Why nobody thanks Frontier for the recent patch? For the 1st time they LISTENED TO US and made changes that we actually asked! So: THANK YOU FRONTIER

OIP (2).jpg
 
You can change a thing without making it significantly worse though.
Why FDev felt that more clicks and less information was an improvement I will never understand.
The very same goes for engineering.
It's not in my view. It's much better in my view. And we actually get more information, just in more logical places.
 
The UI has never been my issue, my issues have always been about broken lighting, texturing, frame rates, incompletable missions, missing biology, invisible rocks, crashes, more broken missions, entire categories of missions stopping being widely available... lack of gameplay depth, terrible planet rendering, other miscellaneous bugs that just seem to crop up everywhere... being led to believe we were going to experience a full and working DLC (some content is still being held back from us) especially after playtesting the Alpha and being assured all the time that we were playing an older version than that which we would be getting, and discovering that instead, we have all the issues we had even at the beginning of Alpha, plus a whole lot more for good measure.
What depth do you want. Are you confusing complexity and depth?

The only issue I have is frame rates, but even then it plays at an acceptable frame rate (yes, it should be much better). As to missions, are these not dependent on the status of the BGS?

Planets look great to me.
 
Frontier has a much longer and consistent pattern of breaking things than doing things right. So they fixed a UI they broke. That's the bare minimum. After much investigations into the pathways of their improvements and fixes over the years, I've concluded praise isn't something they deserve. Give me a record of delivering quality and then we can talk about giving them positive reinforcement.
 
What depth do you want. Are you confusing complexity and depth?

The only issue I have is frame rates, but even then it plays at an acceptable frame rate (yes, it should be much better). As to missions, are these not dependent on the status of the BGS?

Planets look great to me.
SOME planets look good, some do not, I would like missions to actually be playable at least, rather than not spawning, depth and complexity are not the same thing, both would be nice, but stringing missions in a narrative way would be nice, making them about something other than grinding for stuff
 
You can change a thing without making it significantly worse though.
Why FDev felt that more clicks and less information was an improvement I will never understand.
The very same goes for engineering.
So tell us: what information did disapear?
 
How can you
I mean, they've implemented quite a few changes in the UI that are exactly what we asked for and what most people (including myself) complained about. Why don't I see anyone saying that it is nice? I mean, they deserve the praise!
How can you praise such a minuscule level of progress?
Thousands of players have bought a full-priced DLC that is broken not just with its new content but with numerous elements that were perfectly working with Horizons!
All they have managed to fix is the shield percentage and the UI for a month a half following the game's official release!!!
There are numerous other bugs that weren't present in Horizons and numerous others in the present Odyssey gameplay still not fixed.
Major points of their supposed update are still failing: NPC movement, lighting, etc.
Brand new bugs like the messed-up character icons are appearing.
At this rate of "success" Star Citizen will be finished sooner than Odyssey.
And you want to encourage that level of progress? Have some self-respect as a customer.
Players like you that encourage such a ridiculous level of service are why this game is here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Conversations have been had about convertion to walkways. I trust this information fully satisfies your curiousity and WILL NOT lead to supplimentary questions, which, in theory I will be delighted to answer (after full consultation, clearance at the highest level, etc.).

I will have to consult with my legal team, and get back to you on this. They need to decide if my curiosity is fully satiated, but the signs are good. Thank you for your update to the pathways of the Holy Roadmap.
 
So tell us: what information did disapear?
Just a quick couple of examples:

Can you tell me what engineering is applied to your modules in the Outfitting menu?
Can you tell me what modules your ships have from the Ship management screen?

Maybe it‘s fixed now but this kind of information wasn’t available prior to update 5.
 
well just got a flame warning for the troll image... and it appears to have been removed, oh well. My point was that it is exhausting trying to explain why there are issues sometimes....
 
I think Update 5 was a step forward. For example, cockpit lighting and and starfield looks better. I run most of my time in ship (not on the ground), so this update will have me playing more in Odyssey than I have previously.

My $0.02
 
So tell us: what information did disapear?
Oh, and don’t forget the “hold to target” while your whole galaxy map moves around.
Or scrolling with a mouse wheel through a list of settlements also zooms in/out the whole system map.

Those are all things that should not be there in the first place.
 
Last edited:
I think Update 5 was a step forward. For example, cockpit lighting and and starfield looks better. I run most of my time in ship (not on the ground), so this update will have me playing more in Odyssey than I have previously.

My $0.02
Yes, the lighting is definitely better. But it was one of the things that was broken by FDEV in the first place so we shouldn’t be obliged to thank them for this fix.
Which was the whole point of this thread.
 
Just a quick couple of examples:

Can you tell me what engineering is applied to your modules in the Outfitting menu?
Can you tell me what modules your ships have from the Ship management screen?

Maybe it‘s fixed now but this kind of information wasn’t available prior to update 5.
 
Last edited:
SOME planets look good, some do not.
So not different to horizons then.

I would like missions to actually be playable at least, rather than not spawning.
That's unfortunate for you. They seem to work okay for me.

Depth and complexity are not the same thing, both would be nice, but stringing missions in a narrative way would be nice, making them about something other than grinding for stuff
Your missions can be about something, that's were the BGS comes into it. The difference with this game and others is that this game doesn't spoon feed it to you. You need to choose yourself.

I have never in all the years I have been playing, played just to engineer my modules, suits or weapons.

I have long term goals, and some of this will include engineering, but what I don't do is grind away, hating every moment of it to get it. Just so I can do the same stuff that I could do without the engineered stuff.

Yes, there is depth, it's just not shoved in your face.

Saying that, I would like to see some better missions structure, that involves your ships as well as on foot sections. Hopefully they will look at that in the future (it was intimated that they were in a live stream).

Yes it is annoying things didn't go to plan on launch, but I've still had a great time playing the game, even with its issues.

Personally I really don't want overly complex mechanics, they just get frustrating and annoying after a while. Challenging yes, complex no thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom