Why can the anti "space legs" not see benefit from or tolerate space legs? Can we compromise?

[VR Golgot]

There is one comparison which is EVE getting captains quarters.

FDev's pitches seem to be even more ambitious though. The TLDR for me is that CCP didn't actually add a 'new game' into their game, given the lack of game mechanics proposed alongside the tech additions. IE:

EVE's early 2006 pitch was:

• A social MMO 'side build' from the main game with mini games etc.
• Aspects like combat possibly to follow but not promised.

Despite missing its initial 2008 launch date by a mile, and getting caught up in weird scope bloat & daydreaming, it ended up delivering a stripped down version:

EVE's launch feature list:

• A 'side build' from the main game, initially offline.
• Primary focus on easing in new players & duplicating current functionality in an immersive environment. (And getting the baseline tech working solidly in the process).
• A staged approach bringing MMO style interactions & minor novel gameplay later (illicit deals in your hosted area etc).

(Here's some background reading I undertook to try and understand what went on )

Spoiler

- Early 2006 dev hype (initial staged release to be social, big numbers discussed as a challenge, combat a desired addition down the line)
- Scope creep (fashion designers, voice modulation, holographic war rooms, underground missions etc)
- Dev outline + hype in 2011 (cosmetic, immersive, offline)
- Feature List
- A player post-mortem
- CCP's apology for launching with 'essentially a prototype'.
- Producer on the core flaw being 'we didn't really do any gameplay around it'

So the broader locations and MMO aspect slipped from the initial delivery, but ultimately it kinda went to plan. It was just a bad plan... :/

---

By comparison:

FDev's early pitches are [1]:

• First-person mobility within the active game world, including PvP aspects.

-and/or-

• A 'side build' from the main game (space station interiors) with multiplayer aspects, NPC interactions & combat.

I'd definitely classify both of those as 'new games', one built alongside the current game, and the other injected within it.

I think there's some more pragmatic implementation going on (Avs actually in the working game environment already, networking, assets etc etc), but the pitch still seems pretty daunting and untravelled.

Guess we'll see what any actual launch pitch aims for

 

[VR Golgot]

how about world of warcraft, at first you couldnt fly, then burning crusade came out, and you could fly in that, but not fly in the old world because it wasnt designed with flying in mind, then they did cataclysm totally redoing the old world so that you could fly in it.

Yeah I'd be really interested to hear a dev take on the relative difficulty there. My amateur guess is that, impressive as it is as an addition, there are more layers of technical difficulty in amalgamating classic foot action into an existing vehicle scale game.

(I'd imagine the WoW guys had to do a lot in terms of LoD, networking, optimisation etc to get that to work. But ultimately it feels like an extension of the existing UI / character models / move set, rather than a novel one injected in. That may be a naive view on my part though )

 

[DARGAN]

in my opinion it is planned, it is what I heard several years ago, and some commercial videos make us think about it.

and then.. what's the point of selling suits and clothes at the store if it's only to watch them in holo-me, that makes no sense, even our co-pilot we do not see sitting next to us.

I sincerely think that the legs of space will come one day, in any case, as long as Frontier continues to develop the game, i have good reason to keep hope.

 

[Bigmaec]

Congratulations, I present you the Zombie of the Day Necro Award

 

[DARGAN]

Congratulations, I present you the Zombie of the Day Necro Award

it's not nice

 

[Toumal]

Years ago, there were people clamoring against the introduction of automated turrets, construction system and orbital strikes into Planetside 2. Their argument was that PS2 was PvP only and adding turrets or automated defenses would make this more of a PvE game, "which Planetside 2 isn't".

When confronted with the fact that such systems were part of Planetside 1, and worked just fine, they basically resorted to saying that PS2 is not PS1, "get over it", and "play something else then".

Needless to say, these were not valid arguments, and most, if not all of those players who made these statements no longer play Planetside 2. Luckily we did get (very weak) spitfire turrets and there's even some real value to the very safe implementation of the construction system as it is now. And oh look, there's a lot of people supporting their faction by building orbital strikes, giving their teammates a way to spawn vehicles without draining their personal nanite pool, and to provide router spawns deep inside enemy territory.

And attacking force backed by one or two dedicated construction players can be much more effective. Construction acts as a force multiplier, and PS2 has very healthy server pops for years now. This is also largely due to the F2P in PS2 being implemented in a way that's relatively fair, and even the starter weapons are actually really good and versatile. But the other part of the equation is the inclusion of new gameplay mechanics and systems that try to keep the game fresh.

So don't ever say "Game X is not the game you're looking for". A game like Elite Dangerous is not a religion. There are no stone tablets that say that Elite shall not have a FPS component. Whether said FPS component is really a worthwhile addition depends mostly on the implementation, and we can debate if FD has the means or the right design approach for such a feature.

But don't elevate the lack of space legs to a dogma that cannot and shall not be changed because "this is not the game for this". It is, if Frontier (and by extension, their customer base) wants it to be.

 

[VR Golgot]

But don't elevate the lack of space legs to a dogma that cannot and shall not be changed because "this is not the game for this". It is, if Frontier (and by extension, their customer base) wants it to be.

This is not the forum for you...

(Soz just getting in on the necro fun. That was a grand post btw )

 

[cyberus]

Because "space legs" are simply boring. They bring nothing to the game I'm interested in. If walking around had been a priority to me I would play a different game. (Having to walk around is the reason why I don't play NMS for example)

Adding the ability to move around changes the game from a game about flying around in a spaceship into a game about walking around. If it's completely optional without any advantage, then why add it? If there are advantages, then the focus of the game will shift.

I’m so happy that FD not develope the game only for YOU and anything around your need.

Yes you can have your opinion and it’s only YOURS ... large chunk of players completely not agree with you.

What boring is for you for someone else is excitement thing. I personally find it irritating that my character magically reaper in the SRV or SLF instead of me getting out my seat and walk it to man one of this things.

I personally would really like to get out my ships in station walk to ( even if it small room) in station to take some missions or cargo from the market panels.

There is plenty small things can be made without huge (SC manner) space legs in ED and still keep both sides happy

 

[Tifu]

Just one word. Hangars. Probably the only thing SC got right. If you think selling ship decorations is a good thing for ED, take a look at all that space that needs a personal touch

There is nothing, nothing that beats walking around in your hangar.