My point is that it's either or. They're there to be shot. There's no variation in interraction.it really makes me smile how differently is seen shooting of thousands of ships (piloted by npcs) vs shooting ‘the same npcs’ with weapon on foot. There is zero need to play criminal in Odyssey, you only have choice to do so … same like civilian massacres in ships.
I have concerns about where Elite Dangerous is headed and have for years.
- Thread starter Steve O B Have
- Start date
![BigBANGtheory [VR]](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/71/71385.jpg?1644873788){kind=avatar}
I think they took a ton of cash and invested it in other projects. Frontier are perfectly within their rights to do that but it comes at the cost of customer satisfaction when the arc of investment deviates away from the product that was never complete in the first place.
The other situation which I think is less talked about is the effect of Life Time Expansion sales where you arguably get the money upfront from invested players... Its then hard to sell them something later your target audience for sales perversely is 'non-LEP customers' hence pressure to deviate.
We will see what happens next but I think we are already starting from a bad position where even in the most positive view you have:
1. Fix It = Bringing the Elite Dangerous experience to where a lot of people feel it should be
vs.
2. Fix It = Getting Odyssey to work well functionally
vs.
3. Fix It = Getting Odyssey and Space Legs working well within the overall Elite Dangerous experience
All three of those have different meanings, different outcomes and require different levels of commitment from Frontier. Only one of those will satisfy the community and I'm not sure Frontier mean to do option 1.
The other situation which I think is less talked about is the effect of Life Time Expansion sales where you arguably get the money upfront from invested players... Its then hard to sell them something later your target audience for sales perversely is 'non-LEP customers' hence pressure to deviate.
We will see what happens next but I think we are already starting from a bad position where even in the most positive view you have:
1. Fix It = Bringing the Elite Dangerous experience to where a lot of people feel it should be
vs.
2. Fix It = Getting Odyssey to work well functionally
vs.
3. Fix It = Getting Odyssey and Space Legs working well within the overall Elite Dangerous experience
All three of those have different meanings, different outcomes and require different levels of commitment from Frontier. Only one of those will satisfy the community and I'm not sure Frontier mean to do option 1.
You don’t need to do that, you even have chance to get engineered suits for your cmdr and use better mobility (meant on short distances) without firing single bullet. It’s all your choice how to play this game. I personally 100% support idea for much more noncombat content on foot, but the main difference is that I enjoy play and look forward for future adjustments. I really like ability to play on foot in ED, it gives really different perspective to whole game.
Developing games is hard.
Developing multiplayer online games is harder.
Developing immersive games which make you feel you're in a real world is just about impossible.
Personally I felt a sense of wonder the first time I saw a coin-operated "Space Invaders" console. I guess enjoyment of games always hinges on the ability to "tunnel" and appreciate what's there rather than thinking about what isn't.
Developing multiplayer online games is harder.
Developing immersive games which make you feel you're in a real world is just about impossible.
Personally I felt a sense of wonder the first time I saw a coin-operated "Space Invaders" console. I guess enjoyment of games always hinges on the ability to "tunnel" and appreciate what's there rather than thinking about what isn't.
People who think Odyssey is worth saving as it stands will be happy with option 2.
Option 1 cannot be delivered, because what do "a lot of people feel" anyway? Ask 10 different E: D vets what E: D should be, and you'll get 50 different answers.
Option 3 is the best that can be hoped for overall, providing development on the game continues after that point.
David Braben talks about us all having the same "goal" and we should bear with them while they do it.
This is all well and good, but he hasn't told us what his goal is (beyond a non-disastrous console release, that is just £££ for a company that has proven itself time and again it's not to be trusted, and means nothing to me as a player). So how is it possible for players to get behind it, work through the pain, and keep playing?
Last edited:
You've summarised my childhood with computer games. Sadly with modern games everything is basically handed to you on a platter and when it's missing or inconsistent it's painfully jarring IMO.
I think what's worse is that there is implied content and it's not delivered on.
At the feet of the shareholders
You don't. There are even non violent missions.
Nah I don't believe that. I genuinely think DB had the vision and that was the intention. He's been sitting on this since the 80s. I don't think that it's started out as a marketing ploy.
I feels you.
Frontier with it's bulletin board of missing people, police stings and so one meant that each station feels more alive than what we currently have.
I think the technical aspects of Elite are great - 1-2-1 galaxy, gfx and the sound design are sublime (notwithstanding Odyssey issues, obvs)
Where Elite has struggled is with gameplay, and making the ED world feel "alive". I'm sure this is non-trivial with the ambitious scale of the galaxy but the following always strike me as bizarre:-
1. All ships are new, and need no maintenance (A hangover from Frontier where not servicing your drive would lead to misjumps)
2. Nav beacons, system security and govt type - like I can jump into a Dictatorship having a civil war and fly around with impunity.
3. No attempt to have CQC in the main game, where a booth allowing it could be easily in every station.
4. The economy (in the regard that there may as well be a much reduced commodity board as there is simply no point to trade certain products) and that credits have been superseded by mats as the real currency
5. No PvE Co-Op gameplay with NPCs. We had this in Privateer in the 90s. Why can't I hire NPC wingmen?
6. Lack of meaningful (excepting your own head cannon) gameplay for piracy, smuggling, etc. Why even silent run now?
Elite thrives on imagination, but the lack of world building and honestly the lack of developed gameplay really limit this.
Feature creep is a thing too, so the quest for new shinies is at the expense of properly developing what we have in meaningful ways has always been concerning (cf: Powerplay, multicrew)
I'm a LEP with plenty of hours in game, so I don't begrudge the money I have spent, but i would love to see a Game Designer at the helm - perhaps DB needs to let go of his project to let it thrive.
Frontier with it's bulletin board of missing people, police stings and so one meant that each station feels more alive than what we currently have.
I think the technical aspects of Elite are great - 1-2-1 galaxy, gfx and the sound design are sublime (notwithstanding Odyssey issues, obvs)
Where Elite has struggled is with gameplay, and making the ED world feel "alive". I'm sure this is non-trivial with the ambitious scale of the galaxy but the following always strike me as bizarre:-
1. All ships are new, and need no maintenance (A hangover from Frontier where not servicing your drive would lead to misjumps)
2. Nav beacons, system security and govt type - like I can jump into a Dictatorship having a civil war and fly around with impunity.
3. No attempt to have CQC in the main game, where a booth allowing it could be easily in every station.
4. The economy (in the regard that there may as well be a much reduced commodity board as there is simply no point to trade certain products) and that credits have been superseded by mats as the real currency
5. No PvE Co-Op gameplay with NPCs. We had this in Privateer in the 90s. Why can't I hire NPC wingmen?
6. Lack of meaningful (excepting your own head cannon) gameplay for piracy, smuggling, etc. Why even silent run now?
Elite thrives on imagination, but the lack of world building and honestly the lack of developed gameplay really limit this.
Feature creep is a thing too, so the quest for new shinies is at the expense of properly developing what we have in meaningful ways has always been concerning (cf: Powerplay, multicrew)
I'm a LEP with plenty of hours in game, so I don't begrudge the money I have spent, but i would love to see a Game Designer at the helm - perhaps DB needs to let go of his project to let it thrive.
The problem with making a world feel believable and lived-in is a hard thing to do with computer games. Frontier didn't have much choice with Elite Dangerous because it's set in the Milky Way galaxy, thanks to FEII being set here. If FEII had stayed set in 1984's Elite universe, that's where we'd be now with Elite Dangerous, a smaller game world (in this case, a galaxy). In some ways, Star Citizen are taking the right approach with focusing on a single system, and the oft-repeated phrase of "A mile wide and an inch deep" is not without merit when it comes to Elite Dangerous, because a galaxy of 400 Billion systems is hard to make feel populated due to its sheer size.
I don't have the answers, and I don't think anyone does, not even within Frontier. If someone had the answers and made a perfect Space Game, then we'd all be playing that. We all make compromises with the games we play, even hardcore simulators like Microsoft Flight Simulator, simply because it's not real, it's a simulation. Where people in the Elite community are finding dissatisfaction is, I think, because there are too many compromises being made by Frontier in the wrong areas for the player's enjoyment.
I don't have the answers, and I don't think anyone does, not even within Frontier. If someone had the answers and made a perfect Space Game, then we'd all be playing that. We all make compromises with the games we play, even hardcore simulators like Microsoft Flight Simulator, simply because it's not real, it's a simulation. Where people in the Elite community are finding dissatisfaction is, I think, because there are too many compromises being made by Frontier in the wrong areas for the player's enjoyment.
Maybe, maybe... But from the get-go it has been MVP, Random generation rather than proper coding and shoddy untested release after shoddy untested release. The net code was unfot for purpose from the outset, yet they persisted with it and still do. Feature were delivered 'use it or we don't support it' yet those delivered features were garbage. Looking at MultiCrew here... Combat AI, has been plagued with 'we cant do real AI so we'll use bullet sponges'... The list goes on. And then to put the icing on the cake they deliver Odyssey and the best we get is 'we understand your frustration'... From the CEO no less... What's actually needed is a mass complaint to the British Standards of Trading.
As another day one player with over 1500 hours in the game, this pretty much sums up how I feel too. Fixing the bugs in Odyssey won't change things. It's the wasted opportunity and lack of ambition that's killing this game. They just seem happy to coast along, churning out more the same old shallow mediocre content, same as before. No matter how much shallow grind they heap into the game, it will never be more than that. It won't suddenly reach critical mass and transform into deep engaging content.
I mean I sympathise with what you're saying, but this will acheive nothing - there's no legal recourse here (as refunds have already been given) - caveat emptor in the end.
Deleted member 182079
D
It is interesting though that you don't get notoriety for killing NPCs. I'd say we all know the answer as to why that is.