The ADS

[Mohrgan]

False in essence, not revisionist history - the only thing that was done was a temporary silencing of the anti-honk-whiners (AHWs for short) which now have become ostriches claiming everything is good, nothing needs to be changed, and what was delivered was what was asked for - the AHWs are totally wrong in making such claims.

There have been plenty of good constructive suggestions that could have deepened gameplay without removing the ADS but instead FD just listened to the AHWs and delivered mini-game hell on the rest of us.

I guess fantasies are expected when discussing stuffs surrounding video games. I just don;t remember it that way. As I remember it, back then, everyone was an anti-honk-whiner.

P.S. Any argument that revolves around pejorative name calling won't hold water.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

The only people claiming it was just honk and jump was the anti-honk crowd who arguably did not actually know what they were talking about.

Umm... yeah, that's now how you make a valid point, by claiming people who hold a different opinion don't know what they are talking about. Its a variation on "i'm right, anyone who disagrees with me is wrong"

Also, the number of people who wanted more involved exploration mechanics was not insigificant as i recall, and largely came from the exploration community.

Now, personally, i'm split on the issue. I do miss the old honk and jump, the simplicity was one of its good points, but on the other hand, it was a bit too simple and now we have an actual mechanic to make exploration more involved.

I suspect that if FD had included the FSS at launch, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

 

[lenna]

I guess fantasies are expected when discussing stuffs surrounding video games. I just don;t remember it that way. As I remember it, back then, everyone was an anti-honk-whiner.

P.S. Any argument that revolves around pejorative name calling won't hold water.

That is a classic AHW stance... got to refer to them as something.

 

[Ezren]

False in essence, not revisionist history - the only thing that was done was a temporary silencing of the anti-honk-whiners (AHWs for short) which now have become ostriches claiming everything is good, nothing needs to be changed, and what was delivered was what was asked for - the AHWs are totally wrong in making such claims.

There have been plenty of good constructive suggestions that could have deepened gameplay without removing the ADS but instead FD just listened to the AHWs and delivered mini-game hell on the rest of us.

"False", no followup, okay.

You're just repeating, in essence, that what you want is "good" and what you don't want is "bad", without anything supporting it but your willingness to declare "false" at anything that works against you.

 

[Mohrgan]

That is a classic AHW stance... got to refer to them as something.

Name calling. Learning from the ol' tRump-ster huh?

 

[lenna]

I suspect that if FD had included the FSS at launch, this wouldn't even be a discussion.

I suspect at least a few of us would not have bought the game if the FSS had been in at launch - it is a terrible mechanic and badly implemented.

FD have made numerous faux pas with the implementation - first and foremost was introducing them as clear mini-games. They could have done things much differently. The ONLY positive aspect of the FSS/DSS implementation is it frees up an optional slot (possibly two if you are not a space-golfer and have no intention of space-golfing).

 

[Ezren]

Name calling. Learning from the ol' tRump-ster huh?

Don't bring politics into this already-pretty-terrible conversation.

The FSS is pretty good. It's the active engagement that many explorers wanted and were vocal about in the past. Unless there's a good argument to be made against it that isn't "FSS bad", looking at you rlsg, I'm fine with it.

 

[Burke]

The FSS is terrible. It punishes the people who were not complaining.

 

[lenna]

Name calling. Learning from the ol' tRump-ster huh?

Not name calling - calling them what they were and are. How many anti-honk mega-threads regurgitated the same fallacious arguments about how the honk was the beginning and end of exploration and criticising those that liked the mechanics as they were - Turn about is fair play.

 

[Burke]

Takes a big man to do the right thing, to own your mistake and say "yeah ok, i understand it was rather hasty to just cast off the existing explorers"

Its not about blackmail its about doing the right thing. I know a good name doesnt mean alot but dont frontier even care a little bit about their reputation? Its fair to say they are well known for not listening and often getting things wrong. Challenge that perception.

 

[Ezren]

Not name calling - calling them what they were and are. How many anti-honk mega-threads regurgitated the same fallacious arguments about how the honk was the beginning and end of exploration and criticising those that liked the mechanics as they were - Turn about is fair play.

Doesn't sound like a fallacious argument, just sounds like you didn't like it and don't have an argument of your own.

 

[Mohrgan]

Takes a big man to do the right thing, to own your mistake and say "yeah ok, i understand it was rather hasty to just cast off the existing explorers"

Its not about blackmail its about doing the right thing. I know a good name doesnt mean alot but dont frontier even care a little bit about their reputation? Its fair to say they are well known for not listening and often getting things wrong. Challenge that perception.

'...cast off the existing explorers..'? Do you believe that the majority of explorers are fussed over the FSS? I don't. What they 'cast off' was all an but universally disliked 'placeholder' mechanic.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Takes a big man to do the right thing, to own your mistake and say "yeah ok, i understand it was rather hasty to just cast off the existing explorers"

Its not about blackmail its about doing the right thing. I know a good name doesnt mean alot but dont frontier even care a little bit about their reputation? Its fair to say they are well known for not listening and often getting things wrong. Challenge that perception.

What mistake? It's their game and they decide what they want in it, if they are happy with it and it's working as intended and people are using it, it is no mistake. You are being extremely arrogant and it isn't helping your cause. None of these kinds of lists do. It's likely to do the opposite.

 

[lenna]

Doesn't sound like a fallacious argument, just sounds like you didn't like it and don't have an argument of your own.

The only "revisionist history" occuring is on the part of the AHWs... the honk did not grant you discovery rights nor did it unveil any information of significance - just enough to be able to navigate to it and scan it to get discovery rights - the cherry picking argument (theoretically facilitated by the map image) is actually made worse by the new system too.

 

[Burke]

You are being extremely arrogant and it isn't helping your cause.

No im not and if you talk nonsense at me i wont reply.

What mistake? It's their game and they decide what they want in it, if they are happy with it and it's working as intended and people are using it,

Would love to know the truth of this, do the numbers show that exploration has taken a sudden dive? There are alot of just random comments around by names i dont recognise moaning about how the FSS ruined the game and fdev never listen. facebook, steam, youtube... etc. Either way, the common sense approach would suggest just letting both sides of this argument have what they want.

 

[Ezren]

The only "revisionist history" occuring is on the part of the AHWs... the honk did not grant you discovery rights nor did it unveil any information of significance - just enough to be able to navigate to it - the cherry picking argument is actually made worse by the new system too.

I didn't say "revisionist history" so I don't know what you think you're replying to.

Though, again, you are just saying things. No support, no explanation, you may as well be posting via bumper sticker.

 

[lenna]

I didn't say "revisionist history" so I don't know what you think you're replying to.

Though, again, you are just saying things. No support, no explanation, you may as well be posting via bumper sticker.

No more than you are.

You may not have said "revisionist history" personally, but you were reacting to a post opposing the claim. You need only search the forums to find the truth of the matter.

 

[Mohrgan]

No im not and if you talk nonsense at me i wont reply.



Would love to know the truth of this, do the numbers show that exploration has taken a sudden dive? There are alot of just random comments around by names i dont recognise moaning about how the FSS ruined the game and fdev never listen. facebook, steam, youtube... etc. Either way, the common sense approach would suggest just letting both sides of this argument have what they want.

We've moved on from Revisionist History to Confirmation Bias.

 

[Ezren]

Takes a big man to do the right thing, to own your mistake and say "yeah ok, i understand it was rather hasty to just cast off the existing explorers"

Its not about blackmail its about doing the right thing. I know a good name doesnt mean alot but dont frontier even care a little bit about their reputation? Its fair to say they are well known for not listening and often getting things wrong. Challenge that perception.

Does it take a big man to just up and pretend all explorers agree with you, to lend any weight to your argument? Because that just sounds like the words of somebody can't see past their own opinion.

 

[Burke]

We've moved on from Revisionist History to Confirmation Bias.

Dunno about that. All i see is the killjoys ganging up on rlsg