News David Braben Guest Blog - on Xbox One and CQC

[coolruningc]

I was wounding wear they got chess with space ships from Power Play now it all makes sense it may work on the Xbox I have to say I am a little sad to see Microsoft take control of wear the game is going to be honest its nice if it was more than one version of the game but please could you let the Xbox and may be PS4 version elite v2? and left on there server?. Yes it is really annoying ED at the moment is rushing from job to job before the first job is not finished. A lot of us will be conserved about star citizen's coming out this year with landing on planets witch ED is still not said when that will happen?, or how that will improve the game play when it does. So once aging to the loyal ED team thanks for looking out for the fans as I have been reading this thread and David please look at what you promised your customers as you may end up with a lot of refunds if you counties this way.

 

[Wariamu]

Alrite just dropping in to say a few words.. even though my message will probably not end up being read by any important person unfortunately.

Thanks for the update! Looking forward to the release and trying out the new stuff and also can't wait for the next one!

Always nice that when we get to be able to fly a new ship even if it's the weakest ship in the galaxy =) I'm wondering if the empire is going to make a low cost fighter for its own fleet in reponse to the Condor? ...

I have doubts about whether or not CQC can get Elite Dangerous in the esport world but it's worth a try I guess and it's nice for people who just want a fight in a while..

I haven't read all the info about this but I read you can earn credits that way which I don't agree with and I hope you don't get combat ranking XP through it. If you mean to do something in an aside to the game it should stay an aside.

 

[KRONFROMGALVATRON]

Explain why. We got (and still have) what we were entitled to: Alpha and/or beta access to the PC version. At no point anyone mentioned that we will get every new feature on every platform before anyone else.

+1

Also, it might give the 14 year old griefers something to do besides ruin my good time.

 

[adoredtv]

Bit late to this thread but I guess I should throw in my tuppence-worth.

I'm really looking forward to this, simply because team vs team scenario is my kind of pvp. I understand that many people are a bit perturbed by how it's coming about and would rather the resources were spent on the main game - however it probably has to be done in order to get any kind of balanced, meaningful pvp in.

I'd assume that the servers will be hosted by Frontier instead of this p2p nonsense that lets hackers and combat loggers ruin it so that'll be a big help.

 

[CMDR MAIN SEQUENCE]

I'd assume that the servers will be hosted by Frontier instead of this p2p nonsense that lets hackers and combat loggers ruin it so that'll be a big help.

I'd imagine it will use Xbox Live servers.

I wonder what the PC/Mac versions will use for CQC though? The existing P2P architecture or will FD use the existing Amazon-hosted servers?

 

[pulo03]

wow.. what happen

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I think it's because they promised pvp (rare and meaningful) from the outset but have no idea or experience in how to balance it without ruining the game for other players. This is the main reason the combat mechanics went from being fun back in beta to pure shield meta as it is now along with missiles being useless and half the ship modules being useless and that's without even mentioning high wake jumps, interdiction cooldown and armor not protecting subsystems.

.

Whilst I do not agree with all your points, I certainly respect your view. The shield thing I do not understand. I must be missing something but to me it seems like such an easy fix.

keep the boosters as they are, but only allowed 1 per ship.
change the shield cells to only carry ONE charge and only 1 per ship, but have its capacitors recharge off our own engines after main shields are topped off. the quality and class of the cell would depend on the class of shield it can recharge as well as the amount of power it can take to recharge (so higher quality within a class can charge faster) but never enough to make it realistically usable more than once in any 1 scrap. (a class 4 cell should recharge a class 5 shield of course but only to the level of a class 4 shield)

at least imo this would be worth investigating.

as already said, modules need to be - and will be in 1.4 by the sounds of it - more protected by armour but damage here goes towards repair costs, so would encourage a fleeing player to drop some cargo if need be to keep repair costs down..... (cargo hatches do not need to be better protected, indeed possibly make the hatch breakers more effective than they are now)

as for PvP rare and meaningful this can be balanced by longer term legal ramifications and tougher police responses imo, not by making it possible to make a ship such an indestructible tank as to be able to always run away at any point. as well as different police responses depending on the reasons for having a bounty.

so even if the bounty is the same, the police response to a pirate for pirating 10 ships may NOT be the same as to a killer blowing up 1 clean vessel. The police should hit the killer far harder than the pirate imo.

oh and for gods sake increase the chances of NPCs dropping at least a few tons of good stuff in with their crud that way pirates may not feel the need to always cherry pick humans - tho some always will.

EDIT and just notices this is WAY OT for this thread - even if not to the post i quotes. sorry. too many tabs open

 

[Tyger]

Sorry Ian, not cool. The PC version is bug ridden and needs a pile of content added but Frontier are charging ahead with another new feature. Why can't they make the PC version work properly before charging off onto something new. Basically it looks like a real kick in the teeth for the people who funded the kickstarter. The PC is now playing second fiddle to the consoles.

Beginning slow and very deliberate clapping, accommodated with nodding of head.

Another moderator said that actually CQC is a good thing and that a player base of 600k means that complaints of it all, its concept, the way it has been implemented and the console porting are out of parity. Utter Rubbish!

CQC is not wanted. It was not in the Original Elite - its not wanted here. If FD wants an arena commander for the XBone - then release one, but in the appropriate order of priority to the roadmap - main game - stabilise - add features - stabilise - add depth - stabilise - yadda yadda yadda.

I'm sad to say, Elite D is not Elite in 2015, nor is it anything in anyway like it. David Braben is not the George lucas of the gaming industry - he is however, misguided if he genuinely thinks CQC was the right direction to go. Listen less to your advisers and more to the people who put money in your pocket. Supply and demand - simple rules. Don't forcefeed, but satisfy requirements and listen!

To finish off on a high, I'm holding on in there. I played the original and all the iterations and versions - I loved it. Sadley, ED is nothing more than ramped up in the graphic department but the depth is not there.

Lets be frank? What 'is' there:

1 - Great ships (great graphics, trype TrackIR useage by restricting movement, yet the occulus can move around - well listen in FD, my TrackIR IS my occulus.........oh...and very poor usage of that middle monitor used for what exactly?)
2 - Great planets and suns (this......................is done very well!!)
3 - Great combat AI (better than it was anyway)
4 - Great stations (but no where near the variety, object flow or dynamism needed and a complete of an announcer - as if you'd be able to hear that???? whats wrong with an auto port into the cockpit of annoucements? no one can hear what is being said its utter garbage)

That's it.

I'm, holding on in there FD, but your PP, CQC, Faction, Community Goals, BB is utter garbage. I've spent nearly £200 with you and I expect, as most do, at least recognition of your swayed path and assurances for the future. CCP done this once with EVE and the AUR system - guess what - it nearly busted them. They had to revert, issue apologies, make good, and it worked! Don't go down the same path......................listen now, before its too late and ED just becomes another unfounded list of promises............................a British SC.

 

[Firestarter]

The reason FD give CQC to XBox first is probably because it's aimed at that format and/or had only been tested on that format. I see Xbox users being mostly of the pew pew type of gamer and CQC will be right up their alley. I hope the normal rebuy rules don't apply to CQC because if it does they'll all quit the first time they see it.

 

[Cutter]

...greedy s! I only logged on to check the status on planetary landing(which is still non-existent), but still seeing greedy F.D at it again.

 

[CMDR Crustatious Cornelius Pig]

...greedy s! I only logged on to check the status on planetary landing(which is still non-existent), but still seeing greedy F.D at it again.

This is really simple, no conspiracy theories here, no plan to screw the backers. FD is doing what any business would do, see an opportunity to grow the customer base(XBOX and CQC). The income generated will fund development, allowing them to implement features in the DDA.

No magic here, no grand plan to screw the backers just business. FD needs the income stream to continue development which will help us get the features we want.

 

[Arindor]

As a PB'er I was up in arms about CQC being an XBOne exclusive. But, when you think about it, PC/Mac sales alone won't help ED in the long run. Unfortunately for FD, they had to renege on promises just to get more cash. Overall, not a bad thing, but CQC also shows how console gaming is perceived by the industry, whereas console gaming can be much more than that.

 

[CaptainSodom]

As a PB'er I was up in arms about CQC being an XBOne exclusive. But, when you think about it, PC/Mac sales alone won't help ED in the long run. Unfortunately for FD, they had to renege on promises just to get more cash. Overall, not a bad thing, but CQC also shows how console gaming is perceived by the industry, whereas console gaming can be much more than that.

Probably an accidental implication in your post, but requires repeating: CQC will be coming to PC within weeks of launch on Xbone, and is not an exclusive to any platform.

There are reasons to hate CQC (it will suck the little PVP which is in the game into instances forever), but exclusivity is not it.

Also, I don't see how CQC is reneging on any promise.

 

[STRONTIUM DOG]

no oflfine mode, we felt online was the way forward, that might have been true if amazon were not involved
now this new content revealed for x box first, it is pointless to complain just take what your given an shu................
from a ruthless business view point backers have served there purpose and only generate skins profit
wereas x box enticing adds will generate more income which may ensure more content for pc users anyway.....................
as watto would say "business is business!"
and as the dolphins would say" so long and thanks for all the fish!"
and instead of utilizing the talents of there book writers character building, we have fight for a greedy piraty type guy in power play, at alpha stage I rated this game as telegraph stuff now I rate as star soon to be sun unless FD really have something special up there sleeve for there pc user base some were down the line but i a am certainly not holding my breath
at least with no mans sky theres no delusions of grandure it is an x box game!
lets hope the space engine guy writes a game in his spare time........................
next time your at sol look at earth and reason theres more surface area down there than GTA5 and then think so the hell what its not as if you can interact with it like gta5's 60.4gb of data and really is a stupid suc statement