Notice GalNet changes

[Everin Grace]

Drake-Class Carrier

Fleet carriers are massive ships fitted with multiple hangar bays, functioning as a mobile base of operations. Services offered by a fleet carrier can be fully customised by the fleet carrier's owner; this includes the traded commodity types, available outfitting modules and the contents of a...

elite-dangerous.fandom.com

By definition...
'fleet carriers are massive ships'

As soon as somebody at FDev "hopes" a date or feature will arrive, they are crucified when it doesnt happen. This thread is testimony to that. They are damned if they do, damned if they dont. I'm not surprised they treat silence as the best policy....no, I'm not on commission!

I see that. But a lot of developers set up a visible road map precisely to reduce that sort of occurrence. Trello or something. It would be perfectly reasonable for them to be a little more open about some of the things they hope to do - and then have a discussion with the community about what is feasible.

FDev seriously need to just lay their cards on the table: "Here's what we think Galnet should be. Here's what we think CGs should be. Here's what we think needs to happen with Powerplay. With Trading." With all the things the community has listed and FDev have aknowledged but stayed totally silent on. Rather than saying "we're removing it and gonna think about it and then a year passes with nothing.

The reality is that not only gaming, but the method of game developement, and how devlelopers and their users communicate together, has been changing in the past few years.

FDev could really use the example set by some Other developers. And yes I get that it can create new challenges to open up in this way - but if its done right it can be a net positive for studios as a way to interact with and breed excitement for their game.

Lastly: yes I'm aware FDev are talking about releasing developer notes for Odyssey. But that's not the same thing, and arguably they will fall in the same hole as previously. Trying to selectively pick and choose the topic to talk about (tidbits from Odyssey) is not the same as having a conversation with your players. The playerbase wants to know about Community Goals, Galnet, Powerplay fixes, Trading and misson balances and all those things that have been discussed for years on one side but only aknowledged and then ignored on the other.

FDev - respectfully you need to come into the 21st century with how you communicate your plans for the game. Stop feeding us the scraps that you think are tasty.

 

[PeteACarter]

I see that. But a lot of developers set up a visible road map precisely to reduce that sort of occurrence. Trello or something. It would be perfectly reasonable for them to be a little more open about some of the things they hope to do - and then have a discussion with the community about what is feasible.

FDev seriously need to just lay their cards on the table: "Here's what we think Galnet should be. Here's what we think CGs should be. Here's what we think needs to happen with Powerplay. With Trading." With all the things the community has listed and FDev have aknowledged but stayed totally silent on. Rather than saying "we're removing it and gonna think about it and then a year passes with nothing.

The reality is that not only gaming, but the method of game developement, and how devlelopers and their users communicate together, has been changing in the past few years.

FDev could really use the example set by some Other developers. And yes I get that it can create new challenges to open up in this way - but if its done right it can be a net positive for studios as a way to interact with and breed excitement for their game.

Lastly: yes I'm aware FDev are talking about releasing developer notes for Odyssey. But that's not the same thing, and arguably they will fall in the same hole as previously. Trying to selectively pick and choose the topic to talk about (tidbits from Odyssey) is not the same as having a conversation with your players. The playerbase wants to know about Community Goals, Galnet, Powerplay fixes, Trading and misson balances and all those things that have been discussed for years on one side but only aknowledged and then ignored on the other.

FDev - respectfully you need to come into the 21st century with how you communicate your plans for the game. Stop feeding us the scraps that you think are tasty.

Yes I must admit that reaching out to a community manager and being totally ignored (for example) is a little frustrating and that comms could be much better.

But I still se why they do limit comms, when I see a thread like this.

 

[Everin Grace]

Yes I must admit that reaching out to a community manager and being totally ignored (for example) is a little frustrating and that comms could be much better.

But I still se why they do limit comms, when I see a thread like this.

Threads like this exist because they limit comms.

There will always be discussions and opinions and flat out disagreements about whats important versus whats not. But the community literally sat for a year and waited for information without getting anything. It didn't lead to rage or a riot, but an articulate open discussion with suggestions and commentary that never got heated or agitated.

FDev has a strong positive community for the most part. Yes there is salt. This is the internet but as a general rule I would make a significant sized bet that this community will respond positively to being trusted and included.

 

[Jermanicus]

I know the excuse given for the removal of Galnet was 'players find it confusing' - but I don't remember ever seeing any post from any player saying anything of the sort. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Suspension of Galnet has removed a whole layer of immersion from the game, which feels sterile as a result. If this is indeed now to be permanent (instead of just 'refocussing' on actual game events), then why not bring some of the community equivalents into the game - eg Lave Radio?

 

[Jermanicus]

Threads like this exist because they limit comms.

There will always be discussions and opinions and flat out disagreements about whats important versus whats not. But the community literally sat for a year and waited for information without getting anything. It didn't lead to rage or a riot, but an articulate open discussion with suggestions and commentary that never got heated or agitated.

FDev has a strong positive community for the most part. Yes there is salt. This is the internet but as a general rule I would make a significant sized bet that this community will respond positively to being trusted and included.

This.

 

[PeteACarter]

I know the excuse given for the removal of Galnet was 'players find it confusing' - but I don't remember ever seeing any post from any player saying anything of the sort. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Suspension of Galnet has removed a whole layer of immersion from the game, which feels sterile as a result. If this is indeed now to be permanent (instead of just 'refocussing' on actual game events), then why not bring some of the community equivalents into the game - eg Lave Radio?

Lots of players went looking for Gan Romero. That's the classic example.

 

[Everin Grace]

I know the excuse given for the removal of Galnet was 'players find it confusing' - but I don't remember ever seeing any post from any player saying anything of the sort. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Suspension of Galnet has removed a whole layer of immersion from the game, which feels sterile as a result. If this is indeed now to be permanent (instead of just 'refocussing' on actual game events), then why not bring some of the community equivalents into the game - eg Lave Radio?

There was a lot of commentary from players who weren't interested in the RP aspects of it. The example that has been given is that an in-game event was described and players went looking for it - but of course it was only fiction. This was seen as "unnecessary confusion" rather than "inadequate labeling" and absurdly has been used as an excuse to mothball the fiction in its entirety - which basically is like a punch in the face for lore-seekers and role-players and the large number of players that actually like an immersive universe and have the perspective that Galnet and CGs are a major immersion factor.

Part of the frustration here is that at no time have FDev really acknowledged that that perspective is valued. They have acknowledged that it exists of course - but obviously its "not on the roadmap."

 

[Jermanicus]

Lots of players went looking for Gan Romero. That's the classic example.

I can understand that, but things like that could easily have been fixed by common sense editing of the articles. By removing Galnet Fdev have instead used a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

 

[PeteACarter]

I can understand that, but things like that could easily have been fixed by common sense editing of the articles. By removing Galnet Fdev have instead used a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Or adding related in game content

 

[Vayporz]

Best Wishes for The Pilot's ION (Inner Orion Network.)

Screw GalNet.

If I had to rely on FDEV to make their own game enjoyable I'd still be 2 hops from Eravate, where at least I would be close enough to make use of the in-game market commodity data I got from visited stations, and could use the Galaxy Map to sort for my needs... let's not even talk about ship load outs... or engineering and mats...or BGS.... or planning routes for an FC...or...or...or.

GOTO680

 

[Hanerib]

Personally I'm still searching for Gan Romero. The trick is to haul tons of slaves into far reaches of the galaxy, in order to monitor fluctuations in their neurological status during witchspace transit. The Thargoid altered genome will eventually activate in close proximity to higher dimensional monolith network streams, and guide the path to elysian hubs of virtual A.I singularity.

 

[Sunyavadin]

I know the excuse given for the removal of Galnet was 'players find it confusing' - but I don't remember ever seeing any post from any player saying anything of the sort.

