Where is the paid 'content' LEP holder get for 'free'

[Devari]

Fair enough and more power to you, I would consider he fact that you're pretty much the only one on your side of the fence

I am far from the only person posting in this thread who is making these arguments. New LEP threads have been created on a regular basis and this is the only one I've actually bothered to post in. Are you suggesting this isn't a legitimate or important issue for discussion on the forums?

which I hope might give you an indication that you maybe possibly incorrect?

I hope that the sheer number of threads on the topic of LEP concerns, and the fact that I was not involved in any way in creating any of those other threads, should tell you otherwise.

I mean you are a moderator and I therefore assume that you frequent these forums at least as much as I do so you must know how often this topic comes up.

 

[Winterwalker]

So the statement of the "estimated useful economic life of the franchise" means nothing to you here?

Of money .. in bank .. as of date, report (!)

However, Tencent (acquired 9% Frontier in deal worth £17.7 million) is the fifth largest gaming company, in the world (it's about the same size as facebook I understand), the Chinese games market accounts for ~30% of the global market (which in total is order of $100bn annually) .. and how do you say Lifetime Expansion Pass in Cantonese anyway? (No need to google that though because they're not on sale anymore). Not even sure if ED is on sale in China yet but even if it is, early days .. language speaking customer support, hiring was Jan 2018 and reports tend to be delayed by about 12 months.

 

[babelfisch]

Post of the morning!

^TMSoon .... ??

They already did in the last thread that we had a few weeks ago. This one is basically a duplicate and I don't see why they should post the same comment again.

 

[babelfisch]

So the statement of the "estimated useful economic life of the franchise" means nothing to you here?

It doesn't mean what you think it means. I recently went through a lot of trouble explaining it in another thread, I am not sure if I want to waste that amount of time again. I'll see how boring work is today, maybe I find the time to explain that statement to you.

 

[Riverside]

They already did in the last thread that we had a few weeks ago. This one is basically a duplicate and I don't see why they should post the same comment again.

Got a link?

 

[thistle]

Did I imagine someone commenting paaaaages and paaaaages ago about an announcement coming at Gamescom?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Did I imagine someone commenting paaaaages and paaaaages ago about an announcement coming at Gamescom?

That was an expectation in my view. Whether FDev intend that or not is up for debate.

 

[Viajero]

Except that everything that was discussed at that time indicated Horizons would be delivered throughout 2016. Not "well beyond 2016".

I am afraid that the actual delivery and statements and communication from FDEV keep showing how that is wrong.

Facts have a way to be stubborn:

2.0 met its target
2.1 met its target
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.

So all in all the facts show actual delivery much, much more reasonable, than the hyperbolean and baseless "twice as long" you have used already many times in this conversation even after being proven wrong.

At this point I think I am going to start considering your repeated false statements and hiperbole on this point as actual trolling or willful misrepresentation.

Did you read Obsidian Ant's posts like I suggested? He even included screenshots so there's no point in me trying to duplicate those posts when he has already done quite a bit of work to demonstrate that point already.

I did and I am fully aware of those "arguments". Been used in the past several times. And they are 100% pure and unadulterated semantics, hence why I try to avoid.

I find utterly funny how someone like you asking everyone else in the thread to avoid semantics needs to resort to a)ignore actual facts (see above), b)resort to the authority falacy in the shape of Obsidian Ant and c) through him make use of semantics to boot.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I am afraid that the actual delivery and statements and communication from FDEV keep showing how that is wrong.

Facts have a way to be stubborn:

2.0 met its target
2.1 met its target
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.

So all in all the facts show actual delivery much, much more reasonable, than the hyperbolean and baseless "twice as long" you have used already many times in this conversation even after being proven wrong.

At this point I think I am going to start considering your repeated false statements and hiperbole on this point as actual trolling or willful misrepresentation.



I did and I am fully aware of those "arguments". Been used in the past several times. And they are 100% pure and unaddulterated semantics, hence why I try to avoid.

I find utterly funny how someone like you asking everyone else in the thread to avoid semantics needs to resort to a)ignore actual facts, b)resort to the authority falacy in the shape of Obsidian Ant and c)make use of semantics to boot.

I agree with most of what you said, but I do believe that they were planning to release 2.1 earlier then they did and that had a knock on effect with the rest of the updates. But at the end of the day there wasn't a release schedule for 2.4, so for all we know it may be on time. Personally I suspect it was a few months late due to 2.1 being a few months delayed.

But no big deal. Games and updates get pushed back all the time during game development. These things happen and it's no big deal. 2.4 was certainly not a year late. At worst 4 months late, at best not late at all.

 

[babelfisch]

Here is some info about the lifetime of the game I posted in another thread:

3. ACCOUNTING POLICIES CONTINUED ACCOUNTING POLICIES CONTINUED Intangible assets continued Internally generated intangible assets, consisting of direct labour costs, other specific direct project costs and attributable project support costs, are amortised on a straight line basis over their useful economic lives. The estimated useful lives of current development projects are between three and five years. When a self-published game is intended for release on multiple platforms without material content change, amortisation is based on the length of time in which that game is expected to be supported in an unchanged format with a limit of up to six years. Acquired rights are assessed for their useful ‘franchise life’. For Elite Dangerous this is prudently estimated at eight years; within the sector successful franchises normally have useful lives of over ten years. Until completion, the assets are subject to annual impairment testing. In most circumstances amortisation commences upon completion of the asset and is shown within research and development expenses in the income statement.

The complete paragraph is about amortisation of development costs over their useful economic lives. They believe that Elite Dangerous' development costs will be amortised within 8 years, which is a prudent estimate because most franchises in that sector have a life of over 10 years. Nowhere do they say that Elite Dangerous will be abandoned in 3.5 years.

 

[babelfisch]

Got a link?

There is for example this one (which is admittedly a little bit older than a few weeks but still pretty much a duplicate of this thread):
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-LEP-musings?p=6020972&viewfull=1#post6020972

Hey Astral! This is a very reasonable and understandable post. Hopefully I can put your mind at ease a little.


In addition to all the content talked about at Frontier Expo, we also have some pretty cool things in the works which will be available to purchase. We're not ready to talk about them just yet so we can't give you any details but rest assured that the lifetime expansion pass owners will be looked after and will be getting their hands on premium content as part of their lifetime expansion pass before the end of 2018 and the Beyond series of updates.

I hope that helps,


Zac

 

[WR3ND]

Do you guys remember when they first did that dev overview of world generation before Horizons hit? That was hot sauce. Fond memories, my fellows. This is what we need more of. Well, that is what Frontier needs more of. They were honestly surprised by the enthusiasm from it; David Braben even mentioned as much. Impress us, love us, do what we say (I'm quoting The Labyrinth here) and we will be your slaves.

Well, just do what I say. I'm slightly below your average bean.

 

[Red Anders]

Well...this thread has been an interesting read so far...

I can't wait for the threadnaught surrounding the paid DLC when it turns out to be Fleet carriers and Squadrons instead of atmospheric landings and space legs as optimistically envisaged [yesnod]

I have actually had that thought. You can actually read Zac's comment in a way that would mean it referred to some of the already known Beyond content as the paid DLC but I think that might be genuinely heading into the territory of semantics. Time will tell I guess.

 

[Darkfyre99]

That is not what the numbers are saying. They are the total years the franchise will be considered "useful" to develop. They are not referring to the remaining time in the franchise life which would otherwise decrease by one year each subsequent report year. That "time remaining" went from 5.5 years remaining in 2016 to 4.5 years remaining in 2017 but the total franchise life was consistent in each of those reports for a total of 7 years. The useful lifetime of the Elite franchise however was stated as 8 years in their 2015 report, i.e., it would take them to the end of 2022. They decreased this to 7 years in 2016 which was the same total estimate for 2017 which takes the franchise to the end of 2021. That means they shortened the "expiration date" of the franchise by one full year between 2015 and 2016.

It is literally the opposite of what you are suggesting.

The "expiration date" as you called it has changed once, downward, due to changing circumstances. Changing circumstances can just as easily cause that "expiration date" to change again. If that change happens to be upwards, it would be worthwhile to Frontier to continue development past 2021. They're not going to say, "Sorry, can't do it. We promised to stop in 2021 way back in 2017."

Why would an upward change happen? There's lots of ways. A certain currently existing space franchise could reach the end of its useful life, and Frontier receives a sudden influx of new players, all eager to spend their money on this game. A certain space franchise currently under development could go belly up by then, with similar results. Foviated Rendering VR headsets could hit the market, allowing relatively modest computers to run VR at higher resolutions, injecting new life into Elite from the flood of new VR owners wanting the killer VR app. Sony could give the green light for Elite using PSVR, or Microsoft gets VR for the XBoxOneX, with similar results. New markets could open, new technologies could be leveraged, all of which would increase Elite's "expiration date."

Frontier, being a for-profit business, is going to be conservative in their estimates for Elite's "expiration date," and isn't going to stake their future on maybe's. But Frontier, being a for-profit business, also isn't going to have plans in place to adapt to circumstances changed.

Which is why, in answer to your question, "Why wouldn't they put those development resources into another franchise that would represent a new source of revenue for shareholders?" my answer is that circumstances changed, and there's still money to be made in Elite's continued development.

But as I also said, if current trends continue, I wouldn't be willing to buy a new LEP for anything more than $60. Because IMO, current trends indicate that the 2015 purchasers will probably break even, and I only buy LEPs if I think they're a bargain, not a gift card.

 

[babelfisch]

I have actually had that thought. You can actually read Zac's comment in a way that would mean it referred to some of the already known Beyond content as the paid DLC but I think that might be genuinely heading into the territory of semantics. Time will tell I guess.

IIRc they said that everything they talked about during the expo will be free for Horizons owners.

 

[PiLhEaD]

IIRc they said that everything they talked about during the expo will be free for Horizons owners.

My recollection too.

 

[babelfisch]

The "expiration date" as you called it has changed once, downward, due to changing circumstances. Changing circumstances can just as easily cause that "expiration date" to change again. If that change happens to be upwards, it would be worthwhile to Frontier to continue development past 2021. They're not going to say, "Sorry, can't do it. We promised to stop in 2021 way back in 2017."

Why would an upward change happen? There's lots of ways. A certain currently existing space franchise could reach the end of its useful life, and Frontier receives a sudden influx of new players, all eager to spend their money on this game. A certain space franchise currently under development could go belly up by then, with similar results. Foviated Rendering VR headsets could hit the market, allowing relatively modest computers to run VR at higher resolutions, injecting new life into Elite from the flood of new VR owners wanting the killer VR app. Sony could give the green light for Elite using PSVR, or Microsoft gets VR for the XBoxOneX, with similar results. New markets could open, new technologies could be leveraged, all of which would increase Elite's "expiration date."

Frontier, being a for-profit business, is going to be conservative in their estimates for Elite's "expiration date," and isn't going to stake their future on maybe's. But Frontier, being a for-profit business, also isn't going to have plans in place to adapt to circumstances changed.

Which is why, in answer to your question, "Why wouldn't they put those development resources into another franchise that would represent a new source of revenue for shareholders?" my answer is that circumstances changed, and there's still money to be made in Elite's continued development.

But as I also said, if current trends continue, I wouldn't be willing to buy a new LEP for anything more than $60. Because IMO, current trends indicate that the 2015 purchasers will probably break even, and I only buy LEPs if I think they're a bargain, not a gift card.

Actually, as I pointed out above, the useful lifetime of the game refers to amortisation = at that time the current costs of development will be amortised.

That's what the report says and no amount of twisting or misinterpreting their words will change that. Some people just saw a sentence, didn't understand it and used it for their doom scenarios.

 

[Vorxian]

The only problem I see is the speed and quality of content to help ED surf the surface of market. ED is quickly becoming surrounded by teams creating similar genre projects, and unfortunately for ED, they closely watch what is right, and what is not so in their market. I bet they see all the cries for atmosphere planets, see the cries for space legs, see the cries for multi crew stations and multi crew game mechanics, and build it in from the start.. IMO other projects have a LONG long way to go to catch up with ED. FDEV have the advantage of having a head start and if I'm honest some pretty nifty tech running the show.

My disappointment is anchored on the concept that FDEV are letting that lead and head start slip, giving opposition a chance to catch up. Instead of running at full speed, getting bogged down in other projects (which is great for FDEV as a company) but not so much with pace of pioneering content like we saw with Horizons. Nothing wrong with improvements to game play, but, it's additions like Horizons / planet landings that keep ED leapfrogging the competition.

I want ED to be the go to game.. but even now, when I lust for walking around planets, and searching for cute life forms to find and interact with, I'm starting to fire up No Mans Sky more and more... I can't help feel that I should be doing that in ED by now. I just simply do not want other games fulfilling desires that I could possibly be doing in ED about now had the ship been on full sail since the get go.

Time will tell. Who knows. I'm rooting for ED, and a part of my soul is always devoted to it.

o7

 

[Stigbob]

The only problem I see is the speed and quality of content to help ED surf the surface of market. ED is quickly becoming surrounded by teams creating similar genre projects, and unfortunately for ED, they closely watch what is right, and what is not so in their market. I bet they see all the cries for atmosphere planets, see the cries for space legs, see the cries for multi crew stations and multi crew game mechanics, and build it in from the start.. IMO other projects have a LONG long way to go to catch up with ED. FDEV have the advantage of having a head start and if I'm honest some pretty nifty tech running the show.

My disappointment is anchored on the concept that FDEV are letting that lead and head start slip, giving opposition a chance to catch up. Instead of running at full speed, getting bogged down in other projects (which is great for FDEV as a company) but not so much with pace of pioneering content like we saw with Horizons. Nothing wrong with improvements to game play, but, it's additions like Horizons / planet landings that keep ED leapfrogging the competition.

I want ED to be the go to game.. but even now, when I lust for walking around planets, and searching for cute life forms to find and interact with, I'm starting to fire up No Mans Sky more and more... I can't help feel that I should be doing that in ED by now. I just simply do not want other games fulfilling desires that I could possibly be doing in ED about now had the ship been on full sail since the get go.

Time will tell. Who knows. I'm rooting for ED, and a part of my soul is always devoted to it.

o7

Why not both, the more the merrier. Nothing wrong or worrying at all with more games in the wider space genre, ED will be king of the hill on the spaceship flying free roam galaxy dowhateveryoulikeulator front probably until the sequel.

There's a new X game on the way for being a mogul, one day NMS might get a flight model buff, Subnautica gets an expansion later this year and Bethesda have a space game in the works. I'd like an x-wing remake, or a new version of Space Empires.

Own and play all of them.

 

[babelfisch]

Why not both, the more the merrier. Nothing wrong or worrying at all with more games in the wider space genre, ED will be king of the hill on the spaceship flying free roam galaxy dowhateveryoulikeulator front probably until the sequel.

There's a new X game on the way for being a mogul, one day NMS might get a flight model buff, Subnautica gets an expansion later this year and Bethesda have a space game in the works. I'd like an x-wing remake, or a new version of Space Empires.

Own and play all of them.

I also don't see games as competition and I do believe neither do the developers. It's actually possible that other space games increase number of sales since one game is never perfect and most people play various games within the same genre.

I bought Gothic because I enjoyed Morrowind and I bought Mount & Blade because I enjoyed Gothic.