Notice GalNet changes

[Thatchinho]

@Thatchinho see this is what happens when Frontier (or anyone for that matter) tries to break off a relationship (in this case, the relationship between the game and Galnet) using calming, tactfully evasive wording ... people like myself and StuartGT don't fully realise the relationship's over, think we still have a chance and then get horrified later on when we're told ... no, I thought you understood ... we are DONE mate!

If you're gonna dump someone ... DUMP THEM! It's harsh but better for all concerned in the long run.

It’s a funny old do Alec, but I guess how one reads things is down a lot to personal background.

What always gets me with the whole Galnet thing is how few people seem to remember the previous ‘no fluff’ period. FD had then brought ‘galactic background activity’ stuff back in. The galaxy had felt alive for a year or so. And people complained. Still staggers me that people would demand what would in effect be a return to what it had been like in the previous dry patch.

For me, literally zero has changed in FD’s Galnet position in ages. Like since not far off this time year when this thread started.

What they set out then is what they’ve stuck to.

Things have changed around that, but I’ve seen nothing to indicate that the position on Galnet has changed.

Maybe you guys are reading something else into things, but like I say I’ve not seen FD’s actual position on Galnet change in almost a year.

 

[StuartGT]

Then (February 2020):

"We hope that provides some context to why, at the current time, the plans for GalNet articles are unlikely to change."​

​

Now (July 2020):

"Galnet and community goals currently are not in our roadplan for now"​

​

That roadplan likely includes Odyssey, which has already been announced with teaser video.

 

[Old Duck]

@Thatchinho see this is what happens when Frontier (or anyone for that matter) tries to break off a relationship (in this case, the relationship between the game and Galnet) using calming, tactfully evasive wording ... people like myself and StuartGT don't fully appreciate that the relationship's over, think we still have a chance and then get horrified later on when we're told ... no, I thought you understood ... we are DONE mate!

If you're gonna dump someone ... DUMP THEM! It's harsh but better for all concerned in the long run.

And once they dump you, they better move all their furniture out of your apartment and give you back your key. Like I said before, if Galnet is dead, REMOVE ALL TRACES OF IT FROM THE GAME.

I had to shoot a skunk the other night. It was dead, Jim. And it would have been downright foolish to leave its dead carcass just sitting on my lawn for the rest of time. Yet here is dead GalNet, decaying in front of our eyes and stinking up the game.

 

[CMDR-ss47ply]

the only hope I can gleam from this is that the DLC is so damn good it will make me want to play for years. Thats a big gamble Frontier

 

[StuartGT]

https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/hooznk

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/hooznk/cm_stephen_galnet_and_community_goals_currently/

 

[Plaid_unicorn]

I mean they've stated this multiple times and reiterated it when the last galnews article dropped.

People reading tea leaves that aren't there and getting their hopes up. I'm guilty of this .

 

[amigacooke]

Don't panic, it's normal.

Is it normal for games to remove previously advertised features?

 

[Old Duck]

Is it normal for games to remove previously advertised features?

I still miss handing out armor packs as Torbjörn....

 

[Rubbernuke]

A story nobody can read. If Frontier came up with an automated headline generator that posted articles like, "The Dark Wheel has seen an unprecedented expansion across multiple systems thanks to the help over over 1,000 CMDRs this week!" that would be something cool. Same could happen with PowerPlay. The purpose of news is to bring readable, understandable stories to the masses. I can't interpret all the PP stats, but I would find it interesting if there was some big war between two powers.

AI is writing news stories about real world events, so why can't Frontier come up with something similar? And no, I'm not talking about those lame, repetitive BGS "updates" found in stations. A writer and a programmer need to get together and make an AI news baby

I tried to visualise that sort of thing here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...enerated-stories-reports.537679/#post-8298623

I think it is possible, but it still means no spontaneity, new storylines (Thargoid breakthrough! sort of thing).

 

[Thatchinho]

This news warrants its own thread due to its importance

Well this whole thing is getting rather bizarre. I’m honestly not seeing any news. All I’m seeing is them reiterating what the situation is (for what seems to me like the umpteenth time ).

 

[Thatchinho]

Essentially, yes.

Like I say, it’s happened before and been clarified.

It’s just what happens sometimes when people are answering things live in unscripted responses to things being asked in the livestream chat.

I think it’s only fair to point out that there had been a load of complaints at one point that FD weren’t doing the above, and they’ve increased their direct responsiveness in the livestreams massively as a result.

We’ve got to take the rough with the smooth on that a bit IMHO.

Anyway, last post I could find that set out the Galnet situation in full is here for reference:



Anyway, hopefully @Stephen Benedetti or one of the other CMs will pop along and provide some direct confirmation of the situation.

@Alec Turner , I just wanted to add a point to this with respect to your post that it was replying to:

So Stephen spoke out of turn (or at least what he said lacked qualification - i.e. "that kind of Galnet ... is not in our roadplan")?

While what I said in the post stands (demonstrated by the article for the new rare good), the reality is that what Stephen said is probably actually going to be functionally accurate in large part for Galnet as a whole.

A. No plans for fluff.
B. Galnet only for FD lead in-game things.

But no IIs or CGs will mean output from B is likely to be very low.

(Only talking in the period prior to Odyssey here of course - no telling what will change with the launch of Odyssey.)

 

[Rubbernuke]

Then (February 2020):

"We hope that provides some context to why, at the current time, the plans for GalNet articles are unlikely to change."​

​

Now (July 2020):

"Galnet and community goals currently are not in our roadplan for now"​

​

That roadplan likely includes Odyssey, which has already been announced with teaser video.

I drank a rather strong cup of coffee and wondered: what if they took the narrative engine from the Outsider and bolted it into Elite?

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

Spoiler: Do you really want to see what happens in recent Frontier meeting discussing the future of Elite?

It's actually a very good simulation, whereby the barrel, the pins and the marble represent the game, its features and the players. Each pin pulled represents a feature they pull from the game, and each marble represents a percentage of the players. Those four marbles represent players who left when Mac support ended, players who left when community goals ended, players who left when Galnet was suspended, and players who left when VR was yanked.

 

[thistle]

I have to say listening to what Stephen said, I don't actually think it's changed. He explicitly seems to be saying he's happy to reiterate the position again (ie this hasnt changed). But the position is/was that galnet will be used when there's something to say.

Hopefully this will be confirmed by Stephen or one of the other CMs.

On CGs, IIs etc, I suspect the carriers and social hubs change things in terms of how that could work.

 

[StuartGT]

Well this whole thing is getting rather bizarre. I’m honestly not seeing any news. All I’m seeing is them reiterating what the situation is (for what seems to me like the umpteenth time ).

For me, the news is that it isn't a reiteration, but an escalation. This has seemingly happened in stages:

1. The removal of fluff pieces from Galnet - i.e. news on in-game events only.
2. The stopping of all news from Galnet - i.e. no in-game events to report news on.
3. A statement saying that Galnet and in-game events are stopped currently as all writers are focused on text for Fleet Carriers and NewEra/Odyssey - i.e. FDev cannot do news and events until the Fleet Carriers and/or Odyssey updates arrive.
4. A new statement that Galnet is stopped indefinitely as it is no longer on the roadplan - i.e. FDev don't plan to allocate devtime to Galnet and in-game events at all, including for Odyssey.

 

[Alec Turner]

But the position is/was that galnet will be used when there's something to say.

I'm sorry, I have to say it one more time just to get it off my chest ... FLEET CARRIERS. Seriously Frontier, a new rare commodity warrants a Galnet article but Brewer Corp's introduction of a 3km long player ownable ship (over 10,000 of which have now been purchased at a cost of something like 60 trillion credits) doesn't? Your logic on what's Galnet worthy continues to elude me!

Hopefully this will be confirmed by Stephen or one of the other CMs.

Indeed, that would be nice because there did seem to be a change from "we'll still use Galnet from time to time" .. to .. "Galnet's off the roadmap".

 

[Rubbernuke]

I'm sorry, I have to say it one more time just to get it off my chest ... FLEET CARRIERS. Seriously Frontier, a new rare commodity warrants a Galnet article but Brewer Corp's introduction of a 3km long player ownable ship (over 10,000 of which have now been purchased at a cost of something like 60 trillion credits) doesn't? Your logic on what's Galnet worthy continues to elude me!


Indeed, that would be nice because there did seem to be a change from "we'll still use Galnet from time to time" .. to .. "Galnet's off the roadmap".

Will it be death by patchnote though? A beast as complex as ED is, with so many wonky parts I don't want to wait 8 months to be told "it might come back sometime later" yet again. As well written as the text for fleet carriers was (no spelling mistakes for example) the amount of text for fleet carriers from my armchair dev was not exactly huge or enough to divert from Galnets bare bones mode.

 

[CMDR-ss47ply]

So does this mean there will be no more thargoid attacks no more burning stations no more people to save how will we know if the news cant get sent

 

[zimms]

There’s two lessons here:

- people need to start getting a lot better at thinking through what the consequences are going to be of what they’re demanding

- FD need to get better at pointing out the consequences of people’s demands and saying the equivalent of ‘this will be the negative side of what you’re asking for. Is that what you really want?’. (Or even just saying ‘No. There will be these negative consequences, and because of that we think the playerbase as a whole will be less happy overall if we go ahead.’)

Oh, I also have two lessons:

- people need to stop blaming "the players" for everything. It's utterly ridiculous. The players never demanded GalNet to be shut down.

- FD need to listen better and communicate more clearly. Players only wanted to know whether certain stories have in-game relevance in order not to completely waste their time. If that sounds like "shut it all down" then you either didn't listen carefully or you're a fan of malicious compliance.

Closer to reality is probably that FD jumped at the chance to cut another feature while claiming "we listened to the community".

 

[Rubbernuke]

So does this mean there will be no more thargoid attacks no more burning stations no more people to save how will we know if the news cant get sent

At most it will be procedurally based I reckon, but with no underlying motive.