Is ED cursed? 'Cursed Problems in Game Design'

[-VR- Max Factor]

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.

NMS is about as shallow a game as it gets. If you want me to compare the design prowess of HG and Fdev, well I would say the FDev peas all over HG.

Yes NMS get updates regularly, but they are shallow updates. Even the "major" updates haven't added that much in the grand scheme of things if you really have a close look at what they are adding.

NMS is awful. As to NMS freighters that's fine for a game like NMS which is basically a single player fantasy game in space. They would look pretty silly in a game like ED that has a semi believable hard sci-fi setting.

 

[CMDR Tony]

The video is 51 minutes long, so we really need a TLDR summary.

By accident I happened upon the point of the video at the 5 minute timer. Skim through, the guy is still saying the same thing through and through. (Others' opinions may vary.) The essential element appears to be, don't make promises you can't keep ... which, of course, leads to silence

And don't make promises you don't intend to keep.

 

[House0fDerp]

NMS is about as shallow a game as it gets. If you want me to compare the design prowess of HG and Fdev, well I would say the FDev peas all over HG.

Yes NMS get updates regularly, but they are shallow updates. Even the "major" updates haven't added that much in the grand scheme of things if you really have a close look at what they are adding.

NMS is awful. As to NMS freighters that's fine for a game like NMS which is basically a single player fantasy game in space. They would look pretty silly in a game like ED that has a semi believable hard sci-fi setting.

Wow, that's a chunk of vitrol.

I mean sure, NMS is intentionally pop-scifi and that doesn't scratch some people's itch but it's a competently developed and updated game and doesn't stop being so because it's not your cup of tea.

 

[Commander Biscuit]

So you can look for reasons all you like "Frontier are bad at community management", "cursed aspects of game development" or whatever, the blame lies firmly at our door, not Frontier's (and no, this doesn't excuse Frontier, but don't blame them before you acknowledge our own faults first).

Company annoys fans/customers
Fans/customers push back
Company clams up on development prompting neverending pushback
Fans/customers are to blame

Not all companies are in FD's awkward position, and FD's fanbase is not uniquely different to any other fanbase. This just sounds like more "gamers are toxic" stuff to me.

Some companies are loved, some are hated. The responsibility for public perception of them rests with them.

 

[ShimEnki]

Many of the major games hold to this silence---Zenimax, Rockstar etc
They agree and are practicing the below
"He that openeth his lips too wide shall have destruction" (Proverbs 13:3)

 

[IPFreely]

I wonder what would happen if a game ( any game- you choose ), that didn't insist on being playable by any pc or console and concentrated on only the top tier of PC's - The PC I'm inferring is the top-end gaming PC's - Top graphics cards, CPU's, at least 32 g of Ram etc. - I know a machine of this nature changes every 6 months or so with the Moore's Law of computers - But, it would be interesting to see what a game would look and play like at this level of design. - Market share would [robably drop dramatically at this level but the game footage would still be interesting to see and maybe help spur others to improve their machines to 2021 levels, instead of playing on 10 or 20-year-old machines.

 

[Wrecked]

The reason they dont talk is because no matter what they do they get relentlessly critizied.

Do you think it is because FDev doesn’t know their customer or do you think it is just the nature of this community? There are plenty of other game communities that are perfectly happy with the game and its developer. This community seems abnormally passionate about this game. I know I have a level of passion for this game that I’ve never had for another which is precisely why I criticize so much. I want to see it succeed and a forum full of people just having fun.

 

[Wrecked]

No that's not. I would much rather prefer to be in the situation where I pay for a billboard to say thank you FDEV for the good job!

This is a perfect example of a what happens when a company listens to and learns about their community and the actually takes action. Hello Games went from death threats to a thank you billboard across the street funded by their community in three years.

This is a prime example of the difference between a company ran by passionate people who love gaming and a company that seems to just be driven by playtime statistics and the bottom line.

 

[Teh Smoo]

Are there any "cursed problems" specific to Elite Dangerous? It's an interesting video anyway!

Well, Fleet Carriers are pretty cursed.

Fleet Carriers are supposed to be endgame content.

As endgame, they want to remove as much money as possible from literal billionaires who have varying amounts of lots-of-free-time
As content, they need to be accessible to as many players as possible (at least eventually) who DON'T necessarily have infinite money and/or time.

So they simply need to be really expensive and also affordable. Uh, okay.

The rationalization from the former group is pretty universally "just don't use it then." Which is a pretty crappy position to take. SOME people can manage it, but it other people can't, well, tough on them? What makes one player group more important than another? DLC purchases? Amount of free time? Skill? And how MUCH of those things are required? Should everyone else just uninstall?

And, quite frankly, maybe people on disability can and do farm 12 hours a day as efficiently as possible. Should everyone else's gameplay be pegged to junk, simply because they can't or won't spend scads of time mining LTD or whatever makes the most money this patch?


I've suggested management sim features- so the rich players can operate at a loss with everything engaged messily, and just plow around via expenditure of money. And the rest of the players can play smart, move a bit less, make choices and go where they can make some credits. But I really don't think FD can manage something like that.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Wow, that's a chunk of vitrol.

I mean sure, NMS is intentionally pop-scifi and that doesn't scratch some people's itch but it's a competently developed and updated game and doesn't stop being so because it's not your cup of tea.

That's a matter of opinion. I could say the same about people that have a pop at ED and Fdev.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

I wonder what would happen if a game ( any game- you choose ), that didn't insist on being playable by any pc or console and concentrated on only the top tier of PC's - The PC I'm inferring is the top-end gaming PC's - Top graphics cards, CPU's, at least 32 g of Ram etc. - I know a machine of this nature changes every 6 months or so with the Moore's Law of computers - But, it would be interesting to see what a game would look and play like at this level of design. - Market share would [robably drop dramatically at this level but the game footage would still be interesting to see and maybe help spur others to improve their machines to 2021 levels, instead of playing on 10 or 20-year-old machines.

If a game requires 32G of main PC ram (not graphics ram) my main suspicion would be that the developers were terrible and had left a serious memory leak in there somewhere, not that the game was going to be great. I can't think of a plausible reason for a game to hold that much data in memory at once other than poor programming.

Similarly with graphics card requirements, I'm sure it'd make the game look better, but as that has to be backed up by high-resolution textures and models, which take longer to make, the game would take much longer to develop and cost more to develop ... which then makes restricting it to a tiny market share a really bad idea, and also risks it being obsolete when it finally comes out anyway because by then the next two generations of graphics cards are released. (The exception would be use of graphics cards for massively parallel computation of non-graphical data, as e.g. ED does for planetary surface generation - making more use of that sort of thing could potentially allow more interesting environments and simulations)

Modern hardware is already advanced enough not to be the main limitation on game design.

 

[hydlided]

Are there any "cursed problems" specific to Elite Dangerous? It's an interesting video anyway!

I have been watching parts of the video and I do somewhat like the concept on how he goes on about this topic. While in relation to Elite Dangerous I am not really sure if the game is cursed in this context. I do believe that the part where you have "Millions of systems to explore" vs "Interaction Vibrant and Diverse" is where Elite dangerous kind of lacks it in that area (because there is limit amount of different type of planets and the system composition isn't what makes the system interesting enough to keep myself entertained).

There are also parts that do not really relate to Elite Dangerous in the context of the video. For instance, it is not a game to play to win (something that gets mentioned quite often in this video).

I would park ED more in the category of: "community", "developers", "making a universe".

If someone would make a video about this connection, I would say that this is a cursed mechanic. Because the community has different ideas on how the game should be played. The developers have an idea of how the game should be played. And these do not always connect with one and other (engineering, fleet carriers just to name 2 examples).

Another problem with this is that the community is often way larger than the company that makes the game. If the community than would speak its mind this would mean that a lot of people are sharing "their opinion" vs the few developers that can implement features. Thus this results in a disconnect with the game when those ideas of the community are not implemented (so you can call that 'cursed' if you like).

I think the most complicated part when looking at a game as ED is that is always evolving and changes. But these changes sometimes connect with the people who play the game and sometimes they do not connect with people who play the game. In most cases, the negative views will spawn more heavy (I am mainly looking at stuff I have seen on Steam forums, Eve Online, Youtube, and this forum for instance). And this will result into a 'curse' if you will. Because negativity will spawn more negativity and thus people are more eager to jump on to express their opinion.

If someone would say "this is awesome"... there is barely any comment on it being awesome because no person would want to say "I agree because of...". It is just easier to be against something than being positive about something. The army who is positive about something is usually pretty quiet. The army who is negative about something... well they want to express their opinion. Because they do not agree with it so they need to express their opinion. And that is something I also find a bit 'cursed'. Negativity leads to lesser sales, thus the project gets canned.

So yeah... when I take my own argument about the community vs developers than I would say that the game is cursed in a big way.

 

[ebbrell]

I also think its cursed by the forum. they are not able to use the original ideas and design due to people complaining about stuff.... so they change things and make it harder to fit into design so far.

 

[Rat Catcher]

If someone would say "this is awesome"... there is barely any comment on it being awesome because no person would want to say "I agree because of...". It is just easier to be against something than being positive about something. The army who is positive about something is usually pretty quiet. The army who is negative about something... well they want to express their opinion. Because they do not agree with it so they need to express their opinion. And that is something I also find a bit 'cursed'. Negativity leads to lesser sales, thus the project gets canned.

I also think its cursed by the forum. they are not able to use the original ideas and design due to people complaining about stuff.... so they change things and make it harder to fit into design so far.

Look at this: some wisdom appears on the forum, well said both!

What, in my opinion, would be the ideal situation is that Frontier just withdraw from all of the (un)Social Media channels, can the forum and just get on with developing the game THEY want, without 'useful' suggestions from every 'forum developer' (as so many players appear to be top-notch games developers) and the squealing like a stuck pig from both PvE & PvP players about being neglected...

Without all of this 'immensely valuable feedback' coming from the few we just get the game Frontier want, and opt to spend our money or not, simple.

(I actually enjoy being part of the forum userbase, it is often hilarious to participate in!)

 

[Rudi Raumkraut]

“Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing.”
– Aristotle

“Remember: when people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.”
– Neil Gaiman

“The trouble with most of us is that we'd rather be ruined by praise than saved by criticism.”
– Norman Vincent Peale

“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.”
– Winston Churchill

+1 for a Neil Gaiman quote between Aristotle and Churchill

 

[VR jefranklin18]

BONUS: Added into that their need for perceived infallibility over a flawed product and the second chance / forgiveness token is gone too, if you're not a white knight, or a beneficiary of frontiers marketing spend at real world events.

Exactly this. Rather than getting the best of the best with honours to tour Frontier Towers, why not get some of the more vocal critics? It would be a lot more effective for a group of passionate but vocal critics to come on here and say "sorry guys, we were wrong. Frontier do care and what is coming in the future is worth waiting for" than same old, same old.

 

[Bigmaec]

+1 for a Neil Gaiman quote between Aristotle and Churchill

It was fitting. Also he made much better TV series and novels then Aristotle or Churchill combined

 

[Rat Catcher]

It was fitting. Also he made much better TV series and novels then Aristotle or Churchill combined

... and co-wrote with one of the greatest fantasy/humour witers too!

 

[zimms]

Many of the major games hold to this silence---Zenimax, Rockstar etc
They agree and are practicing the below
"He that openeth his lips too wide shall have destruction" (Proverbs 13:3)

The silent approach only works if you stick to it from the very beginning. When you tell your customers about all kinds of stuff they "will be able to do" in the game and six years later most of that still is nowhere to be seen, people will get a bit impatient. Especially when that implied content played a big role in the decision whether to buy the game.

So I guess your quote still applies to Frontier and going back to "didn't say a word" doesn't work.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

The silent approach only works if you stick to it from the very beginning. When you tell your customers about all kinds of stuff they "will be able to do" in the game and six years later most of that still is nowhere to be seen, people will get a bit impatient. Especially when that implied content played a big role in the decision whether to buy the game.