Frontier's release plan is genius

[Old Duck]

I can hardly wait until 20th December, then the announcement being made that there will be no inclusion of new tech in Horizons and the two clients are to be split forever...

That would not bother me in the slightest. If I want Odyssey tech (and Odyssey UI), I'll buy it. Since Odyssey tech will likely kill my VR experience, having the ability to switch back to Horizons to play in VR while saving Odyssey for 2D footfall play is a win in my book.

"Oh, now be honest, Captain, warrior to warrior. You do prefer it this way, don't you, as it was meant to be? No peace in our time."

 

[Rat Catcher]

Yeah, sure they could have. I have no idea, but does frontier use any gpu compute features for elite, for planet surfaces at least? I could have read in passing that was the main reason they stopped, there wasn't any equivalent api there to do the same work as on pc. Having said, metal 2 was released which apparently had more compute stuff in it, so it might be possible now. Guess they figured there wasn't enough people there. Do they even have hotas drivers for mac?



I still play games on my macs.. have steam installed and play fs19 and ats (and megaquarium, lol) on it. Being realistic and seeing what the trends are in the development community it really doesn't seem likely that triple a will go there again. If anything, they have their own ecosystem of multiplatform mobile games. Just like xbox and pc are very similar, going forward it would be that easy for any mobile developer to make the same game work on mac with the same ease. The scene of those quite graphically good cutesy hipster games will get a good boost from it.

The ARM chips are the basis for mobile phone CPUs, aren't they?

 

[Chrystoph]

You forgot that the current "release" let them cash grab right before fiscal year end...

Nope. Didn't forget about it. I just don't mind it. I've know that Elite Dangerous is a developer training ground, an engine test bed and a bit of a cash cow for years.

I really don't see that as a bad thing? as long as the game is good and you can enjoy your time spend there, who cares if they profit from it, it's a business not a philanthropical experiment.

Both of you ignored the primary point, which is that it was right before year end, which means that it was done to inflate the year end reporting. I would not object to that if it had been a proper development cycle and if there weren't as much criticism about the game play.

As it stands, they are doing the same old same old. The product isn't ready for release, problem content was removed instead of being fixed, and, yes, the EXISTING content is a good game, but that isn't what you paid for.

Oh, and let's not forget that they reneged on the statement that the planet tech would be released synchonously in a blatant attempt to get more people to buy the unfinished work.

@lysan - You're right, it is a business, and I am not conducting a philanthropic experiment. I expect a decent product, not prototype material, especially when they charge the same amount of money for an expansion as for a new game.

End result - I'll wait it out for a sale because this is a hot mess (I'd use more sailorly language, but the forum rule preclude it).

 

[Rat Catcher]

problem content was removed instead of being fixed,

Which content has been removed from the copy you are currently playing? Why haven't the rest of us who paid for Odyssey been able to play it?

 

[LeoBartlet]

The ARM chips are the basis for mobile phone CPUs, aren't they?

Yes along with Snapdragon, Exynos and others

Edit: Correction Snapdragon and Exynos are ARM based chips to.

 

[amigacooke]

I still play games on my macs.

So do I, I feel so naughty!

 

[Rat Catcher]

Yes along with Snapdragon, Exynos and others

I remember the ARM chips for their exceptionally good (for the era I recall) RISC designs, but that was quite a long time ago, I haven't kept up with that particular technology.

 

[Eymerich]

Both of you ignored the primary point, which is that it was right before year end, which means that it was done to inflate the year end reporting. I would not object to that if it had been a proper development cycle and if there weren't as much criticism about the game play.

As it stands, they are doing the same old same old. The product isn't ready for release, problem content was removed instead of being fixed, and, yes, the EXISTING content is a good game, but that isn't what you paid for.

Oh, and let's not forget that they reneged on the statement that the planet tech would be released synchonously in a blatant attempt to get more people to buy the unfinished work.

@lysan - You're right, it is a business, and I am not conducting a philanthropic experiment. I expect a decent product, not prototype material, especially when they charge the same amount of money for an expansion as for a new game.

End result - I'll wait it out for a sale because this is a hot mess (I'd use more sailorly language, but the forum rule preclude it).

Would'nt conseder Odyssey as an expansion.

While still bare bone - although the work requested for it - the fps view is something really different in scope as they did before.

And to be honest, the price seems fair to me too.

 

[LeoBartlet]

I remember the ARM chips for their exceptionally good (for the era I recall) RISC designs, but that was quite a long time ago, I haven't kept up with that particular technology.

It'll be interesting to see where ARM based chips go given what Apple was able to do with the M1.

 

[Factabulous]

It'll be interesting to see where ARM based chips go given what Apple was able to do with the M1.

Yeah - they're heading into more data centres - I wish I had invested a few years back.

 

[Juniper]

It's the opposite of transparency, "Beta" is an obfuscated term. "Alpha" is an obfuscated term. It has no meaning to you as a consumer. It doesn't mean anything to the developer other than it's not finished.

Indeed, but it's not the opposite of transparency. Ask 10 different people what "alpha" or "beta" mean to them, and you'll get 15 different answers, but the one thing that unites them all is that the product is "unfinished". Releasing stuff without those labels explicitly (in this case) means that this is it. This is the game. This is what you're paying for. Not what might happen in the future.

By allowing developers to use these labels on software you buy:

• They are getting no accountability
• They don't have to support it
• They don't have to meet standards like age rating for content
• You are basically saying "I won't expect this to be reviewed"
• You are basically saying "I won't complain much about the bugs and lack of features

There is no advantages to you as a consumer other than your misconception that "Honest Joe's uncooked food at high prices" is better because "Honest Joe says the food is not cooked at the door" so it doesn't matter if he doesn't wash his hands or bother to cook it properly.

So... fine. Release Odyssey at least 6 months before it's ready, say it's finished, and be damned by all & show the company up to be incompetent.

It's a strange lie that hurts them in multiple ways - one wonders why they do it.

 

[LeoBartlet]

Yeah - they're heading into more data centres - I wish I had invested a few years back.

Im seriously considering getting something M1 based but I can't decide between a macbook, imac or a mac mini.

 

[ZeeWolf]

Indeed, but it's not the opposite of transparency. Ask 10 different people what "alpha" or "beta" mean to them, and you'll get 15 different answers, but the one thing that unites them all is that the product is "unfinished". Releasing stuff without those labels explicitly (in this case) means that this is it. This is the game. This is what you're paying for. Not what might happen in the future.



So... fine. Release Odyssey at least 6 months before it's ready, say it's finished, and be damned by all & show the company up to be incompetent.

It's a strange lie that hurts them in multiple ways - one wonders why they do it.

Frontier will put Odyssey out as a release product this week.

The consumer press will review it. You will read those reviews and customers can make up their minds.
If it is terrible Frontier have nobody to blame but their own processes.
You will be able to say its horrible and nobody will be able to say "er but it's a Beta"
You will be able to say advertised features are missing and nobody will be able to say "er but it's a Beta"
If it doesn't work you will open a support ticket and expect a response.
If your region isn't correctly supported they are accountable
If your localisation isn't correctly supported they are accountable
If your kid plays it and it's full of stuff you'd rather they shouldn't see they are accountable

It's up to Frontier to be accountable and make good products, not the consumer or people on the forum to concuct excuses for terms they don't understand.

If they put a crappy game out and ask for money for it, prefixing it with "Beta" shouldn't be an umberalla term for "uh guys, all of the above points don't matter but hey would you mind paying money anyway because er Beta"

 

[Northpin]

It's the opposite of transparency, "Beta" is an obfuscated term. "Alpha" is an obfuscated term. It has no meaning to you as a consumer. It doesn't mean anything to the developer other than it's not finished.

No, it is not.
Alpha is a release in which the gameplay features are tested. Once the Alpha finishes there are no game features added or modified.
Beta is a release that has the main purpose of bug hunting, but also testing the cost/reward balance of certain things. Based on the results, the devs might chose to fix some of the bugs while others could be let to slip into the final release, being targeted by later patches.

Both Alpha and Beta are supposed to be internal releases.
But some marketing genius found out that if this can be properly hyped out, there are a lot of people willing to PAY money to test/play the Alpha and Beta builds

So now it is not that unusual to have public Alpha and Beta releases.
Based on how much hype the marketing manages to build, they can even charge as much as twice the normal release price. And people will pay. Gladly. While echo-hyping the not yet released product and berating the others that are more cautious.
And, as some people already found out, some of the bugs they took their time to report, more often than not using obnoxious platforms for bug reporting - graciously made it into the final release.

Yea! Weird!
At least for me.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

So do I, I feel so naughty!

Yeah i know. Been happily bolting down a new era of "classic macs" i think. Given apple are a marketing company first i don't think i want to join the ride of their own silicon. Its been quite nice.. just get used to not doing raw browsing on unsupported machines, and just stick with the version of macos that works best on your hardware. As bloaty as it is, i think catalina will get some legs as the last macos i ever use High sierra being their best work i think.

Games were pretty interesting during that period everyone was nterested in macs. Subnautica is missing fish shaders so i can't play that. Eso was the same for ao, but much credit to them for supporting it until the m1's.. where they bowed out understandably. Blizzard games work well on macs still. Yeah its going to be a fixed experience going forward i think.

 

[VR Jay Le Chardon]

I thought about it for a minute and i cant think of any way they could have squeezed more profit out of the Odyssey release.

I can - put a special offer on ARX if bought alongside Odyssey at launch, FOMO would have people flexing their cards in an instant.

I still think it's due to technical restrictions and not some evil marketing plan.

I've said it before, but I genuinely think this delay to the delivery of Odyssey graphics to the Horizons clientele is because they have a monumental task ahead of them optimising it to a point where last gen consoles and older gaming PCs can run Odyssey, as even mid to high end gaming PCs were getting brought to their knees by Odyssey alpha.

