Players have forgotten a fundamental concept, and that's why they're complaining about the difficulty.

[Marc_Hicks]

why does every fanboy have to make their own thread about this.

use the search function.

Hmm, maybe for the same reason that whiners have to make their own threads about the "too hard" AI.

 

[Mohrgan]

I'm sorry, is recorded history too intangible for you?

Tens of thousands of people have lost their jobs, careers, businesses, etc... By doing exactly as you suggest. Go tell them they were just the victims of random misfortune.

You insist on an inaccurate view of what I say. You're determined to dismiss opposing points of view with insults and absolutism. I won't be run off a topic, but I will leave you to yourself. We have no avenue of communication between us on this subject.

The game can make room for all tastes. I suggest that not only should FD do that but, in the end will do that. I just hope they find a way for me to enjoy the challenge I seek, while all others can do the same.

 

[Katkon]

No.

No no no this is not how you make a game commercially successful in the long term. This is how you burn out early and get your development cycle cut short.

People buy the game, they get their quick sense of satisfaction and they leave. ED's player retention is horrific and getting worse. People aren't sticking around. Just look at the forums, most of us who've been here have been here over a year, meanwhile 10 times our number have come and gone, each staying a couple weeks or months. If nothing else, even if you don't take the numerous statistics available as credible, just looking at what happens here should tell you everything.

Every game that has tried to cater to everyone has failed in the end. Doesn't matter whether it's WoW or Call of Duty or Civilization, you cater to everyone you satisfy no one. WoW went from being the definitive MMO experience to being just more of the same because that's what was selling copies, and now they're at less than half their subscriber base, which started to decline when they started to change the game dramatically to satisfy this ephemeral "everyone" that doesn't really exist. Call of Duty sells less copies every year, they've just been bulldozing through on sheer marketing hype which also every year is met with more and more outrage by the intangible "everyone". Civ:BE was an attempt to draw in a larger crowd by simplifying things about a strategy game that many people often find awkward or confusing. Go look on Steam at how many people are playing Beyond Earth compared to Civ V.

Countless examples going back to the 80's showing that if you try to cater to everyone, you don't do much except get under their skin.

On the other hand, a good game is a good game. It becomes timeless and can be appreciated by anyone and enjoyed at any time. Games like Chrono Trigger, Super Smash Brothers, Sim City 4, etc.... have withstood the test of time and continue to be played by a large number of people 10, 15 and 20 years after their respective shelf lives. They don't get stale because they're good games that can be appreciated by anyone who finds that type of game fun. They're not games for everyone, far from it, but for the people who enjoy them they will never be bad games.

Elite: Dangerous can easily be a bad game if the wrong decisions are made. The most common wrong decision that gets made during ongoing development cycles such as this is catering to everyone.

Just make a good game, and your game will last forever.

I agree wholeheartedly with this, and the original post. Many say they want an easy game and instant satisfaction, but when they get it they get bored quickly and move on. My pre-teen son is a great example. He wants to dominate every game he's got ASAP, and as soon as he does, he's onto the next game. He's got countless games on his iPad and many on the Xbox. He gets bored quickly with easy games, and most games these days are easy.
-
The original Elite is a classic example of a game that was difficult. I don't think it'd be the cult game it is today if it had been easy. I don't think this forum would exist if the original Elite had been devoid of challenge. I personally believe that games with longevity provide entertainment through challenge. Heck, the most fun I had in ED were the first 6 months when I felt the steep learning curve. Thankfully some challenge has been introduced - I hope it continues to ramp up over time.

 

[Marc_Hicks]

You insist on an inaccurate view of what I say. You're determined to dismiss opposing points of view with insults and absolutism. I won't be run off a topic, but I will leave you to yourself. We have no avenue of communication between us on this subject.

The game can make room for all tastes. I suggest that not only should FD do that but, in the end will do that. I just hope they find a way for me to enjoy the challenge I seek, while all others can do the same.

Ah yes, the "lowest common denominator approach". That will spell the death of Elite: Dangerous if they go down that path. Truth is that there are already options out there for people who want to take the "low risk" path in the game......as I proved when I sat in a Resource Extraction Site for over an hour, mining gold, without once getting attacked.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I agree wholeheartedly with this, and the original post. Many say they want an easy game and instant satisfaction, but when they get it they get bored quickly and move on. My pre-teen son is a great example. He wants to dominate every game he's got ASAP, and as soon as he does, he's onto the next game. He's got countless games on his iPad and many on the Xbox. He gets bored quickly with easy games, and most games these days are easy.
-
The original Elite is a classic example of a game that was difficult. I don't think it'd be the cult game it is today if it had been easy. I don't think this forum would exist if the original Elite had been devoid of challenge. I personally believe that games with longevity provide entertainment through challenge. Heck, the most fun I had in ED were the first 6 months when I felt the steep learning curve. Thankfully some challenge has been introduced - I hope it continues to ramp up over time.

Yes, the "instant gratification" crowd who complain about the AI are usually the same people who whine about "Grinding".

 

[AluminumAlloy]

I bought Elite: Dangerous back in 2014 for several big reasons. One of them was that I wanted to play a game that had a dangerous feel it. Since then, iv'e only had 5 deaths (how did I even manage to not die so much through these years in intensive gameplay?) over the past 3 years and 2 deaths by glitches. Over time I started feeling the game was getting less dangerous, taking away the fun. Would dangerousness be the fundamental concept?

 

[Mohrgan]

Ah yes, the "lowest common denominator approach". That will spell the death of Elite: Dangerous if they go down that path. Truth is that there are already options out there for people who want to take the "low risk" path in the game......as I proved when I sat in a Resource Extraction Site for over an hour, mining gold, without once getting attacked.

I suggest that the same approach to the modes, be applied to the AI. If accommodations to the many destroy games, it should all be over by now. One anecdotal situation doesn't even come close to proving anything. Just as one story of an OP AI isn't going to change my mind. It's the overall tenor of the combined information on this subject that suggests to me many aren't enjoying their experience with the new AI. I have compassion for those players, and I am willing to accept changes to improve their gaming.

 

[Henri]

I win an interdiction, I successfully evade an interdiction.. I win a PvP dogfight with another commander, I was successful in beating another commander. Same damn thing to me, I win or lose, am successful in the task or I failed.

I understand where you are coming from, ED is about long term survival, that doesn't change the fact that it involves performing tasks that involve winning and losing.

I have a nice amount of cash tucked away, successful in most of my fights. I'd say I'm winning and surviving quite nicely.

It would be if there was an Iron man mode.
FD had to take that out because they would not be able to handle the support tickets from kiddies begging to have their ship back.

FD should have a permanent beta server with unlimited money and invulnerability where those in need of a safe space go and all fly the same big, a rated maxxed out zero heat ships with all the top mods in circles around each other firing their lazors without ever being damaged. Sometimes an NPC without AI will spawn and auto explode and everyone gets an extra 3000.000.000 credits.Perfect Balance!

 

[Marc_Hicks]

I suggest that the same approach to the modes, be applied to the AI. If accommodations to the many destroy games, it should all be over by now. One anecdotal situation doesn't even come close to proving anything. Just as one story of an OP AI isn't going to change my mind. It's the overall tenor of the combined information on this subject that suggests to me many aren't enjoying their experience with the new AI. I have compassion for those players, and I am willing to accept changes to improve their gaming.

I have no compassion for people who got rich & powerful by exploiting things like Robigo & the previously poor AI. If they feel the new AI is now too great a challenge, then maybe they should start from scratch-like I did-or ask support to drop their Combat ranking, as the NPC's you meet are definitely scaled towards your Combat ranking.

Meanwhile, if you want to avoid danger, then stick to High Security systems, low end RES's & Low intensity Conflict Zones.....as they already exist to accommodate those who value safety over danger.

 

[Jabezz]

Risk vs. Reward.

It's finally coming back to the game for traders, miners, etc.... and people have forgotten that this is a fundamental, irreplaceable part of the gameplay mechanics. You want to take a risk in a squishy ship to get that sweet sweet high credit reward? Guess what, it's risky now.

Spot on comment. I couldn't agree more.

Did you somehow not get the info that the NPCs behaviour was a BUG that created unsurvivable, let alone unwinnable scenarios?

That has nothing to do with balance of risk and reward, it frustrates most people and will lead to 90% of p(l)ayers to leave the game.

And you obviously haven't encountered the bug or are trolling. I encountered a FAS in my Anaconda (D-rated, but with Shield Boosters and gimballed Beam Lasers in all positions) - after interdiction, I had its shields down and its hull at 93% in 10 seconds, while it had stripped my shields and my hull to 23%, no thrusters and no FSD left ... I've never seen anything like it.

Absolutely hilarious. What you can't fly your D rated Conda like a fighter anymore and a FAS, one of the hardest NPCs in the game, gives you a good kicking? No, I don't believe it! I'd be embarrassed to write a post like that, it shows you just haven't got a handle on this game at all.

Yes we know there was/ is a problem with some NPCs having some bugged weapons but even when this is sorted once and for all the OP is still correct. In certain situations you now have to weigh up what the risk is before engaging in any activity. That was just not part of the game pre-1.6/ 2.1. I could cruise around in my A rated Conda or FDL oblivious to any danger. A wing of fighters in a Compromised Nav Beacon? So what, have some of that, and collect the bounty. There's no way I would be so nonchalant about that now.

The game has changed for the better, it's more difficult. I struggled for a while at first until the penny dropped. I've changed my combat style, changed my load outs, I'm more careful and more cautious. But because of that it's more fun, the adrenaline kicks in now instead of the rinse repeat rubbish we had before.

 

[frostypaw]

It would be if there was an Iron man mode.
FD had to take that out because they would not be able to handle the support tickets from kiddies begging to have their ship back.

In all fairness without a savegame function that sets the bar very very very high for a lot of folk and can you imagine the carnage after a bugged update like the one we just had?

I was all pro-ironman but now I've had time to think about it and seen how people are with the game and what they want of it now I don't think it's possible - the ganking situation would have been terminal, the risk averse would never throw themselves into a challenge - deeper trenches would be dug and any increasing threat resisted with even more vigour.

It's hard enough right now to imagine how the playerbase would cope if a Proper war broke out, the bloodbath and wastage of a proper war would be unbearable.

ps. i can confirm i got a total kicking from a FAS. I got cocky :/

 

[relayer]

Unless it is Morrowind!

Or Morrowblivion!

I just replayed through the "Morrowind Sounds and Graphics Overhaul" huge upgrade/patch & am looking forward to replaying it with the Morrowind Rebirth 3.5 upgrade/patch.

(offers you a Rusty Sword)

 

[Reverend TZW]

Come on now, invalidate my points with facts if they're wrong, don't just Ad Hominem your way out of a valid explanation.

You've stated a lot of 'facts' but provided no evidence to substantiate them. You stated the 'facts', you validate them.

 

[relayer]

no more rep to give you so have 100lbs of Cubeo Razorback Bacon o7

 

[Mohrgan]

I have no compassion for people who got rich & powerful by exploiting things like Robigo & the previously poor AI. If they feel the new AI is now too great a challenge, then maybe they should start from scratch-like I did-or ask support to drop their Combat ranking, as the NPC's you meet are definitely scaled towards your Combat ranking.

Meanwhile, if you want to avoid danger, then stick to High Security systems, low end RES's & Low intensity Conflict Zones.....as they already exist to accommodate those who value safety over danger.

Ok, no compassion for those guys. How about all of the rest of the players, that don't fit that model, that are still struggling, or just don't play the game for combat?
I can find room in my gaming for all types, and I am dismayed at how many simply cannot.

Personally, I prepared and capable against the current state of the AI. I generally use High RES for my hunting because that's what we have in our system. All told, it surly seems that you are saying 'get good. or get out' to me, and I'm pretty convinced FD doesn't agree with you either.

 

[Bounder]

It's hard enough right now to imagine how the playerbase would cope if a Proper war broke out, the bloodbath and wastage of a proper war would be unbearable.

Alien invasions are a great leveller. A plague of Thargoids might help rebalance perspectives.. Just wait till everyone starts getting mullered in witchspace, oh the howls of consternation..

 

[Long Star]

Risk vs. Reward.

It's finally coming back to the game for traders, miners, etc.... and people have forgotten that this is a fundamental, irreplaceable part of the gameplay mechanics. You want to take a risk in a squishy ship to get that sweet sweet high credit reward? Guess what, it's risky now.

Don't start with the "But mining pays beans, and Explorers are the homeless of ED!"

Yeah, I know, Exploration has been my main gig since combat was trash. Doesn't matter. Until the risk is brought back into balance, the rate of reward can't be estimated and then adjusted to fit. You're just going to have to deal with the fact that FDev is slow and does these things one step at a time just like combat oriented players had to deal with it for a year waiting for FDev to rebalance combat.

That is all. And remember Devs, games that challenge players keep them playing. Once it's beaten that game is replaced and forgotten.

Mining isn't without reward, but it isn't balanced or efficient. Bounty hunting is balanced in a combat ship in a HIGH/HAZ res without too much trouble its profitable. You can get jumped in a mine zone without any back up and lose an hours worth of work in about 20 sec due to the NPC. Not about risk vs reward. Its about out of control NPC behavior. There are NPC Griefer AI coded for some reason. I have been interdicted where the AI are telling me to give up my cargo, while shooting at me and not waiting for me to drop any cargo and this was yesterday 6-4-15, while I didn't even have cargo racks on board! my ASP EXPLORER so tell me how that is risk vs reward when if they suceed they kill my ship and I am out a 1.5 M Rebuy!?!?!?

 

[Cmdr Dubstep Dragon]

Why are you bounty hunting in a 400 mil ship when something that's worth 4 mil will work just fine?

Stop flying the hard mode ship.

honestly , you think a smaller ship can hold up to fdls and condas HAHAHA

 

[relayer]

I have no compassion for people who got rich & powerful by exploiting things like Robigo & the previously poor AI... as the NPC's you meet are definitely scaled towards your Combat ranking.

Well, part the first of that I do agree with - all the bug exploiters re: rank, commodity manipulations, combat-stealing, all running round in uberships and throwing disposable millions into the mix.

However, I am reporting, as are others, that the AI is not scaling to Combat ranking. I am still, after 18months, Mostly Harmless (I am the Rabbit King) & I am encountering runs of Deadly & Elite Anacondas with no cargo in my hold, not on a mission, in mediumsec spaces, with teleporting AI ships which appear right in front of you and an Anaconda outrunning my Cobra MkIII (fastest ship in the game, right?)

I don't understand the rancor these discussions devolve to. Enough players have posted videos of these things. FD itself said that there was definitely a bug in the NPC weapons allowing for physics-breaking rates of fire & heat buildup. "git gut" isn't really a relevant answer to those problems.

Just my 2¢

 

[Marc_Hicks]

Ok, no compassion for those guys. How about all of the rest of the players, that don't fit that model, that are still struggling, or just don't play the game for combat?
I can find room in my gaming for all types, and I am dismayed at how many simply cannot.

Personally, I prepared and capable against the current state of the AI. I generally use High RES for my hunting because that's what we have in our system. All told, it surly seems that you are saying 'get good. or get out' to me, and I'm pretty convinced FD doesn't agree with you either.

Don't like combat? Then stay away from those areas where combat is most likely to occur.....I have found plenty of them....like High Security systems, as I mentioned above. Jumped into dozens of them, never got interdicted within them. If people are experiencing differently, then either they're really making themselves targets, or they're suffering from a BUG.....in which case they should report it as such. However, what I'm hearing here & in the AI threads sounds more like willful exaggeration rather than actual fact. If they fail to provide video evidence, then its really hard to take their claims seriously.

Lastly, did people not read the title of the game on purchase? It's called "Elite: Dangerous".....not "Elite: Shoot Fish in a Barrel all day".

 

[frostypaw]

How about all of the rest of the players, that don't fit that model, that are still struggling, or just don't play the game for combat?
I can find room in my gaming for all types, and I am dismayed at how many simply cannot.

You've kinda dodged my question of how do you expect us all to exist in the same galaxy if the threat level is wildly different between different players?

If you can find room then it needs explaining - in a multiplayer galaxy it can't work in such a free and easy way. Players not seeking combat can avoid it, but they need to adjust their behaviour to do so and go to safe areas and use them otherwise it breaks the whole system of having safe and unsafe areas that people are suggesting is such a good idea in the first place