Cobra Mk V in-game availability?

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
Knuttin Atoll said:
but the way a number of posters act like SC is the one and only other spacegame out there is grinding my gears.
Click to expand...
Maybe just because it is the only other game that offers much of what ED does, particularly PvP ship & on-foot combat (there is only a PvP mode), along with trade & missions (I don't think exploration can count with its very limited arena)

It is also the game (I'll use that term very loosely) that gets compared to ED most often, and its players insist it excels in every possible way.

I'm ok, I gave Chris Roberts money years ago, so have it in my library, along with NMS, X3 / 4, Space Engineers, Starcraft and the Homeworld series...
 
Last edited:

Stealthie

Stealthie
Knuttin Atoll said:
Full disclosure, I never tried SC even though I'm well aware of it. I do scratch my head over the (imo) over-obsession of it on these forums...
Click to expand...

It shouldn't really be a surprise to find ED players taking an interest in, and drawing comparisons with SC.

IIRC, they both launched their kickstarters within weeks/months of each other, they were both the next chapter of iconic franchises and they both had "rock star" creators promising great things.
After that, of course, they took very different development journeys.

A random thought; I wonder how much revenue SC has generated, compared to ED?

Maybe I'm overthinking it but ED seems very "British", whereas SC is very "American".
ED was/is a modest game with modest ambitions whereas SC was very "Hollywood" - glamorous panels at con's with adoring audiences, famous actors getting hired for roles, dev's driving around in Lamborghinis and huge wads of money changing hands solely on the basis of a promise.

I guess it's not surprising that some people are feeling a bit smug about how things turned out.
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Stealthie said:
I guess it's not surprising that some people are feeling a bit smug about how things turned out.
Click to expand...
i like elite dangerous. its a good game... but assuming you are meaning smug from an elite players point of view.... i am not sure anyone is in a position to feel "smug".

yes SC has been badly organised and its bordering on criminal how much money has been wasted. but S42 is finally seeming to come together and i genuinely think we may see a 2026 release, and i do believe SC will go gold eventually.

elite, yes its released, yes its had some nice content (the thargoid war was superb imo) but i dont think anyone should be smug about anything given the large number of features which have been cut from the game to actually get it released, along with the only 2 paid expansions we have had over getting on for 10.5 years

frankly my experiences from BOTH games have reduced the chances of me ever kickstarting a project again to almost zero and now i ignore anything the devs ever say until its in game.... Peter moleneux is similar. . perhaps not deliberately dishonest but you cant trust what they are pitching.

And lest we not forget FD have categorically done stuff in elite they told us would never happen.

initially EVERYTHING would be purchasble in game, cosmetics the lot.

this then got changed to ok we sell mtx but only on cosmetics..... we wont sell in game stuff for money.
Now i know some have tried to frame ARX as not real currency and have cited the 400 ARX a week as proof everything is earnable in game.

but that is a dishonest take imo. yes the 400 arx is nice but its a splash in the bucket in terms of buying a lot of stuff from the store if you want to actually buy stellar ships..
 
Last edited:

Knuttin Atoll

K
Stealthie said:
It shouldn't really be a surprise to find ED players taking an interest in, and drawing comparisons with SC.

IIRC, they both launched their kickstarters within weeks/months of each other, they were both the next chapter of iconic franchises and they both had "rock star" creators promising great things.
After that, of course, they took very different development journeys.
Click to expand...
That's a fair point - I forgot they 'launched' around the same time, in the same fashion (kickstarter). I can barely remember how I came across Elite, but I knew about it before SC. Maybe an article in the press, because I do remember back then being surprised about its mere existence and that it would launch imminently. Insta-purchased it even without any reviews being a fan of the original on the C64.
Stealthie said:
A random thought; I wonder how much revenue SC has generated, compared to ED?

Maybe I'm overthinking it but ED seems very "British", whereas SC is very "American".

ED was/is a modest game with modest ambitions whereas SC was very "Hollywood" - glamorous panels at con's with adoring audiences, famous actors getting hired for roles, dev's driving around in Lamborghinis and huge wads of money changing hands solely on the basis of a promise.
Click to expand...
I see where you're coming from and largely agree.

I do think though that Elite could've been a lot more than what it is today, and the way Frontier has treated it for a good few years feels more like the stepchild in their IP family their devs and managers were trying to avoid.

The more recent push for content is the realisation that it can still be milked for a little while longer as it has a loyal fanbase with a high pain threshold. Frontier is incredibly lucky to have us, but much of that is also due to there being no real direct competitor if you truly compare apples with apples.
Stealthie said:
I guess it's not surprising that some people are feeling a bit smug about how things turned out.
Click to expand...
Perhaps - on the other hand, a lot of the heavy lifting the game does comes from the early core concept and design decisions, as opposed to the stuff they bolted on over the years. A game that's resting on its early achievements, and hampered by subsequent design missteps and neglected spaghetti code.

PS - I realise the above is a horribly cynical take, but if the shoe fits...
 

Dillon Fallon

Dillon Fallon
Knuttin Atoll said:
Yeah I'm not trying to convince anyone to pick up those games, but the way a number of posters act like SC is the one and only other spacegame out there is grinding my gears.

Agree - I find it interesting (and perhaps a little depressing) how quickly these prices have apparently been normalised by the players. I see the new ships with all sorts of skins and kits flying around a lot from the beginning of the P2 release, so it seems they're selling well enough. But I'm not pointing fingers, just making observations. I've been part of the problem in the past to be fair.

And if people really think that 5k to name a single station is good value... well what can I say, maybe I'm out of touch. It also means we see more (and bolder) derivations along those lines in the future. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
Well given that when I worked in product development for a company I had evidence backed facts ignored because shareholder expectations/product launch coming up/sales, I know exactly what FDev, who I don't work for, would take any feedback I have. This is why I do understand the "don't buy it then" attitude. If putting out poor and rushed games and overtly scalping their playerbase was actually punished by players not buying games, EA would have been out of business years ago.

People will do their own thing and to be honest, it would stop as soon as we stopped buying the horse armour. It won't happen though.

The thing I'll remember is that we're not here because ED is a bad game. We're here because FDev took on too much and overstretched themselves and have realised they have to focus on the successful games they're making. If that means they want to push cosmetics and have fancy early access ships, that's fine, so long as the new features keep coming and those new features get fixed (ideally in that nice space in their roadmap after Vanguards). We've been in worse places. At least we're not back to Galnet not being updated for months.
 

WR3ND

WR3ND
Personally, I'm not at all interested in exclusive or P2W type content unless it's cosmetic. That's no longer a game to me, at least not one I'm wanting to play.

It can be avoided at least somewhat here still though, so I find my corners of the galaxy and have fun putting around in spaceships. Well, that's the plan at any rate.
 
Last edited:

Nowski

Nowski
forbiddenlake said:
What they actually said was that the Python Mk 2 would be 3 months, and it was. They never said other ships would be 3 months.
Type-8 was announced on stream a few days in advance.
Click to expand...

Elpapo said:
Fdevs quickly abadon idea of 3 months only early acess.

Thats why they never, ever mentioned it again.
Click to expand...

FDev livestream, Jul 31 2024, while announcing the Type-8:

'It'll be in early access and then I think it's early access for three months - like the Python'
Click to expand...

It went into early access 7th Aug and on general release 28 Nov, so 3 months and 3 weeks as it turned out.

It seems likely to me their schedule slippage on this is the reason they stopped announcing dates.

For reference, Mandalay was EA on 31 Oct 2024 and out for credits on 26 Feb 2025 - just shy of 4 months, and with the Cobra V featuring in the current gamestore sale, ending May 1st, it looks set to pass 4 and a half months from its EA date of 12 Dec 2024.

Is this clear evidence of evil Machiavellian marketing from FDev? I think I'd rather go with a modified Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice what can be explained by Hofstadter's Law.
 

amigacooke

amigacooke
Nowski said:
FDev livestream, Jul 31 2024, while announcing the Type-8:



It went into early access 7th Aug and on general release 28 Nov, so 3 months and 3 weeks as it turned out.

It seems likely to me their schedule slippage on this is the reason they stopped announcing dates.

For reference, Mandalay was EA on 31 Oct 2024 and out for credits on 26 Feb 2025 - just shy of 4 months, and with the Cobra V featuring in the current gamestore sale, ending May 1st, it looks set to pass 4 and a half months from its EA date of 12 Dec 2024.

Is this clear evidence of evil Machiavellian marketing from FDev? I think I'd rather go with a modified Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice what can be explained by Hofstadter's Law.
Click to expand...
You think Frontier are ‘accidentally’ lengthening the time in late access?
 

Elpapo

Elpapo
Nowski said:
Is this clear evidence of evil Machiavellian marketing from FDev? I think I'd rather go with a modified Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice what can be explained by Hofstadter's Law.
Click to expand...
For me its very clear evidence what you meant.

Longer the ship is behind ARX wall, more money it brings. Simple as that.



The current gen of Fdevs and biggest issue with them on such matters like this one - is lack of proper communication.

Its very clear that for each new ship, the timeline for "credit debut" is simply very next patch update, and Frontier clearly cant dish out those, every 3 months, as given amount of few last updates, there is one meaningfull update every 4 months or so, if not longer.

But somewhat, every time it takes longer than previosly to relase a ship. I suspect Corsair gonna be arx locked for atleast 6 months.


But funny part, I noticed all of that already about 7 years ago, about 1 year after horizons, as amount and quality of patches went down cosiderably - as every single update since that - breaks something, sometimes more than once, and there are numberous cases of bugs supposedly being fixed, only to return later.

I dont know if its because "spagettification" of the game code, or fact that any of the talented ones, seems indeed not sit too long there at Frontier, I mean the progammers who knows thier thing and understood the code and game they work at it - as they simply move on. But its clear - given poor quality of patches since YEARS, likely its mix of both of such.


amigacooke said:
You think Frontier are ‘accidentally’ lengthening the time in late access?
Click to expand...
As if isnt obvious, but yes.
 

Nowski

Nowski

Elpapo

Elpapo
Nowski said:
FDev livestream, Jul 31 2024, while announcing the Type-8:
Click to expand...
Must have been missed that. Oh well. But it does not change the fact, they cannot keep thier words.

Now then, it can be argued if that very comment about T8, should be viewed as "promise" or not...
I found it funny, and very Frontier like, for them say "I think"... yet they where 3 weeks late in case of T8, thus the word was not kept. Later it got worse, and trend is that every ship is being relased much later than previous one.

Nowski said:
With respect, Your Holiness, You need further work on Your Infallibility ;-)
Click to expand...
I try my best :cool:
 

zimms

zimms
Nowski said:
FDev livestream, Jul 31 2024, while announcing the Type-8:



It went into early access 7th Aug and on general release 28 Nov, so 3 months and 3 weeks as it turned out.

It seems likely to me their schedule slippage on this is the reason they stopped announcing dates.

For reference, Mandalay was EA on 31 Oct 2024 and out for credits on 26 Feb 2025 - just shy of 4 months, and with the Cobra V featuring in the current gamestore sale, ending May 1st, it looks set to pass 4 and a half months from its EA date of 12 Dec 2024.

Is this clear evidence of evil Machiavellian marketing from FDev? I think I'd rather go with a modified Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice what can be explained by Hofstadter's Law.
Click to expand...
But what do you mean takes longer? Development is already finished, the ship is in the game. There are no unforeseen delays. It's simply Frontier's decision when to make it available for credits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom