This is why I worry about the future of ED - it's FDev themselves

[Cmdr Eratosthenes]

Dooooooooooommmmmmmmmed !

 

[sollisb]

I will point out that as Linux user I was really saddened by this, because I doubt they will necro OpenGL engine some day just to do Linux version.

Wine version gives some hope actually, but yeah....ED on Linux natively would be like...killer game.

Well.. if you keep up with the linux news you'd know Linux is possibly heading into a huge legal battle over copyrights and the new Linux Software adoption community, in that; They are removing anyone they don't like for whatever reason. Be it not acknowledging sexual preferences, moralities, ideology. For example, once chap got removed, including his software for not accepting 'binary' as a gender preference. Another got removed because spoke out against that case where a professor was removed because he would not acknowledge the various gender criterias in the US.

I know off topic completely... But Linux is not exactly safe right now... If you want, I'll dig up the article...

 

[Lateralus]

Nope. I said don't cater to the edge cases who fail to do any research then demand a total rewrite from the ground up just to suit them.

The fact that they closed the Mac completely game means they can, if they want, change the amount of weighting open has compared to solo/private and offline console players would just have to take it on the chin. That was the premise for your original argument which I 'm responding to: that Fdev can't change anything that has been established which would affect existing customers - they've already proven they're willing to do that with the Mac fiasco, so they can do it with open weighting vs offline console players.

 

[amigacooke]

I will point out that as Linux user I was really saddened by this, because I doubt they will necro OpenGL engine some day just to do Linux version.

The thing is, have Frontier ever released a Linux port? In retrospect it seems clear that they never seriously considered doing a port to Linux.

Shame.

 

[Barking_Mad]

You don't have to worry about ED's future - it doesn't have any. After whatever mediocrity dressed up as "exciting" and "new" "content" drops in Q4 it will be maintenance mode until they drop whatever excuse for paid "content" in a couple of years so that LEP wouldn't be an outright scam and they will simply call it a day until such time when they decide they can't be bothered to copy-paste CGs every week any more and run the servers in general.

I wouldn't spend ANY money or invest huge amounts of time in anticipation of any substantial changes or new content, because there aren't going to be any.

That's why you're here. A truuuuuf seeker, a noble knight, come to challenge all that is unjust and unrighteous! Right On Commander!

 

[Stigbob]

The fact that they closed the Mac completely game means they can, if they want, change the amount of weighting open has compared to solo/private and offline console players would just have to take it on the chin. That was the premise for your original argument which I 'm responding to: that Fdev can't change anything that has been established which would affect existing customers - they've already proven they're willing to do that with the Mac fiasco, so they can do it with open weighting vs offline console players.

I don't care about mac for the same reason I don't care about Betamax.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

The thing is, have Frontier ever released a Linux port? In retrospect it seems clear that they never seriously considered doing a port to Linux.

Shame.

They never promised and to be fair, I never expected.

 

[Oztig]

Well it really should work on the 'Gem' desktop under CPM

I'm old enough to have actually used that - long b4 windows existed, and it wasn't that bad - we used it to generate DB schemas for an IDMSX database running on an ICL 3960 (I think).

I loved GEM on Atari ST's, and even wrote a few things using it - A patch editor for a Yamaha DX27 anybody (with fully GUI keyboard etc)

ahhh - the good old days

Back to cack windows dev !

 

[CMDR Redcrest]

Well what SPECIFICALLY was the "strong pressure" in relation to?
Without knowing what they were pressuring Fdev over they could be pushing for something that I totally disagree with. Or something I totally agree with.
Once the NDA is lifted I'd like to know the specifics of this.

 

[dayrth]

You're coming at this from a bespoke development sale. In that, you're approaching or having being asked, to provide a solution specific to that customer. In that scenario you are correct.

What people are posting on the forums is exactly that. Asking for a change specifically for them or thier group (no matter how many times they claim to speak for all players).

How-ever, when selling a product to a global audience, you are not there to sell or provide a bespoke solution. Therefore, you create a product that is a viable solution to a mass market. To get a product that is viable, you meet with multiple target audience participants and get a common framework on which to built the most necessary components that will deliver what the customer wants and indeed needs (if there was no need, there'd be no sale).

Key phrase here is 'viable solution to a mass market'. Achieving that doesn't involve bowing to pressure from a few forum posters. Success in the mass market depends on good market research and good designers. The way you measure that success is in sales. (ED by the way is still selling well four years after release, so they must be doing something right from the point of view of the business).

Elite is a not bespoke product tempered to the needs of one player. It is a mass marketed game to apparently millions of players. So tell me, As a lead developer, are you going to visit each and every one and deliver a bespoke solution? No, you're going to design and deliver a combination of solutions to cater for a combination of needs.

No I won't speak to all the customers. Neither will I try and cater for everyone though. that way lies mediocrity at best and disaster at worst. I will rely on my researchers and designers and judge them by the success of the game. I certainly won't add or change every features based on demands from random posters on the forum.

As a game, a leisure activity, it needs to cater to the most commonest. I get Elite is meant to be something special, but from what I see, it is nothing more than a 30 year old game with up-to-date graphics, which are astounding. The actual game play, is boring and bereft of imagination. There is nothing dynamic, the rewards given begrudgingly. And worse, it is a bug ridden mess. It is entirely disjointed and built on the idea that using randomness is the key to success.

There is no doubt that this is my opinion, I still play Elite, but I can say this with utmost certainty, if Elite did not have the graphics it has, I'd have felt like I was ripped off.

The real question is this; if Elite became subscription based tomorrow, how many would sign up? (That's rhetorical, but indicative of how successful an MMO really is) And if it is a successful as everyone is saying, why is it not subscription based?

I think we all want what is best for us and the game, neither exist without the other after all.

It needs to cater to the majority of its target customers. It seems to be doing that OK at the moment. If ED became subscription tomorrow then it's success would indeed depend on how many people were willing to subscribe, but surely a game that sells so well that it doesn't need a subscription suggests it's plenty successful enough already.

 

[Valorin]

Reading comments about the future of ED, one comment stood out like a sore thumb for me:

"A number of the visitors put some STRONG pressure on frontier on various matters on behalf of wider player audience..."

Obviously we don't know what it was, or what the resistance was, but it's been known for a long time that what a large amount of the community wants, and what FDev thinks they want (or thinks they'll appreciate), are sometimes light years apart.

Take the original grind for guardian blueprints, which was horrific before FDev dropped the requirements to one blueprint per unlock after a lot of pressure: the fact that they thought that many blueprints was an acceptable number, considering what had to be done to obtain one, showed a big element of why some think FDev don't actually play their game or are always understanding of what engaging gameplay is.

There have been many times where FDev have live streamed and come across as really incompetent in the actual day to day flying of the ships, flying in combat, basic landing manoeuvres etc which backs up certainly MY suspicion that they really haven't spent enough time in game to obtain these skills and so, while having to gather 60 sets of G5, or tradable, mats to engineer that set of multi cannons may look good, or reasonable, on paper it's boring as hell in real life to have to do it.

So when I read that community members had to put STRONG pressure on FDev to get a point across, it's concerning to me because if FDev had played it as much as many cmdr's have - or in as many ways as the thousands of cmdr's have - perhaps they'd have some understanding of the frustrations people have when it can take a dozen hours of play to recoup the money spent on one cutter repair after one combat mission that didn't even offer a strong reward in the first place, or cmdr's who want a higher variety in missions offered because they're bored of seeing the same old things every mission board.

I really hope that the Q4 update and future paid content addresses some of these issues, as I love this game but am struggling to get enthusiastic about logging in again at the moment. I have some faith in FDev but when the commanders who have put the hours in and who have a valid opining seemingly have to fight like hell to justify why a change is needed, or a feature required, I hope - when the NDA has expired and we find out actually what these were - that we aren't having more unnecessary grind in lieu of engaging gameplay and the developers have really listened and, more importantly, UNDERSTOOD, what cmdr's want to see.

Drama much?

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Well what SPECIFICALLY was the "strong pressure" in relation to?
Without knowing what they were pressuring Fdev over they could be pushing for something that I totally disagree with. Or something I totally agree with.
Once the NDA is lifted I'd like to know the specifics of this.

I might be wrong but Obsidian Ant gave context to that episode, saying it was related to Squadrons. (reference Lave Radio last ep)

I suspect it was BGS Open only/PP Open only crowd who tried to get their way. OA even felt it was too much.

 

[Mengy]

I don't worry about games... I play them. Worry is for problems.

This is how I treat most games. Elite for me is different however. I’ve been playing Elite games for most of my life so they mean more to me personally than is normal. Same with the Civilization games.

I’m invested into the franchise, so they are more than just games to me. This equates to more passion regarding them than is otherwise normal, or even healthy, lol.

 

[amigacooke]

They never promised and to be fair, I never expected.

That's true, though they did dangle the prospect.

 

[Darth Ender]

Drama much?

forum drama is the most exciting thing about Elite Dangerous after you've played it for a month.

That could be changed, but it involves embracing their multiplayer aspects of the game and frontier has been unwilling to pick if they want a really good single player game, or a really good multiplayer game... They're cool with what they've produced. A mix of the worst aspects from both with just enough potential leaking thru to frustrate everyone who plays it.

 

[Enderby]

forum drama is the most exciting thing about Elite Dangerous after you've played it for a month.

That could be changed, but it involves embracing their multiplayer aspects of the game and frontier has been unwilling to pick if they want a really good single player game, or a really good multiplayer game... They're cool with what they've produced. A mix of the worst aspects from both with just enough potential leaking thru to frustrate everyone who plays it.

Ouch.

 

[Stigbob]

forum drama is the most exciting thing about Elite Dangerous after you've played it for a month.

That could be changed, but it involves embracing their multiplayer aspects of the game and frontier has been unwilling to pick if they want a really good single player game, or a really good multiplayer game... They're cool with what they've produced. A mix of the worst aspects from both with just enough potential leaking thru to frustrate everyone who plays it.

I'd say best of both, the modes were an inspired piece of design.

 

[Kayweg]

Reading comments about the future of ED, one comment stood out like a sore thumb for me:

"A number of the visitors put some STRONG pressure on frontier on various matters on behalf of wider player audience..."

Obviously we don't know what it was, or what the resistance was, but it's been known for a long time that what a large amount of the community wants, and what FDev thinks they want (or thinks they'll appreciate), are sometimes light years apart.

Take the original grind for guardian blueprints, which was horrific before FDev dropped the requirements to one blueprint per unlock after a lot of pressure: the fact that they thought that many blueprints was an acceptable number, considering what had to be done to obtain one, showed a big element of why some think FDev don't actually play their game or are always understanding of what engaging gameplay is.

There have been many times where FDev have live streamed and come across as really incompetent in the actual day to day flying of the ships, flying in combat, basic landing manoeuvres etc which backs up certainly MY suspicion that they really haven't spent enough time in game to obtain these skills and so, while having to gather 60 sets of G5, or tradable, mats to engineer that set of multi cannons may look good, or reasonable, on paper it's boring as hell in real life to have to do it.

So when I read that community members had to put STRONG pressure on FDev to get a point across, it's concerning to me because if FDev had played it as much as many cmdr's have - or in as many ways as the thousands of cmdr's have - perhaps they'd have some understanding of the frustrations people have when it can take a dozen hours of play to recoup the money spent on one cutter repair after one combat mission that didn't even offer a strong reward in the first place, or cmdr's who want a higher variety in missions offered because they're bored of seeing the same old things every mission board.

I really hope that the Q4 update and future paid content addresses some of these issues, as I love this game but am struggling to get enthusiastic about logging in again at the moment. I have some faith in FDev but when the commanders who have put the hours in and who have a valid opining seemingly have to fight like hell to justify why a change is needed, or a feature required, I hope - when the NDA has expired and we find out actually what these were - that we aren't having more unnecessary grind in lieu of engaging gameplay and the developers have really listened and, more importantly, UNDERSTOOD, what cmdr's want to see.

I am sorry, but i don't believe for a second that a group of community members/streamers/"influencers"/"content creators" can put any pressure whatsoever on FD, let alone "STRONG" pressure.
What can put pressure on a company are dissatisfying quarterly or yearly results and, resulting from that, dissatisfied major share holders.
The impact of the opinions and views of the community (including mine) are exaggerated to the extreme.
And by community i mean active forum/reddit/etc community.
We are but a fraction of the player base.
I don't know if you have read FD's yearly financial statements over the years, it can be pretty boring reading, and it can be difficult to draw valid conclusions from them for a layman.
As a former accountant (long time ago) it would seem to me that FD completed their transition from software developer to self publishing software developer successfully within a short amount of time.
The numbers aren't earth shattering or sensational, but they are solid.
Also worth remembering, FD aren't a one trick pony, PC and JWE enjoyed successful releases and remain popular, other games are in the making.
Of course ED is a jewel in FD's publishing crown, and of course they want it to remain popular with it's community and to continue to be a substantial contributor to the overall revenue.
But i think you can be sure they have their very own ideas on how to achieve that, and while feedback certainly will play into it all, this forum or occasionally invited special guests will have very little to do with the direction they chose.
Now just to clarify, i am very critical of ED as a whole, and i'll spare you the details as to why.
But when i take a step back and look at it without wearing my own "what it should/could have been glasses", ED is doing alright.
Whether i approve of where it has been going, is going or will be going is a different matter, for the most part i don't approve of any of those.
It just seems clear and obvious to me that enough other players do seem to approve, and that therefor ED remains to be a viable title and with no need for anybody to "worry" about it.

 

[Darth Ender]

I'd say best of both, the modes were an inspired piece of design.

Your answer is both wrong and/or purposely trolling.

By doing what they do, they can't utilize any of the things that make a single player game great. They stumble over narrative that comes in disjointed chunks. They can't introduce mods. They can't introduce user-defined difficulty settings. They can't make the player important. They can't create stories that revolve around the player and impact the game. Essentially anything that sets a single player game apart from a multiplayer.

Then on the flipside, they can't do the things that make multiplayer games great because they keep this anchor of single player chained to themselves. Look at powerplay. That's the extent of the awesome that is possible with the game's current multiplayer mechanics. We miss out on the drama and emergent mechanics because of opt-in mechanics and control over the direction the game takes is never really able to be given to us so long as Frontier wants to keep their narrative. And the stuff that is made for multiplayer is weak, since they can't ever be integral to the game.

So no, it's not a mix of the best of both worlds. It's a compromise of both that nets you tease of a game that fails to deliver a great experience for either group of players.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

The thing is, have Frontier ever released a Linux port? In retrospect it seems clear that they never seriously considered doing a port to Linux.

Shame.

Sorry not read whole thread so sorry if already covered but have you guys heard about the new steam service allowing you to play windows game in Linux? Apparently a lot of windows titles are already running 100% and pretty much no loss of performance
Called it's Foss I think