We have to talk about ED - why it is

[Mosait]

I'm just scared that FD listens TOO much. See, when the playerbase thinks something is wrong, there's lots of feedback, but none when they think FD is right. So, FD end up changing perfectly fine things (Ex- 1.1, NPCs can't steal bounties) for these people, leaving the people who liked these things in the dust. FD is just too, too jolly! They love this game and want to see it move forward, and they're very much linked with the community as they were kickstarted.

FD, I think, needs to put some wax in their ears and ignore the community, at least a little bit more. If they want thoughtful forum threads, the type which they could get in Alpha/Premium Beta/Beta, they could create Alpha/PB/Beta forums for only those backers. I guess you would have to link your game account with your forums account, but it could work. A huge portion of the general community is no longer the original backers, it's the new steam players.

So, because I missed out to participate in the KS campaign, my opinion doesn't matter? That would be in FD's error. Granted they need to listen to the beta players to fix issues. Look, I'm new to this series, but if the mass player base doesn't like what they're doing and aren't going to play then they will have a harder time selling their expansions when they decide to start charging for those. And if their paid expansions are anything like PP, I'm not buying it.

I want to see Elite succeed, but PP makes me a bit nervous about what they have planned for the future when there are still so many other issues that need to be fixed and/or revamped. I'll try PP, but I wasn't intrigued when it was announced, and I am even less intrigued based on what I've read. I hope I'm wrong when it gets released, h.owever, I'd rather seen 1.3 as a massive issue fix and enhancement to what already exists instead of a loose overlay attempting to force participation.

 

[Dagless]

Why does Call of Duty always come up?

No one would ever buy an open world space trading game and expect it to be like a linear FPS.

Can everyone please stop with this ridiculous strawman argument?

 

[PrometheusDarko]

No one would ever buy an open world space trading game and expect it to be like a linear FPS.

Oh, honey, that's adorable.

 

[W4rSkuLL]

There is another thread on here which someone posted all of the plans FD had for the individual professions of the game. When you read that you know EXACTLY why you wanted to buy this game. Unfortunately we got only the tiniest of portions of that plan. THAT is what causes the so-called toxic responses to the game. All of those things from exploring to mining were so much more fleshed out than the skeleton versions we have. I'm an old school gamer you talk of. I'm 51 years old. I don't need or want my hand held, nor do I want instant gratification. What I want is the game as it was described and not what I have. What I have is a mess of a game that can't figure out what it wants to be! MMO, not really, simulation....sorry no at least not by flight sim standards. Combat is simplistic, flight is simplistic, landing is simplistic. It is bordering on arcade in many aspects. I feel no connection to ANYTHING going on in the game. The universe seems dead. This has been argued to death. Some people are quite happy just flying around looking at procedurally generated planets and stars and some are just happy earning the next most expensive ship. That's fine. Some of us though are looking for the game and vision that was originally envisioned and what we have now is a pale pale comparison. Until the game catches up to the vision you will continue to have toxic attitudes towards the game. No amount of shiny new ships is going to replace obvious lack of MEANINGFUL content or real simulation aspects people were hoping for. This is the xbox era. Not my era and we are all suffering as a gaming community for it. Of course this is just the opinion of one old school gamer.

You need persistent NPCs. Then you will be happy. Calling this game a pale pale comparison to what? What comes close to E.D at the moment. Where you can play in space with your friends and explore unknown star systems. And feel you are part of a big community. None. There are no other at the moment. And Star Citizen tries to do everything at same time. And aint finished before 2017. So E.D is what you have. Maybe PP doesn´t fit everyone but it can be updated/patched to become better. I think we have gotten a lot of stuff in ver 1.3 thats very good. More stable Cobra engine, better sounds, more complex universe where you can "choose" to not play PP if you don´t like to, and we wont miss you either. 2 new ships, more diversity is always better. Being able to change the galaxy in PP, better missions or mission template so more advanced missions can be added. Drones which carry fuel and cargo. I´ve tried the cargo ones and they work. Maybe tweak them a little. Better graphics. More stuff will come in later updates and patches. Frontier has used over 3 years to make the game and don´t call it pale. There is no justice in that.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Why does Call of Duty always come up?

No one would ever buy an open world space trading game and expect it to be like a linear FPS.

Can everyone please stop with this ridiculous strawman argument?

I think CoD is mentioned because difference in experiences. Not just because it's different genre, but it offers tonally very different experience. It's very goal oriented, and to execute goal in very Hollywood-ish action.

- - - Updated - - -

You need persistent NPCs. Then you will be happy. Calling this game a pale pale comparison to what?

That's always a good question. People dislike some aspects or things about ED - sure. But going overboard every time when speaking about it - it's laughable and hilarious at best and blanks any potential discussion about improvements.

 

[nedeaalex]

Ending comments; To me, the game doesn't feel shallow at all; Landing requires careful maneuvering (especially without a shield.), especially in high traffic areas with lots of players going in and out of a docking area, interactions with other players are both varied and interesting.

WHAT ? 99% of the time i boost in and out of stations without a problem. I come in to the pad like im landing on a runway, and generally dont miss it. I dont need more than 30 seconds from the moment i request landing in front of the door to land...Where is the "Carefull maneuvering"?

 

[W4rSkuLL]

I think CoD is mentioned because difference in experiences. Not just because it's different genre, but it offers tonally very different experience. It's very goal oriented, and to execute goal in very Hollywood-ish action.

- - - Updated - - -



That's always a good question. People dislike some aspects or things about ED - sure. But going overboard every time when speaking about it - it's laughable and hilarious at best and blanks any potential discussion about improvements.

I think people are comparing E.D to the DDF. Or those promises which were made there. I guess more ideas will be implemented in due time from the DDF. Its still there. Its not always as easy to get something from a decision and into a game. But I hope more will be added. I say as I have said before persistent NPCs, 1 person stuff and then planetary landings. My wishlist if its worth something

 

[Varrag]

Very well written post, although I admit that I don't fully understand the point. Perhaps it was directed towards certain group of players - in that case, I hope that they will get the message.

I, for one, have been playing open world sandbox games more than anything else, so I know pretty well what to expect when I see one. Now, if you ask me about ED... well, fact that I am still here 6 months after release tells something. But not so much about the game, but rather my persistence: I am simply refusing to let it go because it has so much potential; it would be such a pity if this doesn't come to fruition.

Needless to say, I am one of those who think that ED in its current state is "a mile wide, an inch deep".

 

[Defacto]

I would not say that ED is very simulatory. At least, it isn't moving in that direction. I guess such a thing as ''simulatory'' is pretty subjective and hard to define, but look at, for example, the High Intensity Resource zones that are coming in 1.3. The point here seems to be offering a higher level content for fighters and higher reward+risk for miners.

This, I think, is not ''simulatory'', but very ''gamey''. A ''simulatory'' implementation of this feature would instead be to remove resource extraction sites entirely, since they seem completely arbitrary and serve no real purpose. A more simulatory approach would instead have these things arise dynamically, different regions can have higher resource amounts, or there might be single larger asteroids with large mineral veins that cannot be rapidly mined out by one ship.

The system of USS also aren't very simulatory. They are essentially random events, and since 1.2, they are now also comfortaly levelled to cater to players at different stages of ''progression'' (here the journey that follows with played time, where the player's power slowly goes upward with occasional interrupts and very rare setbacks).

If a simulatory approach would be taken to this system, signal sources would just be signal sources, and any information on them would be based on what information you reasonably could aquire (five anacondas stealthing and a few canisters certainly aren't going to be ''strong'' but a merchant wanting to buy goods would be). The things encountered would have to make sense based on the circumstances, at the very least giving the impression that there's actually any reasoning behind why there's a wreckage, or spilled canisters, or a pirate trap. If possible, it would be even better if these actually were persistant NPC's.

I also think people need to calm down about the ''You think that there must be a possibility to win the game'' stuff.

I really don't think that is much of an issue. Sure, some people might think this, but I actually don't think ''modern gamers'' in general really have a problem with accepting that games can have a purpose in themselves. Why do I think that? Because I play other games that are the same: Games that don't give Skinnerbox-style rewards or go ''You win! Fanfare!'' after 15 hours. So-called ''modern gamers'' play these games too and enjoy them, because unlike what some people seem to think here, most ''modern gamers'' aren't some kind of addicted videogame hamsters that gets dopamine rushes from harvesting Strawberries in Farmville.

In fact, I think the problem lies more in how ED flirts around with these ''modern games''. How they add things to ''cater'' to people and ''give purpose'' to this and that or ''ease'' whatever. Where's the DDF features?

 

[JughedJones]

Right on, brother OP!!


I've been playing this game since PB and it's been a blast the whole way.

I got in on the PowerPlay and it seems pretty cool to me. I'm not worried about grinding at all though.

Sometimes, I feel like committing to a CG.. I assume that's when PP will be good for me. Other times, I have
my own ideas about how to have fun in this game.

I'm a simmer. I dig it.

 

[Midian27]

Oh that's cute, he thinks he's an FD dev now.

 

[tough boy]

I don't think it's a good assumption that everyone who complains about the current status of Elite: Dangerous do so because "in his heart" he wanted a scripted experience but instead got a sandbox. I believe the majority of people who bought it, and pretty much the entirety of the kickstarters, actually wanted a sandbox game very much, the kind that it's not produced anymore by major publishers. Yes there is the odd noob who complains that docking is impossible or that it takes forever to do anything, but you can't dismiss that the majority of the critics are actually people complaining that there's not enough sandbox (which, by the way, can mean anything to anyone, so this kind of arguments generally just degenerate into semantics) in this "sandbox". USS are lame, the economy is static, ships progression is just linear... really, one mile wide, one inch deep, there's no better way to describe it. It will get better I'm sure, if Frontier can sustain it, but as of now the critics are valid.

 

[Faded Glory]

I think OP makes a good point. ED is an open ended game, as was Frontier (I never played Elite, but Frontier I played for ages!). Even when you attain Elite ranking, you haven't 'won' the game.

And perhaps herein lies the 'problem'. FD are trying to create a game, a game they (or perhaps David Braben) want to play, and to that end, since money is involved, whatever else they say, they are still trying to make the game financially viable. To do that, simply put, they need to attract players, and I suspect play styles have changed over the years, and players' expectations of what they want from a game have changed too.

I'm far from a serious gamer, didn't even have computers when I was a teenager. (Well, they probably did, but I didn't have one.) I play a few games, most of which don't involve a "You Won" moment. I play them I suppose as a time sink, in the same way as I read books, listen to music, ski, ride a mountain bike... Because they are fun things to do. I wonder though whether 'modern' gamers want to feel as though they won, they beat something, or someone.

There is no question that FD had to make ED a multi-player game, that I suppose is the norm in our ever more Internet connected life, but it leads perhaps to a bit of schizophrenia on the part of the game, trying to accommodate competition in what is essentially an non-competeive game.

On the whole, I think FD are doing a pretty good job of appealing to both the modern gamer, and the people who loved the earlier incarnations of the game. It's always going to be a compromise, but they have cleverly managed to accommodate different play styles with the different modes. Now comes the challenge, remembering that the game is only in it's infancy really, it's a framework, waiting to be dressed. So who gets the content first? The game really does need content, just because there's no winning, doesn't mean it should be boring to play. (To be honest, at the moment, ED actually has slightly less content than Frontier did.) I'm Ok to be patient waiting for that content. I was initially disappointed with missions in 1.3, because it was more of the same, but then I got that all they have changed for now is the framework, and the content can (and I'm sure will) follow.

One thing that I occasionally worry about, if that's the right word, is that they are having to spend too much time and effort on patching exploits and balancing to try and make the competitive side of a non competitive game fair. I worry about that only because it detracts from moving the game forward, takes resources that could be being used to create content, complicate the game unnecessarily, and don't, or more probably can't work, anyway. I like and appreciate that they listen to feedback on the forums though, and don't envy their position.

There are times I get frustrated, because I suppose my expectations and hopes are high. Generally though, I manage to take a breath and trust that I'll still be able to keep playing this game, have some fun, and sink some time. Not all the changes that are made will appeal to me, and if I feel strongly, I'll post on the forums, otherwise, I'm going to keep playing (well, not this week, I'm away, and hopefully my rep won't have declined too much in my absence ) and look forward to more varied content for an old style Frontier player.

 

[kreuzbichler]

"Elite: Dangerous" in many aspects is basically space sci-fi simulator (also dubbed 'Hans Solo simulator' by few).

remember the part where Hand Solo shipped rares back and forth the same route for 167 times to grind out the Millenium Falcon? Me neither

t mixes AI and player elements to create dynamic world. [/B]

the world is not dynamic, it´s rather scripted at this point and it seems nothing much is happening, plus looks almost the same wherever you go. I think most of the stuff you make up is actually in your mind, not in the game (yet)

 

[Dagless]

I think CoD is mentioned because difference in experiences. Not just because it's different genre, but it offers tonally very different experience. It's very goal oriented, and to execute goal in very Hollywood-ish action.

Yes, but it's so different, that the comparison becomes meaningless. Mentioning Skyrim or GTA would make more sense as both have main quest lines along with a free roaming world. Plus of course DBOBE has regularly compared ED with these games. But CoF just strikes me as an easy target as it's a game many people look down on.

That's always a good question. People dislike some aspects or things about ED - sure. But going overboard every time when speaking about it - it's laughable and hilarious at best and blanks any potential discussion about improvements.

A lot of people also compare with Final Frontier and First Encounters. To me it seems most of the "I Quit" or "What are You Doing Frontier?" threads are from people who've had 20 years to think about what a sequel would look like. I don't think it's coming from "the console generation" at all.

The proposals in the DDF seemed much like what I expected a new Elite game to be like. I assumed that at least something similar to much of this was in the works, but with the whole Power Play thing, I really have no idea where they are going now.

 

[Surly_Badger]

remember the part where Hand Solo shipped rares back and forth the same route for 167 times to grind out the Millenium Falcon? Me neither

That's because that part wasn't in the show; it happened before Solo became a good enough pilot to be interesting. Remember when Skywalker used to zero swamp rats? That was a heck of a "grind" but it was part of how he became such a great pilot. That and, uh, midiclorians.

Han Solo either levelled up early with a severe "grind" or took an exploit thanks to inside information from the script-writer. Either way, the point that he was a great smuggler was that he got that way somehow.

I know the preceeding is largely irrelevant, but what's relevant is that if you become "elite" through lots of flying and fighting then you eventually are going to be a pretty good in-game pilot. If only because of the muscle memory of flying so much. If you "grind" your way to buy a big ship (especially using an exploit like, say, beacon trading) then you'll be a mediocre pilot who could afford a ship that's vastly better than you are a pilot. Then you may be surprised to discover that someone who actually took the time to become a great in-game pilot is going to wax you in a less-specced ship.

 

[almostpilot]

To the OP, it's obvious you spent a lot of time writing your post and while I may agree with some aspects of it, I have to wonder why you have blatantly disregarded one of the biggest complaints about ED. It completely lacks depth.

The mining, mission, exploration systems etc are all simplified and boring to a lot of people. And there is no sense of this universe being alive, whether it's a "sandbox" or not.

The end result of all this alleged "grinding" is simply to attain ships that are better at more grinding. There is no other point or purpose. This is what you discover when you pull back the curtain of all the fancy effects. There are simply no other tools to immerse yourself in this experience. Furthermore, I would say the folks who argue against this criticism can quite easily be put into the "easily entertained" category.

Exactly, the core game improvement was forgot by FD.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I love ED and cooperative MP was the thing I always dreamed off. Some people complain about ED because it just simply is not the kind of game they like and unfortunately if FD do not cave IMO it never will be. The danger is they try and appease these people however and ultimately put off the core ED audience and still do not please those people.
It is OK for elite to be a niche game. FSX ETS2 and dcs world among others manage just fine this way.

Other people complain however because they want more content. 6 months after release ED still has less mission variety than 1st encounters and less content in terms of space stations and general content etc.

As I said I love what we have and maybe hoping the DDF would come close was unrealistic however I do think complaints that ED is lifeless are valid.
Where are the shipcfactories, the refineries with cranes and construction machines moving around? Real time scaffolding as stuff is built etc. And just a general hubub of background d ai milling around giving us a feeling that we are in a hugely population centre or a quiet cull we sac in space. I hope this still comes.

I just want to feel like I am living the life of a space man with realistic goals, and experiences and where I have to live with the consequences of my actions.

I hope they still deliver all this stuff . Or at least plan to.

I agree mostly with op tho even if none of the above happens I get more enjoyment out of ED than most of my games

 

[Renegade Roach]

That's because that part wasn't in the show; it happened before Solo became a good enough pilot to be interesting. Remember when Skywalker used to zero swamp rats? That was a heck of a "grind" but it was part of how he became such a great pilot. That and, uh, midiclorians.

Han Solo either levelled up early with a severe "grind" or took an exploit thanks to inside information from the script-writer. Either way, the point that he was a great smuggler was that he got that way somehow.

I know the preceeding is largely irrelevant, but what's relevant is that if you become "elite" through lots of flying and fighting then you eventually are going to be a pretty good in-game pilot. If only because of the muscle memory of flying so much. If you "grind" your way to buy a big ship (especially using an exploit like, say, beacon trading) then you'll be a mediocre pilot who could afford a ship that's vastly better than you are a pilot. Then you may be surprised to discover that someone who actually took the time to become a great in-game pilot is going to wax you in a less-specced ship.

He won the Falcon in a bet, he beat the grind ... now if only we could gamble our ships in Elite. Think of the fun (and inevitable 'Omg I lost my Anaconda in a card game and now I r in Sidewinder ((' posts )

 

[Varrag]

There is no question that FD had to make ED a multi-player game, that I suppose is the norm in our ever more Internet connected life, but it leads perhaps to a bit of schizophrenia on the part of the game, trying to accommodate competition in what is essentially an non-competeive game.

Yep. ED is a game with identity crisis, I said that quite long ago. It's not single player; it's not multiplayer/MMORPG; it's not theme park; it's not sandbox. ED takes a little bit of everything and tries to mix all ingredients into something hard to define. Which is not bad thing per se, but ultimately you're getting a game which is moderately interesting for everyone, but doesn't really shine in anything. Mistake, or great design decision? It's hard to tell, yet.

See, I invested lot of time in exploration and decided that I want to get an elite rank, which I managed to do yesterday (I took it slowly...). But I don't have illusions about exploration: just like everything else, it feels like a placeholder, an absolutely necessary minimum required to be playable at all. Now when I achieved this goal, I am not sure what else is left for me to do: reading data about scanned colourful balls and taking pretty screenshots can only go this far. There is nothing more to it. PvP without guilds or at least killboards is totally meaningless for me; trading on generally static, NPC controlled market is not something I find fun nor challenging; PvE feels like generic WoW-like grindfest... etc.