Yep I'm really picky myself, one of my dislikes is 3rd person so I just avoid those games I don't hang about on the forums of them demanding everything changes just for me.
This is why I worry about the future of ED - it's FDev themselves
- Thread starter FatFreddysCoat
- Start date
Yep I'm really picky myself, one of my dislikes is 3rd person so I just avoid those games I don't hang about on the forums of them demanding everything changes just for me.
So simple, isn't it? Rep!
It's true, but Halo didn't star on a kickstarter platform where backers were invited from start to contribute ideas and opinions. What you see here is a remnant of ED's history of being developed in the public, in a sense, and perhaps it's just time for everyone to forget that it was kickstarter project (where plenty of promised features are still missing), and just treat it as a regular game that they were never part of. I just don't think it'll happen though. Quite a lot of people put money into the start because they liked what was promised.
On the other hand, if Fronter make changes that are unpopular with some groups of players, there's a chance they leave the game, and what then? Is that what Fronter wants? Wouldn't they want to make a game that large groups of players want to play? If that's the case, it's not wrong to let Frontier know by players what they like or not. It's not like we can demand changes or certain improvements, but I do think for any software developer that the opinions from the users is very, very important, even if they're not appropriate or correct. If a software doesn't change to please the users to some degree, then it'll eventually die out.
That's your subjective (and highly suspect) opinion talking. Many of the changes and ideas requested here on the forums are anything *but* dreadful, they've just gotten no-where for reasons unknown.
I don't have an answer for BGS/open-only ideas; I feel that problem perhaps stems from that same decision-making table I've mentioned before, where there's no clear sense of cohesion. Whether it should be open-only is something that only the people at that table can answer, because it entirely depends on what they intend players to do with the BGS and whether it's supposed to be a form of competitive PvP or not.
Nobody plays a game they've burnt out on, dude...that's not the point. Telling people that want change to go somewhere else isn't necessary and on the whole is unhelpful and unproductive. It's advice that nobody needs, it's already painfully obvious to any conscious human being to do things that interest oneself.
Baloney. "Willfully ignorant", "trolling", "overly emotional fib to create drama", and dismissing it as "silly" - that's not reasonable or considerate, and rather plainly fits the definitions of the words 'disingenuous' and 'derogatory'. Do I need to direct you to a dictionary next?
Perhaps not to you - not a surprise given you're the one saying it. This isn't a course on soliloquy, Bob.
Perhaps treating discussion of the game as trivial is why things have gotten so out-of-touch to begin with....
...Overlooking 'warts' and 'minor flaws' is generally what people associate with the phrase "head in the sand", Bob.
I'll quote from idioms.thefreedictionary.com: 'To avoid...a particular situation by pretending that it does not exist.' Alternatively: 'refuse to deal with unpleasant realities, possible dangers, etc. by pretending they do not exist'.
Wholly untrue. The forum uproar over it was spectacular, there's been nothing like it since (and that's saying something, given Elite's history). Even today, every so often there's a new thread that continues to show up in the aftermath, reawakening the whole conversation and a whole lot of back-and-forth to hash out what's already been hammered out.
I'm pretty sure the subreddit's mods just blanket ban new threads that do the same there.
That falls under the general usage for the term "debacle", Bob.
Of course there's nothing wrong the poll, or listening to the players. That's never been pointed at as at fault, Bob, not even by the people that voted for instant transfer, and it's certainly not what I was criticizing by calling it a 'debacle'.
There's plenty to disapprove about the situation leading up to the poll - which I've already described in posts prior; and the decisions that have been made since - such as, as I've already pointed out, the decision to blanket-remove ALL polls altogether.
Complete oranges to apples, that's got nothing at all to do with their anti-poll policy or how in tarnation it ever got past that decision-making table to even voice the idea of instant ship transfer like they did. Anybody can see the PR potential in having community leaders come visit the office every so often. Buckingham Palace and the White House have constant public visits for the same reasons - does that really make you think the people inhabiting these locales are more in touch with the communities they serve? 'Cause if so, I've got some snake oil I'd like to sell you....
I'm not your English teacher, Bob. Reading comprehension is your responsibility after a certain point.
I would have thought that you were around the forums during the time of the poll - if you had, it should have been obvious what my views were on the matter, as I voiced them often, and 'loudly' so to speak, during that time (the whole while not knowing how stupidly expensive Fdev was about to make the feature, making it all pretty pointless).
A simple look through my post history regarding the matter could have sufficed.
Or you could have simply slowed down and read what I typed here in this thread in the first place.
No, it's not reasonable in the slightest to assume that, Bob. Not unless you think it's a regular and condoned habit in general for people to only pay lip service and not pay attention to what's been said during a conversation.
__
We could disagree about Halo and the quality of its narrative, albeit that it started getting...wonky after the first couple games, and got massively overmarketed and overbranched as time went on...but that's beside the point. (Though I suppose that might mean there very well is a variant of a Halo game that is right for you, nowadays? lol)
What you're alluding to is as though people suggesting change or making complaints about Elite, aren't playing Elite or enjoying Elite.
Which is pure NONSENSE.
Nobody would waste that amount of time offering criticism about something they did not care about.
Sticking to what you know, and what works, is fine and all...but it's nice to try new things too.
And, so what if you don't have the time to whinge? Does that mean that all criticism or complaints - and therefore the impetus for change and improvement should cease? I really don't think so.
__
And see, complete nonsense again. Nobody hanging about these forums is demanding everything change JUST for them, and it's not because they haven't played Elite and dislike all games that remotely resemble it.
Backers were not invited as such. You had to pay £300 to be a member of the DDF, which was a group of cmdrs who FD bounced ideas off. if you didn't pay £300 then you were not part of this design forum.
Just because it's on kickstarter does not mean every man and his dog has a right to say how the game is developed.
Even the DDF didn't have any say...we were just a think tank...and FD cherry picked ideas that were discussed.
Yes, yes they do, and I don't get it. There are loads of people who post who don't play the game anymore because it's "rubbish and boring"
You need to read the forums more
Maybe they are dreadful, someone in another thread just suggested being stuck in an escape pod as immersive and exciting gameplay.
It stems from people buying a game with a shared BGS optional PVP and separate modes then deciding its just not good enough after the fact. Simply the result of poor pre-purchase research and not worth discussing, hence me never posting in Hotel California.
I have no idea how you voted or why, and no reason to remember what you said way back then if I even read it in the first place. I just voted the way I wanted and gave it no further thought.
You're the one who can't or won't explain their massive enduring objection to a trivial video game change made a few years ago. Maybe you should just try to come to terms with it.
Yes, yes they do, and I don't get it. There are loads of people who post who don't play the game anymore because it's "rubbish and boring"
You need to read the forums more
Since roughly around year 1 of the game's release the general pattern has been :
Release
Everyone consumes the new content
New content is consumed
Players come back to the forum and spend their time discussing the content and wait for new content
This isn't a mystery or something that should be hard to understand. Fdev didn't provide in-game socializing. Though if they did, the pattern would have just moved the last step into the in-game lobby channels
I bet you can even map the level of negativity on the forum around release cycles as well.
Positive to apprehensive chatter
**Release
Knee jerk fear (again, because you're trying to mix two types of gamers who do not co-exist so they're constantly afraid the other group is going to get their way)
Excitement with new content
disappointment at the limits or coverage of new content
Excitement at completing new content
boredom
frustration that new content didn't improve the replayability of existing content (often confused with grind)
Angry arguments between players as no new content will be released for weeks or months
knee jerk reaction to negative comments
**Trailers / teasers on new content
Hesitation at getting excited since last release was underwhelming
long term memory loss
Positive / excited chatter at new release
and repeat.
Absolutely. Not disagreeing with any of that...always makes me smile when I see people whinging about a "trailer"
Even so, there are posters who post who don't play the game because it's rubbish, shallow and boring...I get that not everyone may like a computer game/car/house/clothes....but you don't see me going on the web complaining about how useless a product is and how the company are all muppets. If you feel that way...move on, life is too short.
Absolutely. Not disagreeing with any of that...always makes me smile when I see people whinging about a "trailer"
Even so, there are posters who post who don't play the game because it's rubbish, shallow and boring...I get that not everyone may like a computer game/car/house/clothes....but you don't see me going on the web complaining about how useless a product is and how the company are all muppets. If you feel that way...move on, life is too short.
life may be short, but if you're spending that life online anyway, where you spend it doesn't really matter.
The internet is full of people who consider their ideas to be important. It's also full of people who say things to get a reaction out of other people. Forums that aren't soley about being a reference guide, cater to both. Mix in diametrically opposed audience and you create an environment that has become unintentionally more exciting than the thing that the forum was originally about.
The forum has become Elite Dangerous for many people, offering missing drama and suspense and excitement and emotion and continuous content and real multiplayer directed interactions thru the use of flooding threads or flooding the front page with new threads to drown out opposing ones that the namesake's game has failed to do or simply doesn't do.
That's why you have people hanging around. In the absence of star citizen or another viable alternative, Elite : Forum is the best space combat/trucker/political game around.
-Year-long delays
-Allows people to send death threats and legally-actionable harassment to people that play the game in a way they don't like, and fostering a toxic community in general as a means to force critics away.
-"exploits are only exploits if PvPers use them"
-Instantly fixes "exploits" that allow people to actually make a meaningful amount of money for the amount of work they put in but leaves bugs in that have been present since 1.0
-Pushing back content promised in updates to sell it back to the playerbase in a future expansion
-Complete and total lack of transparency, leaving the playerbase to have nothing to go on until updates are imminent
-Told financiers they view elite as a small side franchise they work on and not their main focus
-Ceasleess DoA updates that still don't work to this day
-Wasted dev time on mini games nobody plays
-Taken almost 4 years to finally decide that the recurring criticism of "mile wide inch deep" from nearly every person that has ever played this game was valid and actually decide to start reworking core mechanics rather than giving us more broken and buggy garbage
"Everything is fine, frontier can do absolutely no wrong".
There's a difference between dev bashing and having actual, genuine concerns about the future of the game based on the myriad of worrying decisions made by the devs.
-Allows people to send death threats and legally-actionable harassment to people that play the game in a way they don't like, and fostering a toxic community in general as a means to force critics away.
-"exploits are only exploits if PvPers use them"
-Instantly fixes "exploits" that allow people to actually make a meaningful amount of money for the amount of work they put in but leaves bugs in that have been present since 1.0
-Pushing back content promised in updates to sell it back to the playerbase in a future expansion
-Complete and total lack of transparency, leaving the playerbase to have nothing to go on until updates are imminent
-Told financiers they view elite as a small side franchise they work on and not their main focus
-Ceasleess DoA updates that still don't work to this day
-Wasted dev time on mini games nobody plays
-Taken almost 4 years to finally decide that the recurring criticism of "mile wide inch deep" from nearly every person that has ever played this game was valid and actually decide to start reworking core mechanics rather than giving us more broken and buggy garbage
"Everything is fine, frontier can do absolutely no wrong".
There's a difference between dev bashing and having actual, genuine concerns about the future of the game based on the myriad of worrying decisions made by the devs.
Blackcompany
Banned
All of this is completely true. And its also the reason I dont think more big releases are coming. Not for Elite. I think its the Winter release, and then...maintenance mode. Wherein, they will continue to be "excited for, and interested in" making cool new content...right up until so many people are sick of the promises, that the low server population justifies shutting out the lights on this money sink of a broken tech demo.
I miss the old alpha forum days, so much funElite : Forum is the best space combat/trucker/political game around.
So a few things here...How can they have delays, that you notice, and how can you know content is pushed back if FD are not transparent? Surely the fact they are transparent means you are aware of this info...?
FD are not obliged at all to say anything.
I've no clue as to what mini games you're referring to.
All enterprise/commercial software...and I mean all software...has bugs and has features cut for release. In 22 years of coding this has been the case with all software that the company I worked for wrote. Every last single one. Why on earth would you think game development was any different?
Are you really suggesting FD are responsible for death threats???! Also, what clowns are issuing death threats and to who? I'd love someone to try that with me
I've played since alpha and I have come across many little bugs in that time, not one of them is anything to get worked up about and not one of them seriously affected my game time and enjoyment.
If ED is broken and buggy garbage then why do you play? *scratches head*
Based on what has been developed so far in ED and what has been developed in the new Jurassic World Regression, unless there are internal changes in FD, the future will really be very bad, because in these two games, just see the reviews, the FD did not know how to put good content in the game. Being the same teams, the story was sure to repeat itself.
Last edited:
They aren't the same teams though:
I did not mean it's the same team working on different games. I meant that ED, for any good future development, will need a new team, which is not one of those two teams that you posted. Otherwise it will always be more of the same.
Although some names are the same for both games.
It's the same senior management.
If you don't like the game, nor improvements along its same vision, you shouldn't have bought it.
Indeed. CEO David Braben, CCO Jonny Watts, Exec Producers Michael Brookes and Gary Richards, and roughly 5% of content creation devs.
