The future of ship-based content?

[Erei]

Hi Erei


You have a point, and I understand what you're saying, and you're most probably right. On the other hand they are developers, work is work whatever business you are in. Adding new content is important and relative to this game in particular. I would imagine the people playing only Horizons is fairly large?....I don't know, I also don't know whether Frontier as you say...."That's nearly double the work. Something they don't want to do." is actually what they are thinking?
Keeping players playing your game/s would be fairly important I'd imagine?.
It would be interesting to know just how many people play Horizons or Odyssey, I know from observation on this forum some players skip from Horizons to Odyssey and back again (I do for various reasons), some stay with Horizons because of the computer hardware needed to play Odyssey, some have migrated to Odyssey only.
As I've stated, I haven't a clue what Frontier are actually thinking in this context, but I'd imagine they wouldn't want to lose that Horizons player base at the moment.

Jack

You have a few consideration to take in :
-there is a limited amount of time/workload that can be done by Fdev. If you double the workload, you half the amount of new content that can be developed, basically.
-bugs will always arise from new content, and they are not necessarily the same between horizon and odyssey, further compounding the workload issue
-future content may require Odyssey features to exists. It would lead to a big bag of poopoo to make it available for horizon, if it's even possible

 

[Thatchinho]

That's what I find odd, though.

As long as it's likely - or even just possible - that something new might appear that'd be available for EDH/Console players, you'd think less absolute wording might have been used.

I mean, I'm sure we could come up with a huge list of ship-based features that we'd like to see implemented, most of which wouldn't be "groundbreaking" but they'd probably be significant enough that you couldn't just expect the dev's to knock them together in a week and drop them as a nice surprise during an update.

I just don't really see how a lot of that stuff could be developed without being paid-DLC... but then, if it is paid-DLC, there's the risk of fragmenting the player-base.

I don't think there will be anything new like that for Horizons. It's not a set of optional independent DLCs. It's a sequence of them, and you always need the current one to get the next. So Odyssey will get feature updates. Then there will be another Major Paid Expansion (assuming it's commercially viable). And so on.

(Worth bearing in mind here that the major stuff that should be coming in future has it’s foundations in stuff that is there in Odyssey but isn’t there in Horizons - legs, and an expandable and extendable Planet Generation system.)

 

[londonx]

The announcement was specifically about leaving Consoles on the old codebase with no new content update, only critical bug fixes, not about Horizons as a feature set. But eitherway No further Horizons content does not preclude ships, we have had DLC exclusive ships before. ie in Horizons itself. I assume the PC codebases will merge as planned originally so that the PC version will get the new universal lighting and planet terrain engines. The talk of the "pre-Odyssey" and "post-Odyssey" codebase is telling as it fits the clear demarkation point of the "New Era". Im sure there will plenty of scope to introduce new ships, particularly in the realm of atmospheric flight in thicker atmospheres.