Why does it take so long to fix game issues?

[Genar-Hofoen]

True. Why anyone would play something they don't enjoy past 20 hours is beyond me though, let alone 10hr per day for 50 days. I clearly don't understand insanity development.

I disagree with this.

It is very, very easy to clock up 100's of hours in ED without having achieved much. 20 hours of ED can be easily clocked up just by supercruising around systems and jumping between systems alone. Supercruising around a system is probably the biggest time-consuming event in ED, and there is next to nothing to be gained from it other than "getting from where you are, to somewhere else".

An extreme example of "clocking up hours in ED without actually doing much" is travelling to Hutton Orbital.

Another example - any mission where you have to go looking for a mission-specific USS. You travel to the designated area, then you're simply flying around that area waiting for said USS to spawn - that could take seconds or it could take much, much longer. You're not doing much during that time either, but those minutes and hours are clocking up.

Scavenging on planet surfaces for materials is just one long "drive around until something spawns" - not really doing all that much, but it devours time.

Countless other examples of how the game is deliberately designed to clock up 100's of hours without anything actually being accomplished or much reward given for the time a player spends in the game.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Are we listing out every bug in the game now?

Oooooo.... what about the old "Kill X number of particular faction" missions and only 1 out of 5 of them in the area are actually Mission Targets, even when winged up?

What about some that are actually game breaking like those missions they had to retract do to bugs or the bug induced sensitivity of SRV on an instance with many commanders?

 

[Barking_Mad]

I disagree with this.

It is very, very easy to clock up 100's of hours in ED without having achieved much. 20 hours of ED can be easily clocked up just by supercruising around systems and jumping between systems alone. Supercruising around a system is probably the biggest time-consuming event in ED, and there is next to nothing to be gained from it other than "getting from where you are, to somewhere else".

Surely if you do this knowing it's part of the game and know it's boring, you wouldn't keep doing it? I'm not saying it cant be boring, just......*shrug*

Another example - any mission where you have to go looking for a mission-specific USS. You travel to the designated area, then you're simply flying around that area waiting for said USS to spawn - that could take seconds or it could take much, much longer. You're not doing much during that time either, but those minutes and hours are clocking up.

Again, that sounds like something you don't enjoy doing, on top of getting to the planet, which if super-cruising isn't your thing is also boring. I'd agree the USS on their own aren't great - Sandro suggested this might change in Q4, so fingers crossed.

Scavenging on planet surfaces for materials is just one long "drive around until something spawns" - not really doing all that much, but it devours time.

Don't like super-cruise, don't like USS, don't like driving on planets.

Countless other examples of how the game is deliberately designed to clock up 100's of hours without anything actually being accomplished or much reward given for the time a player spends in the game.

OP quoted 2500 hours. That's 103 days of deliberately inflicted boredom. I'm fairly sure the majority of people who didn't like the game did not spend 2500 hours on it before realising it wasn't their bag?

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Surely if you do this knowing it's part of the game and know it's boring, you wouldn't keep doing it? I'm not saying it cant be boring, just......*shrug*



Again, that sounds like something you don't enjoy doing, on top of getting to the planet, which if super-cruising isn't your thing is also boring. I'd agree the USS on their own aren't great - Sandro suggested this might change in Q4, so fingers crossed.



Don't like super-cruise, don't like USS, don't like driving on planets.



OP quoted 2500 hours. That's 103 days of deliberately inflicted boredom. I'm fairly sure the majority of people who didn't like the game did not spend 2500 hours on it before realising it wasn't their bag?

Um, reading too much into what I'm saying makes for a bad forum experience

Nowhere in my post did I say "I don't like this" - I'd advise re-reading what I wrote, I simply listed factual reasons as to why 100's of hours can be clocked up in ED without doing much. If you disagree that the items I listed are not good examples of how the game mechanics simply clock up game time without much achievement or reward occurring, then I'm open to reasoned debate

I'd absolutely love to know how some people could find utter joy in 90 minutes of supercruise to Hutton Orbital, for example (And yes the run to Hutton Orbital is an extreme example - however shorter runs to other places, even if they "only" take up 20 or 30 minutes, they still clock up time. Time that you're not really doing anything compellingly interesting in-game.)

 

[StuartGT]

I disagree with this.

It is very, very easy to clock up 100's of hours in ED without having achieved much. 20 hours of ED can be easily clocked up just by supercruising around systems and jumping between systems alone. Supercruising around a system is probably the biggest time-consuming event in ED, and there is next to nothing to be gained from it other than "getting from where you are, to somewhere else".

An extreme example of "clocking up hours in ED without actually doing much" is travelling to Hutton Orbital.

Another example - any mission where you have to go looking for a mission-specific USS. You travel to the designated area, then you're simply flying around that area waiting for said USS to spawn - that could take seconds or it could take much, much longer. You're not doing much during that time either, but those minutes and hours are clocking up.

Scavenging on planet surfaces for materials is just one long "drive around until something spawns" - not really doing all that much, but it devours time.

Countless other examples of how the game is deliberately designed to clock up 100's of hours without anything actually being accomplished or much reward given for the time a player spends in the game.

Yep, achieving things in Elite takes a substantial amount of time, and that is made apparent during the first 20 hours of playing.

Now back to my comment that you replied to:

True. Why anyone would play something they don't enjoy past 20 hours is beyond me though, let alone 10hr per day for 50 days. I clearly don't understand insanity development.

Why do you disagree? If after 20 hours someone doesn't enjoy playing a game that takes a long time to achieve anything, why play it for another 480 hours? "this isn't fun, so I'll continue not having fun for a ridiculous amount of time, that is the totally-not-insane thing to do"

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Yep, achieving things in Elite takes a substantial amount of time, and that is made apparent during the first 20 hours of playing.

Now back to my comment that you replied to:

Why to you disagree? If after 20 hours someone doesn't enjoy playing a game that takes a long time to achieve anything, why play it for another 480 hours? "this isn't fun, so I'll continue not having fun for a ridiculous amount of time, that is the totally-not-insane thing to do"

Because you know as well as I do that it'll take way more than 20 hours of pfaffing about ED's mechanics in order to decide whether it really is the game for you or not. There is always that thought of "maybe if I try <this activity> for a bit?" whilst running ED. That, is going to take way more than 20hrs in a game in which travelling alone will quickly eat that time up - and especially if you're just starting out in ED with a Sidewinder.

There are all sorts of things one needs to do before getting equipment which - for example - reduces travelling time; FSD Engineering for one. Unless you're a person who can just sit at their PC/console all day every day and just grind for all the things like Engineering - and a lot of folks aren't in that position - and unless you completely know your way around ED, then 20 hours in ED isn't going to be an accurate measure of "when should someone decide if the game's for them or not".

 

[StuartGT]

Because you know as well as I do that it'll take way more than 20 hours of pfaffing about ED's mechanics in order to decide whether it really is the game for you or not.

It most certainly does not take way more than 20 hours to determine if a game is enjoyable or not.

There is always that thought of "maybe if I try <this activity> for a bit?" whilst running ED. That, is going to take way more than 20hrs in a game in which travelling alone will quickly eat that time up - and especially if you're just starting out in ED with a Sidewinder.

There are all sorts of things one needs to do before getting equipment which - for example - reduces travelling time; FSD Engineering for one. Unless you're a person who can just sit at their PC/console all day every day and just grind for all the things like Engineering - and a lot of folks aren't in that position - and unless you completely know your way around ED, then 20 hours in ED isn't going to be an accurate measure of "when should someone decide if the game's for them or not".

See, that all there sounds bonkers to me.

What it comes down to: "ok, during the first 20 hours I've learned how to fly, and done a few things in this game, did I enjoy myself? If yes, I'll continue playing. If not, I'll go play something else."

I cannot see how any sane person would think "No, I didn't enjoy myself, so I'm gonna continue not enjoying myself, in the hope I find an in-game activity that will provide 5% of enjoyment alongside the 95% of not-enjoyment, instead of playing a game that is actually enjoyable."

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

It most certainly does not take way more than 20 hours to determine if a game is enjoyable or not.


See, that all there sounds bonkers to me.

What it comes down to: "ok, during the first 20 hours I've learned how to fly, and done a few things in this game, did I enjoy myself? If yes, I'll continue playing. If not, I'll go play something else."

I cannot see how any sane person would think "No, I didn't enjoy myself, so I'm gonna continue not enjoying myself, in the hope I find an in-game activity that will provide 5% of enjoyment alongside the 95% of not-enjoyment, instead of playing a game that is actually enjoyable."

Then we're at an impasse.

Part of my job is to listen to end users in many different aspects of IT. Part of it is to listen to providers of IT. And part of it is to come up with solutions that try to satisfy both. I guess that gives me a degree of empathy for all types of users, which I am translating to players of ED. There are going to be a lot of variations in the types of person who play ED - and to me, what I am saying is that it is quite reasonable that some folks might take 480hrs of playing ED in order to decide whether or not they truly enjoy playing it.

I simply don't think that is outwith the bounds of possibility, and to deride a person's opinions merely by dint of how long they have played ED is in my opinion unreasonable.

Like I said - we're at an impasse.

Oh, actually, whereas it might be in Frontiers financial interest in obtaining new players of ED, in my opinion it is also in Frontier's interest to try to keep as many existing and long-term players of ED as they can. I doubt a high turnover of players is good for the game, overall. This means listening to opinions of players who have spent 480hrs and more - and not to simply dimiss their points.

 

[StuartGT]

Then we're at an impasse.

Part of my job is to listen to end users in many different aspects of IT. Part of it is to listen to providers of IT. And part of it is to come up with solutions that try to satisfy both. I guess that gives me a degree of empathy for all types of users, which I am translating to players of ED. There are going to be a lot of variations in the types of person who play ED - and to me, what I am saying is that it is quite reasonable that some folks might take 480hrs of playing ED in order to decide whether or not they truly enjoy playing it.

I simply don't think that is outwith the bounds of possibility, and to deride a person's opinions merely by dint of how long they have played ED is in my opinion unreasonable.

Like I said - we're at an impasse.

Oh, actually, whereas it might be in Frontiers financial interest in obtaining new players of ED, in my opinion it is also in Frontier's interest to try to keep as many existing and long-term players of ED as they can. I doubt a high turnover of players is good for the game, overall. This means listening to opinions of players who have spent 480hrs and more - and not to simply dimiss their points.

At no point have I implied that FDev shouldn't listen to feedback and suggestions from current or former long-term players.

 

[verminstar]

At no point have I implied that FDev shouldn't listen to feedback and suggestions from current or former long-term players.

Unfortunately, many others have and quite openly...and that is more a part of the problem than the solution as it sends very mixed signals...

"We should start listening"
"To who?"
"Our white knights say we shouldnt listen to anyone"
"Problem solved...that was easy so whats fer tea?"

Seems they took the easy way out by just ignoring everyone.

A quick browse through the first page then reveals a number of players who question the validity of all opinions based on their skill in programming.

A quick browse through the first page also reveals how long term players on a break are told to stay away and not comment at all.

While this is all well and good and passes the time, it does point to some very illogical points of view and some very unimaginative people with all the wit of a second hand bogroll ^

 

[Stigbob]

Unfortunately, many others have and quite openly...and that is more a part of the problem than the solution as it sends very mixed signals...

"We should start listening"
"To who?"
"Our white knights say we shouldnt listen to anyone"
"Problem solved...that was easy so whats fer tea?"

Seems they took the easy way out by just ignoring everyone.

A quick browse through the first page then reveals a number of players who question the validity of all opinions based on their skill in programming.

A quick browse through the first page also reveals how long term players on a break are told to stay away and not comment at all.

While this is all well and good and passes the time, it does point to some very illogical points of view and some very unimaginative people with all the wit of a second hand bogroll ^

As with everything else it depends.

A player who has taken a break, or doesn't like mining, or wants exploration improvements by all means they should be listened to.

On the other hand you've got ex-players melting down about everything everyday years after they quit in some cases. They are the ones who are not worth listening to.

Brok mentioned he's in another gaming forum where ragequitters are banned by the mods just to keep toxicity down. It sounds draconian, but as time goes on with every game there are more and more ex-players. Most people play something else no game lasts forever, but the edge cases hang around bitterly resenting anyone who still enjoys themselves. The more time elapses the more bitter edge cases there are and the more bitter they seem to be.

 

[Achilles7]

As with everything else it depends.

A player who has taken a break, or doesn't like mining, or wants exploration improvements by all means they should be listened to.

On the other hand you've got ex-players melting down about everything everyday years after they quit in some cases. They are the ones who are not worth listening to.

Brok mentioned he's in another gaming forum where ragequitters are banned by the mods just to keep toxicity down. It sounds draconian, but as time goes on with every game there are more and more ex-players. Most people play something else no game lasts forever, but the edge cases hang around bitterly resenting anyone who still enjoys themselves. The more time elapses the more bitter edge cases there are and the more bitter they seem to be.

Tbf though, Elite's die hard apologists (3 of whom spring to mind) with their consistently antagonistic agendas - towards players who simply voice their concerns & frustrations about a vid game with which they are undoubtedly invested - are much, much worse in all respects....don't you think?

Hmmm...on reflection, no, you probably don't! [squeeeee]

It's also quite amusing that these aforementioned 'guardians of the galaxy' are allowed by the mods to troll other posters for expressing an opinion about a product for which they've paid good money...I guess, special dispensation is in order due to their blinkered allegiance. I've attempted to redress the balance on a few occasions but been pulled up for (quote) 'excessive trolling', which was pretty annoying because I thought I had hit upon just the right amount!

 

[Stigbob]

Tbf though, Elite's die hard apologists (3 of whom spring to mind) with their consistently antagonistic agendas - towards players who simply voice their concerns & frustrations about a vid game with which they are undoubtedly invested - are much, much worse in all respects....don't you think?

Die hard apologist or people who like the video game ?.

Hmmm...on reflection, no, you probably don't! [squeeeee]

I complain when somethings broken, it's mild complaining and it takes the form of accurate feedback and bug reports with no name calling or dev bashing. I don't get angry at people who disagree either. So it might not really stand out as actual complaining in the background of this forum.

It's also quite amusing that these aforementioned 'guardians of the galaxy' are allowed by the mods to troll other posters for expressing an opinion about a product for which they've paid good money...I guess, special dispensation is in order due to their blinkered allegiance. I've attempted to redress the balance on a few occasions but been pulled up for (quote) 'excessive trolling', which was pretty annoying because I thought I had hit upon just the right amount!

Nope the mod conspiracy isn't a real thing. People who see conspiracies also tend to get abusive, they are just upset and overinvested so that's how they come across. They can't differentiate different opinion from personal slur so they go overboard and get infractions.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Unfortunately, many others have and quite openly...and that is more a part of the problem than the solution as it sends very mixed signals...

"We should start listening"
"To who?"
"Our white knights say we shouldnt listen to anyone"
"Problem solved...that was easy so whats fer tea?"

FD does listen to everyone capable to formalize their feedback in civil manner. If you really think that we somehow have sort of magic power over FD that they suddenly don't hear anyone else - it just doesn't work that way.

It feels more that people with their grievances does not want to be challenged, for some reason. That's something I have seen everywhere - heck, I get defensive when someone says my experience doesn't fit with his and everything feels ok to him. It is just human nature.

But FD does listen. Issue is many people with very strong views and criticisms sometimes ignore other narratives, including FD ones. That of course excludes obvious bugs, which needs to be fixed. But people with opinions of gameplay or how it should be constructed or conveyed will always feel very strongly that devs should listen to them - and do what they want them to do.

When it doesn't happen, people turn salty.

 

[Soulstain]

Has nothing to do with "white knight" approach- has everything to do with actual truth and data available. For example- your initial assumption that the game had been out for 5 years (which you admitted to being wrong about after being called out on it) but you're surely adamant that you're "right" on everything else.

How about actually taking a step back and realizing that perceptions may differ and there's no "right or wrong" in regard to how people may perceive them?

Apples for some, oranges for others. That's the great thing about choice- if ED isn't everyone's cup of tea, there's others out there. Again, why does ED need to be exactly like everything else out there for some to be content? Why can't it be its own game?

You seem to be conveniently ignoring the game was released long before Dec 2014. I guess all of the time people were playing Alpha, Beta and Gamma doesn’t exist. There were no open betas for NMS.

These games are much more similar than not in my opinion.

Both games:
1. Hyped beyond what they released as.
2. Released before they were ready.
3. Both had to offer refunds (or do you forget single player offline dropped right before launch)
4. Both had trailers that didn’t represent actual gameplay.
5. Both filled with bugs.
6. Both suffered from crashes.
7. Both suffered from FPS issues even on high end rigs.
8. Both lacked content (not sure if you were around during gamma when people claimed we were only seeing a vertical slice of the content and 1.0 was going to magically patch in all the missing content)

I could go on. One company then released a paid update a year later for roughly the same price as the original game. Still no multiple commander slots, paid cosmetics, lifetime passes. The other company filled the game in with several large updates for free over the last 2 years and promising to continue to provide more for free making their profits strictly off new game sales.

This is is really what the discussion is about when it comes to comparing these two space games and not how different the flight models, graphics or solar systems are.

 

[m0rl0ck]

Are we listing out every bug in the game now?

Oooooo.... what about the old "Kill X number of particular faction" missions and only 1 out of 5 of them in the area are actually Mission Targets, even when winged up?

This one is a classic, one of my favorites. The only times those missions work is pirates in a system with a res site. Otherwise i guess they are just there to troll noobs, because they obviously arent going to fix them.

 

[Lobstris]

<Wanders by> 1. Regarding 'games are more complex than cars' - FWIW Modern cars have lots of 3rd party components, all talking over CAN bus, using mishmashes of proprietary and 3rd party software, thus you can end up with potentially 100m+ lines of code. Anyone any idea how many lines make a typical AAA game? I'd hazard a guess at the low millions. 2. The original name of the DDF *WAS* 'Design Decision Forum' - go have a look at the Kickstarter page.

Pledge £300 or more. Be a design decision forum member, plus all rewards above. Estimated delivery Jan 2013.

. It was changed later, and caused a bit of a stink at the time IIRC. However, it's still archived as the 'Design Decision Forum' on these very boards. Though, whether it was/is 'decision' or 'discussion' is a moot point now, as that group is technically defunct, and E: D, is, what it currently is. <Wanders back out again...>

​

 

[Flimley]

I think the reason it takes so long to fix issues is global warming.! Or conspiracy theories, or microwaves.

Flimley

 

[Shinji Ikari]

FD does listen to everyone capable to formalize their feedback in civil manner. If you really think that we somehow have sort of magic power over FD that they suddenly don't hear anyone else - it just doesn't work that way.

It feels more that people with their grievances does not want to be challenged, for some reason. That's something I have seen everywhere - heck, I get defensive when someone says my experience doesn't fit with his and everything feels ok to him. It is just human nature.

But FD does listen. Issue is many people with very strong views and criticisms sometimes ignore other narratives, including FD ones. That of course excludes obvious bugs, which needs to be fixed. But people with opinions of gameplay or how it should be constructed or conveyed will always feel very strongly that devs should listen to them - and do what they want them to do.

When it doesn't happen, people turn salty.

Well, none of Mengy's suggestion or the suggestion to get back double neutron star boosts materialized yet they were rather civil requests.

 

[Stigbob]

Well, none of Mengy's suggestion or the suggestion to get back double neutron star boosts materialized yet they were rather civil requests.

That doesn't mean dropping any semblance of civility would work any better.