Why is ship interiors something that is not planned to be included if at least half the player base wants it?

While we are at it, I want "Suit Interiors" too.......
Fjc54zM.jpeg
 
?????
What do you call this?
The internals locations on SC ships is mostly set. Yes, you can change out the turrets and what would be considered core internals in ED, but they go in the same place. What you can not do, is swap cargo modules for a fighter/srv bay, armor package, passenger compartments, etc. There are no optional internals like in ED. SC ships are a bit more purpose built than ED ships. (Almost any ED ship can be outfit to do nearly anything) It's not better or worse, it's just different design philosophy.

I still want ship interiors in ED. I don't think we are going to get them. At least not on the same level as SC. That's OK. I still enjoy the spaceship portion of the game just fine.
 
They want to be able to get a full expansion price out of us for the feature. And then sell ship interior color palettes and customizations in the ARX shop.
 
LOL "Living in the galaxy"

That is as an empty characterization as they come. When was the last time you did anything in this game that was about "living" in ED?

ED has been about shooting, scooping and scanning.
 
Last edited:
They want to be able to get a full expansion price out of us for the feature. And then sell ship interior color palettes and customizations in the ARX shop.
The question is: do they have what it takes to offer the ship interiors AND enough gameplay content to be worth its weight of peanuts.
Because if it's like Odyssey...
 
for those who want to play solo on ED, what are you doing here? ... you have video games like X REBIRTH, or a lot of space single players. ED is not a single player, but a "multiplayer space simulator!" and therefore the subject of immersion is its natural path.

That is why the creation of boat interiors is so important, anyone who has tried SC knows that the most striking mechanism is this, since if what you are looking for is PVP or space PVE, there are also other lower quality options on the market that also provide it.
 
Because video games made my a publicly traded company that answer to a board of directors and share holders are more worried about profit then what is fun.

Indeed, because Frontier is a company, needs to pay hundreds of people and make a profit. It's not a public service.

Let me provide some of my experience running an education course. Major feedback was students wanted more practice questions. And then I looked at the stats on how many students did the practice tests we created, and it was about a quarter of the class. So a quarter of the class really, really want practice questions and make a huge amount of noise about it, and three-quarters can't be arsed. So is more practice questions actually a good use of staff resources? This also introduces the concept of resources. How hard is it to do things? The harder and more resources to do something, the higher the threshold to make it viable.

Thus, no ship interiors. Shrug and move on.
 
Indeed, because Frontier is a company, needs to pay hundreds of people and make a profit. It's not a public service.

Let me provide some of my experience running an education course. Major feedback was students wanted more practice questions. And then I looked at the stats on how many students did the practice tests we created, and it was about a quarter of the class. So a quarter of the class really, really want practice questions and make a huge amount of noise about it, and three-quarters can't be arsed. So is more practice questions actually a good use of staff resources? This also introduces the concept of resources. How hard is it to do things? The harder and more resources to do something, the higher the threshold to make it viable.

Thus, no ship interiors. Shrug and move on.
That's an appeal to the most easily satisfied argument - lowest quality product you can get away with.

Were the students asking for more questions the ones most likely to pass, and / or with the best results? Is the purpose of the course to teach as effectively as possible or churn as many through the door as cheaply as possible?

Should you just cater to the most easily satisfied with the least? They're probably the people you can sell just about anything to anyway. Still, I suppose it works for the likes of EA, churning out barely tweaked versions of FIFA year after year, that's what all game companies should emulate eh? Wouldn't it be a great world if everyone only catered for the widest, easiest audience? What you'd actually get then is a few very successful and the rest dropping out, unable to compete, which is why some businesses aim for a more complicated but less catered for niche. E:D is already somewhat in that area.
 
Indeed, because Frontier is a company, needs to pay hundreds of people and make a profit. It's not a public service.

Let me provide some of my experience running an education course. Major feedback was students wanted more practice questions. And then I looked at the stats on how many students did the practice tests we created, and it was about a quarter of the class. So a quarter of the class really, really want practice questions and make a huge amount of noise about it, and three-quarters can't be arsed. So is more practice questions actually a good use of staff resources? This also introduces the concept of resources. How hard is it to do things? The harder and more resources to do something, the higher the threshold to make it viable.

Thus, no ship interiors. Shrug and move on.
So... if I understand correctly, most of the ED players don't want ship interior because three quarters of your students, for one reason or another, haven't done practical questions ?
And you are absolutely certain that there can be no others reasons than "don't care" that may explain why 3/4 of the students did not participate ?

Because in my experience, when i look at Odyssey, i can see why the reception hasn't matched the strength with which the on-foot gameplay has been asked. And that's not because most of players don't care about it.
 
That's an appeal to the most easily satisfied argument - lowest quality product you can get away with.

Were the students asking for more questions the ones most likely to pass, and / or with the best results? Is the purpose of the course to teach as effectively as possible or churn as many through the door as cheaply as possible?

Should you just cater to the most easily satisfied with the least? They're probably the people you can sell just about anything to anyway. Still, I suppose it works for the likes of EA, churning out barely tweaked versions of FIFA year after year, that's what all game companies should emulate eh? Wouldn't it be a great world if everyone only catered for the widest, easiest audience? What you'd actually get then is a few very successful and the rest dropping out, unable to compete, which is why some businesses aim for a more complicated but less catered for niche. E:D is already somewhat in that area.
I guess the people that want the practice questions are the people that don’t understand the subject. :)
 
Speak for yourself. My doctor says I need to cut down on fun, so I'd like FDev to make the game less entertaining.


Sorry @Rubbernuke
 
Back
Top Bottom