My thoughts on where things are going.

Dude, read the post and grok the point being made.

You call DOOM AND GLOOM siting the decline of retail outlets to sell games.

I show that FD don't even use Retail outlets.

You wonder what that WHOOSHING noise was that just went over your head.

Elites doom is coming for a different reason. When you turn your back on the fans who backed you, blow off promises and refuse to deliver...That spells it's own kind of Doom.

If the next big expansion doesn't deliver something to DO in this game...I dont think more promises will cut it after that.
 
I would love them to add depth to the other elements of the game, trading & exploration. I don't see many suggestions from people as to how they'd do this - except making the markets actual real dynamic player markets, where you can trade things that are actually functional as opposed to meaningless 'xxxx pointless commodity'. I am genuinely fascinated by what all the trading and exploration people want. Because I would probably enjoy it too.

Well, as a veteran explorer in Elite, I can at least let you know how I would improve exploration if given the chance:

Exploration needs two areas of improvement: mechanics, and content. Frontier has added some content since 1.0 in the form of geysers, fumeroles, and fungal life, but explorers have no tools at all to find them, so they need to search entire planets by eye, which is of course not feasible for anything other than the smallest of potato worlds. They added content potential with landable worlds but as of yet have not utilized this potential for explorers in any engaging nor interactive ways. Neutron jumps are the only meaningful mechanic to be added to exploration since 1.0 that directly changes and makes the game play of exploration more interactive and engaging. Exploration in Elite desperately needs more engaging and interactive mechanics to add diversity and player initiated actions to the role, the fact that so many explorers currently watch Netflix while they explore says it all!!!

So this is how I would develop exploration, and I’ll do the mechanics first, followed by the content which then uses said mechanics:

New Exploration Mechanics and Improvements:

  • Planet Surface Heat Maps – A new feature of DSS scans, surface maps now highlight areas of interest, or search zones which can identify large areas to find things like man made unidentified objects (unregistered bases or outposts), alien unidentified objects (alien ruins, alien ship crash sites), geysers and fumeroles, fungal life, basically any unidentified procedurally or hand placed fixed POI on the surface.

    Upon flying down into a heatmap zone and entering glide, a bouncing search designator routine begins just like is currently used for surface salvage missions, only requiring many more “iterations” to narrow down. Once the commander finalizes the search routine they then must land and use the SRV scanners to exactly locate where the POI is. Once these POI’s are found by the commander then they become “known” to them and from then on are no longer marked with heatmaps but instead with the normal surface designator icon, like bubble surface content currently is.
  • Solar Flares – Fuel scooping is now more dangerous! Occasionally there can be solar flares and star corona ejections while flying close to stars, like when fuel scooping, which have to either be avoided or the ship could experience sudden drastic heat increases, and even take shield damage, and if the shields drop then hull and module damage.
  • SRV MkII – This is a new, larger version of the Scarab, with a weaker turret but much more cargo space. The MkII also carries a surface drill rig which can be used for various things, some of which will be detailed below in the “content” section.
  • Exploration Internal Slots – Certain ships get additional internals that can be used for exploration related modules, like both scanners, fuel scoops, and the AFMU.
  • Natural Signal Sources – New version of USS but all naturally occurring stuff, like comets, very large landable asteroids, wandering asteroid fields, and even rogue planets (more below). Some NSS’s contain things which can be scanned for data (more valuable with distance from SOL), others can be mined for materials. NSS can spawn anywhere, even in the bubble too, but they get much more valuable with distance from the bubble of course.
  • Neutron Battery – New module, can store one charge of a neutron jump corona scoop for the FSD. This could allow explorers to potentially use neutron stars to jump into very remote systems which would normally strand the ship with no way to return.

New Exploration Content:

  • Rework Geysers / Fumeroles / Fungal Life – Simply update these to work with the new DSS heatmaps, and add scan points to them so that they can be flagged as “discovered” and their locations can be sold for credits. Also add increased variety, like huge and gargantuan geysers!
  • New Natural Surface POI’s – These are not fixed POI’s like geysers, but a new category of randomly generated instanced POI’s (like cargo dumps and mat nodes) which are located via the SRV scanners. Gives explorers things to find out on planet surfaces in deep space which can be scanned for valuable data. Things like geologic formations, meteor impact sites, more kinds of fungal life, and surface core samples (more on this below), all in varying degrees of value and quality. These data scans become more valuable with distance from SOL, this encourages explorers to get out into deep space.
  • Surface Core Samples – These are rare random locations found with the SRV scanner which allow the commander to use the drill rig on the SRV MkII to drill through the surface and collect a planet core sample, which takes 1T of cargo space and can be taken back to civilization and sold for large credit values. Again the cores increase in value with distance from SOL. The new DSS heatmaps can be used to locate areas on planets with the best chances of finding surface core spots, but much SRV searching will still be required to find one. In general though they will procedurally spawn around areas of increased surface terrain geometry, like large canyon or mountain networks.
  • Rogue Planets - Fully landable and functional planets found in the new Natural Signal Sources, with potentially everything that can be found on normal planets, but with much more robust terrain geometry. These planets have gone through hell, so they can potentially have very extreme terrain features and crazy POI clusters. Extremely valuable surface core samples, as long as you can locate them!

This is all just off the top of my head, I have more ideas. More planet types to land on would open so many more concepts, but at least the mechanics would then be in place to take advantage of the new worlds. I’ve posted so many “improve exploration” ideas across so many threads, I really should just make my own thread detailing it all out and then just post a link from now on, LOL!!!!
 
The player numbers are NOT down. In 2017 the average has remained higher than at any other time during 2016
source - https://steamdb.info/app/359320/graphs/

The criticism has remained constant since launch, the Steam reviews reflect that, and that's what is being discussed.

Those numbers are just steam numbers. There's no way to tell how many people that bought the game from the FD store (and kickstarter backers) are still playing.
 
I don't think Elite's doom is coming, only ours. Most current players might not like S3 when it arrives and probably will stop playing the game for a number of reasons, but new players most likely will enjoy it nevertheless. The worst case scenario is that the current audience will move on, and a new audience will arrive. And this is quite normal. The sad thing is that the game that some KS backers supported, might become, in the end, a game made for someone else. Which seems like a betrayal if we take it morally, but in the industry of video games, that day will be just another day.
 
Last edited:
This is all just off the top of my head, I have more ideas. More planet types to land on would open so many more concepts, but at least the mechanics would then be in place to take advantage of the new worlds. I’ve posted so many “improve exploration” ideas across so many threads, I really should just make my own thread detailing it all out and then just post a link from now on, LOL!!!!
Thanks, some interesting thoughts and cool ideas.
I think exploration is probably the biggest challenge for Frontier as far as creating actual gameplay goes, because making 'interesting' things come along too often would just be unrealistic. I agree with your assessment that what it needs most are mechanics which allow the player to find interesting natural features etc. relatively quickly - the planet heatmap feature being a good example.

In general I've always thought they should be at least aiming for the level of fidelity that Space Engine has as far as features like aurorae, comets, accretion disks and so on go. Also, add planets and moons with atmospheres (but without life) - Mars/Venus/Titan. That should be relatively easy enough, it just requires volumetric cloud tech, atmospheric fog, and a good lighting model. In fact, thinking about it, it would be logical for them to be adding those kinds of planets/moons next...
 
Those numbers are just steam numbers. There's no way to tell how many people that bought the game from the FD store (and kickstarter backers) are still playing.

And it's interesting, because Frontier is hush-hush about the number of active players. It would be interesting to get these values from them, though I fear they would reaffirm the "niche game" portrait.
 
It is a nice list of features mengy. +1. However :

I think exploration related issues run deeper than just more POI/astronomical objects/SRVs/Surface features.
While having those would be nice and help, it is not really changing the core of exploration. Once the novelty
factor of those new things wear off, we'll be back to square one so to speak.

What exploration need is tension & danger and more risk / reward gameplay tied to exploration. How to do it
without redoing the whole game is the big question.

But, from my small experience with RPG design :

  • Ships have a number of "pools" that are way underused in ED, such as hull integrity and fuel.
  • There need to be dangers. Not bang! you're dead dangers, but more like wear and tear that need attention in order to avoid bigger complications leading to the final loss of the ship. Good examples are : "the long dark" and "FTL".
  • Module damage beyond % damage. Think of the typical "afflictions" that RPG have, and that are the hooks for various quests and turning simple situations into challenging ones.

All of this is broad brush / no detail stuff, but I'm sure any rpg/adventure/survival game designer worth its salt would be able to pull something off.

IMO that is what exploration really needs to go from tourism (what we have now) to exploration (think Magellan voyage : it was rife with dangers and difficult situations, nothing like a cruise trip lol).
Exploration in ED is just that at the moment : a cruise trip, safe and comfy. Make it unsafe and tense !
 
Last edited:
It is a nice list of features mengy. +1. However :

I think exploration related issues run deeper than just more POI/astronomical objects/SRVs/Surface features.
While having those would be nice and help, it is not really changing the core of exploration. Once the novelty
factor of those new things wear off, we'll be back to square one so to speak.

What exploration need is tension & danger and more risk / reward gameplay tied to exploration. How to do it
without redoing the whole game is the big question.

But, from my small experience with RPG design :

  • Ships have a number of "pools" that are way underused in ED, such as hull integrity and fuel.
  • There need to be dangers. Not bang! you're dead dangers, but more like wear and tear that need attention in order to avoid bigger complications leading to the final loss of the ship. Good examples are : "the long dark" and "FTL".
  • Module damage beyond % damage. Think of the typical "afflictions" that RPG have, and that are the hooks for various quests and turning simple situations into challenging ones.

All of this is broad brush / no detail stuff, but I'm sure any rpg/adventure/survival game designer worth its salt would be able to pull something off.

IMO that is what exploration really needs to go from tourism (what we have now) to exploration (think Magellan voyage : it was rife with dangers and difficult situations, nothing like a cruise trip lol).
Exploration in ED is just that at the moment : a cruise trip, safe and comfy. Make it unsafe and tense !

Agreed completely, but explorers need things to do right now out in space, things other than just sightseeing and taking screenshots. The greater risk is needed, but not in the form of aliens shooting at us. It’s why I love the neutron jump mechanic so much, and it’s why I suggested to make fuel scooping a more interactive mechanic with the added possibility of risk. Exploring deep space should be dangerous, but a lot of that can all be added later with more planet types. Planet weather and volcanism can be greatly used to make exploring much more risky, just not on the barren worlds we have access to now.

As for ship module wear and tear, it should have always been a factor. The AFMU should be a mandatory piece of equipment for exploring far away from stations IMHO. I’m in favor of anything that makes explorers use the AFMU and need to restock it more than once per year. On one of my trips I flew over 180,000 lys and barely ever even turned my AFMU on, and honestly I didn’t really even need it, that’s utterly ridiculous to me.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, some interesting thoughts and cool ideas.
I think exploration is probably the biggest challenge for Frontier as far as creating actual gameplay goes, because making 'interesting' things come along too often would just be unrealistic. I agree with your assessment that what it needs most are mechanics which allow the player to find interesting natural features etc. relatively quickly - the planet heatmap feature being a good example.

In general I've always thought they should be at least aiming for the level of fidelity that Space Engine has as far as features like aurorae, comets, accretion disks and so on go. Also, add planets and moons with atmospheres (but without life) - Mars/Venus/Titan. That should be relatively easy enough, it just requires volumetric cloud tech, atmospheric fog, and a good lighting model. In fact, thinking about it, it would be logical for them to be adding those kinds of planets/moons next...

Mengy's list is great, and desirable, even to non-explorer. (For myself I don't have that bug currently, but do want to do it more if/when the mechanics and content are more fleshed out).

But surely you can see that easy is the wrong word to describe this:

That should be relatively easy enough, it just requires volumetric cloud tech, atmospheric fog, and a good lighting model. In fact, thinking about it, it would be logical for them to be adding those kinds of planets/moons next...

There are a lot of extra demands on the system in ED compared Space Engine - ship modelling, dynamic audio, networking etc. I do agree with you that it's the most likely next big step (and would be blessedly 'building on a base' stylee if so), but easy it surely ain't, even relatively ;)

---

I think OP here, and so many threads like it, miss a core issue when looking at the amount of work lavished on combat over exploration in the last year. Fiddling with the numbers is relatively easy. Making an interactible 1:1 scale galaxy of any depth is ridiculously ambitious and hard. I don't know why this point is so deftly passed over quite so often.

I don't buy the initial point in the OP that combat has feature creeped into an all encompassing position. It was always one major pillar of the Kickstarter etc, it's currently easier to service, and it gets a more obvious dividend from efforts thrown at it. (As noted there have been additions to exploration, but they just form tiny pinpricks in that big old galactic plane)

As much as this sentiment annoys the OP, time is all you've got. Time and hope. They're playing their chemical games with planetary surfaces, they've had work broiling away on proc gen clouds for a fair while now (it seems likely given the early demos and claims of ongoing work). We all know the state the game launched in. If you want a relatively AAA experience of flying your spaceship through a living galaxy, it's clearly gonna take time. (And if other playstyles need to be facilitated along the way, to take this game up to at least 'sci fi' niche, rather than 'what's over that hill astronomy' niche niche, then that's how it's got to be.)

You have my love space brothers and sisters. I want your favourite pastime to get lavished with additions too. Let us hold out for that day. (And, between constructively criticising, play other stuff when ED's annoying us ;))
 
Last edited:
By exploration dangers I mean stuff like :

* Space weather beyond neutron stars, like flare stars, magnetars, micro meteroids strikes, super strong solar winds (WR/O class)
 
(Disclaimer - I am fully aware that this post is going to cause a LOT of hate. I can only ask that, instead of directly attacking ME for having my opinion on, which is after all, an open forum, you direct your attention to the points in my post. They are made solely in the interests of the game, which I want to enjoy.)

So I'm reading through the replies to the latest dissatisfaction post from a player who has had enough, and naturally I see the same tired responses from those who just can't resist from posting a sarcastic remark to bolster their post count (you'll make Deadly in no time!).


I also saw a few posts regarding something that deserves more discussion, that of longevity and value.


Getting your money's worth, burning out after 5000 hours of play. Are these things mutually inclusive?


I have not played the game for about 2 months. I have, according to Steam, 1310 hours of play. You can probably quadruple that, as I have been playing since early beta.


That's a lot of play.


Did I burn out? Absolutely, usually after I achieved certain goals I set myself, such as grinding my way to a Cutter. Because, y'know - shiny.


I look back at the time I have spent playing the game, and I find myself asking the question 'what do I remember, what were the stand out bit that made those thousands of hours worth playing?'


Well, let's see. Flying through my own solar system was quite nice, getting up close and personal with Saturn, yes that was quite good.


FINALLY moving up from my free Eagle to a Cobra MK III was (back then) a great achievement, and, as I suspect for a lot of early players, was a great feeling of accomplishment and freedom from the shackles of the Sidey (or Freagle).


Landing on a planet for the first time was impressive - if a bit jarring - still dislike the obvious transition from space to instance.


Exploring a few star systems and seeing things like Neutron Stars, and a couple of other things I can't really remember.


Um...


Oh, the PR stunt for the Thargoid thing was very good.


Um...


I think thats about it.


Now... what about what I DIDN'T like.


No, I am not going to sit here and list it. Far too numerous. Suffice to say that the hundreds of hours wasted on each and every 'mystery' ingame is probably the highlight. Reasons I have covered in other threads.


The point of all this? It's the original question. Did I get my money's worth? Because I have played thousands of hours?


No. No I haven't. And do you know why? Because almost nothing of which was promised, advertised and expected, has materialised. Instead, we have what has virtually become a meme for Elite - a shell of a game, a framework for a masterpiece. If Da'Vinci could just find the right paintbrush, he'd turn this blank canvas into the Great Work it sorely deserves.


Instead.... instead we get pewpew, lovage for the PvP crowd, pointless updates with no actual content for those who choose not to just fly around shooting each other.


