When FD dropped the ball (with the background sim in v1.3)

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Ok, maybe I should say "punctuated equilibrium" rather than "static". Nothing changes until triggers of cumulative player action occur. So there are no minute by minute changes to markets as pirates kill traders, only big changes due to community goals and weekly power play expansion. Market prices fluctuate a little around set levels, but those equilibrium levels don't change over time.

Why isn't the game as dynamic as advertised? Some people say because it is still in beta. The OP mentioned that people working on it were sacked. We know that the game uses peer to peer networking with out central servers to save money. It's not a big stretch to assume that FD decided not to do the advertised thing that everyone is asking for that would be really fun only because of money issues.

Hopefully they do get around to it as Sandro said.

I understand concerns, but to add such complexity and get there takes considerable effort and time. We can loop trough another 'game shouldn't be released, it's still beta' but then we would have to go trough online/MMO/hybrid games in general.

As long as Sandro and Michael keep us posted - and that's something they really should do more frequently - about developments of simulation, we should be good.

 

[Tarman]

Brumster, the guy who zeroed me down to the CH HOTAS. (excellent review sir btw)
ElectricZ, THE Buckyballer.
Granite, your friendly neighbourhood guide writer.

All of disappoint in here. This makes me sad.

 

[Tiamat]

Players screamed for better missions structures and more "personality" to NPCs. Powerplay arrives attempting to be a base to build that on and everybody complains.

CQC may seems like a waste of time to many but you are clearly ignoring the fact that to gain the console audience, many of whom are twitch shooter players at heart, something like CQC is a must. Without instant action ED will fail big time on consoles. FD have gambled on the return from the console version will outstrip their costs in porting it leaving more money int he bank for them to spend on the game. You get an extra game mode as a freebie to either enjoy or ignore as you see fit but CQC is about getting extra funding from a gaming segment that otherwise would have no interest in ED (or not enough to justify the cost and dev time).

And all of you saying that the game should have been 100% at release time need to wake up because you don't know what you are talking about and are embarrassing yourselves publicly displaying your naivete. FD is a small team operating on a fairly small budget and there is no way they could have delivered that. RSI have a bigger team, literally all the money and have had a similar dev time and look at the state of Star Citizen compared to ED. They are worlds apart. 2 years is enough to make a finished, polished AAA game the size of ED? Name me one studio that has ever done that, dare you. Can't? I wonder why.

As for those complaining about the background sim and how "easy" it apparently is to make an autonomous system that never gets anything wrong alongside a procedural generation system I suggest you go and read some game dev articles such as the one below. Apparently getting procedural generation right is HARD. They started work in 2009 and still have not released anything. Now remind me what year ED ran their Kickstarter?
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/07/13/no-mans-sky-from-humble-beginnings

As with any game the forums are always full of people who know better better than the devs, yet don't work in game development. I wonder if that is just because they choose not to or that they have a very inflated idea of their actual ability to make games?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ED is without issues or that it still needs work but threads like these full of totally unrealistic expectations by people with little to no understanding of the software development process really do make me angry.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Hello Commanders!

Just to let you guys know, we have *not* stopped work on the background simulation.

Clearly there are some issues that we're working through with the way that states interact with each other, and some where influence formulas don't return the results we expect (or think appropriate). I guess it's fair to say that this stuff can get pretty complex.

We're also still looking at more ways for minor faction interaction to join up with Power interactions and general iterations to improve the experience overall.

Player feedback and our long term commitment ensure that this work remains ongoing: we're going to be working on the background simulation until it hits all the notes we're aiming for. It isn't going to happen straight away, but the plan is to keep going.

I can't give you ETAs for this stuff right now, all I can say is: we haven't given up!

I hope this info helps a little.

Good to hear, Sandro.

Please refocus on Minor Faction / Background Simulation. For me, this is the "proper" galaxy, in the "proper" game.


Others may disagree, but for me, PowerPlay is to Elite what Richard Pryor is to Superman.

 

[Soliluna]

The background simulation doesn't exist. Your pc spawns NPCs to fight, everything else is static. FD didn't want to pay server costs to simulate the factions, NPCs, trades, markets, etc, so decided not to.

And I am certain you have proof of this right?...

My guess is not.. because FD do have servers... elsewise people wouldn't be making posts when the servers go down and they are unable to play.

 

[Aigaion]

Hello Commanders!

Just to let you guys know, we have *not* stopped work on the background simulation.

Clearly there are some issues that we're working through with the way that states interact with each other, and some where influence formulas don't return the results we expect (or think appropriate). I guess it's fair to say that this stuff can get pretty complex.

We're also still looking at more ways for minor faction interaction to join up with Power interactions and general iterations to improve the experience overall.

Player feedback and our long term commitment ensure that this work remains ongoing: we're going to be working on the background simulation until it hits all the notes we're aiming for. It isn't going to happen straight away, but the plan is to keep going.

I can't give you ETAs for this stuff right now, all I can say is: we haven't given up!

I hope this info helps a little.

The first thing you have to really do is to set your priorities, what is clearly not the case actually. That's why I blame Braben all the time, that guy is just outside reality and runs after money before giving a crap about how players feel. 1.3's Powerplay is still totally unbalanced, buggy as hell, but hey, let's do CQC stuff, right.

Braben's policy is driving Elite: Dangerous in the wall at full speed, it makes me sad for you Sandro becous I feel the passion in you and in your work, your talents are really wasted by Braben's rush to make a golden chair. Before thinking about new content, you should really fix what is actually sinking the game, bugs, combat-logging and solo mode, I say it and repeat it, as long as the Solo Mode will exist, Elite: Dangerous will NEVER be a good game. With the comming of the console version, the dev team will be split into half (and don't tell me it is not true, you know it is). Braben sworn that NEVER the console version will take the foot over the PC version, it's done after E3's announce to give the new content to Xbox One before PC and MAC version.

Now anyway, I don't expect much giving the fact that Braben showed his true face, it's sad, I loved Elite: Dangerous once upon a time.

 

[Arkantes]

Hello Commanders!

Just to let you guys know, we have *not* stopped work on the background simulation.

Clearly there are some issues that we're working through with the way that states interact with each other, and some where influence formulas don't return the results we expect (or think appropriate). I guess it's fair to say that this stuff can get pretty complex.

We're also still looking at more ways for minor faction interaction to join up with Power interactions and general iterations to improve the experience overall.

Player feedback and our long term commitment ensure that this work remains ongoing: we're going to be working on the background simulation until it hits all the notes we're aiming for. It isn't going to happen straight away, but the plan is to keep going.

I can't give you ETAs for this stuff right now, all I can say is: we haven't given up!

I hope this info helps a little.

But the background simulation should have been finished and working for release...

You know, this is exactly why a few of us were asking for the release to be pushed back (while the zealots were basking in their Vertical Slice theory), because now you can't reset the galaxy anymore to tweak this properly with the help of players. You've effectively backed yourselves into a corner, not exactly the move of the century.

The game still needs to be in beta, and if you really needed the Steam money, at least you could have tried an Early Access release.

Now you can still try to tweak it from live data without a really active players support, which will be inefficient and waste a lot of time and resources.
Or you can come clean and admit it's just broken, and have a special beta build out that's dedicated to this, something at a smaller scale (a hundred systems?) that you can reset daily if needs be, with scaled up factors (missions, trading, etc) so that you can get to the bottom of this issue quickly. Try different scenarios, etc, and communicate with players so that they know what you want to test.

The fix must not be in some distant future, it got to be as soon as possible, because 7 months after release Elite's heart is still not really beating.

 

[2plex]

But the background simulation should have been finished and working for release...

You know, this is exactly why a few of us were asking for the release to be pushed back (while the zealots were basking in their Vertical Slice theory), because now you can't reset the galaxy anymore to tweak this properly with the help of players. You've effectively backed yourselves into a corner, not exactly the move of the century.

Yeah, the vertical slice always sounded to me rather a lot like the erect middle finger.

 

[CMDR Commander]

The magic spell of "it's in the constant development!!!" really starts to work against them. No wonder since it feels more like "being in a state of constant disrepair" with more and more broken things added on top of it and fixes running thin. It's like a plumber promising you golden piping all around your house in some unspecified moment in a distant future while you stand knee deep in water with showered with it from all sides.

Only thing those vague promises do is breed frustration.

 

[Soliluna]

Players screamed for better missions structures and more "personality" to NPCs. Powerplay arrives attempting to be a base to build that on and everybody complains.

CQC may seems like a waste of time to many but you are clearly ignoring the fact that to gain the console audience, many of whom are twitch shooter players at heart, something like CQC is a must. Without instant action ED will fail big time on consoles. FD have gambled on the return from the console version will outstrip their costs in porting it leaving more money int he bank for them to spend on the game. You get an extra game mode as a freebie to either enjoy or ignore as you see fit but CQC is about getting extra funding from a gaming segment that otherwise would have no interest in ED (or not enough to justify the cost and dev time).

And all of you saying that the game should have been 100% at release time need to wake up because you don't know what you are talking about and are embarrassing yourselves publicly displaying your naivete. FD is a small team operating on a fairly small budget and there is no way they could have delivered that. RSI have a bigger team, literally all the money and have had a similar dev time and look at the state of Star Citizen compared to ED. They are worlds apart. 2 years is enough to make a finished, polished AAA game the size of ED? Name me one studio that has ever done that, dare you. Can't? I wonder why.

As for those complaining about the background sim and how "easy" it apparently is to make an autonomous system that never gets anything wrong alongside a procedural generation system I suggest you go and read some game dev articles such as the one below. Apparently getting procedural generation right is HARD. They started work in 2009 and still have not released anything. Now remind me what year ED ran their Kickstarter?
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/07/13/no-mans-sky-from-humble-beginnings

As with any game the forums are always full of people who know better better than the devs, yet don't work in game development. I wonder if that is just because they choose not to or that they have a very inflated idea of their actual ability to make games?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ED is without issues or that it still needs work but threads like these full of totally unrealistic expectations by people with little to no understanding of the software development process really do make me angry.

I don't mean to argue an irrelevant point, but it is worth noting that while gamers may not have the foggiest regarding software development process (personally I am familiar with agile); they are familiar with what they like and when they want it.

Also the article you link shows that 4 guys in Guildford created the basics of No Mans Sky in 6 months by themselves alongside other projects. They started in 2013 (arguably Sean started in Sept 2012 around the release of Joe Danger 2) - not 2009 (when they founded). Around December 2013 after the VGX awards they brought the team together (10 people). Considering No Mans Sky offers procedural creatures and planetary landings I would say that they are currently beyond the scope of Elite (although I know that if Elite are going to be offering Planetary landings their internal builds will have this already.. probably had it at release). But I don't want to compare the work of both teams, both teams have world class experience and dedicated visionaries directing their products and I am impressed by both companies technology.

I would also argue that triple AAA games are commonly made in that time frame - it is the engine that takes time to make. CoD is an example that is on this release cycle (within 2 years for the same studio).

Also, off the top of my head I cannot think of any way that the BGS is linked to the rendering of assets. I could be wrong but I believe they are entirely different systems. I would say the BGS is processed in batches on the server in a frequency that is set to allow the time it takes to process (probably 12 or 24 hours with allotted headroom) while the procedurally generated universe is created client side combining the procedural/maths engine, the physics engine and finally the graphics rendering engine. The BGS data (such as commodities, faction, influence etc) is provided to the client upon request depending on location within the game.

Finally, I would say that the ~£11m in cash that Frontier have from sales according to recent financial information (posted somewhere else on the forum) is not really in the realm of a small budget any more. At the start perhaps, small, but now I would say it is a 'typical' budget for an established gaming studio. - Hell it's probably one of the best budgets for a UK based company/studio (A testament to their success of course).

 

[Space Fan]

The best, and most creative elements of ED, are those left over from the original game: the real sense of danger sometimes; the quirks and inconsistencies; the 'fun'.

It leads me to suspect that Braben's 'forgotten' partner, was the real creative force - and what has been unleashed upon us is brilliance, without any sense of style or swagger.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

Well that's pretty much killed of the prospect of more dev comments on this thread.

 

[sorcer3r]

Players screamed for better missions structures and more "personality" to NPCs. Powerplay arrives attempting to be a base to build that on and everybody complains.
[...]

Because PP fails to provide better missions and improved NPC interaction. Until now the wishes for better missions were completely ignored (at least since beta).
And if you say that hey have limited resources and are a small team then it would had been even better not to work on PP but improve gameplay of mechanics we already have.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Some people should kick the habit trash talk developers.

 

[Space Fan]

Well that's pretty much killed of the prospect of more dev comments on this thread.

So be it. If it is the truth..

Edit: I'll remove that ellipsis - 'If it is the truth.'

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

So be it. If it is the truth..

It is not what is said, but how it is said.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

So be it. If it is the truth..

And it's not true and you came accross like arrogant and ignorant human being.

You wonder why devs don't even try to explain themselves?

 

[Space Fan]

And it's not true and you came accross like arrogant and ignorant human being.

You wonder why devs don't even try to explain themselves?

It is, probably, the truth.

- - - Updated - - -

It is not what is said, but how it is said.

It was stated very clearly.

 

[Scudmungus]

Considerin source, mi tinkin oder end of probablity curve

 

[fourty6to3]

Hello Commanders!

Just to let you guys know, we have *not* stopped work on the background simulation.

Clearly there are some issues that we're working through with the way that states interact with each other, and some where influence formulas don't return the results we expect (or think appropriate). I guess it's fair to say that this stuff can get pretty complex.

We're also still looking at more ways for minor faction interaction to join up with Power interactions and general iterations to improve the experience overall.

Player feedback and our long term commitment ensure that this work remains ongoing: we're going to be working on the background simulation until it hits all the notes we're aiming for. It isn't going to happen straight away, but the plan is to keep going.

I can't give you ETAs for this stuff right now, all I can say is: we haven't given up!

I hope this info helps a little.

Hi Sandro. I'm just curious, with regards to the background sim, is there any work being done on visual feedback of a system? For example, states that are in war/civil war I would expect to see a lot of NPC's pulling each other out of supercruise, small scale battles popping in and out of the radar in super cruise, logistics strike missions, capital ships battling outside of a station, etc. Lockdown's would have checkpoints out in front of stations, booms would have traders everywhere and ships flying from a planet to and fro. People floating outside of stations working on the exterior, painting, building, etc.

Is there any work being done on that? I ask because, this:

[video=youtube;9NSMMTfwTOU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NSMMTfwTOU[/video]