The Beta lasted less than a week so the upkeep and maintenance costs were pretty immaterial for the beta and since it only lasted a week they gathered no data on maintenance and upkeep costs. They kept all the costs to the same they expected them to be in the live game probably because they wanted to see how they were accepted. Most people are quite happy with the purchase price, that doesn't seem to be the issue, big ship, big price, but the short beta gave them no data on the maintenance and upkeep except for the feedback they are experiencing through the forums.
Seems like frontier actually doesn't want everyone to have a carrier.. for technical reasons?
- Thread starter CMDR Karrde Sun
- Start date
The Beta lasted less than a week so the upkeep and maintenance costs were pretty immaterial for the beta and since it only lasted a week they gathered no data on maintenance and upkeep costs. They kept all the costs to the same they expected them to be in the live game probably because they wanted to see how they were accepted. Most people are quite happy with the purchase price, that doesn't seem to be the issue, big ship, big price, but the short beta gave them no data on the maintenance and upkeep except for the feedback they are experiencing through the forums.
Stephen was in my stream a few days ago and said the complete opposite when questioned about this.
I will be having two of the CM's, both Stephen and Bruce, on Tuesday for a voice interview starting at 15:00 UTC and we can ask these questions again to clarify. People here on the forums seem to ask the wrong questions and then assume they meant something else that their reply never mentioned. It is also very difficult for them to reply when asleep as they posted that reply at 7:31 local, which means it was 3:31 in the morning for them. I am sure that they will reply again here when they get up and get some coffee/tea
Last edited:
Would it be possible, good sir, to get an actual reasoning on the lack of Universal Cartographics on Carriers?
Could you forward the suggestion to create a dummy faction, that holds no stations, planets, or systems, and have influence that would normally reparated via data sales of exploration data be funneled through there and let explorer's... stay out and Explore? I think if an Explorer takes the time to get a carrier out to the Archeron Region to explore they shouldn't have to haul 20,000 LY+ to hand in data when Trade/Mining, and combat pilots have now a new, and more efficient way to conduct business. It has also been suggested data sold via the FC remove first discovered tags or at a reduced rate to give explorer's the option to sell at the carrier for reduced value (both in presitge and credits) or return to a station to sell for full value/prestige. Options!!!!
Deleted member 192138
D
People on the forums are asking plenty of questions, the CMs are answering a tiny, tiny, fraction of them - very strategically.
Categorically if carriers go into the game with the current pricing structure it will be a disastrous smack in the fact for the players they've hyped, ecouraged and kept on the hook for 3 years with a promise of content for late game content.
The fact that they're unable to directly say "the pricing for upkeep is a placeholder" implies that, as the original post was inclusive of all costs, we should read the same of Stephen's reply. There's nothing in it that favours Malic's reading that "this is only for 5 billion purchase". So they genuinely, seriously thought that 5-7 billion annual upkeep to maintain the fleet carrier is something functional or desirable for anything other than the smallest fraction of even late game players.
What I don't understand is: are FDev so incapable that in 3 years of development on carriers they're unable to talk to the player base about what people want/need? No serious use of focus groups and surveys?
Do they only communicate with a shrinking select segment of yes-men influencers to get their information? Ope. There we go then ...
Categorically if carriers go into the game with the current pricing structure it will be a disastrous smack in the fact for the players they've hyped, ecouraged and kept on the hook for 3 years with a promise of content for late game content.
The fact that they're unable to directly say "the pricing for upkeep is a placeholder" implies that, as the original post was inclusive of all costs, we should read the same of Stephen's reply. There's nothing in it that favours Malic's reading that "this is only for 5 billion purchase". So they genuinely, seriously thought that 5-7 billion annual upkeep to maintain the fleet carrier is something functional or desirable for anything other than the smallest fraction of even late game players.
What I don't understand is: are FDev so incapable that in 3 years of development on carriers they're unable to talk to the player base about what people want/need? No serious use of focus groups and surveys?
Do they only communicate with a shrinking select segment of yes-men influencers to get their information? Ope. There we go then ...
I would not call Yamiks, Ant, or Exegious yes men in this case. Three have all put out content basically, in various ways, stating that FC's in their current state are essentially worthless and are highly critical of their current state.
Deleted member 192138
D
They aren't getting live interviews with the CMs, from what I'm aware of at least.
Not that I'd want to be a CM right now tbh. Any communication they do now will be mostly centred around the absolute failure of communication for the last 3 years around fleet carriers, primarily centred within the leadership of development that's turned them into this absurdly overpriced scope bloat. Most of the CMs weren't even working for FDev when fleet carriers were first announced. So they're going to be drawn over the coals for other people's failings if they want to actually have a proper conversation with someone willing to be actually critical.
Not that I'd want to be a CM right now tbh. Any communication they do now will be mostly centred around the absolute failure of communication for the last 3 years around fleet carriers, primarily centred within the leadership of development that's turned them into this absurdly overpriced scope bloat. Most of the CMs weren't even working for FDev when fleet carriers were first announced. So they're going to be drawn over the coals for other people's failings if they want to actually have a proper conversation with someone willing to be actually critical.
Deleted member 110222
D
MMO endgame is not just "reach max level".
It's about becoming truly skilled, holding a truly powerful character, and basically, standing out from the rank-and-file.
Yes. It is for the elite members of a game's community.
Carriers are just like the rarest of rare weapons and armour in MMORPGs. Only a select few players are ever going to complete those powerful sets.
There are 120 people total working on Elite as of last November when the shareholders report went out (one of the first followup replies) : Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/fgamn7/frontier_developments_elite_dangerous_planet_zoo/
120 people, 75% of them working on the Dec 2020 update, meaning 90 of them have not been working on the content we have gotten since the middle of 2018, or the last 2 years. The remaining 30 people does not mean 30 programmers, the teams are split between programming (server, gameplay, audio), art (concept, 3D modeling, textures, animation) producers, audio, QA, and others. Going though the game credits you start to realize the many different things required to make a game, is not just a room of programmers where you give them coffee and code comes out of their fingertips.
If you have been to my streams the last few days for this beta, then you would also know that I have been very critical of the upkeep costs and non-use by certain gameplay loops. But I also ask the developers and CM's that join my stream questions and get replies to them, and then follow up. I do plan on asking these questions and clarification afterwords, not ask one question, adding in words that are not there to take their reply out of context that they were talking about upkeep and upgrade costs too, then jump to conclusions while the CM's are asleep and run around claiming the sky is falling.
Deleted member 192138
D
I appreciate that all of that is true. It is still a management choice to allocate resources in such a way. Interstellar initiatives/community goals shut down. Galnet silent. Bug fix updates that introduce more bugs than they fix. Implementation of an anti-consumer currency layer. Since 2018 carriers are the only meaningful content update that's targeted at mid to late game players. So sure - I don't blame the skeleton crew tasked with holding down the fort for the last two years. I blame management for deciding that this development model is one that would work for maintaining a living community around their game.
You also have been trying and are still trying to get a job with FDev by your own words, but ask yourself this:
Do you ask questions based on them being a potential employer and the insider access you have received, or ask to support your real employers - The people who watch and sub to your channel, who donated enough in one night to get you flights to the UK and deserve the very best information you can squeeze out of FDev?
Not sure what you're seeing on the timestamp Malic but Stephen replied in the middle of a working afternoon. His reply wasn't there at lunchtime, was there at the end of my day.
We'll have to disagree on that.
There are already enough contraints with jump time and fuelling for using carriers to explore that forcing the player (not the carrier mind, just the player) to go back to a station is unnecessary.
Edit: I'm not saying it has to be a UC, just some way to provide upkeep.
Deleted member 192138
D
2:31pm seems like a sensible time for a CM to be engaging with the community assuming they're expected to work on a standard working day.
This ^^ I completely agree with
Except that's not true right, you do the money game you can have a carrier in what, 6 months of less from when you buy the game and the only thing you will know how to do is mining. As I said, define end game in ED, owning a carrier is not end game. In most MMO's you need to be skilled to reach max level, the good ones anyway because you have to defeat the challenges along the way, so define end game for ED.
Just me, or are Fleet Carriers a logical 'endgame' for product-as-a-service as currently presented?
Just you I'm afraid, there is no logic attached to them as they are currently set up.
Next week announcement will be that there is no change ... the beta is fine, everybody are happy, cottage credits will appear and the live release will be earlier this month.
They will also give everyone a redbull paintjob for Eagle right before the live launch..
Sorry, a little bit of sarcasm from me. See you next week.
They will also give everyone a redbull paintjob for Eagle right before the live launch..
Sorry, a little bit of sarcasm from me. See you next week.
Deleted member 240115
D
You would think every game developer in existence would have learned from the colossal f-up SOE did with Star Wars Galaxies "New Game Experience".....