What do you 'realistically' require for release in 4 months?

[MadBoris]

SECTIONED for those avoiding walls of text

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This isn't a speculation thread, rather hoping for the opposite, I am seeking realistic consideration and objectivity regarding an upcoming completed game.
I don't have the beta but I am excited by the prospect of the game and buying it. I'm affected pretty heavily by first impressions so I am trying to be patient to play and enjoy the actual experience, not test it. From everything I see, the 'foundation' is intact and looking really good, the immersion seems there. I think people are in agreement it needs fleshing out and more features. But with only 4 months looming until an expected Q4 release, what does the game really require and what can be reasonably accomplished in that time-frame? I've spent a couple days wondering what is really realistic but without hands-on I don't know what is incomplete and truly lacking from 'Design Discussions'.
(Those on a fast track can zip down to Summary Question)

BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS:
Beta 1 is out, Beta 2 is in the horizon, usually this means a feature lock for proper polish and bug hunting needs to take place in a few months, until the separate expansion build can have full focus beyond first 1.0 release. Most games don't really follow traditional Alpha/Beta/Gold anymore, although it's a native part of the process of programming and development, gamers have been being taught lately to accept what they are told and what is given. The definition of these monikers has become looser and is redefined by the whim of devs more and more these days, I'm not sure of Frontier's philosophies. But there is going to be a Gold, 1.0, Completed (whatever) version of the game at some point, even though development will continue beyond.

Unfortunately for the development schedule of the game there are press events upcoming that actually detour development a bit by needing to 'sell' the game and satisfy the press, the backers and new comers. Marketing is a necessary evil from a devs point of view, because it takes a toll on development deadlines. Anyone familiar with this process knows this diverts a good bit of money and detours some development resources for a couple weeks to get a good build ready, a running demo, new assets to showcase, hardware to acquire, setup and showcase it, etc. Lots of time, preparation and money for a few hours at a show. It's a minor hiccup in development, but a hiccup none the less with only 4 months to go. I can almost start to smell the perspiration with the subtle lemony hints of some anxiety with Gamescom coming and a Q4 release scheduled.

In recent newsletter 32 (33,34,35 are not yet visible on the website News section) they say they are still "on track to launch in late 2014 (Q4)". At the outset that is now about 4 months away. 33-35 do not include phraseology or indication of still being ontrack, something that was around for some earlier newsletters pretty consistently. It's omission doesn't prove anything, just something to note. I know game development and the last 4 months up to a gold release doesn't produce miracles in terms of content, unless it will be released with a beta moniker or be pushed back, both possible.

Strangely newsletter 32 didn't speak of specific upcoming DDA's that were being worked on and fleshed out for Q4 release (the upcoming design docs). It instead spent its text speaking of distant dreams of expansions where we can hope of walking on ships, stations, landing on planets, etc. Sounds all very wonderful but that is the expansions, and that will probably be over a year away and likely longer. Step 2 and 3 are preceded by step 1. I'm far more concerned about what will happen these next 4 months in making a fleshed out game with a bit more depth before expectations of the expansions can be more realistic. Also, for bugs to get really play tested and ironed out (existing and upcoming), along with some performance optimization, feature lock has to take place in a few months in preparation for the release to the public. The team isn't really that large where the laws of game development can be seriously broken, like speed of light. It's safe to say I've closely watched hundreds of games get developed since early nineties and I have good experiential knowledge of the process, so I know reasonable and realistic expectations.

Latest newsletter 35 mentions the following in this context-

as the game gets further towards completion...The key areas of focus for development now is extending the online mission system to deliver a compelling experience, the accessibility of the game for those that haven’t been intimately involved in its evolution like our Alpha and Premium Beta backers, and of course vast quantities of new content, polish and optimizations.

Vast quantities of new content isn't something I have seen in the last 4 months of development of a game. Vast quantities of content normally require vast testing, balancing and bug hunting. Expectations of vast, as some may consider vast, may need to be toned down a bit.
Future patches after Q4 may include content for free but its not expected.

SUMMARY QUESTION:
So I'm asking the beta participants and backers, what do you really require for the game to be fleshed out to make the game feel objectively complete for public consumption before getting back into "wait mode" for the future expansions? (The fruit of the future will only be realized by a robust and quality initial release.)
Beta 2 may be be the last big jump in testing new features and prepping for a solid release.

Some things I considered as necessary...just by reading...

• Initial well made tutorial or good help system- to learn functions and be introduced to the game in a natural/intuitive way like a mission with onboard computer or a wingman teaching the ropes. Learning by mistakes and fumbling through confusion in the early game can leave a bad first impression and does turn most people off
• Multiple ship ownership- and decent place to store multiple ships
• Better Understanding energy/heat consumption of weapons/modules prior to being purchased- As I understand it, this needs to be fleshed out. If I'm not mistaken it's currently buy it and see what happens.
• Quality joystick support and mapping- always has been a bit time consuming and onerous with PC development, requires time for different devices to get solid 'native' support
• Quality Missions- I think quality over quantity will make the mission system engrossing
• Just a smidgen more than 55 out of 400,000,000,000 star systems available.
• Don't sell out the soul of the game in acquiescing to consoles.
• Mining-all that needs to be involved for it to be compelling/fun. Dunno if its required really.

IMO, much in the Development Diaries doesn't seem to have the time to be fleshed out,tested, balanced in 4 months.
So what do you think the game 'objectively' requires and can it be done in a reasonable 4 month time-frame from your experience?

Edit Added link to DDA's compilation

 

[SAB380]

More station types.
Mining
Way more mission content, both quality and quantity
Factions - Imperial, Federal, Indy, piracy ....and their ranks
Elite Rankings
25 ships as promised
400 billion star system (or whatever the complete game should have)

 

[Valcrow]

400 billion star system

I like how this is just an expectation, but it seems like somehow it should be more sarcastic...

What do you want from a game?
Oh, not much, just 400 billion star systems for me to explore...

 

[Bootsock]

Tutorials and a manual need to be added, I'll give you that as it's quite a complicated game by all accounts.

Expanding the 'bubble' beyond 55 systems is of course going to happen as it's currently an artificial limit for Beta, but compared to the one we started with in Alpha, it's loads!

Completely disagree with the 'no to consoles' thing because there is no real reason beyond elitism for this. More platforms would mean more players and therefore more money to put back into the longevity of the product. Besides, the innovative GUI suits console controllers well.

Missions (including military) and mining are the main things which I think need adding soon, and of course progress markers (for example military and Elite ranking, although presumably this will be a late addition).

Given that we only had single player scenarios eight months ago, I'm not too concerned about Frontier's commitment and pace to adding vast new features.

 

[Hamerstein]

• Full implementation of pilot roles and their associated mechanisms: Pirate, Trader, Smuggler, Miner, Explorer, Assassin, Bounty Hunter, Personnel transporter etc.
• Full AI implementation - vastly improved NPC AI control, varying difficulty.
• Complete Galaxy (with the exceptions of areas reserved as previously outlined by FD for expansions)
• 25 playable ships
• Full Supercruise implementation - POI, Interdiction
• Fully realised background simulation
• Fully realised missions
• Fully realised multiplayer options - communications, grouping, alliances, network management.
• Full Galactic Map implementation - real time and accelerated time viewing (as covered in the DDF proposal), in-system level view.

Think that about covers it.

 

[Zallibik]

Completely disagree with the 'no to consoles' thing because there is no real reason beyond elitism for this. More platforms would mean more players and therefore more money to put back into the longevity of the product. Besides, the innovative GUI suits console controllers well.

Hmmm actually its not an easy thing to do and would take ALOT of frontiers resources and time, that could be spent making the PC version better instead.

 

[Sacman]

Seamless galaxy in which we are travelling:
SC and HJ are just not feeling 'right'.
I hope both are placeholders at the moment and for me an absolut immersion breaker regarding to travelling a seamless galaxy.

Exploring (includes system maps):
At the moment there is no real exploration available in Beta 1.0.
Would be nice to have some more in-depth details in the upcoming newsletters.

Mining:
Could be in Beta 2.0 as hinted in the newsletters.

 

[Sacman]

• Full implementation of pilot roles and their associated mechanisms: Pirate, Trader, Smuggler, Miner, Explorer, Assassin, Bounty Hunter, Personnel transporter etc.
• Full AI implementation - vastly improved NPC AI control, varying difficulty.
• Complete Galaxy (with the exceptions of areas reserved as previously outlined by FD for expansions)
• 25 playable ships
• Full Supercruise implementation - POI, Interdiction
• Fully realised background simulation
• Fully realised missions
• Fully realised multiplayer options - communications, grouping, alliances, network management.
• Full Galactic Map implementation - real time and accelerated time viewing (as covered in the DDF proposal), in-system level view.

Think that about covers it.

Realistically? Really?

 

[psykokow]

If we just rhyme off what we have been promised we're missing the point of the OP, he wonders what we would accept realistically...

Ie is the full starmap absolutely essential for gamma?

Could gamma be a modular release?

I have to say the difference to the build we're on now and the last is huge, so I who have no understanding of where development is currently (it will be further along that where we are by some margin).

I would minimally expect the game to have the procedurally generated star systems up and running whether that be a 100,000 stars systems or half the full amount, I don't think that would bother me too much.

This is trickier than I thought, because I would love it to be full, and all ships.

But is that realistic...

I guess the op will learn that we just don't know enough to extrapolate what's realistic. Based on what we have currently it seems like an unassailable jump to all features, but with good procedural generation 50 - 100,000 or 100,000,000 systems is without much pain. Thats the point of it.

So I am going to go for blind faith in Frontier on this one. I have no idea what we will get, they said they will deliver for Q4, I hope and believe they will do exactly that. Minor disasters allowing.... of course.

(I just wrote one of thos didn't need to write posts again)

 

[SAB380]

I like how this is just an expectation, but it seems like somehow it should be more sarcastic...

What do you want from a game?
Oh, not much, just 400 billion star systems for me to explore...

Yeah, I wrote it in for giggles.
Seemed funny to combine it with the '25 ships' number.

 

[SAB380]

Hmmm actually its not an easy thing to do and would take ALOT of frontiers resources and time, that could be spent making the PC version better instead.

Would it really take a LOT of resources for an Xbox1 conversion?
They are both Microsoft based platforms, right? (no idea, just asking)

But aside from that, I think a conversion team would be separate.
Frontier are a pre-existing company, larger than simply the Elite team and that don't rely on crowd funding. If they want to release Elite on consoles I'm sure they can figure out a strategy on how to do so.

 

[MadBoris]

Completely disagree with the 'no to consoles' thing because there is no real reason beyond elitism for this. More platforms would mean more players and therefore more money to put back into the longevity of the product. Besides, the innovative GUI suits console controllers well.

I didn't say avoid consoles, its already pretty clear they will likely go down that path.
My statement was not to lose the soul of the game in acquiescing.
I mean this from a technical perspective and overall content of game and its game play. It may just be elitism to assume and call me out as being elitist.
More money, regardless of the means it is acquired, is by no means automatically better for the game. Spoiling people with money is a pretty proven to have ill effects. Games money grabbing has also had negetive impact on the games, I'm a gamer not a banker, bankers would think otherwise.

If this forum consisted of short attention spanned gamers that can't function well with PC, (which some console gamers are) instead of the current community, you might see a distinction in community. And absolutely no doubt in expectations of what the final game should look like. There is a reason you have not seen similar games produced on consoles. There is a reason many interesting styles of play disappeared around first couple years of Xbox, I know because I remember. They can make far more money on console, they just shouldn't change the game negatively and compromise what makes these kinds of games great.

Please lets not take a single statement and twist the entire thread to a PC vs Console debate. Thx

 

[Falkenherz]

I am also wondering how on earth they could release this year still with so many features missing, respectively not being tested in beta yet!

The core game offers already more than many of the recent finished space shooter products, but those products are naturally very short lived. Moreso, Frontier have to life up to their promises, and the promises go far indeed. And they have a relatively low budget. Star Citizen has about 45 million by now, plus an unknown investors´ amount, and apparently this is not even near of what AAA titles are financed nowadays. Since this core game we already have in beta is already so sound, imagine what Frontier could achieve with a healthy AAA funding!

So, I want the game to have quality over quantity, and it should attract a large customer base, in order to live and be able to add more content than any game had ever before. Therefore, I want the game for release not to have what I want, but what mostly attracts customers (fortunately this tends to converge):

- fancy graphic
- intuitive gameplay
- epicness and fun
- a world to live in where you can choose what you want to play (and be it just some Pazaak in some bar at the end of the universe!)
- coolness

Translated into game features, it should be:

- even more fancy graphic
- vastly improved accessability, e.g. via carefully created and motivating tutorial missions (i.e. besides teaching how to fly, they need to transmit the mood of Elite very well and give a clear idea about the player´s place in the world)
- clear pointers to what to do and how to do (a weakness EVE Online never overcame; i.e. memorable NPCs, an easy to access ingame magazine, top score lists for the e-peen people, achievements, etc.)
- vastly improved mission system (not only better gameplay and rewards, but they also need observable consequences, as a means to provide motivation beyond simple cash grinding)
- vastly improved trading information (beginners could enter via trade missions and grow from there, ideally also trading should be linked to game-world consequences so that it is more than cash grinding)
- Mining, building and supplying installations (e.g. player housing of a kind, EVE planetary interaction was a good start but still lacks "interaction")
- clearly staged PvP areas with varying mission goals (take Mass Effect 3 multiplayer as a very good example and translate into PvP)
- has evolved to and should continue as THE reference game for the "coolness factor" Oculus Rift

As for the long term: Frontier needs to make a game on a whole new level, as promised. Walking in stations, landing and traveling on planets, first person action like ship boarding or ground battles. I dearly wish they can achieve it, because this is the game I really want.

Again: I am very worried, so much yet to add and not even being in beta yet!

 

[Ramireza]

I want all that is promised for 1.0 Elite Dangerous, so all officialy discussed Features of the DDF.

I know that this is impossible, i said this a few month ago, there the fanboys said : "You are to negative, Most content is done already, they just need to release it"

Suuurre

I repeat myself : A feature complete, polished and balanced Elite Dangerous 1.0 will not be ready before Mid 2015. FD will maybe releas an Version by the End of this year and call it "full release", but this will not be the 1.0 Version. And yes, i know that the planetary flight and the "leaving the seat" feature arent a part of the 1.0 Version.

 

[eleanorsbee]

I want more giant ships and space stations to be able to have battles around .... fighting in space is ok, if you like going round and round ...... but flying down the centre of a dreadnought being shot at from behind and watching missed pulse lasers slam into the walls and floors around you ... and trying to hide behind a rotating arm of a space station rocks.

and i realistically want FD to steal a deathstar .... I want an epic deathstar battle !

 

[Zalamander]

I think its pretty realistic. Considering how fast the development has moved so far it shouldn't be a problem.

Most people seems to not realize that a lot more of the game is already almost finished than what we have now. the progress we see is not the real progress, the development of the game is way ahead of what we are playing right now. They are just not 100% ready to show it to us just yet.

 

[Ramireza]

I think its pretty realistic. Considering how fast the development has moved so far it shouldn't be a problem.

Most people seems to not realize that a lot more of the game is already almost finished than what we have now. the progress we see is not the real progress, the development of the game is way ahead of what we are playing right now. They are just not 100% ready to show it to us just yet.

How fast?! Sorry, but we playing an early alpha right, not a Beta. Nearly all things from the playable parts are very raw and rudimentary and the biggest chunk of the features and the content is not in the game right now.

I mean, the Map, Missionsystem, the Market, the Tradingpart, the Shippool, the modules, the UI.... all raw and unfinished. And thats the parts that are in the game right now. Take a look at the DDF and see whats still missing.

And of course they are ahead of us, but surely not more then 6 - 8 weeks. This means : When we reach the actucal dev state of the game in Oktober FD already testing the final Version? Sorry and with all respect, but this is... laughable.

Dont get me wrong : I have NO problem with an postpone release. But one thing i am realy a little bit scared right now : The possibility that they are FORCED to release a (unfinished) Version this year and just call it "final".

 

[DWorth]

I'd like to see at least the same features that existed in Frontier with regard to information available to the player. So:

-Complete player info in one screen.
-Complete info for ships (both when purchasing and when owning) Range, shields, speed, cargo capacity)
-System and trading info available from the galaxy map (diagram of bodies, description of economy and major/minor imports/exports) A zoomable 3D system map would be nice as well.
-Keyboard shortcut to galaxy map

 

[VR jefranklin18]

One thing that needs to be considered (and granted it is speculation on my point at this stage) is that we are only beta-testing what needs to be beta-tested.

If you cast your mind back to the alpha stages, the testing process was first flight and combat physics (making sure that what they had created was acceptable to the masses), then the FSD and the docking, etc. Arguably, the beta stages (both premium and regular) have been scaling up this testing, while drip-feeding features to ensure that people are not left feeling disappointed with each release.

Meanwhile, in parallel the development and test team have been working on all the "missing" features such as mining, system maps, etc. None of these would need to be tested in volume as they will not be significantly hitting the servers (I would expect). From a development perspective, I would expect whatever source code control tool they use (ClearCase, SVN, GIT, etc) to use feature branches so that team X is working on mining for example on a branch called "Mining" and when the test team have signed it off, then it would be merged to the main trunk at the point it is due for release.

At least that is the way I would be doing it, although I am not a games developer

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

FD have always said their priority is PC and Mac releases. If any ports will happen, it will start to happen after retail releases of both PC and MAC releases.

Also people already provided solid lists of what has been promised for first version. I will just add that biggest things I am looking forward to is good enough AI (at this point sometimes it shows some good decision making, but mostly it is plain dumb), and background sim -> event generation -> mission generation -> feedback loop to background sim combo. These two things will make or break ED.

And yes, FD uses "vertical slice" method to give us things they want us to test. Lot of things are in WIP but we have seen nothing of them. Michael already said that we probably won't see lot of Imperial content till gamma.

Also gamma *is* full release. It is not modular, it is not beta. It is full release 1.0. Of course hotfixes will happen, and some server fine tuning. But that's already in production mode.