2 Months in; "We don't know"
- Thread starter EValve
- Start date
I can hold it for you!
Why do you have to lug around engineer crap? the commodity portion of a recipe doesn't require that many items ...you get the couple you need to do a mod and then you go on about your business. nothing in the game forces you to hoard for more than what you immediately plan to do.
the commodity argument for storage is weak. The module argument is a bit stronger. Stick with that.
the commodity argument for storage is weak. The module argument is a bit stronger. Stick with that.
Question for you as admittedly I haven't played ED since the most recent patch.
Do they still have rare, hard to find commodities that are required for L5 mods ? If so, there's your reason ...
This /\ and this again ... (anvil slams..case closed)
Brett: Hey game design guys, so i looked at the forum extensively, prepared these summarized arguments and players would like to sugg....
Senior game designer: !@#$@#$!!! We never do, what player want. What part of that did you fail to understand last time?
Brett: But we promised player stora
SGD: I lied. We never given in to any player demands to change the game design, that would kill HIS holy vision. Now leave the room and never try this again!
Last edited:
I suspect this is harder to implement than we realize. Having been involved in game design in the past I have learned that it can be a challenge to implement what seems to be the most basic changes BECAUSE it always has side effects in other parts of the programming. There can be hours and hours of code cleanup/debug/testing, rinse and repeat.... that goes with it.
Methinks this is the reason we don't have storage.
Methinks this is the reason we don't have storage.
What logic, so do your missions and jettison the rewards out the ass end of your ship when you get them, what fun.
Pure genius I tell ya.
Last edited:
FWIW, It seems to me that FDEV isn't too hot on the idea of emergent gameplay
This is puzzling indeed. How come one group of people, who develop the plans for the future, know the code and have far more insight into the project have a more nuanced and ambiguous view on storage? I have an idea: maybe its because they are the ones who develop the plans for the future, know the code and have far more insight into the project. As with everything: the less one knows, the more one is sure of their opinion.
Not when 'emergent gameplay' devolves into 'two dudes living in their moms basement ruining the galaxy for the rest'. There needs to be a balance, and the premise of ED is that you are NOT 'the Chosen One'.
Not when 'emergent gameplay' devolves into 'two dudes living in their moms basement ruining the galaxy for the rest'. There needs to be a balance, and the premise of ED is that you are NOT 'the Chosen One'.
But you can do that now - you fill ur ship's hold with stuff and just sit in it for days...
You cant store the ship with the hold full. YOu have to empty the hold so you can swap to a different ship.
Notice he didnt say the arguments against are NOT from players........... I bet the only ones who dont want it to be a QoL improvement and I would have thought prerequisite for crafting are the bean counters and are thinking of ways to monetize it, there is no other argument against it as far as I can see.
Last edited:
Shockingly so in fact - how is it this wasn't forseen as an issue at the design stage is embarrassing. I don't know how you can miss something like this - did they not think it through even a little?
this is a cool idea but it ties storage to engineers. and while engineers makes the need even more visible i thinks storage could be useful in general.
i honestly don't think so, unless storage capacity was way over the top (and even then transport is limited to cargo space). thats why ...
... i think it *is* a lame excuse. no aggression intended whatsoever, it's just lame and i would be happy to be proven wrong!
We can only work with the information that has been given to us and our personal and/or professional expertise in the area.
So far none of the published comments have been suggesting difficulty or problematic implementation. ( I understand a lot depends on the tools at hand, especially in this case since they've opted not to create their own Engine.) ( there are undoubtedly difficulties to overcome ).
The question about storage has been raised long before the Engineers were announced. Evaluating the circumstances, necessity and possibilities are the first steps when considering a suggestion.
2 Months in the Engineers patch with non-stop feedback about the sheer necessity to maintain play-ability has given even more incentive to analyze the possibilities and especially whether or not there is a real necessity.
After 2 months, coming up with an answer that basically says "we don't know" is outrageous. Cut the rope, make a decision. Don't stare at your paper only to come up with "I don't know yet"..
The very least is to communicate.
As I said I'm open to be informed about any kind of reasoning that could hinder its development. I'll express an opinion accordingly.
Until then, I'm raising the flag to ask "what the F are you doing?"
The information we have so far is of extremely poor quality and outdated. ( Referring to the live-stream BGS-Abuse reasoning )
If anybody is against module storage they are as crazy as the people who are against credit transfers.
1) They did create their own engine, called Cobra.
2) The "I dont know" answer isnt from a dev.
3) They dont have to constantly communicate everything with us, because in the past it clearly showed people here go ape when they misunderstand something or when plans change.
Because storage in ED is more complicated than a door...
http://www.lizengland.com/blog/2014/04/the-door-problem/
http://www.lizengland.com/blog/2014/04/the-door-problem/