Future elite dangerous

[CMDR jefsev]

This may be a unpopular suggestion.

I do understand the backlash ED got the last years, but we still love ED and I do believe most of us want ED to be a big success.

Personally for me there is no other game like ED or even coming close, I mean our universe on a 1:1 scale that's pretty damn cool. And yes sometimes it still feels empty but the sandbox feel is real for me. I tried start citizen and don't understand any hype about that game, the only cool thing was stepping into the pilot seat but that would probably get old soon enough. No man's sky is to cartoony for my taste.

Let's move on to my suggestion, and please hear me out.

An optional subscription for elite dangerous players

Elite Dangerous is a live service game and I for the live of me don't understand how they can make this game profitable enough to pour everything in development and future expansions the way the player base would like. I feel ED is a very cheap game considering the gaming culture we live in today.

I would happily pay a subscription between 10 or 15 euro's to support ED's future. When I look at ESO which is thriving.
I would love to support ED development each month if that ensures the livelihood and future of the game. This game has massive potential still laying around, like more ships, fleshed out exploration, ship interiors (which would only be accessible when engines are of ), player space station building / control. Earth like planet landing, more fleshed out fps mechanics etc etc, the community probably has way more wishes.

Yes we can support the game by buying cosmetics which is fine, but I personally do not care much about cosmetics and more often than not I will forget to support ED this way. Like in ESO or other games frontier could give some trinkets to people who pay the subscription. Like some ARX every month or access to limited edition cosmetics for example.

ED is a live service game and if an optional subscription means more and better patches and expansion than I'm all for that. I do understand development costs money and I want ED to profit so the game will thrive and become even better than it already is.

I would love to hear what everybody thinks.

o7 commanders

 

[zikolach]

I would rather pay for a DLC (which I did when I bought Odyssey) than paying a subscription.

If FDev made another crowdfunding campaign to get money for full VR on-foot support I would probably paid for that.

 

[avow555]

I would rather not pay for "unwanted" DLC like Odyysey.
If a monthly sub would save and push the game in a favourable way, I would pay that.
I do however stress that it would need to be an agreeable partnership with the players as to the direction the game goes.

 

[Darrack]

This may be a unpopular suggestion.

I do understand the backlash ED got the last years, but we still love ED and I do believe most of us want ED to be a big success.

Personally for me there is no other game like ED or even coming close, I mean our universe on a 1:1 scale that's pretty damn cool. And yes sometimes it still feels empty but the sandbox feel is real for me. I tried start citizen and don't understand any hype about that game, the only cool thing was stepping into the pilot seat but that would probably get old soon enough. No man's sky is to cartoony for my taste.

Let's move on to my suggestion, and please hear me out.

An optional subscription for elite dangerous players

Elite Dangerous is a live service game and I for the live of me don't understand how they can make this game profitable enough to pour everything in development and future expansions the way the player base would like. I feel ED is a very cheap game considering the gaming culture we live in today.

I would happily pay a subscription between 10 or 15 euro's to support ED's future. When I look at ESO which is thriving.
I would love to support ED development each month if that ensures the livelihood and future of the game. This game has massive potential still laying around, like more ships, fleshed out exploration, ship interiors (which would only be accessible when engines are of ), player space station building / control. Earth like planet landing, more fleshed out fps mechanics etc etc, the community probably has way more wishes.

Yes we can support the game by buying cosmetics which is fine, but I personally do not care much about cosmetics and more often than not I will forget to support ED this way. Like in ESO or other games frontier could give some trinkets to people who pay the subscription. Like some ARX every month or access to limited edition cosmetics for example.

ED is a live service game and if an optional subscription means more and better patches and expansion than I'm all for that. I do understand development costs money and I want ED to profit so the game will thrive and become even better than it already is.

I would love to hear what everybody thinks.

o7 commanders

Would happily pay a monthly subscription for this especially considering the rubbish ive subbed to in the past, the forum drama alone would be worth the cost!

O7

 

[Ian Doncaster]

I for the live of me don't understand how they can make this game profitable enough to pour everything in development and future expansions the way the player base would like.

They can't. The expectations placed on an open-world space game are both extremely large and ultimately contradictory. It's not really a question of funding as such. But that's not really what you were asking, I expect


On the funding side ... the company as a whole is profitable, has diverse sources of revenue from its various games, and substantial cash reserves. They could afford to fund the development of another Odyssey-sized expansion without needing to raise additional money in advance, they don't need to worry about year-on-year profitability of any individual game so long as it makes a profit over the longer term.

So the question is: if they spent - say - £10 million [1] on developing "Elite Dangerous 5.0" as the next big expansion after Odyssey, would they get enough in sales to make a profit on that? Say they sell it initially at £35, they'd need about 300,000 [1] sales to break even ... maybe more because they're not all going to be day-1 full price sales even if it's good, and Steam and Epic will take a cut for ones sold on those platforms ... but maybe less as they can also sell new cosmetics around the expansion content so it doesn't need to get its entire income from the expansion itself, and it might also encourage more interest in new players/alts for the base game.

An optional subscription isn't really going to make a difference to that question - £10 a month for the three year [1] development cycle of an expansion would be £360 per subscriber. So every subscriber they get means that they need to sell roughly ten fewer copies of the expansion. But the number of optional subscribers is going to be a tiny fraction of the player base. It's not going to make a serious dent in that "about 300,000" sales number.

Can they make a profit by developing and selling expansions? In theory, yes. In practice, Horizons did, Odyssey didn't. Are they confident enough to try a third time? Whether the stuff they're doing now with the Thargoid War and the further updates in 2023 stabilises and increases the long-term player count is going to be way more important to answering that question than whether a few dedicated superfans are (still) willing to give them even more money.


In the meantime buying ARX (and I think also using it, because of how the accounting works) is the alternative if you are wanting to give them more money. If there aren't any cosmetics you particularly want ... well, the point of a voluntary subscription would be to give them money without direct or guaranteed return, so buy some you don't want instead...


[1] Wild guesses. We know from financial statements Odyssey cost at least this much to make over this sort of time, not counting the spending of time and money on fixing it afterwards, and from other official statements we also know they were hoping for medium-term sales over 500k - which would have been more than the break-even point. So they're wrong but probably in the right general area.

 

[ethelred]

As long as us LEPers get all content for free, crack on.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

As long as us LEPers get all content for free, crack on.

Yeah, i was going to ask how this squares with LEP holders.

If some people want to pay a subscription to FD they are welcome, as long as it doesn't block me from content that I paid for.

FD could offer it via DLC or subscription, choose your poison kind of thing.

 

[CMDR jefsev]

I would rather not pay for "unwanted" DLC like Odyysey.
If a monthly sub would save and push the game in a favourable way, I would pay that.
I do however stress that it would need to be an agreeable partnership with the players as to the direction the game goes.

That seems fair. ED does have a strong community and I think if they would let the community vote on some of the features it could be a positive for the game. I also understand that it's hard to satisfies everybody.

And the neat thing with a sub is that your able to cancel anytime if you don't like the direction the game is going.
I agree that if enough people do subscribe the game need to go in a better direction with better fleshed out patches and less bugs.

o7

 

[zikolach]

I would rather not pay for "unwanted" DLC like Odyysey.

That's exactly what I meant - the Odyssey should be optional DLC for the game (which in the end it is considering free access to Horizons 4.0). But it should not separate player base as it is now due to some (imo avoidable) issues with age rating.

If a monthly sub would save and push the game in a favourable way, I would pay that.

No one would guarantee that the game will move in favorable way for one. If you played for many years paying subscription and devs decided to move in the direction you don't want - the only thing you can do is to stop paying, loosing all your "time investments".

 

[CMDR jefsev]

Yeah, i was going to ask how this squares with LEP holders.

If some people want to pay a subscription to FD they are welcome, as long as it doesn't block me from content that I paid for.

FD could offer it via DLC or subscription, choose your poison kind of thing.

I think it should be a separate from DLC's which should just work like they do now. I meant it more as an addition, so paying the sub would give you some limited edition goodies that don't impact gameplay or maybe 500/1500 arx every month. Don't pin me down on it FD could probably come up with something that works fine. I would just pay the sub to support development in the hope that the game will become more expansive

 

[AlSki]

well, the point of a voluntary subscription would be to give them money without direct or guaranteed return, so buy some you don't want instead...

^ This.
Admittedly when you compare to the number of hours you put in to ED over the years, to how little we pay for ED + expansions + cosmetics over the years, its tempting, but then how would we pay for the PC/HOTAS/VR you need to run it?

 

[Ettanin]

Ditch peer to peer. Only then you can have the  audacity to demand a monthly sub. Paying to be asked to offer one's own connection and hardware to host is unfair.

 

[CMDR jefsev]

^ This.
Admittedly when you compare to the number of hours you put in to ED over the years, to how little we pay for ED + expansions + cosmetics over the years, its tempting, but then how would we pay for the PC/HOTAS/VR you need to run it?

That's why it should be 100% optionally and only reward things that don't impact gameplay. This way people who could miss the money and are happy to support can and get some goodies and other people can just play like they always have. I would not mind supporting FD this way. And if it goes of rails I just cancel and would still be happy with supporting for the time I did play and enjoy.

 

[HRDiagram]

I would just pay the sub to support development in the hope that the game will become more expansive

And then, one day, they will acknowledge your suggestion, and thank you publicly.

"We've decided to pick a random suggestion and decided to implement it.
CMDR jefsev, thanks for your input, from today the game is more expensive!
...
At the same time we're sad to announce that the CM that misread the suggestion has left the company.
If the game is more pricey, that's his fault!
And TJ's, by contract"

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I think it should be a separate from DLC's which should just work like they do now. I meant it more as an addition, so paying the sub would give you some limited edition goodies that don't impact gameplay or maybe 500/1500 arx every month. Don't pin me down on it FD could probably come up with something that works fine. I would just pay the sub to support development in the hope that the game will become more expansive

But if you are talking about something that many LEP holders or potentional DLC purchasers would want, then you're going to have a lot of very angry people. I don't do subscriptions, never have, never will. I pay for content that i expect as long as the game is live as a one off. Subscriptions are a pain and i don't like them.

Now, if they were to do it like ESO, where you get more backpack space, maybe some custom skins, something like that, then fine, whatever.

I would just pay the sub to support development in the hope that the game will become more expansive

Expensive you mean?

Subs for content would probably be the death of the game.

 

[CMDR jefsev]

They can't. The expectations placed on an open-world space game are both extremely large and ultimately contradictory. It's not really a question of funding as such. But that's not really what you were asking, I expect


On the funding side ... the company as a whole is profitable, has diverse sources of revenue from its various games, and substantial cash reserves. They could afford to fund the development of another Odyssey-sized expansion without needing to raise additional money in advance, they don't need to worry about year-on-year profitability of any individual game so long as it makes a profit over the longer term.

So the question is: if they spent - say - £10 million [1] on developing "Elite Dangerous 5.0" as the next big expansion after Odyssey, would they get enough in sales to make a profit on that? Say they sell it initially at £35, they'd need about 300,000 [1] sales to break even ... maybe more because they're not all going to be day-1 full price sales even if it's good, and Steam and Epic will take a cut for ones sold on those platforms ... but maybe less as they can also sell new cosmetics around the expansion content so it doesn't need to get its entire income from the expansion itself, and it might also encourage more interest in new players/alts for the base game.

An optional subscription isn't really going to make a difference to that question - £10 a month for the three year [1] development cycle of an expansion would be £360 per subscriber. So every subscriber they get means that they need to sell roughly ten fewer copies of the expansion. But the number of optional subscribers is going to be a tiny fraction of the player base. It's not going to make a serious dent in that "about 300,000" sales number.

Can they make a profit by developing and selling expansions? In theory, yes. In practice, Horizons did, Odyssey didn't. Are they confident enough to try a third time? Whether the stuff they're doing now with the Thargoid War and the further updates in 2023 stabilises and increases the long-term player count is going to be way more important to answering that question than whether a few dedicated superfans are (still) willing to give them even more money.


In the meantime buying ARX (and I think also using it, because of how the accounting works) is the alternative if you are wanting to give them more money. If there aren't any cosmetics you particularly want ... well, the point of a voluntary subscription would be to give them money without direct or guaranteed return, so buy some you don't want instead...


[1] Wild guesses. We know from financial statements Odyssey cost at least this much to make over this sort of time, not counting the spending of time and money on fixing it afterwards, and from other official statements we also know they were hoping for medium-term sales over 500k - which would have been more than the break-even point. So they're wrong but probably in the right general area.

Thanks for this explanation. I confess it was just some idea floating around in my head I have not given it this much thought. I just compared it to other games and in that way it seemed fine to support ED with a sub. If it does not make any sense doing it then of course I agree it should be done. If it would help out ED development and maybe produce better DLC's and content more often then i would be happy to support in this way.

I should buy some cosmetics more often to support but a sub is way easier for lazy me

 

[CMDR jefsev]

But if you are talking about something that many LEP holders or potentional DLC purchasers would want, then you're going to have a lot of very angry people. I don't do subscriptions, never have, never will. I pay for content that i expect as long as the game is live as a one off. Subscriptions are a pain and i don't like them.

Now, if they were to do it like ESO, where you get more backpack space, maybe some custom skins, something like that, then fine, whatever.



Expensive you mean?

Subs for content would probably be the death of the game.

I meant expansive, like more content.

The sub should be totally optional and no content should be behind the sub only goodies. I think ESO went a bit to far with the bag space even, because without the materials storage the game is way more cumbersome. But yes something like ESO but only with premium skins etc.

 

[CMDR jefsev]

And then, one day, they will acknowledge your suggestion, and thank you publicly.

"We've decided to pick a random suggestion and decided to implement it.
CMDR jefsev, thanks for your input, from today the game is more expensive!
...
At the same time we're sad to announce that the CM that misread the suggestion has left the company.
If the game is more pricey, that's his fault!
And TJ's, by contract"

Just trying to help out a game i love playing.
And I meant expansive in the sense of more content and bigger updates. Not expensive like money wise.

Just curious what the community thinks about this.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I meant expansive, like more content.

The sub should be totally optional and no content should be behind the sub only goodies. I think ESO went a bit to far with the bag space even, because without the materials storage the game is way more cumbersome. But yes something like ESO but only with premium skins etc.

The game can be more expansive with DLCs.

Asking FD to make DLC level content AND subscription content on a similar scale in parallel might be hoping for a little too much from them. But if like ESO, then meh, whatever, as long as subscribers and non-subscribers can enjoy the same content.

 

[CMDR jefsev]

Yeah, i was going to ask how this squares with LEP holders.

If some people want to pay a subscription to FD they are welcome, as long as it doesn't block me from content that I paid for.

FD could offer it via DLC or subscription, choose your poison kind of thing.

Content should not be behind a sub, only cosmetic like things that don't impact gameplay or content. It's a way to support the game if you want and are able to.