Request for open development and real communication with players.

My request to Frontier is for them to switch to more open development, to have a more detailed public roadmap, to have regular (more than once a week) updates via live streams and to have those streams answer questions raised by the community (see below), discuss the development and current progress of the game and not have them showing Frontier employees trying to play the game.

As part of this I would like to see Frontier making active use of the forum suggestions, questions and feedback. We already have an ED suggestions forum (though it does seem to go mostly ignored), if you added an ED questions forum and an ED feedback forum then they could serve as a valuable resource. Players could raise threads with suggestions, questions and feedback in each forum respectively and Frontier would be able to order them by most replies and be able to see straight away which suggestions, questions and feedback most players were discussing. The most active of these threads could then be discussed in the regular live streams mentioned above.

I understand Frontiers reasons for closed development but I think their fears are greater than they need be and the benefits of open development would considerably outweigh the downsides.

A public roadmap doesn't mean that the players expect everything on there to happen as laid out, most of us realise that it is a plan and plans can, and do, change. By keeping all the plans behind closed doors you are hurting yourselves more by wasting dev time on features that you ultimately end up removing, having re-done or that the players have to end up putting up with. Every one of these unwanted 'features' adds another thing that the players don't enjoy about playing Elite Dangerous. As you get more and more of these in the game you are going to get more and more players saying 'I've had enough...' and moving on.

Having a public roadmap and more open development does not mean that you have to show us everything before a DLC is released. Yes, you would need to discuss features and mechanics, so that you can get player feedback, suggestions and questions on them but you don't need to show them or you don't need to show all of them. If you need to show how a certain part of a mechanic looks then you could use art work or a screenshot rather than a video to help explain how you were going to do the mechanic and players could supply feedback from that.

For example - in the case of the recent sampling tool - you could have shown art work of the sampling rings and explained how you thought they should work back when they were first being planned. Players would have given the feedback you are getting now back then and all that wasted dev work could have been avoided.

In my opinion this course of action would resolve the biggest issue that I see with Frontier - that you consistently waste dev time on new functionality/design or changing old functionality/design that, when it actually comes out, the majority of the player base doesn't like or doesn't like all of. I have been a backer of Elite Dangerous since the second day of the Alpha, back in September 2013, and this same scenario has been repeating over and over again ever since then. I was a part of the original DDF so I know all the suggestions and feedback that Frontier received in those forums. I am also well aware that a lot of it was ignored (and since removed) by Frontier and nobody wants to have that happen again.

This request is made in the hope that Frontier will listen and make these changes but if you intend to do things your way regardless of player feedback, Frontier, then please ignore this request as it would be pointless and be a waste of your, and our, time without your intention of actually listening and acting on our feedback.

This course of action could also potentially help resolve what I see as the second biggest issue with Frontier - that you have no open communication with your players. If you want to improve your relationship with the player base then you not only need to start listening to what the player base has to say on your games development but you also need to start talking to us about your thoughts on the subject in response to what we have to say. It needs to be a discussion, not just a 'we have heard you and are taking it on board'. Those sort of responses help nothing and whilst you continue to fob us off with these platitudes nothing is going to change, you are going to continue to have 'unnecessary friction' with your player base. I'm afraid the blame for this lies squarely with you, Frontier, I just hope that you are willing to do something about it and start really talking to us, for the sake of Elite Dangerous, which I still love despite all of the lost potential and frustration with its developers.
 
Last edited:
I would say that assumption is very naive. Even on these forums, people are still holding FDev to things they said years ago about what they might change or implement.
...and so they should. I hold them to what they say, be it years ago or not. Holding them to what they say isn't the same thing as expecting plans not to change.

For example - David Braben once said that he would like to be able to get out on foot on planets and go big game hunting. He also said that he wanted game play like sneaking on board someone else's ship. Now he only said those things are what he would like or that he wanted so I don't expect them but I do hope to see those one day too.

As far as plans for the game go though, if Frontier gave us a roadmap that said, for example, they were looking at getting ship interiors done and this would start with being able to walk around the Fleet Carrier and that content was being planned for the end of 2021 and then that plan got changed and it was delayed until spring 2022 because of A, B and C, then, so long as those reasons were in the best interests of the game, I don't think the majority of the player base would have a huge problem with it. I think many would be in support of Frontier spending the time to get things done properly, especially if they can see that Frontier are working to put what they want into the game.
 
I would say your assumption is very naive. Even on these forums, people are still holding FDev to things they said years ago about what they might change or implement.
To be honest that is more a case of some people misrepresenting what was said in the first place. Anything that was "might", "would want" or "would like to be" isn't a promise of anything. Anyone trying to make what was said into a promise instead of what it was needs to be ignored.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
A public roadmap doesn't mean that the players expect everything on there to happen as laid out, most of us realise that it is a plan and plans can, and do, change.
Apart from when they do, of course - and where any change to the plan is met with vehement opposition.

There's also the fact that not all players would agree that the published roadmap was the way that they wanted the game to be developed - and they would lobby for changes to it.

Not all players want the same things....
 
A Public roadmap may affect their business model.
The stock market would be able to react differently to news according to the plan, progress of the roadmap.

"I don't care!" some say.
We should care. I honestly believe it's in FDev best interest (and by extension, our interest) to be in control how healthy their business is through release of information in a controlled manner.

However, I hear what you may be saying; "FDev please communicate more often and be a bit more open about what your next steps are"
I concur! It doesn't need to be a public roadmap, but when there are new directions of Elite, perhaps small outlets of info could happen.

But most important of all - Do NOT stop communicating (even on the forums).
Lack of communication causes frustration, issues, speculation. People get nervous that 'something bad is brewing'.
Communicating even 'lack of progress' is a good thing, it means we know you're still alive and CARE about us.
 
Apart from when they do, of course - and where any change to the plan is met with vehement opposition.

There's also the fact that not all players would agree that the published roadmap was the way that they wanted the game to be developed - and they would lobby for changes to it.

Not all players want the same things....
I appreciate that. Surely this way though the majority would win out?
 
Frontier have previously reminded us that the design of their game is not a democracy - it's their game and they change it / add to it as they see fit.
I know, but if it is truly the case of 'this is our game and we are going to make it how we want it to be' then why have they just removed the sampler tool functionality?

It seems they are saying one thing and doing another. If they want to stick to the 'this is our game and we are going to make it how we want it to be' mantra then fine, just stick to it. We don't have any say in it and if we don't like it we don't play it, simple. BUT they also keep saying that they want our feedback and want to listen to us. Why do they want our feedback and want to listen to us if they are going to totally ignore that feedback and do what they were going to do anyway? It makes no sense.

Frontier need to decide what their position actually is first of all, if indeed it is not a democracy and they are going to do what they want regardless of feedback then all of this is pointless. The feedback threads are pointless, the suggestion threads are pointless. Frontier saying that they want our feedback is pointless.

So yeah, we definitely need clarification there for starters.
 
It seems they are saying one thing and doing another. If they want to stick to the 'this is our game and we are going to make it how we want it to be' mantra then fine, just stick to it. We don't have any say in it and if we don't like it we don't play it, simple. BUT they also keep saying that they want our feedback and want to listen to us. Why do they want our feedback and want to listen to us if they are going to totally ignore that feedback and do what they were going to do anyway? It makes no sense.
During carrier development things were changed based on feedback. Asking for feedback and having and open roadmap with a democratic (whatever that is) development process are 2 completely different things.

Development of this game took almost 10 years already, imagine if you'd had to ask your player base what sampling tool they would of liked to be build.
 
During carrier development things were changed based on feedback. Asking for feedback and having and open roadmap with a democratic (whatever that is) development process are 2 completely different things.
Exactly. So why were things changed based on feedback? According to Frontier this is not a democracy and they are going to make the game how they see fit. What I am saying is the two things don't fit together. Look at what happened and see if you can see what I mean:

Frontier: This is not a democracy - it's our game and we change it / add to it as we see fit.

Players: We don't like how you've done the Fleet Carriers!

Frontier: Okay, we've changed the Fleet Carriers.

Can you see what I mean? They said that they make the game as they see fit but then they go and make it how the players want it. The two things are not the same. Frontier have said one thing and done another. They need to be clear and consistent in how they want to make their game.
 
Learn to keep your money in your wallet until such time as the product is fully released and reviewed. FD is not going to change and you have been around long enough to know it. You will have less frustration by waiting to see the product before paying for it and it’s the best message you can send.
 
Top Bottom