Will Frontier ever cave to the 'majority' if...

[ScipiosDefence]

I really hope not, my experience with E so far has been brilliant if tough, but that is the way I want it to be. I like games to challenge me, the payoff comes when you overcome difficultly in games.
My first impressions of Arena Commander were not good at all, I hope it gets better and want it to be good, I've invested in both. The more space sims the better

 

[Vargur]

I think player input is already represented enough in the DDF.
Everyone who joins ED by now should know well enough what to expect, which is awesome for a game in alpha. FD are making their game, we pledge because we like where they are going and want to see the end result.

CIG's uncertain stance about something critical as the flight model kind of baffles me. They have 250 devs, many of them veterans in their line of work, they should be more than enough to make up a decent model that is both fun and interesting. I know they all work on different things, but it wouldn't be that hard to atleast get all their opinions about what may be the best choice.
If they will ask 500k people what they want they will get 500k different answers, so they end up back in square one.

 

[mckayi]

The DDF is was the place to suggest changes to the game...remember DB always said that this was the game he wants to play....there just happen to be several thousand people who want to play it too.

 

[ElGuappo]

I think some change is inevitable. There are aspects of the game (the control methods for flying for instance) that define it as Elite, but there's an awful lot that doesn't, and those things will always be up for revision.

At the end of the day if some part of your game is disliked by almost everyone except the people who devised and created it in the first place, then there's a problem.

 

[Dalkeith]

While I applaud star citizen and the developer in question for his very accurate reply. I would like developers to follow their own personal vision. I am buying into that vision and if everyone only followed the majority we would just have no variety.

I know myself that there is a part of me when I am designing my own programs that wants to please myself. I try not to apologise for that. It helps motivate me and keep me going. If I only ever did what the majority wanted I may end up with a camel...

Coherence is sometimes more important than popularity.
Its probably why I hardly ever make suggestions...
The only exception would be when I am out and out asked.

 

[Graill]

The developers do not need to focus on the majority or the minority. They do not need to focus on the folks wanting it easier, nor do they need to focus on the people that want it hard.

As incredulous as it may read, The developers will do what is best for the game, what will make them the most money and in the end, people will either play it or not.

Suggest, rant, whine, beat your chest, stand on your soapbox, the developers will simply watch, take notes and make the final decisions. Whether any of you like it or not.

 

[Memnoch]

The developers will do what is best for the game, what will make them the most money

This can often end badly as they aim for the lowest common denominator. In other words, devs. often get it wrong.

Suggest, rant, whine, beat your chest, stand on your soapbox, the developers will simply watch, take notes and make the final decisions. Whether any of you like it or not.

Very true, but the DDF has had a positive effect on the game and FD do listen to us. I realise that is not the 'majority' but still.

 

[Graill]

This can often end badly as they aim for the lowest common denominator. In other words, devs. often get it wrong.

Very true, but the DDF has had a positive effect on the game and FD do listen to us. I realise that is not the 'majority' but still.

I wouldn't say "The get it wrong" they may get it wrong for the person that says they got it wrong but they will, at all times, plan for the most bang for the buck and the most money.

Trust me, no one wants this game to end up a cross between EVE Online and the Kerbal Space Program.

 

[Mobius]

Will Frontier ever cave to the 'majority' if...the majority ask for the game to be changed?

Yes and it has been done, but if a game changer was proposed by the majority it would probably be discussed within the DDF.

 

[Saxxon]

I think CIG will say anything at this point to keep the money rolling in.

Backers of SC will be lucky to see anything resembling a game by maybe late 2017.

 

[Dante80]

I think CIG will say anything at this point to keep the money rolling in.

Backers of SC will be lucky to see anything resembling a game by maybe late 2017.

This is a little harsh and pessimistic imo. Remember guys, CIG has about 250 people working full time all over the world for SC.

There is A LOT of stuff that is in development simultaneously, that we have not seen yet. This also applies to FD btw..

 

[breakpointUK]

If your familiar with the development of the original Elite, then you'll know that they pitched Elite to various publishers and it was rejected because it didn't follow the mainstream curve of the day.

Thirty years later we are talking about a sequel, where the developer didn't even bother pitching it to publisher (afaik), just based on the legendary status of Elite, Elite: Dangerous wouldn't of been a hard sell!

Instead they gave the crying out fans, the power to back them to create a game they want to make, we understood our role.

I'm in the DDF and the whole experience has been very good, the topics aren't just 'what colour do we paint the cabin quarters', they are much more fundamental mechanics and Frontier have often given valid reasons for the design decisions they are making...

...but they also listen to the community, 'Supercruise' was a great solution to a difficult problem, basically the original plan was PoI to PoI flight, which doesn't give the feeling of open explorable space but you also don't have the 'Star Dreamer' (fast travel) option for an massively multi-tiered online game running in real time.

Which is completely different from what RSI's majority rule is, if the majority want teleportation to a friends hangar... then thats what they'll get (RSI said so, can't go back on that now), sure it will break immersion and make it CoD in space but who cares the majority have their way.

And there lies the problem, SC's success may also be it's downfall...

 

[Dynamo]

Will Frontier ever cave to the 'majority' if...the majority ask for the game to be changed?

I hope not, as there are some really bad ideas out there which will change the game for the worse.

I also find your premises to not be totally correct. Most are just of course your opinion - not sure if you played the original games or not, not that it should matter. However:


1) Elite Dangerous can be difficult.

It can be, yes. But the player more often than not puts themselves in situations that make it difficult for themselves. It is a sandbox game, you can do what you want - if the goals you set yourself are difficult, that's the player's choice. I am enjoying not having everything handed to me on a plate.

2) The flight system and combat takes time and skill to learn.

Hmmm, not really - I was circle straffing, and looping around stations with flight assist off within an hour of playing. I am glad skill is important.

3) The game can be very unforgiving.

Which is a good thing.

4) It is in many ways all about long term goals.



5) There is little in the way of 'instant gratification'.

Having to work for something is a nice change of pace to modern games. The game certainly has moment that reward you - finding a great profit run - coming out tops in a battle.

 

[Leo Sagan]

If Frontier D. dumb the game down, E : D will become a low-budget Star Citizen instead of a unique space sim. In that case, I'll just switch to SC : no reason to stick with a game when a better one exists.

 

[breakpointUK]

If Frontier D. dumb the game down, E : D will become a low-budget Star Citizen instead of a unique space sim. In that case, I'll just switch to SC : no reason to stick with a game when a better one exists.

Define 'better'...

nothing, in both development plans and what we have seen... warrants the word better... different yes... better no.

 

[Leo Sagan]

Define 'better'...

Better at being a take-it-easy space game. To me, the learning curve of Elite is what makes the game special and if they remove it, I'll have no reason to play it anymore. But that's just my opinion of course.

 

[Suul Vellumcore]

Maybe it's just me, but having been reading this forum regularly for a few weeks now, I get the distinct impression that, in fact, the majority view of us backers is that the game is extremely good as it stands now, and will only get better as long as it follows in the same vein as it has been going.

I think that the whining and frustrated posts come from a distinct MINORITY, where it can almost always be seen that the majority of us regularly come to the fore and dominate such threads after they appear, always with helpful instructions, advice, and an urging for disgruntled players to stick it out. (basically just like this thread... in terms of majority view) And I think it's readibly apparent, from those kinds of threads and the resulting response from us, for Mr Braben and his team to see exactly where we the majority stand.

Then again, maybe it's just me...

 

[breakpointUK]

Better at being a take-it-easy space game. To me, the learning curve of Elite is what makes the game special and if they remove it, I'll have no reason to play it anymore. But that's just my opinion of course.

Hmm... I agree that the flight mechanics make Elite special, but I would also say that what makes Elite special (to me, at least) is the feeling that Frontier are trying to create a realistic future universe... it's faithful representation of our galaxy and the freedom to do whatever you want.

I having nothing against SC, I've back it. I played Freelancer solidly since launch right up to a couple of years ago! Although my heart will always be where space sims first started!

But nothing has impressed me so far with SC, the hanger module thingy was a joke, the first showcase had nothing to go with flying a space ship. The Arena thing looks confined, ugly and boring (just wow that blue orb).

 

[Amorelia]

Will Frontier ever cave to the 'majority' if...the majority ask for the game to be changed?

No. This is David Braben's baby, and he's getting the game that he wants whether anyone else likes it or not.

However, if they do make a change that the majority wanted, does that mean they caved to the majority, or that they decided what the majority want is for the betterment of the game?

 

[Tonberry]

The quote from CIG posted by the OP is an interesting one, especially when it comes to the statement regarding the wishes of the 'majority' - as with all games, it is highly probable that the 'majority' dont post in forums or feed back... as such, how can this influence the game's direction? Heaven help us if developers start folding to the demands of the vocal minority of the player base

CIG would be best off just making the game that they originally envisioned imho - those backers who supported the game through kickstarter and beyond deserve only the game that is ultimately delivered, so long as the developer delivers on their original specification, regardless of whether or not it aligns with their own (inflated) expectations. If they keep making ad-hoc changes to core mechanics in an attempt to appease fanatics, then the whole project risks unravelling down the line.

The main issue here is the promise of a 'realistic' space combat simulator: with no definitive non-theoretical baseline in reality on which to base the game (i.e. outside of starwars and BSG), realism is a very VERY loose term to adhere to. I backed Elite as the actual alpha gameplay fulfilled my interpretation of this and I hope that the direction never changes for that reason. EVERYONE who backed SC to this point did it with zero point of reference - they ultimately backed an idea and not an implementation.

Crowd funding is a great idea in theory but damn, it muddies the waters when you have a hundred thousand stakeholders all expecting different outcomes... If CIG were smarter (hindsight is wonderful) they would have paused crowdfunding at the kickstarter stage, produced an alpha 'demo' and THEN opened their additional funding program to the masses. The hype machine might not have snowballed like it has, but the final game may have been better for it as they could have remained focused on Chris Robert's initial dream as opposed to the increasing weight of backer €£$ slowly stifling it.

In my eyes, the attitudes of the vocal SC community has now influenced my decision not to indulge in the foreseeable future as, frankly, I am losing confidence in my own ability to not get frustrated by the hyperbole.