This is a very accurate description of the game.
It feels like someone is doing their job wrong
- Thread starter Silvere
- Start date
- Status
This is a very accurate description of the game.
stormyuk
Volunteer Moderator
LOL I hope it is the most polished, I don't accept all the bugs are due to the PS4 work though.
But you are not developing games for a living. Take a look at Warhorse, they just announced that certain features will not make it into the game because they start polishing now. So opinion aside, you are wrong too.
BTW
I couldn't care less if you develop software for a living, for me you are just a random internet dude. So either get some facts to prove your claims or I'll tell you that I am the Queen. Don't have time for this
- - - Updated - - -
You are looking at concurrent players, not active players. The game sold ~ 1 million times on steam and 2.1 million in total (FDEV store + Steam + xbone?). According to steam 123,000 out of 1,000,000 people played the game during the last two weeks. Taking the remaining 1.1 million units into account you can guess that 240,000 people played the game during the last two weeks.
http://steamspy.com/app/359320
Thats fine you can not listen to reason and live in your tiny world right up your back end for all I care. It shows your utter lack/ability to understand reason, logic, or the word of people who develop software. Living within your self imposed ignorance and very limited personal point of view does not mean you have said one thing of merit.
It does mean however that you have your opinion which is fine. However other people have their opinions and you will never be able to change another persons mind with your clear lack of knowledge, logic, or understanding of the world around you.
Just because you do not agree that they have failed at product/software development also does not mean you are correct. It just means you lack the knowledge or ability to understand application design.
So you can either prove that every decision that has been made is by design and correct, then you can go back to your imaginary world. Let the people who live in reality and or have experience talk. There are people who are offering ideas and recommendations and you are purposefully and willfully attempting to derail a constructive Thread. What is it you are trying to prove?
You have nothing to offer other than your close minded illogical opinion and you wont convince anyone of your opinion.
+ Rep. You and me both, and others. But it seems the fan-base has trouble accepting this as if being a console / arcade shooter means something derogatory or something. But it's true. The game uses, what, 3-4 push buttons maybe for the majority of game play. It works on consoles with gamepads. It relies on endless spawning and repeating instant action with NPC and ranked bosses. There's no learning required for taking off, landing or piloting. There's no complexity or requirement to plan missions - just pick one from a screen. It's point, click, click, squeeze trigger, press, press, press, and get an achievement with increased rank or rep or credits.
I really do laugh when I see the words simulation and Elite being used together. It is pretty funny because they couldn't be more different! [haha]
- - - Updated - - -
About the using in-game assets comments, can you tell me where I can find - or even see - people and pilots walking around in Elite? You know, like what FDev show in many if not all of their trailers these days? Where are these in-game assets? Take your time to get back to us... Probably have to wait 3-7 more years... (Wait - is that close or no-where close?)
Back OT: agree with the OP that something is clearly wrong in that FDev missed the mark in meeting many customers expectations, and have so since release. And, unfortunately, it seems to be drifting further and further away from what many hoped for and wanted to see the game become.
Last edited:
so u expected a simulator that will do what exacly? maybe train u to be a space pilot in real life?
for sure e/d needs improvements but is really fd's fault that ppl had big expectations?...if u need examples look all the WoW killer mmo's and why they failed...
Precisely. I love simulators, I've been playing DCSs and lots of indie space/air simulators for quite a while, I know the level of complexity this genre can achieve.
Still people say "Elite has a very steep learning curve". LOL. No it doesn't.
The only thing you have to learn is how the various mechanics work together, because ED universe is filled with double standards and nonsensical rules caused by layered development with short sighted game design planning.
A new player doesn't have to *learn* how to play a starship. Just point it to the destination you want to go, push the throttle foward and press J.
What he does have to learn is why an slf can be reprinted and an SRV no, why one of his friends can join him from whatever location but his slf pilot can't, why ammo can be synthesized but heat sinks no, why can he read a virtual newspaper from wherever he wants but if he wants to know the prices within the same system he has to dock at a station.
The learning curve is not given by gameplay or simulation complexity but by arbitrary and convoluted game design.
Last edited:
It is a sim in the respect that ED is a fair approximation(simulation) of what it could be like to fly a space ship in a fictional future.
Technology would have moved on somewhat in this fictional future.
So your assumptions of the level of accuracy are flawed.
No. The fighters in CQC and the ship launched fighters might as well be different ships. They handle completely differently.
