Elite Dangerous is the Largest Empty Sandbox Ever Made

[Old Duck]

This thread is turning into the largest sandbox ever... Whether it's a mile wide and an inch deep or not, I'll leave that to the historians to decide.

 

[FrodoHobbits]

Agreed.

But Squadrons, multipew must come first. It's what everyone wants!
How dead will it be after a week or two of going live?

 

[Robert Maynard]

But Squadrons, multipew must come first. It's what everyone wants!
How dead will it be after a week or two of going live?

I expect that Squadrons will prove to be significantly more popular than Multi-Crew - if only for the possibility to gain control of a Carrier to store one's ships in and move them around the galaxy. Add to that the ability to control membership (that has been requested for a long time by player groups) and group communications and I expect it to be rather popular.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

This thread is turning into the largest sandbox ever... Whether it's a mile wide and an inch deep or not, I'll leave that to the historians to decide.

But we're having fun aren't we?

Wheeeeeeee!

 

[IamMe]

A lot of valid points and things that have been brought up in the past before, but that doesn't make it any less relevant or valid as feedback goes.

These comments were limited but let's not go down the route of "another of these threads," "oh, another white knight defending FD," or "it's just a bunch of whinging" folks. It's not especially constructive and just derails things unnecessarily.

The volume of sand, or lack thereof as far as the feedback on this and the reddit thread goes, is something I see comments about a lot. There's not much I can comment on it just yet but I thought it prudent to drop in and at least acknowledge it. We see it a bunch, and while I'm not always in agreement, it's hard to really deny people's perceptions of it... both sides of the argument make a good case for their side. I can't say that this will be resolved completely because that's a bit of a stretch when a lot of it is also down to what people want at the individual level. That said I am hopeful that future updates in the Beyond updates and (for lack of a better word) beyond will go a long way to address many people's umbrage with ED.

I appreciate that 2.4 wasn't well received (which the reddit thread was talking about.) We said from the very beginning that it was a different way of doing things. Criticism is an opportunity to learn, so this is what we will continue to do. Feedback is gathered regularly so as we move forward we will keep a note of what aspects worked and which parts received the harshest reception to help inform future content releases. We're immensely proud of what we've done but humble enough to learn and do better every time.

2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 weren't well recived! That is called slow learning!
I still hope to install ED again next year or in 2019 when surface overhaul is done and game mehanics revized.
Also it is not to a personal/invidual taste, majority of ED owners think that way and they all point to same problems, you know how many players still play ED.

OP i understand you, ED has unique potential but bad design decisions.
Adding atmo planets, and things player can build would solve exploration problem beside other occupations and fill the galaxy. Instead we have BGS of economy which no one is interested in, multicrew and other complete failures.
It's never too late for fixing things, we'll se next and following years even i don't expect much given the slow development and bad design choices.
Just give up and save yourself being miserable about it, move to other games and if worth get back to check new updates.

 

[NeilF]

Gads not another of these threads!

WWhhhhhhhhhhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy????

Desperation...? Hope...? Something...? Anything...?

I've been in this mindset for nearly two years now, wondering when significant game depth will arrive, as per what I came to expect from the kickstarter days.

My confusion on why we weren't seeing such gameplay added, and what we were instead getting (Powerplay? CQC? Half baked Engineers? Multicrew? Point and click Generation Ships? Pointless Asteroid stations? etc...), slowly turned into concern. And TBH now I've all but accepted FD might have a different idea for the game than I'd hoped for, and it's one with lots of bolt on mini-game elements. Next year I suspect will tell me/show me if this is the case, or if my last glimmer of hope is justified.

The design choices made to go ahead with some of the things we've had significant development time spent on over the past two years just confused me no end Anyhoo... Next year will be make or break for me I suspect... They've got a clean slate and supposedly learned a lesson from season 2. So let's see...

 

[IamMe]

I expect that Squadrons will prove to be significantly more popular than Multi-Crew - if only for the possibility to gain control of a Carrier to store one's ships in and move them around the galaxy. Add to that the ability to control membership (that has been requested for a long time by player groups) and group communications and I expect it to be rather popular.

Yeah, first few days like multicrew!
After that everyone will want to go separate way, another failure i can bet.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yeah, first few days like multicrew!
After that everyone will want to go separate way, another failure i can bet.

A Carrier should give a player group a mobile base - presumably able to travel wherever they wish it to go (jump range, fuel, time permitting). It should also, again presumably, take players with it as it travels - so a group of players can stick together even when some are logged off (by docking in the carrier prior to exiting the game). This is supposition on my part, however I'd be surprised if it was not going to be the case.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 weren't well recived! That is called slow learning!

From whom. There where plenty that liked all or some of the updates. I liked most of 2.1 and 2.2 and aspects of 2.3 and 2.4.

 

[verminstar]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

Oh I dont doubt it fer one second...not after 85% on a poll last year voted against a proposed change...and frontier ignored the feedback and did as they pleased anyway. Meanwhile, a year on we have threads complaining about the disaster that turned out to be.

So much fer the feedback ye got...in one ear and straight out the other and it didnt all work out in the end like frontier obviously thought it would. Not to mention some the arguments when theres a beta and large numbers are giving feedback on bugs...only to see the bugs in the live version.

Sorta makes one wonder if theres any point in giving feedback at all when there are so many examples of it being ignored out of hand. But obviously you guys have a plan so time will tell the tale ^

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

From whom. There where plenty that liked all or some of the updates. I liked most of 2.1 and 2.2 and aspects of 2.3 and 2.4.

Plus, it's not easy changing directions mid season when a lot of work already has gone into it.

 

[NeilF]

From whom. There where plenty that liked all or some of the updates. I liked most of 2.1 and 2.2 and aspects of 2.3 and 2.4.

I liked all the update 2.0 -> 2.4. There was something in all of them to like. It's just that I just found too many of the headline features ill-conceived, or misguided. ie: Bucket loads of development time in very question goals.

 

[Robert Maynard]

...not after 85% on a poll last year voted against a proposed change

Which poll was that, please?

 

[VR jefranklin18]

Which poll was that, please?

I'm guessing ship transfers. It's the only poll that I can recall Frontier recently running and some people just can't let it go that their vote lost.

 

[verminstar]

Which poll was that, please?

The one on whether or not to introduce the bgs to jacques ^

 

[NeilF]

A Carrier should give a player group a mobile base - presumably able to travel wherever they wish it to go (jump range, fuel, time permitting). It should also, again presumably, take players with it as it travels - so a group of players can stick together even when some are logged off (by docking in the carrier prior to exiting the game). This is supposition on my part, however I'd be surprised if it was not going to be the case.

Indeed, but surely it needs to do more than that? It need to be a way of improving and leveraging more interesting gameplay? eg - As per my suggestions for mining - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ly-with-stateful-resource-hot-spots?p=6054187

If all it is is just a means of allowing CMDRs to travel/refuel/reammo more easily... Sigh...

 

[verminstar]

I'm guessing ship transfers. It's the only poll that I can recall Frontier recently running and some people just can't let it go that their vote lost.

Ooh forgot bout that one thx ^

 

[Robert Maynard]

The one on whether or not to introduce the bgs to jacques ^

Do you have a link to the thread handy?

 

[babelfisch]

I'm guessing ship transfers. It's the only poll that I can recall Frontier recently running and some people just can't let it go that their vote lost.

Ship transfers was 70/30 and not 85/15. The majority was also for delayed transfers, which is what FDEV implemented.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Indeed, but surely it needs to do more than that? It need to be a way of improving and leveraging more interesting gameplay? eg - As per my suggestions for mining - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ly-with-stateful-resource-hot-spots?p=6054187

If all it is is just a means of allowing CMDRs to travel/refuel/reammo more easily... Sigh...

I doubt that the presence of a Carrier will confer territorial control over anything - nor do I expect it to offer an NPC trade fleet to deliver commodities - we'll see, however.