Why I think Elite Dangerous is going to dominate the Space MMO/Space Sim genre

[Mu77ley]

I agree

Both, the old Elite, and Frontier, were ahead of their time and became instant classics, FFE was more like an expansion (it came relatively soon after FE2) but it still attempted many new things in the genre (galnet etc.)

ED is just mediocre all around with most things playing catch up with the other space sims instead of setting the path for others to follow like its predecessors did

And just like you i believe its all due to somebody`s silly idea to make this game always online. I mean.... ED with its silly disjointed instances feels far less technically impressive than Frontier`s seamless universe from 1993

Ed is not a bad game... just like 75% of other bargain bin games. But it`s not in the same league as Elite and FE2/FFE. It feels cheap all around

You really need to remove those rose-tinted specs.

Also, please name a single current space game that ED is playing "catch-up" with, because there's really nothing out there that can hold a candle to ED right now.

 

[eqinox]

You really need to remove those rose-tinted specs.

Also, please name a single current space game that ED is playing "catch-up" with, because there's really nothing out there that can hold a candle to ED right now.

Must admit, the premise, the world and tech of FE2 was great, but the combat was so bad that it was pretty hard to get excited about the gameplay itself. But the size of the galaxy, missions, trading, ships, variety of stations and planets, it was a truly astonishing feat. And Braben wrote it himself in 68000 assembler..

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

ED is just mediocre all around

It has great ambience : Station noises; engines going into/out of SC; creaking noises; etc. All stacks up to be a lovely feast on the ears.

 

[Pomerlaw]

ED will never dominate for one main reason.
It doesn't offer the 'you are the hero that can save the galaxy' campaign.

If they want to sell games like hot cakes, they need to build a single player campaign with an epic story, and put the player in the center of it. That will please all the "I'm special" kids out there.

Seriously, they should do it. Remember that capital ship battle video?

Something inside me is secretly hoping this is what 2.4 is all about. It could turn out to be a direct competition for Squadron 42. Remember they said they want to make military more of a career? You could build your character with the single player missions then join the main game afterwards. It would make the whole game feel more personal and add a lot of story.

 

[Electric Kite]

I am sorry but please re-read your words. When you tell me what you think I do that is discussing me, so I will kindly ask you to refrain from it. We have already been warned by a Mod to stop sniping so I would welcome you adhering to it as well.

Have a good day.

lol..
Have a good day friend

 

[Hellhawk666]

ED will never dominate for one main reason.
It doesn't offer the 'you are the hero that can save the galaxy' campaign.

That or a player-driven mileau in a game that embraces multiplayer functionality instead of actively avoiding it.

 

[Varrag]

I think ED missed its chance to become the cult classic that it could of been, I think it missed it by a wide mark.

What you have with ED is more of a 'space invaders' style game world that lacks any persistance or meaning, something which its predecessors had bucket loads of.

I think if a true successor to FFE was produced, it would clean up, nothing would come close for years.

Im talking a single player experience, with Coop at the most.

I too strongly believe that the true successor to FE2/FFE, which means purely single player and everything else that goes with this kind of game, would have yielded much better results. ED isn't working very well as the single player, nor the MMO - it's stuck somewhere in between, incapable to deliver quality enough gameplay experience for either.

However, FDEV still sits at pretty comfortable place because serious competitors are well below the horizon. They have plenty of time, I'd say a year at least, to improve things if they wish so.

 

[dannysquid]

I too strongly believe that the true successor to FE2/FFE, which means purely single player and everything else that goes with this kind of game, would have yielded much better results. ED isn't working very well as the single player, nor the MMO - it's rather stuck somewhere in between, incapable to deliver quality gameplay experience for either.

However, FDEV still sits at pretty comfortable place because serious competitors are well below the horizon. They have plenty of time, I'd say about two years, to improve things if they wish so.

I think most of ED's persistence problems are related to multi-player so it really all depends on how much you value the multiplayer side of things. Even the bitty and weakish persistence we have is massively harder to pull off than the full persistence you'd get in a single player game.

NMS isn't really trying to do proper multiplayer, as far as I can tell, and we don't really know how successful SC will be at multiplayer. It still sounds like it's at the promises rather than delivery stage.

 

[Varrag]

I think most of ED's persistence problems are related to multi-player so it really all depends on how much you value the multiplayer side of things. Even the bitty and weakish persistence we have is massively harder to pull off than the full persistence you'd get in a single player game.

I see problems on both ends: single player experience in ED falls short in comparison with FE2/FFE... while on the other hand, MMO aspect is nowhere near EVE (to keep it in the realm of the sci-fi games). ED is 'jack of all trades, master of none' -sort of. It's not bad per se of course, but more often than not such games tend to leave both the single player and MMO-oriented crowd more or less dissatisfied; this is exactly what is happening with ED at the moment, imo.

 

[Hellhawk666]

I see problems on both ends: single player experience in ED falls short in comparison with FE2/FFE... while on the other hand, MMO aspect is nowhere near EVE (to keep it in the realm of the sci-fi games). ED is 'jack of all trades, master of none' -sort of. It's not bad per se of course, but more often than not such games tend to leave both the single player and MMO-oriented crowd more or less dissatisfied; this is exactly what is happening with ED at the moment, imo.

Hard not to agree. I believe ED was forced into this difficult position very early on, and over time we are seeing more and more of the fallout.

DB clearly wanted to make a game that appealed to the "old guard" of 84s, both because they were the natural audience who had wanted a remake for a long time and because they would constitute the core of the kickstarter backers. That meant appealing to an older demographic and players who loved the single-player game. However, being able to play Elite with friends was always a fantasy of every old guard player, and of DB himself, so there was a strong desire that it should be a multiplayer online game. That's where trouble started because although FD wanted it to be a multiplayer game, they didn't want to make an MMO (and I'd argue they had and still have no idea of how to do that properly anyway).

Consequently the game is a bit schizophrenic. During design every activity, mechanic and function MUST be made suitable for single players so it does not exclude them from any possible gameplay (which is why exploration requiring groups of players was nerfed). At the same time, multiplayer features of all kinds always feel like miserly afterthoughts added with fear and loathing lest they cause the game to become too much like an MMO (and EVE in particular). As more complexity is added, the more this tension becomes evident.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Hard not to agree. I believe ED was forced into this difficult position very early on, and over time we are seeing more and more of the fallout.

Agreed also. By being massively multiplayer it closes off a lot of possibilities - save/load to "try stuff out", suitable "at own pace" play, repeating of events (what happens if I fight Lugh for the Feds this time), meaningful modding support, ability to stick to previous versions if you don't like an update, more straightforward game balancing, and plenty of less obvious stuff.

It's an unavoidable cost, which would be fine, if the multiplayer side worked properly, but I'm not sure Frontier really get what's needed there. A lot of the recent - historical, for that matter - shouting matches seem to have come from Frontier saying "hey guys, here's a cool mechanic you can work on as a group" (BGS, PowerPlay, CGs, etc), players going for it, finding that despite some clunkiness or bugs it is indeed pretty cool, and so getting invested into making it work for them - and then Frontier either introduce a serious bug and respond to it in a way which doesn't account for that investment, or make an intentional decision which doesn't. Add to that the very basic nature of many of the multiplayer features for actually encouraging player interaction - though I'd put that down to "early days" than a deliberate decision against them - such as comms, wings, friends management, CQC, and carrying out long-term coordinated multiplayer activities (which are great fun when they work) really feels like a struggle against the game at times.

So, as you say, doesn't really work as either solo or multiplayer. I think they could have made it work great as a pure singleplayer game - but this is the "everything must be multiplayer" era, so I don't know if it would have even got the initial funding for that. I strongly doubt if "great", "Elite-like" and "multiplayer" is a compatible set of things for a game to be, though I think everyone including Frontier hopes it is.

 

[Insomnia]

A recent report said Elite Dangerous sold 1.7 million copies across all platforms (PC, Xbox One and Mac)

Units, not game copies only... Units means bobbleheads, skin packs and all the merchandise around ED like T-shirts and caps.

OP
I think ED was spot on at 1.0 and it was a great starting point. But after time, it became quite clear that ED tried to be everything to everyone and it ended up not knowing what it was. Even 1.5 years later I still feel ED is very confused.
I do believe SC to be more focused than ED even if it takes time for it to be completed.

All in all, Elite Dangerous has such massive potential and sometimes I don't think FD has the ability to achieve what they try to achieve (if that even made sense). It always seem to miss its targets.

 

[lysan]

Units, not game copies only... Units means bobbleheads, skin packs and all the merchandise around ED like T-shirts and caps.

OP
I think ED was spot on at 1.0 and it was a great starting point. But after time, it became quite clear that ED tried to be everything to everyone and it ended up not knowing what it was. Even 1.5 years later I still feel ED is very confused.
I do believe SC to be more focused than ED even if it takes time for it to be completed.

All in all, Elite Dangerous has such massive potential and sometimes I don't think FD has the ability to achieve what they try to achieve (if that even made sense). It always seem to miss its targets.

We actually don't know that, its just one of those things that is speculation, it could also mean copies of the game, just saying.
Fact is that FD is financially ok, and there is enough headroom to develop the game in the future.

A Block Listing Return was issued two days ago, so anyone concerned can just follow the trade on LT.

 

[Insomnia]

We actually don't know that, its just one of those things that is speculation, it could also mean copies of the game, just saying.
Fact is that FD is financially ok, and there is enough headroom to develop the game in the future.

A Block Listing Return was issued two days ago, so anyone concerned can just follow the trade on LT.

Here's a piece from a Euro Gamer article about it. Now, English isn't my native language so I don't fully understand the financial terms.

"Antonaci's mention of a "public statement" relates to Frontier's full year trading update, issued on 6th July.

In it, Frontier said its self-published revenue grew year-on-year by 13 per cent, and was over 99 per cent of its total revenue in its first full financial year of self-publishing of the Elite Dangerous franchise. That revenue was £21.3m.

Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) are expected to be £6.1m, with an operating profit of £1.2m, but there's a curious note in the financials that mentions that this EBITDA figure is "stated before the deduction of £8.9m of capitalised R&D in the period". Surely taking this deduction into account, Frontier's financials wouldn't appear so rosy?

Countering this, Frontier said its balance sheet remains strong, and that by the end of 31st May, it had net cash of around £8.6m.

Frontier added its long-term strategy is to "transition to self-publishing multiple revenue generating franchises". That includes the launch of the promising Planet Coaster, set for the fourth quarter of 2016.


Meanwhile, total Elite Dangerous franchise unit sales increased by over one million during the financial year, and are currently around 1.7m. Now, it's worth noting the use of the term "Elite Dangerous franchise unit sales", here. That doesn't necessarily mean games, only. There's plenty of Elite Dangerous add-ons, such as the second season expansion pass, and merchandise, including T-shirts, caps and books, available to buy."

 

[Mu77ley]

"stated before the deduction of £8.9m of capitalised R&D in the period". Surely taking this deduction into account, Frontier's financials wouldn't appear so rosy?

That figure is related to the £21.3m in the first part of the sentence you failed to quote. Capitalisation of R&D is just a way of companies claiming back tax on internal R&D costs, so work on future technology, prototyping, etc. Some development teams have got this down to such a fine art they are almost profit centres without ever releasing code to the public.

 

[Insomnia]

That figure is related to the £21.3m in the first part of the sentence you failed to quote. Capitalisation of R&D is just a way of companies claiming back tax on internal R&D costs, so work on future technology, prototyping, etc. Some development teams have got this down to such a fine art they are almost profit centres without ever releasing code to the public.

I quoted that text from Euro Gamer mate.

 

[lysan]

Here's a piece from a Euro Gamer article about it. Now, English isn't my native language so I don't fully understand the financial terms.

"Antonaci's mention of a "public statement" relates to Frontier's full year trading update, issued on 6th July.

In it, Frontier said its self-published revenue grew year-on-year by 13 per cent, and was over 99 per cent of its total revenue in its first full financial year of self-publishing of the Elite Dangerous franchise. That revenue was £21.3m.

Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) are expected to be £6.1m, with an operating profit of £1.2m, but there's a curious note in the financials that mentions that this EBITDA figure is "stated before the deduction of £8.9m of capitalised R&D in the period". Surely taking this deduction into account, Frontier's financials wouldn't appear so rosy?

Countering this, Frontier said its balance sheet remains strong, and that by the end of 31st May, it had net cash of around £8.6m.

Frontier added its long-term strategy is to "transition to self-publishing multiple revenue generating franchises". That includes the launch of the promising Planet Coaster, set for the fourth quarter of 2016.


Meanwhile, total Elite Dangerous franchise unit sales increased by over one million during the financial year, and are currently around 1.7m. Now, it's worth noting the use of the term "Elite Dangerous franchise unit sales", here. That doesn't necessarily mean games, only. There's plenty of Elite Dangerous add-ons, such as the second season expansion pass, and merchandise, including T-shirts, caps and books, available to buy."

Yes,

Meanwhile, total Elite Dangerous franchise unit sales increased by over one million during the financial year, and are currently around 1.7m. Now, it's worth noting the use of the term "Elite Dangerous franchise unit sales", here. That doesn't necessarily mean games, only. There's plenty of Elite Dangerous add-ons, such as the second season expansion pass, and merchandise, including T-shirts, caps and books, available to buy."

They are speculating, the "units" are not defined, it could mean a lot of things, however not necessary restricted to Elite Dangerous copies. The Problem here is that you or the article could be right, again we don't have any confirmation from FD. What we need to look at are numbers like steam sales, and then guess what FD store sells. The best way is to look at the EBITDA numbers and then evaluate the financial strength of the company.

In my humble opinion FD are good, they need to stay focused and it could all turn 180, however for now its all good.

 

[Mu77ley]

I quoted that text from Euro Gamer mate.

Well, in future it might be best to avoid lazy click-bait articles and go direct to the source material: http://www.frontier.co.uk/investor_relations/reports/news/?artid=636&pageNum=0&blk=275

 

[yaip]

Let's not forget Frontier are experienced at space games

Frontier has produced only one space game before. It didn't turn out well.

 

[Riedquat]

Frontier has produced only one space game before. It didn't turn out well.

FFE was a fantastic game, I played it for a long time.

I suspect that article is a rant about the state it was released in, if I remember rightly it was very buggy.

What was that from anyway?