Why I think Elite Dangerous is going to dominate the Space MMO/Space Sim genre

[Aewarin Jameson]

nah. There's a reason why there hasn't been an outcry about 2.1 being "pay to win" outside a few sad cases playing semantic games on the forums: it isn't.

Sorry mate, but "expansions" arent pay to win at all. Every MMO or game with expansion has it, either you as a player follows with it or you dont. In WoW if you dont, you get left behind in anything and your char is completly useless if you dont buy that expansion.

Technically Sunleader is correct but it's not viewed that way by a lot of people as it's an "expansion pack".

The thing with other MMOs is that when PvP-Combat is involved (which is the root of the P2Win argument) they separate those with and those without. In WoW expansion packs tend to up the max level and introduce more power creep (bigger, better weapons and armour) However no one cares when it's PvE as you're playing cooperatively but when it comes to PvP-Combat then Blizzard recognised the obvious imbalance and split you you. It is impossible for a current max level 100 player to enter the 75-80 battlegrounds (old max level pre expansion IIRC) so the fact that these level 100 players have paid for the content and ended up with better gear they can't use it against other players. ED does not do this ... Unless mistaken the matchmaking system will lump all open players together : those with and without Horizons DLC. As such it's possible, in combat, to mix players with engineers mods (which they paid for via the expansion pack) and players who don't.

As I said though people don't see it as P2W as it's an "expansion" pack and forget you can be mixed with those that don't have it

 

[Sunleader]

Aye.
But People being Fooled by this doesnt change it.

Its the Funny thing about People being easily Manipulated.

In the Beta. WoW Introduced the Resting Mechanic which made sure that People had a Reason to Play Regularily rather than Blazing through in one Big Leap.
Back then WoW Advertized this as an Overplay Penalty. Which Punished those who would not take Breaks in between.

But People Hated it.
And then Blizzard did something Ultra Simple.
They Renamed it.
Instead of Calling it a Punishment for one Side. They Declared it an Bonus for the Other Side.
WITHOUT CHANGING A SINGLE MECHANIC.
And People Loved it.


This is the same case here.
Engineers is Called an Expansion.
Thats right because it Introduces Content.
But where is the Difference to any usual Pay to Win Package that gives you Super Weapons and Access to other stuff that grants you advantages ?
There is non.
Any Package you Buy for Real Money and which Contains "Content" that is not Available without Paying Real Money. Is in the end just that.
An Expansion or Package of Pay to Play Content.

And if this Content Provides an Advantage that others cannot get in a Direct Competition. Then its called Pay to Win.

But People are Fooled by it being Called an Expansion.
Because the Weapons are Hidden in a Package with other stuff. They dont see it as an Direct Pay to Win Package. But as something introducing Content.

Its the same as when Games like War-Thunder Sell this Package which Contains the Single Player Campaigns etc etc and which also Contains an Aircraft which somehow does everything Better than the other Aircraft Freely Available on this Rank.
If they Sold this Aircraft Directly. Everyone would Yell. "Pay to Win Pay to Win". But because its hidden within the Package nobody sees it.....

 

[Zetta]

Technically Sunleader is correct but it's not viewed that way by a lot of people as it's an "expansion pack".

The thing with other MMOs is that when PvP-Combat is involved (which is the root of the P2Win argument) they separate those with and those without. In WoW expansion packs tend to up the max level and introduce more power creep (bigger, better weapons and armour) However no one cares when it's PvE as you're playing cooperatively but when it comes to PvP-Combat then Blizzard recognised the obvious imbalance and split you you. It is impossible for a current max level 100 player to enter the 75-80 battlegrounds (old max level pre expansion IIRC) so the fact that these level 100 players have paid for the content and ended up with better gear they can't use it against other players. ED does not do this ... Unless mistaken the matchmaking system will lump all open players together : those with and without Horizons DLC. As such it's possible, in combat, to mix players with engineers mods (which they paid for via the expansion pack) and players who don't.

As I said though people don't see it as P2W as it's an "expansion" pack and forget you can be mixed with those that don't have it

If we really wanted to play with technicalities one could say that world PvP opens the P2W door in WoW.
A silly point but technically true.

Spoiler

Aye.
But People being Fooled by this doesnt change it.

Its the Funny thing about People being easily Manipulated.

In the Beta. WoW Introduced the Resting Mechanic which made sure that People had a Reason to Play Regularily rather than Blazing through in one Big Leap.
Back then WoW Advertized this as an Overplay Penalty. Which Punished those who would not take Breaks in between.

But People Hated it.
And then Blizzard did something Ultra Simple.
They Renamed it.
Instead of Calling it a Punishment for one Side. They Declared it an Bonus for the Other Side.
WITHOUT CHANGING A SINGLE MECHANIC.
And People Loved it.


This is the same case here.
Engineers is Called an Expansion.
Thats right because it Introduces Content.
But where is the Difference to any usual Pay to Win Package that gives you Super Weapons and Access to other stuff that grants you advantages ?
There is non.
Any Package you Buy for Real Money and which Contains "Content" that is not Available without Paying Real Money. Is in the end just that.
An Expansion or Package of Pay to Play Content.

And if this Content Provides an Advantage that others cannot get in a Direct Competition. Then its called Pay to Win.

But People are Fooled by it being Called an Expansion.
Because the Weapons are Hidden in a Package with other stuff. They dont see it as an Direct Pay to Win Package. But as something introducing Content.

Its the same as when Games like War-Thunder Sell this Package which Contains the Single Player Campaigns etc etc and which also Contains an Aircraft which somehow does everything Better than the other Aircraft Freely Available on this Rank.
If they Sold this Aircraft Directly. Everyone would Yell. "Pay to Win Pay to Win". But because its hidden within the Package nobody sees it.....

Nobody's being fooled.
People understand that an expansion typically offers better gear, better skills and/or higher stats which all give an advantage.
It's just par for the course.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

If we really wanted to play with technicalities one could say that world PvP opens the P2W door in WoW.
A silly point but technically true.

Indeed, but I purposely left that out so as not to go on a massive long winded essay session.

+1 for being thorough

 

[lysan]

You misunderstand the whole thing of what Star Citizen currently is. It's still a crowd funded project where you buy ingame ships or packages to fund it. Because it's not yet a product, any P2W arguments is not substantiated.

World of Warcraft is P2W. ED isn't. SC certainty isn't because it's still in alpha stage.

Ok, i'd agree with that, however if they continue selling ships or weapons for real money after release, it is P2W.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

More or less agree with OP.

ED: I can play it now, updates might be delayed, but they keep coming. FD might make some mistakes (in my eyes) but overall, progress is good. Communications could be better. They do listen, that is clear, but they lack in the talking department. But hey, i can fly my spaceship when and how I want, and that's all that really matters to me.

NMS: Actually looking forward to this as a side game to play on the PS4, let the kids have a blast as well. It looks like what the Spore space stage should have been like, and i played Spore for hundreds of hours. Its no competitor to Elite though, except perhaps for those looking for a single player game more than a space game, but should still be fun, although not sure how engaging over the long term. I feel that in the long term, it will not be as successful as ED, although it might very well sell more copies, at least in the short term.

SC: Ah, a shame. With their budget, I would have expected they would have already surpassed ED in what the game can do and it would by now have a release. Looking at recent videos, i'm quite glad i never backed the game. Almost did as well. Maybe in a year or two, there will be a released game, but i'm not holding my breath. Maybe in a few years, it might surpass ED in terms of being the better and more popular game. But looking at what seems to be on offer (and possible), i can't see myself switching, and probably many others when push comes to shove. The ship flight model looks terrible, and the character animations.... dear gods, we had better animations 10 years ago. There is still a lot of work to be done with it to make it the better game. Overall, i hope it does turn out to be a good game, more good space games are always welcome... but not convinced at this stage its going to happen.

Others: Nothing else has particularly interested me. Limit Theory, Evochron remake... none really look to offer what i'm looking for.

So, overall, ED is my bet as the long term winner.

 

[Zak Gordon]

I never liked the title of this thread much. Why is it that important an issue? And i 'think' (i could be wrong) it is more reflective on the very public and obvious issues ED has had in relation to how divisive a game it has been amongst Elite fans. So maybe it is a thread title born out of slight desperation and concern over those issues? Atleast that is how i read it, and as i have said i could be wrong on the inner workings of the OP's reasons for the title

Whatever, i'm glad to simply see such a vibrant and wide ranging group of games that deal with space simulation, for a good long while it seemed we were never going to see them again, especially a new Elite (how long were those Elite 4 rumours running - decades!). And while ED has failed to 'grip' me in the same way the previous versions of Elite have, i still do hold out hope that it will be all it can be, one day.

I won't play one exclusively, i love space simulation games too much for that! So bring them on, the more the merrier and i hope the more worthy ones find the success they deserve, and i don't see any one (singular) dominating other any others in particular, i believe there is room for more than one in our lives, and no single one game of those we have listed has everything 100% perfect to void all the others (which is a good thing).

 

[lysan]

I never liked the title of this thread much. Why is it that important an issue? And i 'think' (i could be wrong) it is more reflective on the very public and obvious issues ED has had in relation to how divisive a game it has been amongst Elite fans. So maybe it is a thread title born out of slight desperation and concern over those issues? Atleast that is how i read it, and as i have said i could be wrong on the inner workings of the OP's reasons for the title

Whatever, i'm glad to simply see such a vibrant and wide ranging group of games that deal with space simulation, for a good long while it seemed we were never going to see them again, especially a new Elite (how long were those Elite 4 rumours running - decades!). And while ED has failed to 'grip' me in the same way the previous versions of Elite have, i still do hold out hope that it will be all it can be, one day.

I won't play one exclusively, i love space simulation games too much for that! So bring them on, the more the merrier and i hope the more worthy ones find the success they deserve, and i don't see any one (singular) dominating other any others in particular, i believe there is room for more than one in our lives, and no single one game of those we have listed has everything 100% perfect to void all the others (which is a good thing).

Agree, however I'm not supporting companies that behave like one of the biggest space game KS successes companies are doing ($120 MIL). It just leave a bad taste in your mouth.

 

[PiLhEaD]

...ED: I can play it now, updates might be delayed, but they keep coming. FD might make some mistakes (in my eyes) but overall, progress is good...

One of the biggest concerns I have abt ED for the longer term is FDev's decision making.

CQC and PP were both heralded as 'the next big thing', and I'm not sure either has fulfilled that promise. Engineers might be a nice idea, but has been very badly implemented. Planetary landings are blooming great, and flipping fabulous buggy-bouncing fun-fun-fun. So, a one-in-four 'success', from my point of view. Your experience may be very differerent.

Also, some of the ships and other 'balancings', are mindboggling - e.g. the Keelback, a slower and less manoeuvrable 'fighter/blockade runner' variant of the T6 trader it is based on - fighter-soon^tm or not, this is clearly silly. I could go on, but you get my point.

Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of ED and FDev - they do some great stuff - but I have long felt that the path they take from the design idea to instantiation often doesn't deliver, or translate into, exciting or compelling gameplay for the more casual player. My frustration is doubled when issues are flagged in beta by we who test, FDev drop into their 'it's okay if you don't like it' mode of denial, only to flip when there is a forum meltdown.

I completely get that PP is likely the technical basis for the impending arrival of 'those who shall not be named', but far too often for me FDev seem blind to their snatching of defeat from the jaws of victory, and FDev seem wilfully naive in how they listen to their customer. My trite little mantra is - 'you are never properly listening unless you are prepared to change your mind', whereas waiting until people are up in arms tends to lose customers and/or a lot of goodwill.

Bottom line, I used to be 80% confident about ED's future. It's more like 50% now. In context, SC is at 3%, NMS 85% - I appreciate I am comparing working product with dreams and expectations. As for SQ42 and CoD IW - I really don't care.

 

[K-Rose]

I think NMS will sell a lot more as it's a lot more casual and been better advertised...

This chart shows almost 225,000 copies have so far been pre-ordered in the US
http://www.vgchartz.com/preorders/

That's PS4, and US only...

But then NMS isn't a space sim, it's an exploration/survival game.

I'll be playing both and I think there's plenty of room for a 3rd story driven space game as well.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

One of the biggest concerns I have abt ED for the longer term is FDev's decision making.

CQC and PP were both heralded as 'the next big thing', and I'm not sure either has fulfilled that promise. Engineers might be a nice idea, but has been very badly implemented. Planetary landings are blooming great, and flipping fabulous buggy-bouncing fun-fun-fun. So, a one-in-four 'success', from my point of view. Your experience may be very differerent.

Also, some of the ships and other 'balancings', are mindboggling - e.g. the Keelback, a slower and less manoeuvrable 'fighter/blockade runner' variant of the T6 trader it is based on - fighter-soon^tm or not, this is clearly silly. I could go on, but you get my point.

Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of ED and FDev - they do some great stuff - but I have long felt that the path they take from the design idea to instantiation often doesn't deliver, or translate into, exciting or compelling gameplay for the more casual player. My frustration is doubled when issues are flagged in beta by we who test, FDev drop into their 'it's okay if you don't like it' mode of denial, only to flip when there is a forum meltdown.

I completely get that PP is likely the technical basis for the impending arrival of 'those who shall not be named', but far too often for me FDev seem blind to their snatching of defeat from the jaws of victory, and FDev seem wilfully naive in how they listen to their customer. My trite little mantra is - 'you are never properly listening unless you are prepared to change your mind', whereas waiting until people are up in arms tends to lose customers and/or a lot of goodwill.

Bottom line, I used to be 80% confident about ED's future. It's more like 50% now. In context, SC is at 3%, NMS 85% - I appreciate I am comparing working product with dreams and expectations. As for SQ42 and CoD IW - I really don't care.

Completely agree with you.

The thing with NMS for me is they've only ever shown gameplay footage, what I've seen I like. I remember going to watch Star Wars with my mates, the Horizon's trailer comes up, I have to state (at the time) "yeah that planetary footage attacking together is pretty much a rarity in this game, and the graphics are good, but not that good."

I've said it elsewhere but I got into ED for passengers, mining & general space sim feeling. If passengers don't deliver I'll be really disappointed

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

More or less agree with OP.

ED: I can play it now

Only because it's available now.

Once NMS has been released - revisit this topic. (You may still agree with OP or not)

Once SC has been released - revisit this topic. (You may still agree etc)

Point being - You can only agree with the OP right now as only ED is in production .. once the others start to come online then you can answer the question. until then it's a bit pointless.

 

[lysan]

Only because it's available now.

Once NMS has been released - revisit this topic. (You may still agree with OP or not)

Once SC has been released - revisit this topic. (You may still agree etc)

Point being - You can only agree with the OP right now as only ED is in production .. once the others start to come online then you can answer the question. until then it's a bit pointless.

Yes, and so are every claim being made without proof

NMS not a competitor, this game are so different from ED that its not competing at all.

Only SC would be a direct competitions to ED as CIG/SC are moving closer and close to the same gameplay as ED, in the beginning they want to be different, however as of lately they seem to be steering more in ED's direction.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

NMS not a competitor, this game are so different from ED that its not competing at all.

That is where I believe you are wrong.

It's not a competitor in the sense that it rivals what ED is doing, but more importantly it's a competitor for time - that's the only important thing here. Time. There are only so many hours in a day and each person only has a certain amount of free time to be filled with whatever they please - yes, you can easily split your time and play both (or more) but ultimately that is what each game is competing for .. your time.

 

[Zak Gordon]

You bring up an excellent point Liqua, that of time. It is probably the main reason i have never been able to get into ED so far, it just requires too much of my time to feel i'm making acceptable progress. This is of course subject to different players attitudes, but overall that design convention from the MMO genre is not doing ED the greatest of favours. I'm really hoping NMS is more 'casual' in this respect, and ED's 'time sink' aspects get toned down as it matures.

 

[lysan]

That is where I believe you are wrong.

It's not a competitor in the sense that it rivals what ED is doing, but more importantly it's a competitor for time - that's the only important thing here. Time. There are only so many hours in a day and each person only has a certain amount of free time to be filled with whatever they please - yes, you can easily split your time and play both (or more) but ultimately that is what each game is competing for .. your time.

I don't think so, some people will be attracted to this type of game, others don't.
Normally I play games like witcher and a like for long periods of a time, just because I like the story, however games without a story I play in bursts.

ED is one of my always return to games, just like Arma, DayZ, IL-2, DCS and prepar3D. Then again, there its more to do some missions or get that item or whatever goal you set for the day. NMS simply do not draw me as much, CoD:IW I will play the story campaign the move on, just like the Witcher and Hitman, GTA and so on. Its my opinion that people who already are looking for a replacement for ED already left it mentally and thus not really committed to the game anymore.

The funny part is that they probably still will be on this forum and not on the NMS forums

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

ED is one of my always return to games, just like Arma, DayZ, IL-2, DCS and prepar3D. Then again, there its more to do some missions or get that item or whatever goal you set for the day. NMS simply do not draw me as much, CoD:IW I will play the story campaign the move on, just like the Witcher and Hitman, GTA and so on. Its my opinion that people who already are looking for a replacement for ED already left it mentally and thus not really committed to the game anymore.

All those games compete for your time - when one no longer draws you to them it's ED that you return to and that's OK. The same can be said for me also - I have a plethora of games, ED included, and Diablo 3 is my "go to" when all else fails me.

NMS, SC and perhaps Limit Theory to me are simple new games to add to the collection and compete for my time - if they hold my attention and present new opportunities that my "go to" no longer does then I will switch - same goes for you. Any one of the up and coming games could give you something that ED does not and take over the mantle - you never know.

However until they are released and you have tried them saying "ED is king" is only true whilst the others are not released.

Regardless of the outcome as long as you have fun in your spare time that's all that matters.

And you're right - I come here not for ED, as that's pants, but for the company instead. (NMS afaik does not have a forum bar the steam one)

 

[Insomnia]

Its my opinion that people who already are looking for a replacement for ED already left it mentally and thus not really committed to the game anymore.

ED didn't quite turn up to be what I thought it would be. It's missing way too many game elements and overall basic game design 101 aspects. So I've been looking for other space games for more than a year now. SC seems to be what I'm searching for but I hate the flight model.
I'm not committed to ED these days. FD took care of that splendidly.
But I still play once in a while, perhaps because I bought a X55 specifically for ED. And I had so much fun with the 2.1 AI!

 

[lysan]

ED didn't quite turn up to be what I thought it would be. It's missing way too many game elements and overall basic game design 101 aspects. So I've been looking for other space games for more than a year now. SC seems to be what I'm searching for but I hate the flight model.
I'm not committed to ED these days. FD took care of that splendidly.
But I still play once in a while, perhaps because I bought a X55 specifically for ED. And I had so much fun with the 2.1 AI!

Its good that there is something for all, however until now SC are still just a dream, nothing solid, far from it.
Or is it in your opinion fulfilling you expectation now?

 

[Insomnia]

Its good that there is something for all, however until now SC are still just a dream, nothing solid, far from it.
Or is it in your opinion fulfilling you expectation now?

Agreed.

I was going to write something lengthy, but honestly I don't know. It's too early to know if SC will meet my expectations. Probably not as my expectations are...high.

 

[lysan]

Agreed.

I was going to write something lengthy, but honestly I don't know. It's too early to know if SC will meet my expectations. Probably not as my expectations are...high.

we agree there then I'm more betting on ME:A that will probably suit me fine in between playing all the other games i own. and of course CoD in space, as it seams to be a good story and I'm a sucker for a good space story.