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

JeffRyan · Jun 24, 2015

AnnuverScotinExile said:
The name originally had Decision, yes. I don't think the description ever suggested that we would decide anything, though.

I only joined so Michael Brookes would talk to me, but he never did

Ralph Vargr · Jun 24, 2015

Please insert $1,000,000,000,000 USD into slot for a playable game.

steevaavoo · Jun 24, 2015

AnnuverScotinExile said:
I prefer to put it down to a mistake, because otherwise it implies things about FD that I still hope are not true. You can understand why posters who do not believe it was an accident are using the 'bait and switch' phrase.

Yes indeed - whenever there's an option, one should choose to believe the one that gives the better feeling.

I truly do think that and I deeply respect anyone who can do it. Does wonders for the digestive system.

Therefore I tip my hat to you. Do excuse me, I'm seeing "Condition Red" on the Amiga...

Arjin · Jun 24, 2015

salad said:
Ignore this I fed up my reply and gave up. I was only going to make a joke anyways.

xoxo, love you all.

We love you too, especially with extra ranch.

Sanderson · Jun 24, 2015

JeffRyan said:
I only joined so Michael Brookes would talk to me, but he never did

He touched me......once.......another time I saw him in my toast.

Patrick_68000 · Jun 24, 2015

DDF / DDA is a pleasure to read. But, Frontier can really take care of that now ? Of course +1 for the come back. But the DDF would be listened by Frontier ?

Lobstris · Jun 24, 2015

JeffRyan said:
I only joined so Michael Brookes would talk to me, but he never did

Awww. I'm sure he will do... SOON (TM)

.
I do remember one of those 'Meet a Dev QAs' where a question to Sandro was along the lines of 'What will be Elite's biggest achievement?' to which he responded 'If we can get the mission system working in multiplayer'. I jokingly corrected him by suggesting changing the 'if' to 'when'. Seems he may have been right with 'if'...

Sanderson · Jun 24, 2015

Patrick_68000 said:
DDF / DDA is a pleasure to read. But, Frontier can really take care of that now ? Of course +1 for the come back. But the DDF would be listened by Frontier ?

Doubt it, they didn't the first time.

Atinus · Jun 24, 2015

AnnuverScotinExile said:
And my memory might be failing too. I am of that age. But I certainly have a strong impression that was the case, but cannot be bothered to trawl through the DDA to prove it (indeed, that may not be possible because some of the threads are not there any more). I have that impression because I was in favour of it as a simulator (rather than an arena) to help training on new ships, or to just play with a ship you would never be able to afford.

Fortunately, being a bit younger (I was 4 y/o in 1984

), I did trawl through it. Sandro discounted it out of resource concerns, not as a vision:

Sandro Sammarco said:
The only thing that I'm going to have to rule out right now so far from the suggestions (remember, I've not quite finished reading all the posts!) is the concept of unique "games" in the Founder's system, because the resource cost here would almost certainly be too high.

So jogging my memory, I now recall this was a post shooting down the idea of an arena.

In fact, looking back at the thread, besides myself, MikeSnos suggested a combat practice area:

MikeSnos said:
How about a combat practice zone to help hone skills and get used to new kit without losing the ships... eg... simulated rather than real damage etc

And, at the time, nobody much objected to anything like an arena at all. Just a couple of positive comments. So, there may have been vigorous debate on the topic of arenas, but I don't think it was in a DDF topic. Perhaps it was in the you'd-have-to-be-insane-to-read open discussion thread?

Koen · Jun 24, 2015

Seconded -- well, threehundredtwentynine-ed.

Atinus · Jun 24, 2015

But yeah. More DDA. Go thread!

Patrick_68000 · Jun 24, 2015

Rauminen said:
+1, I would be mighty fine with them just using what's already there though.

Very just. There is lot of material, and as said Sanderson, was not really listened to the first time

Arubeto · Jun 24, 2015

AnnuverScotinExile said:
I actually do not have a major problem with CQC being implemented. Especially as they have done it as a thing 'on the side, not part of the game as a whole. If it was necessary to get a wheelbarrow-full of money from Microsoft, then that justifies it. My biggest complaint is that I disagree with the prioritisation

Expertly put! This is exactly what I thought, too. I don't mind a PvP arena being implemented (even though I am not interested in it), but what I do mind is if it get's in the way of other stuff that I would have prioritized higher (and - going by the DDA - thought FD would prioritize higher, too!)

Sanderson · Jun 24, 2015

Arubeto said:
Expertly put! This is exactly what I thought, too. I don't mind a PvP arena being implemented (even though I am not interested in it), but what I do mind is if it get's in the way of other stuff that I would have prioritized higher (and - going by the DDA - thought FD would prioritize higher, too!)

Money is the highest priority and the ultimate deciding factor. "What will make more money?", "Go with that then."

Atinus · Jun 24, 2015

Sanderson said:
Money is the highest priority and the ultimate deciding factor. "What will make more money?", "Go with that then."

Which, in principle, should lead to even more features.

Obsidian Ant · Jun 24, 2015

Atinus said:
Which, in principle, should lead to even more features.

By the same principle, is it likely it will lead to more features for the audience that will deliver the most money. (Which probably will not be the small niche audience with a specific taste for Elite that backed the game on Kickstarter).

Then again - only Frontier know that.

Sanderson · Jun 24, 2015

Granite said:
By the same principle, is it likely it will lead to more features for the audience that will deliver the most money. (Which probably will not be the small niche audience with a specific taste for Elite that backed the game on Kickstarter).

Then again - only Frontier know that.

We all know that, as witnessed by PP.

Obsidian Ant · Jun 24, 2015

Sanderson said:
We all know that, as witnessed by PP.

At this point I'd pay a subscription to fund the game that was described in the DDA, if it meant that Frontier no longer had to come up with game designs that allow them to sell copies of the game to a broader audience.

deusx_ophc · Jun 24, 2015

Sanderson said:
Money is the highest priority and the ultimate deciding factor. "What will make more money?", "Go with that then."

Atinus said:
Which, in principle, should lead to even more features.

Granite said:
By the same principle, is it likely it will lead to more features for the audience that will deliver the most money. (Which probably will not be the small niche audience with a specific taste for Elite that backed the game on Kickstarter).

Then again - only Frontier know that.

Sanderson said:
We all know that, as witnessed by PP.

Granite said:
At this point I'd pay a subscription to fund the game that was described in the DDA, if it meant that Frontier no longer had to come up with game designs that allow them to sell copies of the game to a broader audience.

the good thing being imho that all of you are right, in parts ^^

so, how about some THARGOIDS now?

Sanderson · Jun 24, 2015

Granite said:
At this point I'd pay a subscription to fund the game that was described in the DDA, if it meant that Frontier no longer had to come up with game designs that allow them to sell copies of the game to a broader audience.

There's (another) recent thread that asks the question "would you pay a subscription" that's popped up a few times. Some are talking about a subscription just to keep it going. Others have speculated that FD is hurting for money. Who knows?

At this point, based on what I've seen, I'd have to take a "wait and see" approach.

- - - Updated - - -

deusx_ophc said:
....how about some THARGOIDS now?

This, we can agree on.