Why ED should ignore the forums and love the silent mob (This is not about the current quality of Odyssey)

dannysquid

dannysquid
Morbad said:
I'm not saying Frontier hasn't failed in their goals with Odyssey. I'm saying that neither the collective nor individual desires of the player base, let alone the forum subset, are likely to align with Frontier's.
Click to expand...
I think ED is a bit of a special case when it comes to what players want vs what Frontier want.

If you're doing a rock-climbing game or a sniper game or even a fantasy RPG then there are fairly clear boundaries and areas where you can obviously expand the experience, but if you're attempting to simulate an entire galaxy there's no way you can give every player whatever fantasy version of the game they want. There are simply too many things you can do and too many things you'll break if you do them.

If the game was still being developed in a hundred years time the forum would be full of threads complaining that the water-skiing isn't effected by gravity and that wax doesn't get stuck in my pet cat's fur when I'm doing batik...

...and that powerplay is broken and when will we get ship interiors so I've got somewhere to keep my collection of historically-accurate vintage underwear.
 

Raliel

Raliel
I would be very mindful of stating that a proportion of the player base has a particular mental illness...
 

Old Duck

Old Duck
ObiW said:
Well... I'm not a big base building fan myself - the games in my library that feature it (Fallout 4, NMS, X4) I only dipped my toes in it very briefly (although I can see myself getting more into it with X4 as those are space stations, not buildings i.e. different scope) as I don't have a lot of interest in that kind of stuff but can see how others would.
Click to expand...
Consider this - you won't need to enjoy building bases in order to enjoy player bases. I refer you to an old thread of mine:

Space Engineers - "Open" Changes Everything

My love for Space Engineers is well known, but I eventually hit the "What's the point of it all?" wall in my Solo game. The worlds are beautiful, but empty. NPCs are literally empty ships on autopilot just going through waypoints, and the various assets are also empty and cookie-cutter. NMS or...
forums.frontier.co.uk

SE is an extreme example, since planets are completely empty in single player mode unless you use mods. Still even populated planets in ED only have a few installations and bases, and a common complaint I read about Odyssey is that all these bases are samey after awhile. Now imagine if the galaxy starts getting populated by custom player bases, each unique and diverse. Would that not make the galaxy feel more alive?

My "end game" goal in No Man's Sky is to head towards one of the commonwealths where players have converted a swath of the galaxy into a collection of player-populated planets. I've even heard of proper cities being built there! That just takes the game to a whole other level, something that cookie-cutter NPC bases cannot do.

BTW, I like building bases, but they are very humble and simple. There are a surprising number of players who are pure architectural geniuses, and I can't wait to see what they've built in NMS!
 

dannysquid

dannysquid
Old Duck said:
Consider this - you won't need to enjoy building bases in order to enjoy player bases. I refer you to an old thread of mine:

Space Engineers - "Open" Changes Everything

My love for Space Engineers is well known, but I eventually hit the "What's the point of it all?" wall in my Solo game. The worlds are beautiful, but empty. NPCs are literally empty ships on autopilot just going through waypoints, and the various assets are also empty and cookie-cutter. NMS or...
forums.frontier.co.uk

SE is an extreme example, since planets are completely empty in single player mode unless you use mods. Still even populated planets in ED only have a few installations and bases, and a common complaint I read about Odyssey is that all these bases are samey after awhile. Now imagine if the galaxy starts getting populated by custom player bases, each unique and diverse. Would that not make the galaxy feel more alive?

My "end game" goal in No Man's Sky is to head towards one of the commonwealths where players have converted a swath of the galaxy into a collection of player-populated planets. I've even heard of proper cities being built there! That just takes the game to a whole other level, something that cookie-cutter NPC bases cannot do.

BTW, I like building bases, but they are very humble and simple. There are a surprising number of players who are pure architectural geniuses, and I can't wait to see what they've built in NMS!
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think it's a shame they haven't gone for base-building as it's a thing I enjoy too, and construction games are something FD excel at. Dunno, is it maybe that it's too much of a task to make the AI adaptive to any and all situations/layouts? Is it too much info to network? Or is it just that they want to make flying around the primary thing?
 

Dextio

D
True Phoenix said:
I've had an epiphany. I was watching a utube video that Drew was casting, streaming NMS. In it there was a brief discussion about realism versus fun and it rang a bell.

