FD Devs, please don't take this the wrong way...

CmdrJacks

CmdrJacks
A lot of what you say comes down the the graphical user interface, which is a difficult thing to get right when things get more complicated than simple buttons. Look at the huge list of keybinds this game has and all the UI screens. A lot of the UI problems come from and are limited by the initial design. in fact, it's amazing that they have managed to keep it as streamlined as they have. You also have to bear in mind that any UI solution they come up with has to work across platforms, some of which have no keyboards/mice available. Most options in the game which require interaction with the GUI are just a few clicks away, as they add more layers those clicks increase, screens hiding behind screens (like selecting a planetary port (left panel -> system map -> select planet -> open planet map -> select destination -> exit -> exit)). I think the most obvious culprit of the UI limitations is the engineers blueprints (the 1 blueprint limit isn't for gameplay, it's an UI limitation which they probably didn't have time to implement). The xample you gave of the module storage limitations is another example of this, which to solve would require layers of GUI nesting. Not impossible but the number of required clicks start adding up pretty quickly and that makes UI designers a little bit sick.

So, what they've managed to achieve given the limitations imposed by the initial design and the multi-platform requirements is impressive but to improve significantly would probably require some "back to the drawing board" type effort.
 

amadeus1171

amadeus1171
If the devs put their heart and soul into Elite: Dangerous and in fact, they do not suck, then why do we have these deficiencies in ED? There is someone, or some group, in the ED chain that do suck, and are making horrible decisions when it comes to game design.

This bottleneck, for lack of a more civil word, needs to be identified, readjusted, removed, or replaced, so that we can have a good game.

And referring to a response a few pages up, where someone took exception to me using the phrase "our programmers", we the players are stakeholders. So yes, I do take a personal view of our programmers. I know they work hard and put everything they have into the code. But sometimes everything isn't enough because other elements are at work holding them back.
 

thirstyfish

thirstyfish
You know that any time you say "Don't take this the wrong way but..." Anything that follows would likely make someone punch you in the face IRL. Would love to see the OP do a better job. If you think that the devs are that bad, the go fix it yourself. Put up or shut up when you make comments like this, oh brave keyboard warrior.
 

Cageman

Cageman
The OP has a point, but presents it in the worst manner ever.

Regarding CORE internals, I do agree with the OP. Currently, the game forces you to have something in each CORE internal slot and I can see why.

However, with some revisions of the code, they can throw away this enforced requierment, and instead put it in clear text whenever a CMDR tries to launch a ship that is missing one or more CORE modules; "You are missing one or more CORE modules! Go to Outfiting and fix the problem!!!"

I am not saying that this will be a simple task to change, however, it would make a lot more sense compared to the current state with CORE modules.
 

Witcher 7

Witcher 7
Cagman said:
The OP has a point, but presents it in the worst manner ever.
Click to expand...

Agree.

When I first started playing ED, my kids came to watch and said "At least it's not as boring as playing FSX ..." My elder daughter stopped watching me played soon after and now my son also stopped watching me play.

What's my point?

1. ED is similar to FSX in the sense there's no plot/story and just fly around where you want.

2. My son never stopped watching me play Witcher 3 and he wanted to play it except is under-aged.

3. 2.4 was a huge disappointment for the majority. I consider it an average patch rather than an expansion. Apart from more Thargoid Interceptors spawning and interactions (which was rare in 2.3), Multi-crew a 2.3 feature was finally fixed I think and then CMDRs get some more new hair styles and free nerd glasses. Yes, we can also plot routes up to 20k ly except going into system map takes just as long. When I jump into a new system, I still have to make sure my ship is not heading into the star before opening System map b/c you all know what happens otherwise [knocked out]
 

kofeyh

kofeyh
amadeus1171 said:
If the devs put their heart and soul into Elite: Dangerous and in fact, they do not suck, then why do we have these deficiencies in ED?
Click to expand...

Because it is not easy, and folks seem to think it really is, and can't understand why something is so hard, despite the fact that it's hard.

This bottleneck, for lack of a more civil word, needs to be identified, readjusted, removed, or replaced, so that we can have a good game.
Click to expand...

The problem is "good game" means many things to many people; so asking them to produce something that has no actual terms of reference, is just as bad. Frankly, it's clear you believe this is easy, cannot actually comprehend it's not, and just toss a bunch of assumptions out to explain why it might be.

The developer has work to do, and more to learn, but to effectively suggest, repeatedly, that they are inept and "how hard can it be?" makes you sounds just like a . Don't be a . It's possible to discuss without immediately labelling people as inept, stupid, lazy or whatever else you seem to believe is relevant.

Frontier have come to understand that Elite's primary drawcard is the experience, and are refactoring to better meet that. That actually makes them a lot smarter than you seem to believe.
 
Last edited:

babelfisch

babelfisch
amadeus1171 said:
If the devs put their heart and soul into Elite: Dangerous and in fact, they do not suck, then why do we have these deficiencies in ED? There is someone, or some group, in the ED chain that do suck, and are making horrible decisions when it comes to game design.

This bottleneck, for lack of a more civil word, needs to be identified, readjusted, removed, or replaced, so that we can have a good game.

And referring to a response a few pages up, where someone took exception to me using the phrase "our programmers", we the players are stakeholders. So yes, I do take a personal view of our programmers. I know they work hard and put everything they have into the code. But sometimes everything isn't enough because other elements are at work holding them back.
Click to expand...

It could also be too much ambition with too little time.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Ziggy Stardust
This is weird. I'm stuck on page 6, and can't get to 7. Click on 7, takes me to page 6 again. Same with clicking last. Posting to see where this post ends up.

edit: 7 was a lie! I've been had. [mad]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom