Deleted member 115407
D
I read that simply as Quester91.
FDev doesn't care about you, players. It only cares about money. Here's why
- Thread starter Fatalution
- Start date
- Status
I read that simply as Quester91.
It was the number one game when it came out.
It costs 70 Euro. Of course it's successful.
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
this actually came up the other day, though it wasn't an intentional discussion. two things got some focus: the wack build backend that might've made the initial release so buggy, and the lack of customizations that aren't just color retextures
if the build/patch infrastructure could check that the public build definitely has all the changes and fixes built up over testing the beta, there wouldn't be moments where a new patch comes out and the world suddenly breaks (c.f. that one time every AI ship went super saiyan with multicannon pacs); all those "why is this broken" threads wouldn't exist, way less load on mods immediately. stop making existing customers mad for no reason and you have less workload to spend time and money on
which leads to the other end, making customers happier. everyone likes customizations, I can't think of someone that doesn't like getting to name their ship for example and there's enough that people would pay to have the name physically on the ship. but there's tons of stuff people would want that isn't in the store, likely because those assets would be quite an investment: being able to decorate the bridge/cockpit as opposed to just the dashboard, different suit bumpmaps as opposed to just suit recolors, and the like. people always bring up "why is the anaconda so junky inside", imagine letting them buy an alternate that's super sleek/even rustier. or redecorating a courier to have fuzzy dice and a squid monster pinup on the side. or any of the crazy truck interiors you see irl:
and it's not like art can't afford to do this, because imagine how much the sound department costs every month
almost every feature has spots that, if hit, would instantly improve QoL and also be used to attract new/bored customers in. PvE that goes past the Everquest-style "field of rats" in particular would be a huge selling point, since that gives players something to do whether they're solo or doing co-op
Last edited:
That would be nice, but what about
- it doesn't add content
- it doesn't add gameplay
- it's just a money grab
- why didn't you work on feature X instead?
arguments? How does it make these people happy?
Last edited:
They almost sold a million copies on steam, that's not bad at all for the
Last edited:
same way they did it when ship naming was added, Frontier saw a lot of customers wanted this first versus fewer customers that wanted it later and made a judgement call. some people aren't going to like it and they have valid reasons for not liking it, but that's every business decision ever.
(as an aside - this is why the emphasis on the forums isn't a good thing and is why new posters flooded onto the board with the MC payment change. the majority of Frontier's market will never post, so market research has to be way more proactive than it currently is. but I digress)
personally PvE additions would be higher priority, but then there's also trading (different market rules and supercruise geography depending on the system government; imagine trying to buy an anarchy station's supply of drugs and getting a "patrol" spawn just outside the undock in response), and giving more mechanics for exploration inside the bubble (something more along the lines of hacking or espionage?). these absolutely require tons of work to implement but so do adding brand new features like landing on planets (coordinate system hell) or multicrew/deployable fighters (resource ownership hell); at least with QoL you have a sense of what the feature is about and the likely pain points for testing
basically every existing feature is a candidate for better QoL, but they have to be chosen over adding new features first, otherwise you get the current ratrace where you announce "now you can land on [xyz]/fly a new [xyz]", people take a look for a week, then go "I'm bored" and vanish. they're not totally gone but you can't reach them with more features, you reach them by improving existing ones; you can focus on more features anyway but when the whole market's already in your hands that's going to dry up fast
Last edited:
Then take a look at Mass Effect 3 or Andromeda or Total War or some other game. They are all successful and yet there is lots of criticism.
Last edited:
Elite player numbers are apparently still good, what is your point?
they're high but possibly stagnant, a lot like how EVE's player numbers are "good". you need to reach customers that got bored and potential buyers you overshot (the latter is a huge priority, blue ocean is vital in such a small market) or that good player count will decay pretty quick
Last edited:
It has been over a year since ED's last paid content was released, if the numbers are still good, that's saying something isn't it?
it's really not, especially when this doesn't operate on subscription; you need growth or the customer base shrivels up real fast (again, see EVE). in this case we need numbers on how many people actually bought that paid expansion and you want it to grow well with such a young (relatively speaking) game, if it's just +5% over last expansion or (god forbid) +0% that is a not great sign when this game's only been out for a couple years and its only competition has either lost steam or doesn't exist
Last edited:
Maybe the 'Steam' losing competition, lost said "Steam" due to ED being a good game [hotas]
Maybe the 'Steam' losing competition, lost said "Steam" due to ED being a good game [hotas]
yes that is a pun but we need numbers on this game's growth before we can say "everything's cool"
Last edited:
But as I said, the numbers seem good .. We can't expect a massive influx of players at the near end of this season model .. which is probably why FD are changing the model (In my view, to a once a year expansion)
I can feel your frustration, however wouldn't you rather these bugs be fixed then FD to go out of business and the game die?
As a programmer I know that sometimes it just makes sense to allow known bugs to make it into the public build with intentions to fix them later - I know that may be hard to understand but it's true.
Also, every game I love has bugs that were never fixed - however I have a lot of hope that FD wish squish all the ones you mentioned!
What? Very very wrong haha. A games success is how much money it made. Game devs aren't paid by people actively playing their games. They get paid when a players purchases a game.
Last edited:
To say FDev don't care about the players is over the top and frankly untrue.
However... this is definitely the most buggy update they've released. I tried to play MC last night at least half a dozen times. One times I was in someone's Conda and kept trying to jump in a fighter, the screen would fade and then reappear and I was still in my co-pilot seat. Then it disconnected. The other times I didn't even get that far and was just spat out at the main menu. Not going to try MC again until it's fixed.
naming my ships was fun but then I paid almost the price of the full game to do so, so you'd hope it gave some enjoyment.
However... this is definitely the most buggy update they've released. I tried to play MC last night at least half a dozen times. One times I was in someone's Conda and kept trying to jump in a fighter, the screen would fade and then reappear and I was still in my co-pilot seat. Then it disconnected. The other times I didn't even get that far and was just spat out at the main menu. Not going to try MC again until it's fixed.
naming my ships was fun but then I paid almost the price of the full game to do so, so you'd hope it gave some enjoyment.
- Status