RPS article

[Graaf]

It didn't take long to make the changes to combat, it just took some time to test balance. Not many useful things were added to the, in reality 1.50-patch. Adding some missions and naming it v2.0 just makes for a better way at another money-grabbing sale.

I get really annoyed with this kind of 'statement'. She is part of a serious and untrue complaint. If I understand correctly, you are trying to say that there are changes and corrections to 'earn more'?

If so, I'm sorry - but this is complete nonsense.

There was a patch released, it had fixes like the ones before. So basically patch v1.50.

But by adding a combat re-balance, 3 (visually only) cockpits, a few missions and 2 additional ships they found it a proper idea to upgrade the patch to v2.0, give it some additional title text and put it on a 50%-off sale.
So yes, in my opinion that is a money-grab to "earn more" by both Egosoft and Steam.

[GCU Grey Area]

New and different was only ever going to work if the gameplay experience was better, and it just clearly wasn't you can't blame bugs on that.

Certainly not clear to me - for me the new & different XR gameplay experience IS better in many areas & has only improved as bugs have been fixed. A few examples:

Prefer manual trading with XR's trade interface to the old best buy/sell locators & having to keep notes (i.e. with pencil & paper) on which ships were going where & what cargo they were trading - personally consider queued trade orders to be one of the best thing's that's ever happened to Trade in an X game, it's just so damn convenient.

Definitely having more fun with boarding ops in XR. Could still do with a bit of balancing (particularly with respect to how lucrative it can be), however apart from that I find it's tons more fun disarming a target vessel by destroying it's turrets & other subsystems, rather than the long & often tedious process of frying them with Ion-D in the old games (preferred to do my boarding ops without pods wherever possible, so disarming the target was not optional).

The recent changes to combat in general have also been a distinct improvement to the gameplay experience for me - for a change I'm finding combat in an X game to be rather challenging at times. Didn't often happen in the old games where, for example, it wasn't all that difficult to wipe out an entire Xenon Invasion fleet using just a single M3 (usually Mamba Raider) & the only way to make combat remotely challenging was to deliberately pick a ship which was woefully unsuited to it (doing combat missions in an Angel springs to mind). In contrast in XR I struggle to stay alive if there's more than just a handful of enemy fighters.

Also certainly prefer the stations in XR. Wish there was a bit more freedom in where I can build them but, aside from that minor gripe, definitely prefer having to build stations with stuff (not just buying them with cash), having stations which use a MUCH greater range of raw materials for production (rather than just food, energy & either silicon OR ore) & stations often being armed with a rather frightening amount of firepower if you do anything to annoy the faction which owns them.

[BigBANGtheory]

I think it is naïve and/or arrogant for any of us to think we know any better than Egosoft wrt how to achieve their goals. It is up to them to decide how they want to pursue their product development. If they wish to take note of feedback from the community then that is fine, but they are not beholden to us.

Yes it probably is a little arrogant, but the reverse argument is just plain stupidity so that doesn't work either. It is for Egosoft to strike the right balance I'm merely pointing out they got it wrong last time.

If you get peoples buy in you'll find they will tolerate a hell of a lot, just look at DayZ and Stalker:Lost Alpha absolutely riddled with problems but people love it anyway.

[BigBANGtheory]

New and different was only ever going to work if the gameplay experience was better, and it just clearly wasn't you can't blame bugs on that.

Certainly not clear to me - for me the new & different XR gameplay experience IS better in many areas & has only improved as bugs have been fixed....

Look things are certainly better now post v2.x and yes you can find specific examples of XR being superior to previous versions the presentation of stations being a good example from day1, the cockpit radar in v2 etc etc

Overall though XR has some fundamental problems relating to what you can do in the sandbox and how you interact with it. You'll always get over dramatic BS at both ends of the scale but XR has such poor general feedback (such as the RPS review) since release it can only be described as toxic. Whether you agree with that or not is not the point, it is there for all to see and it is there for a reason.

Some players were always going to h8 XR, others gave it a chance, fewer still stuck with it and reaped the rewards of v2.x

I myself think things are moving on well, a good job has been done since release (besides the communication), but nor am I blind to the opinion of others.

* on a separate matter I don't personally think it is helpful to dump blame on Bernd, its not a perfect world and I don't doubt he's done what he thinks is right at every turn.

[ragamer]

I think it is naïve and/or arrogant for any of us to think we know any better than Egosoft wrt how to achieve their goals.

Really some ppl forgets were they are in the food chain...

...It's neither naive nor arrogant... To expect whetever features you like on a game when the features you like aren't there you have 2 options:

a) Silently move away from the tittle.

b) Look back and tell the Developer why you don't like certain features.


Then there are 2 kind of developers:

a) The ones that adapt their goals to please their target audience (You as an individual can belong or not to the target audience). This kind pay the price in delays but in general, produce games with a decent acceptance level (The critical factor here is were most small Devs fail... Which is doing decent market analysis).

b) The ones that proceed with their hardcoded plans doesn't matter what. This ones usually arrive on target but the product can either be the seed of new genre (Innovation only happens if you have the will and resources to create something unique according to your vision) or a complete disaster (Innovation is a double edged sword, ofc... Sometimes your "vision" is only shared by a few loyal fans).

If you empatize too much with the creator of a product you like... At the end you are doing more harm than good, you always have to retain enough level of criticism to project what you would like to have on a game... With independence if it's possible within the limits of the Developer.

I don't know the rest... But one thing XR managed on me is to be 100% sure that I will not buy the next tittle until solid reviews are written and first hand experience arise to the public a couple of months after release... Doesn't matter how much hype Egosoft generates this time. I wonder how many of current/potential custommers like me are around or if ES will take into account this factor on their next release "sales projection".

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

@ragamer: Yes, some people do...

A COTS company/team (this includes Egosoft) develops the software it wants to and has to live with the consequences of if a product sells or not. In such cases, potential customers have no rights with regards to dictating how said company/team develops their product nor what features that product provides.

It does not matter if we liked the previous products or not, there are no special rights just because of being a long term fan.

Providing feedback in a constructive and respectful manner is one thing, but there seems to be too many that seem to think that they can bully Egosoft into developing their games to suit them personally.

Egosoft listen to our feedback and act upon it as they see fit (in a time frame of their choosing), if we do not like the path they have chosen in response to said feedback then there comes a point where you have to agree to disagree. When software is developed for multiple users with differing views the developer often has to make compromises with their implementation.

With specific regard to X-Rebirth and possibly subsequent games derived from it, people need to realise that X-Rebirth is a clean slate and it will take time to get it to the point comparable to that which X3 has reached in terms of numbers of features and overall complexity.

What Egosoft do from this point forward is up to them and only them. We should be respectfully and calmly providing constructive feedback and that means we should not be continually criticising them (or any given member of the team) for any perceived mistakes nor should we be demanding/pushing for consultation - it is not like Egosoft have a contract with us nor are developing their software specifically for us (Developing a COTS product for a potential audience is not the same as developing a bespoke product for a specific customer or collection of customers - the Crowd Funding model is closer to the later).

[Graaf]

Really some ppl forgets were they are in the food chain...

If we are the consumer and Rebirth is our food, aren't we then on top of the food chain?
But since features were disclosed well before launch we used option C: inform developer that we don't like the feature's we see presented.

As for the 2 kinds of developer:
Clearly Egosoft falls in category B. And even though that isn't such a bad course of action in itself, it only works when nothing was known about Rebirth before launch.
Unfortunately since details were disclosed half-a-year before launch and concerns were raised about that, Egosoft not only failed to launch in time (original Q4/2011), but also failed to deliver a finished product.

And because Bernd knew our concerns well before launch, and the state of the game before release (as the owner he had to sign off for it) he deserves everything thats coming to him.

[Sam L.R. Griffiths]

Using the food chain analogy, COTS software consumers (inc. us wrt X-Rebirth) are more like animals at a trough. They can pick and choose what they take but not what is available there (unless they put it there themselves).

[jeroll3d]

So yes, in my opinion that is a money-grab to "earn more" by both Egosoft and Steam.

Your opinion is wrong.

[BigBANGtheory]

I think we should move on to using metaphors, analogies are so 2013

...but in all seriousness having fumbled the ball you cannot expect your market to pick it up for you in an charitable way, they will want a better pass

If you want help ask for help, don't do ur own thing again and hope people will appreciate it whatever the end product. Life is too short for that and you are smarter than that.

[Slashman]

Using the food chain analogy, COTS software consumers (inc. us wrt X-Rebirth) are more like animals at a trough. They can pick and choose what they take but not what is available there (unless they put it there themselves).

Except that, unlike animals, the customers don't die if they choose not to eat, the trough-owner does.

So how smart is it to mostly ignore the people you are depending on to survive in favor of 'doing your own thing'? I'm sure you'll tell me it's completely brilliant. Like how Microsoft enjoyed all that success and adoration with Windows 8. Oh wait...

[ragamer]

What Egosoft do from this point forward is up to them and only them. We should be respectfully and calmly providing constructive feedback and that means we should not be continually criticising them

The problem, as an individual, is that you may not belong to the target audience... So doesn't matter how much feedback you give, you are not listened at because the company is aiming for greener pastures you may not frequent...

...That could explain a lot of things, and a permanent "back-end" thought I always had since XR was released. Sadly, there is no way to confirm this in one way or another, than to wait for which features appear and which ones not... On that regard XR evolution since launch, I would say 80% of the features added have been well received by X-series lovers but...

...A highspeed access UI (running in paralell with the clunky gamepad UI) and "combat awareness" (Or "fleet awareness") UI elements is something you can't meassure by cold numbers but more like features certain players that like space games don't need and thus, if those are the ones targeted by XR, are of low priority (OFC, there is always 2 sides of the same story... A trusty X series fan may still think that they are "in the pipe" but lack of resources have delayed them for further patches/tittles)...

...This are the 2 hot topics for me ATM to see if "I'm in target" or my "pasture" is far from ES's, because IMHO, are requirements ES need to add if they bet for the Empire Building gameplay in the future, which, in turn, is the strongest reasson for the player to get involved into station building, one of the signature changes between XR and the past X games (And that, bugs aside, it's the only one more or less univesally praised by all kinds of players).

[scottykad]

Egosoft are looking toward new game possibilities. “Whether these are at some point called X4 or X Rebirth 2 or whatever, I cannot talk about now,” Lehahn says. “We are making experiments, we are trying out certain things. Depending on the outcome of those experiments, we will decide how our next product will look and how it will be called.”

Basically we just funded their next venture, rebirth isn't going to change, Brend thinks this is a good game design etc and isn't going to be changing anything really, just minor tweaks here and there, i've lost all faith and will not, no matter what videos they post this time or hype they throw out, this was the last game i get of this company, but ill be keeping the other X-series games forever

[gbjbaanb]

Egosoft are looking toward new game possibilities. “Whether these are at some point called X4 or X Rebirth 2 or whatever, I cannot talk about now,” Lehahn says. “We are making experiments, we are trying out certain things. Depending on the outcome of those experiments, we will decide how our next product will look and how it will be called.”

Basically we just funded their next venture, rebirth isn't going to change, Brend thinks this is a good game design etc and isn't going to be changing anything really, just minor tweaks here and there, i've lost all faith and will not, no matter what videos they post this time or hype they throw out, this was the last game i get of this company, but ill be keeping the other X-series games forever

Absolutely, and now there's a new mod for X3 - Litcube's Universe - that has some interesting competition concepts in it, where you can't just potter about the sandbox but must compete in trade against Phenom corp or combat against the OCV.

Added some good changes to the UI as well to help you manage your empire too. See his wiki

But yes, X:Rebirth had a massive amount of expectation from the fanbase in the forums, I remember people were buying new rigs they were so excited at the prospect of TNBT. There was a lot of information coming onto the forums, in dribs and drabs, but no-one ever expected it to be such a car-crash as it was when it appeared.

Its like saying to fans, you're going to get a Ferrari for your birthday, a Ferrari for your birthday... choosing colours and trim and wondering which exact model it'll be ... and then the big day comes and there's an old Ferrari tractor in the driveway, 'pre-loved' and requiring some maintenance.

I think the best thing they can do for the future is to resurrect X3, maybe go in to refactor the code with a small team dedicated to the task, and then think what could be added to make it even better. I imagine it'd go in a more strategy-game style. At the same time, take the X:Rebirth code, fix it, and then make it more first-person style.

Then players can choose which type of game they like and play the branch that suits them.

[pref]

Wow this was...surprising.
Still obsessed with looks, lol. No word about the game world's shallowness.
Why is it so hard to understand it was not the bugs that killed this product..? They had bugs at every release.

And all the positive feedback? There are like 20 guys on the forum saying XR is cool, and now that has become an excuse not to improve this game and admit the real mistakes?
Oh my, this looks worse and worse...

[Senner]

I think the best thing they can do for the future is to resurrect X3.

I totally disagree.

X3 never caught my attention. If feels more like a strategy game than a space-sim.

X-Rebirth, on the other hand, has great potential. I wish they would speed up their bug-tracker and give the game a serious FPS boost.

[pref]

"He wanted players to be more like businessmen than delivery drivers, flying around, picking up offers and discounts from stations rather than making cargo runs themselves. “The only thing that we did is really cut out the very early part, where you start with a small ship, where you trade the goods yourself…

You only cut out the early part, huh..?
And the rest things missing got in X3 accidentally.

Besides it's no secret that these go and fetch activities are not really entertraining, it might have been better to have an economy we can interact with. Or to be able to command our ships in a clean way.
Wonder how much time they wasted on this stupid AI that acts instead of player commands, or on station interiors. But sure bugs were the biggest grief.

Cargo upgrade as a cheat... though it did cost about as much as the ship itself for traders, and the point was it helped in the end to have less ships to manage? And furthermore it was not always profitable to use.
It made asset control easier for quite a high price... thats not the definition of cheat. But letting enemy capitals be capped for free, because no other parts of the game function that could turn a profit is certainly not a cheat.
Does this guy have any idea about how his games work?

[Slashman]

Does this guy have any idea about how his games work?

I think he does on one hand, but on the other he has a tenuous grasp of how people really want to play with and interact with the game world.

The first and biggest mistake was the 'wide appeal to casual audience' slant. Granted that never really panned out, but it seems to have influenced so much of the bad design features in the game it isn't funny.

The major problems with X3 aren't actually addressed by Rebirth. Many of them just carried over. Many more of them simply underwent fixes that didn't work.

I have been on a lot of different websites and forums where the X series was being discussed. Most of the major problems people had with X3 wasn't the complexity of the game. Most people who didn't like it quit long before the complexity showed itself. What people wanted was some clear instructions on how to achieve tasks, to know clearly what their starting possibilities were when they started a new game. And finally a universe that was interesting (not simply pretty, but actually interesting with things to do).

There were always a couple people who complained about the poor plot, writing and story elements. But from my observations, those guys weren't looking for a true open world sim experience in the first place. They were looking for an RPG-like story.

So when it comes right down to it, what did Rebirth really address? It addressed station building and the economy(still not working right to this day). Most of the people who didn't get into X3 never made it to that part of the game, and not even all X fans invested most of their time there.

Rebirth sold well (initially) because they played the hype card really well. Then in the end they could neither deliver the deep and intricate game that the hardcore fans wanted, or the streamlined GTA-in-Space open world romp that Bernd talked about in his highly unrepresentative video trailers.

[pref]

So when it comes right down to it, what did Rebirth really address? It addressed station building and the economy(still not working right to this day). Most of the people who didn't get into X3 never made it to that part of the game, and not even all X fans invested most of their time there.

I'd call XR's station building way inferior compared to X3's. It looks better thats hard to argue, but in functionality it is an oversimplified version - with the tedium increased to an insane level..

Rebirth sold well (initially) because they played the hype card really well. Then in the end they could neither deliver the deep and intricate game that the hardcore fans wanted, or the streamlined GTA-in-Space open world romp that Bernd talked about in his highly unrepresentative video trailers.

Yes that's obvious - but what is really unbelievable that ES CEO is still in denial regarding these things.
This game will stay f'd up as long as ES is working on it it seems.
Hope they finish their patches soon and let mod's do what ES is incabale of.

One more thought regarding X3 - i think it was pretty nice in that game that there were always huge goals that the average player never did. For me this means there is still more to the game (even though i might never touch that certain part). It gave me the feeling that the game world is still 'bigger', and it's still worth to play more.

[BigBANGtheory]

Egosoft are looking toward new game possibilities. “Whether these are at some point called X4 or X Rebirth 2 or whatever, I cannot talk about now,” Lehahn says. “We are making experiments, we are trying out certain things. Depending on the outcome of those experiments, we will decide how our next product will look and how it will be called.”

Just make sure you include real gamers in the experiment, invite some German players over to sign an NDA, show them what you have in mind, listen carefully to what they say and watch their behaviour.