A message to Frontier From D2EA

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
yet he says in his video that the Titan is nice and all, but "imagine all the ships that could have been designed for the dev time that went into it" (I am paraphrasing). That is very... let's say not smart on a lot of levels.
Your interpretation of his words remind me of what you said about his interpretation of the poll results ;)

You're right, 17+20 is a bigger number than 9+19, but all depends on where the 45% neutral will lean.

It doesn't matter when in the past these assets were developed, they were developed instead of something else.
 
It doesn't matter when in the past these assets were developed, they were developed instead of something else.
you point being? This will always be the case. The developer has to make a choice where to put their time in. Do you really think another multipurpose ship or two (ironically, that was what D2EA was asking for instead) would have been a better dev time investment than the Maelstroms and the Titans? Seems apart from a few outliers like him and the Latvian, the Titans were received unanimously positive. But no, instead of the greatest experience we ever had in the game (maybe apart from first Thargoid contact, but I wasn't around at that time) let's instead do another boring and replaceable ship. Come on.
 
Last edited:
I get the overall frustration but there is a glimmer of hope for those not interested in Thargoid wars or even combat, the Thargoid War is currently taking up all of the new asset creation development, which lets face it, post-Codebase 4.0 games development is going to be tightly focussed because well.... it's free and the company has some other big budget titles to develop in 2023 (could also suggest that maneuvering around the marketing blackhole of Starfield also makes some sense in 2023).

This Thargoid War is a pretty big change to the game because it is an AI-driven dynamic campaign and is the fruit of the behind the scenes Codebase 4.0 work which was funded by the Odyssey DLC and yet free to all. The development build up to this Thargoid dynamic campaign must have been decided in the post Horizons pre Beyond years of 2017.

What I see is a long term vision and steady progression, Beyond Season, Odyssey DLC all had major stuff for other parts of the game so will the future.

The next freebie, the Core-gameplay refresh, now due for 2024 is intruiging, bets on for PowerPlay, to me this also makes an exciting natural partner for this new AI driven dynamic thing, maybe the other Super Powers and small independents can be unleased on the bubble like Thargoids are currently.

With regards to major new asset development like new gameplay loops, new ships, new hand weapons/tools, new missions, dare I say new worlds or at least habitats, we are surely looking at a new Paid DLC(s).

It is Frontiers trademark to maintain titles with free stuff and fund that with DLCs, I don't see future ED being treated any differently and just like all of their titles we can but speculate!

So back to the video, I don't see any room or reason for them to "react" (they aren't CIG with a $500 million slush fund), there is a stricter long term plan at play here, with things in maybe the 3-5 year distance being open to variation, I personaly feel that we are heavily in the original post-Horizon plan of 2017 that is ultimately aligned to the original kickstarter goal of 2012.
 
Last edited:
I get the overall frustration but there is a glimmer of hope for those not interested in Thargoid wars or even combat, the Thargoid War is currently taking up all of the new asset creation development, which lets face it, post-Codebase 4.0 games development is going to be tightly focussed because well.... it's free and the company has some other big budget titles to develop in 2023 (could also suggest that maneuvering around the marketing blackhole of Starfield also makes some sense in 2023).

This Thargoid War is a pretty big change to the game because it is an AI-driven dynamic campaign and is the fruit of the behind the scenes Codebase 4.0 work which was funded by the Odyssey DLC and yet free to all. The development build up to this Thargoid dynamic campaign must have been decided in the post Horizons pre Beyond years of 2017.

What I see is a long term vision and steady progression, Beyond Season, Odyssey DLC all had major stuff for other parts of the game so will the future.

The Core-gameplay refresh now due for 2024 is intruiging, bets on for PowerPlay, to me this also makes an exciting partner for this new AI driven dynamic thing, maybe the other Super Powers and small independents can be unleased like Thargoids are now.

With regards to major new asset development like new gameplay loops, new ships, new hand weapons/tools, new missions, dare I say new worlds or at least habitats, we are surely looking at a new Paid DLC(s).

It is Frontiers trademark to maintain titles with free stuff and fund that with DLCs, I don't see future ED being treated any differently and just like all of their titles we can but speculate!

