Everybodys talking about Multi-Crew Combat and the Insta-Travel to do it in 2.3 and Im over here like- "Ok..uh, Solo-Explorer/Merchant here. What about the other 90% of the game and 80% of the Playerbase?
Whats in this Update for Us?
2.3 dev update feedback mega thread
- Thread starter Jenner
- Start date
- Status
Everybodys talking about Multi-Crew Combat and the Insta-Travel to do it in 2.3 and Im over here like- "Ok..uh, Solo-Explorer/Merchant here. What about the other 90% of the game and 80% of the Playerbase?
Whats in this Update for Us?
Sterling MH
Banned
There would then be no need for multi player modes. Or Wings. Or Multicrew. They'd be filled by NPC roles.
About all you could proffer would be some hired help if you took a trader mission, with an NPC wingman if no player wants to answer the request to participate in the mission (e.g. there are more credits per hour running combat zones, the major reason why you won't get any wingmates in multiplayer).
An NPC wingmate would only make sense in Open against PvP "Pirate" attacks, and an NPC isn't really up to the task unless they actually outclass the ship. What they DID do for traders being attacked by pirates was make getting away much easier, so as long as you're on the ball, and kitted out defensively, you should be able to get away scot free. And a wingmate won't change that.
Sliders for your facial features.
And maybe some different colored pilot suits in the cash shop later.
Enjoy.
Sterling MH
Banned
The stuff not in the headlines. Look at the release notes, wherever they are.
But, yes, multiplayer gameplay is not availalble in solo games. Want to use that content? Play a multiplayer mode.
At least the idea, that you'll no longer be treated as 'as ship' but with the promise that you are no longer just a number but are in fact a human being. (aka. Commander creator / face design UI)
Who are you?
The new number 2
Who is number 1?
You are number 6
I am not a number! I am a Human Seat Cover!
All aboard the Hype Train! Have your tickets ready.
Next stop: Disappointment.
---
On an unrelated note, it just occurred to me - when you ride the train, there's always this fellow in a nice jacket, walking the isles, "Ticket please."
Why would they not check your tickets at the station, before you board?
Did someone miss a memo somewhere?
Next stop: Disappointment.
---
On an unrelated note, it just occurred to me - when you ride the train, there's always this fellow in a nice jacket, walking the isles, "Ticket please."
Why would they not check your tickets at the station, before you board?
Did someone miss a memo somewhere?
Last edited:
Sterling MH
Banned
Uh, you're here. So you think that what you're doing is unhealty. Fine. Go ahead. But you could keep it to yourself and, as the moderator said, keep to the topic.
But you're evidently trying to shame me and I either defend myself posting against you and your ilk, or I block you and never see it.
Guess.
WELL, this thread took some interesting turns! It's been a very interesting read catching up over 30 pages since last night! [big grin]
With regards to the anemic multicrew feature of 2.3, my gut tells me that Windscreen may actually have a point. He even posted some factual evidence to support it, but really, all you need do is look at the slower pace of updates coupled with the lacking features as of late compared to what they were originally supposed to be, and add in QA which takes far longer than it should to fix important bugs, and you end up with Elite Dangerous experiencing development slowdown and issues. The symptoms are synonymous with a term from the video game industry known as "twilighting", when games enter into a more maintenance phase of development rather than full on development.
However, I don't think that is the case with Elite, not entirely anyway. Rather I believe that the burden of working on three platforms simultaneously (PC, Xbox, and PS4) has encumbered both the dev team and QA department to the point of simply not being able to keep up with their schedules. Because of this, features slip, mechanics go on the backburner, bugs go unfixed because QA is now doing three times the work they used to. It's not an uncommon phenomenon in the industry, unfortunately.
Now, this is all speculation of course, none of us can truly know what the deal is, BUT the evidence is in the updates themselves. Curtailed features, neglected mechanics, slipping schedules, and unfixed bugs. No matter what you think, those are the reality.
Regarding multicrew, we can only hope that someday in the future the feature gets improved upon to be made useful for more than just combat players. For now though, for whatever reason, it is what it is. [sad]
With regards to the anemic multicrew feature of 2.3, my gut tells me that Windscreen may actually have a point. He even posted some factual evidence to support it, but really, all you need do is look at the slower pace of updates coupled with the lacking features as of late compared to what they were originally supposed to be, and add in QA which takes far longer than it should to fix important bugs, and you end up with Elite Dangerous experiencing development slowdown and issues. The symptoms are synonymous with a term from the video game industry known as "twilighting", when games enter into a more maintenance phase of development rather than full on development.
However, I don't think that is the case with Elite, not entirely anyway. Rather I believe that the burden of working on three platforms simultaneously (PC, Xbox, and PS4) has encumbered both the dev team and QA department to the point of simply not being able to keep up with their schedules. Because of this, features slip, mechanics go on the backburner, bugs go unfixed because QA is now doing three times the work they used to. It's not an uncommon phenomenon in the industry, unfortunately.
Now, this is all speculation of course, none of us can truly know what the deal is, BUT the evidence is in the updates themselves. Curtailed features, neglected mechanics, slipping schedules, and unfixed bugs. No matter what you think, those are the reality.
Regarding multicrew, we can only hope that someday in the future the feature gets improved upon to be made useful for more than just combat players. For now though, for whatever reason, it is what it is. [sad]
Can't rep you again but thanks for having a basic understanding of how the game development industry works.
Or at least used to work over a decade ago. FDev is stuck in an old business model they just started using that most companies are trying to transition out of. It's a shame.
And here the last 12 pages will repeat ad infinitum, or at least until the Windscreen Smudge gets cleaned off 
Last edited:
A secondary character wouldn't really solve anything. It would still be setting the precedence of using the same functional mechanic. Besides... They would have jsut implemented multiple pilot slots if they could do that.
I think, by this point, we might as well have stuff like tractor beams (it always feels like they're what pull you in from an out-of-angle landing, anyway). They'd potentially add some neat gameplay value I wouldn't be averse to. If Frontier's reason for not including them is the lore, the whole telepresence thing has pretty much broken that proverbial window, anyway.
I'm kind of looking forward to how the gunner station is portrayed. It sounds like they were basing it on the old 'I-War' game and 'The Last Starfighter' film. Just a shame we can't simply utilise the SLF mechanic, have an NPC fly the ship according to a flight profile (evasive, aggressive, etcetera) while we take direct control of weapons. I don't think Frontier factor in how issues of trust and performance anxiety come into play, when people invite another human player to interact with them aboard their ship.
Last edited:
I'm an amateur game dev myself, so yeah I have some understanding of the industry.
I did indeed spend time finding materials in 2.0. The fact you even had to ask really undermines the point you made in the first place (because you actually didn't even know if I was hunting for materials, pratting around on planets, or delivering fruit to the old folks home)
Also, I don't actually feel the need to respond with anything sensible for two reasons. Firstly, because you are the one who brought me into this based upon your false perceptions on something you feel I may or may not have done over a year ago. Secondly, because your posts are quite unfriendly and impersonal - but you can continue on with that if you want, it's a reflection on you after all, not me.
Bottom line is, I only responded to your post to point out that you were wrong in that I never called The Engineers "too hard". The rest of it is an argument I have no interest in partaking because it has no relevance to this thread. I gotta admit though, the picture you paint of how you view my antics is very funny and entertaining reading.
Actually I was using your rant as an example when responding to someone elses post.
You didn't have to respond at all....
The reason I had to ask if you did is because your video looked like you were a newbie just trying for his first time! IT was a catalogue of stupid mistakes anyone who spent any time looking for rare stuff prior to 2.1 easily avoided!
Your rant was indeed a "it's all too hard" I remember specifically you moaning that in a grand total of one hour driving round a single crater you hadn't found any of one of the rarest materials in the game that the planet may not have had! Again had you tried prior to 2.1 you'd have known this to be the case, yet you acted like this was the first time you'd realised. Now you may try and make it sound now like that's not what you were saying, but the entire thing sounded exactly like dozens of rants I've read from new players who can't master docking! You don't need to say the exact words "it's too hard" for the meaning to be "it's too hard"!
Now I don't generally follow tubers, I only watched that because I was pointed to it by someone else, and the impression of someone who had "never seen your work" before was it was a guy reading out a rant he wrote for the forum about how everything is awful mostly because of your own mistakes! Sure that may not be how you meant to say it, but it's sure how it came across to me! Now those more used to your ramblings may think it was some sort of Einsteinian level piece of work, but in reality it was just a forum rant put to video of the sort seen regularly, and mostly by people who don't realise that they have started from the wrong place and so therefore are always going to end up in the wrong place!
Now THAT is a great idea that would work and satisfy all I believe
Commander goes to Station - Crew Lounge and hires a crew, but a Player can assume control of them for Multi-Crew (at a lesser pay/experience cut)
If a player wants to use their Personal Character on a Multi-Crew ship, they would have to actually be at the same Station to join.
I wonder if one of the reasons that development may have slowed down is that every time they announce an update the forum is immediately full of threads explaining that it will be complete crap/break the game/ruin immersion/whatever before it's even gone into beta, necessitating rewrites and generally crapping things up.
What was in the last update for explorers?
This is promised content being delivered....now we can argue about the quality/lack of quality of said content but to be moaning that every update doesn't specifically cater to your gameplay style.....wozers!
And before you spout of about me being some pew-pew nutter I'm elite Trader in Explorer, and only Master in combat....And I have no issues with an update with HEADLINE features focused around combat
Sterling MH
Banned
Those're probably magnets, especially with the way the bars at the edge turn up, as if to set up a magnetic field change to force you down flat. After that, probably magnetic locks on the underneath of the undercarriage. Pressure activated, maybe.
At least it fits the evidence, all of it is conjecture.
I think they do, hence the financial incentives. They won't be enough, though, because cash is fairly easy to come by. And it just increases the sense of unfairness when extra money is magicked in. So I think they DO realise, hence the bribery over and above what makes it tactically sound to have another player virtually there. Just not that the bribes won't be enough except for the lulzbunnies, who don't care what happens in the turrets.
Some way to vote a prospective gunner up or down in reputation in-game might help. Not good for noobs or early in its introduction, since we'd have a catch-22 going on there.
If the pilot has the ability to retract weapons that the gunner cant override, griefing by the gunner isn't going to be all that successful, as long as there's a way to say "Sorry". If the AI have a three strikes policy if you holster your weapons with in 3 seconds of an infraction, and the bounty lifted, but the third time some AI sees an offence you're toast?
We don't know how the code is structured to know how to fix it, we just have to keep churning ideas. And avoid a repeat of old ones.
I was talking about this with someone else a week or so ago.
Had they got engineers right first time and not needed a redesign in the middle of summer would we have seen 2.2 earlier? I believe so
Had they not gone down the road of instatransport only to backtrack and rework would we have seen 2.2 earlier? I believe so
Had they had not pratted around with if gimbals should be nerfed and if shields should be nerfed for big ships etc do I believe we'd have 2.3 earlier? I believe so
I think that simply poor decision making has probably cost 3 months of dev time at a guess.
Sure we'd still be behind the original estimates for content delivery, but I believe some better decision making would have seen 2.3 released already and us arguing about 2.4 right now
- Status