Should FDev have the guts to upset players in order to improve the overall quality of the game

Simple really..... You would have thought.

EDIT: Right, been at work, posted a thread, come home, now having to do an edit. The text regarding Imperial and Federal Ranks is an "Example" of where people have put a lot time an effort into the game, to rank in both, but where a vast amount of additional lore, depth and gameplay can be injected into the game, but in order to do this, FDev would have to make some hard choices in order to add the improvements into the game. This was an example, the point of the thread is "should FDev have the guts", despite it being obvious that some people would get up set.

Eve is a clear example of this, the developers have done many changes to the game that have upset a lot of people, but the game is still going strong if not grown, regardless of whether you like it or not.


This is not about any game mechanic in particular, but rather if it is in the best interest of the game to have the guts to say we are going to implement x, y and z, because we feel x, y and z would add so much more to the game.

I personally think it is far more dangerous not to and FDev are going to have a far more bigger how to climb out of further down the line.

This thread is due to a question being being raised at Lavecon regarding consequences in the game that David Braben himself in front of a live audience, that he wanted in the game, and the ranking of both within the Federation and Imperium was used as an example of the these consequences, which resulted FDev saying that they have to think about players who have ranked in both, Despite after 30 years of lore development this would never have happened in the first place. (Despite it appearing in previous Elite games, most likely due to certain limitations at the time).

So, should FDev have the guts to upset players in order to implement new game mechanics, lore and other changes to the game, regardless if it upsets a majority of players? Most of whom, would probably forget all about it within a couple a days and had a think about the long term benefits.

Edit: Can a moderator change the title to included the word "should" in the title, thanks to phone and fat fingers.

Thank you Mods.
 
Last edited:
I think so.

The game, for me, is permanently stuck in easy mode. Nothing I do changes that.

I'd love it if they made system security rating and government really matter. Currently the difference is so tiny it's not noticeable.


This would upset a lot of people. But not me. :p

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
As long as changes make sense and ai reactions make sense then I'm all for it. I agree some find the game too easy and need more of a challenge, but it's vital that it's not a global (wrong word for this game I know!) thing. I also agree (which is the ops point I think) that someone ranked high on the Fed side shouldn't be able to progress on the Imp side and vice versa.
 
Ofcourse they should implement whatever is best for the game.

In regards to implementing features that were previously place holders such as a military career path that focuses on dedication to a faction, then it makes sense to level set everyone back to zero and implement the new system.

You would have to allow players to keep ships and permits, but with a new system, all should start the same.
 
I'd love it if they forced players to pick a side either by direct choice or by action, but I don't think they're willing to off the forum loudmouths that get terribly offended at features they would never use anyways and result in useful features nerfed into the ground and made pointless.
 

verminstar

Banned
Erm, they already have that ability and pow2er OP...not entirely sure what the confusion is. Ye can please some players some of the time, but one can never please all of the players all of the time. Cant be done and many have tried...but maybe frontier are "special" though...they certainly appear to think they are. The reality however...

All dev teams on all games have that right...because by looking at the terms and conditions, one can actually see that they reserve those rights in black and white. So what was the question again? Because Im confused as to why theres any confusion about this tbh ^
 
I am all for it, but if they take my Corvette off of me and make me earn that thing again, I will be slightly more than miffed! :D I never wanted the Space , only the Vette.........brouhaha! Of course, it does beg the question that if they make it so you can only be aligned to one type of power, can I legitimately leather any iShips on sight in my Vette? :D
 
I am all for it, but if they take my Corvette off of me and make me earn that thing again, I will be slightly more than miffed! :D I never wanted the Space Length, only the Vette.........brouhaha! Of course, it does beg the question that if they make it so you can only be aligned to one type of power, can I legitimately leather any iShips on sight in my Vette? :D
 
Easiest way to fix the either or question is introduce mutually exclusive ranks above king/Admiral and have new rank locked ships. e.g Panther clipper, imperial trader or even a mega ship..
 
Ofcourse they should implement whatever is best for the game.

In regards to implementing features that were previously place holders such as a military career path that focuses on dedication to a faction, then it makes sense to level set everyone back to zero and implement the new system.

You would have to allow players to keep ships and permits, but with a new system, all should start the same.
Hmm. I'm not seeing the equality here. If ranks get to be reset then so too should rank locked ships be taken away from everyone across the board. If they're not prepared to do that then they shouldn't be prepared to reset ranks. Why should some players get to keep their rank locked ships while others who might have been on the verge of unlocking the Clipper for example get shafted back down to zero just as they were about to get the Baron rank.
 
As to the "pick a side" argument. I have a feeling it is actually too late to fix that.

But I had a few ideas.


What if...
[Prepare For Poorly Thought Out Ideas]
1) Whichever rank you're higher in, is automatically assigned in a CZ, if it's an empire/fed CZ.
2) If Fed/Empire factions are at war in a system, free flying NPCs from the other power may attack you.
3) You can actually lose rank by attacking ships from that faction.
4) one rank decays slowly as your other rank increases.
5) Mission pay/reward less and are less common if you're ranked highly with the opposing faction. Eventually missions will be rare.
6) You can not join an opposing CG.


And that's it so far.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
That's kind of a rhetorical question though, isn't it ?
No matter what changes or additional content they come up with, it will upset segments of the player base.
Quite normal and expected, both on the developer and the player side of things.
"Guts" doesn't come into it, it will happen anyway.
Ultimately the developer has to call the shots, and i wouldn't want it any other way. I didn't pay them money for me to make the decisions, and i don't want development "by popular vote".
I, as a player, then have the choice of "take it or leave it".
None of that means that a developer should be tone deaf to feedback, or that the players shouldn't criticize planned or finalized changes.
The one thing to remember (on the dev's side), when considering any sort of radical changes, is of course: "Could this hurt us in the wallet, and how bad ?"
Because "we're making the game we want to play" is no more than marketing spin, no dev/publisher can or will ignore the reality of life and, more importantly, economics.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. I'm not seeing the equality here. If ranks get to be reset then so too should rank locked ships be taken away from everyone across the board. If they're not prepared to do that then they shouldn't be prepared to reset ranks. Why should some players get to keep their rank locked ships while others who might have been on the verge of unlocking the Clipper for example get shafted back down to zero just as they were about to get the Baron rank.
Yea that's true. They kinda ruined the whole idea by allowing ranks in all the factions simultaneously without balancing factions against each other. I guess the lore would be that Pilots Federation CMDRs are just mercs for hire, with honorary military titles.

I guess the current ships could just all be unlocked and a new ship (or whatever prize) would just be introduced with a new military career path.

Or maybe the factions send you a message that says choose...

Quite the pickle.

I think I'm leaning to full reset, but then again I don't fly a rank locked ship.
 
I think so.

The game, for me, is permanently stuck in easy mode. Nothing I do changes that.

I'd love it if they made system security rating and government really matter. Currently the difference is so tiny it's not noticeable.


This would upset a lot of people. But not me. :p

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

It does feel this way, I tend to feel like unless I'm going out of my way (or my wing friends) to actually gimp ourselves, there's little to no challenge.
 
I have been wanting FD to get on with delivering THEIR vision of the game for a while.
If it's awful, then its awful, and I will be sad, but I would much rather it was THEIR awful and not the awful of the forum ranters.
 
They can reset the ranks but keep the ranking points.

That way commanders can play whatever new gameplay there is for ranking without losing their progress towards unlocking ships.
 
Back
Top Bottom