Devs please read! | An Old Dog that doesn't like the new tricks

[charlie1024]

And that was the whole point I wanted you to look at through answering my (disregarded) questions, ie. who decides how a player should play this sandbox, and who decides what's the most important to a player in their gameplay style? No one, but that particular player themselves, right? IMHO, we won't convince each other because we have different priorities/game style/expectations.

And this is exactly why you could concentrate on your initial claim:

Likely, especially if we think of content as base game features and systems... i don't think we necessarily need more ships, but to be able to do more with them (can't wait for diplomacy! exploration sounds neat too)

When you claim Egosoft delivers the same amount of content, it should be based on how much content is actually available to players, not just your personal priorities. Just because someone prefers Hyperion doesn’t mean it suddenly counts as more than ten L ships.

Well, even 'much' is different based on personal POV.

Also, from the update log from 6.x->7.0 and 7.0->7.5, we see main difference:
6.x->7.0 added 'playable ships, contents, itself, etc'. 7.0->7.5 adjusted the main mechanics, and enforced quality of life. Of course 6.x->7.0 also covered some QoL, but main point was the new features itself.

How can these 'different' update directly compared? That seems too unfair for the game.

Just an example, you'll know TAA was introduced in 7.0. After that, DLSS/FSR3 was introduced with 7.5 release. Because DLSS/FSR3 needs TAA as a fundamental technology, they were introduced later. How the 7.5 update can be less?

[flywlyx]

Again, it wasn't my point. It was yours ie. evaluation based on amount of content delivered (and preferably amount of ships, right? because you talk a lot about them, compare them , etc.). Mind you, this is actually your personal priorities. Mine bases on immersion and quality of simulation. I said "bigger" and "one of the most important" based only on those two factors. I fully understand your perspective, mine is neither better nor worse than yours. It's just a different.
Hope it makes sense to you, now

If you don’t care whether it's more or less content, then this discussion is pointless, as neither of us is interested in debating each other's preferences.

Also, from the update log from 6.x->7.0 and 7.0->7.5, we see main difference:
6.x->7.0 added 'playable ships, contents, itself, etc'. 7.0->7.5 adjusted the main mechanics, and enforced quality of life. Of course 6.x->7.0 also covered some QoL, but main point was the new features itself.

How can these 'different' update directly compared? That seems too unfair for the game.

Just an example, you'll know TAA was introduced in 7.0. After that, DLSS/FSR3 was introduced with 7.5 release. Because DLSS/FSR3 needs TAA as a fundamental technology, they were introduced later. How the 7.5 update can be less?

Since both 7.0 and 7.5 include multiple updates, I don’t see the point in comparing just one feature to claim that one has more or less content than the other.

Overall, it seems you've already noticed that 7.0 not only introduced QoL improvements but also added a lot of new content, clearly indicating that it was a more substantial update. I don’t understand why it’s so hard for you to admit that—isn’t it obvious that 7.5 would naturally include less content than 7.0? Because there is 8.0 on the way.

[NightIntruder]

If you don’t care whether it's more or less content, then this discussion is pointless, as neither of us is interested in debating each other's preferences.

I do care. Quantitative/qualitive evaluation is not completely ignored by me, but immersion and simulation are the most important. Quantities and qualities are just a part of those two, with their weights shifting depending on content delivered. Imagine yourself being engaged in discussion about quality of immersion in the game and the way the number of ships affects it. You can try all day long, good luck bud

PS. While in this exercise, try not to focus on ships and their numbers, but on measuring an immersion first

[vvvvvvvv]

Just to take some wind out of your sails with your "a first" points:
X Rebirth launched with Argon, Xenon and a few Khaak ships.
Boron Split and Paranid never made a proper appearance in XR.
Terrans were a former shell and represented via the canterran factions.
The Teladi outpost added this race into the game.

In Rebirth, Split are represented as Family Ryak, and have 3 ships. Gangrene Chaser, Skull Crusher and Bonescout. They also have a base in Blurred Reflection, Maelstrom. Split mercenaries are common on stations.

Kha'ak, I believe, were added by a DLC, Home of Light, unless they made appearance in campaign which I never finished. They were "unidentified ships"

[Chips]

I can see some people's concerns as... well, actually, not sure. People worry this is a path of endless expansions? Was this the concern when X3 released and had subsequent releases of the expansions. I mean new games? Well, my opinion on that... controversially

It would have been a concern if X3 had started selling individual ships as DLC, whatever the reasoning.

Well, this is easy to solve.
1) Don't buy it.
2) Wait and see if they repeat this "single ship" to see if it is indeed a strategy, or just a one-off "for the fans of that specific ship".

The new sector was more of an eyebrow for myself...

[flywlyx]

I do care. Quantitative/qualitive evaluation is not completely ignored by me, but immersion and simulation are the most important. Quantities and qualities are just a part of those two, with their weights shifting depending on content delivered. Imagine yourself being engaged in discussion about quality of immersion in the game and the way the number of ships affects it. You can try all day long, good luck bud

Although 7.0 didn’t change the flight model, making direct comparisons difficult, 6.0 completely replaced the physics engine, which had a much greater impact on the entire game. On top of that, the graphics engine was also updated in the same patch. It’s pretty clear that 7.5 is a minor update compared to previous major patches—otherwise, it would have been 8.0. I have no idea why you keep insisting that it provides a similar amount of content.

[NightIntruder]

I have no idea why you keep insisting that it provides a similar amount of content.

I never claimed that Although, we're already diverging a bit from the OP's theme, but let's assume you're conveying here an "objective truth" - the more content, the better. Which is not always true in this game genre, eg. Elite Dangerous (some say "mile wide, inch deep"). Even though, it might be true, it has nothing to do with my subjective perception how much fun I have from this particular game. Improved FM means I tempted to fly more by hand, which I love. This brings immersion to me, and kind of intimate contact with the game. I don't have fun from ruling the galaxy, or spending the majority of the gameplay on map. I like doing small things in this huge game. That's why I am not interested in more destroyers, corvettes or fighters. Of course, this great game wouldn't exist without much of its assets and mechanics. The new FM wouldn't be possible without prior introduction of new physics. I said the update is "bigger and one of the most important" FOR MYSELF because I got my toy now, with 7.5 update. I finally got more demanding flight model which I really enjoy. I always played simulation games, mostly flight sims. The amount of content has nothing to do with it. The importance of updates for the entire game has nothing to do with that. What matters in a player's judgment is what they like/prefer in a particular game. I love flying and improved FM is a way to go, for me. Due to my modding inclinations, I'd also love to see new features/mechanics that can give me better freedom of creation, mainly when it comes to stations. I am pretty sure there are players who dislike both themes. You are trying to evaluate things no one can evaluate for the whole player base, I guess. The reception of games or their updates by players isn't a mathematical equation, IMHO

[Boronenkumpel]

If X4 would follow semantic versioning, then it should be obvious that 6.x to 7.0 is bigger leap than any 7.x to 7.y.
Does it?

Anyway, a long list not necessarily more, if each item is tiny (compared to couple huge items).

Well, teeeechnically, since X4 has always remained fully save-game compatible, semantic versioning would put X4 at, what, 0.750.0?
For anyone who doesn't know, semantic versioning numbers are not about the size of change but the type, i.e. API breaking changes, non-breaking features and bug fixes (resulting in MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH)

To add my two cents to the overall topic:
Yeah, I did a double take when I found out that the Mini-DLC would be *a single ship*
And yes, the worries expressed here occurred to me too. But then I thought about how much damn work that flight model and especially rebalancing ALL ships and engines must have been, all the new sounds (seriously, those boost sounds rock ) and the deep trust Ego has earned over the decades. And I relaxed.

I think this all comes down not so much to what has happened but fears/expectations of what will happen.
The basic idea as rudi_pioneer described in his graphic is sound. Balancing more developer time towards the base game keeps the game healthy.
The issue is whether or not you trust Ego do this right, and whether you are willing to effectively subsidise the base game with your DLC purchases or if you want to get your money's worth out of every DLC.

From what I've read here, many are not, especially those who are already somewhat unhappy with the direction the game is moving.
If that's you, ok. Wait it out, and enjoy your free diplomacy update when that comes out (funded by? Exactly...)

PS:
For what it's worth, for all the flak Space Engineers seems to get here, I think they do this pretty well.
Most of the effort in each update is on the base game, all new features are always part of the free update, and the DLC is just some cosmetic stuff you can simply skip if you don't like it.
The one time they had a piece of gameplay locked behind the DLC they got a massive backlash and learned from that. I don't get the problem with this approach, as long as the devs stick to the deal.
It got SE to over ten years of active development.

[13913408324]

I'm glad the game has been maintained for 7 years, this is very reassuring.

I like this DLC. More mini DLC and take my money please.

[flywlyx]

I never claimed that Although, we're already diverging a bit from the OP's theme, but let's assume you're conveying here an "objective truth" - the more content, the better. Which is not always true in this game genre, eg. Elite Dangerous (some say "mile wide, inch deep"). Even though, it might be true, it has nothing to do with my subjective perception how much fun I have from this particular game. Improved FM means I tempted to fly more by hand, which I love. This brings immersion to me, and kind of intimate contact with the game. I don't have fun from ruling the galaxy, or spending the majority of the gameplay on map. I like doing small things in this huge game. That's why I am not interested in more destroyers, corvettes or fighters. Of course, this great game wouldn't exist without much of its assets and mechanics. The new FM wouldn't be possible without prior introduction of new physics. I said the update is "bigger and one of the most important" FOR MYSELF because I got my toy now, with 7.5 update. I finally got more demanding flight model which I really enjoy. I always played simulation games, mostly flight sims. The amount of content has nothing to do with it. The importance of updates for the entire game has nothing to do with that. What matters in a player's judgment is what they like/prefer in a particular game. I love flying and improved FM is a way to go, for me. Due to my modding inclinations, I'd also love to see new features/mechanics that can give me better freedom of creation, mainly when it comes to stations. I am pretty sure there are players who dislike both themes. You are trying to evaluate things no one can evaluate for the whole player base, I guess. The reception of games or their updates by players isn't a mathematical equation, IMHO

The reality is that depth comes from content, not just fixing system bugs. The flight model you love wouldn’t be possible without the new physics engine—it’s the introduction of new content that creates new possibilities. Your reasoning is pretty difficult to follow, but I suppose your point is simply that you like it. As I mentioned before, if content quantity isn’t something you care about, then this discussion is pointless—preferences don’t require debate. It’s just you being you.

[charlie1024]

Also, from the update log from 6.x->7.0 and 7.0->7.5, we see main difference:
6.x->7.0 added 'playable ships, contents, itself, etc'. 7.0->7.5 adjusted the main mechanics, and enforced quality of life. Of course 6.x->7.0 also covered some QoL, but main point was the new features itself.

How can these 'different' update directly compared? That seems too unfair for the game.

Just an example, you'll know TAA was introduced in 7.0. After that, DLSS/FSR3 was introduced with 7.5 release. Because DLSS/FSR3 needs TAA as a fundamental technology, they were introduced later. How the 7.5 update can be less?

Since both 7.0 and 7.5 include multiple updates, I don’t see the point in comparing just one feature to claim that one has more or less content than the other.

Overall, it seems you've already noticed that 7.0 not only introduced QoL improvements but also added a lot of new content, clearly indicating that it was a more substantial update. I don’t understand why it’s so hard for you to admit that—isn’t it obvious that 7.5 would naturally include less content than 7.0? Because there is 8.0 on the way.

Personally, I rather think 7.5 is really valuable even though 7.0 added many ships. I always wanted to use DLSS or FSR3(not only for latest tech; lower wattage consumption, etc), but X4 haven't had that kind of techs. It means, at least for some people, what you think can be not very important in priority. Even, I remember absurd booster usage and eventually losing all shields after jumping for ships to the other sectors. I had lost some L/XL ships in my past plays due to this kind of issues. Is this really 'trivial' or 'can be compared'? Well, some people can think so, and people can be many of, but at least for me, I cannot think so.

Just lowering the value of the improvements will not help anything, just a personal opinion though, and this is not really the point OP said as well.

[jlehtone]

There are quantity, quality, and subjective value. The quantity is easiest, as one can simply count something.
Quality is harder. Is it number of bugs in the feature, number of inconvenient clicks you have to do to use the feature, or what?
Then is the subjective value that is off the charts. For example, I don't use AA. Those "TAA", "FSR3" are greek to me, effectively nothing.

The value to player is made up from all of those. That sum ain't simple math.


Everybody does not have to buy a DLC. (Obviously, it would be better for Egosoft if many would.) We players evaluate whether the value of DLC is worth the price for us. If the content is clearly "me want" or "none of that", then our decision is easy. It is the cases in between that are hard. Is the OP concern that Egosoft would shift to churn out "easy to do" DLC that almost, but not quite, feel worth the price?

[flywlyx]

Personally, I rather think 7.5 is really valuable even though 7.0 added many ships. I always wanted to use DLSS or FSR3(not only for latest tech; lower wattage consumption, etc), but X4 haven't had that kind of techs. It means, at least for some people, what you think can be not very important in priority. Even, I remember absurd booster usage and eventually losing all shields after jumping for ships to the other sectors. I had lost some L/XL ships in my past plays due to this kind of issues. Is this really 'trivial' or 'can be compared'? Well, some people can think so, and people can be many of, but at least for me, I cannot think so.

Just lowering the value of the improvements will not help anything, just a personal opinion though, and this is not really the point OP said as well.

What exactly makes more content less valuable? It’s odd to assume that if they had released 8.0 with a major DLC instead of 7.5 + 8.0 + two mini DLCs, they wouldn’t have included the new flight mechanics or DLSS/FSR3. My point is that @rudi_pioneer claims the 7.5 update has the same amount of content as the 7.0 update, which I find questionable.

OP's concern mirrors that of most players here—that Egosoft might release less content at a higher price. I just don't see the point in pretending that the 7.5 update has as much content as the 7.0 update.

[CBJ]

How about lightening up a bit and letting people discuss this subject without hammering this particular point of yours to death? It's turning a perfectly reasonable discussion into something unnecessarily fractious. We're interested in people's opinions on this, and really don't need everyone to justify themselves to the nth degree in order to have one.

[Frogfist123]

Hi,
I came here because I’ve also been thinking about the issue of walking in stations feeling underwhelming.

At first, I was blown away with a big "WOAH" on my face — finally, a dream come true! Ever since I joined the X-Series with X3, I had wished for this, and now it’s here: I can walk on stations and inside ships!

But after a few hours of running up and down those stations and ships, I found myself thinking, That’s it? What else can I do besides approaching random NPCs standing around on platforms or behind reception desks, trying to hire them? And let’s not even talk about the frustrating search for a high-ranked NPC—I’ve never found one, EVER! The interactions are mostly limited to hiring crew, asking for directions, buying blueprints, or "Pimp my Ride" customization requests at receptions.

Honestly, the NPCs feel less responsive and less alive than those in the Elder Scrolls series. And while those games might feel clunky by today’s standards, the NPCs in X4 feel even clunkier in comparison.

I do appreciate that Egosoft took the bold step of introducing this new feature. Maybe this is just the first step of many, and in the future, it will improve. But in its current state, it feels dull, lifeless, and a total waste of both my real-life and in-game time to the point where I just want to skip it entirely.

So, I totally understand what TroubledRabbit said about having the option to disable this feature entirely and manage all station-related tasks just like in X3, through Comm Links. As long as the system remains in this state, I would really appreciate the option to turn off certain features that are underwhelming and don’t impact game balance or the overall experience too much.

A suggestion: How about Egosoft — or any other well-known community hub — launching a well-thought-out survey for the X4 and X Rebirth player community to gather feedback on this matter so that maybe Egosoft might change its current Roadmap and address it earlier then later?

[SparvieroGed]

Are the devs buying ferrari with the money they make from dlcs or are they getting the founds to expand even more the game?

If the answer is the second one...I'm more than happy.

[vvvvvvvv]

A suggestion: How about Egosoft — or any other well-known community hub — launching a well-thought-out survey for the X4 and X Rebirth player community to gather feedback on this matter so that maybe Egosoft might change its current Roadmap and address it earlier then later?

Any sort of survey should be one within game client itself and not on forums, if t he idea is to gain accurate data. Because most people do not visit forums, so data will be badly skewed.

[alt3rn1ty]

But after a few hours of running up and down those stations and ships, I found myself thinking, That’s it? What else can I do besides approaching random NPCs standing around on platforms or behind reception desks, trying to hire them? And let’s not even talk about the frustrating search for a high-ranked NPC—I’ve never found one, EVER! The interactions are mostly limited to hiring crew, asking for directions, buying blueprints, or "Pimp my Ride" customization requests at receptions.

For me, in addition to what you list there which are all good additions to this game series on their own, the most important thing about having legs is how much it adds to the immersion of the game.
I also love just being able to stand on a station and simply enjoy watching large ships landing, and taking off into the depth of space. The new Observation platforms have been added for the player simply just to hang out watching the universe go by.
I once just tried hitch hiking other faction ships, just to see where it would go, then had the panic moment when you think "OMG I hope it comes back to that station" (took about an hour, teleport not researched at that point and no money to buy anything).

I guess its inevitable though that now we have been given such things, people will want more more more, for ex' "Where's the arcade machines in the bar/casino etcetera, give us Space Invaders & Asteroids"

Edit: Sorry, off topic

[jlehtone]

Ever since I joined the X-Series with X3, I had wished for this, and now it’s here: I can walk on stations and inside ships!

That has a side-effect that has nothing to do with stations: you don't have to pilot a ship all the time.
Now you can completely focus on managing your empire/spreadsheet. Granted, that does not really require legs.

However, as already noted, legs are off-topic here as they are not a "mini-DLC".

option to disable this feature entirely and manage all station-related tasks just like in X3, through Comm Links.

Is your suggestion to create a mini-DLC that has an IRL price and adds the "Comm Links" option?
In other words, do you disagree with OP about such endeavours?

[Frogfist123]

@jlehtone,
My main point wasn’t about turning ‘legs’ into a mini-DLC, nor was I suggesting that Comm Links should be a paid feature. I was just sharing my thoughts on how the current implementation feels underwhelming and that having an option to manage stations more efficiently—similar to X3—could be beneficial for some players.

I didn’t mean to disagree with OP, just adding my perspective. But I see that this might not be the right place for the discussion, so I’ll leave it at that. No hard feelings.