I think the most reasonable conclusion is to not pay in advance for software products.
Where is the paid 'content' LEP holder get for 'free'
- Thread starter DeathStroke
- Start date
- Status
The Lifetime Expansion Pass gives Beta access to all expansions too, so the fair comparison would be to Horizons Beta at $60, and therefore 3x standalone expansions (including Horizons) would allow Lifetime Expansion Pass owners to "break even".
I would've added - "unless you are totally ok with taking some gamble that your expectations will not be met".
Nothing is wrong with taking a calculated risk - but if you get upset later, this may only mean it wasn't that well-calculated after all
I can't agree more.
People fight in the forums (Frontier and Reddit) making speculations and allegations because Frontier communication has always been cryptic and this unfortunately leads to interpretations and "complot theories". See also the legs story with the Krait trailer (guys walking and interacting with the ship rendered with the in-game engine).
Last edited:
I agree on the 3x, the fourth would be to establish that paying in advance was worth doing.
And that assumes all expansions would be wanted by all LEPers. I bought (rightly or wrongly) on the assumption that there would be some stuff I would want & some I didn't, but that 3-4 of them would be ones I would want.
At the time I assumed Thargoids would be a standalone opt-in expansion, as would what is now being called squadrons. Spacelegs & Atmospheric landings I could see as at least two expansions each.
A 3 for 2 deal with one thing I don't want isn't good value, but it's no loss. A 3 for 2 deal with 2 things I don't want is not a bargain.
Yes, if they would've been uber-pessimistic and keep saying "we don't know, but we most likely won't be able to deliver more than one big expansion in 5 years", sure, that would've reduced LEP sales.
But why would they? They didn't know how it will be after all. And they didn't promise anything they didn't deliver.
Any time you pay for something so well in advance its a gamble - even if you clearly promised something consise (e.g. "you will get 3 paid expansions in 5 year"). But for LEP that's wasn't even a case - it just said "you will get whatever gets released for free", naturally it would be normal to assume that little actually may get released. It's your job to ensure you are buying something you will be happy with.
Last edited:
Even I won't argue that Horizons wasn't originally intended to be completed by the end of 2016, not based on the statement to which you're referring (and which Ant highlighted in his post) but based on the actual delivery timetable which was included when they announced it. As per both Ant's post and Viajero's that timetable was:
Update 1 - Spring
Update 2 - Summer
Update 3 - Autumn
Update 4 - to be confirmed.
Bear in mind here that the first season of updates was delivered one per quarter over the course of a calendar year. Then the second season of updates is announced which includes three defined times for releases, which are again one per quarter. So yes it is an assumption that the fourth update was planned for Winter 2016, but it isn't an unreasonable one at all because what's reasonable (i.e. an expectation) can only be meaningfully defined with reference to whatever historical data is available and in this case, that would strongly suggest Winter 2016 for the final Horizons update.
Note, I'm not saying that failing to deliver it by then breached a contract, it can't have done because the contract did not specify a release date and no matter how much people want to pretend otherwise, that is the test to be passed. However I do think people could reasonably feel aggrieved that it wasn't released by that date based on the information they would have had at the time of purchase. I've made that point in the past so it would be hypocritical of me not to acknowledge it now.
It's also worth saying though that I'd have thought it would be obvious to anybody by the time 2.2 was released (October 2016) that 2.4 arriving by December was frankly unlikely so that's the point at which any surprise about it should have been over by.
I don't think mathematics applies to retail products in the way you think it does.
Without labouring the point, retail products are worth what customers are prepared to pay for them.
Even assuming that somehow expecting that they will deliver quarterly "by extrapolation", was it actually stated that Horizons will be *just 4 updates* and nowhere more though? Also all the joys of defining "what update is", especially when its >1 year in the future and you barely have slight idea what this update be, not to mention what will take to make it to completion.
Last edited:
As to the timeline of the Horizons updates, I clearly remember that throughout the Horizons launch stream, Horizons was repeatedly described as "A years worth of content".
The reason as I see it for this thread, and the one I started (and then closed when it started heading 'south'), is the lack of news since late 2017.
All I would like is an update on when we will hear more about what's coming.
Some people like to interpret me as asking for 'news on upcoming premium content now'.
I'm not. I'm asking for a broad indication from FDev as to when they will tell us more. E.g. 'we'll be ready to tell you more towards the end of August 2018'.
I really don't think that's asking for too much, and I really cannot understand those who think it is.
All I would like is an update on when we will hear more about what's coming.
Some people like to interpret me as asking for 'news on upcoming premium content now'.
I'm not. I'm asking for a broad indication from FDev as to when they will tell us more. E.g. 'we'll be ready to tell you more towards the end of August 2018'.
I really don't think that's asking for too much, and I really cannot understand those who think it is.
Oh, but it actually may be asking quite a lot. Put yourself in the shoes of FDev and consider that any statement about future plans (and god forbid, timelines) will come to bite them later potentially.
Sound.
Eh. Autumn is Sep 21st to Dec 21st, the time period 2.3's release was slated for (it was instead released Spring 2017). For 2.4, which didn't have an announced window anyway, to release in 2016 too then the assumption must have been "2.4 - coming 21st to 31st Dec" - that's pretty silly.
2.2 was delayed from Summer 2016 by 5 weeks, and released 25th Oct. 2.3 was delayed 3.5 months from Autumn 2016 until 11th Apr 2017.
2.4 wasn't delayed at all, because once its release window was announced it met it.
Ant, have you ever thought about doing an interview with Sandro and some of the other folks from FDev?
I'd love to hear an interview with them where they could just riff about what they hope to achieve with ED, on the understanding that they're making no guarantees about anything and are just expressing personal opinions etc.
If it was me, I'd stick a charity jar on the table (for Special Effect, perhaps) and get them to stick a quid in it every time they resorted to "I don't want to talk about that" during the interview.
Seriously, it's fairly obvious that you're well aware of EDs issues so you could be relied upon to ask the right questions but you're also pretty even-handed and a frank interview that, at least, demonstrated that FDev have got some kind of "roadmap" for where ED is going could do wonders for people's confidence and be a PR goldmine for FDev, themselves.
What are you high on? Like, really. What is it? Seems good stuff!
I will also add that in 2017 the continued development of Beyond was not subject to further payment- and that's how integrity works with Software houses you can trust.
Yet they've done exactly this with the Beyond series, so why not the premium content?
e. and, yes thanks, I've been in the shoes of FDev, and it is quite reasonable for customers to ask you 'when will we hear more', and not replying is a very very bad 'response'.
Last edited:
What part of that Act do you think FDev are in breach of, and why?
Please show your working.
how is the truth not helpful?
anything paid in advance not backed by a specific contract or regulation is a gamble. i don't think you signed any contract (if you did then there are your terms), and i doubt there is any regulation specifying if 'expansion' is the same as 'dlc' or how they can be quantified, or how 'any future expansion' translates into specific delivery schedules and calendar. it's a gamble in good faith, likely on both sides, but a gamble still.
and your right to expect delivery of content is still perfectly preserved since there are no terms on exactly what and when you will be delivered. this is normal when you gamble on unspecific terms.
regarding communication, frontier has already stated that:
- there will be more paid content
- their whole business model just shifted to 'dlc'
it's not rocket science. i understand your impatience, but dunno what more you guys need to know.
the 'dlc' model is expected to be more profitable for frontier, more flexible (and expensive) for regular customers ... and free for lep owners. if finally you happen to like all 'dlc' or none that's an entirely different issue, but is part of the same gamble.
- Status