They are relevant for me, and i played 300+h since my last restart 1.5 years ago. I agree that you can easily play the game such that CR become irrelevant very fast. I don't do this, this would spoil my game. I want the slow progression.
[Obsidian Ant] Elite Dangerous - The Credits Problem: A Case of Feeling Unrewarded?
- Thread starter SaliVader
- Start date
They are relevant for me, and i played 300+h since my last restart 1.5 years ago. I agree that you can easily play the game such that CR become irrelevant very fast. I don't do this, this would spoil my game. I want the slow progression.
I only have don't have enough to get a Python yet!
I love Elite Dangerous, and have been playing for about a year. I have my Asp X and My Cobra MKIII, oh and my stock Sidewinder. I'm currently saving for a Python.
It would be great if I could have it tomorrow, but then I would want something else by Monday. Personally I think the game teaches you about more than just getting the bigger ships, and racing to the edge of nothing.
You have to think about all aspects.
Do I sell my current ship, or previously loved ships?
Shall I run the risk of getting my Python and running on stock internals with no buy back cash, just so I can keep my pre-loved ships?
I've tried to avoid exploits and concentrate my time grinding as it should be. When I get bored I just find something else to do, or go play something else.
It's the great thing with it being a game and not real life, you can just switch it off and do something else
I love Elite Dangerous, and have been playing for about a year. I have my Asp X and My Cobra MKIII, oh and my stock Sidewinder. I'm currently saving for a Python.
It would be great if I could have it tomorrow, but then I would want something else by Monday. Personally I think the game teaches you about more than just getting the bigger ships, and racing to the edge of nothing.
You have to think about all aspects.
Do I sell my current ship, or previously loved ships?
Shall I run the risk of getting my Python and running on stock internals with no buy back cash, just so I can keep my pre-loved ships?
I've tried to avoid exploits and concentrate my time grinding as it should be. When I get bored I just find something else to do, or go play something else.
It's the great thing with it being a game and not real life, you can just switch it off and do something else
Indeed, the payouts now are JUST FINE.... I can earn a cool couple of million nightly simply flying a few missions in an Allied (home) system. Its basically, the game mechanic where you spend some time somewhere to build up rep, and then the payouts proceed.
Not sure what all the complaint is about??
I do not have billions in the bank, and simply do not need it. I have 50+ mil with 100+ mil in assets. Seems a comfortable state to be in after playing the game at a moderate pace for a year.
Not sure what all the complaint is about??
I do not have billions in the bank, and simply do not need it. I have 50+ mil with 100+ mil in assets. Seems a comfortable state to be in after playing the game at a moderate pace for a year.
Did you miss FDev mission team member post? They don't want Colonia missions to be viable as standalone (when you take trip there because someone offered you mission).
They want you to stack them and even them be just a "bonus" on same scale to usual kind of money from exploration you will made while making that trip.
Hence the payout deliberately not scaled in this case.
I actually think they are afraid if they make payment properly scale someone just stacks lot of them - makes a trip, then makes insanely silly sum of money which will have old Sothis rush pale in comparison. Or they have now a hard prohibition that mission generator should never give missions above X tens of millions (not a hard cap - just must not be designed in way to break this limit).
Last edited:
Very well said ... that last sentence should be stickied at the top of the forums ! [yesnod]
i could see Yamiks quiting Elite.. same thing happend with Kornelius.
I'm happy that Obsidian finally made a real constructive critique for the game.
The most important thing is one: ALL the activities of the game must be equally profitable, it is not possible for a single type of activity to be the only one to offer great rewards (long distance passenger transport).
Players must be free to do what they like and receive a fair reward. The reasoning: "do what you like for the taste of doing it" is simply ridiculous ... who thinks this one forgets that ED is a game, it's just a game: in the games to the action of the player must always follow a reward or punishment ... an objective reward or an objective punishment ...OBJECTIVE.
I can hardly convince my friends to come back to play on ED, why? because they are deceived and tired of the way FD is doing.
The FD has to stop listening to only the most vocal and noisy groups of players ... everyone deserves a fair reward for the in game activities, achieving this goal has priority over everything.
Will miners have to wait until the end of 2018 before they have a fair reward? but are you crazy? things and payouts must be settled immediately and not in 12 months!
FD if you continue to do so and ignore it, do not complain if your players make you bad advertising on reddit, forums, youtube, and the web. Your players and consumers are now tired, more and more people give up directly to playing your title ... FD Are you sure you want to get away from potential buyers of the store? Do you really want to invest in small, noisy groups of players?
If you FD does not change your wrong approach (considered so by the majority now) do not complain if all will end like this:
The most important thing is one: ALL the activities of the game must be equally profitable, it is not possible for a single type of activity to be the only one to offer great rewards (long distance passenger transport).
Players must be free to do what they like and receive a fair reward. The reasoning: "do what you like for the taste of doing it" is simply ridiculous ... who thinks this one forgets that ED is a game, it's just a game: in the games to the action of the player must always follow a reward or punishment ... an objective reward or an objective punishment ...OBJECTIVE.
I can hardly convince my friends to come back to play on ED, why? because they are deceived and tired of the way FD is doing.
The FD has to stop listening to only the most vocal and noisy groups of players ... everyone deserves a fair reward for the in game activities, achieving this goal has priority over everything.
Will miners have to wait until the end of 2018 before they have a fair reward? but are you crazy? things and payouts must be settled immediately and not in 12 months!
FD if you continue to do so and ignore it, do not complain if your players make you bad advertising on reddit, forums, youtube, and the web. Your players and consumers are now tired, more and more people give up directly to playing your title ... FD Are you sure you want to get away from potential buyers of the store? Do you really want to invest in small, noisy groups of players?
If you FD does not change your wrong approach (considered so by the majority now) do not complain if all will end like this:
Last edited:
Well... The key difference between spending ten hours on one immersive mission and ten hours on grinding a bunch of smaller missions is that with the smaller missions after 25% of the time you have 25% of the money. After 50% of the time you have 50% of the money. Etc etc.
With one longer mission you have no money until right at the end, and then you have 100% of the money.
If something goes wrong 75% of the way through grinding you still have 75% of the reward (minus a rebuy, perhaps). If something goes wrong 75% of the way through one long mission you have el zilcho.
So they're not equal in that respect.
I wouldn't be surprised if the are prepared - and it eventually will end like this, like any other game. All projects some day come to an end.
Obviously it will not be announced in PR events - but I bet plans how long they actually plan to make revenue from ED and how development will be scaled (down) are always here.
Last edited:
Is this about credits only? I think the whole of "currencies", "reputation" and "loot" needs to be factored in the equation. It's pretty much the measure of progress of players. And if I look at that whole picture I would say "stifling" to describe it.
Sorry, did you mean "grinding passenger missions" when you spend an hour with your game on supercruise in background window, doing other things, - then cashing that 50mil payout?
Last edited:
I only have don't have enough to get a Python yet!
I love Elite Dangerous, and have been playing for about a year. I have my Asp X and My Cobra MKIII, oh and my stock Sidewinder. I'm currently saving for a Python.
It would be great if I could have it tomorrow, but then I would want something else by Monday. Personally I think the game teaches you about more than just getting the bigger ships, and racing to the edge of nothing.
You have to think about all aspects.
Do I sell my current ship, or previously loved ships?
Shall I run the risk of getting my Python and running on stock internals with no buy back cash, just so I can keep my pre-loved ships?
I've tried to avoid exploits and concentrate my time grinding as it should be. When I get bored I just find something else to do, or go play something else.
It's the great thing with it being a game and not real life, you can just switch it off and do something else
Just you wait until the day you have the credits but can't seem to figure out why the stupid reputation you need for (insert ship) doesn't raise.
My teenage friend is always whining on about choice. She want's to choose now, get it now, decide now. The problem is, she hasn't finished school. So she's make choices now that mean when it comes to university, she won't have the choice that she would like. Choices - Consequences. Problem is, no-one likes consequences. Want to do things your way because that's fun for you, why are you moaning that you are not earning what the other person earns who is playing it their way?
Different career paths *should* make different amounts of money. Thieves never prosper, Bankers hit it big or go bust in a blink, and workers sit somewhere in between. Balance is just another catchphrase for "I want it all, but I want it my way" and if anyone listens to that [confused fish], the game will be a train wreck.
Different career paths *should* make different amounts of money. Thieves never prosper, Bankers hit it big or go bust in a blink, and workers sit somewhere in between. Balance is just another catchphrase for "I want it all, but I want it my way" and if anyone listens to that [confused fish], the game will be a train wreck.
Sure, also IRL travellers between parallel universes rule. Don't like reality, just switch it!
The problem with ED is that the FDevs have typically created a feature but failed to make the best of its potential, instead making it basic and unrealistic in terms of value. And that feature is the ED-universe's economy.
You only need to look at our real-life economy to see areas like technology, communications, transportation, harvesting natural resources, housing, clothing, weapons, food, energy production, entertainment, pharmaceuticals and healthcare, etc are major areas of manufacturing and services... and, unsurprisingly, all of them are highly influenced by politics. There is also a high level of ignorance for third-world needs in all these areas since more consumers live in first-world nations.
ED goes so far as to identify different different economies by their trade routes, systems that focus on them but there is no differentiation in game mechanics that allows players to focus on specific economies.
Mining is particulary poor – investing in an appropriate ship, cargo bays, mining lasers, propsect/collection lipets, refinery, etc is a high financial cost. Plus the time it takes to locate good sites, get there, pour through dozens of rocks for materials whilst fending off pirates... the pay-off is extremely poor value, and it's little wonder that more people complain about mining than most other mission types... it's not just unrewarding, but insulting simply because its so time-consuming. It bears a very low "satisfation" rating.
The only time we actually see prices rise for goods, in a realistic way, is in trade CGs... but even then, it's not realistic in terms of suppliers setting high prices to provide goods, since its the recipient setting the price they want to pay. ED economies lack forms of market exploitation, as exist in the real world... there is no form of price negotiation, no way of undermining other suppliers or over-charging desperate customers. This how real markets work. But ED is too simplified and only offers bare-bones economy mechanics.. there's no real substance to it. Trading is almost as weak as mining in terms of lacking opportunies to seek out specialised markets and to use them in advantageous ways.
Personally, I'd like to see a complete overhaul of the trading system, with deeper and even complex mechanics that allow for different us to practice different game styles, that alllows for honest and dodgy dealing, trades that affect relationships with people you buy from or sell to, that cause factions to close their doors to you and block trade or missions for a limited period of time, sanctions, penalties, tips... a better black market system, more ways of acquiring goods and various ways of trading them to interested parties, depending on their business ethics... political, corporation, dictators, anarchistic factions, etc could compete for services, good and such, would split profits or make back-hand offers to try to increase their infuence in systems via players, instead of the basic pick 'n' mix format we have now which offers no diversity, incentives or opportunites in relationships, expect as a cordial/friend/ally. The current Reputation/Influcene mechanics needs expanding with some form of Ethical/Morality equation... it's one thing to call a group an "Anarchy" and have them send you to bomb settlements, or have politcal factions send you to kill pirates, but that's not taking it far enough. The social standing and strength of a group could detemine their influence on economic markets and the value of certain goods in far more detail.
ED is a game with a lot of ideas, but they're all too thinly spread, under-developed and this causes a serious lack of enjoyable gameplay elements. Players keep having to find new ways to stay loyal to the game, before the grind drives them nuts. And this isn't going to happen with the current pace of development that exists now, which lacks focus. Even the "story" is employed very weakly, and depends far too much on players seeking out the story elements instead of delivering it to them in an exciting way.
You only need to look at our real-life economy to see areas like technology, communications, transportation, harvesting natural resources, housing, clothing, weapons, food, energy production, entertainment, pharmaceuticals and healthcare, etc are major areas of manufacturing and services... and, unsurprisingly, all of them are highly influenced by politics. There is also a high level of ignorance for third-world needs in all these areas since more consumers live in first-world nations.
ED goes so far as to identify different different economies by their trade routes, systems that focus on them but there is no differentiation in game mechanics that allows players to focus on specific economies.
Mining is particulary poor – investing in an appropriate ship, cargo bays, mining lasers, propsect/collection lipets, refinery, etc is a high financial cost. Plus the time it takes to locate good sites, get there, pour through dozens of rocks for materials whilst fending off pirates... the pay-off is extremely poor value, and it's little wonder that more people complain about mining than most other mission types... it's not just unrewarding, but insulting simply because its so time-consuming. It bears a very low "satisfation" rating.
The only time we actually see prices rise for goods, in a realistic way, is in trade CGs... but even then, it's not realistic in terms of suppliers setting high prices to provide goods, since its the recipient setting the price they want to pay. ED economies lack forms of market exploitation, as exist in the real world... there is no form of price negotiation, no way of undermining other suppliers or over-charging desperate customers. This how real markets work. But ED is too simplified and only offers bare-bones economy mechanics.. there's no real substance to it. Trading is almost as weak as mining in terms of lacking opportunies to seek out specialised markets and to use them in advantageous ways.
Personally, I'd like to see a complete overhaul of the trading system, with deeper and even complex mechanics that allow for different us to practice different game styles, that alllows for honest and dodgy dealing, trades that affect relationships with people you buy from or sell to, that cause factions to close their doors to you and block trade or missions for a limited period of time, sanctions, penalties, tips... a better black market system, more ways of acquiring goods and various ways of trading them to interested parties, depending on their business ethics... political, corporation, dictators, anarchistic factions, etc could compete for services, good and such, would split profits or make back-hand offers to try to increase their infuence in systems via players, instead of the basic pick 'n' mix format we have now which offers no diversity, incentives or opportunites in relationships, expect as a cordial/friend/ally. The current Reputation/Influcene mechanics needs expanding with some form of Ethical/Morality equation... it's one thing to call a group an "Anarchy" and have them send you to bomb settlements, or have politcal factions send you to kill pirates, but that's not taking it far enough. The social standing and strength of a group could detemine their influence on economic markets and the value of certain goods in far more detail.
ED is a game with a lot of ideas, but they're all too thinly spread, under-developed and this causes a serious lack of enjoyable gameplay elements. Players keep having to find new ways to stay loyal to the game, before the grind drives them nuts. And this isn't going to happen with the current pace of development that exists now, which lacks focus. Even the "story" is employed very weakly, and depends far too much on players seeking out the story elements instead of delivering it to them in an exciting way.
You consider this undesirable in some way?
It seems a bit assbackwards to complain about having to do the same thing over and over to earn credits and then complain that high-paying missions can yield no reward if you fail to complete them.
Again, I find myself wondering what people do think is an acceptable way to earn credits?
Fly out the mailslot and be awarded Cr100m if they do it cleanly?
Nah, you'd still get people bleating that was unfair on those who can't manage it.
The fundamental problem is that there are two "stages" of credits in Elite. "I don't have enough to do what I want" and "Money is no longer an object".
The binary state is the problem.
There are other problems, like certain professions that don't pay well, that need to be addressed. But the core issue is money has two values. Not Enough and Too Much.
The binary state is the problem.
There are other problems, like certain professions that don't pay well, that need to be addressed. But the core issue is money has two values. Not Enough and Too Much.
A great example of how the pay for activities in ED is just ever so slightly off*, is by beginning with mining.
You can drop in to a ring, and start mining.
An NPC Pirate shows up, and if you're equipped to kill it, you can earn more money in those few seconds, than you will in the next 'whatever it takes to find a good asteroid' minutes.
Then a PvP pirate can show up, relieve you of your cargo, and sell it for even less than its worth. Making less money than the miner would have, had they sold it legally.
Then a bounty hunter can show up, blow up the PvP pirate, and make a loss, because the ammo cost more than the bounty reward.
Meanwhile, a CMDR can ship a single passenger a few ly, and earn more than all of them combined.
CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
*Extreme exaggeration.
You can drop in to a ring, and start mining.
An NPC Pirate shows up, and if you're equipped to kill it, you can earn more money in those few seconds, than you will in the next 'whatever it takes to find a good asteroid' minutes.
Then a PvP pirate can show up, relieve you of your cargo, and sell it for even less than its worth. Making less money than the miner would have, had they sold it legally.
Then a bounty hunter can show up, blow up the PvP pirate, and make a loss, because the ammo cost more than the bounty reward.
Meanwhile, a CMDR can ship a single passenger a few ly, and earn more than all of them combined.
CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
*Extreme exaggeration.
Hey, I didn't complain about anything... I just pointed out what I see as a key difference between two things that you'd compared in a previous post. And went on to say why I thought that difference might cause players to choose one over the other. I'm not expressing any preference at all, both seem valid to me.