LIFETIME Expansion pass, and Python Mk2
- Thread starter Viaharo
- Start date
Jonty... that takes me back... what an censored that guy turned out to be!
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
ooooooooo sounds like there is some drama there which passed me by!. as much as i would love to ask what happened, i wont as that would go against forum rules on naming and shaming i guess.
I will say, i cant remember specifically everyone i met, but every single person i did have the pleasure to meet at the Duxford launch party (and the pre launch gathering the day before) were legends (both staff and backers alike)
Last edited:
The crux of the LEP dispute is moot due to the fact that Elite is still in development so trying to get all legalese about it is pointless until Frontier categorically state that they are halting development of the game, which they have not and there is no grounds for any reasonable expectation that they will by the looks of the development roadmap they have announced, proving any claim that Frontier are halting development to be rather spurious from the perspective of anyone at this point in time.
Now, being upset at the pace of development is understandable but trying to pivot that complaint to justify the claim that the LEP has not been fulfilled is an attempt at misdirection, intended or not.
To look at the financial aspect of the LEP as a like for like sum of the price of the LEP to compare the value for money exchange is fine, and based on that the equation for some still leaves value on the table and for others still some to break even. But again, this will only become relevant at such time that Frontier announce that they will not be releasing any more paid updates, which they have not.
It's also subjective as to whether anyone likes or dislikes the fact that Frontier have deemed the early access ship PDLC to not be encompassed by the LEP and whether anyone feels that Frontier should 'be nice' and give early access to LEP holders. If things over the last couple of years were different then I can see it but I personally don't have an issue with it. I don't have an LEP, only because I ended up leaving it too late, and if I had gotten the LEP, I would still be fine with the situation as is, but again, that's just my subjective view on it. I don't think there's any relevant legal argument to be made against it either.
Now, if Frontier choose to switch from releasing paid expansions to using early access ship sales & other pdlc to fund expansions to be released for "free", then I would understand that there could be a need to settle with LEP holders to resolve any reasonable outstanding value disparity some LEP holders feel they are due. But yet again, that would depend on that intention to switch being formally announced.
Personally, I think the early access ships etc.. will likely/hopefully help justify and fund future paid expansions, and might contribute to them being released for around $20 rather than $60, but that's also down to a lot of equations that none of us can know. I would be surprised to see Frontier move to free future expansions funded by early access ships, so again, I don't think LEP holders are being left out but rather being asked to be patient.
FWIW; I think the income earned by the game from last year and this year will be used (among others) as a metric for the scope of any future paid expansion developement, and if this year is like the last it wouldn't surprise me to see an announcement of intent for the next expansion towards the end of this year, or early in 2026.
Now, being upset at the pace of development is understandable but trying to pivot that complaint to justify the claim that the LEP has not been fulfilled is an attempt at misdirection, intended or not.
To look at the financial aspect of the LEP as a like for like sum of the price of the LEP to compare the value for money exchange is fine, and based on that the equation for some still leaves value on the table and for others still some to break even. But again, this will only become relevant at such time that Frontier announce that they will not be releasing any more paid updates, which they have not.
It's also subjective as to whether anyone likes or dislikes the fact that Frontier have deemed the early access ship PDLC to not be encompassed by the LEP and whether anyone feels that Frontier should 'be nice' and give early access to LEP holders. If things over the last couple of years were different then I can see it but I personally don't have an issue with it. I don't have an LEP, only because I ended up leaving it too late, and if I had gotten the LEP, I would still be fine with the situation as is, but again, that's just my subjective view on it. I don't think there's any relevant legal argument to be made against it either.
Now, if Frontier choose to switch from releasing paid expansions to using early access ship sales & other pdlc to fund expansions to be released for "free", then I would understand that there could be a need to settle with LEP holders to resolve any reasonable outstanding value disparity some LEP holders feel they are due. But yet again, that would depend on that intention to switch being formally announced.
Personally, I think the early access ships etc.. will likely/hopefully help justify and fund future paid expansions, and might contribute to them being released for around $20 rather than $60, but that's also down to a lot of equations that none of us can know. I would be surprised to see Frontier move to free future expansions funded by early access ships, so again, I don't think LEP holders are being left out but rather being asked to be patient.
FWIW; I think the income earned by the game from last year and this year will be used (among others) as a metric for the scope of any future paid expansion developement, and if this year is like the last it wouldn't surprise me to see an announcement of intent for the next expansion towards the end of this year, or early in 2026.
Last edited:
i admire and am slightly jealous of your optimism (genuinely.... i realise that could read as passive aggressive but i promise it isnt!). I no longer share it but i really hope you are correct and that the potential for a proper paid expansion is still on the table.
Sounds like a more pertinent question for a Star Citizen player to answer in reality tbh.
Why not 10 years?
That other "Early Access" game has managed it...
As the saying goes.... always look on the bright side of life.
indeed. and that is one of the songs i want at my funeral. (not sure i will get away with highway to hell but you never know
)
As a LEPer I won't defend FD on this issue
It unquestionably is a renege of the original LEP
That said - I'm willing to tolerate the behavior if in fact it was necessary to keep ED alive, as unfortunate as that may be because it tacitly condones unethical behavior.
It could have been handled in a much better way, but my suspicion is that turnover at FD has eroded a bit of collective corporate memory.
At least I hope that's the issue...
It unquestionably is a renege of the original LEP
That said - I'm willing to tolerate the behavior if in fact it was necessary to keep ED alive, as unfortunate as that may be because it tacitly condones unethical behavior.
It could have been handled in a much better way, but my suspicion is that turnover at FD has eroded a bit of collective corporate memory.
At least I hope that's the issue...
Last edited:
worry about it when you see a 4 year early access i'd say. if they were gonna do it, they aren't gonna come here looking for differing opinions
Only deflections instead of actual answers. You absolutely love to criticize CIG for it (and rightfully so), but it's absolutely fine if Frontier does it. Sounds a bit hypocritical to me.worry about it when you see a 4 year early access i'd say. if they were gonna do it, they aren't gonna come here looking for differing opinions
SOP for the forum, isn't it?
If the answers are not what you prefer, so call them deflections, well, that's the freedom of the individual coming into play, isn't it?
ETA: I gave CIG the price of an AAA game, years ago, and still haven't a useable product, and little chance of ever having one...
I've given FD much more money over the years, for multiple copies of a product that remains consistently playable (even with geriatric bugs) and for cosmetics, and now ships, that enhanced my own gameplay. MY choice and I am happy enough to do so.
If others disapprove of such, that is their choice, and, being perfectly frank, I don't care how offended others may be that FD chose to make ships available early for a token payment, in comparison to the other game, so that I, and others, might play how we wish.
Last edited:
It is an answer to a hypothetical question that isn't answered with a corresponding hypothetical. Your speculated premise has yet to materialize from Frontier and I don't think you'd find anyone seriously thinking that Frontier are planning on extending the early access to four years, so the question is moot. But so as to not be considered to be deflecting, I would suggest that if Frontier announced the Corsair is going to be in early access for four years, there'd be a mix of forum gnashing of teeth with the silver lining that says that Frontier have just committed to supporting Elite Dangerous for another four years. My opinion is that if Frontier did that it would be rather silly, like the question.
Last edited:
The question was where you would draw the line. Where would it go from okay to not okay for you personally. Because it looks like that's the deciding factor, not the principle itself.
Seemed rather straight forward and changing the topic to other games is just whataboutism.
It wasn't obvious...
... but, for the sake of clarity, it wouldn't affect me in any way if early access lasted 10 years, as I would have already bought the ships I wanted on day 1, because, naturally, I have made my own choices.