Even then, everyone assumed when it was announced that the Codex was the obvious intended solution to this problem. It was clear to everyone that having Galnet articles which connect to actual ingame events be added to the codex upon reading them as "rumours" with a starting system link would have resolved this right away.

 

[Everin Grace]

The game needs storytellers again. That's what went missing. The release of carriers without any attempt to retrofit them into the storyline meant the face of the game has been forever altered without any form of narrative. That worries me tbh.

I firmly believe the community can contribute to the work, as I've said - but it needs direction and a set of firm boundaries.

 

[MishaTX]

I firmly believe the community can contribute to the work, as I've said - but it needs direction and a set of firm boundaries.

Agreed. Even though I fundamentally disagree with the notion that the community have to provide unpaid content for a game that they've paid for. But I'd be happy to help in any way I can anyways, even if it's wrong in principle, since it's a lot better than the utter neglect that the game is given right now by the company charging money for it.

And I appreciate your willingness to help too, and if there is anything I can do...

 

[Randomkeyhits]

Yes I must admit that reaching out to a community manager and being totally ignored (for example) is a little frustrating and that comms could be much better.

But I still se why they do limit comms, when I see a thread like this.

The behaviour from FD is a common response, lots of game companies use the silent treatment for so, so many reasons.

What I've seen in almost every case is the same, they leave a void or black hole or empty room or whatever behind and player attempts at engagement just get swallowed up. When this happens its a bit like an echo chamber, the players are projecting their worries, concerns or anxieties on whatever the issue is but nothing comes back so the only engagement is their own negativity which with nowhere to go feeds back on itself. Sort of anti-hype.

Engagement may not make the relevant section feel any better but it does stop things from escalating or getting out of control so easily. I struggle to see why so many game companies fail with this, they only have to look at each others forums to see it all in action if they won't admit it about their own.

 

[rootsrat]

the face of the game has been forever altered without any form of narrative. That worries me tbh.

That happened some time ago now, slowly but steady - every single time a storyline arc was stopped without resolution. The whole lore and story (the latter is a big part of the former) just slowly ceased to progress. I honestly think that "this game is dead" while not true when it comes to Elite Dangerous as a whole really applies in this particular context. It's sad.

 

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

So, what would it take to get storylines back? They were a great "flavour" to the game and made GalNet feel like a 34th century newspaper for the EDverse.

 

[Old Duck]

So, what would it take to get storylines back? They were a great "flavour" to the game and made GalNet feel like a 34th century newspaper for the EDverse.

New management.

 

[Everin Grace]

So, what would it take to get storylines back? They were a great "flavour" to the game and made GalNet feel like a 34th century newspaper for the EDverse.

It starts with us.

In a nutshell:
Galnet and CGs were canned because a minority of players were very vocal in their displeasure of those features.
That displeasure was voiced to the community managers here agreed and (not unreasonably perhaps, but a little melodramatically) then communicated back to the developers that the community didn't like those features.
The developers took a look and removed those features with a "we will take a look at it" kind of non-promise that basically weakened the game for that time.


A year later, with no new real info, the community that actually liked those features has had enough with non answers and would like concrete information and action taken.

We can:

1. Be visible. Help FDev understand that there is a significant part of the player base that were never happy with those features being removed, and were only silent because the assumption was that they were being restored with improvements at some later date.
2. Be courteously persistent and press the matter so that it doesn't slip from focus. FDev have a lot on their plate and stuff falls "off the roadmap" when it is assumed it is not a big deal. We just need to remind them that removing game features IS a big deal to the community.
3. Offer to help. Continue to offer creative input. The community has loads of artists and writers. If we were given useful limits and targets we could really help out. We just need FDev to tell us what to do. In the meantime contribute what you can where you can.
4. Stay calm. I repeat: FDev have a lot on their plate with Odyssey. We still don't really understand the true development process of the game nor how heavily burdened the team currently is but we can assume the factory is at full blast.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

And, Odyssey had better be worth it.