This is why I worry about the future of ED - it's FDev themselves

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Sorry not read whole thread so sorry if already covered but have you guys heard about the new steam service allowing you to play windows game in Linux? Apparently a lot of windows titles are already running 100% and pretty much no loss of performance
Called it's Foss I think

It is based on Wine and yes, it can run things. Not ED yet though, however there is considerable chance it will happen one day. There are known bugs that holds it back, but they are identified and maybe one smart fella will fix them one day.

 

[pippo]

McDonald's should really listen to me, I'm obese and diabetic after spending the last 25 years of my life eating breakfast, lunch and dinner at their restaurants. Ergo, I clearly am an authority as to what makes or breaks a good sandwich as well as the imperative of creating a good and well balanced burger sauce.

It is beyond (pun) me how a bunch of skinny whippets like these guys...

Spoiler

...managed to make any money by making sandwiches they clearly DO NOT EAT!

Don't you dare show me numbers and take it from the expert, these guys have no idea what they are doing.

 

[StuartGT]

McDonald's should really listen to me, I'm obese and diabetic after spending the last 25 years of my life eating breakfast, lunch and dinner at their restaurants. Ergo, I clearly am an authority as to what makes or breaks a good sandwich as well as the imperative of creating a good and well balanced burger sauce.

It is beyond (pun) me how a bunch of skinny whippets like these guys...

Spoiler

...managed to make any money by making sandwiches they clearly DO NOT EAT!

Don't you dare show me numbers and take it from the expert, these guys have no idea what they are doing.

 

[Stigbob]

Your answer is both wrong and/or purposely trolling.

Or neither, I might just have a different opinion to you.

By doing what they do, they can't utilize any of the things that make a single player game great. They stumble over narrative that comes in disjointed chunks. They can't introduce mods. They can't introduce user-defined difficulty settings. They can't make the player important. They can't create stories that revolve around the player and impact the game. Essentially anything that sets a single player game apart from a multiplayer.

I don't want a storyline in a sandbox, they just get in the way. The difficulty setting is in ship/outfitting and mission choice its as easy or as hard as you make it.

Then on the flipside, they can't do the things that make multiplayer games great because they keep this anchor of single player chained to themselves. Look at powerplay. That's the extent of the awesome that is possible with the game's current multiplayer mechanics. We miss out on the drama and emergent mechanics because of opt-in mechanics and control over the direction the game takes is never really able to be given to us so long as Frontier wants to keep their narrative. And the stuff that is made for multiplayer is weak, since they can't ever be integral to the game.

What anchor ?. There's nothing missing, it's all just optional player choice is great. Don't sweat other peoples mode choices, they can't be forced to play with you anyway.

So no, it's not a mix of the best of both worlds. It's a compromise of both that nets you tease of a game that fails to deliver a great experience for either group of players.

That's just your entirely subjective opinion. I think the game provides solo, group and open to suit whichever mode I fancy at the time and they all have their individual advantages without detracting from the others.

I like all of the modes, and in a genre like this you can't overspecialize so it makes good sense to cater to everyone which the modes do perfectly. It's only an issue for the people who resent or worry about other peoples choices, which they can't influence anyway. Totally pointless self inflicted issue.

 

[Oss133]

Obviously we don't know what it was, or what the resistance was

Fair enough. Discussion over.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

I’ll venture to say those at Frontier who actually do play the game likely do so far more than forum opinion would has us think. But these folks are also not the ones hosting livestreams or other PR events. I’ve seen Ed play, somewhat abysmally. I’ll wager his daily job does not include intensive play testing. So to say “they don’t play their own game”, well, that just doesn’t float. And perhaps those who do log more hours of time in game might not do so in the same manner, “grinding” away at just one thing. That’s a style thing. I don’t grind at anything, or if I do, I don’t notice it because I’m enjoying my play time.

 

[Darth Ender]

Or neither, I might just have a different opinion to you.



I don't want a storyline in a sandbox, they just get in the way. The difficulty setting is in ship/outfitting and mission choice its as easy or as hard as you make it.



What anchor ?. There's nothing missing, it's all just optional player choice is great. Don't sweat other peoples mode choices, they can't be forced to play with you anyway.



That's just your entirely subjective opinion. I think the game provides solo, group and open to suit whichever mode I fancy at the time and they all have their individual advantages without detracting from the others.

I like all of the modes, and in a genre like this you can't overspecialize so it makes good sense to cater to everyone which the modes do perfectly. It's only an issue for the people who resent or worry about other peoples choices, which they can't influence anyway. Totally pointless self inflicted issue.

You are ignoring the situation entirely to fit your desired reality.

Nobody wants a narrative with a sandbox. But that's what we've been given. The existence of the narrative can't be ignored because it limits what the sandbox can do and vice versa.

Difficulty settings aren't about picking crappy components to make it harder for you. The NPC's dont get smarter or dumber based on what ship you pick or what weapons you pick. Difficulty != handicap.


Nothing is missing? So you are blind and dont play the game, good to know. I'm sure everyone playing powerplay (which is the most multiplayer sandboxy aspect of the game by far) has been extremely satisfied with all the multiplayer features and how much control the participating players have had in steering the story that they are creating thru their actions. Oh wait, no they're not. Because _EVERYTHING_ that is multiplayer is optional. The very essence of it being optional means impotent.

It's not about forcing players to play with you. In a hypothetical multi-player only game, the people playing it would be opting in. The difference is that _everyone_ playing it and impacting the game is directly able to be impacted by other players doing the same thing. Instead of the shadow nonsense we have now that makes most if not all multiplayer efforts meaningless.

In that same vein of hypotheticals, a single player game would be just that. You impact your own game and nobody else's. Free to do everything and anything you want.

What I've stated isn't subjective. It's observed reality. Anecdotal, maybe, but with a sample size that is far larger than whatever anecdotal evidence supports your idea that it's the best of both worlds. I dont see people praising the single player aspects of the game, only complaining about how aspects of multiplayer are interfering with them and always potentially destroying their ability to play solo. I only see people complaining about the lack of multiplayer functionality that can never succeed because it all has to be optional, even in open.

And as for overspecializing, making a game single player or multiplayer isn't overspecialized. It's normal. There's a reason why most games dont go the route that Frontier went with elite dangerous. it's because there are too many mutually exclusive needs and wants in either mode and when you eliminate those, you are left with compromises. Compromises in both that can never meet the potential of either if they were done individually.

 

[m0rl0ck]

Yeah they are out of touch. As long as they have the money rolling in they dont need to listen.
Soon they will have more competition in this particular gaming niche, then maybe they will pay more attention.

 

[Stigbob]

You are ignoring the situation entirely to fit your desired reality.

I'm not ignoring anything. I knew about the modes before I bought in and think they are an absolutely great idea.

Nobody wants a narrative with a sandbox. But that's what we've been given. The existence of the narrative can't be ignored because it limits what the sandbox can do and vice versa.

There is no compulsory narrative limiting the sandbox.

Difficulty settings aren't about picking crappy components to make it harder for you. The NPC's dont get smarter or dumber based on what ship you pick or what weapons you pick. Difficulty != handicap.

I solo wing assassinations in a part engineered medium ship with sub optimal guardian weps when I want a challenge and loot and mats. Its great fun.

Nothing is missing? So you are blind and dont play the game, good to know. I'm sure everyone playing powerplay (which is the most multiplayer sandboxy aspect of the game by far) has been extremely satisfied with all the multiplayer features and how much control the participating players have had in steering the story that they are creating thru their actions. Oh wait, no they're not. Because _EVERYTHING_ that is multiplayer is optional. The very essence of it being optional means impotent.

If your idea of multiplayer requires pressganged unwilling participants, then you haven't thought this through. Nobody can ever be forced to play a video game with you, its always an optional thing. ED just caters directly to that at the menu.

It's not about forcing players to play with you. In a hypothetical multi-player only game, the people playing it would be opting in. The difference is that _everyone_ playing it and impacting the game is directly able to be impacted by other players doing the same thing. Instead of the shadow nonsense we have now that makes most if not all multiplayer efforts meaningless.

Everyone playing can directly impact everyone else through the single shared BGS no matter mode or even platform, another absolutely brilliant idea.

In that same vein of hypotheticals, a single player game would be just that. You impact your own game and nobody else's. Free to do everything and anything you want.

We are all free to do everything and anything we want now, you are asking for something we have.

What I've stated isn't subjective. It's observed reality. Anecdotal, maybe, but with a sample size that is far larger than whatever anecdotal evidence supports your idea that it's the best of both worlds. I dont see people praising the single player aspects of the game, only complaining about how aspects of multiplayer are interfering with them and always potentially destroying their ability to play solo. I only see people complaining about the lack of multiplayer functionality that can never succeed because it all has to be optional, even in open.

Open only proponents should have read up on the modes before buying if that was as important to them as they like to claim.

I can't overstate just how much I don't care about the whining of people who want my choices limited after they made a foolish purchase. This is why I've never posted in Hotel California, the entire basis for that discussion is just people being thick it can only ever go downhill from there.

And as for overspecializing, making a game single player or multiplayer isn't overspecialized. It's normal. There's a reason why most games dont go the route that Frontier went with elite dangerous. it's because there are too many mutually exclusive needs and wants in either mode and when you eliminate those, you are left with compromises. Compromises in both that can never meet the potential of either if they were done individually.

There's also a reason space games died out for twenty years. Small genres can't overspecialize.

 

[Stigbob]

Yeah they are out of touch. As long as they have the money rolling in they dont need to listen.
Soon they will have more competition in this particular gaming niche, then maybe they will pay more attention.

Waiting a couple of years is always best with Egosofts stuff, its notoriously broken at release.

 

[Heater]

Is the sky falling yet?

 

[Darth Ender]

I'm not ignoring anything. I knew about the modes before I bought in and think they are an absolutely great idea.




There is no compulsory narrative limiting the sandbox.



I solo wing assassinations in a part engineered medium ship with sub optimal guardian weps when I want a challenge and loot and mats. Its great fun.



If your idea of multiplayer requires pressganged unwilling participants, then you haven't thought this through. Nobody can ever be forced to play a video game with you, its always an optional thing. ED just caters directly to that at the menu.



Everyone playing can directly impact everyone else through the single shared BGS no matter mode or even platform, another absolutely brilliant idea.



We are all free to do everything and anything we want now, you are asking for something we have.




Open only proponents should have read up on the modes before buying if that was as important to them as they like to claim.

I can't overstate just how much I don't care about the whining of people who want my choices limited after they made a foolish purchase. This is why I've never posted in Hotel California, the entire basis for that discussion is just people being thick it can only ever go downhill from there.




There's also a reason space games died out for twenty years. Small genres can't overspecialize.

You're stuck on this idea that I'm saying that players should be forced to play open or that the modes are some kind of surprise.

1. The narrative does limit the sandbox, because nothing you do in the sandbox-ness of the game matters until Fdev makes it matter by applying things to the bgs and narrative. They control the narrative, not the players.

2. Ask _ANYONE_ who has played powerplay how much control they have in their "Sandbox". How much has changed in powerplay in the years since it was released? How has those changes impacted the game overall? Now how has the narrative impacted them? Nothing is allowed to happen until it is agreed upon by the people controlling the narrative. Every CG was the same way. A CG is the narrative and there was no legitimate way they could be realistically opposed. In every way, Fdev has retained control over the direction the game takes. The Sandbox is only a sandbox in the same sense as Zelda is. Not in the sense that it's implied in relation to a multiplayer game. We aren't free to shape the galaxy, shape our super power, shape our faction...except when it aligns neatly with the narrative that fdev has set in motion. I'm not saying you are forced to follow the narrative. I'm saying that the existence of it is what restricts how much of a sandbox the sandbox can be. To the point where it's completely neutered and almost a farce. In the example of powerplay, it's a complete joke that you have any real control over the game.

3. In my hypothetical, which i used english to be clear, a mulitplayer game doesn't force players to be unwilling participants in a multiplayer game. Nobody is stealing players from a single player game and putting them in a multiplayer one. And vice versa for the single player hypothetical. Everyone is willing participants in whichever version they chose. But they are separate. The joined universe between them is the problem in this situation and it fully undermines multiplayer by allowing single player to impact what goes on in multiplayer.

4. I'm not asking for something we have. I'm asking for something we should have but is currently compromised to the point of being frustrating and annoying to both player groups. You are not free to do whatever you want. Or powerplay activities would have toppled all the current governments and superpowers currently in the game years ago.

5. The above isn't whining about the BGS being shared between modes and how players are being surprised by it after purchase. It's a very real and valid observation about the limitations imposed on the game by including both compared to what it could do if you separated them. Since we're not really playing together anyway, the forced joining of the modes does far more harm to the potential gameplay of both than any kind of benefit from interacting with the same BGS. With a shared BGS, everyone is losing because you're giving up far more than you're getting back as a player.

 

[znôrt]

Is the sky falling yet?

it's no man's fault (except tj's).

 

[Taimaru]

I am not worried about the future of ED. FDev know what they're doing.

It's the community who can't decide amongst themselves what they want.

 

[Darth Ender]

I am not worried about the future of ED. FDev know what they're doing.

It's the community who can't decide amongst themselves what they want.

There's at least 2 communities and they want different things. Each knows exactly what they want. Neither has so far gotten it. What you see on the forum is the result of them trying to make sure neither side gets more of what they want for fear of losing what they already have or not being able to utilize what comes next.

Due to the nature of the shared universe between the modes, I dont see that ever ending because it's not a matter of little things ...but integral aspects of those types of game-types that are directly compromised by the other and simply can't exist together. It will be a constant tug of war between the playerbases until the game ends or something better comes.

 

[Stigbob]

You're stuck on this idea that I'm saying that players should be forced to play open or that the modes are some kind of surprise.

Limiting BGS access is forcing into open.

1. The narrative does limit the sandbox, because nothing you do in the sandbox-ness of the game matters until Fdev makes it matter by applying things to the bgs and narrative. They control the narrative, not the players.

We are just contract pilots in a galaxy sized galaxy, I'm fine with that. We can't all save the same princess, besides which shes got entire systems and billions of people at her command she doesn't need us.

Players can very easily influence the BGS.

​

2. Ask _ANYONE_ who has played powerplay how much control they have in their "Sandbox". How much has changed in powerplay in the years since it was released? How has those changes impacted the game overall? Now how has the narrative impacted them? Nothing is allowed to happen until it is agreed upon by the people controlling the narrative. Every CG was the same way. A CG is the narrative and there was no legitimate way they could be realistically opposed. In every way, Fdev has retained control over the direction the game takes. The Sandbox is only a sandbox in the same sense as Zelda is. Not in the sense that it's implied in relation to a multiplayer game. We aren't free to shape the galaxy, shape our super power, shape our faction...except when it aligns neatly with the narrative that fdev has set in motion. I'm not saying you are forced to follow the narrative. I'm saying that the existence of it is what restricts how much of a sandbox the sandbox can be. To the point where it's completely neutered and almost a farce. In the example of powerplay, it's a complete joke that you have any real control over the game.

I've played powerplay, it never struck me as a galactic domination thing where players could alter the destiny of humanity. People vie for control of systems sometimes win sometimes lose, the worlds keep turning its more politics than conquest.

3. In my hypothetical, which i used english to be clear, a mulitplayer game doesn't force players to be unwilling participants in a multiplayer game. Nobody is stealing players from a single player game and putting them in a multiplayer one. And vice versa for the single player hypothetical. Everyone is willing participants in whichever version they chose. But they are separate. The joined universe between them is the problem in this situation and it fully undermines multiplayer by allowing single player to impact what goes on in multiplayer.

The joined universe brings all platforms timezones and modes together into one game.

Also PVP is worse than useless at effecting the BGS as you are actively wasting time you could spend supporting a chosen faction.

​

4. I'm not asking for something we have. I'm asking for something we should have but is currently compromised to the point of being frustrating and annoying to both player groups. You are not free to do whatever you want. Or powerplay activities would have toppled all the current governments and superpowers currently in the game years ago.

I'm free to do what I want, the PMF I'm in is doing fine.

​

5. The above isn't whining about the BGS being shared between modes and how players are being surprised by it after purchase. It's a very real and valid observation about the limitations imposed on the game by including both compared to what it could do if you separated them. Since we're not really playing together anyway, the forced joining of the modes does far more harm to the potential gameplay of both than any kind of benefit from interacting with the same BGS. With a shared BGS, everyone is losing because you're giving up far more than you're getting back as a player.

It only bothers people who don't like others being able to choose. I'll play whichever mode I like whenever I like, you don't have any input in that.

 

[besieger]

While I am normally agreeing with the whole ED is in its death rattle type thing, the only thing I found true in OP post is that Frontier don't player their game or at least don't come across as playing the game especially when you look at the live streams... I could post countless examples of Frontier failing to play their own game in some of the most basic situations you could think of.

 

[AdriánGuth]

One of the big problems about FDEV is that they hear to much the comunity.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

I don't worry about games... I play them. Worry is for problems.

Why not both?

Far from it, but they don't work for us. We're not their bosses.

More importantly, we are their customers.

 

[Quantis Trap]

I think 2.8% of Frontier understand their audience and 2.8% of Forum goers understand Frontier!