everybody wants..

I also do not buy into the premise that FD is off track.
It might not be the track of some, but it is FD's track. They are the devs, we are not.
It is as simple as that.

 

[Sanderson]

I do not care much about the DDF.
I feel that FD will make the game it wants too and is also very capable of doing so and they also seem to keep an eye on the forums anyway and listen to what is said in the discussions.

I also do not buy into the premise that FD is off track.
It might not be the track of some, but it is FD's track. They are the devs, we are not.
It is as simple as that.

Fair enough. When did FD switch tracks then? Because the DDA used to be the path.

Apparently PP was our warning shot?

 

[Cody]

My thanks to you, sir.

If you fancy a read, the archive is here.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Fair enough. When did FD switch tracks then? Because the DDA used to be the path.

Apparently PP was our warning shot?

They didnt, it is and it wasnt.

 

[Sanderson]

They didnt, it is and it wasnt.

What game are you playing? I'd like to check it out as ED not even close to the DDA.

 

[Zplintz]

I do not care much about the DDF.
I feel that FD will make the game it wants too and is also very capable of doing so and they also seem to keep an eye on the forums anyway and listen to what is said in the discussions, which of course is not the same as obediently doing everything everybody wants..

I also do not buy into the premise that FD is off track.
It might not be the track of some, but it is FD's track. They are the devs, we are not.
It is as simple as that.

Have to agree.

I think to assume that having a DDF again at this stage would change the development path, would speed up development or indeed help in anyway is a naive (at best).

FD know what they want to do, they have a plan, know their budgets and staff abilities and are quite obviously keeping the details close to their chests (now) because they believe that is best for the game in the long term.

Whilst I enjoyed the DDF and would be happy to be part of one again - I don't see there being a great deal of point in it at this stage of development.

 

[Tinman]

If we get a single official response from FD that they are listening and/or care I'd be happy...

Come on FD! See! Just give him an answer and he'll finally be happy!

...to scour the entire DDA and list everything I think isn't in-game or is a shadow of it's DDA self.

Oh wait...so if they give you an answer you will go through the entire DDA point by point listing everything that isn't up to your standards!?

Forget what I said FD!

 

[Iskariot]

See you around! I just don't see the need for this thread. We received what we were promised. The DDF is still in play. People disagree with the implementation.

Indeed, people always will, whatever the devs do. There will always be incessant complaining.
For that reason alone I think the DDF is good as is. It is still part of the design process. Why would it not be?
And FD already acknowledged that they keep an eye on current forum discussions and they also listen to useful proposals.
But in the end it is their project.

 

[Roybe]

What game are you playing? I'd like to check it out as ED not even close to the DDA.

We are trying to tell you it is EXACTLY what is in the DDF...just not fully implemented.

You do not like the implementation. Point taken. Saying they are not following the DDF is incorrect. There has been no veering off the development path...just a veering off your desired path.

 

[Arindor]

Totally agree OP. Sentimentality and love of the original helped, but the DDF/DDA was one of the few reasons I signed up (and also, *cough* online *cough* ... <ducks and covers behind a settee>).

 

[Ian Skippy]

What game are you playing? I'd like to check it out as ED not even close to the DDA.

Ofcourse it isnt. Dda is an ultimate drram list that someday, in the far future, may happen. Or not. Expecting it all now is just silly, and saying fd is off track because it isnt all here yet is absurd. I advice getting to terms with reality. Or dont, it wont influence anything else

 

[Zplintz]

Come on FD! See! Just give him an answer and he'll finally be happy!



Oh wait...so if they give you an answer you will go through the entire DDA point by point listing everything that isn't up to your standards!?

Forget what I said FD!

http://i.imgur.com/LaJ9Kmo.gif

Hitting the nail on the head Mr T.


It also doesn't matter what was or was not in the DDF - FD never said that everything discussed or proposed was even going to be in Elite Dangerous, let alone fit the form of the DDF - it was a discussion, DDF members were invited to discuss and perhaps influence the FD Design Team, to provide ideas, opinions and sometimes point out game play/mechanics that FD had not thought of - nothing more.

 

[Stolas]

Sorry for the late post I was scanning the DDA/DDF link that was posted earlier in the thread. Sorry not the type to just +1 without any pertinent information, also means I am not the type to blast without pertinent information. <- ok the last statement was a bit of a stretch.

+1 on my part.

 

[ste]

I dont recall frontier saying they had abandoned it.

 

[Sanderson]

Come on FD! See! Just give him an answer and he'll finally be happy!



Oh wait...so if they give you an answer you will go through the entire DDA point by point listing everything that isn't up to your standards!?

Forget what I said FD!

http://i.imgur.com/LaJ9Kmo.gif

Nothing to add to the topic besides a feeble attempt at attacking me personally? Sad, even for you.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Nothing to add to the topic besides a feeble attempt at attacking me personally? Sad, even for you.

He is pointing out your 'logic' is flawed. That is not an insult, it is an argument. You're calling him sad, which is a personal insult.

 

[Sanderson]

Hitting the nail on the head Mr T.


It also doesn't matter what was or was not in the DDF - FD never said that everything discussed or proposed was even going to be in Elite Dangerous, let alone fit the form of the DDF - it was a discussion, DDF members were invited to discuss and perhaps influence the FD Design Team, to provide ideas, opinions and sometimes point out game play/mechanics that FD had not thought of - nothing more.

What was the point of the entire exercise if you intend to go a completely different direction? Perhaps the DDF's members will be able to use their almost god like powers to change the galaxy back to wat it was supposed to be in the first place?

If the DDF was a "wish list, just for fun if you give $500" I doubt anyone would have signed up for it. Indeed it wasn't sold as that.

FD has the right to make the game anyway they want to. As a backer and a paying customer I have the right to express my opinion, here or if necessary elsewhere.

If you don't agree with the "petition" say your peace and move on. No need to keep trying to get those that agree with the OP to change their minds now.

 

[Midian27]

If PP is FD's idea of what ED needed then yes, I'm all for other people making decisions because power play is a gigantic mess I want no part of.

 

[Sanderson]

He is pointing out your 'logic' is flawed. That is not an insult, it is an argument. You're calling him sad, which is a personal insult.

Oh, well thanks you two very much. Now you can leave the thread and go "compliment" other opinions you don't like.

 

[Tinman]

Nothing to add to the topic besides a feeble attempt at attacking me personally? Sad, even for you.

Now, where did that humor go?

Ok, how about this then?

The intention is that we'll be a bit more granular with what we intend looking at over the coming year. Some of that will be big announcements that will be handled in a suitable fashion, but also for the periodic updates to the game as the idea is to theme. Once the plan is a bit more solid and has been approved we'll share the bones of it.

Michael

Isn't that the Design Discussion forum?

That provides details on some of the design before implementation, but things change as they get implemented. It also doesn't say when a particular feature is planned.

Michael

Does this mean that stuff from the DDF will be implemented? Will we be getting persistent NPCs? A mineral scanner? A game that doesn`t feel like it was rushed out for Christmas?

Some of it will be, but there'll also be other things added.

Michael