Elite Dangerous is the Largest Empty Sandbox Ever Made

[CapuchinSeven]

It does feel a little as if ED is fading into obscurity.

Which is a great shame when one considers the lovely graphics and the feeling of flying that they created.

If only they'd given the gameplay and fun aspects the same attention, then they could've potentially had a really amazing game. Or, at least, a game. Maybe, I dunno, like having some player interaction with things in this massive galaxy. Beyond the paltry interactions that we currently have which sort of renders the vastness of the galaxy kinda ridiculous.

It's big, great! What can I do in it?!
Erm... shoot, scan, deliver.
Oh.

I agree that more interaction with core gameplay or even just your ship would be a good thing, a personal bug for me has always been that when taking a mission to find someone or something and flying to the planet they are located at, "scanning" for the target is basically just waiting around for the game to randomly pop up a USS.

If I'm playing as a search and rescue pilot looking for a back-box or a escape pod then I'm actually just a wait and rescue pilot because I sure as hell didn't do any searching. Interaction with my ships sensors (and frankly a chance to actually fail!) is, to me at least, some interesting depth to the bland gameplay.

All that said, I don't think ED is going to slip into obscurity, season 3 has a lot of promise and really right now it has no real direct competition.

 

[babelfisch]

Do I need to bring up the revenue and active player count (per day) of Eve Online again? Aside from the game copy sales (many people only buy the game once, not the expansions), ED literally pales in comparison. The micro-transaction revenue of ED is a lot less than Eve Online's micro-transactions and monthly paid subscriptions per month. It doesn't come close to the amount of active players per day. It does NOT come close to the annual revenue that Eve Online (CCP) makes per year.

Why do you want to take Elite away from us when you just could go and play Eve?

 

[TheSynopticVision]

Just throwing this out for people to debate the active playerbase. I don't know how reliable it is, nor what to infer from these numbers. Purely FYI

http://steamspy.com/app/359320

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

Oh for sure. And indeed there are what I would call the 'usual bunch of very vocal forum participants' - myself included - who no doubt you are by now very familiar with

And we all have our opinions on the game and how it should proceed from here. But you have the final say of course.

I feel it is my duty to remind you that this is Elite IV, not EVE Mk.II and that it should not be turned into EVE Mk.II. Others are proposing it should be turned into EVE Mk.II.

As for how the game has been recieved overall - well, that's going to be coloured by the almost skeleton-like base mechanics that have basically not changed since December 16th 2014. I'm talking about Trading, Exploring, and the obviously dead-at-birth Piracy and Bounty-Hunting mechanics, all of which haven't seen any improvement in almost 4 years since initial release.

My point being - you should be very careful in how you interpret how the game has been received, bearing in mind those base mechanics, as I can see that from Frontier's point of view, a lot of code has been written in the past 4 years, adding new things to the game since release, but at the same time, those base mechanics have more or less remained static.

I think if you concentrated on fleshing out Trading, Exploration, and did something to finally bring Bounty-Hunting and Piracy into life, you'd find that this would go a very long way in bringing actual improvements to the game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I don't know how reliable it is, nor what to infer from these numbers. Purely FYI

As discussed previously in this thread, those stats do not include any players on PC that don't use Steam to launch the game or any console players at all.

 

[M00ka]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

I don't envy the task you guys and girls have set for themselves. With this community being so emotive, you can ask 100 forum members what direction they want the game to go in and what (if any) new content they want - and you will no doubt get 100 different answers. And out of that 100, 50 will state that unless their ideas are taken up the game will fail, they will leave to play CS or some other hollow threat.

 

[Cosmo]

The death of the game has been prophesied for a long time now - some have stated that features needed to be added / removed "or the game will die".

It will happen at some point - that's an odds-on certainty. When and why it will happen is open to speculation, however.

Yes, and for a long-time I have supported and defended Elite Dangerous, trust me.

Here are a few examples of successful sandbox games:

• Eve Online = has been online since 2003. That's more than 14 years. Eve Online has expensive dedicated servers and server parks that they have to finance. They managed to do this all those years. They still have many core dedicated fans who willingly pay a monthly subscription fee (they also opened the game with Free-2-play limited player accounts).
• Ultima Online = perhaps the oldest true MMORPG in history launched in 1997. 20 years later, it still has a considerable dedicated fanbase and many people play it despite having outdated low-resolution, pixelated graphics.
• Minecraft = has awful low resolution graphics, but 122 MILLION copies have been sold.

So why have these games survived the tests of time, thrived and are still alive after so many years? Because each of these games has a deep sandbox where players have a lot of options to mold, change, influence, build, create and manage things by themselves.

Elite Dangerous doesn't have to go into obscurity. It can also last another 10 years.

Frontier should take a hard look at these games and then decide what could be added to Elite Dangerous to improve the state of the sandbox. It's up to them of course and it would be wise to learn from these great sandbox games.

Anyway, I've explained it enough in this thread.

 

[TheSynopticVision]

As discussed previously in this thread, those stats do not include any players on PC that don't use Steam to launch the game or any console players at all.

Yes of course. Could maybe still be useful for a relative (to other comparable Steam games) rather than absolute rough assessment of the playerbase (like, total owners vs peak daily players).

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You can keep saying, lets keep on doing what we've been doing for the last three years and keep the sandbox shallow, but that will be the gradual demise of this game.

If that is what you want Frontier then keep listening to these guys who staunchly oppose a deep sandbox.

I'm very curious to see how Frontier is going to handle enriching the Elite content in Beyond. You seem to reason that anyone who doesn't agree with your ideas is arguing for stagnation. That my dearest is called a strawman.

So if you need logical fallacies to be able to argue your position, you're in bad shape my friend.

 

[Old Duck]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

FWIW, I don't want Elite to turn into Eve or Star Citizen. I think Elite is heading in the right direction, it's just a bit malnourished and could use a little meat on the bone. Otherwise, it's great IMO.

Now if Elite wants to borrow some ideas from No Man's Sky, I won't complain

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

You can keep saying, lets keep on doing what we've been doing for the last three years and keep the sandbox shallow, but that will be the gradual demise of this game.

No that is not what I have been saying at all. You keep saying that to yourself, if that is what makes you feel happy. But adding what you want to me is just a waste of time and effort and is not something I want to ever see in the game.

If you cannot understand that there are different types of sandboxes out there, then you are truely blind. ED is not a corporation/building contruction sand box. It is an adventure sandbox where you create your own adventure from the tools available. At the moment there is sand (I accept there could be more) there are just not the tools to properly play with that sand. So lets get the tools in to play with the sand we have first before expanding on what other types of sand are available. And if the sand that you want doesn't comes a long, I very much doubt the game will fall into obscurity as it seems to have a pretty consistant player base.

I also think the player base will improve a lot more when the tools to play with the sand we have gets improved.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

You can keep saying, lets keep on doing what we've been doing for the last three years and keep the sandbox shallow, but that will be the gradual demise of this game.

If that is what you want Frontier then keep listening to these guys who staunchly oppose a deep sandbox.



Do I need to bring up the revenue and active player count (per day) of Eve Online again? Aside from the game copy sales (many people only buy the game once, not the expansions), ED literally pales in comparison. The micro-transaction revenue of ED is a lot less than Eve Online's micro-transactions and monthly paid subscriptions per month. It doesn't come close to the amount of active players per day. It does NOT come close to the annual revenue that Eve Online (CCP) makes per year.

That's not what I've been saying at all.
I agree that ED is shallow but we differ on the cure.

What's the point of an Open World if everywhere in it is more or less the same.

The extra sand should be focused on adding variation and deepening the gameplay for everyone as individuals.
- cure the beige plague - when I explore, I don't want to rediscover the same cut-and-paste dozen or so planet textures.
- make systems distinct - have the art team work on distinct looks and feels for superpowers, powers, factions, government types, etc. instead of churning out more generic paintjobs. (That sole addition of different coloured station interiors for different economy types made a huge difference to the feel of the game - more of that please).
- make system states and security levels feel different and lead to choices with consequences
- make population and wealth apparent in the NPC population and types
- make non-combat equipment functions that have depth rather than point and click
- many, many more

Player agency does need to be apparent but that doesn't mean making the game one where you have to join a group to participate.
Building things would be nice but that is not the core of a game about being a space pilot.
Focus on making the game deeper and more engaging for the lone pilot - everyone benefits from that.
Include elements that may require player cooperation, as wings or as larger groups, but ensure that there are ways for single players to engage with it

Eve and ED are completely different games - the only thing they have in common is the setting.

Focusing on the things that you want will not make it the game you want - Eve has a ten year plus head start on implementing those features and FD would never catch up and we'd all lose because we'd just end up with a sub-standard Eve clone instead of a first-rate next-gen Elite game.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

That's not what I've been saying at all.
I agree that ED is shallow but we differ on the cure.

What's the point of an Open World if everywhere in it is more or less the same.

The extra sand should be focused on adding variation and deepening the gameplay for everyone as individuals.
- cure the beige plague - when I explore, I don't want to rediscover the same cut-and-paste dozen or so planet textures.
- make systems distinct - have the art team work on distinct looks and feels for superpowers, powers, factions, government types, etc. instead of churning out more generic paintjobs. (That sole addition of different coloured station interiors for different economy types made a huge difference to the feel of the game - more of that please).
- make system states and security levels feel different and lead to choices with consequences
- make population and wealth apparent in the NPC population and types
- make non-combat equipment functions that have depth rather than point and click
- many, many more

Player agency does need to be apparent but that doesn't mean making the game one where you have to join a group to participate.
Building things would be nice but that is not the core of a game about being a space pilot.
Focus on making the game deeper and more engaging for the lone pilot - everyone benefits from that.
Include elements that may require player cooperation, as wings or as larger groups, but ensure that there are ways for single players to engage with it

Eve and ED are completely different games - the only thing they have in common is the setting.

Focusing on the things that you want will not make it the game you want - Eve has a ten year plus head start on implementing those features and FD would never catch up and we'd all lose because we'd just end up with a sub-standard Eve clone instead of a first-rate next-gen Elite game.

100% this. Pretty much what I said in my reply.

 

[FrodoHobbits]

Hi
can you confirm you will still be looking at the DDF archives and trying to implement that stuff as well ? FD have been worryingly silent imo about the likes of hirable npc wingmates, npc crew (not just the slf pilot) and missions such as escort and protect npcs etc.

I would be happy as a pig in muck if this came in and i am not the only one.

thanks

I couldn't have said it better and would really like an answer on this.
Have some rep

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

I haven't always agreed with the direction Elite has taken, but what did like, is that it is blazing it's own trail (pardon the pun). This comes of course with duds, because you are trying something new and you're not restricting yourself to proven paths. It's not the easiest route, but once you get it right, it's the most satisfying. And for me that shines through when I think back of the many enjoyable hours exploring stuff. It was enjoyable because there never has been anything like it.

The Beyond update I feel is a recognition and admission of not getting it right with regard to the new toys/in-depth improvement ratio. And I can see why that went awry, since my crystal ball tells me that marketing departments have an easier time sexing up new toys than boring same old but slightly better features.

I'm sure I had a point when I started typing, but it eludes me right now.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Elite Dangerous doesn't have to go into obscurity. It can also last another 10 years.

There is no evidence to suggest that ED will fall into obscurity.

 

[S3B4ST13N]

That's not what I've been saying at all.
I agree that ED is shallow but we differ on the cure.

What's the point of an Open World if everywhere in it is more or less the same.

The extra sand should be focused on adding variation and deepening the gameplay for everyone as individuals.
- cure the beige plague - when I explore, I don't want to rediscover the same cut-and-paste dozen or so planet textures.
- make systems distinct - have the art team work on distinct looks and feels for superpowers, powers, factions, government types, etc. instead of churning out more generic paintjobs. (That sole addition of different coloured station interiors for different economy types made a huge difference to the feel of the game - more of that please).
- make system states and security levels feel different and lead to choices with consequences
- make population and wealth apparent in the NPC population and types
- make non-combat equipment functions that have depth rather than point and click
- many, many more

Player agency does need to be apparent but that doesn't mean making the game one where you have to join a group to participate.
Building things would be nice but that is not the core of a game about being a space pilot.
Focus on making the game deeper and more engaging for the lone pilot - everyone benefits from that.
Include elements that may require player cooperation, as wings or as larger groups, but ensure that there are ways for single players to engage with it

Eve and ED are completely different games - the only thing they have in common is the setting.

Focusing on the things that you want will not make it the game you want - Eve has a ten year plus head start on implementing those features and FD would never catch up and we'd all lose because we'd just end up with a sub-standard Eve clone instead of a first-rate next-gen Elite game.

Well said.

Something Braben mentioned in a very early video; apparently we should have been able to see the construction of a station over the course of a month.. like, imagine seeing a Coriolis under construction? It would be like approaching the Death Star...

And on that note, I'd like it if the system reflected the current state .. if it was at war, make the stations look battle worn.. make the system look and feel like it's at war .. right now..it's like "they're at war.." "ok, how can we tell?" "There's a randomly spawned marker you can drop into and have a look at." "..."
After the war, have repair crews outside the station fixing things..
Perhaps have a station unavailable because of a battle that took place outside, rendering the letterbox inoperable.

 

[kofeyh]

Now change this to: If the same threads from the same people saying the same thing keep popping ... etc etc etc.

That indeed tells me something.

This is how hotel California started, by the way. And there is a point where the endless repetition in game, spills into the forums. And reddit. And a lot of other places. This is probably not lost on Frontier. Maybe it is. Who knows.

As for the game, folks either find entertainment, settle for the ordinary, or give up and move on. Frontier has, for reasons only they can explain, elected to build a game that essentially offers the ability for players to interact, but never have any agency in it.

It’s that quirky mix of freedom expressed via a straight jacket. At this point? Frontier are going to build a great game; I just don’t know what that’s for; us, or them.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes of course. Could maybe still be useful for a relative (to other comparable Steam games) rather than absolute rough assessment of the playerbase (like, total owners vs peak daily players).

How would they be able to be compared - given that the Steam stats ignore two and a half platforms of players?

We know that Frontier do have all the stats though - and I expect that they can draw conclusions based on them (as Dale alluded to in his most recent post).

 

[CaptainKremmen]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

Hi Dale.

Here is a quick view of how I've been "interacting with the game"... and also, how Frontier's own "interactions" with the game directly affected me:


When ED 2.4 went live and the Thargoids appeared, this is what I did:

- Flew to the Pleiades
- Transferred my Fer de Lance over, fitted AX Missiles and Xeno Scanner.
- Spent days dogfighting Cyclops Variant flowerships, learning their strengths/weaknesses, and those of my own ship in combat against them.
- Got to a point where I was about through to their fourth and final "heart".

Awesome, fantastic, challenging gameplay!


Here is what Frontier Developments did in a "minor patch" the next morning.

- Reached in via the Hand of God and reduced the effectiveness of AX Missiles.
- Wrote in the patch notes that "the Thargoids have adapted!".


Here is what I did next:

- Barely logged in for about a month, as I was annoyed that someone had touched my, err, junk.


Please please please resist the urge to go god-modding. It's perfectly reasonable to make significant game changes and edits in a big point-release upgrade - sure thing, let nothing be sacred, take some risks! However, changing something I'm actually in the middle of using, like between Monday night and Tuesday morning, that's really jarring and irritating...

...especially when it's a new "feature" you've just added. "Here are some new scary aliens, and here are missiles to fight them with" - new headline stuff, added in 2.4. I was doing just that. Why rattle my cage when I'm engaging with it?