Persistent NPC's - what happened?

[Arindor]

Unfortunately for me, playing since PB has burnt me out, and the relentless grinding and same old feel to everything I do has been slowly destroying any enthusiasm I have left. So I've given up playing ED for the time being because I'm waiting for it to become the game FD promised it was going to be when it was released on 16 December. I'd rather FD fessed up and said, "Sorry guys, but we've bitten off more than we can chew in order to get the basics ready for the 30th anniversary. Just call the 'final' release extended Beta/Gamma, or whatever floats your boat. Oh, and ignore most of the DDA too, most of background stuff will be there ... eventually, but the cool stuff is more than likely going to be vapourware."

 

[Globusdiablo]

...Really looking forward to when this gets implemented! Yes...I said when!

Ever the optimist.

You argue your points well, but walls of in-game text are hardly NPC characters? (Who reads that stuff anyway?!... <ducks and geese>)

The approved DDA is from september 2013. What recent communication supports your optimism?

 

[Sanderson]

Yes, I can easily agree with that since that is pretty much exactly what I'm saying. See! What did I tell you previously...we probably agree on more than you think. It's more how we choose to approach it that is different.



Just curious...which videos are you referring too? He never really spoke specifically about persistent NPCs as such as far as I can remember so I think there might still be a lot of personal assumptions showing themselves here.

Once again, I'm not saying it is in a good state yet or that they can't improve on it, they most certainly can and will.

The way I listen to David is as follows:

He lays out the vision, not the specifics. If he talks about some new feature, let's say inflatable space stations that the players can deploy, then I take that as something that might come in the future, but I always try to approach his comments as rough sketches rather than something concrete. Making it concrete is the job of the designers after all. Until something else is said we can still assume these things will come in some way since he owns the company and is "the law", but production, design or technical issues might still block the implementation at any given point.

I'd have to scour the many many videos and interviews David has been in and honestly, that's not something I care to do. Perhaps we could ask the posters in this thread to post up the videos and interviews they've seen about NPCs? That would be great.

Your second point of discussion is more problematic, IMO, than the first, and is responsible, again IMO, for much of the anger and frustration currently surrounding ED. David not only laid out his "vision" but he directly took backers questions about what would and would not be in the game. If you care to, rewatch all the dev diaries from David, you'll find a lot of things David said would be in ED, not a vision or a maybe, they would be in the game, haven't yet made an appearance or, like persistent NPCs, are a bare minimum (at best) in their current form. Take a look at Dev diary #4 for just one example. How much of that is in game right now? IMO, not very much at all.

The way I listen to David is by what he says, not some interpretation of what I think the devs can actually deliver. David's mouth, as is a popular expression here in the states, was writing checks the dev team couldn't cash and unfortunately, for many in their minds, those checks were banked on backer funds. Personally, I can't give David a pass for this, if I could, I'd have to give Peter Molyneux a pass too, something I also can't do. Unfortunately for David when you're the owner, face and voice for a company and you say things will be in the game and they are not then you have to accept responsibility for that, something, IMO, David has not done and actively avoids.

I think and IMO, what needs to be done is everyone that is interested or cares about the current topic (persistent NPCs) should post up everything David or the Dev has said, in particular David, about persistent NPcs or NPCs in general and then we can all sort through what was said, what wasn't, what's ingame, what's not, what we know will be for sure and what's still super top secret "maybe" to be in the game.

I'll start it off with this dev video #4 @5:57 (incase the time is incorrect when I copied it) where David talks specifically about persistent NPCs, this is just one example, there are more. I suppose one could say the Mineral Magpie "technically" fulfills Davids statement about NPCs in this video but, I'd wager this is not what anyone imagined it would be like:[video=youtube;QJGUvr-uBRA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJGUvr-uBRA&t=353[/video]

I suspect much of the persistent NPC stuff will come with "Power Play" After the Xbone release but, I don't think anyone that argues what we have now is what David said it would in videos and interviews where he directly answered questioned without saying "This is just a vision" or "If my devs can make this happen".

Also, just because I call David out for, IMO, outright rubbish sales pitches, that doesn't mean I'm anti FD or hate the game, quite the contrary.

 

[specialsymbol]

Well, it also helps a lot.

Right now I'm in a system where I get frequently interdicted before I reach the only station.

Funny enough, all the pirates launch from that station, then turn around to interdict (and they can turn on a dime, no matter what gravity well might be around).

Solution: as soon as I get close to the 6, unlock destination, slow down, drop out of SC.

Immediately power up SC again - voilà, empty space all around.

Then speed up to the station and watch them launch again. Rinse and repeat if necessary (twice usually does the trick, when you're close enough they can't seem to make the turn).

 

[Jex =TE=]

It takes two years to develop a COD game. Surely, I don't have to tell you what shallow kinds of reskinned games those are? They can reuse assets galore, have an incredible amount of financial power and workforce behind them, yet after two years the games they release are but mere bug-ridden iterations of their predecessors at much higher price than this. It takes more than two years to create a modern and fleshed out game. What you're describing as patience is nothing more than an unrealistic expectation.

Not only that, but they also put $140 million into developing that piece of crap too so just imagine the army of devs they have to make it (though really they're just using the old engine and slapping new maps and tweaking the gameplay a little so it's probably a couple of grannies doing all the work).

FD made a whole engine - those things take years to design and build and then you need to put a game on top of it. Pity ED didn't come out in December this year and now the game is going to suffer for it, taking us with them

 

[Tinman]

I'd have to scour the many many videos and interviews David has been in and honestly, that's not something I care to do. Perhaps we could ask the posters in this thread to post up the videos and interviews they've seen about NPCs? That would be great.

Your second point of discussion is more problematic, IMO, than the first, and is responsible, again IMO, for much of the anger and frustration currently surrounding ED. David not only laid out his "vision" but he directly took backers questions about what would and would not be in the game. If you care to, rewatch all the dev diaries from David, you'll find a lot of things David said would be in ED, not a vision or a maybe, they would be in the game, haven't yet made an appearance or, like persistent NPCs, are a bare minimum (at best) in their current form. Take a look at Dev diary #4 for just one example. How much of that is in game right now? IMO, not very much at all.

The way I listen to David is by what he says, not some interpretation of what I think the devs can actually deliver. David's mouth, as is a popular expression here in the states, was writing checks the dev team couldn't cash and unfortunately, for many in their minds, those checks were banked on backer funds. Personally, I can't give David a pass for this, if I could, I'd have to give Peter Molyneux a pass too, something I also can't do. Unfortunately for David when you're the owner, face and voice for a company and you say things will be in the game and they are not then you have to accept responsibility for that, something, IMO, David has not done and actively avoids.

I think and IMO, what needs to be done is everyone that is interested or cares about the current topic (persistent NPCs) should post up everything David or the Dev has said, in particular David, about persistent NPcs or NPCs in general and then we can all sort through what was said, what wasn't, what's ingame, what's not, what we know will be for sure and what's still super top secret "maybe" to be in the game.

I'll start it off with this dev video #4 @5:57 (incase the time is incorrect when I copied it) where David talks specifically about persistent NPCs, this is just one example, there are more. I suppose one could say the Mineral Magpie "technically" fulfills Davids statement about NPCs in this video but, I'd wager this is not what anyone imagined it would be like:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJGUvr-uBRA&t=353

I suspect much of the persistent NPC stuff will come with "Power Play" After the Xbone release but, I don't think anyone that argues what we have now is what David said it would in videos and interviews where he directly answered questioned without saying "This is just a vision" or "If my devs can make this happen".

Also, just because I call David out for, IMO, outright rubbish sales pitches, that doesn't mean I'm anti FD or hate the game, quite the contrary.

Sorry, but to me that is still vision. If devs aren't allowed to talk about what they want to do before they've actually implemented it and know for sure that it works as described we would never get to hear anything until it actually dropped into our laps. Then people would just complain about that instead and the game wouldn't get any funding either so there would be no game. Why would he need to say "This is just a vision" or "If my devs can make this happen"? That should be obvious to anyone...

As for your example in the video he mostly talked about the ability to build up rep with factions so you are trusted. This is in the game already and some missions aren't available if you aren't trusted enough. The missions in themselves can certainly be expanded on and the same can be said about the depth of the interaction, but the framework (rough sketch) he described is there. As for interacting with NPCs in other ways than the BBS, well we have that too when going to POI and USS even if NPC comms (which is on the list) are needed to make that possible in a more meaningful way.

 

[Sanderson]

Sorry, but to me that is still vision. If devs aren't allowed to talk about what they want to do before they've actually implemented it and know for sure that it works as described we would never get to hear anything until it actually dropped into our laps. Then people would just complain about that instead and the game wouldn't get any funding either so there would be no game. Why would he need to say "This is just a vision" or "If my devs can make this happen"? That should be obvious to anyone...

As for your example in the video he mostly talked about the ability to build up rep with factions so you are trusted. This is in the game already and some missions aren't available if you aren't trusted enough. The missions in themselves can certainly be expanded on and the same can be said about the depth of the interaction, but the framework (rough sketch) he described is there. As for interacting with NPCs in other ways than the BBS, well we have that too when going to POI and USS even if NPC comms (which is on the list) are needed to make that possible in a more meaningful way.

Problem is David never said these things were on his wish list, they were direct questions and he answered directly that they will be ingame, not some vision or wish list.

Rep isn't currently working correctly and the other things you've listed are "on the list" but, like the huge DDA list, we have no way of knowing if these things will ever come to pass. They may be working on them, they may be on the list but, like your previous points, aren't they too covered by the "maybe" clause? At this point, IMO, nothing can be said for certain until it's actually ingame. This is exactly the same argument you used to use with the DDA, I've seen a lot of references from you pointing people with questions to the DDA and, IMO, this is the same thing with potentially the same outcome, only now instead of the DDA your pointing out one line answers from Michael. Essentially, it becomes a circle of things said, things not delivered, "wish list" argument and repeat, until or unless it's actually in the game.

Some or even all may at some point be ingame but, as for the OP, where are they? What happened to that stuff? The answer is: we don't know for sure until it actually is in the game.

Doesn't mean I don't like ED or hate the game or lack faith. It does mean that my faith (along with many many others) has been shaken by over promising sales pitches and under delivered in-game results. Sure, someday I hope all will be as it was sold to us and I DO like the game but, there's no question that what David said would be in the game (not a vision or wish list) is not yet in there and much of what is isn't working correctly or is bugged.

I have faith FD will deliver, just not nearly as much as I used to have. Once bitten, I approach the second time with a lot more caution. Something, based on the past, I also recommend you do when responding people's questions with quotes and promises, as we know how that turned out the last time. I hope ED will become what David said it would be, I have faith the devs can do it and I believe it will come, in time but, I'm also not going to point people to things said. I'll wait until it's actually there before I get burned again by quoting things from FD that turns out to be just a "vision" of a barebone (at best) implementation of it.

 

[RoadRunner]

FD made a whole engine - those things take years to design and build and then you need to put a game on top of it.

If I recall correctly, the ED is a modification of the Cobra engine that FD have had coded and working for years. Sure, there will have been substantial rewrites and lots of new content, textures, sound and such, but I'd bet good money bet they already had the renderer, audio engine, control system, etc and most of the basics already working way before we knew ED was even getting made.