Request for a "Player Council", Resurrected DDF, Streamer Representation to Dev track, Focused Feedback or Similar Directed Community Engagement

[BigBANGtheory [VR]]

The problem as I see it is time and again the user and consumer of the product only gets to see it at the point of public release.

Now Frontier can absolutely choose to operate like that, but my goodness it comes at huge risk.

imho where focus groups and player communities can give the most value is where the developer says and is open to 'we want to do this....' and players tell them 'in order for that to work you're gonna need to do....' at which point the developer has to think hard as to what is feasible. So absolutely 100% the developer calls the shots, its not a committee but at least they know what they are getting into BEFORE making that decision.

Frontier has to want to do that and there in lies the problem... is Elite Dangerous for a wide audience of gamers > a select group > or a vanity product for its CEO. If its towards the later then this whole discussion and topic serves no purpose its redundant the decision has already been made not to act on anything that is said.

 

[Rat Catcher]

this whole discussion and topic serves no purpose its redundant.

This about sums it up, I think, and very accurately!

(only because diverse opinions on what the game should be, and what players 'like' would never, ever, converge into anything coherent)

 

[Robert Maynard]

This about sums it up, I think, and very accurately!

(only because diverse opinions on what the game should be, and what players 'like' would never, ever, converge into anything coherent)

Indeed - the only thing that players are guaranteed to have in common is that they play the same game - what might be considered by each player to constitute an improvement to their game varies for each player.

In a comparitively recent iteration of this topic it became quite clear that some of the proponents (who would also want to be members of such a council) would be quite happy to ignore the opinions / wants of some players in pursuit of their particular agenda.

 

[Phoenix_Dfire]

The problem with a player council, DDF (where are our special powers BTW?) and any 'secret Squirrel' group is that every time Fdev has set one up, important info has been leaked ahead of time. For example, last time, 'the pilot' got a whole load of info he wasn't supposed to get which was leaked despite the group in question being under nda. Nobody owned up to it, so the whole group was disbanded. Trust me, there are a number of people who are very angry with the pilot and the individual who leaked that info because it makes it less likely that a DDF group or player council will be formed with fdev's blessing

 

[Bottom Hat]

Indeed - the only thing that players are guaranteed to have in common is that they play the same game - what might be considered by each player to constitute an improvement to their game varies for each player.

In a comparitively recent iteration of this topic it became quite clear that some of the proponents (who would also want to be members of such a council) would be quite happy to ignore the opinions / wants of some players in pursuit of their particular agenda.

Exactly right. And when this place is as turbulent as it is at the moment, it would be the worst possible time to try and make such a thing work.

 

[SP_Predicador]

EDO is a can of worms with bugs and performance, without doubt, but it did introduce content into a stale space game that was badly needed.

The isolated fps from the rest of the game, and being so focused in combat, you say? I can agree totally understanding that as big design mistakes

 

[Rat Catcher]

The isolated fps from the rest of the game, and being so focused in combat, you say? I can agree totally understanding that as big design mistakes

Funny that, it appears to a n00b like me that the entire game is focused, in one way or another, on combat... (we even shoot planets and plants)


I'll try to find the isolated FPS later while I am playing (as I have done exclusively since launch) the expansion, I'm sure you couldn't possibly be biased in your perception.

 

[SP_Predicador]

Funny that, it appears to a n00b like me that the entire game is focused, in one way or another, on combat... (we even shoot planets and plants)


I'll try to find the isolated FPS later while I am playing (as I have done exclusively since launch) the expansion, I'm sure you couldn't possibly be biased in your perception.

I am Elite in Exploration and Trade since a lot of years, while only being Expert in Combat. That is my bias, I don't care at all about combat. For me Odissey is almost useless, only a lame xenobiology small game and some visual improvements against optimization. The FPS is not even integrated in other aspects of the game, those I really care. I was playing ED since june 2014, and I did because Stellar Forge, and not combat, were what did unique Elite. There are outside a lot of fps and combat sims game that are far better. But not so many, even anyone? exploration and trading ships games in a full galaxy being an mmo.

Do you really think that the design of Odissey FPS into this game is a good design?

 

[LeoBartlet]

I will happily lead the player council if no one else is willing.

 

[Jmanis]

Request for a "Player Council", Resurrected DDF, Streamer Representation to Dev track, Focused Feedback or Similar Directed Community Engagement​

​

God no...

 

[Rat Catcher]

Do you really think that the design of Odissey FPS into this game is a good design?

Yes, yes, I do, even if it isn't just a FPS, but has much more subtle content to enjoy... but I digress...

EDO (despite its issues) has increased the time I, and some of my friends, spend playing the game since its release. It is fine that you dislike combat, even if it is a little odd in a game that has its major focus on just that. EDO has more than you describe - I know, I play it.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The problems with Odyssey aren't ones which would show up in a DDF-style design proposal anyway, though.

DDF-style design proposal for Odyssey missions:

- new surface bases with various economies and services assigned to factions in each system
- missions generated to these bases according to the BGS conditions, to carry out legal and illegal activities
- players can enter buildings on foot and will usually need to, to meet a contact, pick up an item, or carry out sabotage or assassination, but there can be activities outside as well
- much of the base will require security clearance to access, where sometimes the CMDR will get this as part of the mission, and other times they may have to steal that too, or break in another way
- guards will patrol the base and respond to violence, trespass and other suspicious activity
- bases which are subject to lots of sabotage might be temporarily abandoned, and scavengers can occupy them.
- players can also be sent on missions to abandoned bases, either to repair them or to steal items while the base is derelict.
- during a war, bases become on-foot combat zones to add to the existing space combat zones (we're considering allowing the results of the on-foot zones to influence individual base ownership after the war)
- etc. etc.

