Nah. Cheer up Cmdr. There's nothing about 2.4 having been cancelled.
2.3 dev update feedback mega thread
- Thread starter Jenner
- Start date
- Status
Nah. Cheer up Cmdr. There's nothing about 2.4 having been cancelled.
Lol. The Multi-crew concept is crap. I can see that. It' allows for a crew of 2, one of which is flying the SLF. Flying the SLF isn't crewing the same ship, it's flying a totally separate, slightly crappier one.
So the only actual multi-crew addition is turret control, which is just about as basic and shallow as multi-crew gets. I don't need to play this turret mode to know that it's far removed from the 4-man-crew-what-actually-crew-the-same-ship concepts spoken about at the season 2 reveal.
The argument "you have not tried it, you can not know how well it works in practice" is perfectly valid for more subtle changes (such as the gimbal changes FD beta tested recently).
But I don't think this argument is applicable in the current context. From FD's description it is pretty clear what multicrew will and will not be. Thus in this case the argument sounds a bit like "but you have only ever read about the _concept_ of watching paint dry for 2 hours. Its impossible to know if you will like it until you get some first hand experience"
Last edited:
That is reasonable and can be fixed in 15mins by one of the writers. Its the other people that are unable to play the game when things are not to their liking.
If you look for holes in the lore, you will find them because it not real.
The argument "you have not tried it, you can not know how well it works in practice" is perfectly valid for more subtle changes (such as the gimbal changes FD beta tested recently).
But I don't think this argument is applicable in the current context. From FD's description it is pretty clear what multicrew will and will not be. Thus in this case the argument sounds a bit like "but you have only ever read about the _concept_ of watching paint dry for 2 hours. Its impossible to know if you will like it until you get some first hand experience"
I is worth to mention that we dislike concept of multicrew not whole 2.3 patch. Some features like Commander Creator or other QoL upgrades may be really god. Only this major feature sound like underdeveloped, but is it nothing new for Frontier...
Right after dev notes for 2.3 most of the peoples was unsatisfied because lore breaking telepresence - yeah it is stupid. However after some teams that clear vision occur that whole multicrew is barren and shallow addition to the game and currently most of complains right now is because of that.
At the beginning I really disliked telepresence but now I don't care, however I would prefer full physical transportation in beaming in Star Trek. The main problem for me is shallowness of this... I hoped for boarding my friend's ship permanently until I leave. Thanks to that we will participate in our adventures together all the time. Even if I logoff I still traveling with him, also when he logoff I can take helm and he traveling with me. It will make journeys to Sag A* much more comfortable to have copilot! Sadly it was only my dreams and I think many of players. We will receive another half backed mini-game. However I hope we will pour over enough sadness and Frontier will improve multicrew in near future.
Last edited:
Thus in this case the argument sounds a bit like "but you have only ever read about the _concept_ of watching paint dry for 2 hours. Its impossible to know if you will like it until you get some first hand experience"
As a world expert on watching paint dry - I can emphatically say that it's a lot of fun
Joking aside, I was originally interested in support for comments that FD were reappraising the release in the light of the overwhelming negative feedback - only to find that FD have not said any such thing and the basis for those commenst is a poll showing 163 don't like the idea.
Last edited:
As a world expert on watching paint dry - I can emphatically say that it's a lot of fun
The funniest thing on this forum is watching Frontier worshipers defending bad design decision all the time
I agree. Don't make it unlimited range telepresence so it doesn't make a mockery of the ingame lore and I will be happy. There are already holes in the in-game lore, such as engineered modules replaced after ship death, I think a better solution to that would be you get the same rated module and the components to create a new engineered module. Would make far more sense, but hey, I don't design the game and I know a lot of others wouldn't be happy due to the randomness of it.
Consistency is the key for me. Infact I would prefer if they didn't give a reason at all, and just say its for convience sake until we get other mechanics in to supplement it.
Last edited:
Who's defending?
I'm asking for some evidence that FD are reassessing - as stated by someone earlier in the thread.
There is no evidence it appears. At least no-one has provided any.
EDit:
You tell me 163 people don't like the concept of the release. I point out that that is a pretty small number compared to 1.5 million. Someone else is claiming the FD are re-thinking things becasue of the forum posts.
Where was the confirming link was all I asked.
I'm asking for some evidence that FD are reassessing - as stated by someone earlier in the thread.
There is no evidence it appears. At least no-one has provided any.
EDit:
You tell me 163 people don't like the concept of the release. I point out that that is a pretty small number compared to 1.5 million. Someone else is claiming the FD are re-thinking things becasue of the forum posts.
Where was the confirming link was all I asked.
Last edited:
Well, FD promised (or advertised) the multi crew feature in one way, and is now delivering not even a barebones version of that. It has already been confirmed that there are no additional role planned, i.e. gunner and fighter (the later isn't even crew on the same ship) are the only roles we will get.
Or maybe i misunderstood what you wanted to say?
Edit:
Just to make the point more clear, missions for PP and Engineers were also implied as being in development and now look where we are today. PP is essentially the same dull grind with the cheapest time mechanic from F2P/mobile games that it was at release almost two years ago. Gaining rep with engineers is still the dull craft&trash system that makes no sense at all.
You see, i really lost hope that FD will add anything substantial post release of an update. The best one can hope for is balancing numbers, i.e. hitting stuff with the nerf bat. So where does this leave us regarding 2.3 features?
Last edited:
The problem is related is that the quality of major updates developed by Frontier degrades over time. Planetary Landings was huge, then engineers which offers quite many options, then SLFs, and now multi pew pew. Then they will release season 3 which first really big and nice major update and they will start to fulfil season bullet points at lowest possible costs as we see now.
That depends on how you want to decode that "?" that's been beside the update in the lists for almost a year now.
"?"
"Ehh, we'll figure out what 2.4 is going to be depending on what the budget looks like. IF there is a budget."
They never actually said that. All they have said is that 2.4 is a surprise. I don't remember seeing anything about it being more exciting then Planetary landings.
Last edited:
Yeah, I remember that too. 2.4 was a "surprise", hence the "?".
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
As am I (and I remain an advocate of delayed ship / module transfers).
It's still around - much, much more recently than that - usually when complaining about the lack of multi-player features / content in the game.
My guess is that the other complaint (that engaging in / being engaged in PvP costs too much due to rebuys) is being addressed here - with the reduced rebuy for multi-crewed ships possibly being a deliberate attempt by Frontier to encourage players to play in Open (although the proposal is silent on whether Multi-Crew is available in both multi-player modes, so I would assume that, like all permanent content, it will be implemented in all modes to which it is relevant).
The funniest thing on this forum is watching Frontier worshipers defending bad design decision all the time
The real funniest thing ist that nearly 300 People, that take a part in this thread, think that they speak for the 1.4 Million People that bought the game [wacky]
Lol. That's a possibility few would have considered 18 months ago.
- - - Updated - - -
Given how the active forum members have been pretty indicative of official feedback requests, I think you can take the opinions expressed to be fairly representative.
I'd like to remind some of the people who are upset about telepresence about some other things :
Tanking a plasma slug to the face after the canopy is broken (OP flight suit)
Escaping said battle through deep space at speeds faster than light, Jumping tens of lightyears away in an instant (OP seat buckles i guess)
Blowing up anywhere in the galaxy, will instantly jettison you out in an escape pod and return you to your last docked station in an instant (Teleporting, OP escape pods that will surprisingly survive ramming a Anaconda at lightning speed into a 5G planet)
And you're upset about something less ludicrous, as telepresence, wich is already used in SRV's and fighters?
Tanking a plasma slug to the face after the canopy is broken (OP flight suit)
Escaping said battle through deep space at speeds faster than light, Jumping tens of lightyears away in an instant (OP seat buckles i guess)
Blowing up anywhere in the galaxy, will instantly jettison you out in an escape pod and return you to your last docked station in an instant (Teleporting, OP escape pods that will surprisingly survive ramming a Anaconda at lightning speed into a 5G planet)
And you're upset about something less ludicrous, as telepresence, wich is already used in SRV's and fighters?
- Status