Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Sounds like a reference to Distant Worlds 2 - not the tag-along event organised to disrupt DW2.
Request for a "Player Council", Resurrected DDF, Streamer Representation to Dev track, Focused Feedback or Similar Directed Community Engagement
- Thread starter Hydrino
- Start date
That's not quite right. I think Distant Ganks was a PvP event that eventually disbanded.
Distant Worlds was an exploration event, and it was organized by a whole bunch of people, created and lead by Kamzel (the guy who discovered Beagle Point), Dr Kaii, and Qohen Leth.
I thought a group of them just decided to go out just to cause mischief and the name came later but maybe not.
SDC may have been involved...
If I recall, the original kickstarter period DDF was a bit of a mess, so frontier dropped it early on. I don't think you can design a game by committee to be honest. They must have learned that lesson back then.
Yea, that rings a bell, thanks.
My mention of the DG 'expedition' was as a counterpoint to the 'common' exploration based events, and, of course, the Premonition one.
Frontier manage to get plenty of participants into CGs, particularly when the 'reward' is shiny...
I'm just sad that I joined too late to have enjoyed the Gnosis event, Frontier at their very best, from what I read of it!
Frontier manage to get plenty of participants into CGs, particularly when the 'reward' is shiny...
I'm just sad that I joined too late to have enjoyed the Gnosis event, Frontier at their very best, from what I read of it!
I think the Gnosis event was a player created event wasn't it? Set up by Canonn, not Frontier. But frontier stepped in and changed it at the last moment to be a PvE event.
Something like that would be awesome again. The Thargoids are obviously going to be a big big part of Odyssey, and the FPS that's been added must surely be with that in mind. I hope we get a Gnosis x 100 event, where they burn the bubble, well most of it. Not just damaging stations, but wiping them out - Borg style. Ground settlements too. That's what this game needs - a massive kick in the butt
Indeed, Canonn had 'arranged' the expedition, but it was Frontier who made it an event!
(Accepting that some of the 'explorer community' were less than enthusiastic about the Frontier created event, of course.)
I tend to agree as well. Looking back, the original post is mainly complaining about "do they play their own game" type issues - not so much asking that players have a say in what content gets developed, but that the perspectives of experienced players be consulted when designing new gameplay activities.
The thing is, a "player council" is a terrible solution for that. You halfway develop a feature and then give them access to a demo of some kind, and probably get a bunch of
plus five different ideas for what you should have done instead. It's unworkable most of the time, and there's a perfectly good alternative available: you employ some experienced players. Ideally by the time you're several years in you'd have developed the necessary people in-house, perhaps from among the QA/test team. But it's unheard of to directly hire a player or three onto the design team. Point being, you want people who know how the game plays on your payroll, where you can include them in design meetings from the very start of a new feature.
Just to clarify... the target wasn't permit locked... until FD realised later that cone sector was meant to be permit locked (yknow, for future content and all), and then permit locked it.
They then told Cannon they could abandon our go ahead (afaik) and they chose to go ahead, to obvious failure.
So... about that future content... since it's regions of space that are locked, gotta be Horizons accessible.... wonder if FD have thought about the console implications of that...
Should they get to that point the answer is probably fairly straightforward - you buy "Elite: Salvation" and you get Col 70 and Cone permits.
I guess, though i wonder about the mechanics of the software though..
The mechanics are entirely unknown, since they've never unlocked a sector permit before. Star system permits are just a flag on your user account, so nothing client side has to happen to grant those. Do sector permits work the same way?
I guess what i meant was the mechanics of physically separating those systems as "the next DLC". On paper.... can't go to those systems = can't access the content.The mechanics are entirely unknown, since they've never unlocked a sector permit before. Star system permits are just a flag on your user account, so nothing client side has to happen to grant those. Do sector permits work the same way?
But that's only a lock on player movement. The implications for the underlying software could be substantial.
Like... sure, it's still permit locked. What about the galaxy map? I can see when things exist in a permit locked system via the galaxy map... is there going to be no information stored about those systems which is common to both games?
What if i don't own Odyssey but do get some future DLC? Is that further fragmenting code bases and over complicating even the simplest of changes?
I could list dozens of artefacts that need to be considered... but that's the general gist... not really thinking about how issue of a region permit works.
It is likely, as Horizons is now, essentially, EOL, that future DLC will require the EDO expansion as a base.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I suspect that the fold-down of Horizons into the base-game before Odyssey was released has set the precedent in this situation, i.e. by the time the next DLC is released, Odyssey will have been folded down into the base game as well.
However this would mean that any future DLC would be PEGI-16 (as a minimum) rather than PEGI-7 (as the base game is and Horizons was, when it was available separately).
So, what happens to the console versions then?
It's just a massive cluster waiting to happen, no matter which way you go about it.... but again, this is just one of heaps of artefacts that will explode in FD's face later on down the track, or alternatively, has dire consequences for the state of future content.
They remain in Horizons maintenance mode, as was mentioned in the post by David Braben?