Or for the exo-biology career

- planets with thin atmospheres will have more common surface life than the existing bark mounds
- reform of terrain generation to allow life to be distributed all across a planet rather than at a few POIs
- upgrade of the DSS to allow viewing of lifeform distribution
- surface life presence can depend on planet type, star type, local terrain, atmosphere composition, and other factors related to the planet or even the system
- players will locate an area of lifeforms using the DSS and their ship, then land to collect samples on foot
- dedicated sampling tool as part of the exploration suit, which will be designed for high endurance and have a powerful jetpack to help in difficult terrain
- successful sampling will require analysing the DNA sequences of the lifeforms and matching up key components
- once sufficient samples of a particular lifeform have been collected, this produces a data packet which can be sold to contacts at stations
- some life forms may be in particularly rare or hard-to-reach places and therefore provide a significant challenge to sample
- etc. etc.

All sounds pretty good on paper, and indeed the first Odyssey trailer revealing that it was space-legs was incredibly positively received, too. The release-day problems with it, some of which fixed since, only became obvious after implementation was almost complete and the Alpha started ... by which time it was way too late to go back and change the underlying design anyway.

That sort of DDF/Focused Feedback I think can work out well in certain conditions:
- there's already been some released content of this sort
- it's been out and stable for at least six months so players have had time to see how it does and doesn't work
- there's a fairly straightforward to describe proposal for changes
...and that way on neither side - Frontier or player - is it mostly just wishlisting and mutual misunderstanding about what people think this will look like. Even then - see Beyond 3.0 C&P reform - you can get something which people are cheering on as "the end of ganking" in both FF threads and even in Beta, and then it really doesn't work like that in live once it's actually had a proper run.

(Similarly it's interesting to compare the aspects of the 3.0 Engineer rewrite which were complained about in Beta/early days, and the ones which are being complained about now in the recent FF thread. There's not that much overlap...)

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

Which particular issue?

.... as the rules relating to players affecting mode shared game features are quite clear, and have been for years - as has the opposition to those rules and Frontier's stance on the topic from a subset of the player-base.

It's the community that's a mess but not everyone. For years, people have been putting blockers on things and things end up stuck in limbo.
All i'm saying is that maybe FD should just over-rule these people if it means improving certain elements of the game. People are always gonna complain anyway and someone is always gonna be upset. There is no way to avoid that.

I'm not even taking a side on anything but the absolute worst thing to do is nothing.

I'm just happy they're doing things again and i don't even have a FC.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's the community that's a mess but not everyone. For years, people have been putting blockers on things and things end up stuck in limbo.

The community chose to buy the game that Frontier designed, developed and released. "People" don't put blockers on things, as Frontier, not "people", are in control of the game design (unless the "people" in question are in a decision making position at Frontier, of course).

Frontier are certainly aware that some players don't agree with their position on some particular aspects of the game - and that has not changed their position. They've been aware of this since the game design was published with regard to some aspects.

When considering changes to the game I expect that they take into account their whole player-base - not just those who want things to be changed to suit their play-style preferences in a way that would adversely affect other players.

All i'm saying is that maybe FD should just over-rule these people if it means improving certain elements of the game.

Arguably they set out their stall when they published the game design over nine years ago - and some players still can't accept it.

People are always gonna complain anyway and someone is always gonna be upset. There is no way to avoid that.

Indeed - and the design of the game that we all bought already does that for players who can't accept that design.

I'm not even taking a side on anything but the absolute worst thing to do is nothing.

It depends on the particular issue under discussion - as changing some aspects just for the sake of change would be very likely detrimental for a significant number of players.

 

[Slamdance_Kozmopolis]

Hard no. The "player councils" I have seen with places like Twitch have been not been representative of a single gamer I know, but have instead been openly hateful of them. These types of bodies are ripe for destruction-minded authoritarian activists. I'd much rather have the representation we currently have with FD (absolutely none), than one of these farces.

Exactly.
If FDev cares what players think they have all the tools needed to collect opinions from everyone who wants to give them, RIGHT HERE on the forum.

What they need is more staff monitored/moderated focused feedback threads.

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

@Robert Maynard
Let's not drag this off-topic Robert.

 

[Bottom Hat]

I will happily lead the player council if no one else is willing.

Well seeing as nobody else is up for it, and you are (let's be fair) the best person I can think of, you get my vote.



(What about ender though?)

 

[LeoBartlet]

(What about ender though?)

Who?

 

[Erei]

Well seeing as nobody else is up for it, and you are (let's be fair) the best person I can think of, you get my vote.



(What about ender though?)

If you let me in the player council, I'll vote for a ministry of Silly Hat, and for cockpit cat. And Dolphin and Rabbits, as I remember some forum user have expressed their need for it.

I will not abuse my power to make "I am the council" meme with Palpatine. At least for the first week.

 

[LeoBartlet]

If you let me in the player council, I'll vote for a ministry of Silly Hat, and for cockpit cat. And Dolphin and Rabbits, as I remember some forum user have expressed their need for it.

I will not abuse my power to make "I am the council" meme with Palpatine. At least for the first week.

No we already have someone with red highlighters.