I'm losing faith in the 10yr plan.

[sensai25]

The main trouble is that people dream tons of content, embrace what devs could talk about and imagine how it will be implemented.

Dream, wishes and imagination lead to disappointment. Because devs have sometimes difficulties to put promise stuff into right order in the game.

Instead I do prefer enjoy what I have to play with and participate to Q&A in order to propose stuff. Sometimes devs do listing.

 

[WeirdWizard]

So stop focusing on it and debate the unique elements of gameplay if brought into 5 previous posts.

But no your are focusing on that and blaming people to do so. Really ?

Unique gameplay elements is the way.

Well you could always try apologising and admitting you were wrong in first place. Anyway I'm not here to debate the unique gameplay you find in ED. I'm here because the 10 year plan meme only hurts the game and the community by providing a crutch and an unrealistic expectation of future development overhauling the game. It won't and that's a shame but it's better to view the game with clear eyes and find enjoyment (or not) for what it is, not what you imagine it might become.

 

[sensai25]

Well you could always try apologising and admitting you were wrong in first place. Anyway I'm not here to debate the unique gameplay you find in ED. I'm here because the 10 year plan meme only hurts the game and the community by providing a crutch and an unrealistic expectation of future development overhauling the game. It won't and that's a shame but it's better to view the game with clear eyes and find enjoyment (or not) for what it is, not what you imagine it might become.

And still you keep going the wrong way. Debate, bring me other unique gameplay counter arguments. I bring them and I wait

But no focus the other pointless way

 

[Marc_Hicks]

Almost forgot. I think a Karma system, coupled with a more granular Crime & Punishment system will be a huge shot in the arm for the game....even moreso for Open.

 

[WeirdWizard]

And still you keep going the wrong way. Debate, bring me other unique gameplay counter arguments. I bring them and I wait

But no focus the other pointless way

and still you haven't apologised or admitted you were wrong to try and undermine the thread with your elite dying strawman. You want to discuss unique gameplay then start a thread to do so.

 

[Mikey2305]

oh joy, yet another doom and gloom thread...

(apologies for that, a little snarky!)

 

[sensai25]

The OP asked for it. Unique gameplay.

I bring 5 entire posts of valid arguments without any valid counter arguments.

I just have in front of me some "locked mind" people refusing to debate. Quite sad attitude.

 

[Mengy]

I'm not losing faith in the ten year plan, but I will admit I have similar feelings to the OP. I simply haven't been a fan of the development focus of Frontier for the game, I feel like so much potential for improved and new core gameplay mechanics have been neglected or squandered to instead add stuff that seemed very impractical or limited. That said though, patch 2.2 was by far my favorite update to the game, as it added some very engaging new mechanics and improvements that were FINALLY not purely combat stuff! I'm hoping it's a new trend that Frontier continues as combat feels "well done" to me, although the upcoming multicrew seems to go back to the combat focused development. Maybe 2.3 will include some other great things that we just don't know about yet, or possibly 2.4 will return to fleshing out other aspects of the game. Or, maybe 2.2 was a fluke and I'm getting my hopes up for nothing, and that lingering sentiment in me which sympathizes with the OP might be right.

Time will tell, but I'd be lying if I said a part of me didn't agree with the OP. 2.2 gave me serious hope though.

 

[sensai25]

For instance 2.3 is mostly not an update for me as the gameplay around Multicrew is not for my kind of style play.

But I'll keep playing. Not every update should fit to anyone 100%.

 

[SkipRat]

There is a lot of active players. Yesterday is the most populated day since January 2016.

So another "we're doomed thread" for nothing

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/f8abb10c-ba74-4a11-a591-eeb18b6c2b23.jpg

Just because people play it, doesn't make it good. Seeing as most modern gamer's are whiny little millennial, instant gratification, bad excuses for brainfarts.

The game has become nothing more than a credits per hour bore fest with no thinking required. AS for this oh the Thargoids (More like thyroids) are here... Just a gimmick to cover over the glaring faults and huge mistakes during the games development.

- - - Updated - - -

Steam user numbers have been used to support the premise that "Elite: Dangerous is dying" since people have been able to access them.

Elite: Dangerous is still here.

Refuse to accept the word dangerous, it is more like Elite: Pansy

 

[babelfisch]

Where was that claim made by anyone in this thread? Once in a blue moon a thread does crop up making that claim but the other 99% of the time its mentioned is by people straw maning with it.

It started with this:

I don't care much for Steam stats but you actually pulled numbers supporting the 'ED is losing players and not recovering back' threads.

And I explained why this conclusion would be wrong. Any problem with that?

PS

There is a really ugly tendency in these forums for people to shout down and/or belittle any attempt at people expressing dissatisfaction, usually either by misrepresenting their position as something it isn't or by outright insulting them.

You are the one misrepresenting my position

 

[Mikey2305]

Absolutely no point in entering any kind of discussion or dialogue here. Attitudes are fixed and immovable. Game is rubbish. No other thought or opinion is valid. Does God exist? Yes/no/dont know

so i wont. And my wit and insight will be lost forever

 

[Ian Phillips]

Refuse to accept the word dangerous, it is more like Elite: Pansy

Playing it your way?

 

[SnowyNI]

There is a lot of active players. Yesterday is the most populated day since January 2016.

So another "we're doomed thread" for nothing

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/f8abb10c-ba74-4a11-a591-eeb18b6c2b23.jpg

Look again in a month.. that is all...

 

[Luponator]

It started with this:

And I explained why this conclusion would be wrong. Any problem with that?

With respect Sir, you didn't prove the conclusion would be wrong. You proved that you read it different- which is fine. I argued that the data can be read in both ways. Which is besides the point, besides the OP's point, and also not implying I'm considering ED dying. I'm arguing that the data presented is so weak that it does not support the implied conclusion.

With that said, here we go:

https://s27.postimg.org/lh1dh4ggz/ed_steam_chart.jpg (I am too stupid to embed this. Don't ask me why)

These are peak players.
You actually have a rough descending triangle with a triple tops & bottoms at the end. Support line is at roughly 5k, resistance around 10k, implying that should the peak playerbase drop below 5k there would probably be a problem and if the peak playerbase breaks out over 10k something's afoot.
This could also be read that after an all-time high end of October 2015, the peak player base consistently dropped to it's equilibrium of about 6k. The equilibrium changed August to a stable 9k with a noticeable decline before, and recovery over the Christmas period.
The increase in Peak players Jan 2017 indicates that the Thargoid event is driving up player numbers for that particular event- it will be interesting to see where the numbers stabilise in 3-4 months.

Conclusion one: From it's peak in October 2015 to it's latest peak in Jan, ED has lost about 7k peak players/month (or 40%)
Conclusion two: The Xmas period plus the Thargoid event nearly doubled peak players/month from 5,5k to 11k, sending it into recovery (technically speaking).

This is all meaningless because it does not count the non-steam players, nor the XBox players, nor the PS4 players. But it shows that I can massage and read the data any way I see fit.
As such, I have to respectfully disagree Babelfish and you didn't prove any conclusion more right or wrong than my on-purpose interpretation of the data would allow it.

All of this is besides the point and academical. It's totally unrelated to the OP's point.

 

[Wylie28]

Guys do not use steamstats.com for measuring a playerbase size. That graph is CONCURRENT players. If you want to compare playerbase size over periods of time use the active players over 2 weeks graph.
Also steam shows a small fraction of the playerbase. Ever poll ever made shows there are 2x more people who directly launch ED.

 

[Kubicide]

My motivation to play ED is dropping fast lately. Looking back at the past 2 years there are a some developments that don't sit well with me.

1. Combat gameplay seems to have become the game's headline feature and has become more and more arcade-like, especially since Engineers.

2. Standard MMO gameplay was added to create infinite gameplay loops (Powerplay) and drawn-out 'must grind to be competitive' gameplay (Engineers).

3. The greatest assets of the game (400 billion starsystems and 30 years of lore) were all but ignored as a basis for new gameplay.

4. The long term storyline in the game (Thargoids are coming!) seems exclusive content for a happy few with degrees in encryption and audio analysis.

A unique game needs unique gameplay. The Kickstarter campaign raised expectations (with me at least) of a game where one could shape one's own adventures based on trading, exploration and lore, set in a huge galaxy and spiced with exciting, meaningful and dangerous combat. And all of that enhanced with a new multiplayer experience (coop and PvP).

To me it seems the game is heading towards a mix of arcade space shooter (PvP and PvE) with standard MMO 'grind for stuff'. True, it is set in a magnificent galaxy, but that is almost irrelevant for gameplay.

I hope I'm wrong.

Well, OP the good news is there never was a 10 year plan so you have nothing to lose faith over! Elite is what it is and development changes course every few months to wherever the next money grabbing opportunity lays. We're now on course for a PS4 money grab; everything else is secondary even completing Horizons. To me Elite has already turned into more of an arcade console shooter and continues to head down this path. FDev really only have experience in making simple single player console arcade games so I guess this should have been expected from the start.

Lots of cute replies from those defending the game's current state but the simple fact is not everyone is happy with what we have nor the direction it's taking. Some players have higher expectations wanting something more than a shallow pew-pew experience. Let's hope things change and FDev "raises the bar" to meet some of these expectations, and make the game more than the simple arcade experience it's becoming.

The great first contact reveal this past week is quite interesting for this discussion since it's simply more of nothing unless one likes playing senseless RNG for hours just to see a non-interactive, scripted and hard-wired animation. The encounter content itself is something FDev simply switched on (and this should remind us of when Jacques Station was first introduced where everyone expected to see these stations actually move only to be let down when it was revealed that "the jump" takes place instantly when the server is updated). For the new encounter players didn't discover it 'by chance' as Maia and the surrounding region has been visited countless times. It didn't bring new gameplay and there's no skill involved or puzzle to unlock or (new) challenge for the player. Frankly, the excitement and attention it's getting shows just how content-starved this game is. And whatever motivation it stimulates or generates is short lived. Let's see what actually gets implemented next. Have to say I don't expect it to raise the bar or raise it much. But I too hope I'm wrong.


Oh, and it's worth repeating that there is no 10 year plan. It's a theory crafted concept by a fan as someone already posted.






- - - Updated - - -

Guys do not use steamstats.com for measuring a playerbase size. That graph is CONCURRENT players. If you want to compare playerbase size over periods of time use the active players over 2 weeks graph.
Also steam shows a small fraction of the playerbase. Ever poll ever made shows there are 2x more people who directly launch ED.

And actually - if anything - these stats probably simply show the actual number of LTP holders and hard core fans! I'd expect this group to be the ones always online playing the most. Doesn't 3000-4000 out of x00,000 playerbase sound about right? [big grin]

 

[Ian Skippy]

3. The greatest assets of the game (400 billion starsystems and 30 years of lore) were all but ignored as a basis for new gameplay.

Right. So going from a perfect little ball with a texture on it to incredibly PG planets you can land os 'all but ignored'? And if you think there is no lore you obviously havent been following much.

 

[Luponator]

Right. So going from a perfect little ball with a texture on it to incredibly PG planets you can land os 'all but ignored'? And if you think there is no lore you obviously havent been following much.

To be fair, ED doesn't make it easy to 'follow' things in-game. That doesn't mean there's nothing to follow (nor speak for or against it's quality) but I think the point that the lore representation in-game could do with improvement is quite valid.

- - - Updated - - -

Guys do not use steamstats.com for measuring a playerbase size. That graph is CONCURRENT players. If you want to compare playerbase size over periods of time use the active players over 2 weeks graph.
Also steam shows a small fraction of the playerbase. Ever poll ever made shows there are 2x more people who directly launch ED.

I'm happy to abuse any other data taken from any other data source and massage it to show whatever's required, heh
That aside, spot on with regards to the wider playerbase.

 

[Ian Skippy]

To be fair, ED doesn't make it easy to 'follow' things in-game. That doesn't mean there's nothing to follow (nor speak for or against it's quality) but I think the point that the lore representation in-game could do with improvement is quite valid.

True, but thats a different point. You can argue its hard to follow the rather deep and complex lore, you can argue FD should somehow involve people more in-game, or nudge them towards realising there is stuff. But you cant argue 'FD just makes pewpew game, they dont care about lore or the galaxy.' Its just inane nonsense.