.
Last edited:
Allow use of pre 3.3 Advanced Discovery Scanner
- Thread starter ThatSmileyGuy
- Start date
The forums represent a small proportion of people actually playing the game (and those actually posting on the forums even smaller). I don't doubt that they can be representative, but from what I can tell, FD can and do collect huge amounts of metric data, both on the big things (which modes people play in and what they do), but also very small details. They know, for example, how many players use fixed weapons as opposed to gimbals and turrets, and they knew from metrics that players were struggling with docking and un-docking, neither of which were really big deals on the forums.
So for sure, they know how many players are exploring, and they also know what they are scanning and mapping and with much more detail than they are likely to get from forum polls. There's a post in another thread describing (from optionally submitted player data) that as time goes on, players are scanning less bodies per system. For sure, if optionally submitted data shows this, it's highly likely that any data FD has will provide them with much more detailed numbers and information.
We all know that DWE2 sign up was over 9000. If thats the measure of how many are exploring we have no chance.
Well I shouldn't worry then. Nobody is seriously asking for the FSS to go, and there's no reason why FD would remove it, they will only expand its capapbilities, they want players to be able to find stuff that they put out there on planets.
Nearly all the requests for modification are to add something back, not take anything away.
It's not a bug and should not be falsely represented as one. I would not take part in that kind of deception.
It's a design issue that should have been addressed before the beta, instead there has been many incentive moves to encourage a better reception, the designer(s) worked long and hard but failed to fully understand the effect on some players... possibly due to their own gameplay style.
It's not to late to address the issues that are affecting some players but the longer it's left the fewer players will be affected... (more new players and fewer older ones)
Last edited:
FD take a longer term view with their metrics, which I think is wise. That's likely why they don't get involved in responding to these issues, they wait and see what they are going to do based upon what players actually do.
Yes, a lot of players signed up for DWE2, and I'm sure they expected that, but they want players to explore at other times too.
Well then it was appropriate to give us a couple of lines saying so. I dont understand why its so difficult to just let people know that they have heard the complaint. What purprose can it possibly serve to stay silent other than to annoy and alienate people? This is the company that was awarded for community management? Difficult to beleive.
I do understand your frustration Burke, and I don't know why FD do things the way they do. That said, nowadays any announcement they make on the forums is greeted with equal amounts of praise and condemnation... So if they did say anything they'd then be criticized if they didn't follow up all the myriad of responses.
And of course, if they did say they had heard the complaints then people get their hopes up that something may change, which it may or may not based upon how people play the game. I'm quite sure they've heard them, they just haven't decided yet what, if anything, to do.
For that reason, I personally think these threads are useful, as a knee jerk reaction might have been to simply populate the system map with the FSS honk, and that IMHO would be a detrimental step as it would have negatively impacted those who so dislike the system map reveal.
Assuming those people arnt just arguing for the sake of it, or worse trying to prevent anything from being done to fix this. Would it really affect anybodys game if the system map was revealed? I dont believe so and there would always be the option of simply not looking at it. You dont remove features from one groups game to please another.
I hope you are not being serious with that as it makes no logical sense.
.
Last edited:
The one thing I wouldn't want is for the Map to be plonked back without thought for the players than enjoy the build and discover that the FSS allows, that's why a choice for a purchasable fitting is the best way in my view.
You know (I think) that I'd like a system map reveal available and I've explained why and how I'd use it. I also don't believe it would affect anybody else, particularly if it were optional, hence why I think these discussions are useful because FD can see the best way to address the issue if they were to choose to and take feedback from those saying they don't want to see it.
Player 1 says: I want the ADS back
Player 2 says: Okay I understand your pain, how about having the ADS but it doesn't work with the FSS.
Player 1 says: How dare you pumish me by giving me what I want back.
Player 2 backs away as player 1 is obviously insane.
And you complain incessantly that people are being rude and nasty to you on the forums...
Fairy tales
...it's how you get sympathy
What has that got to do with anything. I am not calling anyone insane. I have not named anyone. If you think I am talking about you, you need to ask yourself why, not complain about me.
It's only an example of how it can look. It's not meant to be personal, but take it how you want. Your choice.
.
Last edited:
Well it's pretty simple to comprehend.
This is all about personal preferences and has nothing to do with punishing others. People like different ideas. That's is all. To say it's done to punish others is just unpleasant and insulting.
I can't believe that anyone would actually say that as a serious statement.
It's just as crazy as me saying the the ADS guys are punishing me by wanting the ADS back because I despise the mechanic.
I know that is not the case. It would be stupid to even think that
Last edited:
Those saying the proposed module should be mutually exclusive with the FSS have absolutely ZERO good reasons to back why that should be the case.
There is also no good reason for the original ADS being completely removed either but that is a topic for another thread.
The simple fact of the matter is there have been numerous good justifications for re-adding an optional module (the primary one being to allow the more leisurely exploration experience that some have enjoyed since V1.0 and may actually prefer) that allows population of the map with unexplored and unreported bodies BUT not a single good reason to counter this being done nor even one good reason make it disable the FSS capability either.
It is a total fallacy to refer to the module as either an easy mode module nor I-win type button.
There is also no good reason for the original ADS being completely removed either but that is a topic for another thread.
The simple fact of the matter is there have been numerous good justifications for re-adding an optional module (the primary one being to allow the more leisurely exploration experience that some have enjoyed since V1.0 and may actually prefer) that allows population of the map with unexplored and unreported bodies BUT not a single good reason to counter this being done nor even one good reason make it disable the FSS capability either.
It is a total fallacy to refer to the module as either an easy mode module nor I-win type button.