If they aren't capable, bug off. God knows how many manuals I had to read so i could operate some jets in flight sims. I'm just being realistic. True manuals are scarce, but ED ain't their game if they just want to blow up stuff.
Horizons What's going on with the Horizons Reviews? Both Number and Score.
- Thread starter Cosmo
- Start date
If they aren't capable, bug off. God knows how many manuals I had to read so i could operate some jets in flight sims. I'm just being realistic. True manuals are scarce, but ED ain't their game if they just want to blow up stuff.
Thanks goodness that reviews are not the deciding factor on continuing game development or not. FDs income counts.
Last time I followed a review I wasted my $8.50 on Star Wars 7...
See reviews are hit and miss...
Hate pie charts
/HC
Last time I followed a review I wasted my $8.50 on Star Wars 7...
See reviews are hit and miss... Hate pie charts
/HC
I think it's exactly that.
Last edited:
It is always the same in these threads - the fanboys burying their heads in the sand, ignoring the facts and casting aspersions upon doubters.
I have no problem with them being happy with the game and expansion in current state and with the price model, please enjoy, but the idea that those who disagree are plain wrong or simply lacking a deeper understanding of what the game is supposed to be are condescending and unhelpful.
for example;
One of the greatest myths is that people like me who are dissatisfied with the game content and entertainment value must be people who lap up fast paced shooters and simplified game-play, we just don't get Elite as it is geared toward simulation.
Well I play flight sims that are massively more hardcore sim than ED will ever be including Xplane which doesn't even include combat and yet still I plough many more hours into that than ED and find it far more rewarding. There's that myth squashed.
I played the original ED and loved it but we have moved on now, we ain't in Kansas anymore.
We are supposed to be in an largely unexplored galaxy forging our own stories and shaping a persistent but dynamic universe that is full of mystery and endless possibilities but that just is not the case.
Interaction with the outside world is limited to pointing at it and pressing an interact button whether that be scan or shooting it (mostly shooting it. C'mon, even collecting samples is finding a rock and shooting it and the collecting it Mario style by running over it)
I say interacting but that is a very loose terminology as far as this game is concerned.
Even the supposed persistent NPC's (which we never got) who would evolve with us on our journey are either there to be shot or not be shot - the end.
Most of the functionality comes from menu screens - we trade through them, we select destinations through them, we chose systems through them etc etc - all totally non immersive, counter intuitive and frankly boring.
Many of these functions could be on the Hud or part of a 3d Cockpit perhaps, certainly more intuitive and less clunky.
We don't even see another person or NCP on stations, not even as an avatar. We certainly don't communicate with them beyond accepting missions which is essentially not at all.
We don't even see any human activity in the busiest star ports or settlements - everything is so very dead and devoid of any sense of presence.
All the things wed do and can do outside of combat are extremely limited and shallow experiences. If you have done them once you have done them a thousand times.
Even that isn't so bad if those things are enjoyable such as one of the few mini games that work and feel part of the game-world such as interdiction.
Elite Dangerous is a shell of a game, if you put it to your ear you can hear the wind, listen...
This is why, despite buying beta, I didn't pre-purchase a pass or Horizons, because i knew it would ultimately be a shallow and empty experience given past history.
I'm happy to wait and see if the content eventually comes and if it does nobody will be happier than be.
Until then, if you enjoy the game as is, please continue to do so and good for you but opinions like mine are not such a tiny minority as to be ignored because future sales and development rely on current content being a success.
You should welcome constructive criticism in that respect.
I have no problem with them being happy with the game and expansion in current state and with the price model, please enjoy, but the idea that those who disagree are plain wrong or simply lacking a deeper understanding of what the game is supposed to be are condescending and unhelpful.
for example;
One of the greatest myths is that people like me who are dissatisfied with the game content and entertainment value must be people who lap up fast paced shooters and simplified game-play, we just don't get Elite as it is geared toward simulation.
Well I play flight sims that are massively more hardcore sim than ED will ever be including Xplane which doesn't even include combat and yet still I plough many more hours into that than ED and find it far more rewarding. There's that myth squashed.
I played the original ED and loved it but we have moved on now, we ain't in Kansas anymore.
