Frontier: Don't waste the E3 opportunity, please learn your market.

[B33 ENN]

I think you have this exactly the wrong way round. Those contract games were what Frontier was in the past. E: D and Planet coaster are deliberate attempts to change that model, and to become a 'proper' studio, not just a sub contractor. E: D and Planet Coaster (and the games that they hope will follow) are what Frontier are betting their future on.

I see. Looking into it a bit, it seems there have been several devepors over time for the Rollercoaster Tycoon series and Frontier did the third game of that series, but non of the spin-offs, like on mobile. So the new Planet Coaster is actually their own IP, looking to compete with that now.

...A more 'sensible' business plan would have been to start with the coaster game (they are world leaders at building those, even if it is not their IP), and use that as a cash cow to build Elite.

Looking at what they say about it, I would agree. and it seems to make more sense now why the progress on the core game of Elite has been slow going.

Marketing. To show that there was a market there, even if it was nostalgia driven, and to some extent to get free advertising, and also to show that demand was there to help them raise funds through other means. They didn't financially need the kickstarter to make the game happen (kickstarter around 1.5Million, game costs over 8Million, money in the bank from the IPO), but they probably did need it to encourage investment. They had, of course, already been working on it as a stealth project for some time, or we would not have been able to see the 'as it stands' game footage during the kickstarter - two devs chasing each other through an asteroid belt, and all that.

Interesting. I think if they were going to be splitting resources with Planet Coaster, as you say, likely a more polpular genre, it would have been better to extend the Elite beta at least another year. Then keep working closely with the community for feedback and focus on the core game mechanics.

If a wider released was needed, take advantage of Steam's Early Acces programme (as they have on XBox GPP) so that all new players are aware that it's a work in progress and they can help shape it further, without the criticisms of depth being as relevant.

 

[Insomnia]

Off topic

What does IP mean?

 

[deej]

Off topic

What does IP mean?

Intellectual property

 

[Agrar Therenus]

This whole CQC thing looks like people at FDev have sat down and gone "Hey! The game is coming to Xbox One. Console gamers like their games to be more action based. You know what would be cool, and keep them from getting bored? An online multiplayer battle arena add-on!"

It's a misconception that a lot of developers (and gamers) have that console users prefer shallow, action based gameplay. I'm not knocking the CQC idea, but it should have been something that was added to the game after the main game was finished.

What would have been "cool" and stopped the new gamers getting bored would have been a deeper and more immersive universe. A deeper missions system. More diversity between the Empire, Alliance and Federation station designs, space weather, comets, asteroid fields with pirate bases hidden in them, events where you have to protect an outpost from a pirate raid... There's lots of stuff the could have added to the game before they felt the need to go down the MOBA route.

If it's a misconception, why are there almost no strategy games on consoles.

- - - Updated - - -

Alien Isolation
The Vanishing of Ethan Carter
Skyrim (end of 2011)
The Witcher 3
Assassin's Creed Black Flag


I'd say there have been some amazing releases the last 3-4 years.
But... Sometimes I wonder if I've lost the interest in gaming in general. Especially after putting 3 years into WoW and 4 years with Skyrim (with hundreds of hours tuning my ENBs). I can feel a little like you too at times, that games nowadays disappoint me. But I rarely give them a chance. When doign it, I like gaming again.

Hope my english is somewhat understandable.

How can Skyrim and Witcher 3 be a disappointment?

 

[FuzzySpider]

If it's a misconception, why are there almost no strategy games on consoles.

Except for Anomaly: Warzone Earth, XCOM: Enemy Within, From Dust, Castlestorm, Might & Magic: Duel of Champions, Tropico 4, Quarrel, Port Royale 3, Defense Grid: The Awakening, Command and Conquer, Warhammer: Battle March, Universe at War: Earth Assault, Supreme Commander, Darwinia+ .....

You know what I can't be bothered to list them all. Go and research it yourself.

 

[Insomnia]

How can Skyrim and Witcher 3 be a disappointment?

Meh.... You didn't read. Or I can't express myself lol.
Those games I listed, I listed them because they are amazing games.

 

[rebelredneck]

Very dissappointed by DB at E3

Would have been a perfect oppotunity to showcase ED on the PC as opposed to the xbox especially when Star citizen and No mans sky were featured.

But no DB and FD decided to feature planet coaster

Big thumbs down on that decision and way to drop the ball and give a leg up to the competition

 

[Derath]

Except for Anomaly: Warzone Earth, XCOM: Enemy Within, From Dust, Castlestorm, Might & Magic: Duel of Champions, Tropico 4, Quarrel, Port Royale 3, Defense Grid: The Awakening, Command and Conquer, Warhammer: Battle March, Universe at War: Earth Assault, Supreme Commander, Darwinia+ .....

You know what I can't be bothered to list them all. Go and research it yourself.

There are very few strategy games on consoles, you can indeed list many but all the most successful ones generally don't get ported, the medium is one of the few thats truly compromised by a controller. I remember the red alert on the console for example, its amazing how it was the best strategy game on the PC for its release year, yet one of the worst on the console lol. It doesn't help that realistically strategy games have become less and less prevalent over the years.

Enemy within is the best mention on your list there, though that was designed to be multi-platform from the get go and much to everyones surprise actually worked very nicely

 

[FuzzySpider]

There are very few strategy games on consoles, you can indeed list many but all the most successful ones generally don't get ported, the medium is one of the few thats truly compromised by a controller. I remember the red alert on the console for example, its amazing how it was the best strategy game on the PC for its release year, yet one of the worst on the console lol. It doesn't help that realistically strategy games have become less and less prevalent over the years.

Enemy within is the best mention on your list there, though that was designed to be multi-platform from the get go and much to everyones surprise actually worked very nicely

It doesn't change the point of the post though. Strategy games do work on consoles, are successful on consoles, and console players (much like PC players) enjoy them. The claim by a handful of PC elitists that they're somehow intellectual giants for playing video games on a computer rather than a dedicated gaming device is, urgh, wrong, to put it mildly.

Kinect and other interfaces are now available as well as the controller. Elite: Dangerous could well find itself a home on the xbox as well as the PC.

The point is it doesn't need in any way to be altered from Elite to work there. The control functionality needs a massive overhaul because the interface is different, but that's all. The same actually applies to the PC version - if they announced that they were adding Voice Attack as a core part of the game and were expanding it to have, for example, voice docking requests I think you'd find that would have massive appeal across all platforms.

More depth, a more interactive universe, it's what Elite needs and what it lacks. All it really has is the fact it's the only sandbox space sim available right now that can be played.

Instead of focusing on that they've gone and announced an arena space shooter mode at the same venue as Battlefront 3 is on show. Faceplant!

 

[Agrar Therenus]

Except for Anomaly: Warzone Earth, XCOM: Enemy Within, From Dust, Castlestorm, Might & Magic: Duel of Champions, Tropico 4, Quarrel, Port Royale 3, Defense Grid: The Awakening, Command and Conquer, Warhammer: Battle March, Universe at War: Earth Assault, Supreme Commander, Darwinia+ .....

You know what I can't be bothered to list them all. Go and research it yourself.

Considering how many strategy games there have been in the history of gaming, this is hardly a good case you bring here.

Note, 'almost none' is quite a valid comment when you par it up with PC. Also consider how well they generally do, why do you think Xcom 2 has only been announced for PC?

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't change the point of the post though. Strategy games do work on consoles, are successful on consoles, and console players (much like PC players) enjoy them. The claim by a handful of PC elitists that they're somehow intellectual giants for playing video games on a computer rather than a dedicated gaming device is, urgh, wrong, to put it mildly.

Kinect and other interfaces are now available as well as the controller. Elite: Dangerous could well find itself a home on the xbox as well as the PC.


The point is it doesn't need in any way to be altered from Elite to work there. The control functionality needs a massive overhaul because the interface is different, but that's all. The same actually applies to the PC version - if they announced that they were adding Voice Attack as a core part of the game and were expanding it to have, for example, voice docking requests I think you'd find that would have massive appeal across all platforms.

More depth, a more interactive universe, it's what Elite needs and what it lacks. All it really has is the fact it's the only sandbox space sim available right now that can be played.

Instead of focusing on that they've gone and announced an arena space shooter mode at the same venue as Battlefront 3 is on show. Faceplant!

I never said they don't work, and indeed don't exist as a flat statement. I said there are almost none-- which is true when you look at how many there are on PC.

There are almost no fighting games on PC - though that is changing. There are some, but compared with consoles, very few.

Just stop being Mr Diplomatic and accept the fact that one can generalise about platforms.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Considering how many strategy games there have been in the history of gaming, this is hardly a good case you bring here.

Those were just on the Xbox 360. If you're going to compare the entirety of the history of PC with one console cycle then yes, but in that case PC gaming is absolutely pitiful compared to the last 1500 years of chess.

Just stop being Mr Diplomatic and accept the fact that one can generalise about platforms.

Diplomacy has nothing to do with it. Of course you can, to an extent, generalize about the platforms. What you absolutely can not do is to generalize about the users of said platforms.

 

[peteuplink]

If it's a misconception, why are there almost no strategy games on consoles.

Simple answer: The PC has mouse and keyboard and consoles do not.

Strategy games do appear on consoles, as has been mentioned, but a joypad isn't really a good control option for complex strategy games like the Total War series, Command and Conquer series, even city builders like Sim City. Strategy games on console always feel somewhat clunky because you're trying to convert a keyboard/mouse control combo to fit an Xbox or Playstation controller. Which, take it from me, is a pain to do if you've got a startegy game that relies on the keyboard short cuts as much as it does the mouse and icons. You've only got so many buttons on a controller (I think the PS4 has 12 buttons and your average computer keyboard has 101 keys), so at some point you have to start leaving stuff out or design a command menu system to get to the other functions you can't fit on the pad. So you have to make sacrifices or risk making a game that's very awkward to control. And if a game is awkward to control, then people most likely won't play it and you've just wasted a load of money developing a game that isn't going to sell.

That is the reason why we don't see quite as many strategy games on console as we do on PC. It's also the same reason why we don't see flight simulations on console, too many controls to fit onto a controller. Even converting something as simple as the old computer helecopter simulation "Gunship" by Microprose to the PS1 was a headache, due to the controller only having 10 buttons plus the d-pad (and that was a relatively simple simulation by today's standards). The lack of strategy games and simulations on PC has got absolutely nothing what so ever to do with the intelligence levels of the gamers, but more down the the limitations of the consoles chosen control method. That being said, there is absolutely no reason why someone couldn't design wireless mouse and keyboard peripherals for consoles. Heck, my first computer was a ZX81 with 1K of ram, and that had a keyboard.

 

[jadefriendly]

What really needs to be muscular now are the missions. Sort this out and then it all falls into place for me.

this this 1000x this

missions are the key

currently they are pretty terrible, probably the worst aspect of the game (aside from bugs)

 

[n13L5]

Why is it that in everything FD has done so far there has not been any depth in anything so far ?
EVERYTHING is shallow, event this,this... PP. is shallow. not one inch depth. its just mindblowing really.
yes I play still, but only because of flight model, love it. the rest is repetitive and in reality boring, because there is nothing new, or even chance of, around the corner.
Gratz FD , you have made a cool flight model and universe, very cool, but where is the frigging game !!!!!!
( ill just go play now, i use it as Zen , it soooooothes my mind, I even play Indian music to it , to get to the right state)

Cheers Cmdr's

Yeah, the shallowness is the issue more than anything, even though if PP wasn't shallow, I'd still not want to play a card deck soap in space.


Its like the current team can't think along the lines of deepening the essential core functionality of Elite.

I suspect the issue is, that marketing wouldn't be able to bill that as some "big new addition".
Also, they look increasingly untrustworthy to me, their patches never actually do what they say they're going to do. At best, its like one guy wrote up the patch notes and then other people from the team changed their mind without telling him. At worst, they either lost grip on their math and code, or they're just dissembling, like there was even the slightest benefit to turning their real intentions into some inconsistent mystery.


Just stop adding shovelware to Elite so you don't end up burying it.