I see discussions in beta - and here - about the fine details of weapon systems, meta builds and shield strength - from both players AND FDev. I see the ridiculous lengths people are going to to wring that last bit of DPS from their build, and then complaining to FDev that X weapon isn't right because it affect's Y strength.


And I see FDev responding.


I see groups of players arguing about wings... ganking (and how to do it right)... I see players defending the pointless playerkilling, stating it's 'part of the game'. I see spreadsheets, full of data on how to get the absolute best possible build for PvP.


I see Eve.


That, is what this game is slowly turning into. The very thing that people, who defend the way the game is being designed, were vehement in their dismissal of having anything to do with.

There are LESS rules in Elite than in Eve. Sure, there are no official corporations (thankfully), but the amount of vitriol I see spouted towards anyone who isn't 'One of Them' is ridiculous. Eve is, by it's very nature, a player-run PvP-centric game - and Elite is starting to very much emulate it.

When I first heard about the remake of Elite, I was overwhelmed with excitement, because what was promised was almost the polar opposite of Eve. And, for a while, that's how it seemed to be.

But today? Today it's all about the numbers, about the DPS, the RNG and the shield ratings. It's about who can kill who, in the most efficient way possible. It's all about time and money. Which is EXACTLY what Eve is about.

I have often remarked on these forums about the issues I perceive Elite to have - lack of content, direction etc. Now however, it's VERY clear on what direction Frontier want for Elite. They want it to become solely player driven, and they're doing it via PvP combat.

Now, I am fully aware that a certain subset of the playerbase are elated by this, and of course, they did, afterall, pay for the game the same as me. And, while I don't personally like PvP combat, it was, from the very beginning, to be part of Elite in some manner. Unfortunately, since those early days, PvP has become more and more the focus of development, tacking on one update after another, all to make ships shoot things better, and to....encourage... multiplayer gaming.

I am pretty confident in suggesting that the vast majority of players on the PC (I'm discounting console players for the time being), did NOT buy the game back in beta and the original release, just to play PvP pewpew. In fact, this was confirmed in a well-known FDev post a while back (stating there were far more non-PvP players).

It is also, in my opinion, and also an opinion shared by a significant number of other posters, largely down to the opening up of the game to console players, which has led to this direction. The (probably incorrect) view on console players, is they actually all play CoD and Battlefield. Therefore, they will buy a space combat game with lots of emphasis on shooting things, which will make Frontier lots of money. This is of course sound business. Provide a product that the majority of customers will be willing to pay for. That's great for the large influx of new players, absolutely awesome.

Unfortunately, I personally don't think they have that quite right. I have read and spoken to numerous players on XBox who are just as disgruntled with the mainly combat direction of the game in the last few months. I can't possibly say if they represent all console players - but I would surmise that if one player feels such, then there must be more.

My main concern however, is that those of us - the MAJORITY of us PC players, who were here from the early days, and are still here, are literally losing the game they paid money to bring to life. Don't forget, while the Kickstarter was not a REQUIREMENT in terms of cash, it was NEEDED to establish a desire for the game to be developed - and based on the promises of that kickstarter, we all voted with our wallets.

In closing, I would suggest that, while all long-term projects tend to deviate from their original path, I feel that Elite has not just deviated, but is now walking an entirely new path altogether. And while the inevitable outcries of 'But what about PP!' and 'Use your imagination!' (which is my personal most hated excuse - I don't pay money to imagine things, thanks.), and other such stuff will soon fill the first few pages of this thread, I would simply respond with this.

Elite was originally a space trading game. That's it. Combat was literally about self-defense from pirates. Elite Frontier introduced bounty hunting against NPC's which was an alternative method of play - which was also great.

The combat we have in today's game however has morphed, from the original styles from the original games, to PvP-centered stats and figures. We never bothered with DPS numbers in Elite: Frontier. Sure, we had weapons and shields and other nice toys to choose from. But I don't believe we sat there, with a spreadsheet or website, designing the perfect killing machine. We didn't need to because it wasn't something we needed to do.

Elite: Dangerous has lost it's way, in the eyes of the majority of it's original backers and players. This is not an arbitrary comment, it is based on the multitudes of threads and posts on this, and many other forums. It comes down to this. If this is the direction Frontier WANT this game to go, to be another Eve, with offensive and aggressive players in game and on the forums, and primarily about the combat and DPS, balance, etc... Can you please just tell us, so those of us who are tired of hoping for better things, can leave the game quietly, without the need to make the leaving posts that are apparently so disliked.

Perhaps, and this is just IMHO, FD should offer different modes of play like No Man's Sky - for those who like to play for the money, the challenge and time it takes, to get the rewards/things they want. Of course, for a mode such as 'Creative' a player would only be able to use Solo mode as it would not be fair for a person to easily have it all in Open play. I'm sure there are those that would disagree with this idea, as there usually is and that's ok, but, hey, it is just an idea. In a way it would allow players to get out of the game what they want and not have to trade their real life away for the game life in order to achieve one's personal goals - especially true for those who just don't have a lot time. Again, this is just IMO.
 
(Disclaimer - I am fully aware that this post is going to cause a LOT of hate. I can only ask that, instead of directly attacking ME for having my opinion on, which is after all, an open forum, you direct your attention to the points in my post. They are made solely in the interests of the game, which I want to enjoy.)

So I'm reading through the replies to the latest dissatisfaction post from a player who has had enough, and naturally I see the same tired responses from those who just can't resist from posting a sarcastic remark to bolster their post count (you'll make Deadly in no time!).


I also saw a few posts regarding something that deserves more discussion, that of longevity and value.


Getting your money's worth, burning out after 5000 hours of play. Are these things mutually inclusive?


I have not played the game for about 2 months. I have, according to Steam, 1310 hours of play. You can probably quadruple that, as I have been playing since early beta.


That's a lot of play.


Did I burn out? Absolutely, usually after I achieved certain goals I set myself, such as grinding my way to a Cutter. Because, y'know - shiny.


I look back at the time I have spent playing the game, and I find myself asking the question 'what do I remember, what were the stand out bit that made those thousands of hours worth playing?'


Well, let's see. Flying through my own solar system was quite nice, getting up close and personal with Saturn, yes that was quite good.


FINALLY moving up from my free Eagle to a Cobra MK III was (back then) a great achievement, and, as I suspect for a lot of early players, was a great feeling of accomplishment and freedom from the shackles of the Sidey (or Freagle).


Landing on a planet for the first time was impressive - if a bit jarring - still dislike the obvious transition from space to instance.


Exploring a few star systems and seeing things like Neutron Stars, and a couple of other things I can't really remember.


Um...


Oh, the PR stunt for the Thargoid thing was very good.


Um...


I think thats about it.


Now... what about what I DIDN'T like.


No, I am not going to sit here and list it. Far too numerous. Suffice to say that the hundreds of hours wasted on each and every 'mystery' ingame is probably the highlight. Reasons I have covered in other threads.


The point of all this? It's the original question. Did I get my money's worth? Because I have played thousands of hours?


No. No I haven't. And do you know why? Because almost nothing of which was promised, advertised and expected, has materialised. Instead, we have what has virtually become a meme for Elite - a shell of a game, a framework for a masterpiece. If Da'Vinci could just find the right paintbrush, he'd turn this blank canvas into the Great Work it sorely deserves.


Instead.... instead we get pewpew, lovage for the PvP crowd, pointless updates with no actual content for those who choose not to just fly around shooting each other.


I see discussions in beta - and here - about the fine details of weapon systems, meta builds and shield strength - from both players AND FDev. I see the ridiculous lengths people are going to to wring that last bit of DPS from their build, and then complaining to FDev that X weapon isn't right because it affect's Y strength.


And I see FDev responding.


I see groups of players arguing about wings... ganking (and how to do it right)... I see players defending the pointless playerkilling, stating it's 'part of the game'. I see spreadsheets, full of data on how to get the absolute best possible build for PvP.


I see Eve.


That, is what this game is slowly turning into. The very thing that people, who defend the way the game is being designed, were vehement in their dismissal of having anything to do with.

There are LESS rules in Elite than in Eve. Sure, there are no official corporations (thankfully), but the amount of vitriol I see spouted towards anyone who isn't 'One of Them' is ridiculous. Eve is, by it's very nature, a player-run PvP-centric game - and Elite is starting to very much emulate it.

When I first heard about the remake of Elite, I was overwhelmed with excitement, because what was promised was almost the polar opposite of Eve. And, for a while, that's how it seemed to be.

But today? Today it's all about the numbers, about the DPS, the RNG and the shield ratings. It's about who can kill who, in the most efficient way possible. It's all about time and money. Which is EXACTLY what Eve is about.

I have often remarked on these forums about the issues I perceive Elite to have - lack of content, direction etc. Now however, it's VERY clear on what direction Frontier want for Elite. They want it to become solely player driven, and they're doing it via PvP combat.

Now, I am fully aware that a certain subset of the playerbase are elated by this, and of course, they did, afterall, pay for the game the same as me. And, while I don't personally like PvP combat, it was, from the very beginning, to be part of Elite in some manner. Unfortunately, since those early days, PvP has become more and more the focus of development, tacking on one update after another, all to make ships shoot things better, and to....encourage... multiplayer gaming.

I am pretty confident in suggesting that the vast majority of players on the PC (I'm discounting console players for the time being), did NOT buy the game back in beta and the original release, just to play PvP pewpew. In fact, this was confirmed in a well-known FDev post a while back (stating there were far more non-PvP players).

It is also, in my opinion, and also an opinion shared by a significant number of other posters, largely down to the opening up of the game to console players, which has led to this direction. The (probably incorrect) view on console players, is they actually all play CoD and Battlefield. Therefore, they will buy a space combat game with lots of emphasis on shooting things, which will make Frontier lots of money. This is of course sound business. Provide a product that the majority of customers will be willing to pay for. That's great for the large influx of new players, absolutely awesome.

Unfortunately, I personally don't think they have that quite right. I have read and spoken to numerous players on XBox who are just as disgruntled with the mainly combat direction of the game in the last few months. I can't possibly say if they represent all console players - but I would surmise that if one player feels such, then there must be more.

My main concern however, is that those of us - the MAJORITY of us PC players, who were here from the early days, and are still here, are literally losing the game they paid money to bring to life. Don't forget, while the Kickstarter was not a REQUIREMENT in terms of cash, it was NEEDED to establish a desire for the game to be developed - and based on the promises of that kickstarter, we all voted with our wallets.

In closing, I would suggest that, while all long-term projects tend to deviate from their original path, I feel that Elite has not just deviated, but is now walking an entirely new path altogether. And while the inevitable outcries of 'But what about PP!' and 'Use your imagination!' (which is my personal most hated excuse - I don't pay money to imagine things, thanks.), and other such stuff will soon fill the first few pages of this thread, I would simply respond with this.

Elite was originally a space trading game. That's it. Combat was literally about self-defense from pirates. Elite Frontier introduced bounty hunting against NPC's which was an alternative method of play - which was also great.

The combat we have in today's game however has morphed, from the original styles from the original games, to PvP-centered stats and figures. We never bothered with DPS numbers in Elite: Frontier. Sure, we had weapons and shields and other nice toys to choose from. But I don't believe we sat there, with a spreadsheet or website, designing the perfect killing machine. We didn't need to because it wasn't something we needed to do.

Elite: Dangerous has lost it's way, in the eyes of the majority of it's original backers and players. This is not an arbitrary comment, it is based on the multitudes of threads and posts on this, and many other forums. It comes down to this. If this is the direction Frontier WANT this game to go, to be another Eve, with offensive and aggressive players in game and on the forums, and primarily about the combat and DPS, balance, etc... Can you please just tell us, so those of us who are tired of hoping for better things, can leave the game quietly, without the need to make the leaving posts that are apparently so disliked.

Thanks for your post - great points!
 
Elite: Dangerous has lost it's way, in the eyes of the majority of it's original backers and players.

Thank god Elite is losing it's way. This game turns into meaningless and boring gameplay after a few months with no depth, gigantic repetition and a waste of my sparetime. I hope the EVE element (never played it but it sounds great) will take over more and more giving us meaningful gameplay and the chance to finally change things within the game. Before that, Elite is a complete waste of time as nothing we do as players matter AT ALL and it's repetition is just wasting valuable spare time.

Elite:
GFX: 9/10
Sound: 9/10
Mechanics: 8/10
Gameplay/Depth: 5/10

My personal view on this game. Only the RIFT and the fantastic implementation (+1 to FDev) kept me going on with it. The RNGineers were a BIG mistake. Totally taking the fun out of PvP. But well ... that was a downer. But I hope FDev gives us a storyline and meaningful gameplay with the next updates. Because repetition is not gameplay.
 
Last edited:
"Can you please just tell us, so those of us who are tired of hoping for better things, can leave the game quietly, without the need to make the leaving posts that are apparently so disliked. "

Concise, accurate and totally encapsulates my feelings.

+ Rep to you Sir!
 
Last edited:
Hi all, I have been reading all the comments here and I would have to agree with the OP, but something was posted on the Beta Discussions forum that brought a smile to this old 84er. I just want to share this pure genius and all credit to the commander who made this, its just pure gold.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/340481-The-Ballad-of-Ed-and-Sandro

[video=youtube;rHYlqpWkVRY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHYlqpWkVRY[/video]
 
It is a nice list of features mengy. +1. However :

What exploration need is tension & danger and more risk / reward gameplay tied to exploration. How to do it
without redoing the whole game is the big question.

But, from my small experience with RPG design :

  • Ships have a number of "pools" that are way underused in ED, such as hull integrity and fuel.
  • There need to be dangers. Not bang! you're dead dangers, but more like wear and tear that need attention in order to avoid bigger complications leading to the final loss of the ship. Good examples are : "the long dark" and "FTL".
  • Module damage beyond % damage. Think of the typical "afflictions" that RPG have, and that are the hooks for various quests and turning simple situations into challenging ones.

All of this is broad brush / no detail stuff, but I'm sure any rpg/adventure/survival game designer worth its salt would be able to pull something off.

IMO that is what exploration really needs to go from tourism (what we have now) to exploration (think Magellan voyage : it was rife with dangers and difficult situations, nothing like a cruise trip lol).
Exploration in ED is just that at the moment : a cruise trip, safe and comfy. Make it unsafe and tense !

I personally would love to see this in the game. But I believe this is far beyond what the game can offer.

And also exploration content to be made with its own ship without needing the SRV on the surface of the planets
 
Last edited:
It is a nice list of features mengy. +1. However :

I think exploration related issues run deeper than just more POI/astronomical objects/SRVs/Surface features.
While having those would be nice and help, it is not really changing the core of exploration. Once the novelty
factor of those new things wear off, we'll be back to square one so to speak.

What exploration need is tension & danger and more risk / reward gameplay tied to exploration. How to do it
without redoing the whole game is the big question.

But, from my small experience with RPG design :

  • Ships have a number of "pools" that are way underused in ED, such as hull integrity and fuel.
  • There need to be dangers. Not bang! you're dead dangers, but more like wear and tear that need attention in order to avoid bigger complications leading to the final loss of the ship. Good examples are : "the long dark" and "FTL".
  • Module damage beyond % damage. Think of the typical "afflictions" that RPG have, and that are the hooks for various quests and turning simple situations into challenging ones.

All of this is broad brush / no detail stuff, but I'm sure any rpg/adventure/survival game designer worth its salt would be able to pull something off.

IMO that is what exploration really needs to go from tourism (what we have now) to exploration (think Magellan voyage : it was rife with dangers and difficult situations, nothing like a cruise trip lol).
Exploration in ED is just that at the moment : a cruise trip, safe and comfy. Make it unsafe and tense !

This^^
With damage model that certain ship modules get damaged so you need to find planet to collect repair materials. Exploration with a bit of survival.
Space should be dangerous place!
Exploration is funny in elite, there is no risk and exploring tools.
It could be said that there is no exploration at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom