Steam stats?
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!
A sub-group of a sub-group of one of the four platforms.
Nope.
Why build one of the largest game maps in history and refuse to let anyone build anything?
- Thread starter Badben
- Start date
Steam stats?
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!
A sub-group of a sub-group of one of the four platforms.
Nope.
Ah, I get it.
You still can't read.
That sub-group of a sub-group accounts for 1.3 of the 2.7 million copies of ED sold.
In the world of facts. That's what we call a statistically significant sample size.
You may call it that. I know what I'd call it.
Which, at the end of the day- is still considered nothing but an "educated guess" at best.
Also, using only a fraction of data to make an assumption on any group which is divided by demographics (PC vs Consoles, for example) is also going to be flawed.
No one knows for sure but FD- and they ain't telling.
Please share, I'm curious what label you have that's more influential than raw numbers.
The only thing I can think of is religion.
An educated guess that's accurate to within .02%.
It's there to be read. The more you read, the less I have to quote the webpage that was linked.
I'm not worried about demographics, and neither should you be. The vast majority of players for ED are on PC and PC is the most expensive demographic for them to keep online. ED is not going to become a financial monolith because of a staunch group of PS4 supporters.
PC makes or breaks the game.
1.3 million of anything is by any definition a statistically significant sample size, be it bacteria, gamers or camels.
Last edited:
Indeed. Anyone who thinks Steam stats are indicative of anything other than 'the number of people launching Elite from the Steam launcher' is...well, 'misguided' would be the polite term.
So it IS Religion then. Thanks for clarifying.
When you can pick your nose up off of the floor in front of your altar to David Braben long enough to look around you, there are some poignant and relevant topics I'd like to discuss with you about the state of the game and what it means for your future enjoyment of it.
I've just purchased the Vulture ship kit and community paint job and I have the big 3 (or is it 4 or 5 now) vette, cutter and conda. Oh and I mainly fly the cobra MK3, to which I also have the spike kit and some paints.
Not sure where you're getting you facts from but you'd be surprised how many players, especially long term players who have the big ships, still use and buy cosmetics for the small ships. Just saying.
You've also been playing the game for almost a year and a half. Perhaps longer if you waited to join the forums.
You, sir, just supported my "theory".
And when you can make a post that doesn't contain at least one insult then maybe we can have a discussion.
Until then I'll leave you to your fantasies.
Bye now.
I joined the forums along time after I started playing ED. Not sure what you're getting at tbh??
On my PC account I did go through all the small ships and purchased cosmetics for them. It was harder a year or two ago to earn credits so yes you do spend more time in them. After my second account and a lot of experience it took me half the time to get the larger ships and earn more creds, but that doesn't affect the store in anyway. People still enjoy small ships and still buy cosmetics for them, who cares what progression they make towards any ships, Fdev make skins/paint jobs because they sell.
This thread is probably going to be locked as its way off topic now. Why not create your own and we can discuss your points further??
On topic. No I hope ED doesn't turn into Minecraft in space.
Last edited:
That your time dedicated to the game is directly related to your microtransaction purchases.
People who don't stay don't pay. If you put 1000+ hours in the game of course you're going to have a skin for every ship you fly. At that point they really are your ships.
The majority of the people quit in less than a month though. However, if you could keep just an extra 10% of those people who quit, ED would increase it's revenue by half.
1 in 10. Just improving how new players experience the game and doing something about the broken rate of progression would do that.
For the tenth time, no one wants Elite to be Minecraft in space, no one has ever said that.
verminstar
Banned
For the tenth time, no one wants Elite to be Minecraft in space, no one has ever said that.
Only the tenth time? Always the diplomatic one mengy sugar coating everything, it appears to make up half the entire argument against. I think sugar crush was even mentioned a few pages back.
Does seem a bit odd that nobody has actually asked fer that which proves what I said on page one would come to pass...class dismissed ^
For the tenth time, no one wants Elite to be Minecraft in space, no one has ever said that.
Fair enough as I respect you Mengy, my opinion is I don't want building or any mechanics to do with it in Elite. It's about flying space ships around and shooting some stuff. I used Minecraft because fundamentally that's the easiest way to describe it, sorry for mentioning it for the 11th time
I the initial development frontier talked about procedurally generated space stations (newsletter 11
The classic Coriolis Station is as iconic to the Elite series as the Cobra MK III, and whilst we’re happy to confirm that it will be making a triumphant return for Elite: Dangerous, a galaxy cannot live on Cuboctahedrons alone!
View attachment 277
To assure that there is enough variation across inhabited space, Elite: Dangerous will be using procedural algorithms to construct stations out of a range of modular assets. This technique will allow for a wide range of possible station designs, whilst allowing us to make the most of our library of assets.
You can see just a few examples of the very early modules that our team have been experimenting with below. These are not for use in the final game but have been created as a sandbox by our artists, to begin exploring a range of basic shapes that could be used for construction.
View attachment 278
Beyond making it easier to provide variation throughout the galaxy, a modular approach allows for several other advantages. One such benefit is that players will be able to see stations expand over time, or in response to player-driven events.
There are various functions that a module can be designed for and all have to be designed so that they look fit for purpose. Below are two examples of modules that are currently being designed. An agricultural module, for stations close enough to a star to sustainably grow crops, and cargo pods for external storage. The assumption is that plants grown in ‘natural light’ would attract a premium price.