Some people want absolute realism in a game or as close to realism as they can get. Others are happy to play games (not just NMS by the way) that stretch realism toward the boundary of, well, lets call it sci-fi science.

The most vocal seem to be those who suffer angst over the smallest issue or are so focused on one small element of the game that they cannot see anything beyond that point. The concentration on such minor points or a particular feature leads to an almost OCD like condition, where the person cannot move forward unless their complaint is prioritised by the community team and the Dev's to the exclusion of everything else.

Others want to play, relax, have fun and just enjoy the experience. The more laid back player can ignore small annoyances and does not feel the need to dominate the forums with discussions relating to switch placements, panel colours etc. The more relaxed players can enjoy the experience and only pop up on the forums when they find something new in-game or want to share an experience. They do not feel the need to constantly repeat the single themed but slightly reworded thread titles that abound.

Clearly this leads to a forum bias, where the more OCD "focused" players shout much louder for their immersion needs than those who are just enjoying the galaxy. Therefore the content of the forums isn't necessarily reflective of the whole player base experience and (with the exception of the Odyssey build) should be, in the main, ignored by ED.
Click to expand...

Interesting hypothesis, but I don't think many of the negative threads in the Forum are written by those who suffer OCD. Perhaps some though.

There could be a variety of reasons why people can't relax and seemingly enjoy a videogame for what it is, entertainment. I'm sure many will have no problem sharing why (probably already have).

Edit: I will admit though, that having OCD-like tendencies focused on a game, doesnt help much. (Speaking as someone with OCD-like tendencies [luckily not re: the game])
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 182079

D
Old Duck said:
Consider this - you won't need to enjoy building bases in order to enjoy player bases. I refer you to an old thread of mine:

Space Engineers - "Open" Changes Everything

My love for Space Engineers is well known, but I eventually hit the "What's the point of it all?" wall in my Solo game. The worlds are beautiful, but empty. NPCs are literally empty ships on autopilot just going through waypoints, and the various assets are also empty and cookie-cutter. NMS or...
forums.frontier.co.uk

SE is an extreme example, since planets are completely empty in single player mode unless you use mods. Still even populated planets in ED only have a few installations and bases, and a common complaint I read about Odyssey is that all these bases are samey after awhile. Now imagine if the galaxy starts getting populated by custom player bases, each unique and diverse. Would that not make the galaxy feel more alive?

My "end game" goal in No Man's Sky is to head towards one of the commonwealths where players have converted a swath of the galaxy into a collection of player-populated planets. I've even heard of proper cities being built there! That just takes the game to a whole other level, something that cookie-cutter NPC bases cannot do.

BTW, I like building bases, but they are very humble and simple. There are a surprising number of players who are pure architectural geniuses, and I can't wait to see what they've built in NMS!
Click to expand...
Can't see myself getting into SE but X4, NMS and Elite (when it starts working again) are quite the troika in terms of space gaming - X4 gives me a rich and deep space-only environment (where honestly I don't even miss planetary environments as such), NMS for a more relaxed, gamey and content-dense on-foot environment (with weak space flying tacked on) and Elite is the overlap between the two.

I haven't really spent much time in the multiplayer aspect of NMS - I usually prefer single player experiences, yet I always play in Open in Elite, which especially since EDO's launch feels mostly like one anyways - might actually be a good idea to try it out and visit some of those bases so I don't have to build one myself.

I tried to get into Fallout 4's base building for a while but the nukular-shabby-chic style isn't all that appealing to me visually speaking. And I prefer to RP as the lone wanderer type in that game anyways (similar to Elite incidentally).
 

Raliel

Raliel
[MEOW] babelfisch said:
If it helps. Might I suggest to seek professional help though? You probably already did, but sometimes it takes several attempts until you find the right person. You are not losing anything by not giving up.
Click to expand...
pat on the head time, thank you for caring, gosh you have made me a whole better person... (as it happens currently undergoing quite thorough mental health care)
 

Franc Kaos

Franc Kaos
Raliel said:
pat on the head time, thank you for caring, gosh you have made me a whole better person... (as it happens currently undergoing quite thorough mental health care)
Click to expand...
Wasn't sure a like was the appropriate response to your statement, so, in the immortal words of Spock, 'Live long and prosper.' 🖖 and 'Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.'
Peace, love and respect - o7
 

True Phoenix

True Phoenix
Well that was interesting, I've read all the responses and noted the "likes".

If anyone who identifies as OCD feels that because someone used "OCD" in a phrase is somehow denigrated, I'm afraid that individual(s) has misread the intention of the thread or the use of a common phrase. However, I respect your right to feel offended, even if the offense hasn't occurred. Its quite typical of society to take offense these days and who am I to questions the ways of society. Indeed, I find myself more distant from society than at any other time of my life, including my public service.

There were a number of likes for my OP which may have been in support of some, or all of the sentiment I put forward. Whilst I did not seek "likes" it is interesting that I may not be just a maverick free thinker.

Nothing I have seen has made me sway from my thought that video/computer games are a form of entertainment to be enjoyed, rather than dissected in its smallest elements to find fault, angst or other self torment.
 

AkenBosch

AkenBosch
Alec Turner said:
Nah, it's more nuanced than that. It's about some fine level of detail bothering you when you know it shouldn't (for example the fact that the shield percentage display on the HUD is about 2 degrees out of alignment with the ship hologram above it).
Click to expand...

Yeah, you hit that spot on. As someone suffering from a range of (fortunately very mild on the scale) symmetry disorders, ranging from "ok, the car is misaligned to the walkway by three cm, but who cares I'm too tired to move it again" to "I'm totally going to be late to work, but the bedsheet corners need to be perfectly overlapped at 90°", with some bits of "I need to take a round breath. That was not round, I need to take a round one", and other funny stuff like that when I feel particularly anxious, I can say yours is a correct description of what a very mild condition is: "It's about some fine level of detail bothering you when you know it shouldn't". With the only caveat that the level of "bothering" can be quite substantial.

That slightly off center shield percentage bothers me, but not nearly enough to make me feel discomfortable. Someone suffering by a stronger condition could get to the point of feeling physically ill just by something as minor as that. OC is a spectrum like autism, not a binary condition, and the line after which disorders become a debilitating disease can be hard to identify at times and depending on a high number of conditions and circumstances. But exactly as autism, it can be devastating in the most serious cases. It's a tricky topic and one mostly down to cultural customs and someone's own perception of the "weight" of a word. "OCD" as a term is widely used and generally not considered too harmful, while a term like "autism" is an immediate red flag, even though the milder forms of Asperger are barely distinguishable from just a peculiar OCD (and the family of disorders is the same at large). Tricky topic, as I said.

And that said, I genuinely think that all this outrage by some people at how the term has been used here, given the context and what the OP rather clearly meant to communicate, is just stirring the pot for the sake of stirring it, from the usual suspects.
 

Celedon

C
AkenBosch said:
Yeah, you hit that spot on. As someone suffering from a range of (fortunately very mild on the scale) symmetry disorders, ranging from "ok, the car is misaligned to the walkway by three cm, but who cares I'm too tired to move it again" to "I'm totally going to be late to work, but the bedsheet corners need to be perfectly overlapped at 90°", with some bits of "I need to take a round breath. That was not round, I need to take a round one", and other funny stuff like that when I feel particularly anxious, I can say yours is a correct description of what a very mild condition is: "It's about some fine level of detail bothering you when you know it shouldn't". With the only caveat that the level of "bothering" can be quite substantial.

That slightly off center shield percentage bothers me, but not nearly enough to make me feel discomfortable. Someone suffering by a stronger condition could get to the point of feeling physically ill just by something as minor as that. OC is a spectrum like autism, not a binary condition, and the line after which disorders become a debilitating disease can be hard to identify at times and depending on a high number of conditions and circumstances. But exactly as autism, it can be devastating in the most serious cases. It's a tricky topic and one mostly down to cultural customs and someone's own perception of the "weight" of a word. "OCD" as a term is widely used and generally not considered too harmful, while a term like "autism" is an immediate red flag, even though the milder forms of Asperger are barely distinguishable from just a peculiar OCD (and the family of disorders is the same at large). Tricky topic, as I said.

And that said, I genuinely think that all this outrage by some people at how the term has been used here, given the context and what the OP rather clearly meant to communicate, is just stirring the pot for the sake of stirring it, from the usual suspects.
Click to expand...
What's a round breath?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom