There is a subset of players that want a single player game where they can set or circumvent all the rules so they can have whatever it is they want when they want it without trying...for various personal reasons.
They exist in this game because fdev made stupid promises early on and kept being stupid by not committing to a game identity.
These players aren't going to be happy with anything but effectively 0 cost and effectively infinite credits. And they've been rather surprisingly effective at crying the loudest to get their way. Costs of everything are so low that they are achievable by anyone with a lazy weekend to play. 5 billion in a month and then the cost of maintaining your new FC toy is laughably easy now to the point where tons of players come June will have enough credits to upkeep their fc for the lifetime of the game day 1.
the problem with elite dangerous isn't that it's too difficult. haha.. not even close. It's that it's far far too easy while at the same time, not having anything rewarding to offer players if it were actually corrected in difficulty. That's why everything you do feels empty and devoid of purpose and meaning. Absolutely everything is a grind mechanic you can do infinite numbers of times and not impact anything in the game.
To make the corrections needed to have ED be an engaging game you need to create a reward for player achievements that matters to the entire game and would likely be something abstract rather than a currency or thing you get in the game and it would have to be player based to a heavy degree so that fdev is not in control over the direction the game goes due to player actions. You'd also probably have to get rid of the third party api setup to eliminate easy advantages groups of players can have over individual players. That would allow you to right-size the costs of things since now there would be real incentive to do things in a non-boring grindfest environment - even if most of the activities haven't technically changed. Their outcome would have changed from being something that doesn't matter, to something that does. So you'd want to create much higher limits on how frequently they are completed.
They exist in this game because fdev made stupid promises early on and kept being stupid by not committing to a game identity.
These players aren't going to be happy with anything but effectively 0 cost and effectively infinite credits. And they've been rather surprisingly effective at crying the loudest to get their way. Costs of everything are so low that they are achievable by anyone with a lazy weekend to play. 5 billion in a month and then the cost of maintaining your new FC toy is laughably easy now to the point where tons of players come June will have enough credits to upkeep their fc for the lifetime of the game day 1.
the problem with elite dangerous isn't that it's too difficult. haha.. not even close. It's that it's far far too easy while at the same time, not having anything rewarding to offer players if it were actually corrected in difficulty. That's why everything you do feels empty and devoid of purpose and meaning. Absolutely everything is a grind mechanic you can do infinite numbers of times and not impact anything in the game.
To make the corrections needed to have ED be an engaging game you need to create a reward for player achievements that matters to the entire game and would likely be something abstract rather than a currency or thing you get in the game and it would have to be player based to a heavy degree so that fdev is not in control over the direction the game goes due to player actions. You'd also probably have to get rid of the third party api setup to eliminate easy advantages groups of players can have over individual players. That would allow you to right-size the costs of things since now there would be real incentive to do things in a non-boring grindfest environment - even if most of the activities haven't technically changed. Their outcome would have changed from being something that doesn't matter, to something that does. So you'd want to create much higher limits on how frequently they are completed.