The epic fail of Beyond

[-VR- Max Factor]

Part of " the game is boring" mantra is precisely to do with travel as well which you are fully aware of. If you have a long SC journey you are doing nothing. They might not be fixing SC times but beyond is about them recognizing their are flaws in the game that need addressing.

Personally I love the Supercruise mechanic and much prefer it over jump gates or anything else like that. You keep saying that if you have a long supercruise journey you are doing nothing, well that depends on what you mean by long, but as I have stated on a number of occasions, those long supercuise journeys are purely optional, if you do not like them do not do them, then you won't get bored with them will you. What part of that do you not understand? It really is a simple concept.

Also what part of beyond is going to shorten the supercruise journey?

 

[S3B4ST13N]

Jex =TE=,

I just want to check something, humour me please.

A company sold 1,000,000 units of their game.
At launch 500,000 people played that game.

Is that playerbase 50% of 1,000,000, or 100% of 500,000?

 

[Whitehair]

Can I make a plea at this point for a number of people to make use of the Ignore function?

Some forum users are better off NOT being replied to!

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Jex =TE=,

I just want to check something, humour me please.

A company sold 1,000,000 units of their game.
At launch 500,000 people played that game.

Is that playerbase 50% of 1,000,000, or 100% of 500,000?

The player base is obviously 100% of 500,000. I think what Jex is asking is the current player base compared to owners. At 500,000, that would be 50% of owners playing the game.

 

[babelfisch]

The player base is obviously 100% of 500,000. I think what Jex is asking is the current player base compared to owners. At 500,000, that would be 50% of owners playing the game.

What I don't understand in Jex's logic is why we need the term playerbase at all if we could just refer to owners or sold units following his definition.

 

[Jex =TE=]

Ähm whut?
Maybe i got something wrong but this "issue" seems quite easy...

Sure the "Playerbase" (people actually playing the game) is based at 100% but lets say:
Month A 100%=100, Month B 100%=50
So if you compare Month A to Month B you definetly have a loss of 50%, but the 50 People playing the game at Month B are still 100% of the Playerbase for this Month...

Another example:
Lets say you earn 2000€ at Jan and 1000€ at Feb, so while you would have earned just 50% in Feb compared to Jan its still 100% of what you earned at Feb.



I think they actually mean that 95% less people playing the game compared to the people that played the game 3 month before, so yeah the playerbase is still 100% its just 95% less compared to the 100% before.
Also its totally possible that people bought/own the game and didnt played it all, so it would make sense to differ between "Playerbase" and "Sales"


Hmm i realy think/hope i got something wrong here [noob]

Edit: Dont get me wrong here, im just used to explain stuff as simple as i can (also no native speaker), so no offence intendet.

I can't explain it anymore than I've already done so please see my first post on the subject and then all proceeding posts there on

 

[Skizomeuh]

Another question:

700 people bought the game. Day one the first 100 play the game, day two other 100 people play the game, etc until the end of the week, except wedneday where noone played. Weekly player base is 100 or 600 or 700?

 

[Jex =TE=]

I see, you are moving goal posts again. A few posts earlier you said that player base in Elite couldn't be compared to player base in a subscription based game and that definition just wouldn't apply, implying that your definition would be the only valid one. I don't have time for your trolling attempts and don't expect that I waste even more time with your nonsensical posts. That is not a promise BTW.

No, I've been clear throughout and perfectly so and somehow you're resorting to name calling. I've been crystal clear but I can't do anything about people who don't get context and only half read posts.

 

[babelfisch]

No, I've been clear throughout and perfectly so and somehow you're resorting to name calling. I've been crystal clear but I can't do anything about people who don't get context and only half read posts.

Dito.

 

[Jex =TE=]

What I don't understand in Jex's logic is why we need the term playerbase at all if we could just refer to owners or sold units following his definition.

It's not my logic - it's what everyone uses so what you're saying is you don't get the logic of context. When I say 95% of the player base of ED stopped working, are the people struggling with this actually admitting they don't have a clue what is meant by that? That it is somehow beyond their reasoning capabilities to think what on earth I could be talking about when everyone else gets it?

It's my fault for failing to remember that some people take things literally or just don't take the time to think what is being said. The other issue being that even when it's explained, they still harp on about it!

It's not my definition - I'm using general terminology that everyone else uses except you.

 

[StonedThoughts]

What so ever,
i deffinetly need 100% of 400mg Ibuprofen and 50% of 1L chicken broth now

 

[babelfisch]

It's not my logic - it's what everyone uses so what you're saying is you don't get the logic of context. When I say 95% of the player base of ED stopped working, are the people struggling with this actually admitting they don't have a clue what is meant by that? That it is somehow beyond their reasoning capabilities to think what on earth I could be talking about when everyone else gets it?

It's my fault for failing to remember that some people take things literally or just don't take the time to think what is being said. The other issue being that even when it's explained, they still harp on about it!

It's not my definition - I'm using general terminology that everyone else uses except you.

Doesn't look like it and I believe NuttiKrust already provided examples that you chose to dismiss. What you want to say is that 95% of the owners currently don't play the game.

(Which doesn't tell us anything because I don't believe that a game exists that gets played by 100% of the owners all the time)

 

[Jex =TE=]

Doesn't look like it and I believe NuttiKrust already provided examples that you chose to dismiss. What you want to say is that 95% of the owners currently don't play the game.

Annnnnd we've gone full circle. I already explained why his example was incorrect but keep beating this dead horse. I think we've gone over everything but please, have the last word.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

It's not my logic - it's what everyone uses so what you're saying is you don't get the logic of context. When I say 95% of the player base of ED stopped working, are the people struggling with this actually admitting they don't have a clue what is meant by that? That it is somehow beyond their reasoning capabilities to think what on earth I could be talking about when everyone else gets it?

It's my fault for failing to remember that some people take things literally or just don't take the time to think what is being said. The other issue being that even when it's explained, they still harp on about it!

It's not my definition - I'm using general terminology that everyone else uses except you.

It is your terminology that is incorrect. Don't confuse player base and owners which is what you seem to be doing. If you said 95% of the game owners don't seem to be playing, then people would understand you. Player base are the people who still play regularly.

 

[Sylveria]

It is your terminology that is incorrect. Don't confuse player base and owners which is what you seem to be doing. If you said 95% of the game owners don't seem to be playing, then people would understand you. Player base are the people who still play regularly.

I'm personally not confused about the "game owners" vs "player base", but rather how people seem to be getting absolute percentages of the player base to begin with.

From what I've gathered, FD hasn't released any numbers regarding active players- and since there are 3 platforms (PC, XBox, PS) as well 3 "modes", the fact that ED isn't sold on only the Steam platform, how someone manages to "glean" absolute percentages or statistics from it...

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I'm personally not confused about the "game owners" vs "player base", but rather how people seem to be getting absolute percentages of the player base to begin with.

From what I've gathered, FD hasn't released any numbers regarding active players- and since there are 3 platforms (PC, XBox, PS) as well 3 "modes", the fact that ED isn't sold on only the Steam platform, how someone manages to "glean" absolute percentages or statistics from it...

I agree. There isn't any overall absolute percentage. It's just a subset of the player base.

 

[B1rdy]

Rather than do what everyone else does because it a) makes sense and b) is the obvious way to do it. So when they say The Division lost 95% of it's player base in the first 3 months they mean the people who own the game stopped playing it.

Sorry, but I don´t think so: http://githyp.com/the-divisions-player-count-has-dropped-93-percent-since-launch/

 

[Han Zulu]

Part of " the game is boring" mantra is precisely to do with travel as well which you are fully aware of. If you have a long SC journey you are doing nothing. They might not be fixing SC times but beyond is about them recognizing their are flaws in the game that need addressing.

True.

Reducing the travel time wouldn't be the answer though, since interdictions are kind'a based on the ability to stop someone in their tracks. The way to fix the boring travel would be to introduce an NPC pilot that can do the flying for you, and then... space legs so we can walk around the ship while the NPC is flying (and taking the risk willingly that we could be interdicted at any point).

 

[Han Zulu]

I think that's not a bad idea. Personally I'd rather see SC implemented as the only form of travel (so replace Jumping with it) but on the condition that we could walk around our ships, affect repairs on route (even EVA), have access to CQC from a console in our cabins and also have cargo holds that if we're transporting delicate goods, need to monitor temperatures say so they don't ruin the product.

Only problem is that players will scream bleaking murder when they're griefed unexpectedly and not sitting in the cockpit to handle the situation.

 

[Dsign]

I don't get the OP, we know barely nothing of Beyond except for what Frontier told us... we know they keep surprises for a later date but yet there are already complaints ?
Beyond hasn't even started yet, damn... people like to complain.