We are supposed to be in an largely unexplored galaxy forging our own stories and shaping a persistent but dynamic universe that is full of mystery and endless possibilities but that just is not the case.
Interaction with the outside world is limited to pointing at it and pressing an interact button whether that be scan or shooting it (mostly shooting it. C'mon, even collecting samples is finding a rock and shooting it and the collecting it Mario style by running over it)
I say interacting but that is a very loose terminology as far as this game is concerned.
Even the supposed persistent NPC's (which we never got) who would evolve with us on our journey are either there to be shot or not be shot - the end.
Most of the functionality comes from menu screens - we trade through them, we select destinations through them, we chose systems through them etc etc - all totally non immersive, counter intuitive and frankly boring.
Many of these functions could be on the Hud or part of a 3d Cockpit perhaps, certainly more intuitive and less clunky.
We don't even see another person or NCP on stations, not even as an avatar. We certainly don't communicate with them beyond accepting missions which is essentially not at all.
We don't even see any human activity in the busiest star ports or settlements - everything is so very dead and devoid of any sense of presence.
All the things wed do and can do outside of combat are extremely limited and shallow experiences. If you have done them once you have done them a thousand times.
Even that isn't so bad if those things are enjoyable such as one of the few mini games that work and feel part of the game-world such as interdiction.
Elite Dangerous is a shell of a game, if you put it to your ear you can hear the wind, listen...
This is why, despite buying beta, I didn't pre-purchase a pass or Horizons, because i knew it would ultimately be a shallow and empty experience given past history.
I'm happy to wait and see if the content eventually comes and if it does nobody will be happier than be.
Until then, if you enjoy the game as is, please continue to do so and good for you but opinions like mine are not such a tiny minority as to be ignored because future sales and development rely on current content being a success.
You should welcome constructive criticism in that respect.
This point stated above really is very relevant to a lot of the opinions being posted. There are two basic types of players for ED. One, the first players being those who understood the nature of the game. They understood how content was released and the game short comings. They are very patient players.
Then there are the second kind of players. The ones that Frontier reached out too, that weren't looking for this game, but because of marketing and past game experienced - where as they were expecting a first person ship type shooter. Fast action and loads of content. I kind of feel they were mislead to an extent and can understand some of their frustration.
I think it's mostly the 2nd type of players that will most likely be unhappy with the game. Not because of the game itself, but because how it was marketed to them. What they expected, versus what the first type of players were experienced with.
I hope I wrote this right. It's a thought that is difficult to explain for me.
I used to live for a good manual. Would fall asleep reading them. They've gone the way of the Dodo now, along with boxed releases. Sometimes I really miss the old days - maps and code wheels, when pirate protection was flipping through the manual and finding out what month the Silver Train arrived at Cartagena in 1660...
There is a third group of players (or people, I'm not sure they even play the game). This group is present in every game forum and their sole purpose of existance is repeat some criticism from IGN or e-famous youtuber infinitely. They either open threads or respond in support of already opened ones, totally disregarding any counter arguments. You can spot them by their relentless repeating of issues which are long addressed by the devs, or the issues which are promised to be solved with a near future patch. These will never go away even if their issue is solved but instead start the complain about the solution too!
There are a lot of these in ED forums as far as I observed.
Always the same, haters and fanboys apparently.
If you hate then you think everyone who doesnt agree with you is a fanboy. If you are a fanboy you vehemently deny everything the haters say. Point to any forum anywhere on the internet and you have the exact same thing.
Or you could just play it, wish for improvements here and there and suggest some fixes but still encourage the devs to do more good work. The game isnt perfect but then no game ever is.
If you hate then you think everyone who doesnt agree with you is a fanboy. If you are a fanboy you vehemently deny everything the haters say. Point to any forum anywhere on the internet and you have the exact same thing.
Or you could just play it, wish for improvements here and there and suggest some fixes but still encourage the devs to do more good work. The game isnt perfect but then no game ever is.
I am not surprised by the reviews, whilst I am very happy with the expansion, I can see for those having to buy it that it might not be everyone's cup of tea. The reason I bought a life time expansion (well two actually) was because I was along for the ride and I was anticipating some releases would not be relevant to my play style and some would; also some pieces would be half complete due to time and budget constraints. If I look brutally at this expansion, it's a huge add on for the explorer who enjoys seeing vista's. It adds more places to visit but aside from being different graphics the bases are simply stations to visit like their space station equivalents. Driving an SRV is fun and something I could do for hours, material collection and synthesis is an interesting addition but it is stage one of crafting and not the complete thing. The SRV scanning is more like what I was expecting in space, requiring some interpretation and a touch more complexity.
Whilst I understand the pricing model I think its an unusual one and its quite hard to make a judgement call on because the expansion is incomplete and you are not actually paying a monthly sub, so its a high price for an expansion.
If I was FD, I would be thinking about making some changes in the following areas
1) Add a new product, ED Expansions monthly subscription - includes ED and all released addons - 5 pounds. Minimum period 3 months. Gives a lower price entry point and turns it into the option of a subscription.
2) Add a set of starter missions that need to be complete before you get regular missions that guide a player through the first stages of the games. eg transporting goods from station to station in system, then via a system jump.
3) Review the exploration scanning mechanics - Make scanning systems more complex, so more thought needs to go in. SRV scanning is great but it needs to be linked to the ship so you can get gps positional info because it is too easy to lose position. When you explore from space, systems exploration and discovery on planets needs to be more complex.
4) Hide the galaxy map so you only know where systems you have visited or paid for information on are available.
5) Provide option to buy trade data of systems/stations that you have visited or paid for information about.
I could go on, but as a fanboy I wanted to make the point that some of us are not unaware that some areas of what could potentially be a great game are somewhat limited, but we are here for the duration and to see how FD evolve this game.
Whilst I understand the pricing model I think its an unusual one and its quite hard to make a judgement call on because the expansion is incomplete and you are not actually paying a monthly sub, so its a high price for an expansion.
If I was FD, I would be thinking about making some changes in the following areas
1) Add a new product, ED Expansions monthly subscription - includes ED and all released addons - 5 pounds. Minimum period 3 months. Gives a lower price entry point and turns it into the option of a subscription.
2) Add a set of starter missions that need to be complete before you get regular missions that guide a player through the first stages of the games. eg transporting goods from station to station in system, then via a system jump.
3) Review the exploration scanning mechanics - Make scanning systems more complex, so more thought needs to go in. SRV scanning is great but it needs to be linked to the ship so you can get gps positional info because it is too easy to lose position. When you explore from space, systems exploration and discovery on planets needs to be more complex.
4) Hide the galaxy map so you only know where systems you have visited or paid for information on are available.
5) Provide option to buy trade data of systems/stations that you have visited or paid for information about.
I could go on, but as a fanboy I wanted to make the point that some of us are not unaware that some areas of what could potentially be a great game are somewhat limited, but we are here for the duration and to see how FD evolve this game.
If FD were ever to do that I would hand in my moderator badge (hey, where is my moderator badge Brett?) immediately. I simply would not want to be a mod when the flames from that hit.
Besides, as a lifetime pass owner, umm... no, no subscription desire here thanks.
Well, there's a thing. It takes at least five years to develop all the content that you are talking about. In the meantime that development requires funding. You can, of course, hold off on buying the game until it is further along and starts having the content that you're looking for, but without funds the game may never get there in the first place.
Buying Elite Dangerous is an act of faith. You're buying into a venture, a journey, a piece of gaming history being made, no guarantees implied, your mileage may vary, destination unknown. It is NOT, I repeat, NOT like buying a finished product, all prettily boxed with paper manual and DVD-ROM in glossy cardboard cover, off the shelves at Game Station.
Now I assumed this was kind of obvious, what with a whole Kickstarter and a detailed ten-year development plan involving seasonal expansions and stuff. People buying into Star Citizen certainly seem to have grasped the notion that they are buying into a game development, which will take a goodly amount of years to yield a finished product, so I like to think that the whole concept is not beyond human understanding.
So why the confusion of expectations around Elite Dangerous? Possibly it's because Frontier released a working base game, and people thought that was it: the finished product that should contain ALL the things. Perhaps Frontier should have hung on to the Beta label. But again, Frontier has always been clear that this is not the whole game, that there are a number of (yes, paid) expansions to follow. Perhaps it's that Frontier has been less clear about what is placeholder and what is still to be added --such uncertainty can cause anxieties, I suppose. CIG has always been very detailed about what they intend to include in Star Citizen, and how it will look, and how it will function. And although, in fact, almost none of that has been realised yet, I guess it reassures people that the 'vision' is intact and on track for realisation (eventually). Perhaps also, Star Citizen is just a game that has not had a chance to disappoint us yet.
Regardless, it is undoubtedly so that Frontier does not master the fine art of marketing that e.g. CIG does. So people are not sure how much of Braben's vision Frontier considers to have realised, and how much it still intends to realise, and how, so a lot of anxiety ensues. To the extent that they totally forget that between CIG and Frontier, it is the latter who have actually delivered, on schedule, everything that they promised to deliver thus far. Frontier is facing the dual task of not just realising the vision, but also keeping it alive in people's minds in the meantime. In order for people to keep following you on the long and difficult journey, you have to keep holding the vision ahead of them like a shining light, driving them on. It's not enough to say: "But look how far we've come". You also have to keep reminding: "And this is where we're going".
Perhaps I'm more laid back about it because I remember an era when there was no slick advertising. Games were coded in someone's bedroom, and released on cassette tape with some hand-drawn cover art on the sleeve. Game reviews were some pictures and printed text in C&VG. You bought a lot on faith then. In a way, Frontier's slightly hapless way at marketing their game is kind of reassuring: reminiscent more of enthusiastic computer geeks coding away in their shed than a slick big game publisher cynically releasing yet another derivative game projected to appeal to the largest segment of the gaming market, with scantily clad females and big guns and badass gangster assassins killing their way through pre-fab levels driven by a cut-scene cliché narrative. I'm good with that, personally. I'm down with the somewhat Indie feel about this whole enterprise.
Make no mistake: this is gaming history being made. Elite Dangerous is not just a game. It is you and the whole galaxy. Personally, Braben had me at "Hello".
This!
I believe FD would have much better time containing its player base, if clear road map was presented.
Even if we don't get specific dates, and standard "everything is subject to change along the way" disclaimer is applied, maybe we could see the grand scheme of things.
For example, I'm not sure why - from my perspective - FD wastes time on facial features, instead of focusing on polishing the already-existing things like mission variation, missions making better use of available assets (like planetary missions - why not utilize spaceship wrecks as a base for more missions?)?
But if they told us "this season you get facial features, so later this season you can multi-crew your ships, so that next season you will walk inside your ships, so that the following season you can walk on stations and surfaces" - wouldn't that make much more sense and prove that the plan is there and it is worth keep paying?
FD, please read wise man nexxo words, a free hint that can ensure E
is well funded along the way. That's all it takes.
All the different aspects of the game should tie together. We can't craft anything yet.
Example:
1. collect minerals. Not only to sell for credits, but to craft things
2. go to station
3. craft modules, new ships, build a player outpost on a planet
4. Trade or sell crafted inventory with other players
5. Share ships, modules with guild members.
Those features make the sandbox deep and massive.
If the upcoming Loot and Crafting expansion only adds basic crafting of ammo, fuel and weapons, that adds too little depth.
NPC interaction is still very basic. It boils down to scan, shoot or get shot. It lacks richness and depth.
It could be presented better without needing to turn your head left or right. Allow players to customize their HUD can improve this a lot.
The biggest complaint is the lack of multiplayer, chat rooms, guilds, guild chat, multiplayer missions, anything for wide-scale socialization between players.
NPC character customization is planned and a crew of up to 4 players per ship. I read it's 4 players per wing. If 4 players fit in 1 ship that's 1 wing. This is not massively multiplayer.
6 to 10 players per Wing and, or multiple-wings in one group is massively multiplayer.
The galaxy of Elite Dangerous doesn't feel or look vibrant, alive, bustling.
Examples:
- There are no NPC characters in stations or starports.
- no traffic between populated planets and stations.
- no NPC vehicles or traffic at starports.
- No NPC ship dog-fighting on planets.
- Too basic and simplistic interaction between players and NPCs.
- Stations controlled by different Powers look too similar.
- Players are unable to make guilds or group-chat for massively social interaction.
- Can't build an outpost on a planet or in space that's managed by players of a guild.
If you have done them once you have done them a thousand times.
Most player activities are basic and lack depth. It are independent activities that don't tie together. There aren't any deep sandbox objectives.
Right, people who point out the flaws and lack of the promised "richness" by Braben give their feedback in the hope that FD will add said richness and depth to make ED a truly great space sim.
Last edited:
Billexista
Banned
Just you wait when players will have huge influence on how universe works and operates also when this causes to BGS to start working and resources would have PROPER chains with demand and supply that could make even food cartridges more profitable then palladium.
System/station one farm: sells food buys machines
Nobody delivers food from this station, food shortage will appear on nearby systems making it REALLY expensive at other stations, no food no production so yeah really short supply of stuff. This system will have tons and tons and tons of food that is not being sold anywhere so machines won't be used up fast, so machine demand will lower price. You will spot this and start selling food for good profits in other systems, it will cause machines to be used up and demand will rise.
Good food supply could cause other systems to lower production costs of other stuff.
Just food can cause miners to sell their metals/minerals cheaper, machine producing stations produce more machines and require more food/minerals/metals. So fully saturated economy cycle could mean profit on large array of goods and stuff like palladium might not be used on machines or agricultural machines much. You could use combination of them to make another thing and base stuff on that.
Elite still might surprise us and provide such epic BGS that would be agent based with some extreme safety protocols like npcs delivering at least bare sustainable minimum to keep stations from starving and halting to stop.
Good economy could bring better quality outfitters or ships to shop. Cheaper ammo or more expensive, depends on trade.
Trade would probably need to scale on game population so people won't be forced to just trade but trading would seem like a real thing where stuff gets really used and made from stuff you haul and not just from +1000 palladium mined per hour no matter what.
System/station one farm: sells food buys machines
Nobody delivers food from this station, food shortage will appear on nearby systems making it REALLY expensive at other stations, no food no production so yeah really short supply of stuff. This system will have tons and tons and tons of food that is not being sold anywhere so machines won't be used up fast, so machine demand will lower price. You will spot this and start selling food for good profits in other systems, it will cause machines to be used up and demand will rise.
Good food supply could cause other systems to lower production costs of other stuff.
Just food can cause miners to sell their metals/minerals cheaper, machine producing stations produce more machines and require more food/minerals/metals. So fully saturated economy cycle could mean profit on large array of goods and stuff like palladium might not be used on machines or agricultural machines much. You could use combination of them to make another thing and base stuff on that.
Elite still might surprise us and provide such epic BGS that would be agent based with some extreme safety protocols like npcs delivering at least bare sustainable minimum to keep stations from starving and halting to stop.
Good economy could bring better quality outfitters or ships to shop. Cheaper ammo or more expensive, depends on trade.
Trade would probably need to scale on game population so people won't be forced to just trade but trading would seem like a real thing where stuff gets really used and made from stuff you haul and not just from +1000 palladium mined per hour no matter what.
1. there are players who understand and accept the way Frontier have decided to market and develop the game.
2. there are players who don't understand but accept the way frontier have decided to market and develop the game.
3. and everyone one else.
1 and 2 have varying ideas about how the game is and what it could benefit from, they give input, they may have gripes, but are still enjoying the game, and will continue to do so as long as it keeps making the headway it is.
3 will either learn to accept the game, its development direction and its pricing structure for what is.. or they wont.
2. there are players who don't understand but accept the way frontier have decided to market and develop the game.
3. and everyone one else.
1 and 2 have varying ideas about how the game is and what it could benefit from, they give input, they may have gripes, but are still enjoying the game, and will continue to do so as long as it keeps making the headway it is.
3 will either learn to accept the game, its development direction and its pricing structure for what is.. or they wont.
Last edited:
- "Gamers don't want to read the manual"
ohhhhh this need to die
IMHO part of the problem is how FD advertise ED, which makes it look like a 'traditional' fast-paced action/shooty space game.
Hence lots of people buying it without realising it's actually a harsh slow-paced space "arcade sim" that requires a lot of effort to learn to control the thing & work out how do to stuff yourself (without having your hand held).
Hence lots of negative reviews.
FD reap what they sow. (Short-term money influx, but longer-term body of negative reviews that they are saddled with.)
Last edited: