The epic fail of Beyond

[Lucifera Danzig]

Yep.

I'd like to feel like the only thing preventing me from accomplishing something is my own lack of ability and not the fact that I lacked the willpower to wait for something to happen or, at worst, was simply unlucky.

It wouldn't be easy to make this happen but most of the tools to achieve it are already in the game.
It just needs for some smart people to spend some time sitting around and brainstorm a whole bunch of suitable challenges.
And then, if necessary, tweak the difficulty of them so that the level of challenge reflects the level of the reward.

Fundamentally, everybody should know, for sure, where they can find any mat' that they want.
The only obstacle in their way should be whether or not they can successfully collect them.

Get that right and you wouldn't need contrived time-sinks to prolong gameplay or "band-aid" solutions like material brokers.

The only thing I disagree with in principle here is calling the material broker a "band-aid." Follow me along on this thought:

In ED, "materials" are various fiddly bits that can be used to get your ship running above spec. You may not always find the ones you want yourself.

In RL, in similar circumstances, we have...trade shows, swap meets, conventions, online auction houses, and other ways to acquire and trade for things we like. Such as my brother finding a specific type of kit for his car's exhaust or my brother-in-law finding that special liquid-cooling accessory for his PC.

Adding the material broker to me feels like adding those RL ideas to the world of ED, for the same reasons we have them in RL for the enthusiasts, hobbyists, and hardcore modders of the galaxy. To me it would add a bit of a feeling of depth to the world of ED.

 

[Devari]

To be perfectly fair though, that is how the original 1984 Elite worked - to get to any given rank you had to destroy a specific number of NPC ships (NPCs didn't have rank, difficulty was based entirely on the type of ship the NPC was flying - there was no such thing as a Deadly sidey or a Mostly Harmless anaconda. Your Elite rank was just shorthand for your number of kills). So I can see why the game still works that way. HOWEVER, that was the mechanic on a game that ran on an 8 bit PC with 48KB of RAM and a cassette tape recorder. I think it's not unreasonable to ask that the modern version of the game be based on skill rather than repetition.

I actually don't mind that the game isn't challenge-based because it takes a game designer who truly understands gaming principles (not just software development) to design a truly challenging and well-balanced game. I don't think that the older technology was a limitation to make the game skill based though, that is really a fundamental issue of game design that can be implemented with any type of game. Some of the best designed video games are actually the old 8-bit NES or 16-bit SNES Nintendo games because they couldn't use impressive graphics or immersion to hold a player's attention. They had to be genuinely fun and also challenging at the same time and that seems to be a bit of a lost art in modern game design.

A good example here is probably the old racing game F-Zero, it was basically perfect as far as being a careful balance between skill and challenge. The game was only partially based on twitch-based gameplay, there also an appropriate risk/reward balance for various racing strategies as well as resource management issues throughout the race. Another good example of challenging and well-balanced gameplay from the space-sim games is the original Wing Commander series as well as the X-Wing series. You can make a game challenging without being mindlessly repetitive or at the very least include some sort of actual skill development to keep the repetitive aspects of the game from becoming boring.

 

[Stealthie]

The only thing I disagree with in principle here is calling the material broker a "band-aid." Follow me along on this thought:

In ED, "materials" are various fiddly bits that can be used to get your ship running above spec. You may not always find the ones you want yourself.

In RL, in similar circumstances, we have...trade shows, swap meets, conventions, online auction houses, and other ways to acquire and trade for things we like. Such as my brother finding a specific type of kit for his car's exhaust or my brother-in-law finding that special liquid-cooling accessory for his PC.

Adding the material broker to me feels like adding those RL ideas to the world of ED, for the same reasons we have them in RL for the enthusiasts, hobbyists, and hardcore modders of the galaxy. To me it would add a bit of a feeling of depth to the world of ED.

You have to be realistic though.

If people had advocated this as a means of creating a bit of diversity or even as a source of income, it would never have got off the ground.

The reason it's being considered is because FDev are aware that players find gathering materials tedious and that some materials are unreasonably difficult to source so they're implementing this simply because it's the easiest way to address those criticisms.

And, let's face it, all it's going to achieve is that people are going to spend proportionally longer harvesting the mat's they can easily obtain in order to trade them for the mat's they actually want while accounting for some level of loss in the process.

So, you're going to get people spending hours trawling planet surfaces for any G3 element so they can go and trade them in for a heap of arsenic for FSD rolls or you're going to get people spending hours hanging around outside stations, scanning every ship around, so they can trade in the scans for a wad of the elusive CIF for their weapon mod's.

Yippee! That's some intense new gameplay, right there.

 

[Lucifera Danzig]

You have to be realistic though.

If people had advocated this as a means of creating a bit of diversity or even as a source of income, it would never have got off the ground.

The reason it's being considered is because FDev are aware that players find gathering materials tedious and that some materials are unreasonably difficult to source so they're implementing this simply because it's the easiest way to address those criticisms.

And, let's face it, all it's going to achieve is that people are going to spend proportionally longer harvesting the mat's they can easily obtain in order to trade them for the mat's they actually want while accounting for some level of loss in the process.

So, you're going to get people spending hours trawling planet surfaces for any G3 element so they can go and trade them in for a heap of arsenic for FSD rolls or you're going to get people spending hours hanging around outside stations, scanning every ship around, so they can trade in the scans for a wad of the elusive CIF for their weapon mod's.

Yippee! That's some intense new gameplay, right there.

There will always be people who grind. Even in games that reward NOT grinding. (See WoW's "rested XP - then see the one guy I know who couldn't leave well enough alone and obsessed over grinding to the point he perpetually lost jobs due to not wanting to break away.) For most players, I think it's mainly going to be a chance to to take a bunch of materials they already have but filed in the "What do I do with this now?" category and actually find a use for it.

But yes, the rest of what I'm seeing in the engineering proposal has me raising eyebrows. I don't see how that's going to be a good idea.

 

[Stealthie]

There will always be people who grind. Even in games that reward NOT grinding. (See WoW's "rested XP - then see the one guy I know who couldn't leave well enough alone and obsessed over grinding to the point he perpetually lost jobs due to not wanting to break away.) For most players, I think it's mainly going to be a chance to to take a bunch of materials they already have but filed in the "What do I do with this now?" category and actually find a use for it.

But yes, the rest of what I'm seeing in the engineering proposal has me raising eyebrows. I don't see how that's going to be a good idea.

From a slightly different POV, I'm genuinely concerned that the mat' broker is actually going to damage gameplay.

I mean, be honest here, with a mat' broker available, are you going to go and visit Dav's Hope or hunt down any of the tankers to find mat's?
Are you going to try and get into surface installations to obtain MEF from data-point scans?
Will you be taking missions that reward you in Exquisite Focus Crystals?

Or are you just going to have a "go-to" method of obtaining G1 mat's, another method of obtaining G2 mats, another for G3, another for G4 and another for G5?
And then, once you've got sufficient quantities of any suitable mat', you're just going to head over to the mat' broker and trade them for what you need?

What the mat' broker is going to do is, effectively, create a "meta" for obtaining every class of mat' in the game and thus render all unique mat's redundant.
Instead of having 150-odd unique mats, they might as well be replaced by generic "G1 mat", "G2 mat", "G3 mat", G4 mat" and "G5 mat" which people will just pick up in sufficient quantities to trade for the specific things they need.

Which, as a result, will also (ironically enough) render the mat' broker redundant too.
After all, the mat' broker renders unique mat's redundant so, that being the case, you might as well just get rid of the entire process and then set it up so that, instead of finding 10 random G3 mat's, taking them to the mat' broker and trading them for 5 arsenic, you just take 10 generic "G3 mat's" straight to felicity Farseer and 2 get used in every roll for a G5 FSD.

The only reason to have unique materials is because they are sourced in diverse ways.
When you introduce the mat' broker it renders the entire process redundant.

 

[Lucifera Danzig]

From a slightly different POV, I'm genuinely concerned that the mat' broker is actually going to damage gameplay.

I mean, be honest here, with a mat' broker available, are you going to go and visit Dav's Hope or hunt down any of the tankers to find mat's?
Are you going to try and get into surface installations to obtain MEF from data-point scans?
Will you be taking missions that reward you in Exquisite Focus Crystals?

Or are you just going to have a "go-to" method of obtaining G1 mat's, another method of obtaining G2 mats, another for G3, another for G4 and another for G5?
And then, once you've got sufficient quantities of any suitable mat', you're just going to head over to the mat' broker and trade them for what you need?

What the mat' broker is going to do is, effectively, create a "meta" for obtaining every class of mat' in the game and thus render all unique mat's redundant.
Instead of having 150-odd unique mats, they might as well be replaced by generic "G1 mat", "G2 mat", "G3 mat", G4 mat" and "G5 mat" which people will just pick up in sufficient quantities to trade for the specific things they need.

Which, as a result, will also (ironically enough) render the mat' broker redundant too.
After all, the mat' broker renders unique mat's redundant so, that being the case, you might as well just get rid of the entire process and then set it up so that, instead of finding 10 random G3 mat's, taking them to the mat' broker and trading them for 5 arsenic, you just take 10 generic "G3 mat's" straight to felicity Farseer and 2 get used in every roll for a G5 FSD.

The only reason to have unique materials is because they are sourced in diverse ways.
When you introduce the mat' broker it renders the entire process redundant.

I'd imagine not every station's broker will have every material, and I'm also thinking you won't be able to trade say...data materials for prospected, or manufactured for data, etc. Or at least, that'd make sense to me. Do we know if FDev has even touched on that aspect?

 

[Stealthie]

I'd imagine not every station's broker will have every material, and I'm also thinking you won't be able to trade say...data materials for prospected, or manufactured for data, etc. Or at least, that'd make sense to me. Do we know if FDev has even touched on that aspect?

I'm assuming a "best case scenario" whereby you'll only be able to trade same-level mat's.

Anything other than that is only going to make things worse though.

I mean, let's say the mat' broker opeates on a "2 for 1" basis.

To obtain rolls on a G5 FSD you currently need to find a suitable planet, go down to the surface and hunt around until you find arsenic, you then need to find a system in famine, scoot over there and scan ships until you get DWEs and then you might go to Dav's Hope for chemical manipulators.
You then take your swag to Farseer and get 3 rolls on a G5 FSD.

Now let's look at how the new system is likely to work....

You land on a planet surface and run around until you find any 2 x G3 raw materials, you scan ships until you get 2 x G5 data-scans and you pick up 2 x G4 manufactured items at a USS.
This will give you 6 x raw materials, 6 x scans and 6 x manufactured items.
You then fly to a mat' broker and trade these (at a "2 for 1" rate) for 3 x arsenic, 3 x DWEs and 3 x chemical manipulators.
You then fly to Farseer, hand over the stuff you got from the mat' trader in exchange for the stuff you found, and get your 3 rolls on a G5 FSD.

Why?
Why bother with any of that stuff at all?

If the mat's can be traded, why not just take any 6 G3 raw materials, any 6 x G5 scans and any 6 x G4 manufactured items straight to Farseer to get your 3 rolls?

The mat' trader is removing the need for specific items so why bother retaining the need for specific items at all?

 

[Powderpanic]

Let me put this here at the last day of the year and I will come back to it at the same day next year to see if I was right or wrong.

I saw the clue in other thread which leads to conclusion as topic says about Beyond. The last update *The Squadrons* was announced with these words:

* Squadrons - Players like working together, w so we’re going to add a new organisation structure for player groups, called Squadrons. You’ll be able to create your own squadron with tools to manage its hierarchy and membership. Squadrons will feature enhanced communication options, making it easier to coordinate your efforts, whether you’re doing completing community goals, supporting your power or manipulating the background simulation. And as a little treat, squadrons will be able to purchase a fleet carrier, giving members a mobile base of operations where they can restock, refuel and respawn.*

If we liken the BGS to a house at the present state of the game, we, the players, are allowed to repaint the fence. We have small brushes and limited choice of colors to do the job. We have already repainted the fence in all colors of the rainbow… countless times and we are fed up with this. We have said thousands of times in forum: repainting the fence is shallow activity, boring. We want to build a dog hut in the corner of backyard. We need a hammer, saw, nails and few boards, that’s all. What we will have instead in Q4 2018? A huge tractor capable of digging holes, but we will be allowed to repaint the fence with it. Can you smell disappointment? CG, PP and BGS manipulation were, are and will be shallow gameplay despite the way they will be carried out. Nobody sane could be personally engaged in any activity which doesn’t benefit him. CG, PP and BGS will always be exploited by players in short term but cannot provide gameplay to keep players busy for years.

A lot hopes are concentrated in Beyond. It was announced as *Beyond will focus on three things: narrative progression, enhancements and development of the core experience and adding new features and content to the game.*

Repainting the fence with different and more powerful tools is not new feature and content. It is the same shallow and boring gameplay we chew for three years and apparently forth is underway. One of my very first comments in this forum was about the ridiculous C&P system back in the middle of 2015. It took two and half years to someone to realize that the game needs more adequate C&P system. I’ve seen a lot of rage quits in forum because of lack of C&P system i.e. the FD has lost its customers. How many inadequate design decisions the game can take and why?

Another my comment at this time was that nobody will take PP seriously, because nobody will put efforts for prosperity, honor and glory of NPC. Unfortunately I was right: PP is dead, will I be right this time?

I agree with you OP. Foolishly however you had an opinion that is anti ED and however right you are, you will be shouted down by the Whiteknights of this forum.
Whiteknights who seem super excited and content with painting a fence on repeat with a tiny tiny brush.

Squadrons is a super idea but like most thing it will be a lesson in what could have been a great feature, if given to a competent development team who actually have a single vision for the game. Not a vision that is murkey and hoping to make everyone happy by being a vanilla as possible. ( Because, you know actual content might force people to have to get good at the game and that is basically griefing to most of the player base )

Powerplay
Multicrew
Ship born fighters
Thargoids
Arena/CQC

All fantastic opportunities wasted by a myriad of bad decisions, under planning and not understanding what makes for Multiplayer games these days. ( Yes lets not forget that ED was marketed as an MMO/Multiplayer, before the shill screams of the fanbois try to drown me out )

Also another thing which is going to kill Squadrons being awesome before it even launches and let see the Whiteknights defeat this one..

P2P

Oh this should be good.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I agree with you OP. Foolishly however you had an opinion that is anti ED and however right you are, you will be shouted down by the Whiteknights of this forum.
Whiteknights who seem super excited and content with painting a fence on repeat with a tiny tiny brush.

Squadrons is a super idea but like most thing it will be a lesson in what could have been a great feature, if given to a competent development team who actually have a single vision for the game. Not a vision that is murkey and hoping to make everyone happy by being a vanilla as possible. ( Because, you know actual content might force people to have to get good at the game and that is basically griefing to most of the player base )

Powerplay
Multicrew
Ship born fighters
Thargoids
Arena/CQC

All fantastic opportunities wasted by a myriad of bad decisions, under planning and not understanding what makes for Multiplayer games these days. ( Yes lets not forget that ED was marketed as an MMO/Multiplayer, before the shill screams of the fanbois try to drown me out )

Also another thing which is going to kill Squadrons being awesome before it even launches and let see the Whiteknights defeat this one..

P2P

Oh this should be good.

What white knights are those. From what I can tell from you is that if someone disagrees with your opinion they are a white knight. Sounds like pathetic school boy name calling to me.

 

[Arindor]

Open-centric additions to ED offers nothing to solo players and squadrons sound no different. I'm hoping squadrons include stuff for those who play solo. So far ED hasn't given me anything I would call a benefit. But I still plod on with blinkered hope.

As an aside: sometimes I think there is confusion between what is interpreted as white knighting and common sense.

 

[Shanaeri]

Can anyone who knows for sure that Beyond will be an utter failure please mail me next weeks lottery numbers. It'd be a really nice gesture

 

[Lennox Dantes]

FD have made a number of bad design decisions. They have made one of the greatest, visceral experiences in terms of flying your ship. They created the most vast world of any to date.

Then they completely restrict the player into playing some solo rpg that is just about levelling your ship.

Missed opportunity. ED is so well made that a niche of people will play for a long time. But they will suffer once SC comes out and the space fills with PVE games that do content better.

FD need to free up their galaxy asap and stop trying to control every aspect od my gaming experience.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

But they will suffer once SC comes out and the space fills with PVE games that do content better.

Thank you, I needed a good laugh.

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

There are a lot of other mission ideas being bounced about this forum, but none of that is part of the remit of Beyond...

Instead Beyond is about planetary improvements, "squadrons" (formalised playergroup integration into the game), wing missions, revisiting the core gameplay mechanics and making it less placeholdery and more cohesive.

Given the current idea for solving the disattisfaction with engineers RNG/Grind implementation is to add even more grind to it, and the crux of the Crime and Punishment system is the ship carries the criminal record rather than the commander I really have my doubts, but we shall see.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

There are a lot of other mission ideas being bounced about this forum, but none of that is part of the remit of Beyond...

Instead Beyond is about planetary improvements, "squadrons" (formalised playergroup integration into the game), wing missions, revisiting the core gameplay mechanics and making it less placeholdery and more cohesive.

Given the current idea for solving the disattisfaction with engineers RNG/Grind implementation is to add even more grind to it, and the crux of the Crime and Punishment system is the ship carries the criminal record rather than the commander I really have my doubts, but we shall see.

Missions are being updated in every update. I doubt they will stop know, and as the did mention mission updates with the new scanning mechanics coming in Q4, I have to assume that they will be updated. I assume you missed that part.

 

[KING5TON]

I agree OP.
Squadrons on paper as described by FD will ultimately be disappointing.
What appears to be proposed is that you'll be able to sign up to a squadron and have basically a mega ship........and that's it.
FD need to be told "That's not good enough, try harder".
Unfortunately people trying to tell FD that it isn't good enough are shouted down by the vocal minority here on the forums that for some strange reason don't want the game to get better even though they profess their love for it.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I agree OP.
Squadrons on paper as described by FD will ultimately be disappointing.
What appears to be proposed is that you'll be able to sign up to a squadron and have basically a mega ship........and that's it.
FD need to be told "That's not good enough, try harder".
Unfortunately people trying to tell FD that it isn't good enough are shouted down by the vocal minority here on the forums that for some strange reason don't want the game to get better even though they profess their love for it.

But what it good enough. People want different things and what is good enough for someone else is a disaster for another. It isn't that simple.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I agree OP.
Squadrons on paper as described by FD will ultimately be disappointing.
What appears to be proposed is that you'll be able to sign up to a squadron and have basically a mega ship........and that's it.
FD need to be told "That's not good enough, try harder".
Unfortunately people trying to tell FD that it isn't good enough are shouted down by the vocal minority here on the forums that for some strange reason don't want the game to get better even though they profess their love for it.

You will be able to comment on squadrons btw on forum feedback. Yes, again, it is up to FD to take input into account, but that's the rules.

As for disappointing - disappointing for whom? Those who expect EvE in ED - yes, there isn't EvE, and won't be EvE in ED.

Those who want to have place to call their own - it will scratch their back I guess.

As for details - it is really hard to tell. I know what FD can and can't do. I know territorial control won't be there, because that's not how FD does things. What else?

For me squadrons for all intents and purposes are player group support - people doing fun stuff together gets their base as home and chat channel.

As for "you can do so much with concept" - it is all dev time that will be taken away from something else. Yes, you can do, but how much is worth to do is different subject entirely.

 

[Rob At Work]

Damn!!!

New year's resolution broken, I wasn't going to read any more of these "the end of the world is nigh" type threads

arrr.. well there's always 2019 (if we get there )

Happy New Year everybody.

 

[Stealthie]

I agree with you OP. Foolishly however you had an opinion that is anti ED and however right you are, you will be shouted down by the Whiteknights of this forum.
Whiteknights who seem super excited and content with painting a fence on repeat with a tiny tiny brush.

Squadrons is a super idea but like most thing it will be a lesson in what could have been a great feature, if given to a competent development team who actually have a single vision for the game. Not a vision that is murkey and hoping to make everyone happy by being a vanilla as possible. ( Because, you know actual content might force people to have to get good at the game and that is basically griefing to most of the player base )

Powerplay
Multicrew
Ship born fighters
Thargoids
Arena/CQC

All fantastic opportunities wasted by a myriad of bad decisions, under planning and not understanding what makes for Multiplayer games these days. ( Yes lets not forget that ED was marketed as an MMO/Multiplayer, before the shill screams of the fanbois try to drown me out )

Also another thing which is going to kill Squadrons being awesome before it even launches and let see the Whiteknights defeat this one..

P2P

Oh this should be good.

Y'know, I agree with all of this.

Simple fact is, there's no good reason to indulge in any of this stuff and plenty of good reasons to avoid it.

Until both of these things are fixed - creating reasons to indulge in co-op play and creating assurances that a player isn't likely to regret doing so - there's little point in advocating anything based on co-op play.