Elite Dangerous Community Schedule W/C 28 June 2021

And if someone is blaming this on the people who are working their butts off in an extremely stressful situation that is most certainly not their fault they have a screw loose.
An enormous number of players neither know nor care about the important distinction you make here. I do wonder whether this is the reason why the dev stream is now a dev post. It's possible the CM leadership have dropped a clanger here and just assumed the devs would be fine with coming onstream in the current hostile climate (which is not of their making) and now realise making such an assumption without checking with them first was foolish*

*wild speculation and guesswork on my part.
 

Deleted member 192138

D
How utterly absurd! It's for this kind of asinine nonsense that I've stopped watching your videos.
If you think that assessment is off the mark, I invite you to look at the engagement figures indicated by Steam charts and Twitch tracker numbers. Your bubble may be fine, but Elite is haemorrhaging its community - just over a month since the big release Frontier have been working on for years, the release was meant to inject life into the game and prevent it from stagnating, but player/engagement numbers are worse than they were before Odyssey launched.

That's really concerning for the community and the game in general. So if you think viewing how Frontier engages the community around rescuing the state of their game as at a make or break point as "absurd" and "asinine nonsense" - rest assured that content creators and Frontier themselves are paying more attention to these indicators than you are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, it's important to note that the angry voices here should not be directed at the CM team or actual developers, the problem we have is in upper management. I think people easily confuse the terminology and if pressed would agree that it's not the developers we hold accountable (maybe the company name creates some confusion too). And if someone is blaming this on the people who are working their butts off in an extremely stressful situation that is most certainly not their fault they have a screw loose.

Exactly this. The problem does not lie with the CMs or the developers. They're doing everything they can with what they have to work with. It definitely seems to be a problem with upper management refusing to alter this antiquated practice of holding off on revealing any and all info on important things concerning the game until the last possible minute. This method worked (generally) in the past because Frontier as a company held many folks' trust. That is no longer the case. Now is not the time for silence in wait of a 'surprise birthday party' moment. Now is the time to throw your community a bone and give them something to be excited about -- it's time to stop the bleeding.

So many of us want to keep loving Elite, but this outdated method of communicating with the fanbase just isn't cutting it any more.
 
That was in David Braben's second progress post - 30 FPS on low spec, 60 FPS on higher spec (which matches the colours on the in-game FPS display). Now it just needs enough optimisation that it meets that...
Is that High spec as in recommended specs for Odyssey? Or High Spec as in current gen? (approx 8-10Gb VRAM GPU, 32-64Gb Ram, 5GHz CPU).

If it is the Prior, and their intention is to have Low being what High was in Horizons. Isn't this a conformation that Horizon's players will be spec'd out from playing Elite come Autumn? If that is so, then how are they going to Develop for the PS4 and XBOX ONE which has considerably lower specs than what is required for Odyssey (More closer to the low end of Horizons requirements isn't it?)
 
Thanks. It would, however, be a bonus if they could stream the game on that machine they tested the recommended specs on. Would love to see 60 fps.
Yes - I really don't get what the difference is. My PC is basically exactly the recommended specs (slightly more RAM, slightly slower CPU) and ... following patch 4, which did help in terms of at least consistently getting 30 ... I mostly get 30 inside or near bases, 40 on planet surfaces elsewhere, and 60 (as in Horizons) in space.

(As with a lot of other people, I can get 60 inside now so long as I find somewhere there's no glass or holograms in sight)

In addition to target framerates, target settings/resolution would be useful and I don't think have been released yet - I'm assuming "High" at 1920x1080 is reasonable for recommended spec, but it'd be nice to know if Frontier thought so too.
 
In addition to target framerates, target settings/resolution would be useful and I don't think have been released yet - I'm assuming "High" at 1920x1080 is reasonable for recommended spec, but it'd be nice to know if Frontier thought so too.
In 2021, at least in Denmark, not many are gaming on 1080p anymore. So yes, info about settings and res for target would be nice.

Personally I sport a 3440x1440p screen on a RTX 2070. If that means that 35 fps around settlements is "intended", then Im glad Im not used to run it at 4K.
Bonus info: I also have a Rift S - but I dare not start that up with Odyssey. Im already getting motionsick on the monitor.
 
Yes - I really don't get what the difference is. My PC is basically exactly the recommended specs (slightly more RAM, slightly slower CPU) and ... following patch 4, which did help in terms of at least consistently getting 30 ... I mostly get 30 inside or near bases, 40 on planet surfaces elsewhere, and 60 (as in Horizons) in space.

(As with a lot of other people, I can get 60 inside now so long as I find somewhere there's no glass or holograms in sight)

In addition to target framerates, target settings/resolution would be useful and I don't think have been released yet - I'm assuming "High" at 1920x1080 is reasonable for recommended spec, but it'd be nice to know if Frontier thought so too.
I wish my experience was the same. Had very little difference in performance and optimisation throughout the patches so far. GPU goes from 35degrees up to 80-90degrees within half an hour. (even did a full clean, replaced thermals etc and still the same outcome). Normally under sustained high load it never breaks 68degrees (now it normally doesn't even go past 60 after the clean) and Odyssey is the only game that I own that does this.

I'd be happy with 30fps, and I don't personally mind a bit of a downgrade with a new update. But I can't help thinking about the players who have a Horizons capable machines and console players.
 
I wish my experience was the same. Had very little difference in performance and optimisation throughout the patches so far. GPU goes from 35degrees up to 80-90degrees within half an hour. (even did a full clean, replaced thermals etc and still the same outcome). Normally under sustained high load it never breaks 68degrees (now it normally doesn't even go past 60 after the clean) and Odyssey is the only game that I own that does this.

I'd be happy with 30fps, and I don't personally mind a bit of a downgrade with a new update. But I can't help thinking about the players who have a Horizons capable machines and console players.
Temperature-wise mine runs around 80 degrees, which is hot but not massively worse than I get with other games (and it's probably overdue a clean, now you mention it... hmm)

I'm certainly hoping that the optimisations they're going to have to do to get this working on consoles do something useful on PC too!
 
Well, I look forward to hearing the news from the stream tonight on what to expect but I'm very disappointed that the promise of a more strategic view on game development isnt going to happen on Thursday.

Odyssey is working well for me now and I'm impressed with the way it has been fixed but the problems go much, much deeper and I'm losing faith in Frontier's will to fulfill the kickstarter or the game's potential. There is so much frustration about where the game is right now; no lore, minimal gameplay, little diversity across environments, persistent bugs, years of lack of development.

This game has always been great, since 1984, because of its grand vision but it seems that this has been lost; the heart and soul has gone from the game. I had hoped that Thursday's stream was going to be Mr.Braben talking animatedly about where we are going; about what the crazy distant ambitions are for Elite; about what's being planned and is achievable in the next couple of years, and about where game development is now and what's coming in the next few months. I wanted to hear about lore, about new procgen bases, about galactic phenomenon and I'd hoped that there would be some long overdue engagement with the community (it's crazy that there's no clocks to allow racing, that there's no climax to Turning the Wheel, there's no better bookmark system).

Tell me I'm wrong Frontier; tell me that this is a game which values engagement and commitment, tell me that this is a game with ambitions to match the Galaxy which it has created. @sallymorganmoore tell me that, even though there's a change to the expected Dev stream, there's still a plan to share the vision for Elite?
 
The Community has appeared to have split into three camps;-
  1. Those that are upset mostly because they're unhappy with the mechanics of Odyssey. That could be the planetary tech, the changes to the elite rankings, the way the suits work, the suit engineering, lack of feature X, etc.
  2. Those that are upset that the game was released in the state it was and angry at developers in general for shipping MVP.
  3. Those that have been lucky enough to get decent performance and are enjoying the content available.
Those that in camp 3 will get shouted at by camps 1 and 2 for being white knights but will carry on regardless.
Those in Camp 2 are the folks on the fence, the ones who will come back to it later when the performance issues are resolved but will require reassurance from Fdev that MVP releases won't happen in the future.
Those in Camp 1 are leaving/left because they feel the game is no longer for them.

I've seen this pattern with every big update that's come up for an MMO. The exception being Star Wars Galaxies NGE; 90% of the player went straight into Camp 1 and never came back. This isn't a "NGE" type update, as the base game is largely untouched (We'll have to see what they do with Horizons). However, Update 5 is where a lot of those in Camp 2 are going to make their mind up.
 
In the theme of transparancy between all of us, things like this are genuinely a bit hard to read - I won't lie.

A lot of us in Community Management come from development and dev team roles - several of us with over a decade worth of experience.
Despite your opinions here in this post, I'd like to reassure you that we do know and love the game (we dedicate our lives to it at this point), we do hear and understand what people believe is potentially needed for a greater experience, but that's not for us to then personally sign off as CMs. We can only take hold of it and relay back, keeping in line with how development works, stakeholder wishes, priorities for the wider players - many factors with how a game is developed and how a development team functions. This takes time and careful handling - we ALL want to get it right for you.

We aren't content creators, so wouldn't expect for our roles as CMs to be imagined in line with their awesome work, or us assumed to carry less clout than them if they were the "negotiating buffer". If they spent their time being that buffer (as we do, believe it or not), I can't imagine how they'd have a chance to then be the incredible content creators they are, in all fairness. That would make them CMs.
They're unique and a force in their own right and we cherish (and are hugely grateful for) any amount of time they choose to commit to Elite Dangerous.

We communicate daily with development teams and we read a vast array of comments, feedback, DMs on all platforms, tackle any immediate and nasty issues we see, whilst aligning that with our dev side work - we're not lying to anyone if their particular issue isn't fixed in the update they wish, it's not our decision to make, it's collective and aligned with all core functioning teams and the development cycle at that time.
Decisions on development are made out of our hands as CMs, but these decisions when based on gameplay changes, additions and suchlike, could be better communicated to you, we've spoken out about that fact, we do know it's a source of frustration for you all and we truly are aiming on working harder in this area as we move forward.
We understand why it's a huge deal for you, seriously. We want to do better at this. We're not going to hide that fact.

I hope this at least gives a bit of personal insight from my side of things really.
There's a lot of misconception about the team currently and if I can help settle anyone's frustrations right now, then I'll try and be as human as possible about it.
Thanks for your time, as always.

Hey Sally,

I'm very sorry about the position you and the community management team are in right now. Without digging into it, I'd imagine its an incredibly difficult place to be and I'd like to thank you and the team for fighting through it. After reading this post I have a better appreciation of the fact that the your work to improve communication is a work in process. In hindsight, of course it is. It was pretty dumb of me to think that changing the way an organization determines what to share and how to share it would be a flipped switch.

So far, I haven't commented on the "state of the game" the response from your team or Frontier in general but I'd like to now make a suggestion regarding the clarity of communication given what I've seen on here over the past month. I don't want to pile on to the pressure y'all are under right now and I don't claim to know all that the community managers to of that I could do it better. I am not, and will not, question your ability or your character and I hope that comes across here.

(Wow that was an obnoxious and unnecessary number of words)

I feel the comments in this tread went the direction they did because of the vague messaging in the original post. I understand that there are things that you can't say because they are in flux that is a separate issue, and I'm content with a "we can't give you that answer right now" type response. When an announcement is made, or the situation around something that was previously announced changes, the messaging needs to be as clear as possible. Especially if something changes.

Things change. Schedules get pushed, people are unavailable for streams... Stuff happens and most people will understand that. But the original post, not at all mentioning the developer stream, which was stated as definitely going to happen, leaves room for speculation and, to some, feels like Frontier is trying to be sneaky. Whether warranted or not there is a lack of faith among the community right now and this kind of "announcement through omittance", especially at the end of your work day when no one will be able to clarify for at least 12hrs, gives a lot of space for negative ideas to spread. Had it been specifically stated in the original post that a dev stream would not be happening this week, with a brief description of why (which hasn't been given yet), that would have prevented so much worry, stress and negative vibes, likely from both the community and the community managers. Also, important changes and announcements like this and the 1 week postponement of the 5th patch should ideally be announced on all platforms since no one person uses all of them.

Explaining why there is no dev stream on today's Supercruise News is definitely welcome. But if that is the only place it's explained, anyone who doesn't watch the stream will be getting that information second hand with whatever context the person broken-telephoning it choses to include. A stream being canceled/moved or an update being pushed back one week are not "Huge" deals. But when people don't know why, or if anything has actually changed as opposed to just being overlooked in the communication, can make them seem like much bigger issues through free speculation under the context of a lack of faith. Being upfront, putting as much reasoning as you can along with announcements, not at a later date, and widely sharing that information could save you all so much faith and stress.

Well, I feel like a jerkish, pretentious, know-it-all jack-something posting this but I hope it helps? Or something? 🤷‍♂️

I'm truly rooting for y'all.

Take care,

Mags
 
The exception being Star Wars Galaxies NGE; 90% of the player went straight into Camp 1 and never came back.

I recall those dark times too however, like with ED:O, I stuck with SWG and once I got used to the NGE, enjoyed it.

For me, making the decision to leave a game is like throwing away all the effort I put in the game, that, essentially, I still enjoy. SWG was a travesty and still one of the best game experiences I've ever had.

I hope the devs turn this around however for me ED:O works just fine, its the silly things like GUI and planetary tech that I would like to see improved.
 

sallymorganmoore

Senior Community Manager : Elite Dangerous
Well, I look forward to hearing the news from the stream tonight on what to expect but I'm very disappointed that the promise of a more strategic view on game development isnt going to happen on Thursday.

Odyssey is working well for me now and I'm impressed with the way it has been fixed but the problems go much, much deeper and I'm losing faith in Frontier's will to fulfill the kickstarter or the game's potential. There is so much frustration about where the game is right now; no lore, minimal gameplay, little diversity across environments, persistent bugs, years of lack of development.

This game has always been great, since 1984, because of its grand vision but it seems that this has been lost; the heart and soul has gone from the game. I had hoped that Thursday's stream was going to be Mr.Braben talking animatedly about where we are going; about what the crazy distant ambitions are for Elite; about what's being planned and is achievable in the next couple of years, and about where game development is now and what's coming in the next few months. I wanted to hear about lore, about new procgen bases, about galactic phenomenon and I'd hoped that there would be some long overdue engagement with the community (it's crazy that there's no clocks to allow racing, that there's no climax to Turning the Wheel, there's no better bookmark system).

Tell me I'm wrong Frontier; tell me that this is a game which values engagement and commitment, tell me that this is a game with ambitions to match the Galaxy which it has created. @sallymorganmoore tell me that, even though there's a change to the expected Dev stream, there's still a plan to share the vision for Elite?

I've said how passionate we all are about the future of Elite for everyone involved so very, very many times (probably in every response I give in the forums - it's a wonder you're not sick of me saying it by now). I'll keep on saying it, to be fair.
We're working really hard on all corners to get the right information, expectations and accuracy you all deserve for the next comms in regards to Elite moving forward. Changes happen at the frustration of many, I sympathise , I do. We'll just do our best to make sure we get trasparancy with best reasoning for them communicated when we're able.
 
Its True that I have never even heard you swear in your streams, let alone be toxic.
Thanks bookmite. Erm... yeah I try not to swear :) But I have done so a couple of times in Odyssey streams :) I think the thing that frustrates me more is missions failing when you are made 'unconscious' :) As long as you don't break the mission parameters (i.e. don't set off the alarms, don't use lethal force etc.) then you should be allowed to have another crack at the mission - just like it has been all along in Horizons.
When a mission fails due to some silly reason, the only thing that interests me is having another go. But Odyssey will not give you that option. I don't agree with that and I know I'm not alone there. In some scenarios it makes sense for the mission to fail but not in others. It's not consistent with Horizons. So one needs to be brought in line with the other and I'd prefer Odyssey brought into line with Horizons where the mission stays active unless you break it's rules or you abandon it.
The game flow on a mission fail in Odyssey is annoying as hell. :D
 
Top Bottom