View attachment 279
Beyond designs for more conventional stations, we also plan to have a few specialist station types that fulfill specific roles; each constructed using their own sets of rules and modules. This will help to establish some stylistic differences between the stations, which will make it easier for players to define what the role of one is upon approach. Some examples are below:
View attachment 280
Whilst we know that stations will be built modularly, and we have the technical framework in place to make this happen, we are still very much in the pre-visualisation stage when it comes to the aesthetic. That said, some important philosophies that are helping to guide the design of stations for Elite: Dangerous have already been established:
Scientific Plausibility: a station’s design needs to be structurally feasible, and make sense practically. How people get about, the use of very low gravity for loading/unloading of ships, but higher gravity for living – typically half to one earth-equivalent in strength.
Functionality: The function of each element should be considered- where things are stored, where people would want to live, etc. Why it is where it is, and how would people and goods get about.
Gravity: Living in gravity is comfortable, so in general, space stations spin. That way eating, sleeping, sneezing, and going to the toilet, are a lot more straightforward. Some things benefit from low gravity, like unloading cargo and manufacturing. Also, lower gravity levels (say 1/3 g) could be very pleasant because, for example, a normal human could strap on wings and fly! Because of this there is no special direction (no ‘up’), so there is no need for stations for example to be coplanar – something that a lot of science fiction designs neglect.
One idea that the team are currently exploring further is the concept that a station does not need to be a single structure, but can have multiple satellite components around a central structure, linked only by rapid transport routes. This idea is not only plausible but would offer the Elite stations a unique aesthetic that would be visually striking.
As stations are such a huge part of the game, the aesthetic direction that we choose is not a decision that we’re going to rush. We have literally hundreds of ideas at this point for what we want to do with this area of the game, our task now is to choose what we believe will be the best ones for a new Elite.)
with constructions that would make them larger add modules etc. They didn't do this presumably to get the iconic structures maybe for technical reasons. please remember the map isn't actually there it is partially generated on the fly so to speak so just adding stuff is not as easy as you think technically. However I think they missed a trick by not going for procedural generated stations that you and your groups could invest in and build up and maybe specialise them or add appropriate modules as a visual representation of the background simulation. while some could become abandoned and disused. This could have given the bubble a kind of landscape formed and fought over by the players. It is difficult to see how you could retroscpectively do this now though.
The classic Coriolis Station is as iconic to the Elite series as the Cobra MK III, and whilst we’re happy to confirm that it will be making a triumphant return for Elite: Dangerous, a galaxy cannot live on Cuboctahedrons alone!
View attachment 277
To assure that there is enough variation across inhabited space, Elite: Dangerous will be using procedural algorithms to construct stations out of a range of modular assets. This technique will allow for a wide range of possible station designs, whilst allowing us to make the most of our library of assets.
You can see just a few examples of the very early modules that our team have been experimenting with below. These are not for use in the final game but have been created as a sandbox by our artists, to begin exploring a range of basic shapes that could be used for construction.
View attachment 278
Beyond making it easier to provide variation throughout the galaxy, a modular approach allows for several other advantages. One such benefit is that players will be able to see stations expand over time, or in response to player-driven events.
There are various functions that a module can be designed for and all have to be designed so that they look fit for purpose. Below are two examples of modules that are currently being designed. An agricultural module, for stations close enough to a star to sustainably grow crops, and cargo pods for external storage. The assumption is that plants grown in ‘natural light’ would attract a premium price.
View attachment 279
Beyond designs for more conventional stations, we also plan to have a few specialist station types that fulfill specific roles; each constructed using their own sets of rules and modules. This will help to establish some stylistic differences between the stations, which will make it easier for players to define what the role of one is upon approach. Some examples are below:
View attachment 280
Whilst we know that stations will be built modularly, and we have the technical framework in place to make this happen, we are still very much in the pre-visualisation stage when it comes to the aesthetic. That said, some important philosophies that are helping to guide the design of stations for Elite: Dangerous have already been established:
Scientific Plausibility: a station’s design needs to be structurally feasible, and make sense practically. How people get about, the use of very low gravity for loading/unloading of ships, but higher gravity for living – typically half to one earth-equivalent in strength.
Functionality: The function of each element should be considered- where things are stored, where people would want to live, etc. Why it is where it is, and how would people and goods get about.
Gravity: Living in gravity is comfortable, so in general, space stations spin. That way eating, sleeping, sneezing, and going to the toilet, are a lot more straightforward. Some things benefit from low gravity, like unloading cargo and manufacturing. Also, lower gravity levels (say 1/3 g) could be very pleasant because, for example, a normal human could strap on wings and fly! Because of this there is no special direction (no ‘up’), so there is no need for stations for example to be coplanar – something that a lot of science fiction designs neglect.
One idea that the team are currently exploring further is the concept that a station does not need to be a single structure, but can have multiple satellite components around a central structure, linked only by rapid transport routes. This idea is not only plausible but would offer the Elite stations a unique aesthetic that would be visually striking.
As stations are such a huge part of the game, the aesthetic direction that we choose is not a decision that we’re going to rush. We have literally hundreds of ideas at this point for what we want to do with this area of the game, our task now is to choose what we believe will be the best ones for a new Elite.)
with constructions that would make them larger add modules etc. They didn't do this presumably to get the iconic structures maybe for technical reasons. please remember the map isn't actually there it is partially generated on the fly so to speak so just adding stuff is not as easy as you think technically. However I think they missed a trick by not going for procedural generated stations that you and your groups could invest in and build up and maybe specialise them or add appropriate modules as a visual representation of the background simulation. while some could become abandoned and disused. This could have given the bubble a kind of landscape formed and fought over by the players. It is difficult to see how you could retroscpectively do this now though.
Last edited:
I found the answer right in your post. [yesnod]
"1, They don't want their game to become Eve online."
This is not the game you are looking for.
Sorry.
Meso
Sorry.
Meso
Although last time I heard people were still playing Eve online....
Last edited: