Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Elite: Dangerous - Design documents are only "guidelines" ?
SpottyGekko
Member EpicPosts: 6,916
A discussion thread on the official E:D forums brought and interesting "fact" to light:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=123447
The often quoted DDA and DDF (Design Document Archive and Forums) is not actually a list of features that FD have committed to develop for the game. It turns out that FD are actually unwilling to commit to any of the features in those documents.
The official response was: "Some of it will be, but there'll also be other things added."
Iirc, these design documents were an integral part of the Kickstarter funding process. I still frequently see people in forum discussions saying things like: "Have patience, that feature is in the DDF, therefore it will be added at some future point".
Now it appears that nothing in the DDF is actually guaranteed for the future of E:D ?
It seems that "priorities have changed".
Again.
FD got their funding and the game has launched. Now all bets are off. It somehow reminded me of the title of one of Douglas Adams' books: "So long, and thanks for all the fish".
Comments
Am I missing the 'official response' in that thread, not seeing the cooment. Anyhow design plans are always subject to change throughout development, expecting otherwise is unreasonable.
Something to note, the DDF is a list of proposals not contracts.
Subject to change, read the EULA.
THEY own the game, you just bought a playing permit as long as they feel like it. It is like that in every game.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
True. However, it's bad when a project doesn't achieve many of its goals. Bad things lead to customer dissatisfaction, which is what we see here. Whether customer dissatisfaction matters or not is another matter.
At the same time this is the official forums and like forums everywhere, if people aren't complaining then you're doing something wrong
I think it's more due to open development in this case, people can treasure hunt details or comments that they then call the devs out on. Imagine how things will be when certain features are delayed, postponed or even cut for Star Citizen...
Lets say you wanted to travel around the world and you asked people for money to help you do it.
You end up getting 1000 dollars.
How far do you think you would get?
Its an indie project folks!!! Sheesh!! figure it out. You can only do so much with what you have. Are they supposed to magically pull features out of their ass with no money? Man, gamers are just whiny babies these days with no sense of reality. Gimme gimme, I want it all, and I want it now!!
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
And that is why subscription based game model is way to go. Never expect One-Paid products to grow up.
Maybe i am missing something but i fail to see the problem. There is a design document that lists features. It's a guideline, not a fact sheet of what will be done 100% guaranteed at a 100% guaranteed point in time.
They are adding things to the game based on what is feasible at an given time in the development process. We get Wings now, maybe we get the NPC's next, maybe not. I fail to see the problem.
If you can't deal with the development process of games then you should not kickstart them or buy into Alpha/Beta. Just stay away from it.