The core gameplay is boring

[Red Anders]

No. You don't.

So did you not play it, or just not enjoy it?

Don't fool yourself into thinking that I'm somehow 'anti-content' by the way, I find the crowd who want to pretend it's still 1984 just as ridiculous as the ones who seem to think they bought an interactive storybook. Personally though, I enjoy playing this game and I enjoyed playing the one I cited too.

Shouldn't you have used the 30 seconds you spent writing that post to jump your FDL one hop closer to something you want to do? Every second counts! etc

 

[xondk]

You say my OP is not clear enough? What is that it needs to be randomly guessed?
Those pictures were an art vision for THIS GAME from the early days. For this and much other things is why I bought the Premium Beta.

-----------------------------------------
Why some people get so angry when someone say something which he feels something doesn't feel right?
It's feels always like, "It works for me so don't change it". Different mechanics to do the same stuff could coexist, a simplified and a more complex one.

Well, yes, your initial post does not seem very clear, and the whole "I find x repetitive" is the same in more or less every game I've ever seen? so yeah, unsure on that point.
As for the pictures being art vision from 'this game' as you so try to point out? what is your point? I can still find it messy? there are things in this game that don't make sense and things that could be improved, why would it be an issue if or if not the example is from this game? I can still not like it? and still play the game as a whole? and I already agreed that statistics would be a good thing to add? I only mentioned I didn't like that particular design?

As for people being 'angry' I think you are misunderstanding, at least I am not angry, I just do not agree? and at best I am frustrated by people who as described previous go "this is bad, this is bad and this is bad, this game sucks!" because they don't really provide anything productive to the discussion, for example, you could have given suggestions as to what could change so it didn't feel so repetitive to you? You even go half way, saying you don't mind stuff being repetitive, when gameplay is fun, ok, elaborate on that, what would be fun?

Second question: what 'match'? Apparantly some people see it as a 'match', where they have to convince others not to have fun. Colonel Kenney seems to think he 'won' that 'match'. Have a gold star, Colonel! Anyway, I'm back playing ED with a mate. Don't let the Colonel know it, he might think he 'lost' and come back for a rematch.

More seriously: at least he's more honest about what this nonsense is all about, and its not 'constructive criticism'...

I really don't understand your reply, where did I mention anything regarding something being a match or competition to convince each other? or for that matter what does talking about the white knight label have to do with honesty?

 

[Brian of Earth]

Its not flame, its real. The gameplay for me and others is boring and people get upset for nothing really.
I don't speak english with perfection so maybe I'm a bit direct when I speak and maybe I don't use polite ways to say things but if people get mad because of that then they shouldn't be reading a forum.

And I'm not saying all the game is bad. I'm always talking of the core activities, Powerplay for example has a very nice UI, I like it very much and I like the idea behind PP. But I cannot stand the gameplay, its a recycled mechanics over and over.

And I respect that you want to talk about that. And you see we disagree on a basic level about PP. No problems there, maybe your suggestions will improve a variety of things and one day I would participate.

That's not the issue here.

You are unhappy because we are talking about the wrong stuff here. You want to talk about game mechanics, everyone else is arguing with you because of the title you chose for your thread. It's argumentative, so people have come here to argue. Simple.

That's all I'm saying. Use nicer-smelling fly paper (figure of speech).

 

[Ignition]

You know the game "One Finger Death Punch" ? All you need to do in this game is to press the left and right mouse button and it got overwhelmingly positive reviews on steam while beeing a best seller. And there are hundreds of games like this nowadays people seem to like it.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/264200/?l=english

LOL, yes the trend of games with bad gameplay design is constantly rising. For this game it seems it worked. Lets see how it works for Elite...

 

[Whiterose]

Lol. White Knight, troll, classic human compartmentalisation. We cant cope with people's opinions until we have them in a nicely defined little box. There is no black and white, just different shades of grey.

 

[Ignition]

Agreed. Although I am still at a loss as to why some folk continue posting who claim to have given up playing the game some time ago!

Because they see potential in this game and see some good things about it.
They want to play the game but not as it is right now.

Why bother in the forums posting feedback if it weren't that way.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

Lol. White Knight, troll, classic human compartmentalisation. We cant cope with people's opinions until we have them in a nicely defined little box. There is no black and white, just different shades of grey.

but there are facts and stages of ignorance towards facts. So how do you gonna describe a person denying facts and constantly saying everythign is fine? Or People continuing to saying something bad even if facts proof its wrong? These people are either Ignorant on will because they just want to white knight or hate. Or they are uneducated (not knowing the facts even if just gettign told). Some people pend between ths stupidity and ignorance. It's thos epeople makign it hard for devs to find the true problems of their community because its hidden beind non objective written feedback that has hidden intentions.

 

[KaizoMK]

Lol. White Knight, troll, classic human compartmentalisation. We cant cope with people's opinions until we have them in a nicely defined little box. There is no black and white, just different shades of grey.

Now you know how I feel. I wish people could look at what they love critically and have a dialogue about it, but it just doesn't seem possible. :/

 

[Arithon]

Yes I know. Thats why I have hope in it to change.

But the way FD is developing the game is what I don't like. They are focusing in getting the game bigger but they aren't addressing the basic gameplay.

They keep adding new features: Powerplay, CQC and now SRV on planets and the more they add the more they need to fill.
It feels like a really big empty shell instead of a smaller but "more complete" and then it can grow from that.

These threads are a repeating loop of complaint.

People complained they wanted to influence the galaxy and major/minor factions were no good. So Powerplay was added to do what was asked for. People complained.

People complained there wasn't enough PvP and travel was a problem for them. So CQCC was added as an "instant action" PvP only mini-game with real credits to be earned. People complained.

People complained that planetary landings should have been in the game at launch (never promised). So the first expansion added the ability to land on over 60% of all planets in the galaxy. People complained.

People complained missions are limited, not varied enough; that they should be multi-part etc. So next update, that's being added in a total revision of the mission system to add persistent NPCs with faces. People will, I am certain, complain about that too.

No matter what function is made a priority by Frontier, somebody will be unhappy and complain. Welcome to the internet.

 

[RhymeRhyme]

These threads are a repeating loop of complaint.

People complained they wanted to influence the galaxy and major/minor factions were no good. So Powerplay was added to do what was asked for. People complained.

People complained there wasn't enough PvP and travel was a problem for them. So CQCC was added as an "instant action" PvP only mini-game with real credits to be earned. People complained.

People complained that planetary landings should have been in the game at launch (never promised). So the first expansion added the ability to land on over 60% of all planets in the galaxy. People complained.

People complained missions are limited, not varied enough; that they should be multi-part etc. So next update, that's being added in a total revision of the mission system to add persistent NPCs with faces. People will, I am certain, complain about that too.

No matter what function is made a priority by Frontier, somebody will be unhappy and complain. Welcome to the internet.

If so many people complain and threads are looping, there seems to be something not ok with the game.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Now you know how I feel. I wish people could look at what they love critically and have a dialogue about it, but it just doesn't seem possible. :/

When you repeatedly say your opinion is a fact, there is very little room for discussion.

 

[Ignition]

I note that you haven't responded to the majority of my post, which attempted to set player complaints into the context of game development - something that is a profound issue for developers in this era of game development and post-development.

ok, let me tell you something. I bought this game because I read the DDA back in 2014 during alpha or even before. The game was going to have more complexity than what we have now.
Different types of fuel, Fuel tank malfunction, missjumps while chasing another ship. I will put some links so you can read them. There're many of them from different aspects of the game.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=7007

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6561

As you can see there was more complexities doing stuff and not just 1 button. Thats why I make this thread.

I know its a WIP but priorities matter.

 

[Jex =TE=]

yeah, ok I salute you, because I can't make heads or tails in what you seem to be saying. o7
And if you are trying to make a joke it didn't quite translate well into text I imagine. o7 o7

No, I was showing how your logic was faulty. You cannot have a "solid fact" and then go onto say one of them is "likely" to be the case. If it was a solid fact, you wouldn't then say it was likely to be true. Likely implies doubt and a solid fact cannot contain doubt You would also need to cite your sources when your claiming things are facts - we can't just take your word for it.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Yep..

The white knights have lost this match and I don't think they can win it. As soon as ED acknowledges the issues (and they have in some cases) and fixes them everyone will win.

If you actually read the forum posts from the devs and read the newsletters, you will see that they have acknowledged the "problems" and have already said mechanics of the game will be upgraded. Fixed is the wrong term as they generally work at the moment, expanded upon is what will be happening and looks like the first part of that will be 2.1 Engineers.

I really can't stand the term white knights.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

but there are facts and stages of ignorance towards facts. So how do you gonna describe a person denying facts and constantly saying everythign is fine? Or People continuing to saying something bad even if facts proof its wrong? These people are either Ignorant on will because they just want to white knight or hate. Or they are uneducated (not knowing the facts even if just gettign told). Some people pend between ths stupidity and ignorance. It's thos epeople makign it hard for devs to find the true problems of their community because its hidden beind non objective written feedback that has hidden intentions.

No, that is your opinion that you know facts. All you have is opinion, nothing more, nothing less. Said that, you really think FD are stupid enough to listen just to positive feedback - well, you haven't worked in big software company, have you. I will let you have a secret - positive feedback is usually cast aside. Negative feedback gets much more visibility in dev eyes, because it indicates that someone ain't happy. And for them it doesn't matter is it based on facts or not - they feel obliged to do something about it.

Now, there are two groups of negative feedback - feedback about fundamental dislike about the game, which FD can do very little about it. Then "this is our game, that's how we designed it, sorry if you don't like it". You accept it and move on. And then there's feedback FD can work upon. Sometimes feedback hides some more fundamental issues. Good QA/support and design easily gets why some of input comes in.

See, relationships, even between players and game development company of such ongoing longterm projct, are complex. It is constant re-balance and looking for long term solutions. If you treat it like a math problem which needs solution you won't get nowhere far. It is not something you can easily solve, or even solve at all.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

If so many people complain and threads are looping, there seems to be something not ok with the game.

"So many people" are about maybe 100 - 200 people at best. It is effective echo chamber. Doesn't mean there's no problems to solve, but doesn't mean there's fundamental issue with the game either.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

If so many people complain and threads are looping, there seems to be something not ok with the game.

"So many people" are about maybe 100 - 200 people at best. It is effective echo chamber. Doesn't mean there's no problems to solve, but doesn't mean there's fundamental issue with the game either.

 

[Jex =TE=]

You've contradicted yourself there. On the one hand you say it is the job of the developer(s) to add content based on criticisms leveled by players, while on the other you say that it is not the job of the community to make the game. Either a developer should be listening to its games' users and implementing changes to address their concerns, or they should not. The reality is, of course, that it will lie somewhere in between.

Herein lies the major problem that developers have faced in the more recent years of videogame history. 'The community' (whatever that means - be it a relatively small forum such as this, the wider playing base of the game, or videogamers across the internet) has a megaphone the size of the internet through which to voice its displeasure with a particular game. There can, in respect of the largest releases, be millions of individual voices shouting at developers to change 'this' or to introduce 'that'. That presents developers with an impossible task, as clearly very few of those changes can be implemented given the resources involved, and possibly fewer can be implemented without fundamentally altering the vision for a game that a developer has. I am sure everybody on this thread can provide a list of games in respect of which they have seen this happen over the past ten years or so.

And so what happens is that 'the community', or at least a section of it, complains ad infinitum that it is not being listened to and that the developers do not know what they are doing. The vast majority of players' suggestions are not implemented, and therefore the complainants continue to complain. The developer will never win.

At the end of the day, Elite is what it is and it will not stray very far from its core philosophy - Braben & Co will not allow it to. There are a myriad of other games out there that provide the kind of mechanics and complexities that I see being suggested on here in numerous threads. I am not going to tell you to fellow players that they should play something else, but there should come a point at which some people need to accept that their suggestions may never become a reality within Elite.

There's a point in development where the devs are making a game a certain way and that's how they want to make it. Personally, if I was making a game it would have a bunch of features in on release and that's what people would get. Feedback from the community would be taken on board for ideas that I either liked or worked better and I'd probably open the game up for modding or ask the community to get to work on making things to put in the game.

All that being said, ED's issue is it's total lack of game play features. They do some great things with the game but it's all let down with the 4 core mechanics of the gameplay. We're not talking bad here but really bad. You couldn't really get the game mechanics anymore basic or ill thought out I don't think. Hopefully that will be fleshed out a lot more and soon.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

These threads are a repeating loop of complaint.

People complained they wanted to influence the galaxy and major/minor factions were no good. So Powerplay was added to do what was asked for. People complained.

PP does not really influence the galaxy, it's impact is negliable, thats one issue with PP.

ask yourself why Elite recives a mixed on steam and many other games not? Yes all agmes have people complaining yte other games make a mostly positive and others just a mixed. Mostly negative games are those that in nearly all cases aren't working properly. Ed works quite well, its technically rather stable. So when her eis so much "complaints" its probably somethign to take serious. Because the true investors are NOT the ones havign shares in your company it's the gamers who buy stuff and make sure that your shareholdes get a statisfying interets rate on their shares. And if that is in danger they even may retreat. While your gamers only retreta if you make them unhappy.

So sry but no matter what function Frontier impelmented they all were shallow and half heartly done. Thats why people kept complaining, not for the sake f complaining, becasue the change, or addition was just not done properly.

 

[ErikMaintainer]

ok, let me tell you something. I bought this game because I read the DDA back in 2014 during alpha or even before. The game was going to have more complexity than what we have now.
Different types of fuel, Fuel tank malfunction, missjumps while chasing another ship. I will put some links so you can read them. There're many of them from different aspects of the game.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=7007

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6561

As you can see there was more complexities doing stuff and not just 1 button. Thats why I make this thread because thats why I bought the game.

I know its a WIP but priorities matter.

Ok, now I understand a little better what you have in mind. My earlier point stands though - If I were you I would submit a question to the devs in the questions/suggestions section of the forum and ask them, specifically, which of the features set out in those links they are going to implement, and which (if any) they no longer intend to deliver. You may get a positive response.

 

[KaizoMK]

When you repeatedly say your opinion is a fact, there is very little room for discussion.

I haven't even offered an opinion yet though...

 

[sewerratuk]

but there are facts and stages of ignorance towards facts. So how do you gonna describe a person denying facts and constantly saying everythign is fine? Or People continuing to saying something bad even if facts proof its wrong? These people are either Ignorant on will because they just want to white knight or hate. Or they are uneducated (not knowing the facts even if just gettign told). Some people pend between ths stupidity and ignorance. It's thos epeople makign it hard for devs to find the true problems of their community because its hidden beind non objective written feedback that has hidden intentions.

Thought I would highlight your obvious contempt for some people and help you understand that you may be raising the hackles of of them

The Mods removed a post I put on here (its was the 2nd post actually) because they mistook my sarcasm (I'm english, what you gonna do) as insults, this post seems more of an obvious insult so lets see