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

I think we can at least agree on the following:


- The game should be taken in the general direction we think it should be taken in.

- We are all clear on what that general direction is.

- Currently the game is not taken in that general direction.

- It should be.

- The game should be developed the way we want it to be developed.

- We of course all agree on the way it should be developed.

- And of course we want everything yesterday.
 
Last edited:
from earlier today
Show me where prior to release Fd said the game will be released barebones or "unfinished" if you like. While you're at it, please direct me to anything that states a "10 year plan" BEFORE release.

We use quotes and provide references whenever waranted, we don't tailor words to fit our agenda, we use FD's words, quoted. Funny our "agenda" used to be FD's, and that's the problem init?

and then this now
Not at all. Quoting part of a financial statement and then trying to beg off crappy to no communications isn't worth my time.

so instead of having a somewhat formal argument you just demand quotes. you get quotes to counter the exact points you are making.

and then come back with a nonsense answer? given above what is worth your time?
 
I think that is where a lot of concern is coming from in regards to opening the game to new platforms and targeting them with content unrelated to the sandbox such as deathmatches. At a certainly point, it's feasible that the audience for the rail-track gameplay (death-match and powerplay) will exceed the size of the audience that wants the sandbox. Frontier have stated that their income from Elite is dependent upon selling copies of the game, so it makes sense perhaps, that they will target the larger audience. I've no idea if that is what is going to happen, or if that is what is happening. But I do know that Powerplay and CQC give that impression. We will just have to wait and see.

CQC in this case does not matter...as long as it has no effect on the BGS or PP.


PP on the other hand is a game play option to increase the chances of sandbox activity, since it is designed for the community to support or fight against Powers and has graceful exit mechanics for any Power. This means that players could help bring a Power into existence and keep it there if the storyline is strong enough....
 
You know that quote you have from Pecisk in your signature?

Well...*cough cough* :D:p

The only bit of what I said that is relevant to the signature quote is that the CQC addon is uninspired. I haven't played it so that IS speculation, I agree. However the idea, no matter the delivery, is still totally uninspired IMHO, compared to what we have undelivered in the old proposals.
 
Last edited:
i sadly sunk to those type levels, too. no wonder FDEV is not going to try and engage & manage such a grumpy outside source :eek:

I think you can put some of this down to a bit of futureshock among people / backers. While DDF was ongoing, I was reading the archive and painting the picture in my head, of exactly how I thought the game would look and play. I think most DDF members and backers would have been doing the same, but that doesn't mean that vision EVER exactly fitted with FD's vision, there all along.

The moment anyone sees a feature that wasn't discussed, suddenly that breaks the perception and almost inevitably, in the head, questions arise .. I was wrong, is this going to be the game I expected? In the absence of word from FD, although it's probably a mistake to give vent to unease, and hence spread panic, it's a pretty human thing to do.

Would be a shame if FD banished the DDF forever for it, but I guess we just have to accept at least for the time being, their managing their output, not just of the game, but of community interaction their way, and especially at times when there energies might be better spent elsewhere. Especially if they perceive a Hydra .. At one point KS backers were all there were but FD do have other customers now, too.

Doesn't mean that won't ever change but if FD go through a phases of shadowplay, doesn't even matter so much in practical terms if they never come back to DDF, and discussing design may be entirely inappropriate from here on in. Though of course, it would be a shame, both for the DDF and especially if the more unofficial incarnations of KS Backer group disbanded. I kind of pictured the same group in 30 more years time (maybe will have grown into those L size ""POLO"" shirts by then ;))

FD and fans, all fallible humans, even 1000 years from now, I bet it'll still be the case.
 
Last edited:
I think we can at least agree on the following:


- The game should be taken in the general direction we think it should be taken in.

- We are all clear on what that general direction is.

- Currently the game is not taken in that general direction.

- It should be.

- The game should be developed the way we want it to be developed.

- We of course all agree on the way it should be developed.

- And of course we want everything yesterday.

I don't agree about...ah wait...not being serious I see...

Carry on!
 
from earlier today


and then this now

so instead of having a somewhat formal argument you just demand quotes. you get quotes to counter the exact points you are making.

and then come back with a nonsense answer? given above what is worth your time?

Something that shows FD was honest with their customers an backers, besides a financial statement for shareholders. Whatever they said to their board is NOT what they were saying to us.
 
marketing 101. The less smart alecky answer is, 'Why didn't anyone ask what types of interactions would we be having with Tier 1 NPC's?' This is not legal loopholery. This is about whether PP is new or long thought out...I go with long thought out...and a buggy start.

Ah, you edited since my reply! *sigh* I fear you're still catastrophically missing my point. I'm not saying you're arguing a legal technicality; I'm saying you're arguing the equivalent of a legal technicality. To put it another way: there is no value whatsoever in trying to argue that PP was outlined in the DDA. It wasn't. Arguably, some of the component parts were, but not the substance of it, either explicitly, or philosophically; not the PP system itself. You're acting like an evil genie. Like someone wishes to never have to work again, and the genie puts them in a coma, then says they gave you exactly what you asked for!

- - - Updated - - -

I think we can at least agree on the following:


- The game should be taken in the general direction we think it should be taken in.

- We are all clear on what that general direction is.

- Currently the game is not taken in that general direction.

- It should be.

- The game should be developed the way we want it to be developed.

- We of course all agree on the way it should be developed.

- And of course we want everything yesterday.

So....much.....straw! I feel like I'm watching The Wickerman.
 
If there was general agreement about the DDF I wonder if it is vaguely possible to create an open source community created game that is comparable but with DDF ideas ? Perhaps it is just not possible to coordinate such a large project with unpaid people...
 
CQC in this case does not matter...as long as it has no effect on the BGS or PP.


PP on the other hand is a game play option to increase the chances of sandbox activity, since it is designed for the community to support or fight against Powers and has graceful exit mechanics for any Power. This means that players could help bring a Power into existence and keep it there if the storyline is strong enough....

It's sort of sidetracking this thread a bit, but I agree in principle that Powerplay has the power to do this. But I feel the progression based "fill the bars" based gameplay combined with hefty time-sinks are counter-intuitive to sandbox design. But that's just how I feel about it.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope it conveyed the message that a discussion like this is fundamentally pointless :).

The vast majority of discussions are fundamentally pointless unless all parties are open to having their opinion challenged and perhaps changed.
 
I hope it conveyed the message that a discussion like this is fundamentally pointless :).

Not at all. I guarantee it's got FD's attention. Whether or not it's good or bad attention we just don't know. I suspect FD would rather these type of threads didn't pop up but, then a lot of us would rather they had worked on DDA items instead of PP. At the very least it's certainly expressed what the majority of posters in this thread agree on and that is FD should bring back the DDF and adhere to the DDA as opposed to going in some other direction, like PP.

- - - Updated - - -

If there was general agreement about the DDF I wonder if it is vaguely possible to create an open source community created game that is comparable but with DDF ideas ? Perhaps it is just not possible to coordinate such a large project with unpaid people...

The DDF worked very well, IMO. Why FD decided to abandon it I have no idea.
 
Yes. Yes please. The ideas and mechanics described in the DDF are one of the main things that drew me to this game. What we have now is a ridiculously watered down, bare bones, overly conservative / cautious version of that. Let's have the real thing, and make E: D what it should be.
 
This shows that Frontier intend to take the game in the general direction they have told us about all along.

Really that isn't what I am too concerned about though. I'm more interested in how we will get there rather than if we will get there. And the big question for me is will Elite be the sandbox the Kickstarter spoke about, or will it be the rail-track gameplay we currently have?

that is a good question and open to personal interpretation. there are without doubt many players that like ED for the PP, there will be players that will LOVE the PVP ARENA on Xbox (i will buy one for the global ranking on that alone).

FDEV are also driven in by financial necessities such as the deferred income and the must 2014 launch. the transition from 3rd party publisher to self publish is huge, the change in the timing of income, what a gap to bridge. they must monetise assets fast, need to expand to other platforms, XBox alone has huge potential. once they have this up & running i expect calmer waters around here, with focus back on DDA topics and the next major steps aka planetary landing et al. i also expect & hope that the sandbox Elite is right here.

in my experience with mmo FDEV have been exemplary with patches & updates. lots has come in since december on the mirco level. of course if what you demand isn't there, there is a chance that you post threads like these. over time, they will continue to deliver though ^^
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: DJ
Yes. Yes please. The ideas and mechanics described in the DDF are one of the main things that drew me to this game. What we have now is a ridiculously watered down, bare bones, overly conservative / cautious version of that. Let's have the real thing, and make E: D what it should be.
This may not be the time or place but I'm glad you've immortalized me as the obnoxious forum user in your signature :D I believe I was complaining about the Python nerf at the time.
 
The DDF still contains good ideas, many of which have been implemented. But in general its now too out of date to follow slavishly.

Specific ideas though could still be implmemented, and for all anyone knows, they are still on the cards.

Personally i'm hoping the Orrery view still has a chance of being implemented before the next ice age :D
 
Back
Top Bottom