That's just as mature. Equivalent to ears plugged yelling "LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU" while replying you got the last word. Mature indeed.
Understanding the Negative Feedback
- Thread starter Rifter
- Start date
That's just as mature. Equivalent to ears plugged yelling "LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU" while replying you got the last word. Mature indeed.
Err... you haven't been listening, have you?
A monthly sub has been ruled out. Ain't gonna happen. And woe unto them should they change that, because that would be the "offline mode" thingy ten times over.
And "expansions with a fair price tag" is exactly what they said this would be all along. That's why there was a "lifetime expansion pass" for sale, you know?
A little heavy on the berating aren't we...
Saying "ain't gonna happen" is rather pointless. If money dries up from balancing or adding "launch features" that are still missing then how do you expect an expansion will be payed for? If the money dries up... then the game is dead. It's a business and they need to make money and not lose it on "promises".
Considering I only first heard of Elite the week it launched in December I never heard of a lifetime expansion pass. So I had no opportunity for this thus it's irrelevant to the current conversation.
Blagh! Whatever!
These longevity issues: how long would you say you'd been playing when they started to bite? I ask because this is a common complaint, but I'm maybe about 60 hours in and still having fun. I've done a bit of exploring, a chunk of bounty hunting, haven't scratched trading or piracy or factions yet. How fast are people tearing through all this stuff?
Games that give me 60+ hours of fun score well from me for longevity. 40+ is good. 20 to 30 is my usual expectation. I'm genuinely struggling to see how people are exhausting ED in less than that.
Please re-read my original post and perhaps you will have an idea on what this thread is all about....
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Missing the POINT much??!!??
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Managed to grace your ignore list, yet you still feel compelled to post in the thread I started... hmmm double standards much?!?!?
Might be. This has been going on for months now, and it's aggravating.
It isn't when it's a quote from the executive producer of the product...
They got into all kinds of trouble over the offline mode. The accusation was "false advertising".
Can you imagine what would happen if they'd now, after repeatedly going on record that it would definitely not be a subscription-based game, go back on that?
Not at all. Development would die.
Just trying to point out that what you were asking was already answered. No subscription, but payed expansions.
You had a point?
In your opening post you pointed out all the trash thrown at people who don't like the game. In return, I pointed out all the trash thrown at people that do.
You then threw that exact trash at me.
If there was a point in that, then yes, I'm afraid I missed it.
{deleted -- getting my blood pressure up again. Time for some playing instead...}
Last edited:
That's the point you missed.... Try re-reading it and then come back when you can see that's not what I was saying... and your knee jerk reaction is the reason for my disdain of your post.
You are severely mistaken.
It was a part of the kickstarter offering.
That's why there was a big kerfuffle.
FD said that there would be an offline until 1 month till release when they turned round and said they weren't doing it because it was too hard.
Backers kicked off, refunds requested, FD flipped and flopped about it and tried to weedle out of giving people full refunds.
That wasn't what you were saying? You didn't point out all the things that the criticism is NOT based on? In a list, just after you said "first let me explain what it's not"? Just before you explained what it is based on? What was that then? If those things aren't the common excuses I've seen being used to dismiss criticism, then where did you get them from and why did you post them? Genuinely confused.
I then pointed out all the things that the praise is NOT based on in return, to highlight the similarity of our position. And you then claimed my praise was in fact based on all the things I said it wasn't. And insulted me.
Is that not what just happened here? Because I've read through all the posts, and it really is what looks like just happened here. I can't come back when I can see that's not what you were saying because it still looks like exactly what you were saying.
Someone help me out here. I know I'm surely being trolled, but I can't work out the angle.
What keeps a person entertained is different from person to person.
Take modding, for example. For many, perhaps most, players modding is just a means to an end, a way to tailor the game to their preferences or even to cheat; for me, it's a fun activity in itself, reverse-engineering the game files to see how the devs achieved what they did and how to change it to be closer to my own vision of how the game should play. In a game like Oblivion or Starbound I can spend dozens of fun-filled hours going over scripts and tuning spreadsheets, things that for most players would be unbearably boring.
(Which is why I tend to purchase mod-friendly games earlier, without requiring a discount or sale; between the fun I have in modding itself, and being able to play a game tailored to my tastes, I get far more enjoyment out of a mod-friendly game than I could ever get out of an unmodded game.)
ED currently has a problem with having too few different activities, with supercruise being boring enough many players will watch TV or browse the web while going from place to place, and with the one end objective for single players (accumulating credits) basically requiring continuous grinding of the few activities. For some it isn't an issue; if the player finds a few of those activities fun in themselves, the way I find debugging a script fun, then the game can last a long time for those players. For others, though, they will hit a boredom wall early on and — even though they might not have even scratched the game's surface — leave the game due to lack of interesting things the game allows them to currently do (as in, without the need for more grind time or a lengthy trip).
Likes:
1) It's Elite -- one of my favourite games back from when I started with computers. It is the same game, just better. That's about 80% of my satisfaction with the game right there.
2) Different ways to play. The original Elite didn't really offer anything but flying cargo from A to B and shooting whatever got in your way. Now I can trade, mine, explore, seek out combat, or just plain enjoy the sights. Awesome.
3) Space is cold, and vast. No twitch-reflex shooting, no being forced into some "storyline". You play on your own terms, and meeting other commanders is something special (unless you hang out where everybody else hangs out, which is several flavors of dumb because this game is about space, not the local hangout...
Dislikes:
1) Solo / Group play leaving Open with more than its fair amount of lowlifes.
2) That the extensions -- wings, leaving ship, boarding, planetary, etc. -- aren't here yet. (This is a "christmas" problem: I don't like it that it isn't christmas yet. I'm not blaming santa for not delivering in February, or having my enjoyment of the game as-is being spoiled, it just means that I'd like to have those shiny toys.
3) That this forum right here is >50% "this game sucks" by people who are a failure at expectation management or constructive criticism.
As for "people just coming into the game", just this Sunday I wiped my safepoint and restarted at LHS 3447, because I'm playing (voluntary) Ironman. I saw exactly three commanders in normal space before jumping out, a couple more in supercruise while passing through MC-V B2-7, Kremainn, and Uzumeru -- and am flying through mostly empty space since then, the way I like it to be.
I think quite a lot of people have jumped on to Elite : Dangerous completely ignorant of what Elite was about, expecting something like CoD-in-space. I knew exactly what I was expecting, and I got exactly what I was expecting -- and more.
I can feel the passive aggression.
Likes:
1) It's Elite -- one of my favourite games back from when I started with computers. It is the same game, just better. That's about 80% of my satisfaction with the game right there.
2) Different ways to play. The original Elite didn't really offer anything but flying cargo from A to B and shooting whatever got in your way. Now I can trade, mine, explore, seek out combat, or just plain enjoy the sights. Awesome.
3) Space is cold, and vast. No twitch-reflex shooting, no being forced into some "storyline". You play on your own terms, and meeting other commanders is something special (unless you hang out where everybody else hangs out, which is several flavors of dumb because this game is about space, not the local hangout...
Dislikes:
1) Solo / Group play leaving Open with more than its fair amount of lowlifes.
2) That the extensions -- wings, leaving ship, boarding, planetary, etc. -- aren't here yet. (This is a "christmas" problem: I don't like it that it isn't christmas yet. I'm not blaming santa for not delivering in February, or having my enjoyment of the game as-is being spoiled, it just means that I'd like to have those shiny toys.
3) That this forum right here is >50% "this game sucks" by people who are a failure at expectation management or constructive criticism.
As for "people just coming into the game", just this Sunday I wiped my safepoint and restarted at LHS 3447, because I'm playing (voluntary) Ironman. I saw exactly three commanders in normal space before jumping out, a couple more in supercruise while passing through MC-V B2-7, Kremainn, and Uzumeru -- and am flying through mostly empty space since then, the way I like it to be.
I think quite a lot of people have jumped on to Elite : Dangerous completely ignorant of what Elite was about, expecting something like CoD-in-space. I knew exactly what I was expecting, and I got exactly what I was expecting -- and more.
Thanks for taking the time to answer, appreciate it. I too played in the 80's and since this and other venues like Privateer and such.
Add to that the lack of instructions and boom, you've hit it on the head sir.
Too true sometimes best to ignore, SC vs ED, C64 vs Spectrum, ST vs Amiga etc...
I completely agree with all of that. All of it.
The question wasn't what did you find fun though, it was how long it took you to get bored - that being the longevity. If you never had fun, then the game is bad (or you just didn't like). If you had fun, but only for a few hours, then that's a longevity issue. The shorter the period, the worse the issue. I ask because I get the impression from a lot of people that they've played the game for a few score hours or more and then got bored, and then complained about the longevity. That for me isn't really bad longevity.
So, how long did it take you to get bored?
That's not the end objective.
There isn't an end objective.
Maybe that's why people don't realise when they're supposed to stop?
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
Discussions about refunds should occur in the appropriate thread. Please keep things in their proper places.