So back to the video, I don't see any room or reason for them to "react" (they aren't CIG with a $500 million slush fund), there is a stricter long term plan at play here, with things in maybe the 3-5 year distance being open to variation, I personaly feel that we are heavily in the original post-Horizon plan of 2017 that is ultimately aligned to the original kickstarter goal of 2012.

waaay to much common sense in a single post.
 
Every proposed QoL change finds almost the same people against it. The current gameplay is not a gospel, or any other holy script. We have the right to question it and propose changes that - to our opinion - (I speak in plural not because I represent a community, but because we're at least two that support these changes) are or can be beneficial to the game.

I get it, we all support this game in our opposite ways. Those of you that don't see anything needs to change, and those of us that hope that changes like multiple FC jumps, better FC fueling will be a jumpstart for old and newer players alike.

But, as I've said in other threads, to make a change does not necessary break your gameplay. If we're given the option to plot multiple jumps, what's stopping you - or me - to use single ones? How does it affect you if I'm able to ask my lazy crew to slowly harvest tritium from gas giants? or to have better yields at asteroids?

There are other areas where gameplay could be improved. We have backpacks that can hold almost 100 items, but the sample canister can analyze a single specimen at a time? What's the logic in that?
I think we have a responsibility to question bad gameplay. Initially, FCs were designed as squadron assets. It would have been bad. Players complained and it was changed. Same for the FSS and the DSS, they were introduced after many complained about the exploration methods. The complex sampler mini-game was scrapped, and it was a wise decision.

This game is not expanding. Bugs are half fixed or not at all. The glaring one with the lateral thrusters was fixed only where FCs are concerned. My cutter still knocks itself around the station exit if it takes off from a first row pad. Why?

Why do I have to visit my FC market twice (or any market, even the destination one) for cargo I've purchased from my Secure Storage to register in my ship? It's been more than a year. Is that bug so well hidden as to leave it be? If it's trivial, why do they choose to ignore it instead of fixing it?
 
Last edited:
you point being? This will always be the case. The developer has to make a choice where to put their time in. Do you really think another multipurpose ship or two (ironically, that was what D2EA was asking for instead) would have been a better dev time investment than the Maelstroms and the Titans? Seems apart from a few outliers like him and the Latvian, the Titans were received unanimously positive. But no, instead of the greatest experience we ever had in the game (maybe apart from first Thargoid contact, but I wasn't around at that time) let's instead do another boring and replaceable ship. Come on.
Please, don't make the same mistake you're accusing D2EA of doing. The positive response can't be unanimous if at least one (or three, including me) find them negative.
And, we'll never know, because they chose to develop the titans instead of the boring and replaceable ship.
 
  1. Too much focus on the thargoid war right now
It's the old x vs y argument that flips accordingly for some. It's evident that the Thargoid war is/was a main component of the Odyssey expansion/season.

  1. New ships
I'll never say no to new ships but I'm not yearning for them like it's going to bring income into the game or anything.

  1. FC jumping should be 5 minute spooling and 15 minutes cooldown
I think it's fine and I am satisfied with the explanation in regards to technical limits.

  1. More ways to acquire tritium in the black instead of just mining
I do miss the overlapping hotspot feature tbh.

  1. FDev should lean on ED's strength as a space sim and focus more on exploration
(x vs y) vs dev resources, again.

  1. Odyssey has been released for 2 years but there's been nothing new since then (no new suits, guns, equipment)
I think that still remains to be seen. The Odyssey launch problems delayed the beginning of the Thargoid war by about 12-18 months so while not technically untrue, to be fair, I am pretty sure there is more to come in that regard as part of that narrative.

Overall, I get the feeling that maybe some feel that Star Citizen is getting too much flak so there's the need to divert to the "oh look at Elite and its problems" tack...
 
This Thargoid War is a pretty big change to the game because it is an AI-driven dynamic campaign
No offense, but as much as I appreciated the system in its early stages… it’s become pretty evident it’s not “AI-driven” or really even dynamic. It is a very predictable system with almost no, if any, capability for adapting to an opponent that can actually make, well, predictions and change in face of a developing situation.

This thing? Not so much. Didn’t help that Frontier repeatedly nerfed it and reduced its attack capability to 5 systems regardless of circumstances. And it can be manipulated to the point where it sometimes just doesn’t throw out any attacks at all and just sits there.
 
Please, don't make the same mistake you're accusing D2EA of doing. The positive response can't be unanimous if at least one (or three, including me) find them negative.
And, we'll never know, because they chose to develop the titans instead of the boring and replaceable ship.

fair enough. Would you agree though that the Maelstroms and Titans got posive reactions and praise across a wide range of "community bubbles"? You can hardly call that "nobody cares".
 
It's evident that the Thargoid war is/was a main component of the Odyssey expansion/season.
I'd probably put it as "had been the thing they intended to do after Odyssey for a while" - virtually nothing of the Thargoid war involves anything that was added in Odyssey itself, and what there is doesn't sit on either the main quantitative paths to progress or on the big "getting inside the maelstrom" reveals. There was quite a distinct switch between Updates 1-12 which focused pretty much entirely on fixing Odyssey bugs/performance issues and finishing off some on-foot features, and Updates 13-15 which have barely touched the on-foot side and are back to the more normal 3/year sort of pace.

No offense, but as much as I appreciated the system in its early stages… it’s become pretty evident it’s not “AI-driven” or really even dynamic. It is a very predictable system with almost no, if any, capability for adapting to an opponent that can actually make, well, predictions and change in face of a developing situation.

This thing? Not so much. Didn’t help that Frontier repeatedly nerfed it and reduced its attack capability to 5 systems regardless of circumstances. And it can be manipulated to the point where it sometimes just doesn’t throw out any attacks at all and just sits there.
Crude as its tactics are, they were pretty well optimised against the most common human response for months. Without some bits of luck - and noting that Aegis' strategy hints were only a marginal improvement on the initial human strategy, and essentially a dead end route - that might still be the common response and they might still be very gradually gaining ground.

The attack reduction is the biggest problem for it - if they hadn't done the reduction to 5 systems (or rather, the cost increase for attacking uninhabited), then the early attempts to confine it by cutting off its direct routes to inhabited systems would have led to it throwing out a whole bunch of extra uninhabited attacks, which would have been a response (even if a codified one) to let it try to break out of the enclosure in subsequent weeks by increasing its perimeter. Even with the current difficulty-per-system balance it'd have been tricky to get all eight to the contained stage under those rules, and it'd be much harder to keep most of them contained long-term either. It'd probably still have been doable, but it'd have required a lot more effort.

(At this stage, they're probably confined enough that reverting that wouldn't in itself fix the problem, though it does depend what they've got planned for U16/17)
 
The biggest problem is the same exact problem this game has had since the beginning; too many of the aspects of the game are completely disconnected from each other.

The Titan is extremely cool. I very much enjoyed poking around it and Mining it for the community goal. But absent the community goal there is very little reason to check it out.

Historically speaking, they have always obfuscated this behind the 'blaze your own trail' Credo. But I think this is finally catching up to them. This game is now composed of dozens of different micro communities, and any changes that help one of them are at best neutral and at worst actively harmful to multiple other communities.

The war narrative, for example, has been nice for the players interested in ax combat, but has rejected a significant number of bgs players. Why should they play, if months or years of work can be erased in just a few weeks by the expanding warfront?

Of course, the real issue here is that bgs was ever allowed to become a core aspect of gameplay in the first place. It was never intended to be something that players would become so invested in - that was the purpose of powerplay - but because powerplay was never fleshed out, players instead focused on bgs, since that's where their individual efforts seemed to make a difference.

Only now, we are in a situation where players can only succeed if they stand together, only we've spent the last five years establishing them as enemies. Why should historical enemies work together only to stay the same as they have always been? That's a no win scenario. Either you work together, and at best hold on to what you currently have, or you fight each other, and everyone loses.

I suggested thargoid attacks a few months back, but that was part of a much larger power play suggestion, and the primary goal of it was to allow weaker powers to Attack stronger powers; to prevent one power from becoming too rampantly powerful, and to create opportunities for smaller powers to advance.

Without that sense of progress, the war is always going to end up feeling somewhat frustrating. Hopeless battles are best in small doses. Drag them out, and it's no surprise when people lose hope.

But progress requires a larger context. Thus far, that context is largely been provided via community goals, and new modules. But the inherently stop and start nature of those things makes it a challenging way to inspire long-term player engagement.

The ideal approach would have been to set up strong and large player communities long before the thargoid war, and then use the war to shake up whatever the status quo has become and keep things interesting indefinitely. Unfortunately, given the current state of development in the game, I can't see that happening anytime soon.

I'm not normally much of a Doomer, but it seems to me the current path forward will likely consist of a few more updates for the war, some sort of climax, and then a slow winding down. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if they don't aim to have the climax come before Starfield comes out, because they doubtless can expect to lose a significant portion of their player base to that game, and given it's a Bethesda game, that loss could be permanent.

After that? Who knows. It might be time to start looking towards the next Elite game. This game has so much built up development debt, it is probably easier to start from scratch than to attempt to rework it into a game that can compete with modern releases. I think that's probably what they learned from the release of odyssey.
 
I cannot possibly know what D2EA or any other content creator believes or not. But the exact quote from his video is: "Two thirds of the player community doesn't really care much about that Thargoid content". Look it up, it is at 1:26 in the video.

That's a bold claim. If he had meant "two thirds of my community" or if he even had thought that his poll probably isn't representative, he should have said it. But he chose his words they way he did, and it was en edited video, not live content. So he had full control about what he put out there, and he chose to speak for the whole community. Which he doesn't. He speaks for his paper plane building explorer spreadsheat community at best.
You are talking about the remaining community. I guess more than two thirds of the whole community already left. With that in mind, it's not really a bold claim any more. :p
 
You are talking about the remaining community. I guess more than two thirds of the whole community already left. With that in mind, it's not really a bold claim any more. :p

two thirds?
nah

they've sold more than 4 million accounts (excluding EPIC giveaway) and the monthly player base seems to vary between 200k and 500k players.
So the retention rate is about 10% - which i think it's fine for the niche nerdy game ED is.
It's also the number FDev felt comfortably with to develop Odyssey for.
 
No offense, but as much as I appreciated the system in its early stages… it’s become pretty evident it’s not “AI-driven” or really even dynamic. It is a very predictable system with almost no, if any, capability for adapting to an opponent that can actually make, well, predictions and change in face of a developing situation.

This thing? Not so much. Didn’t help that Frontier repeatedly nerfed it and reduced its attack capability to 5 systems regardless of circumstances. And it can be manipulated to the point where it sometimes just doesn’t throw out any attacks at all and just sits there.

Yes I think pragmatisms can eventually change something or dull a potential, linking updates to a Narrative progression will have some constraints, but my highlight of a special function of Codebase 4.0 which was only revealed later once everyone was on Codebase 4.0 (ie it wasn't used exclusively in the Paid DLC) was more showing;

a) we are dedicated to a long term roadmap, ie Codebase 4.0 was set out in the post Horizons era onward, development production phase in 2018, had a grand Narrative introduced in October 2020 (Azimath Saga) and two years later (Nov 2022) we witness this deep-level functionality.

b) the continued policy of free content updates which is the wider company policy for long term support of their titles which goes hand-in-hand with Paid DLC

c) Speculation on how they could re-use this functionality to benefit and enhance other areas of the game e.g. Powerplay
 
Last edited:
two thirds?
nah

they've sold more than 4 million accounts (excluding EPIC giveaway) and the monthly player base seems to vary between 200k and 500k players.
So the retention rate is about 10% - which i think it's fine for the niche nerdy game ED is.
It's also the number FDev felt comfortably with to develop Odyssey for.
Soooo D2EA 17k Views nowhere near the majority of the community then, not even close.

O7
 
This Thargoid War is a pretty big change to the game because it is an AI-driven dynamic campaign and is the fruit of the behind the scenes Codebase 4.0 work which was funded by the Odyssey DLC and yet free to all.
I would disagree with this point , it's a numbers game with fdev fiddling the numbers to try and keep player participation. The cry was thargoids are too hard so they made them easier , with less participation and magically we started winning , participation went up. It's a balancing act but definitely not AI driven Fdev hold the cards and the totals . If it was AI driven we wouldn't need all hands on deck for the war with the major rework only being looked into at the end of the year . Looked at not worked on .
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom