Time to trial it? (Subscription users)

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

If you're feeling like developers are more important than players (the general pro sub mindset) why don't you buy some cosmetics. You could even buy up to your romantic subscription spend per month. Run out? Just buy a second account and build that one up. Its possible for you to scratch your itch as it currently stands.

From a players standpoint, subscriptions are horrific. They are time based encouraging excess play, you lose things when you stop paying which turns the investment into nothing once its over. I played wow for 5 to 6 years i think and have absolutely nothing to show for it. Not even a measly copy of my save (i know you could argue the same here but hey).

If frontier did something like access to all cosmetics for a monthly sub that could be something for the pro sub people to pay for...

Really subscriptions are terrible things.. there is nothing ethical about them. Every single subscription effort has not been to "invest back into the game" its been for extraordinary profit for a software product. Players shouldn't be suggesting it imo.

 

[Sooden]

Nope: That is the stroppy version of, No, or No thanks.

Why. Paying to play is not the Elite ethos. It seems that you were in on the game at it early stages and you are not not happy with the results. So you want us, the other players; to pay for the game, to work the way, you desire.

To be blunt: Throwing money at F.D. is not going to change the way they make the game. It is not going to change the direction of the game; they wish to make.

don think you understood the post.
Not throwing money at them. That'a why i outlined the risk to FDev. Why they would trial it, not like a kick starter where the players pay up, then hope they get what they asked for. Not asking for a change to the core game... at most, a Multi player that works better than what we have now, for the people that want it and can afford it.

''Paying to play is not the Elite ethos'' it may not be but... why stick stubbornly to that, if there was a call for an option. Its not taking away what we have, but offing a better connection to people willing to fund it (If). Its not a case of, people must pay or they lose something (as explained in the OP) but an option to people with the cash.

(And i have outline in a post above this re2W, just in case we go down that road )

 

[Arry]

If you're feeling like developers are more important than players (the general pro sub mindset) why don't you buy some cosmetics. You could even buy up to your romantic subscription spend per month. Run out? Just buy a second account and build that one up. Its possible for you to scratch your itch as it currently stands.

From a players standpoint, subscriptions are horrific. They are time based encouraging excess play, you lose things when you stop paying which turns the investment into nothing once its over. I played wow for 5 to 6 years i think and have absolutely nothing to show for it. Not even a measly copy of my save (i know you could argue the same here but hey).

If frontier did something like access to all cosmetics for a monthly sub that could be something for the pro sub people to pay for...

Really subscriptions are terrible things.. there is nothing ethical about them. Every single subscription effort has not been to "invest back into the game" its been for extraordinary profit for a software product. Players shouldn't be suggesting it imo.

Well said: I was just thinking. With me, real life etc., gets in the way of my play and so I might be lucky to get into the game; once a month. It is nice to know, that it is there ready to play; without any extra cost.

 

[Iskariot]

Important notes before you continue

Spoiler

-I know Fdev chose Cosmetics over Subscription
-I understand this causes an issue with Life time passes
-I know not everyone has cash
-I know it’s less scalable than P2P
-know this has been discussed over and over.
-Don’t just post ‘No’ in this thread, it’s not smart, it’s not cleaver, its spam.

P2P, it’s a shambles most of the time, wings fall apart, Streamers can get in the same instance without a lot of work. Gankers find it hard to get customers, if they are playing outside their geographical zone.

(once I was winged up with people in the US, and in I’m the UK, best I got to see was a marker of where their ship was, in normal space, saw it flying around, but no ship, not same instance)

It impacts all game play and makes Elite feel like it’s held together with sticky tape, in regards to multi play.

I know how clever the P2P system is, the deves have show us… Nice work chaps and chappets, it really is an inspired bit of coding (not being sarcastic) but its hardly doing the job in a lot of cases. It works for casually bumping into people… works great as a solo player in Open, who likes the random encounters (that’s me) But not so great for groups of friends from around the world, or any sort of large scale event.
Not goanna have a 25 v 25 player battle, even if you could get that many in one instance, it’s not gonna hole together… yet the trailers for elite make it look so much fun (misleading eh?)

Wait, before you post

Spoiler

- I’m not saying force a subscription service
- I’m not saying remove the P2P system
- I am hinting at a server based mode (open) for subscriber. Allowing for more stable , predictable instancing, as an option.

What I would hope could happen (even though it would be a big risk, just to test, and a waste of resources if it fails) is a subscription mode that runs on a real server (not a reel-to-reel server). See if people will play for it.

Sure, we may have the problem of complaints over it being open and such, and griefer , but we have all that already . Would be nice if we could also have populated areas, with people from all-around the world.

For example; I was at the CG, must have been 8 commanders in my instance, maybe another 5 in a US bases instance, and who knows in other instances. That could have been an epic experience… but nah, we are all over the place, connection droppings out and … hmph.. it’s sub-par for an online experience.

And just a bit more before you post

Spoiler

-I understand that it could cause issues with others platforms and how that would work… I dint care trial it on PC, Consoles don’t need everything, just like the PC don’t get free multi accounts. We already forking out more.
-I understand it would be a huge investment of time and resources for Fdev, but would it be worth it? Would it make Elite shine?
-And the risks of a trail are – If it not used, then fDev have lost time and resources, that’s cash! and now they have dead code they gotta rip out. I know it not just an easy thing to do.
-also, I understand this would put none-open modes at a disadvantage with connectivity but hay Open is about connecting with others players, more than solo and PG. So not really a good reason to disadvantage open players (if there is a need for such a service)

I personally would NEVER EVER pay a monthly subscription for any game.
I prefer an offline single player version. I am willing to pay extra for that.

If FDev could give me an offline SP version, fully developed, with all the promised features, + modding, + none of the limiting multiplayer shenanigans etc. etc. + some kind of lengthy cool campaign, I would gladly pay another 200 bucks.

 

[Deadlock-3000]

not implying it would be pay to win are you? If so, would like to hear how.

If there was a call for it, and it was viable (all big 'IFs'). Such thing as some people not being able to afford, or not wanting to pay for it, should not restrict players that can afford it. That's life.
Sound heartless, but no. Some people can afford better computers than others, extra joysticks, Ship voice control.

If Fdev could offer a more stable mode for people willing to pay for it, why not? (after all, not much different than someone how can afford a good internet connection and someone that cant)

It's moot whether Frontier would be tempted to make anything pay to win because they're not going to put in a monthly subscription in the first place.

Yes, wage inequality is rampant, that much is obvious from the death throes of late stage capitalism. But if it means that my better computer means I win more than someone with a worse one, I don't want to play such a shoddily-designed game.

You publish minimum requirements and the game should run on those so that you're getting the same play as anyone else. If a better video card or a better internet connection results in anything beyond cosmetic upgrades, it's a bad game and I won't pay for it.

 

[Sooden]

If you're feeling like developers are more important than players (the general pro sub mindset) why don't you buy some cosmetics. You could even buy up to your romantic subscription spend per month. Run out? Just buy a second account and build that one up. Its possible for you to scratch your itch as it currently stands.

From a players standpoint, subscriptions are horrific. They are time based encouraging excess play, you lose things when you stop paying which turns the investment into nothing once its over. I played wow for 5 to 6 years i think and have absolutely nothing to show for it. Not even a measly copy of my save (i know you could argue the same here but hey).

If frontier did something like access to all cosmetics for a monthly sub that could be something for the pro sub people to pay for...

Really subscriptions are terrible things.. there is nothing ethical about them. Every single subscription effort has not been to "invest back into the game" its been for extraordinary profit for a software product. Players shouldn't be suggesting it imo.

Yeah subscriptions are terrible... do you have a phone, or the internet? did you pick the best subscription you could get at good value?

This is not a subscript to access the game 'as pointed out in the OP' This is a service, access to a more stable gaming experience , if player wish to pay for it. it accomplishes what we wish P2P could, and it could if the internet was excellent all around the globe.

If not offering something Fdev arnt trying to achieve, but they when with a low cost auto-scalable model.

Its not the same thing as your WoW experience , sorry to hear about that... maybe you can put your level on your CV?

and.. dont judge

''If you're feeling like developers are more important than players (the general pro sub mindset) why don't you buy some cosmetics''

I have one subscription related to games, and that to a streamer, to support their work. I don't subscribe to any other games (used to as a kid), don't wast cash on TV,phone subscriptions... so if i wanted to, and there was the option, to have a better experience (connection wise) well, i would spend my cash there. as it is, for now. i do spend it on cosmetics


added

Well said: I was just thinking. With me, real life etc., gets in the way of my play and so I might be lucky to get into the game; once a month. It is nice to know, that it is there ready to play; without any extra cost.

so you didn't read the opening post, for the responce explaining there's no extra cost. Here we go again. people that wont read what i put Pointing this out before we get a 3rd person agreeing with a sentiment base on an argument that i never made... this is how we get into pointless arguments, as people argue a point that they invented

...
Wait, before you post

Spoiler

- I’m not saying force a subscription service
- I’m not saying remove the P2P system
- I am hinting at a server based mode (open) for subscriber. Allowing for more stable , predictable instancing, as an option.

...

 

[Arry]

don think you understood the post.
Not throwing money at them. That'a why i outlined the risk to FDev. Why they would trial it, not like a kick starter where the players pay up, then hope they get what they asked for. Not asking for a change to the core game... at most, a Multi player that works better than what we have now, for the people that want it and can afford it.

''Paying to play is not the Elite ethos'' it may not be but... why stick stubbornly to that, if there was a call for an option. Its not taking away what we have, but offing a better connection to people willing to fund it (If). Its not a case of, people must pay or they lose something (as explained in the OP) but an option to people with the cash.

(And i have outline in a post above this re2W, just in case we go down that road )

You are proposing a two tier game play. One for those who can afford to pay for benefits and the other, which is a second rate game. In time, the gap between the two would become greater. Those paying extra, would demand that their game gets more developers time. They would complain that any extras added to the 'lower game', was paid for by the pay to play funders and is not deserved. This is a can of worms and best left unopened.

Personal wealth, is already an advantage in this game. If you can afford the better gaming P.Cs and up-grade them at whim; then you have the advantage, over the player, still playing, with last years set up.

 

[Deadlock-3000]

Yeah subscriptions are terrible... do you have a phone, or the internet? did you pick the best subscription you could get at good value?

I need a phone and I need the internet (up to a point). I don't need mediocre video games.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Those paying extra, would demand that their game gets more developers time. They would complain that any extras added to the 'lower game', was paid for by the pay to play funders and is not deserved. This is a can of worms and best left unopened.

.... if history in other games is anything to go by then some of them would also threaten to cancel subs if the Developer did not do their bidding.

 

[AlexAndTheDJ]

-why would that decrees the player-base.... We don't know that. almost a imagined worry
-why would the premium servers as you put it, get priority patching, every client would be the same client, and i don't think they would run 2 developments of server code. So no segregation of premium development.

the version of open we have now, well, i could not get with any of the players i wanted. And maybe if its more stable, streamer will risk an open venture, as they can get their loyal dregs in the same instance (would be exciting and more interactive). hay, streamer could even gift subscriptions (so people dont get left behind)... and even though someone already trying to poo-poo the idea on cost ''tenner a month'', we do'nt even know if it may be a reasonable venture, could be 5 or 3, and with sub gifting well everyone can get in - on a better connection.


This is why i talk of a trail.. suggest the idea of talking about the possibility of a trail

I wonder how much of the people that have given reason not to look at this idea, player in open as a majority... or even more that 25% of the time. I welcome having the idea challenge, but so far it seems like a knee jerk reaction, and i can understand why.

Of course its an imagined worry as its an imagined scenario.

P2P is always put before F2P. Personally, I only play F2P games because once I've bought the game I expect to play the entire game for free. Hiding elitists (pun intended) behind a pay wall is just silly and unnecessary.

 

[Sooden]

You are proposing a two tier game play. One for those who can afford to pay for benefits and the other, which is a second rate game. In time, the gap between the two would become greater. Those paying extra, would demand that their game gets more developers time. They would complain that any extras added to the 'lower game', was paid for by the pay to play funders and is not deserved. This is a can of worms and best left unopened.

Personal wealth, is already an advantage in this game. If you can afford the better gaming P.Cs and up-grade them at whim; then you have the advantage, over the player, still playing, with last years set up.

how is it 2 tier apart from, people willing to improve the instancing in open, and wiling to play for it, will interact with more player? You inventing hurdles.



''They would complain that any extras added to the 'lower game', was paid for by the pay to play funders and is not deserved. This is a can of worms and best left unopened.''

''But how?'' The paied service would be for connections... yes they may expect to be able to have a nice stable instants and wing, as they payed for it, but the game as a whole is developed as one. Are we going to guess that the code would be different, and not held together like it is now, and instead of the host being a random player, its is a simulated player on a sever... instead you are going to assume feature and development divergence, bases on a server based instance as an option.. i don't get it ><

 

[Sooden]

I personally would NEVER EVER pay a monthly subscription for any game.
I prefer an offline single player version. I am willing to pay extra for that.

If FDev could give me an offline SP version, fully developed, with all the promised features, + modding, + none of the limiting multiplayer shenanigans etc. etc. + some kind of lengthy cool campaign, I would gladly pay another 200 bucks.

hate to think how much disk-space that would take (over time).. sure a system only take a small amount of data to generate, but there 400 billion, that's a lot of bytes

 

[Heater]

I would have to say NO, as they cannot even fix the current bugs!

 

[Sooden]

I need a phone and I need the internet (up to a point). I don't need mediocre video games.

But i'm talking about the service (Being a server run instance of the game we have now). Its not a subscription to play the game.

We could argue if it would split the player base, and some are starting that conversation, and i'm challenging what they say (its not a bad thing, just how we work out ideas). but we do need to be talking about the same thing. This is not a WoW style subscription, its a subscription to a carrier service (like a phone, or the interweb), the way we receive/send the data to/from the game.

Added: Good time to also explain

what i am suggesting can already be achieved by savvy players, who pay extra, but quite a bit extra. Setting up a high end subscription VPN to connect with the game so that it bypassed the Geo-location issues.
Its not the same thing a Elite sever, but is done to overcome some of the matchmaking issues.

 

[AlexAndTheDJ]

how is it 2 tier apart from, people willing to improve the instancing in open, and wiling to play for it, will interact with more player? You inventing hurdles.



''They would complain that any extras added to the 'lower game', was paid for by the pay to play funders and is not deserved. This is a can of worms and best left unopened.''



''But how?'' The paied service would be for connections... yes they may expect to be able to have a nice stable instants and wing, as they payed for it, but the game as a whole is developed as one. Are we going to guess that the code would be different, and not held together like it is now, and instead of the host being a random player, its is a simulated player on a sever... instead you are going to assume feature and development divergence, bases on a server based instance as an option.. i don't get it ><

What planet are you on?! Telling people they're inventing hurdles, imagining problems etc. Of they course they are because you're inventing and imagining a scenario in the first instance.

Clown.

 

[Sooden]

What planet are you on?! Telling people they're inventing hurdles, imagining problems etc. Of they course they are because you're inventing and imagining a scenario in the first instance.

Clown.

not interested. no need to be rude

 

[WR3ND]

Let's see... Where did I put that pic for the last time this came up...

Still waiting on 3 more full priced expansions worth to break even.

TL;DR: Certainly not, nor anywhere near it, thank you very much!

 

[Sooden]

Let's see... Where did I put that pic for the last time this came up...



Still waiting on 3 more full priced expansions worth to break even.

TL;DR: Certainly not, nor anywhere near it, thank you very much!

now your expecting the impossible

 

[killminster]

No.

Mainly due to the financials. Developing a new server architecture to run along side the existing one will be expensive. That expense would have to be borne upfront by FD because no one will pay for a service that doesn't exist yet and they would still have to spend all that money just to "trial" it, with no guarantee it would yield a better experience or the numbers of subscribers to support it.

Sounds like huge waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.

 

[Sooden]

No.

Mainly due to the financials. Developing a new server architecture to run along side the existing one will be expensive. That expense would have to be borne upfront by FD because no one will pay for a service that doesn't exist yet and they would still have to spend all that money just to "trial" it, with no guarantee it would yield a better experience or the numbers of subscribers to support it.

Sounds like huge waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.

That's a fair point. Only Fdev could know if its a risk worth doing. They have the numbers,we don't.

But apart from the potential financials... lets say, they had the funds to invest and risk it... worth doing? if not, why?

...explained a few post back, the changes needed too the code could be very minimal, be we don't know, so all guesswork here