[Serious] Where Horizons Failed (and almost every update in Elite)

[Soon(TM)]

Only problem I see with this is that people would be paying for an expansion that essentially fills out the careers.
Imagine trying to sell that:

FDev: "Hey, here's the new expansion."
Customers: "Wait, I have to pay for depth for the pillars of the gameplay?"
FDev: "Yep, that's right."

So, no, I don't think that's necessarily a good idea. I agree that it's needed, but locking career depth behind a paywall seems like a pretty terrible way to go.

Your right, it should have never been allowed to get this way.

Having professions in a game is a must, having things to do in the game that relates to those professions is also a Must.

ED has somehow managed to go two years with barely anything in the latter area. Now it's becoming more and more apparent with each update, FD bolt on more fluff but don't add content/interaction into the game to actually do with the fluff.

Thus, we need an entire update to fix the missing content for the base professions.

And who should pay for that, pay more money for something that should have been there since day one?

How do you convince people to pay for that!

 

[xondk]

?

I don't know if you are crazy or not, ultimately it comes down to a simple thing to me, Elite is giving me something no other game out there can provide, so I gladly support them so they can continue improving the game, and I do not expect a road of improvements that is perfect without bumps and bruises. And considering how many people are passionate about Elite even if it is 'against' it, it clearly indicates that they want the game to improve. And lets face it, that is not a simple thing. No matter how many 'this fixes all problems' idea's people have, it is rarely that simple.

To me, Frontier is doing a great job, and I gladly support that.

 

[sgurr]

I've said this before and it's still my gut feeling: in the desire to hit the pre-announced December 16th 2014 launch date FD wrote themselves into a corner by pushing out a product that still contained much placeholder, with MVP code rushed into service to hold it all together. And while each subsequent iteration has largely improved on what came before -- some updates more than others -- the frequent need to push out new features to drive sales, as well as balance the increasingly asymmetric multiplayer aspects, has left zero opportunity to actually go back and rebuild the game's restricted core.

The more time passes, the less inclined I am to believe that this can ever be fully resolved. FD will no doubt add new features, or apply heavy reworking to some aspects such as the mission system, and some will be successful while others will fall by the wayside. But the underlying structure of the game is not going to change now. The economy will always be a giant everlasting firehose of credits with a series of BGS-adjustable taps rather than a structured simulation of galactic commerce. NPCs, beyond the static mission-givers and magic teleporting crew, will never be semi-persistent or interact with player characters in a meaningful or memorable way. The "solid" mechanic of exploration will always be jump-honk-scan, even if we get prettier things to honk at.

ED remains a remarkable technical achievement, presenting as it does a game world of such scale and beauty and, yes, immersion. But the way in which we interact with that world will always be hamstrung by the decisions made in 2014. Much of what was written in the DDA, hugely ambitious yet eminently achievable had the time been allocated, I believe will now remain firmly in the realm of what might have been, rather than what may yet be.

It's still a great game, still the best incarnation of David Braben's three-decade-old vision, and can still be terrific fun to play especially if, like me, you're old-school enough to appreciate its slightly retro charms. But it gives the appearance of having been rushed to release on very shaky foundations, and I fear those foundations just aren't capable of supporting the structures the game would need to reach its true potential.

I would never be happier to be proven wrong than to be proven wrong over this.

Great post


And good suggestions OP, career pillars do need depth added

 

[Electric Kite]

Yes there's more and more every day now, maybe FD might notice that there are a lot more concerned players and the white forum knights can't cover it up anymore!

Nope.

What you have is the same 30 or 40 or so disgruntled commanders (non significant) posting the same thing every day. Affectionatley known as the "Elite is Doomed" crowd. They are regulars around here. They are almost like part of the furniture. Very easy to spot. No harm done though, after all, its not like F.D doesnt listen to constructive feedback. Its just a pitty its rarley that , or the OP is so offensive/condecending in their feedback it negates any possible way to take it on board, even if there is a point buried beneath the venom.

 

[Loskene]

I've said this before and it's still my gut feeling: in the desire to hit the pre-announced December 16th 2014 launch date FD wrote themselves into a corner by pushing out a product that still contained much placeholder, with MVP code rushed into service to hold it all together. And while each subsequent iteration has largely improved on what came before -- some updates more than others -- the frequent need to push out new features to drive sales, as well as balance the increasingly asymmetric multiplayer aspects, has left zero opportunity to actually go back and rebuild the game's restricted core.

The more time passes, the less inclined I am to believe that this can ever be fully resolved. FD will no doubt add new features, or apply heavy reworking to some aspects such as the mission system, and some will be successful while others will fall by the wayside. But the underlying structure of the game is not going to change now. The economy will always be a giant everlasting firehose of credits with a series of BGS-adjustable taps rather than a structured simulation of galactic commerce. NPCs, beyond the static mission-givers and magic teleporting crew, will never be semi-persistent or interact with player characters in a meaningful or memorable way. The "solid" mechanic of exploration will always be jump-honk-scan, even if we get prettier things to honk at.

ED remains a remarkable technical achievement, presenting as it does a game world of such scale and beauty and, yes, immersion. But the way in which we interact with that world will always be hamstrung by the decisions made in 2014. Much of what was written in the DDA, hugely ambitious yet eminently achievable had the time been allocated, I believe will now remain firmly in the realm of what might have been, rather than what may yet be.

It's still a great game, still the best incarnation of David Braben's three-decade-old vision, and can still be terrific fun to play especially if, like me, you're old-school enough to appreciate its slightly retro charms. But it gives the appearance of having been rushed to release on very shaky foundations, and I fear those foundations just aren't capable of supporting the structures the game would need to reach its true potential.

I would never be happier to be proven wrong than to be proven wrong over this.

This is the deepest concern that I think all of us have had at some point or another but never really want to think about. There's always holding out some hope that somehow they'll fix it, make the game what it was meant to be from the start, if not this update then the next, and the next, and so on. But we know they won't if they keep having to focus all their effort on some flashy new headline update to keep the pork coming in every time. Maybe relaxing their dependence on pushing DLC sales would give them a little breathing room to actually address the game's core failings that stop them getting the level of quality and consistency they need to really push sales in the first place.

Good post.

 

[Gimi]

I don't agree that Horizons failed. I like what FDEV has done (with a couple of exceptions, but you can't win em all), and I'm still playing more than 2 years after release. But like you have your opinion, this is my personal opinion.
But I didn't butt in to say just that.
I actually like your idea for season 3. I still think they need a headline feature for season 3, but apart from that, I think your idea has merit.

 

[Jenner]

Off topic/handbaggy posts will be removed. Please stay on topic. Thanks.

 

[playfuldreamer]

I've said this before and it's still my gut feeling: in the desire to hit the pre-announced December 16th 2014 launch date FD wrote themselves into a corner by pushing out a product that still contained much placeholder, with MVP code rushed into service to hold it all together. And while each subsequent iteration has largely improved on what came before -- some updates more than others -- the frequent need to push out new features to drive sales, as well as balance the increasingly asymmetric multiplayer aspects, has left zero opportunity to actually go back and rebuild the game's restricted core.

The more time passes, the less inclined I am to believe that this can ever be fully resolved. FD will no doubt add new features, or apply heavy reworking to some aspects such as the mission system, and some will be successful while others will fall by the wayside. But the underlying structure of the game is not going to change now. The economy will always be a giant everlasting firehose of credits with a series of BGS-adjustable taps rather than a structured simulation of galactic commerce. NPCs, beyond the static mission-givers and magic teleporting crew, will never be semi-persistent or interact with player characters in a meaningful or memorable way. The "solid" mechanic of exploration will always be jump-honk-scan, even if we get prettier things to honk at.

ED remains a remarkable technical achievement, presenting as it does a game world of such scale and beauty and, yes, immersion. But the way in which we interact with that world will always be hamstrung by the decisions made in 2014. Much of what was written in the DDA, hugely ambitious yet eminently achievable had the time been allocated, I believe will now remain firmly in the realm of what might have been, rather than what may yet be.

It's still a great game, still the best incarnation of David Braben's three-decade-old vision, and can still be terrific fun to play especially if, like me, you're old-school enough to appreciate its slightly retro charms. But it gives the appearance of having been rushed to release on very shaky foundations, and I fear those foundations just aren't capable of supporting the structures the game would need to reach its true potential.

I would never be happier to be proven wrong than to be proven wrong over this.

This is exactly what's happening. I've seen it before (namely Star Trek Online), where developers/publishers push a game to release only to spend the rest of its lifetime frantically trying to fill the potholes. Meanwhile, the road doesn't even make it to the end of the block.

 

[Antinull]

I've said this before and it's still my gut feeling: in the desire to hit the pre-announced December 16th 2014 launch date FD wrote themselves into a corner by pushing out a product that still contained much placeholder, with MVP code rushed into service to hold it all together. And while each subsequent iteration has largely improved on what came before -- some updates more than others -- the frequent need to push out new features to drive sales, as well as balance the increasingly asymmetric multiplayer aspects, has left zero opportunity to actually go back and rebuild the game's restricted core.

The more time passes, the less inclined I am to believe that this can ever be fully resolved. FD will no doubt add new features, or apply heavy reworking to some aspects such as the mission system, and some will be successful while others will fall by the wayside. But the underlying structure of the game is not going to change now. The economy will always be a giant everlasting firehose of credits with a series of BGS-adjustable taps rather than a structured simulation of galactic commerce. NPCs, beyond the static mission-givers and magic teleporting crew, will never be semi-persistent or interact with player characters in a meaningful or memorable way. The "solid" mechanic of exploration will always be jump-honk-scan, even if we get prettier things to honk at.

ED remains a remarkable technical achievement, presenting as it does a game world of such scale and beauty and, yes, immersion. But the way in which we interact with that world will always be hamstrung by the decisions made in 2014. Much of what was written in the DDA, hugely ambitious yet eminently achievable had the time been allocated, I believe will now remain firmly in the realm of what might have been, rather than what may yet be.

It's still a great game, still the best incarnation of David Braben's three-decade-old vision, and can still be terrific fun to play especially if, like me, you're old-school enough to appreciate its slightly retro charms. But it gives the appearance of having been rushed to release on very shaky foundations, and I fear those foundations just aren't capable of supporting the structures the game would need to reach its true potential.

I would never be happier to be proven wrong than to be proven wrong over this.

Sums it up for me, excellent post.

 

[Bladefeather]

I do agree, but put the Explorers first... Totally not biased here or anything but it is the mechanic with the most potential that is unrealized, oh yes, and you can actually take advantage of the new camera... I do think that we need to flesh out the existing mechanics before adding new ones though, yes. That, before all else, a clean polished game, brings in new players, not arcadey easy combat, lackluster gri-, I mean trading, going out into the black to take selfies next to the most spectacular sights in the galaxy, or any other new mechanic that is lacking on so many levels...

- - - Updated - - -

Only problem I see with this is that people would be paying for an expansion that essentially fills out the careers.
Imagine trying to sell that:

FDev: "Hey, here's the new expansion."
Customers: "Wait, I have to pay for depth for the pillars of the gameplay?"
FDev: "Yep, that's right."

So, no, I don't think that's necessarily a good idea. I agree that it's needed, but locking career depth behind a paywall seems like a pretty terrible way to go.

I think it could be like the 2.1/1.6 thing where you get the new depth of careers, but if you want, say, a special feature like say, multi crew in a bounty hunting update, you will have to pay. You still get the improved mechanics though.

EDIT: I can't spell...

 

[Dbrn47]

You aren't wrong, but people aren't as willing to pay for fleshing out existing features vs paying for new ones. The game was released pretty light on features as it was and thus needed that focus to generate money. I think once all the headliners are in, we'll see more shift toward fleshing things out. I'm as impatient as anyone around here with wanting to see the fleshing out, but I try to at least remain reasonable about it. If they simply can't do it right now, me being negative at all times isn't going to push it the other way. I really don't want to push this game to the back burner completely, because often times I don't ever revisit games I do that to. Some positive outlook is necessary for this game, for me.

- - - Updated - - -

I've said this before and it's still my gut feeling: in the desire to hit the pre-announced December 16th 2014 launch date FD wrote themselves into a corner by pushing out a product that still contained much placeholder, with MVP code rushed into service to hold it all together. And while each subsequent iteration has largely improved on what came before -- some updates more than others -- the frequent need to push out new features to drive sales, as well as balance the increasingly asymmetric multiplayer aspects, has left zero opportunity to actually go back and rebuild the game's restricted core.

The more time passes, the less inclined I am to believe that this can ever be fully resolved. FD will no doubt add new features, or apply heavy reworking to some aspects such as the mission system, and some will be successful while others will fall by the wayside. But the underlying structure of the game is not going to change now. The economy will always be a giant everlasting firehose of credits with a series of BGS-adjustable taps rather than a structured simulation of galactic commerce. NPCs, beyond the static mission-givers and magic teleporting crew, will never be semi-persistent or interact with player characters in a meaningful or memorable way. The "solid" mechanic of exploration will always be jump-honk-scan, even if we get prettier things to honk at.

ED remains a remarkable technical achievement, presenting as it does a game world of such scale and beauty and, yes, immersion. But the way in which we interact with that world will always be hamstrung by the decisions made in 2014. Much of what was written in the DDA, hugely ambitious yet eminently achievable had the time been allocated, I believe will now remain firmly in the realm of what might have been, rather than what may yet be.

It's still a great game, still the best incarnation of David Braben's three-decade-old vision, and can still be terrific fun to play especially if, like me, you're old-school enough to appreciate its slightly retro charms. But it gives the appearance of having been rushed to release on very shaky foundations, and I fear those foundations just aren't capable of supporting the structures the game would need to reach its true potential.

I would never be happier to be proven wrong than to be proven wrong over this.

I don't envy them at all and would also like to see this proven wrong. I think they have the capability to do so, time just isn't on their side.

 

[CMDR GTR2014]

You aren't wrong, but people aren't as willing to pay for fleshing out existing features vs paying for new ones. The game was released pretty light on features as it was and thus needed that focus to generate money. I think once all the headliners are in, we'll see more shift toward fleshing things out. I'm as impatient as anyone around here with wanting to see the fleshing out, but I try to at least remain reasonable about it. If they simply can't do it right now, me being negative at all times isn't going to push it the other way. I really don't want to push this game to the back burner completely, because often times I don't ever revisit games I do that to. Some positive outlook is necessary for this game, for me.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't envy them at all and would also like to see this proven wrong. I think they have the capability to do so, time just isn't on their side.

Well I gotta say , removing the shields not being nerfed... I cant complain all that much for Elite, yes sometimes it's a pain in the butt, but since i now only use smalls ships and have no intention on getting onto the big things.. I just want to see Elite getting better anyway, something that you can actually get as good content from PvP and PvE...

 

[DukeIronHand]

Afraid you lost me OP with my (almost) least favorite forum declaration of Horizons being "P2W."
Nonsense...

 

[CMDR GTR2014]

Afraid you lost me OP with my (almost) least favorite forum declaration of Horizons being "P2W."
Nonsense...

Horizons... no... Engineers yes. heck 300% more shields 40% more DMG... is NOT P2W?

 

[Faybs]

I've said this before and it's still my gut feeling: in the desire to hit the pre-announced December 16th 2014 launch date FD wrote themselves into a corner by pushing out a product that still contained much placeholder, with MVP code rushed into service to hold it all together. And while each subsequent iteration has largely improved on what came before -- some updates more than others -- the frequent need to push out new features to drive sales, as well as balance the increasingly asymmetric multiplayer aspects, has left zero opportunity to actually go back and rebuild the game's restricted core.

The more time passes, the less inclined I am to believe that this can ever be fully resolved. FD will no doubt add new features, or apply heavy reworking to some aspects such as the mission system, and some will be successful while others will fall by the wayside. But the underlying structure of the game is not going to change now. The economy will always be a giant everlasting firehose of credits with a series of BGS-adjustable taps rather than a structured simulation of galactic commerce. NPCs, beyond the static mission-givers and magic teleporting crew, will never be semi-persistent or interact with player characters in a meaningful or memorable way. The "solid" mechanic of exploration will always be jump-honk-scan, even if we get prettier things to honk at.

ED remains a remarkable technical achievement, presenting as it does a game world of such scale and beauty and, yes, immersion. But the way in which we interact with that world will always be hamstrung by the decisions made in 2014. Much of what was written in the DDA, hugely ambitious yet eminently achievable had the time been allocated, I believe will now remain firmly in the realm of what might have been, rather than what may yet be.

It's still a great game, still the best incarnation of David Braben's three-decade-old vision, and can still be terrific fun to play especially if, like me, you're old-school enough to appreciate its slightly retro charms. But it gives the appearance of having been rushed to release on very shaky foundations, and I fear those foundations just aren't capable of supporting the structures the game would need to reach its true potential.

I would never be happier to be proven wrong than to be proven wrong over this.

I think you're right - FDev either ran low on development cash or had to meet a deadline, and so painted themselves into a corner they still haven't fully managed to break out of. I suspect part of the long 2.1 delay was throwing out a lot of 2013/2014 code and rewriting it (see eg the new missions system), and we are probably going to see more of that still (see eg Sandro's recent post about a holistic fix for shield boosters). That is a good thing, it's just a shame that they haven't come out and said it - I'm sure a lot of us would be more understanding, anyone who's ever created anything will have been in a similar situation.

 

[fademist]

Horizons... no... Engineers yes. heck 300% more shields 40% more DMG... is NOT P2W?

how is p2w ?..... unless u say that cause u didnt bought horizons...

 

[CMDR GTR2014]

how is p2w ?..... unless u say that cause u didnt bought horizons...

OH I have Horizons and that's why i say that is extremely unfair against someone with base game. just look at 8000 MJ shields... it's 3x more than normal shields... and weapons can have extra 50% damage!

that's IS too much... i like having engineers I DO have a FULLY engineered ship,but i don't deny the fact that if i meet a CMDR with base game and fight him i will be 200% more eficient than him since most of the Engineering DON'T HAVE DOWNSIDES... that's fact... But that's not the topic here...

 

[fademist]

OH I have Horizons and that's why i say that is extremely unfair against someone with base game. just look at 8000 MJ shields... it's 3x more than normal shields... and weapons can have extra 50% damage!

that's IS too much... i like having engineers I DO have a FULLY engineered ship,but i don't deny the fact that if i meet a CMDR with base game and fight him i will be 200% more eficient than him since most of the Engineering DON'T HAVE DOWNSIDES... that's fact... But that's not the topic here...

is their choise not to upgrade to horizons though....
and us the failed part that depend who u will ask some thinks that is fail others that isnt..so is down to just opinions...

 

[Marcus Machiavelli]

Hey GTR2014, I play both elite and arma 3 together! Try it as my group loves it! We make all our own missions and we base it on our homeworld!
We have space legs already! Very "The expanse"
Fight on Commander!

 

[krylite]

I don't know if you are crazy or not, ultimately it comes down to a simple thing to me, Elite is giving me something no other game out there can provide, so I gladly support them so they can continue improving the game, and I do not expect a road of improvements that is perfect without bumps and bruises. And considering how many people are passionate about Elite even if it is 'against' it, it clearly indicates that they want the game to improve. And lets face it, that is not a simple thing. No matter how many 'this fixes all problems' idea's people have, it is rarely that simple.

To me, Frontier is doing a great job, and I gladly support that.

I am in agreement with this opinion. ED is already a classic. New PS4 players are going to wowed with hundreds to thousands of hours of gameplay far more than the typical console game. No other game or sim lets you see the galaxy with this level of adherence to astronomical theory. It's like getting to play in a hard sci-fi novel or movie, or exploring around like Carl Sagan's ship in the ol Cosmos series for "real". ED extrapolates what FFE was in an excellent way sans the atmospheric planets which is of course eventually coming. I don't see Fdev having made critical core blunders. That's more inline with SC where they changed engines to lumberyard, and now to vulcan. It's only season 2 and just the horizon. Season 2.3 is just a one tenths update. holo-me, avatar creator, and extra camera views probably also serve as testbeds for the upcoming spacelegs. The real update are the seasons. I have faith Fdev are continuously working hard behind the scenes on groundbreaking gaming wonders for seasons 3 through 10 because the scope is so massive and it takes considerable "time and resources" to get it good.