If it's a beta, call it a beta. Call it 'early access'. Call it anything other than a full release - which is basically dishonest and misleading. And we all know the only reason they're doing it is because of their fiscal year end.

I'm not applauding that, sorry.

I agree... PC Release will be a beta at best, and it's a bit of a slap in the face that we now appear to be nothing more than beta testers for the console master race in frontier's eyes.

lol, Mac support springs to mind... Not that anyone should use a Mac for gaming, but hey. FD promised support and then...

I'm hoping VR doesn't go the way of the mac...

Isn't Apple to blame for this one?

Yes, they were, they tried to strongarm games developers to use their new proprietary graphics API, and Frontier called their bluff and walked away.

Essentially yes. But really, FD should have checked before promising.

Wasn't there a period of around three years that elapsed between Frontier pledged to support Mac and Apple changing their API support, pulling the rug from under Frontier's, and no doubt other developers feet?

The ARM chips are the basis for mobile phone CPUs, aren't they?

That's where they have excelled in the past, but the technology scales beautifully, so much so that the first ARM based macbook was trouncing conventional high end laptops in productivity benchmarks. ARM based computing will become more mainstream, even Microsoft has announced support for ARM moving forward, however, there remains an issue that ARM is not compatible with x86 binaries, so it will require software to be redeveloped / updated to support the new CPU platform, which will hobble the pace of the transition

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-10-arm-based-pcs-faq-477f51df-2e3b-f68f-31b0-06f5e4f8ebb5.

 

[ZeeWolf]

No, it is not.
Alpha is a release in which the gameplay features are tested. Once the Alpha finishes there are no game features added or modified.
Beta is a release that has the main purpose of bug hunting, but also testing the cost/reward balance of certain things. Based on the results, the devs might chose to fix some of the bugs while others could be let to slip into the final release, being targeted by later patches.

Both Alpha and Beta are supposed to be internal releases.
But some marketing genius found out that if this can be properly hyped out, there are a lot of people willing to PAY money to test/play the Alpha and Beta builds

So now it is not that unusual to have public Alpha and Beta releases.
Based on how much hype the marketing manages to build, they can even charge as much as twice the normal release price. And people will pay. Gladly. While echo-hyping the not yet released product and berating the others that are more cautious.
And, as some people already found out, some of the bugs they took their time to report, more often than not using obnoxious platforms for bug reporting - graciously made it into the final release.

Yea! Weird!
At least for me.

This is not true. I'll play the "I've been in development for over twenty years including the game industry" card on this one.

Internally we (developers) do not label test builds as "alpha" and "beta" through any specific software standard.

We label internal tests with version numbers like this 0.1.0.4 (example semantic version numbering). There are no 'best practices' that say we have to use "alpha" to mean this or "beta" to mean anything. We use branch names, sometimes terms like "STABLE" this or "MASTER" that.

It's used (but not always) as an identifier that it's a version that hasn't been internally completed, often on public test builds.

There are no specific standards documentation that you can point me to that say constructively what 'alpha' or 'beta' means. It's a general term with some Greek letters which define the order they are released in, nothing more.

If I, a developer of twenty years have no idea what a company means by "Alpha" or "Beta" and you can't reliably point me at consumer advice concerning those terms. How is that transparent?

 

[Rat Catcher]

And, as some people already found out, some of the bugs they took their time to report, more often than not using obnoxious platforms for bug reporting - graciously made it into the final release.

Who are these people playing the final release? Can you point me to their reviews?

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

This is not true. I'll play the "I've been in development for over twenty years including the game industry" card on this one.

Internally we (developers) do not label tests as "alpha" and "beta" through any specific software standard.

We label internal tests with version numbers like this 0.1.0.4 (example semantic version numbering). There are no 'best practices' that say we have to use "alpha" to mean this or "beta" to mean anything. We use branch names, sometimes terms like "STABLE" this or "MASTER" that.

It's used (but not always) identifier that it's a version that hasn't been internally completed, often on public test builds.

There are no specific standards documentation that you can point me to that say constructively what 'alpha' or 'beta' means. It's a general term with some Greek letters which define the order they are released in, nothing more.

If I, a developer of twenty years have no idea what a company means by "Alpha" or "Beta" and you can't reliably point me at consumer advice concerning those terms. How is that transparent?

Which doubles down on the point that odysee to date has been mainly a marketing and sales exercise.

If you could relate further, when do developers consider the game "finished"? Genuine question.

 

[Northpin]

We label internal tests with version numbers like this 0.1.0.4 (example semantic version numbering). There are no 'best practices' that say we have to use "alpha" to mean this or "beta" to mean anything. We use branch names, sometimes terms like "STABLE" this or "MASTER" that.

We use version numbers prefaced by RC
As in Release Candidate. And those RC versions go for testing to our internal QA team.
But we do b2b software. Not consumer software.

However, we do organize tests with some of our customers and the builds designated to be used in those test sometimes are colloquially named beta...