Why do you think FD decided to forget about the DDF?
- Thread starter Ignition
- Start date
Your errant memory isn't a great item of evidence here Stiggy.
This is the type of evidence you should be looking too, regarding Legs being heavily pre-sold prior to launch:
Newsletter 32: 'To Launch, and Beyond with the Lifetime Expansion Pass'
We also plan to allow you to get up out of your seat and walk around your ship. You can see the level of attention and thought that has already been given to the ship interiors from these ship cockpit views in this video:
Of course walking round your ship will be nice, but it is the just springboard for a very significant expansion of gameplay – you will be able to experience the inside of starports and interact with other players and AI characters, and even board other people’s ships in space and take them by force, as shown in this concept piece.
Of course this will be further expanded to include walking around on the surfaces of planets too.
Alpha and Premium Beta customers, and those who have already bought the £35 Lifetime Expansion Pass alongside either Beta or the full game, will have access to all these features and updates for as long as we create them at no further cost.
Elite: Dangerous Development Plan (hosted on Kickstarter page - Dec 2014)
Elite Dangerous Expansion Pass Store Page - [IE the point of sale] (circa July 2014):
Newsletter 29: Lifetime Expansion Pass - to be withdrawn from sale
---
Throw in things like periodic suggestions by FDev that it's still their intent...
And yeah, your recollection has some gaps in it
Last edited:
Something else to bear in mind from what I just posted is that they only raised enough on kickstarter to make the minimum game. Which we definitely got and then some.
Lucky for us.
Why do you keep posting links to stuff I repeatedly told you I never read or watched as though it proves something about my memory ?.
The only thing it demonstrates is that you have some massive gaps in your reading comprehension, which is pretty much a summary of what I've been saying and proving all along (with your help).
What you imagine dependent entirely on you ignoring the things said to you only exists inside your head.
I won't comment on the current 'discussion' on whether FD lied, did what they said they would do, or whatever everyone is arguing with Stig about. But the line that got me in the above advertisement is this one: There is also the fact that as long as we hit the threshold, it commits us to making the game". Whatever you think about FD, you have to give them credit for that, they reached the threshold in Kickstarter and not only committed the company to design, produce and release the game - they actually did it. Make a difference from that other space based game that the company is in a perpetual kickstarter mode, more than ready to take their customers money for little production output.
In that regard, I personally think David Braben and company can hold their heads up high.
Whether or not you personally have read something is deeply immaterial dear Stig. The material still exists. That is the point.
No need to get personal just because it says things which contest your personal narrative. Such as:
You are wrong. Anyone who bought one of the LEP variants absolutely has. It's literally there on the point of sale and written into swathes of marketing material in firm declarative language.
I totally agree that it may not happen. That's a separate issue.
But your silly strawman arguments about 'Oh people saw a sizzle reel pre-render and jumped to assumptions' is just chaff. People can have legitimate expectations of FDev attempting a Legs DLC, based on FDev's own very specific claims and associated monies taken. Your downplaying of the import of pre-order marketing is anti-consumer and daft.
I guess that should end most discussions about Frontier not delivering. They promised us a 'minimum game' and that's it. Everything else is extra.Said what exactly that some stuff would be cool if they could do it with the proviso that plans change, technical feasibility is a thing and they had the final say ?.
I'll show you something they definitely said that predates all this rubbish, even the renaming that some people think is significant of nefarious intent and I think was FDEV trying to rein in peoples delusions of grandeur :
View attachment 150102
Being part of a discussion doesn't mean anyone has to take your suggestions as instructions, construction of a roadmap or that they are in any way practical or realistic. The DDF buyers paid to chat with the devs that's all it ever was.
Link :
Elite: Dangerous
Take a ship and 100 credits to make money legally or illegally - trade, bounty-hunt, pirate, assassinate your way across the galaxy.www.kickstarter.com
In finally getting 'Elite 4' over the line, and remaking 1984 Elite with a modern gleam, they've pushed a wedge-shaped ship up a very steep slope. No doubt.
Interesting to note that without the proof of interest that the Kickstarter provided, the base scenario for ED was that it would be a £10 game!
Add in the £8m they stuck in themselves to make it happen, and yeah, they went the extra mile.
In the process they did also pre-sell a dream of a game that expanded well beyond 'Elite 84 Plus' though. Fingers crossed that they've got their cloud boots on, and can take a step down that fluffy road with the DLC
Cobblers. Anyone who bought an LEP took a gamble on it being a better deal than all the DLC sold separately without knowing how much DLC we'd get (if any) or what the DLC would actually have in it.
Thinking an LEP somehow equates directly to space-feet is laughable.
The issue here is people just don't do pre-purchase research.
You agree. The only gamble is force majeure.
Aaaand, still wrong
There is no guarantee that a particular feature will be implemented.
At the risk of rousing the almighty Stig-beast ---
I agree to an extent that just saying "Engineering role!" and then not following that up with anything is what normally happens - look at the linked video "I think it's self explanatory, power management, looking after the ship etc" - that to me sounded like they hadn't even started designing it, at the point I heard that, I thought there would either be a very very limited engineer role (we have the pip thing!!!) or none at all.
Having said that, I don't think it's impossible to achieve. I think a lot of the problems Multicrew has, is that you can already do everything on your own.
I would have preferred (aware this is a minority view) that ships with crew "slots", instead, had crew REQUIREMENTS. And without those crew, you literally could not do various things.
For instance, some ships could have had hardpoints that only took turrets - and no turrets would work without a crew member.
Ship launched fighters are the one thing that really works with multicrew - because you can't actually have a fighter out and control your own ship at the same time. (you can, with NPCs - but this still proves my point, without a crew member, the action is impossible.)
So much of the game was designed before multicrew was concepted - so there wasn't a lot they could do.
If they had planned for multicrew, they could have made power management either entirely impossible, or a complex process you can't do on the fly with single button presses, or even more basic than it is now, maybe only being able to move power between engines and weapons, not shields - there are other options too.
Then, an engineer could have opened power management up, making it possible to achieve much better results with a dedicated crew member running it.
This could have been represented by either a bunch of panels involving routing power around a grid dependant on the ship type and it's engineering/modules or physically (would require space legs... and probably not neccessary, but this kind of thing will come up again with space legs, as it's not been taken into account while designing the rest of the game...) moving to different parts of the ship to adjust things.
The engineer could also route coolant around the ship, opening and closing valves (via a panel or physically) to cool whatever part of the ship needed it the most (but the helm can press a single button and cool the entire ship so.... oh well?)
Directional shields could be utilised - and this is one thing that could still work, potentially, if it was ONLY available in multicrew.
An engineer could control repair bots (via a panel, or through a first person camera moving them around the ship) to perform... automated field maintenance - oh wait, the helm can just click on a module in the right panel and select "repair" so... there goes that one too.
The engineer could fly external repair limpets and attach onto visible damage to the hull (let's assume FD finished the damage models for every ship here) and repair them (this could even involve controlling physical tools on the limpets to bend panels back into place and seal them over - or I don't know, something an actual professional game designer came up with) - but wait! we have repair limpets, the helm just fires them off and they auto repair everything after attaching to one single spot on the ship, so, that kinda removes the need for an engineer role again there. (decontamination limpets as well)
So I actually disagree with those who say there couldn't have been an engineer role - however, as you used the term "unimplementable" you're right, if you mean unimplementable without adding significantly more mechanics to the game just for that specific role, which I suspect, you do!
Last edited:
Oo, it's a Mexican pedant-off
I agree that force majeure is one of the gambles
Sure. We all just agreed on that
I'm contesting Stig's broader and regular argumentation that:
Frankly all of this stems from an emotional rather than a logical place anyway. Stig just doesn't want Legs in the game due to personal taste ¯\(ツ)/¯
(Guess he should have done his pre-purchase research better)
I agree that force majeure is one of the gambles
Sure. We all just agreed on that
I'm contesting Stig's broader and regular argumentation that:
- The language around 'Legs' additions was vague, strictly of a 'maybe' nature, and any expectations of firm intent were created in players' fervid imaginations
- That having an expectation that FDev attempt a Legs DLC is unreasonable and unwarranted
- That pre-purchasing a package which roadmapped said additions has no legal bite on a consumer front
Frankly all of this stems from an emotional rather than a logical place anyway. Stig just doesn't want Legs in the game due to personal taste ¯\(ツ)/¯
(Guess he should have done his pre-purchase research better
)Oo, it's a Mexican pedant-off
I am looking for common ground Golgot. The assertion that the LEP is 'a gamble' is not 'correct', you just share Stigbob's view that it is a gamble.
There are specific laws, terms & conditions that apply to gambling. Just as it can be viewed as a donation but Frontier are not a charity.
That only proves you didn't understand what you were watching and that you ignored all of the proviso's.
You know, I've never listened to Lave Radio, been to Lavecon, or paid attention to Yamiks, so I'd not have a way to know any of this. I'm familiar enough with the whole NP/NG thing, as that's rather old hat. But in this particular instance we're not really talking about the future of the game here but rather the past - that is, assuming, anyone who's taken this particular position is right and they have "blown off" the paid forum. It's still entirely possible they simply haven't gotten around to implementing all the things they wanted to, and just as possible that, simply because something was posted there, it doesn't mean it would be implemented at all, ever.
It is pretty easy to sit around a brain storming session, go "yeah, that sounds great" only to find out when the actual work starts getting done that what sounded great proves to be crap, doesn't fit, doesn't work, or isn't actually as great as it sounded at the time. Would you want something that sounded great but proves to be crap implemented?
Simply walking outside is a gamble. If you've gone outside, you must have violate at least one gambling law.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I agree with all of the above .... With the proviso that the crew person does not have to be a human but can be an NPC ...... And then we are back to frontiers design decision again. I can't remember who wrote it , (it was a while ago I read it) but there was a fantastic section of game design based around ships crew. Earlier elite games had crew in larger ships (very basic) sadly it has been dropped at least for now in ED
Yes, force majeure as I stated. Frontier could have gone out of business.
I think we have plenty of that already don't we?
Frankly all of this stems from an emotional rather than a logical place anyway. Stig just doesn't want Legs in the game due to personal taste ¯\(ツ)/¯
(Guess he should have done his pre-purchase research better
I like the idea of space-feet and would buy that DLC without any pre-reading since FDEV pass my personal taste quality test.
I just don't think its a certainty and won't get all sniffy if it never happens, since that's not what I buy space-ship flying games for.
Edit : unless it was locked 3rd person. But that's not a realistic prospect given their approach to the piloting postion.