What is in store for Beyond?

[Yure]

I would really like to have FDEV pitch out the ideas they are thinking about already.

No sense in wasting time and manpower on something that the community will vehemently cringe upon receipt. This is a highly involved community. Let us help out with some things. Hell we've already created ed bearing, eddb, and other products, might as well include us in the QA of things.

... And oh yeah. T9 needs kits and skins. Thanks.

 

[Arthur Shappey]

I am not sure this community should be listened to, too carefully.

1) Not all people playing the game contribute here
2) The people that do are hardly of one mind
3) This community is already 95% fans (+5% salt-miners): FDev should concentrate on attracting the people that aren't in this cohort, for the long-term health of the game
4) Developing by committee feels like a disaster in the making

 

[Ralph Vargr]

One should expect a year-long holding pattern, then depression.

 

[UFO Reality]

What I would really like to see is a list of what the game's coding engine is able to do and not do. Some requests and suggestions I read seem impossible yet others seem easy enough for FD to adjust. Well at least a list of limitations, so as players know if they are just dreaming about stuff.

 

[Jenner]

FD like to play their cards close to their chest. Once a dev says they're thinking about X, then X becomes an expected feature by some in the community.

It's a balancing act. Too much info leads to disappointment when features are cut, and too little info leads to fan resentment as they feel the devs are not listening.

Honestly, I'm glad I'm not the one making these calls.

 

[Calebe]

The way some in the community are it would go like this.
.
FD announces we are doing X. People yell I want Y.
.
FD first announced we are doing Y. People scream we want X.
.
FD announces we are doing X and Y both. Then some scream but we want X as well as A B and C.
.
In other words no matter what they say. Some will be happy. Some will be upset. Some won't care as long as they see progress.
.
In fact the ones that scream the loudest are the ones who want what they want and don't really care about what other may want. They call them fan boys etc... So in the end FD will do what they feel is best. Read the boards get a general feel for what people want and try to make it happen. They want the game to succeed as much if not more so then the player base as it is their game they are making and it has their foot print on every piece. It looks good, and plays well then that they can be proud of their job and I am sure that is what they strive for.
.
Calebe

 

[Yure]

All well good points and unserstandable. But to me it seems the community is clamoring for space legs, and atmospheric landings. All great and all, but the amount of time work and effort put into that is so great that other aspects of the game can be improved prior to all that. Not to mention that we don't know the limitations of the game engine. While atmospheric landing in a ELW would be awesome, just thinking about the sheer size of it is mind boggling. Not to mention the effect it would have on the end user's hardware. And at the end of you are landing next to a tree, just to land next to tree in the next planet, and the next. It is as someone had mentioned in another thread "it is just window dressing". So before effort, time and money is put into that, I would rather the team be working on mechanics and gameplay that matter, are replayable, and are intricate enough to keep us entertained.

If exploration is just going to be a task where your just finding rock after rock after rock, with no benefit or world impact, what is the hook? Already I see a bunch of honk and go systems, where the explorer didn't explore, he just got the main star looked for the goodies and left.

Mining, is horrible. Time and effort not worth the money. It seems like mission givers actively scan you to give you missions for anything NOT in your cargo hold. I believe in order for mining to be viable, rewards/ sales should increase exponentially for the more of the type of cargo you have. Make reasons why systems would demand the cheap stuff.

Trading has the same problem. Why trade water bottles, when you can just trade some metal to some famine place and still get more money? If the missions didn't apparently scan for what is in your hold, maybe there would be more missions with water demand.

The system needs a revamp, and I know it is being worked on. I get it and I appreciate the effort, but a little clue in to mechanics being looked into and we the community can give feedback on what it means to us and where potential downfalls can be.

 

[LKx]

I am not sure this community should be listened to, too carefully.

1) Not all people playing the game contribute here
2) The people that do are hardly of one mind
3) This community is already 95% fans (+5% salt-miners): FDev should concentrate on attracting the people that aren't in this cohort, for the long-term health of the game
4) Developing by committee feels like a disaster in the making

That's totally true, but FD keeps delivering designs which are demolished by the comunity on deliver... because flawed from the start and/or half-baked.
So i beginning to think that sharing early designs before it's too late it's becoming the lesser evil.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/383217-Frontier-Expo-2017-Recap <- Full stream link in the OP

2018 is Core revamp:
Trade, Mining, exploration, alliance ships, engineering, planetary tech, galnet audio and a bunch of other things.

Also unknown premium content

Go back 6 months and exploration + core mechanics were the number one most wanted thing. As mentioned above the very second this was announced by FDev people were disappointed that Atmo landings and space legs were not on the menu. Don't expect space legs or atmo planets in 2018. I suspect maybe volcanic planets or gas giants may become landable/flyable in the premium content though. After 2018 who knows

Hopefully this gives you an idea of whats on the way.


For game engine limitations check out Jurrasic World or Planet Coaster, I don't think it's a limitation as such but it's as you say, no easy feat.

I agree sometimes the community can make really good input and I have been one of the ones calling for more community interaction earlier in the dev/design process. I don't think it should be a floodgate though with anyone and everyone. Make it a special club where FDev can pick and choose critics and contributors who are trusted so they get good solid feedback without spoiling secrets to come.
They've done this before with certain livestreamers and stuff so it's possible.
Others will very strongly disagree with my "club" idea and have valid arguments. I just feel personally thats the best way to get it done as even the beta is like being caught in a tidal wave of feedback threads these days.

 

[Arindor]

More pewpewpew. Definitely more pewpewpew.

 

[UFO Reality]

The way some in the community are it would go like this.
.
FD announces we are doing X. People yell I want Y.
.
FD first announced we are doing Y. People scream we want X.
.
FD announces we are doing X and Y both. Then some scream but we want X as well as A B and C.
.
In other words no matter what they say. Some will be happy. Some will be upset. Some won't care as long as they see progress.
.
In fact the ones that scream the loudest are the ones who want what they want and don't really care about what other may want. They call them fan boys etc... So in the end FD will do what they feel is best. Read the boards get a general feel for what people want and try to make it happen. They want the game to succeed as much if not more so then the player base as it is their game they are making and it has their foot print on every piece. It looks good, and plays well then that they can be proud of their job and I am sure that is what they strive for.
.
Calebe

DAmn, democracy is crazy. I guess I will have to think twice about pledging to Felicia Winters.

 

[UFO Reality]

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/383217-Frontier-Expo-2017-Recap <- Full stream link in the OP

2018 is Core revamp:
Trade, Mining, exploration, alliance ships, engineering, planetary tech, galnet audio and a bunch of other things.

Also unknown premium content

Go back 6 months and exploration + core mechanics were the number one most wanted thing. As mentioned above the very second this was announced by FDev people were disappointed that Atmo landings and space legs were not on the menu. Don't expect space legs or atmo planets in 2018. I suspect maybe volcanic planets or gas giants may become landable/flyable in the premium content though. After 2018 who knows

Hopefully this gives you an idea of whats on the way.


For game engine limitations check out Jurrasic World or Planet Coaster, I don't think it's a limitation as such but it's as you say, no easy feat.

I agree sometimes the community can make really good input and I have been one of the ones calling for more community interaction earlier in the dev/design process. I don't think it should be a floodgate though with anyone and everyone. Make it a special club where FDev can pick and choose critics and contributors who are trusted so they get good solid feedback without spoiling secrets to come.
They've done this before with certain livestreamers and stuff so it's possible.
Others will very strongly disagree with my "club" idea and have valid arguments. I just feel personally thats the best way to get it done as even the beta is like being caught in a tidal wave of feedback threads these days.

Wow, impressive stats at the signature. Anyway maybe FD could revamp their suggestions forum with a like or dislike counter similar to what YouTube does. This way the game devs can have a good feel of what is wanted. It may need a verification system so that there are no bot votes.

More pewpewpew. Definitely more pewpewpew.

Yes!!! +1

 

[[VR] Deggial]

I am not sure this community should be listened to, too carefully.
1) Not all people playing the game contribute here
2) The people that do are hardly of one mind
3) This community is already 95% fans (+5% salt-miners): FDev should concentrate on attracting the people that aren't in this cohort, for the long-term health of the game
4) Developing by committee feels like a disaster in the making

Pretty much this. Especially 4)!

As you and also Calebe wrote, there is no common agreement on desired features. Who should FDev listen to?
You need a prove?

... And oh yeah. T9 needs kits and skins. Thanks.

Well, I honestly don't care about T9 ship kits. You do, which is fine. But we don't agree even on this very simple point.

More pewpewpew. Definitely more pewpewpew.

And while this was definitely (?) meant humorously, I wouldn't mind.
I know, others loath combat in ED and want more non-combat activities. Are they the ones to be listened to?
I like combat. Am I therefore wrong in my desires?

Bottom line: Let them make their thing! They are reading the forums anyway and have a quite good idea about people's opinions.
More than this isn't neccesary nor beneficial.

 

[verminstar]

The return of players like me who have since taken the meta forum advice of just playing other stuff until at least some of their promises are more than just words. Ive heard frontier promise a great many things with very few becoming a reality so instead of hanging around the forums being salty and bitter, I just left only to check in every few days in the ever optimistic hope that something has changed from the last time I looked. Nothing ever changes.

When beyond is a reality as opposed to hot air at an expo, then returning players might be in store ^

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

All well good points and unserstandable. But to me it seems the community is clamoring for space legs, and atmospheric landings. All great and all, but the amount of time work and effort put into that is so great that other aspects of the game can be improved prior to all that. Not to mention that we don't know the limitations of the game engine. While atmospheric landing in a ELW would be awesome, just thinking about the sheer size of it is mind boggling. Not to mention the effect it would have on the end user's hardware. And at the end of you are landing next to a tree, just to land next to tree in the next planet, and the next. It is as someone had mentioned in another thread "it is just window dressing". So before effort, time and money is put into that, I would rather the team be working on mechanics and gameplay that matter, are replayable, and are intricate enough to keep us entertained.

If exploration is just going to be a task where your just finding rock after rock after rock, with no benefit or world impact, what is the hook? Already I see a bunch of honk and go systems, where the explorer didn't explore, he just got the main star looked for the goodies and left.

Mining, is horrible. Time and effort not worth the money. It seems like mission givers actively scan you to give you missions for anything NOT in your cargo hold. I believe in order for mining to be viable, rewards/ sales should increase exponentially for the more of the type of cargo you have. Make reasons why systems would demand the cheap stuff.

Trading has the same problem. Why trade water bottles, when you can just trade some metal to some famine place and still get more money? If the missions didn't apparently scan for what is in your hold, maybe there would be more missions with water demand.

The system needs a revamp, and I know it is being worked on. I get it and I appreciate the effort, but a little clue in to mechanics being looked into and we the community can give feedback on what it means to us and where potential downfalls can be.

Heya Yure,

Trading... I'm pretty sure what you feel about 'insider info' cargo hold scanning is not correct though it may well seem that way, recently I have found a few missions taking a pile of Palladium to an Industrial world and packed an extra few tons on for myself as it was cheap, upon arrival on the mission board over five or six trips I found at least two or three missions of 'go get 18+ tons of Palladium 'which I had on board'... 'lucky you' you might think, well, I also though that [yesnod]
though sometimes I have scanned the boards and found a few wanting 'whatever' and rather that commit myself to a contract that I may not be able to fulfil 'not knowing the area' I'd keep it in mind, later that day I'd find it and take it there and not a soul at the station shows any interest in the slightest... sometimes to the point of selling on the market turns a loss... that is infuriating when they were gagging for it just an hour earlier, so I know where you're coming from [up]

Mining... I don't go mining, my mate described the rigmarole of ship storage and chucking out valuable stray lumps of whatever and I just gave it a wide berth!

Exploring... I know what you mean about 'Glory Grab and Go' (the 3G systems) and it's annoying, a mate of mine put forward an idea that could deter future 3G'ing through payments, where...
: The system pays double upon completion...
or
: payout based on % of scans (if there are 20 registered bodies and the player scans only the Earthlike (600k) he/she only gets 5% =30k) I know that will peeve a lot of players but I'll be happy...

 

[Kenneth McGrew]

I am not sure this community should be listened to, too carefully.

1) Not all people playing the game contribute here
2) The people that do are hardly of one mind
3) This community is already 95% fans (+5% salt-miners): FDev should concentrate on attracting the people that aren't in this cohort, for the long-term health of the game
4) Developing by committee feels like a disaster in the making

someone talking sense

 

[Yure]

@Sandro Sammarco and the rest. Thanks.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/389224-READ-FIRST-THE-FOCUSED-FEEDBACK-GOLDEN-RULE

 

[Stealthie]

I am not sure this community should be listened to, too carefully.

1) Not all people playing the game contribute here
2) The people that do are hardly of one mind
3) This community is already 95% fans (+5% salt-miners): FDev should concentrate on attracting the people that aren't in this cohort, for the long-term health of the game
4) Developing by committee feels like a disaster in the making

On that note...

I find it a little hypocritical that whenever there's already an issue with ED, we're expected to overlook it and/or forgive it on the basis that "ED is a work in progress" and yet, by contrast, when it comes to decisions about what actually goes into the game, we're supposed to shut up and accept what we're given.
That seems kind of "one way traffic" to me.

I'd hope FDev are capable of, at least, looking at these forums and being capable of seriously considering the suggestions people make when deciding what new features to add to ED.

When I see FDev smugly saying how the only thing they've ever changed as a result of player input is add a warning light to the HUD, while features such as Powerplay and Multicrew are an unmitigated disaster, other features such as engineers and naval rank are almost universally criticised, many things are still a work-in-progress and a large number of bugs go unfixed, you have to wonder whether that smugness is justified.

With that said, I do agree that attempting to satisfy all the people all of the time probably isn't going to work.
What fans of a game really want is to have a John Carmack, Gabe Newell or Hideo Kajima on the team.
That way, they can usually be confident that the end result will be of high quality.
Does FDev have such a person on their team?
I'm not sure they do.

 

[Kayweg]

FD have years worth of feedback and suggestions at their disposal for their decision making, and it keeps coming.
But ultimately the decisions are their's to make.
They decide what to make and how to implement it, and you/we/i decide whether to play it or not.
I wouldn't want it any other way, regardless of my (often disagreeing) opinions about many aspects of ED.
There are other games, and i can always come back to ED to have another look, no harm done.
"Beyond" has been announced, and features outlined, i'm sure they'll tell us more when there's more to tell.
Good enough for me.

 

[Valorin]

I would really like to have FDEV pitch out the ideas they are thinking about already.

No sense in wasting time and manpower on something that the community will vehemently cringe upon receipt. This is a highly involved community. Let us help out with some things. Hell we've already created ed bearing, eddb, and other products, might as well include us in the QA of things.

... And oh yeah. T9 needs kits and skins. Thanks.

Look no further: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/389241-Beyond-Focused-Feedback