The 2020 Dev Run: As Big As The Launch Run (?)

[sollisb]

You put it that it is their policy to ignore the ever increasing discontent - I mean, it is already quite bad if it is already a policy... but I see you are getting good at it as well, by ignoring the key points of the post.

Maybe they trained him at the last tea and cakes party they attended . Sure seems that way.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

Most people aren't invested in the game to the degree whereby they are so polarised about what and when 'stuff' happens. People who left the game will come back if they like what they see and hear when the DLC is released. All the noise on the forums will count for diddly squat. There's plenty of people who play regularly who just don't bother with forums.

An MMO that has a steep learning curve is by definition targeted to players who do heavily invest time and effort. People may come back, but won't spend money on ship skins, probably won't preorder the game, hell, even wait for the first major discount.

The game's mismanagement has nothing to do with the forums, people come to similar conclusions after having similar experience...

 

[Cervantes01]

My newest simple theory is that FDev initially planned to move on with Fleet Carriers, buggy as usual like all the latest updates but now where somewhat shocked how the ARX update wasn't received all too well. All I'm saying is that it's never too late to learn...

I concur, their Chinese overlords were doubtless not too happy with the situation either.

 

[StuartGT]

You put it that it is their policy to ignore the ever increasing discontent - I mean, it is already quite bad if it is already a policy... but I see you are getting good at it as well, by ignoring the key points of the post.

No I didn't.

First you say "FDev is at war with the fanbase" and now you think I said FDev ignore the fanbase?

 

[Lightspeed]

They are "refining" the FCs, which I take to mean "we've been modifying the FCs on the fly as the forum discussed them." Which is fair enough. The Forum is like a pre-alpha

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Given the new era is not crowdfunded like vanilla was, I would be very surprised if we have a playable beta of more than a month at most (like Horizons), nevermind the 8 months we got from Premium Beta in April 2014. Would love to be wrong though.

I can hear the backup beeper of the flatbed truck, come to repo the thing at 0400...

 

[babelfisch]

They are "refining" the FCs, which I take to mean "we've been modifying the FCs on the fly as the forum discussed them." Which is fair enough. The Forum is like a pre-alpha

So they are going to cost between 200 million and 10 billion credits. They can either do everything or nothing, can't be attacked but can be destroyed. Others can't see your fleet carrier unless they want to see it. Each system is limited to 1 fleet carrier. 100 fleet carriers can be present per system.

That's how we discussed them.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

... Fleet carriers, and hopefully making them even better then what they planned.
Seems like a perfectly reasonable theory to be honest.

I don't know... they already played that card last year when they delayed FC for the first time...

 

[Barking_Mad]

Indeed... Too many half baked designs... Too many questionable designs (which even after second visit are not improved to any real degree)... Too many features delayed when just months away... Too little evidence of a hundred+ people working for 4-5yrs...

ED on its release was impressive. CGs and Wings were good additions. Planetary landings was astounding... And for me then little has been added of any note/worth (eg: Multicrew and CQC were total wastes of time for the game), and indeed some features have even damaged the gameplay (eg: Engineering unbalanced PvE and PvP for no logical reason)...

So I'll hope next year brings a bar raising, technically impressive update to the game... But it is just a hope for me given the past four or so years...

Until we can see the fruits of 100 people working on the next update for over 2.5 years it's probably best not to judge what you can't see, or indeed what you can see but likely don't understand.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

Until we can see the fruits of 100 people working on the next update for over 2.5 years it's probably best not to judge what you can't see, or indeed what you can see but likely don't understand.

I agree but I won't hold my breath...

 

[NeilF]

Until we can see the fruits of 100 people working on the next update for over 2.5 years it's probably best not to judge what you can't see, or indeed what you can see but likely don't understand.

Maybe, but we've had 4-5yrs of 100 people working on the title... So it's not entirely unfair to use that as a baseline, for the same 100 people working for another 2yrs IMHO. ie: If we have a company building a row of houses, could we not judge the potential quality of the next 2 houses, based on the past 5 they've built already?

Now, it's entirely possible they've had staff changes at Frontier, but I'd say unless they've had a significant change in designers, or management have significantly changed their approach, I don't see why we can't have a gut feeling for how next year might pan out based on the past 4-5yrs. Hence me not being very optimistic. But I hope we might still get something as technically impressive and bar raising as planetary surfaces.

Ultimately, fingers crossed but not hopeful.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I don't know... they already played that card last year when they delayed FC for the first time...

Really. As far as I know, they were just re-prioritized. We get the basic idea if what they will be like, if they add more to it, then we will know. Not that it matters if they do or don't. Still, the theory that they were just telling the truth, is just as good as anyone elses so far.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

Really. As far as I know, they were just re-prioritized. We get the basic idea if what they will be like, if they add more to it, then we will know. Not that it matters if they do or don't. Still, the theory that they were just telling the truth, is just as good as anyone elses so far.

I truly believe FC would have been delayed anyway.
Now if we get a public beta for the end of February and a full release at the beginning of April I would then agree with you.
On the other hand if we get a beta only in June it's clear that they messed up the whole thing.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I truly believe FC would have been delayed anyway.
Now if we get a public beta for the end of February and a full release at the beginning of April I would then agree with you.
On the other hand if we get a beta only in June it's clear that they messed up the whole thing.

They may well have been. They may not have been. There is no evidence to suggest either apart from what FDev have said. I can't come to any conclusions with so little evidence, so I will keep an open mind.

 

[NeilF]

I truly believe FC would have been delayed anyway.
Now if we get a public beta for the end of February and a full release at the beginning of April I would then agree with you.
On the other hand if we get a beta only in June it's clear that they messed up the whole thing.

So we know FCs were delayed a while ago, along with ice planet surfaces. And now, FCs have been delayed again, with FD now saying, "Fleet Carriers to be released in an update in the second quarter of 2020."

So what bearing does a beta date (next year) have on them having "messing up" or not? Surely the fact they've pulled the rug from each of these things just a few months before they were due to be released shows things are not going as planned (to some degree)?

For me the reworked surfaces seems the oddest one. Clearly this was a significant lump of work, no doubt planned and developed over a period of time, yet delayed for seemingly two years, just months away from its supposed release?

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

So what bearing does a beta date (next year) have on them having "messing up" or not?

It's about time of course. Delaying a feature by 2 months is one thing, delaying it by 6 is a different story which does not sustain the explanation received.

 

[NeilF]

It's about time of course. Delaying a feature by 2 months is one thing, delaying it by 6 is a different story which does not sustain the explanation received.

Understood, but the features mentioned (Fleet Carriers and I mentioned icy surfaces) would have been delayed already for over a year come xmas...? According to what FD are saying:-

• Fleet Carriers will now be delivered about 18 months late?
• Icy Surfaces will now be delivered about 24 months late?

^ Neither of these imply things are going smoothing, especially when the delays came just months before their release? Then add to this the bug fest of the recent release?

 

[VR Golgot]

Maybe, but we've had 4-5yrs of 100 people working on the title... So it's not entirely unfair to use that as a baseline, for the same 100 people working for another 2yrs IMHO. ie: If we have a company building a row of houses, could we not judge the potential quality of the next 2 houses, based on the past 5 they've built already?

It's definitely a sensible baseline for our expectations. I would throw these potential positives into the ring though:

• Seasonal 'flagship' deliveries clearly had a negative impact on game design & delivery.
  
  We've all seen this clearly in the fractured releases, with their lack of complementary overlap, hurried-feeling mechanics at points (Multicrewwwww ), and thin accompanying content. Informal dev chats suggest the feeling was the same inside FDev. IE these Lavecon snippets [1],[2] for example:
  
  

  The way they told me things, since Horizons was such a, let's stick with the term 'hard lesson', they decided to go with an 'everything at once' approach for the next expansion / update thing. So taking off time to actually work on the thing was necessary but in result as a whole it'll provide a more unified and refined experience that Horizons did not manage.

  
  

  On the brighter side, the fact that it would be developed as a whole thing, with every aspect in the mind, does make me kind of happy... When talking with developers it felt like every single one of them couldn't wait to tell you about it in a genuine non PR way.

  
  
  And this bit of drunken gossip from a prior Lavecon
  
  

  Horizons having the roadmap publicly laid out for the entire expansion (major features at least) meant they were locked in to specific promised feature set with no wriggle-room for deviation if they thought of better/more important things along the way, or certain features turned out to be not as fun as expected, etc.
  
  So this time they're completing the entire mega-update in advance and not telling anyone what's in it until they're absolutely sure about what is going to be delivered.
  
  EDIT: This is what I gleaned from talking to a very drunk Sandro Sammarco (nice chap) at Lavecon the other year.

• Staffing has seemingly upped slowly over that time. (See links in OP. During Horizons they were talking of '100 staff', but after various mentions of staffing increases, they started referring to '100 devs', with further ancillary staffing).

Now, it's entirely possible they've had staff changes at Frontier, but I'd say unless they've had a significant change in designers, or management have significantly changed their approach, I don't see why we can't have a gut feeling for how next year might pan out based on the past 4-5yrs. Hence me not being very optimistic. But I hope we might still get something as technically impressive and bar raising as planetary surfaces.

Ultimately, fingers crossed but not hopeful.

I see a positive here personally. Designers behind game mechanics that were particularly well received from the launch game are still at the company. They've got a chance to have a proper long, considered run at some game mechanics again. And to fill out more content to complement it this time. (The area which is traditionally part of the 'final phase' of game dev, and seemingly very pinched here in ED during Seasons).

They're still up against the proc gen monster though, on all of those fronts. Still waiting to see if they can even land a flesh wound on that beast

---

TLDR: Imagine a Horizons run where SRVs could actually be used with Multicrew, SLFs had specific missions ('destroy the fusion reactor inside the installation...'), Engineering launched with QoL like pinnable blueprints & mat trading, and all of them could be used in concert for top tier missions, as well as narrative features such as solving Guardian puzzles or shutting down invasive Thargoid bases. Both in Solo or Multiplayer.

It's not revolutionary. But it would have been a helluva lot better

 

[NeilF]

It's definitely a sensible baseline for our expectations. I would throw these potential positives into the the ring though:

• Seasonal 'flagship' deliveries clearly had a negative impact on game design & delivery.
  
  We've all seen this clearly in the fractured releases, with their lack of complementary overlap, hurried-feeling mechanics at points (Multicrewwwww ), and thin accompanying content. Informal dev chats suggest the feeling was the same inside FDev. IE these Lavecon snippets [1],[2] for example:
  
  
  
  
  
  
  And this bit of drunken gossip from a prior Lavecon

• Staffing has seemingly upped slowly over that time. (See links in OP. During Horizons they were talking of '100 staff', but after various mentions of staffing increases, they started referring to '100 devs', with further ancillary staffing).

I see a positive here personally. Designers behind game mechanics that were particularly well received from the launch game are still at the company. They've got a chance to have a proper long, considered run at some game mechanics again. And to fill out more content to complement it this time. (The area which is traditionally part of the 'final phase' of game dev, and seemingly very pinched here in ED during Seasons).

They're still up against the proc gen monster though, on all of those fronts. Still waiting to see if they can even land a flesh wound on that beast

---

TLDR: Imagine a Horizons run where SRVs could actually be used with Multicrew, SLFs had specific missions ('destroy the fusion reactor inside the installation...'), Engineering launched with QoL like pinnable blueprints & mat trading, and all of them could be used in concert for top tier missions, as well as narrative features such as solving Guardian puzzles or shutting down invasive Thargoid bases. Both in Solo or Multiplayer.

It's not revolutionary. But it would have been a helluva lot better

I'm more than happy to try and look at things positively and hope that come end of next year you'll see me skipping around that we have a long overdue release that is bar raising and technically impressive.

BUT, I've been hoping for something like that since 2015 (planetary surfaces), and been dismayed at what has been greenlit to be developed, and seemingly the all too often shallow bolt on nature of what has been developed. So count me as not having high hopes...

ps: I really do struggle to pick much out of the past four years to give me hope, especially when there's so much to counter balance it IMHO!

 

[The Chairmaker]

Given the new era is not crowdfunded like vanilla was, I would be very surprised if we have a playable beta of more than a month at most (like Horizons), nevermind the 8 months we got from Premium Beta in April 2014. Would love to be wrong though.

Im not talking about playable betas or alphas as was in 2014. I expect them to be internal only.
I personally am expecting they may have a pre release vertical slice beta about a month before launch, similar to what they have done with Planet Zoo.

I am merely thinking that development of the expansion will be at an internal developmental stage somewhat similar to that of the original Elite Dangerous. Hence Alpha build will be end of this year or first quarter of next year, with private beta being end of 2nd quarter or early 3rd quarter 2020.