I didn't say engineers have nothing to do with planetary landings, but that might as well be the case. The only thing that connects the two is that all engineer bases are on planets. There's no reason why an engineer base couldn't be anywhere else. It's entirely arbitrary and has no impact on the gameplay. You land on their base just like you do on any other base or station.
I don't think some vague and hidden indirect interactions with the BGS add any noteworthy gameplay or cohesion to the game. Doing stuff for powerplay factions and doing regular missions are governed by two separate systems, which doesn't have to be the case.
Why does it need a separate kind of cargo? Why does it need separate npc targets? Why does everything have to be separate?
Dito.
Nothing wrong with that. But unlike you, I also provided facts, not just my opinion, by showing you a developer who just did what I described.
But you will, with the help of ad hominem attacks? By being insulting? Sure about that?
Don't know if the complete game is failed, but that's not something I said either. However you just made a claim and I showed how you are not 100% correct by using an actual example (Warhorse). So far you only told me that you are a software developer and that you like to make ridiculous claims, your childish reaction shows me that you are lying about the former but have lots of experience in the latter.
Why should I? That's not my agenda, I pointed out how Frontier made mistakes very often, even in this thread. Maybe you missed it, but in the post you quoted I said how some feautes suck and explained why. I just disagreed with the reasons for it with you. Do you even read?
Actually you are the one derailing the thread with this ad hominem post.
I think I made it pretty clear: You said features like multicrew always get implemented after development, I said they usually get implemented during development.
Dito.
PS
To clarify:
Your advice is that they shouldn't develop the features first but work on polishing and adding features simultaneously. Polishing what, if they didn't create a feature yet?! Anyway, I say that's what they are already doing and also the reason why updates like 2.3 always fail.
You then claimed that you are a software developer, and that this is how business works. I showed you an example for the opposite. And now you just started insulting me for no reason?!
Last edited:
Not really. It's an approximation of what it would be like to fly a WW2 destroyer in a Vacuum if it were a cartoon. The flight model is absolutely nothing like what flying in space would actually be like. Evochron Legacy has a better "approximation" of what that would be like.
The flight model is superb - it feels nice, you get the feeling of weight and inertia and it's suited to tight dogfighting. It captures the essence of the original Elite and does it justice.
The audio feeback works amazingly well with it, also in combat.
It's just a real shame that all this time you spend in your ship in normal flight mode is supported by hugely underwhelming mechanics - respawning enemies, magically reappearing mission cargo between instances, pop-up points of interest and a complete lack of anything that feels alive or dynamic.
And...! The alien ruins was actually a genius idea, but I was gutted to find that the interaction with it was 'pick up the thing and take it to the thing', which instantly reminded me of a dozen odd 8 bit ZX Spectrum platformers from back in the day.
Someone in this thread commented on the layering of game mechanics which are becoming more convoluted - I see this too, the mechanics are messy, it's a messy game in terms of its rules and mechanics.
It's very difficult to imagine how the gameplay as a whole can be made more dynamic and reactive to the player, more meaningful or persistent, with the big jumble of arbitrary mechanics that honestly I've lost track of which things have been changed or what player guides are even still relevant.
It's still a game I find myself getting lost in and it looks unbelievably beautiful, but the gameplay still isn't there.
I've been looking at that powerplay map now for a year and wondering when Frontier are going to start doing something with it.
My honest deep down gut feeling is that the gameplay design equivalent of Gordon Ramsey needs to visit Frontier Towers in a flurry of swearing and questioning stares.
The audio feeback works amazingly well with it, also in combat.
It's just a real shame that all this time you spend in your ship in normal flight mode is supported by hugely underwhelming mechanics - respawning enemies, magically reappearing mission cargo between instances, pop-up points of interest and a complete lack of anything that feels alive or dynamic.
And...! The alien ruins was actually a genius idea, but I was gutted to find that the interaction with it was 'pick up the thing and take it to the thing', which instantly reminded me of a dozen odd 8 bit ZX Spectrum platformers from back in the day.
Someone in this thread commented on the layering of game mechanics which are becoming more convoluted - I see this too, the mechanics are messy, it's a messy game in terms of its rules and mechanics.
It's very difficult to imagine how the gameplay as a whole can be made more dynamic and reactive to the player, more meaningful or persistent, with the big jumble of arbitrary mechanics that honestly I've lost track of which things have been changed or what player guides are even still relevant.
It's still a game I find myself getting lost in and it looks unbelievably beautiful, but the gameplay still isn't there.
I've been looking at that powerplay map now for a year and wondering when Frontier are going to start doing something with it.
My honest deep down gut feeling is that the gameplay design equivalent of Gordon Ramsey needs to visit Frontier Towers in a flurry of swearing and questioning stares.
It's a space sim as far as it can reasonably go without becoming tediously boring .... heck if I had launched my ship from Earth when the game first launched, in reality I would not have reached beyond Jupiter, so far.
So it has to introduce a faster-than-light-speed-drive just to give us a game worth playing. Once that is invented some time in the future, the bets are off to what that will be like, how a ship would handle, etc etc., so give the devs a break because they have "simulated" one view of faster than light flying. In that respect it is a simulator.
It is also attempting to portray what worlds will be like when they are encountered on long treks into the galaxy. They may not be very accurate, but they are an attempt at portraying "reality" (whatever that may turn out to be), and so far humanity hasn't discovered much to contradict what Elite is actually portraying. In that respect it is a simulator.
But even a pure simulator would remain boring, so gamey aspects have to be introduced, such as the imagination of a galactic civilization, trading, fighting with lasers etc. etc.
There are gamey introductions that appear distinctly odd and contradictory - Quester91 (above #488) has highlighted the glaring ones.
But it doesn't detract from the fact that this is a space game based on a simulation. In short it is a space-sim game. It doesn't pretend to be otherwise, and never has. We knew what we were getting from the old space sim game of the original Elite, but now in a richer more dynamic form.
Granted, the richness and dynamism requires improvement. "More Depth" is a term widely used that expresses frustration with the way the existing mechanics tie together. I doubt that few would argue with that.
FD have created the dots on the page, now they need to work out how to join them together
So it has to introduce a faster-than-light-speed-drive just to give us a game worth playing. Once that is invented some time in the future, the bets are off to what that will be like, how a ship would handle, etc etc., so give the devs a break because they have "simulated" one view of faster than light flying. In that respect it is a simulator.
It is also attempting to portray what worlds will be like when they are encountered on long treks into the galaxy. They may not be very accurate, but they are an attempt at portraying "reality" (whatever that may turn out to be), and so far humanity hasn't discovered much to contradict what Elite is actually portraying. In that respect it is a simulator.
But even a pure simulator would remain boring, so gamey aspects have to be introduced, such as the imagination of a galactic civilization, trading, fighting with lasers etc. etc.
There are gamey introductions that appear distinctly odd and contradictory - Quester91 (above #488) has highlighted the glaring ones.
But it doesn't detract from the fact that this is a space game based on a simulation. In short it is a space-sim game. It doesn't pretend to be otherwise, and never has. We knew what we were getting from the old space sim game of the original Elite, but now in a richer more dynamic form.
Granted, the richness and dynamism requires improvement. "More Depth" is a term widely used that expresses frustration with the way the existing mechanics tie together. I doubt that few would argue with that.
FD have created the dots on the page, now they need to work out how to join them together
Don't take the bait Zambrick
And you're both going to get this thread locked in a jiffy. Discuss the posts not the posters, moderators' motto.
We know people won't change their opinions, and they don't have to.
Meanwhile: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/345865-Changes-Coming-to-Multi-crew it seems that giving feedback is finally paying off. Changes to trolls firing utilities, changes to payouts... I think giving constructive feedback (which is the majority of the posts in this thread) is good. Multicrew is still less viable earning method than winging up, but its easier and will not pay peanuts like it did on release.
It should, however I am not sure the players would like the outcome in the beginning ;-P
It's just stupid because in the end we don't even have different opinions. We both criticise the game and the way FDEV is developing it. And you are right, we should discuss the posts, not the poster. But if someone insults me I rather give a reply than call the mods, even if that means that the troll wins and the thread will be closed. I am stubborn
so u know how is to fly in space i guess
Maybe he doesn't know that you can set FA to Off. He does have a point when talking about speed limits though, but we have discussed this a few hundred times already: The game would be unplayable without a speed limit, both in terms of hitting someone and network.
Duane Dibbley
Banned
One time!...you never let me forget it...it was only ONE batch & anyone can have an off day...please just get over it!
Duane Dibbley
Quality Control
ACME Parachutes Ltd.
Duane Dibbley
Quality Control
ACME Parachutes Ltd.
FAOFF isn't even particularly accurate but it's certainly closer to what actual Newtonian physics are.
I implore people who want to debate this to download the Evochron Legacy demo (300mb, cool game too) and see for yourself what it's like.
- - - Updated - - -
Completely asinine rebuttal.
if they pay me i will ..
- Status