This is what Maintenance Mode must be like :(
- Thread starter Lightspeed
- Start date
I mean - what's the deal with the ADS? I don't have any eggs in that basket.
And on another note - I'd rather play a SP game.
Cos the concessions I have to take for procrustinating the gameplay into MP is just too much.
No, they didn't get as far as a teaser trailer, unlike with FCs
That's what I expected. I believe when people say they want an ED2 in order to fix the 'long standing issues' they imagine it would somehow be their dream game. It's more likely it would be the same compromise between all the different playstyles we have now, including all the issues that come with it.
The only way to 'fix' the game is to get rid of 2/3 of the current player base and design the game for the remaining 1/3. Who knows, maybe that's their plan?
White Knightism seems to be in decline this year. I'm seeing "critiques" from players who I never expected to ever say a single bad thing about ED or Frontier.
If this isn't a sign that the game is doomed, I'm not sure what is!
For Burke and Karrde Sun it's probably the most important issue. I just added it because it's a good example to show that almost everyone disagrees with what's wrong with the game, although they all agree that something is wrong with it.
It's just a sign that you aren't as biased as you used to be.White Knightism seems to be in decline this year. I'm seeing "critiques" from players who I never expected to ever say a single bad thing about ED or Frontier.
If this isn't a sign that the game is doomed, I'm not sure what is!
IIRC you agree with bug fixing and delaying FCs. So everyone who argues for it is a reasonable person. For those who disagree with it they are white knights.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
It is a really hard one for FD to get right (impossible to get right for everyone)
what you post makes sense for a game about PvP... Balance is essential in a PvP game.
OTOH if we are thinking that we want ED to be a realistic plausible game (within its own lore and boundaries) really it does not make sense that a sidewinder should have a fighting chance in a 1 vs 1 against a fully geared up FDL.
Dont get me wrong, i do not like the huge power - its not even creep - of engineers... but at the same time I do not think an explorer ship should really be able to trade blows with a specialised assassin ship either.
To me the game balance should be done by plausible conseuquences. People who seal club are essentially (in game) serial killers, and imo the game should treat serial killers like one would expect society to treat known serial killers. This is really hard to get right, i do get that, which is why for me Open is unlikely to ever be a mode i am interested in playing in, by the nature of people in games, where the option is there to seal club, some will always go that route even if the game pushes back.
the risk of being too draconian is to spoil the game for everyone, therefore open is destined to be mad max mode imo........ just spitballing but maybe FD should embrace that, but at the same time promote PGs and give owners of PG tools to control them better, make it clear that PGs are just as valid a mode as open and that no content will be locked off for any mode.
in the past i used to have this dream of an open where we generally pulled together, I think this is what DB wanted too. This is hugely naive so my view has changed now. Embrace open as a mad max style game mode, and also embrace other modes being what ever players want.
we dont need complete balance imo, we just need to not be able to make ourselves invincible, and we need to be able to pick the correct mode for the kind of game we want to play. to be honest, the current system is not too bad for that imo.
Well, I don't care much about serial killers. And I certainly dont want to play with them.
Niether do i... but IF FD were going to keep the game plausible, imo the only way to stop them via in game rules would essentially ruin the game for everyone which is why i think the answer may be to embrace them......... in open, let them do what ever they want in open and then think about how to get like minded players able to play together....... the original plan was to have multiple open modes each with their own rules.....
I guess it depends on what your definition of Maintenance mode is. Back in the days of SOE, when a game went to Maintenance Mode, that ment no more bug fixes, no new content; just keep the servers up to keep the game available. Once a MMO got to this stage being 'sunset' was not too far away. This is also my definition of Maintenance Mode.
Elite is not at that stage. We're still getting content (albeit Interstellar Initiatives and bug fixes) and although Fleet Carriers have been put back, the real confidence breaker will be with whatever comes in the December Beta. It would be nice to have some small new thing for Christmas (cough cough cut and Pasted Race tracks) but not holding out much hope.
Elite is not at that stage. We're still getting content (albeit Interstellar Initiatives and bug fixes) and although Fleet Carriers have been put back, the real confidence breaker will be with whatever comes in the December Beta. It would be nice to have some small new thing for Christmas (cough cough cut and Pasted Race tracks) but not holding out much hope.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Probably already clarified so apologies if I missed it: They actually issued equity aswell. The volume of which ended up being several times larger that the Kickstarter amount. It is quite likely a lot of those proceeds went into Elite.
Last edited:
MY alt in the bubble plays almost exclusively in PG as time spent there is usually with a friend and we are 'doing our thing' and having a lot of fun, my main in Colonia si the opposite and mainly in open as that is how the squadron plays...
So, in complete agreement, social activities in game with like-minded players works across both multiplayer modes, in my case - very well - as on both accounts I'm still pretty much doing exactly as I like
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Not sure I understand your prediction: FDEV has already explicitely stated the new era update will be a payed for DLC.
Do you mean that FDEV will reverse their current plans? Or are you referring to content coming post new era DLC?
I suppose it is feasible that the base game could go F2P to encourage new players, then make the DLC pay to play... (basically like destiny 2)
I doubt it myself but it is possible.
I doubt it myself but it is possible.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Ah I see, yeah that could make some sense with regards to the vanilla game. Another option would be to merge it with Horizons at a discount price.
A much better solution imo..... and then after each paid DLC the previous DLC gets rolled into the new "base game".
imo having - even a small - fee to get the game is important as it will help to dissuade people from setting up sock puppet accounts just to grief or cheat. I think there is a mental barrier for some people even if it is only a small fee of say £10 to not want to get an account banned for cheating.
I think if a player not prepared to pay even £10 for horizons as a base game (basically all the content we have today) with then an optional extra DLC fee of maybe £30 then I do not think FD really need to worry too much above wanting that player to get on board... going F2P for base game may do more harm than good for the rest of the player base..
The original development budget was £8 million. Kickstarter raised £1.58 million. Some people still believe that Frontier used the Kickstarter money to realise other games, they are probably pretty bad at maths.
Elite: Dangerous' original budget was £8m
Sandbox spaceship game Elite: Dangerous may have only - only! - raised £1.58m ($2.5m) on Kickstarter, but that was just…
www.eurogamer.net