Big Elite Streamers Giving Up On Streaming Elite?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Shinji Ikari

Shinji Ikari
Kwoung said:
I would beg to differ, this is about the most casual game I have ever played, you literally spend most of your in-game time not even playing. Making credits is a joke, as is unlocking Horizon engineers and collecting materials to use them.
Click to expand...
Some materials have very specific places to look for, credits I agree but as a begginer it is not so obvious (I still recall seeing Scott Manley with ~100 million credits in his account thinking he was a baller).
Not being able to get anything done in less than an hour is more a sign of it taking very long periods of time to do anything for what everyone around here likes to say... Space is big, really, really big.
Click to expand...
Idk, that's what I had in mind when saying it's not casual. IMO a casual game is one you may grab for a little time to pass in a rest and then forget once you stop playing for the time being.

Edit: Another reason why I think it is not casual is because it can be unforgiving though once experienced, you are under little risk.
 
Last edited:

Lysette

Lysette
Shinji Ikari said:
The same can be said for any game. I really doubt you never have at least some goal in mind when playing ED or any videogame for that matter, then again, a lot of content in ED needs or is greatly aided by better gear.
Click to expand...
one of my problems with ED was exactly this - that there is no goal worth having for me. Even acquiring money doesn't make sense beyond a certain point, because there is nothing what I could do with that money - and money which cannot be used for a reasonable purpose is just a number on an account - pointless basically. Why would I want to raise that number, if I can do nothing with it in the end? Or why would I even want a bigger ship, if all I can get from it in the end is raising this number even faster?- For which purpose, there is simply nothing i want in ED - there is no goal worth achieving. That was exactly my problem with ED.

btw casual in the context of gaming just means, that one has a life and not all the time in the world to play games. Very limited time to play in comparison to someone, who can spend many hours every day playing the game. It can as well mean, that one has several games to play and not that much time for a specific game on a regular basis.
 
Last edited:

RJ-KNUCKLES

RJ-KNUCKLES
Lysette said:
one of my problems with ED was exactly this - that there is no goal worth having for me. Even acquiring money doesn't make sense beyond a certain point, because there is nothing what I could do with that money - and money which cannot be used for a reasonable purpose is just a number on an account - pointless basically. Why would I want to raise that number, if I can do nothing with it in the end? Or why would I even want a bigger ship, if all I can get from it in the end is raising this number even faster?- For which purpose, there is simply nothing i want in ED - there is no goal worth achieving. That was exactly my problem with ED.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way about on feet content. what is the end game here? what is the purpose of all this work? It doesn't relate back to the main loop of space stuff and grinding to make the grind easier is a hard sell with what can be done with it.
 

Lysette

Lysette
RJ-KNUCKLES said:
I feel the same way about on feet content. what is the end game here? what is the purpose of all this work? It doesn't relate back to the main loop of space stuff and grinding to make the grind easier is a hard sell with what can be done with it.
Click to expand...
the eternal errand runner - that is all one can become in ED - and that is not enough.

well, or the discoverer of basically empty space - putting your name on things - not enough as well. Hm, for some it might be a goal, but I see no purpose in doing that. it is not something special,if there are 400 billion systems with trillions of other objects out there to put a name on - it is not something unique or special, anyone can do that for an eternity to come basically, because it is just that plenty, that it is nothing special.

just as purposeful as naming a specific grain of sand in the Sahara desert - what is the point of that?
 
Last edited:

[VR] James Constantine

[VR] James Constantine
Shinji Ikari said:
ED is not a game for 'casuals' and I'm not being elitist here. It has a steep learning curve and takes time, I personally almost never played less than 1 hour sessions because I couldn't get much done in that time.
Click to expand...
The learning curve isn't all that steep - there's no shortage of YouTube videos that will spell it out to you and it's not terribly difficult to play it casually, especailly given that it's not difficult to log out safely in the middle of nowhere, so ultimately it's not hard to dip in for an hour or less in a session.
Lysette said:
one of my problems with ED was exactly this - that there is no goal worth having for me. Even acquiring money doesn't make sense beyond a certain point, because there is nothing what I could do with that money - and money which cannot be used for a reasonable purpose is just a number on an account - pointless basically. Why would I want to raise that number, if I can do nothing with it in the end? Or why would I even want a bigger ship, if all I can get from it in the end is raising this number even faster?- For which purpose, there is simply nothing i want in ED - there is no goal worth achieving. That was exactly my problem with ED.
Click to expand...
That was one of the revolutionary concepts of the original Elite game - it was brought out back in a time where games all had an end goal (complete a series of levels, defeat a final boss, rescue a princess, etc) and Braben and Bell's original game concept bucked this trend. Since then, however, games have become more sophisticated and all of them ultimately have a point where you've progressed as far as you can in the game and there are no more Worlds to conquer. This is normally where the MMO aspect comes into play and players band together to build guilds, corporations or empires.

In this regard, those mechanics were never added to the game, there's no player driven economy, no way to stake claims to systems, no base or station building. There have been some limited player driven attempts at creating this kind of game play, such as orginizing expeditions into deep space, but the mechanics to allow this sort of thing are quite limited because ED was a Kickstarter, it delivered a checklist of promised features, but something to pull all of those together was never included on that checklist.
 
Last edited:

Lysette

Lysette
[VR] James Constantine said:
The learning curve isn't all that steep - there's no shortage of YouTube videos that will spell it out to you and it's not terribly difficult to play it casually, especailly given that it's not difficult to log out safely in the middle of nowhere, so ultimately it's not hard to dip in for an hour or less in a session.

That was one of the revolutionary concepts of the original Elite game - it was brought out back in a time where games all had an end goal (complete a series of levels, defeat a final boss, rescue a princess, etc) and Braben and Hill's original game concept bucked this trend. Since then, however, games have become more sophisticated and all of them ultimately have a point where you've progressed as far as you can in the game and there are no more Worlds to conquer. This is normally where the MMO aspect comes into play and players band together to build guilds, corporations or empires.

In this regard, those mechanics were never added to the game, there's no player driven economy, no way to stake claims to systems, no base or station building. There have been some limited player driven attempts at creating this kind of game play, such as orginizing expeditions into deep space, but the mechanics to allow this sort of thing are quite limited because ED was a Kickstarter, it delivered a checklist of promised features, but something to pull all of those together was never included on that checklist.
Click to expand...
instancing is as well a problem in regards to building an empire - because all you would own is just that instance and that might not be the same everytime you log in. There has to be some consistency for this kind of game play or all sharing the same universe (with the exception of some instanced pockets for mission runners maybe). The lack of a player-driven economy is something I mentioned a few times, because it would not just give the whole endeavor purpose, but create as well a lot of emergent gameplay. ED is stiff in these regards, it isn't flexible enough to allow for emergent gameplay, where players create the story and it doesn't have to be provided. ED is kind of a sandbox with a lot of sand but no tools to play with it and create something new out of it. And it is so instanced, that players are pretty much isolated from each other and if not, it's laggy.

Well, it's pointless to discuss that - FDev has dropped 2 features, where the game was supposed to be designed with those in mind - VR and ship interiors. Dropping something where the game was designed for "from the ground up" is declaring "we are done with this game, it has run it's course" seen from my perspective. They killed it intentionally. And all what is currently done to "heal" the game, is just to get the console version sold in the end - the last big chunk of money coming from it, grab it and forget about the game.

But then again in the light of what is coming up in the near future from other game developers, it might be the right decision seen from a management perspective. ED has really run it's course and is ready for it's last phase - which could well go on for years, but with a lot less revenue, but can be run by a very small team. I doubt that this is an evil-minded decision, they expected to get a lot more done with EDO and in the end faced problems which cannot be overcome in a reasonable time frame. It can still reach half a century Elite - even in it's decline phase.
 
Last edited:

Cageman

Cageman
[PS4] Filthymick420 said:
Yea, in my experience free thinking/outside the box thinking and creative productivity solutions are NOT rewarded in the job market. Only drones and sheep seem to make it anywhere. God forbid if you dont think what your boss thinks and any advice or ideas is looked at like I'm trying to tell them how to do their job.

Some one needs to. lmao they sure as heck didn't know how
Click to expand...
In what area of work do you work in? In games developement, which I have been a part of for 15 years now, you will be rewarded with out of the box thinking. Games developement is all about problem solving and art.

I got promoted for solving a problem that people said "This isn't possible" and I presented a way to do it... so, it depends where and what you work with.
 

Eymerich

E
Cagman said:
In what area of work do you work in? In games developement, which I have been a part of for 15 years now, you will be rewarded with out of the box thinking. Games developement is all about problem solving and art.

I got promoted for solving a problem that people said "This isn't possible" and I presented a way to do it... so, it depends where and what you work with.
Click to expand...
Definitly you work in games dev.

Agree 120%
 

Lysette

Lysette
[VR] James Constantine said:
Actually in any kind of software company out of the box thinking is rewarded - in theory. In practice, many software companies aren't run very well.
Click to expand...
this is due to the type of the person running the team - a manager type is an executive and rarely innovative - he has to do the same thing over and over and over and over again and be happy with it - that is why he got that job. An innovator on the other side, doesn't want to do the same thing over and over and over again and is rarely a good manager, but can come up with new ideas, in the ideal case even very frequently. But this person isn't very good and quite unhappy, if he/she has to do the same over and over again. I'm of that type, I'm good with producing ideas and thinking out of the box, but I leave management jobs of the "over and over and over again" type to those better suited for that.

The problem with the innovative type - like me - is that we are never happy with what is achieved already and want it to be done better, different and more efficient. This is going on the nerves of those, who are better suited to the "over and over and over again" job type, because it disturbs their world and feels disruptive to them. They can have some new ideas once in a while, but if they are flooded with ideas, they can be that overwhelmed, that they just shut the door and don't want to hear about it anymore.
 

Far Beyond Driven

Far Beyond Driven
Lysette said:
this is due to the type of the person running the team - a manager type is an executive and rarely innovative - he has to do the same thing over and over and over and over again and be happy with it - that is why he got that job. An innovator on the other side, doesn't want to do the same thing over and over and over again and is rarely a good manager, but can come up with new ideas, in the ideal case even very frequently. But this person isn't very good and quite unhappy, if he/she has to do the same over and over again. I'm of that type, I'm good with producing ideas and thinking out of the box, but I leave management jobs of the "over and over and over again" type to those better suited for that.

The problem with the innovative type - like me - is that we are never happy with what is achieved already and want it to be done better, different and more efficient. This is going on the nerves of those, who are better suited to the "over and over and over again" job type, because it disturbs their world and feels disruptive to them. They can have some new ideas once in a while, but if they are flooded with ideas, they can be that overwhelmed, that they just shut the door and don't want to hear about it anymore.
Click to expand...
Chris Roberts has entered the chat.
 

Cageman

Cageman
[VR] James Constantine said:
Actually in any kind of software company out of the box thinking is rewarded - in theory. In practice, many software companies aren't run very well.
Click to expand...
Where I work, it is rewarded. I wouldn't been promoted it it wasn't. I work for Ubisoft.

If people feel unrewarded, try working for Ubisoft... this is not guranteed that you will make your voice heard... there are still lots of "people" in the way, so to speak. Thankfully, I have yet to work in such an environment where good ideas are silenced.
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Cagman said:
Where I work, it is rewarded. I wouldn't been promoted it it wasn't. I work for Ubisoft.

If people feel unrewarded, try working for Ubisoft... this is not guranteed that you will make your voice heard... there are still lots of "people" in the way, so to speak. Thankfully, I have yet to work in such an environment where good ideas are silenced.
Click to expand...
It's good to hear of positive experiences from ubisoft staff.
I really enjoy their (your?) games, indeed I dare say probably my favourite studio over all, most games fit a formula but I really like that formula.....but if you listen to the media it does not paint a good picture.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom