You should really start reading the messages you reply to...
I excluded the "fun scale" in the very first line.
In fact it was pretty obvious that the discussion was about the developers dedication to their own product.
Is ED cursed? 'Cursed Problems in Game Design'
- Thread starter Rocky-451
- Start date
I excluded the "fun scale" in the very first line.
In fact it was pretty obvious that the discussion was about the developers dedication to their own product.
In ED it's PvP vs PvE. The illustration suggests he uses Overwatch as example so that's a PvP game. Which is played in teams, so it's not really about the same thing. Or is carebear commonly used among Overwatch audience too?
And what is stopping you from playing NMS and at the same time what makes you waste time on ED forums?
I mean i spent more than 3000 hours in ED - because i like it.
And i'm not the only one.
So those designers must be doing something good.
Then you haven't seen the NMS community I've seen. The excited and happy NMS community in Discord for instance. HG's is currently knocking it out of the park with their fan's. So you're not one. That's not the point.
The point is not that the games are the same. They're not. The point is that HG is really doing some great development. The designs and the play-ability of their Freighters (ie Fleet Carriers) are fantastic especially in comparison the haft baked release we're currently testing. The volumetric clouds and weather effects in NMS are worth a couple awards!
Anyone can cherry pick points of a game that aren't so good like the fact that the NMS flight model is terrible terrible terrible. Again that's not the point. The level of development being put in by HG currently puts Frontier to shame!
-----
IT IS fair to compare the levels of effort and design prowess of HG vs Frontier in these two games and it is hard to do that without concluding that HG is kicking butt for their fans and Frontier is not for theirs.
Last edited:
No but there are also hardcore and carebear players in PvE alone too. The terms describe a mindset of human (players) rather than their prefared playstyles themselves.
Stop guessing and listen real opinions instead
I'm not a gamer but I like flight simulation. I've definitely spent much more money and time on MS Flight Simulator than Elite Dangerous, so this is not the game of my life. The reason why I play ED so is purely for the simulation style, that all other space games are missing. In fact I've always admitted that the ED flight models are the best between the current space games.
When NMS was released I forgot about ED for almost a year. I reached my end-game content and I was satisfied with it. The same happened with other games of course. All those games had their potential fully developed in my opinion, so they fulfilled the typical game expectations.
Instead my critics towards FDEV are because the game got a lot of unused potential that they seem to completely ignore. I come to this forum to shout all the wrongs about the game hoping that they gets improved and/or fixed (guess why I have a diamond as avatar...). The problem is that on the other side there's just a wall.
In this perspective I'm more useful to FDEV than a White Knight. In fact accepting or trying to justify mistakes will never make anyone/anything better.
Last edited:
"Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.” ~ Bill Gates
This is especially true when large groups of customers are in agreement on failings (the big strokes at least) like they have been with Fleet Carriers!
I agree but the games core logic and mechanics are set in stone right now, its too far in development to make any magiac change I think.
They get criticized for not talking too. Every game company gets criticized for something. The good ones grow a thick skin and still keep their fans informed. Fdev should learn from that.
Exactly my point, so after their great designs and development the game is good? I booted the thing up couple of months back. After having to (manually) change my saved files through a 'tool' (something a 3rd party (!) provided) in order to fix my mission story line, 1 hour later I'm sitting in ship I've had for 3 years, and I'm still not sure what color it is. The first message I get when I want to take off tells me I need to get out out to shoot red stuff with my super soaker. I jump out and a storm of a wooping 32 degrees C starts to burn me to a crisp all the while being chased by a walking hamburger.
The amount of updates, the amount of work and dedication regardless, its impossible to play that game.
Perhaps I should have injected the "Comparing performance" as I'd considered!
Excellent reply
If they announced what's coming in a year's time, and then delivered exactly what they'd promised, they'd still be criticised. "Is that it? We knew about all that a year ago, I was hoping for a surprise..." They don't want to spend 1-2 years on a major DLC / upgrade and have it be 'stale' before it's ever released. (Plus, it would be pretty silly to say "we want to know what's coming. And also a surprise...". This isn't a Kinder egg you're playing)
That said, it is pretty funny how little we know about what's coming in the game. Some day we should be able to visit atmospheric planets... but will we be able to visit gas giants? Water worlds? Those fiery worlds with loads of volcanic/tectonic activity? We're likely to get some kind of space legs at some stage. But on the ships? Stations? Planet surfaces? Visit Earth? Capital ships/megaships/carriers/generation ships? Will we be able to EVA? Board other ships?
In retrospect, I find it odd that I chose to buy the LEP without having any firm idea what I was buying. I THOUGHT it was Horizons and maybe 5 other similar 'seasons', but now that seems increasingly unlikely.
If rumours are true, and base-building will be part of the new era, THEN it will be possible to meaningfully compare NMS and ED. At the moment they're about completely different things.
NMS (which I also love) has barely any interest in space flight or combat, and this is what ED excels at.
I think a lot of the grief they get is because they've got a simulation mad audience and lots of things that seem like obvious improvements (persistent NPCs, for example) would be extremely difficult to figure out in a multiplayer game. It's not just a coding issue, it's managing the very complicated game logic you'd be dealing with. You'd be in a world of exponentially expanding bugs.
I'm not so much of a simulation person, and I think quite a lot of the gameplay limitations are tied up with it being a spaceship simulator. There are only so many ways you can interact with the world from behind a joystick.
So, if we get space legs, that will open up a huge amount of more interesting ways to interact with ED's galaxy.
NMS (which I also love) has barely any interest in space flight or combat, and this is what ED excels at.
I think a lot of the grief they get is because they've got a simulation mad audience and lots of things that seem like obvious improvements (persistent NPCs, for example) would be extremely difficult to figure out in a multiplayer game. It's not just a coding issue, it's managing the very complicated game logic you'd be dealing with. You'd be in a world of exponentially expanding bugs.
I'm not so much of a simulation person, and I think quite a lot of the gameplay limitations are tied up with it being a spaceship simulator. There are only so many ways you can interact with the world from behind a joystick.
So, if we get space legs, that will open up a huge amount of more interesting ways to interact with ED's galaxy.
I agree entirelyStop guessing and listen real opinions instead
I'm not a gamer but I like flight simulation. I've definitely spent much more money and time on MS Flight Simulator than Elite Dangerous, so this is not the game of my life. The reason why I play ED so is purely for the simulation style, that all other space games are missing. In fact I've always admitted that the ED flight models are the best between the current space games.
When NMS was released I forgot about ED for almost a year. I reached my end-game content and I was satisfied with it. The same happened with other games of course. All those games had their potential fully developed in my opinion, so they fulfilled the typical game expectations.
Instead my critics towards FDEV are because the game got a lot of unused potential that they seem to completely ignore. I come to this forum to shout all the wrongs about the game hoping that they gets improved and/or fixed (guess why I have a diamond as avatar...). The problem is that on the other side there's just a wall.
In this perspective I'm more useful to FDEV than a White Knight. In fact accepting or trying to justify mistakes will never make anyone/anything better.
What your opinion considers to be 'wrongs' in the game is certainly going to be your own, although not necessarily shared by another, or even the game developers...
If I perceived the game to have shortcomings against what I wanted it to be, I'd expect the same response, and, naturally, to have my 'ideas' shouted down by those who disagree with me as my perception of what the game 'could' be is far away from the opinions held by many here. As it stands, it is pretty much 'just right' as a piece of entertainment software in my view, not brilliant nor abysmal.
I reserve the right not to shout at a brick wall...
...and guess your 'diamond' is a protest against LTD mining, as mine is a protest against trolls... Neither creates solutions
I'd argue that most design choices Frontier makes are grounded in creating a believable simulation. And some of these choices are not 'game-y fun' but are more realistic. To name a few:
- Fleet carriers requiring upkeep: a lot of people work on a fleet carrier, they need to get paid.
- Seemingly immovable economies: with economies over 5 billion people, is it really that believable that a couple of commanders can actually influence that.
- Crew wages: they work for you so they need to get paid.
- Having to 'work' for credits, so you can buy bigger ships.
I guess you don't read the steam discussion group then
I agree entirely, HG is kicking butt to deliver 'content' - much of it to 'fix' the bits they broke, or additional content that must appeal to someone... I don't dislike the game, I've put around 300 hours into it, but in comparison to pre-horizons there has been 'compromises' made that negatively affect the game since in my opinion.
Funny, I quite like the simplicity of flying the NMS ships... (but I don't expect it to be a competitor to ED)
Nothing HG do could 'put frontier to shame', in my opinion, until the Next Era content is released... Then maybe
But you are entitled to hold your own opinion, of course.
I think this one is perfect.
Pretty much every game studio is going to get relentlessly criticized with every announcement. It, regrettably, is just an inevitable part of community management these days. Expecting otherwise is just naive, and not communicating because of it is just doing a good job of communication. It's like a diver not doing their job because "it's really wet out there."
Calling CMDR Exigeous....he'll boil this thing down to 3 minutes. He is the cure for bloviating content creators and could therefore rightly be dubbed the savior of the internet.