Most inaccessible gamemode ive ever seen in any mmorpg.

[Wulfurkin]

Every week its an objective for the season but very few ever do it because this minigame is completely unplayable for anyone trying it for the first time. It is entirely disconnected from everything else in the game, the tutorial is useless and nothing else has been done to somewhat prepare players before they enter q and if they do they are right away throw into matches with people who have fully upgraded ships and years of experience under their belts. I cant possibly understand how the developers or people who do play it regularly expect anyone else to ever q a second time. I genuinely do think GSF had potential as its something different that you dont often see in a game like this but its utterly wasted if the amount of people who play it can be counted on two hands. I understand and respect that there are some who absolutely love it but at this point its just a waste of development resources if nothing is done to help bring new players in.

[KyraMalakai]

Like anything you aren't born knowing how to do it and yes the tutorial is useless but if you really want you just have to keep trying that is how you learn any gamemode. If you just want to do it because of seasons and you don't like it just do something else there are more objectives.

Now saying that something is a waste of resources simply because you don't like it and/or don't want to put in the effort to learn is a stretch, there is a lot of players that like one content and others don't.

[StrixHiraeth]

It's not up to the devs to bring people in, it's up to us players.  GSF is beloved mode by a lot more people than two hands can count, and for good reason.  You shouldn't be so dismissive of it.  If you are interested in it, reaching out to the GSF community for advice or just moral support will avail you.  The same people you mentioned with fully upgraded ships and years of experience under their belts are a resource for you, not adversaries.

I can't link anything here because reasons but there is a general GSF discord and multiple up-to-date guides available.  I'm sure someone else will link something(s) here or at least tell you what they are called.  Right, guys?

We'd love to have you.  Come fly our deadly skies (tm).

Edit:  It would help an awful lot if the devs could fix a bug or two.  Especially the blaster upgrade deselection bug.

Edited March 27 by StrixHiraeth

[DakhathKilrathi]

2 hours ago, StrixHiraeth said:

I can't link anything here because reasons but there is a general GSF discord and multiple up-to-date guides available

Link is available in my signature. 

 

 

2 hours ago, StrixHiraeth said:

The same people you mentioned with fully upgraded ships and years of experience under their belts are a resource for you, not adversaries.

I would like to highlight and reiterate this point. Have you tried asking anybody to group, OP? Because I can't speak for everyone but I know I'm personally willing to pick up new players as long as they're actually making an effort. We know you're not going to do well at first; it's expected and totally fine. If you're trying you're already doing better than conquest leeches and SDers so I'd be happy to have you. 

[Wulfurkin]

11 hours ago, StrixHiraeth said:

It's not up to the devs to bring people in, it's up to us players.  GSF is beloved mode by a lot more people than two hands can count, and for good reason.  You shouldn't be so dismissive of it.  If you are interested in it, reaching out to the GSF community for advice or just moral support will avail you.  The same people you mentioned with fully upgraded ships and years of experience under their belts are a resource for you, not adversaries.

I can't link anything here because reasons but there is a general GSF discord and multiple up-to-date guides available.  I'm sure someone else will link something(s) here or at least tell you what they are called.  Right, guys?

We'd love to have you.  Come fly our deadly skies (tm).

Edit:  It would help an awful lot if the devs could fix a bug or two.  Especially the blaster upgrade deselection bug.

Im not at all dismissive of it, thats not the point i was making with my post, if i were uninterested i wouldnt have bothered in the first place.  Im saying that im disappointed that there is no way to come into this game being somewhat competitive as there is no place where the mechanics can be learned.. Im no fool either, ive played dogfighting games and ive done a lot of regular pvp in this game,, if i struggle with this imagine the difficulty for the people who havent done those things.

 

 

8 hours ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

Link is available in my signature. 

 

 

I would like to highlight and reiterate this point. Have you tried asking anybody to group, OP? Because I can't speak for everyone but I know I'm personally willing to pick up new players as long as they're actually making an effort. We know you're not going to do well at first; it's expected and totally fine. If you're trying you're already doing better than conquest leeches and SDers so I'd be happy to have you. 

As good a suggestion that is there is only so much one can learn from observing others, also i havent seen that many people actively q or ask to group up for it in general or pvp chat. I just wish there was something comparable to dummy parsing i could do before playing this game.  In every single class i used in regular pvp (which at this point is almost all of them) i first spent several days practicing on a warzone dummy and taking it into easy pve content to get a feel for it, i cant do such preparations for this gamemode.

[DakhathKilrathi]

5 hours ago, Wulfurkin said:

I just wish there was something comparable to dummy parsing i could do before playing this game. 

There are custom games, but you do need at least four people to get that going. I'm happy to review gameplay videos, too, with a second-by-second breakdown of what you're doing right or wrong. I agree that the game should have a better tutorial, though. The tutorial is garbage and good for little more than experimenting with power settings and turning. 

As for general or pvp chat, that's because most people are asking in the GSF channel if they're talking about gsf: "/cjoin gsf" in game to join. 

Edited March 28 by DakhathKilrathi

[StrixHiraeth]

OP:

Excellent point about the need for experiential vs. instructive skill attainment in GSF.  I agree, it is one of those things that is best learned by doing; admittedly, a trial by fire.  But it's so much fun once you come out the other side!

And surely you can understand why your first post seemed dismissive to me.  Glad I was wrong.  Cheers.

[Ramalina]

On 3/27/2024 at 5:57 PM, StrixHiraeth said:

It's not up to the devs to bring people in, it's up to us players. 

Just going to point out that bringing people in, and doing it so well that those people are willing to pay for the product, is LITERALLY the core mission of the employees at a game development studio.   There are lots of things devs can do, but bringing people in is the only thing they have to do if they want to continue being game developers as a paid career.  Of course, an individual employee might have a somewhat indirect effect on bringing players in, but if they don't contribute in some fashion the person doing staff planning should probably be asking themselves, "Why haven't we reassigned them to do something useful or fired them?"

 

On 3/28/2024 at 5:18 AM, Wulfurkin said:

 Im saying that im disappointed that there is no way to come into this game being somewhat competitive as there is no place where the mechanics can be learned.. Im no fool either, ive played dogfighting games and ive done a lot of regular pvp in this game,, if i struggle with this imagine the difficulty for the people who havent done those things.

There are places to learn the mechanics, but unfortunately they're mostly not in SWTOR.   GSF is a Frankenstein of MMORPG with classic RPG numerical combat rules that trace roots directly back to tabletop role playing games (roll to hit, etc.), an arcade style "flight model", and a very First Person Shooter gunnery UI.   So basically you need proficiency in three very different genres of games, and then need to figure out how to integrate those proficiencies in GSF's specific blend, in a high pressure very fast paced game.   It's not too bad if you happen to have solid experience in those genres especially games from the '90s and early aughts that the devs drew inspiration from, but if  you're missing even one leg of the tripod it becomes brutal.   There's no wading pool to learn in (the tutorial is pretty worthless) and beginner learning is slow, and slow in GSF is a recipe for fiery doom.

 

GSF is an unfinished product.  Players in 2.0 were asking for a "space combat" element that was better then the on rails class ship missions, with "something like the Lucasarts X-wing series" being really high on the wish list.  The studio basically said "ok" and set out a budget and schedule for space combat.   It wasn't enough to get the job done.   Development ended with the combat system pretty badly imbalanced, an entire planned ship type missing, and basically no work on effectively monetizing GSF.   It was pretty well received overall, but with no income being generated from it because monetization had been neglected, there was no justification for completing things like a worthwhile tutorial or the stealth ship class.   So because the devs neglected doing a good job of making an on-ramp for paying customers for GSF in favor of just making something that's fun to play once you get the hang of playing it, GSF became permanently crippled because the thing that would have allowed for continued development was the part of GSF that was most badly neglected.  

 

As a playable game mode it's maybe 90% to 95% complete, but for monetization to justify further investment and new player experience/introduction it's maybe 10% to 15% complete.  Disappointing that that's where it got stuck, but probably a good example of how "cool and fun to play once you've mastered it" are not enough to make a successful game mode.  The boring and money grubbing parts are also important.

 

Edited March 31 by Ramalina

[StrixHiraeth]

I stand corrected.  Thanks for that post... I never thought about the game (or games) that way.

[Nee-Elder]

On 3/31/2024 at 8:31 AM, Ramalina said:

GSF is an unfinished product.  Players in 2.0 were asking for a "space combat" element that was better then the on rails class ship missions, with "something like the Lucasarts X-wing series" being really high on the wish list.

That ^ is incorrect.  We ( i was one of the original alpha/beta testers who corresponded with BioWare, since i had already officially helped with SWG's Warden Program & Events/Chronicles Systems )  were actually wishing/pushing for  SWTOR  to implement something more like SWG's JTL ( Jump To Lightspeed ) space expansion.   Unfortunately, SWTOR dropped the ball and eventually ( ironically ) confined GSF to be strictly PvP only.

The initial  Space-Flight-on-Rails  mini game aboard your personal ship  was just a stop-gap meant to placate,  since obviously any logical player ( or fan ) was gonna wonder  wait how the heck do you launch a STAR Wars game without the *STAR* part?!?!!?!

Later, after the mass outrage toward the on-rails version, we were told that SWTOR Devs  had already put  a so called "super secret space project"  up on their  supposed  "wacky whiteboard-of-wishes"  wayyy back in 2010, since they knew there wouldn't be  enough time/fund$  to develop it properly for release because of  'STORY'  ( aka "the 4th pillar" )  being their main focus + main selling point ( fully voiced story )  to differentiate from other MMOs.

On 3/31/2024 at 8:31 AM, Ramalina said:

 The studio basically said "ok" and set out a budget and schedule for space combat.   It wasn't enough to get the job done.  

Again you are incorrect and seem to be speaking out of thin air,  without any facts and without providing any citations.

Since i was actually there helping BioWare ( even as far back as 2009, unofficially ) with testing & such , i will provide the actual  proper/public  intel ...

•  https://www.swtor.com/blog/galactic-starfighter-development-introduction-part-i
•  https://www.swtor.com/blog/galactic-starfighter-development-introduction-part-ii

.... just so you won't be confused and, more importantly, so your posts won't confuse others.  ( like it just seemed to do for @StrixHiraeth , causing him to practically prostrate himself )

Edited April 12 by Nee-Elder
Reason: fixed 1st LINK

[Wulfurkin]

On 3/31/2024 at 9:21 PM, Nee-Elder said:

That ^ is incorrect.  We ( i was one of the original alpha/beta testers who corresponded with BioWare, since i had already officially helped with SWG's Warden Program & Events/Chronicles Systems )  were actually wishing/pushing for  SWTOR  to implement something more like SWG's JTL ( Jump To Lightspeed ) space expansion.   Unfortunately, SWTOR dropped the ball and eventually ( ironically ) confined GSF to be strictly PvP only.

The initial  Space-Flight-on-Rails  mini game aboard your personal ship  was just a stop-gap meant to placate,  since obviously any logical player ( or fan ) was gonna wonder  wait how the heck do you launch a STAR Wars game without the *STAR* part?!?!!?!

Later, after the mass outrage toward the on-rails version, we were told that SWTOR Devs  had already put  a so called "super secret space project"  up on their  supposed  "wacky whiteboard-of-wishes"  wayyy back in 2010, since they knew there wouldn't be  enough time/fund$  to develop it properly for release because of  'STORY'  ( aka "the 4th pillar" )  being their main focus + main selling point ( fully voiced story )  to differentiate from other MMOs.

Again you are incorrect and seem to be speaking out of thin air,  without any facts and without providing any citations.

Since i was actually there helping BioWare ( even as far back as 2009, unofficially ) with testing & such , i will provide the actual  proper/public  intel ...

•  https://www.swtor.com/blog/galactic-starfighter-development-introduction-part-i
•  https://www.swtor.com/blog/galactic-starfighter-development-introduction-part-ii

.... just so you won't be confused and, more importantly, so your posts won't confuse others.  ( like it just seemed to do for @StrixHiraeth , causing him to practically prostrate himself )

What i dont understand is why there isnt at least something similar in the pve part of the game. Knowing that the minigame is based on classic niche games from the past it should be expected that there are mechanics that not every player is going to be familiar with. What baffles me most that there could have been so many easy ways to help players into the gamemode, we all get our own personal starship very early in the game for example. Why not make a gsf fighter game based around that, instead of the completely different rail shooter minigame that we instead do with our personal ships. Not only could you bridge the gap between the maingame and gsf that now exists, you could also prepare players for the more challenging pvp game simply by having them shoot at things that shoot back. Currently there is just no way other than throwing yourself into the deep, unless you are truly dedicated to a dogfighting style game, i dont see why you would stick around knowing terrbily you will do for a very long time.

[DakhathKilrathi]

7 hours ago, Wulfurkin said:

What i dont understand is why there isnt at least something similar in the pve part of the game. Knowing that the minigame is based on classic niche games from the past it should be expected that there are mechanics that not every player is going to be familiar with. What baffles me most that there could have been so many easy ways to help players into the gamemode, we all get our own personal starship very early in the game for example. Why not make a gsf fighter game based around that, instead of the completely different rail shooter minigame that we instead do with our personal ships. Not only could you bridge the gap between the maingame and gsf that now exists, you could also prepare players for the more challenging pvp game simply by having them shoot at things that shoot back. Currently there is just no way other than throwing yourself into the deep, unless you are truly dedicated to a dogfighting style game, i dont see why you would stick around knowing terrbily you will do for a very long time.

That question is pretty easy to answer: designing mobs that can move is not something that SWTOR does. Sure, you get pathing NPCs, and yeah, they will follow you if you aggro them, but that's not the same thing. It doesn't even work well, and that's when you're dealing with only two coordinates. Add in a third and that gets way more complicated. 

Possible? Maybe, but it would cost so much that it doesn't make sense to do it. I would however like to see a training mode with drones that simulate important game mechanics. They don't have to move. 

[Nee-Elder]

2 hours ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

That question is pretty easy to answer: designing mobs that can move is not something that SWTOR does. Sure, you get pathing NPCs, and yeah, they will follow you if you aggro them, but that's not the same thing. It doesn't even work well, and that's when you're dealing with only two coordinates. Add in a third and that gets way more complicated. 

Possible? Maybe, but it would cost so much that it doesn't make sense to do it.

uhh, we did it  just fine in SWG JTL  like 20+ years ago. ( And now SWGEmu is  re-doing it  w/ total code rewrite basically from scratch )

Despite the fact that practically all original GSF coders are long gone, if  BioSword really  wanted  to  code 3-dimensional  ai  ( for PVE ) into  GSF expansion here,  i'm pretty sure they would be able to handle it.

But they won't, because EA  won't let them. ( *coughs*  SW: Squadrons  perceived conflict )

Edited April 3 by Nee-Elder

[DakhathKilrathi]

2 minutes ago, Nee-Elder said:

uhh, we did it  just fine in SWG JTL  like 20+ years ago. ( And now SWGEmu is  re-doing it  w/ total code rewrite basically from scratch )

Despite the fact that practically all original GSF coders are long gone, if  BioSword really  wanted  to  code 3-dimensional  ai  ( for PVE ) into  GSF expansion here,  i'm pretty sure they would be able to handle it.

But they won't, because EA  won't let them. ( *coughs*  SW: Squadrons  perceived conflict )

Ignoring for a moment that this is a different game in a different engine that clearly struggles with letting players navigate in three dimensions (lol no swimming after ten years and no flight either despite it being star wars), where's the incentive for them to do it? 

It might be possible, but possible and a good use of money are two different things. I said it was prohibitively expensive. It would cost too much to ever make any sense at all, and that's assuming you can find someone who can work with it, and that's not a guarantee. 

That's just not a good use of money. I would love to see it, but I live in reality. They don't even acknowledge that GSF exists at this point. Has nothing to do with a conflict with Squadrons either because EA has been busy pretending that game doesn't exist either for a while now. 

Ramalina hit accurately on most points where this is concerned, as usual. I suggest giving that a re-read. Whatever you think they set out to do, what they have done is created a niche game mode that no one picks up because it's too hard to get into. It's too hard to get into because they neglected that portion of the game in development. Whether intentional or not, that is where we are now. 

OP is complaining about that very issue, for that matter. Let's try keeping the thread a bit more on-topic in that regard. 

[Nee-Elder]

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

 Let's try keeping the thread a bit more on-topic in that regard. 

lol pilot puhleez,  i'm just replying to what is typed.

Let's try letting the Moderators moderate, eh?

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

 They don't even acknowledge that GSF exists at this point.

Who do you think you're talkin' to here?  ( hint:  the phrase Preachin' to the choir  mean anything to you? )

i've been calling for GSF  development  since 2016. ( both publicly & privately )

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

 this is a different game in a different engine that clearly struggles with letting players navigate in three dimensions

Fair point.

SWTOR's  'hero' game-engine is, and always has been,  utter dreck.

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

Ramalina hit accurately on most points where this is concerned, as usual. I suggest giving that a re-read.

Riiiight, well i suggest YOU re-read my post correcting him with actual FACTS--> https://forums.swtor.com/topic/934460-most-inaccessible-gamemode-ive-ever-seen-in-any-mmorpg/?do=findComment&comment=9809278

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

It might be possible, but possible and a good use of money are two different things.

You do realize they barely spend ANY money$ on  this game anymore , since all the  "Free"-To-PAY  people  can't stop buying soulless Cartel Market  reskins x infinity.

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

 Has nothing to do with a conflict with Squadrons either because EA has been busy pretending that game doesn't exist either for a while now.

Now, sure post-haste.  But initially  EA didn't want  SWTOR's potential GSF expansion to detract from  $quadrons  hype & resources.   I know because i applied to one of the EA job positions ( Quality Assurance ) to help test alpha of Squadrons.

( i can't find the article/link  at the moment , but it was back in 2019, iirc )

24 minutes ago, DakhathKilrathi said:

 where's the incentive for them to do it?

Basic pride , combined with faithfulness toward the *STAR* in  Star Wars.

Edited April 3 by Nee-Elder
Reason: this dude is talkin' at me like i haven't been here since 2009 lol

[Wulfurkin]

12 hours ago, Nee-Elder said:

lol pilot puhleez,  i'm just replying to what is typed.

Let's try letting the Moderators moderate, eh?

Who do you think you're talkin' to here?  ( hint:  the phrase Preachin' to the choir  mean anything to you? )

i've been calling for GSF  development  since 2016. ( both publicly & privately )

Fair point.

SWTOR's  'hero' game-engine is, and always has been,  utter dreck.

Riiiight, well i suggest YOU re-read my post correcting him with actual FACTS--> https://forums.swtor.com/topic/934460-most-inaccessible-gamemode-ive-ever-seen-in-any-mmorpg/?do=findComment&comment=9809278

You do realize they barely spend ANY money$ on  this game anymore , since all the  "Free"-To-PAY  people  can't stop buying soulless Cartel Market  reskins x infinity.

Now, sure post-haste.  But initially  EA didn't want  SWTOR's potential GSF expansion to detract from  $quadrons  hype & resources.   I know because i applied to one of the EA job positions ( Quality Assurance ) to help test alpha of Squadrons.

( i can't find the article/link  at the moment , but it was back in 2019, iirc )

Basic pride , combined with faithfulness toward the *STAR* in  Star Wars.

I honestly dont even need a pve simulator of the gsf game, i just need something of a bridge between the main game and this pvp minigame. Like i mentioned already, i want to prepare myself and not be thrown to the wolves to suffer. I believe you when you say its not worthwhile for the devs to put out a truly new gamemode, it should be just something more helpful than the pointless tutorial. A repeatable training session with moving targets and the possibility of them firing back, they dont need to act im complex patterns just a way to force me to understand and use the ships available abilities. Like i said in an earlier post, it would be very similar to training on a warzone dummy to prepare for regular pvp matches.  Im now repeating myself though, so there is no sense in saying more on it. Im just frustrated the devs wont make any more efforts, i do want to be able to play everything the game has to offer, otherwise whats the point of paying for it?

[Nee-Elder]

2 hours ago, Wulfurkin said:

 I believe you when you say its not worthwhile for the devs to put out a truly new gamemode,

uh , i never said that.  The other person said that.   And i was just quoting/replying to them.

2 hours ago, Wulfurkin said:

, it should be just something more helpful than the pointless tutorial.

A repeatable training session with moving targets and the possibility of them firing back,

i agree and have literally been calling for BioWare/Broadsword to implement such a PVE type instance for almost a decade.

i even had a private-message convo with 1 of the original Devs ( during testing )  whereby i simply asked:  "How about just letting players fly around inside the various existing PVP maps---without a timer---just to study the booster spots & practice against static pve targets?"

 i was told: "Good idea."

Almost 10 years later.....nothing but static.

And nothing but blatantly ignoring GSF  aka 1 half of the phrase 'Star Wars'.

It's very disappointing and truly astounding.

[Ramalina]

On 3/31/2024 at 3:21 PM, Nee-Elder said:

That ^ is incorrect.  We ( i was one of the original alpha/beta testers who corresponded with BioWare, since i had already officially helped with SWG's Warden Program & Events/Chronicles Systems )  were actually wishing/pushing for  SWTOR  to implement something more like SWG's JTL ( Jump To Lightspeed ) space expansion.   Unfortunately, SWTOR dropped the ball and eventually ( ironically ) confined GSF to be strictly PvP only.

The initial  Space-Flight-on-Rails  mini game aboard your personal ship  was just a stop-gap meant to placate,  since obviously any logical player ( or fan ) was gonna wonder  wait how the heck do you launch a STAR Wars game without the *STAR* part?!?!!?!

Later, after the mass outrage toward the on-rails version, we were told that SWTOR Devs  had already put  a so called "super secret space project"  up on their  supposed  "wacky whiteboard-of-wishes"  wayyy back in 2010, since they knew there wouldn't be  enough time/fund$  to develop it properly for release because of  'STORY'  ( aka "the 4th pillar" )  being their main focus + main selling point ( fully voiced story )  to differentiate from other MMOs.

Again you are incorrect and seem to be speaking out of thin air,  without any facts and without providing any citations.

Since i was actually there helping BioWare ( even as far back as 2009, unofficially ) with testing & such , i will provide the actual  proper/public  intel ...

•  https://www.swtor.com/blog/galactic-starfighter-development-introduction-part-i
•  https://www.swtor.com/blog/galactic-starfighter-development-introduction-part-ii

.... just so you won't be confused and, more importantly, so your posts won't confuse others.  ( like it just seemed to do for @StrixHiraeth , causing him to practically prostrate himself )

I mean, I was around during 1.x and 2.x, and I was one of the people asking for a better space experience than the ship class on rails stuff.  In the threads I was in, X-wing lite was requested more often than JTL lite by a vast margin.   JTL wasn't absent, but it usually came up in the context of having SWTOR endgame in general be a bit more of a sandbox once you got to endgame and ran out of story, or in terms of having more than just pure combat in the space experience.   Maybe we were just reading different groups of threads at the time though.  It's not like a GSF forum section existed at that point to concentrate space flight/exploration/combat wishlist threads in one place.   From the design choices though, GSF is much more X-wing lite than JTL lite, so whatever the total balance of player requests was, X-wing lite seems to have won out in terms of design choices.  That said, GSF is really only about 30-40% X-wing lite in terms of its design, and very much it's own peculiar little beast in the end.   Engine limitations played a role, but also probably the devs' desire to put their own stamp on it and many choices that make it more accessible as a MMORPG minigame than a purist mini-X Wing mode would have been.

 

Your references are all well and good, but they have very little content about the practical limitations on scope of developer intent.  They're a very broad strokes sketch of GSF design and player progression in GSF that can be paraphrased as: "It's going to have to be a PvP mini-game due to limited scope and trends in player feature requests.  No, it's not pay to win.  Yes, F2P players will have access to it.  Thank you for reading."   Also both links are to the same post, but I can delete an i from ii and hit enter in a search bar, so yeah, I read both of the ones you meant to link.  

As far as the differences between "What we meant to build," and "What we were allowed the time and payroll to build," if you know a bit about software development, the tea leaves are not hard to read.   How much well designed monetization is there in GSF?  Not much.  How much well designed tutorial is there in GSF? Not much.  Was there tutorial material well within the scope of the sort of AI/script limits constraining GSF in one of the games that the designers clearly drew inspiration from?  Yes, something like a hundred or so progressively harder levels worth of design template to draw on.   Are there parts of the game that were mentioned in assorted developer posts or that exist as unfinished bits that can be seen in datamining (stealth ships say hi)?  Yes.

Also having been involved in some closed beta testing for GSF, I have the benefit of having read and participated in closed PTS forum posts with a dev who was explaining to testers what the scope of potential changes to GSF were, and why some of the limits were what they were.   Some of it was engine limitations, but the primary limit was available developer time.   The devs, at least the ones that worked on GSF, thought that GSF was pretty darn cool.   They didn't leave bits unfinished because they were bored of working on GSF, but because they were told that they had to work on other more important (which in business speak means more profitable) stuff.  Honestly, that thread was probably the best dev-player interaction I ever saw relating to SWTOR.  There was shared passion for the project from both sides, and a really deep honesty about why things on the "we all wish it could be this way" list were not able to be done on their end.  It was very different from defensive corporate-speak we usually see in official posts.  Can't say about post 6.0, but from 2.0 through the end of 5.x I can confidently say that "Devs don't care about GSF" was not an issue.

The programmers, artists, and designers were working on making a really awesome gameplay experience for a space combat mini-game.  They focused hard on that, and they made a lot of progress and did pretty good work until their bosses told them to stop and do other stuff instead.  Some of GSF's problems though, stem from neglect of aspects that don't fall directly into the gameplay category of game development.   The monetization for GSF is basically: pay to mildly speed up gearing, pay for cosmetics that can't be flaunted in front of other players, pay for a few ships that are almost never available on the Cartel Market.   It's poorly designed in terms of why SWTOR players tend to spend money on cosmetics, and it caps out after a fairly small number of purchases relative to the infinite CM cosmetic gear treadmill in the ground game.  The beauty to players of the relatively short and easy to finish GSF gear grind is an Achilles heel for the GSF monetization scheme, when you're done you're done, and there's nothing left to spend on.   It's more checking off a "has monetization" checkbox rather than a well thought out "how to make GSF have a self sustaining income stream."  If monetization had gotten the same depth of thought and care in design as the gameplay, it might have earned enough to be worth some continued development.  If I as a GSF enthusiast want to take my Clarion with 4 engines worth of pink-purple engine and flaunt it on fleet in a way that makes other players think, "Wow, I don't know what that is but I know that I want to spend however many cartel coins it takes so that I can have it too," there's no way for me to do that.  GSF is excluded from what has been SWTOR's primary monetization driver pretty much since SWTOR went F2P.  If that doesn't count as a design mistake, then I'm not sure what does.  Especially when you consider that the devs already knew they were transitioning to a F2P cosmetics shop based revenue stream at that point.

Tutorial levels with static or easy to code moving AI targets/opponents were another missed opportunity.  If you're drawing from the X-wing game design anyways, you make a map, set a bunch of coordinates for target nodes, and each tutorial level is actually the same map but the number of nodes populated by targets increases with each level and the type of target may change to a more difficult/dangerous target.  Fly through waypoints (recycled TDM powerups work), learn to use cover approaching targets, learn to use engine maneuvers against targets that fire missiles, learn about range and accuracy, it's all doable with existing assets (turrets and drones) or minor modifications of them and good map design.    Technical limitations are not the reason GSF's tutorial is woefully inadequate, it's lack of time to design and build the right map with existing assets.  Track the stats that the game tracks anyway, hits, kills, damage, etc. and it becomes easy to have a "personal best" and also to have leaderboards or performance-gated cosmetic rewards by which e-p##$ can be compared, which seems to drive engagement pretty reliably in MMOs.   

 

This all a "What might have been" conversation.   It's true that there would still have been a chance of stranded development effort, but from a overall game design standpoint GSF might have been better served by starting with Battlescout TDM matches only, a highly functional infinite CM cosmetics treadmill for flaunting GSF swag in front of other players, and a scalable tutorial map with personal best records and a public high score leaderboard.   The rest of GSF as we know it following on in stages.   The point being that if you onboard and retain players well and convince them to pay money for that experience, then higher-ups are more likely to say "Yes" if you as a developer ask, "hey, can we spend some more time working on this part of the game?"   Ultimately, that's what drives decisions in a for profit studio.

 

The fault here I think might mostly lie with the higher-ups.  It should have been their job to make sure that recruitment, retention, and income were given adequate attention in terms of design, and those are clearly areas that didn't get adequate attention, thus dooming any significantly large future GSF development.   It's possible that both GSF enthusiasts and devs wildly overestimated the appeal of space battles, and that GSF as a whole was doomed to be a development mistake.   A complete well designed mini-game can still be a failure if there just isn't the audience to generate sustainable revenue.   That said, I think that paying enough attention to the features other than gameplay would have increased the chances of GSF not being an overall development failure.  It's cool, and I love it, but GSF does not do the core task of a commercial computer game very well (earn money), and in my view there's a strong chance that the incomplete features that should have been there have a lot to do with that.

 

Note: The devs' approach of building a core working game mode first, and then planning to build recruitment, retention, and monetization parts around that later is not necessarily a bad choice.  For that to work though, you need to know that there are the resources and commitment to build those parts when "later" arrives.  If not you should either scale back some components of the gameplay so that you have the time to build parts needed for sustainable future development, or make the painful decision to cancel the project as not currently viable.  Ideally you make these choices and commit to them very early in the development cycle.

 

GSF effectively is a cancelled development project, and it was cancelled a long time ago.  Is it great that it got so close to gameplay complete before getting cancelled, or is it sad that overemphasizing gameplay at the expense of other aspects created problems that likely forced the cancellation of GSF?  I'd say both.

It ends up as a very niche game that's quite fun and engaging for players who fit that niche, and an instructive cautionary tale in some of the pitfalls you can run into during game development.  At this point in SWTOR's overall design life and population curve, there's very little chance it will ever be anything more.  It's too late to find out if any of the promising fixes would have done any good (from the devs' perspective, players would still benefit from for example a better tutorial, but there's no way a tutorial could pay for itself at this point even if it caused the retention of every new player trying GSF).  It is what it is.  Enjoy it until the queues die, the servers shut down, or you get bored of it.

 

I mean, we can all hope that both the developers and executives at Broadsword go completely insane for a brief period during which they embark on a major GSF development binge, but realistically I think we're in a world where fixing the scoreboard enough to display medals correctly again counts as a stretch goal.

[Nee-Elder]

35 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

  Maybe we were just reading different groups of threads at the time though.

Perhaps.

But i was also in convos with the DEVS ( the original ones , not necessarily the GSF ones )  and i can promise you  SWG's JTL  was wayyyy more discussed/referenced than the older  'X-Wing' series.

Not like it matters much now.

The rest of your  wall-of-text-chunks  was just  basically your OPINION  , which is fine of course  you're welcome to it.   But you pretty much totally disregarded the 2 official links i provided to you  that literally came directly from BioWare themselves lol.  ( did you even read them? )

35 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

  At this point in SWTOR's overall design life and population curve, there's very little chance it [GSF] will ever be anything more.

Correct and sad.

tbqh,  after playing other games recently like  'SW Jedi Survivor'  &  'SW: Squadrons'  ( and even 'Starfield'  & 'Elden Ring' ) , it's very difficult  by comparison  after all these years to have any motivation to even login to SWTOR , much less devote any significant playtime toward it.

If i wasn't  GM of our 2 guilds ( both still here & active since 2011 ) , i would quit  paying  $ubscription to EA for SWTOR service....because it offers me practically  nothing  anymore.  ( lol  "Seasons" rehash hamsterwheel  +  Date Night 5-minute "content"  sheesh )

Then again, none of those other games i mention are a MMO, so if by some miracle  GSF  got  say a surprise expansion or like one Dev Cycle code focus..... well.... if  if  if .

Edited April 12 by Nee-Elder
Reason: spelling error

[Ramalina]

Your official links are almost entirely devoid of meaningful content with respect to details of the development constraints.   Yes, I read them in their entirety, even going to the trouble of figuring out the url of the one you mis-linked, which was the only one that mentioned development constraints at all.

 

From that post we can infer something along the lines of: "JTL, Elite Dangerous, EVE, type sandbox games are too big and too hard, and would break the heck out of the game engine, but at least some people (maybe even a lot) have been asking about X-wing, and we think we can do a miniature simplified version of that, so that's what it's going to be."

 

That's about all we can infer from the posts, since they're pretty vague and mostly serve as teasers for the Galactic Starfighter patches that were coming up.

 

When a developer flat out directly tells you that they can't change something that both the players and devs agree would be a good idea because the guy who knows how to code that isn't allowed to take time away from higher priority projects, then inference isn't really needed.

 

I could probably get away with ignoring the NDA at this point, but I'll keep it general enough to be in bounds anyway: When asking "This would be a great change, why can't you do it," the answer was almost always a variant of "not enough time."   The engine's unsuitability basically makes all GSF content a clever workaround, and clever workarounds are labor intensive with expensive skilled labor.  If they didn't have to fight the engine to make GSF happen, a lot more GSF development would happen.

1 hour ago, Nee-Elder said:

Then again, none of those other games i mention are a MMO, so if by some miracle  GSF  got  say a surprise expansion or like one Dev Cycle..... well.... if  if  if .

Having had a tiny glimpse of some of the things the devs were pretty sure that they could do from the list of cool stuff, "if we had time," I can tell you that the sad face is not sad enough.  It needs ten or twelve sad-face friends.   If that hypothetical GSF expansion hit then they could be a crowd of happy faces.

[Nee-Elder]

10 hours ago, Ramalina said:

Your [BioWare] official links are almost entirely devoid of meaningful content with respect to details of the development constraints.

i disagree , but you've made up your mind already and i don't care enough to debate this topic with you.

i also honestly have no clue what the heck you're even trying to argue amidst all your ramblings , nor what your point is  lol  i  feel  like we're sorta arguing the same point  but you're just annoyed because i dared to correct you earlier with facts/links.

10 hours ago, Ramalina said:

  Yes, I read them in their entirety, even going to the trouble of figuring out the url of the one you mis-linked,

lol  "the trouble" , eh?   You mean the big amazing trouble of  just simply  typing  one  " i " at the end  instead of  two?

Anyways, i just  edited my post  and fixed it.  ( simple  copy/paste  error , no big whoop )

But you might want to fix  it yourself within your quoted reply of my post,  so as to help the Community who might click your quoted version.

10 hours ago, Ramalina said:

I could probably get away with ignoring the NDA at this point,

Assuming your NDA was with previous BioWare and not current 'Broadsword' ,  i'm sure you'd be just fine.

If  it was EA though , ehhh  that gets a bit tricky.

10 hours ago, Ramalina said:

  The engine's unsuitability basically makes all GSF content a clever workaround,

Which is why they should've done what we begged them to do in early alpha:  Create/Use a separate  SPACE friendly  engine  for GSF.

Again , who really cares now anymore?   It's all  wasted water under the code bridge,  nearly 15 years post-haste.

And if all these  copycat  "open world"  Action/RPG's  are any indication ( see:  'SW: Outlaws'  ) , there won't ever be another  MMO  for  *Star Wars*  until  i dunno maybe 2050.

So  our choices are:  Playing a 20+ year old  SWGEmu server ( with hybrid psuedo  JTL replica )  ...or.... Staying here in SWTOR a nearly 15 year old game  which hasn't even barely touched GSF code since 2017.

Edited April 12 by Nee-Elder
Reason: typical forum fluff, going nowhere

[Ramalina]

On 4/12/2024 at 4:20 AM, Nee-Elder said:

i also honestly have no clue what the heck you're even trying to argue amidst all your ramblings , nor what your point is  lol  i  feel  like we're sorta arguing the same point  but you're just annoyed because i dared to correct you earlier with facts/links.

Yeah, sort of.  I'm annoyed that your "corrections" don't actually correct anything I said, and that your "facts" are links that are basically marketing material that are at best tangentially related to the post you were "correcting."

My post was primarily about the general pressure devs face in the game industry, and how if your for profit software project fails to build the parts needed for actually generating profit, it tends to kill further development.  

If you want to correct me with an actual correction, post something that shows that GSF monetization per player is equal to or greater than that in the ground game, or that GSF participation in 2.x and 3.x was so low that even with monetization rates similar to the ground game in terms of income/player hour or income/players active in game mode per month the audience for it was too small to earn back what was being spent on it.

That's information that would to some degree refute that claim that failure to build an effective monetization system into GSF was a major contributor to the end of its development.

Just because YOU really wanted more of a JTL type experience and were advocating hard for it, doesn't make anything in my post incorrect.  If you want to back your opinion up with facts, then go get facts that actually back it up.   To be honest, if you manage to do that I would genuinely love to see it.  I like insights into the development, design and production of products I like, probably because I'm a terminally incurable nerd.   So if you find such insights, please share.   Just don't expect me to accept marketing teasers as insights.   One of the sad things about Bioware was how the institutional culture was dead set against sharing any information with the customers if it didn't absolutely have to be shared, unless it could be protected with an NDA. 

 

So I realize that asking you to back up with relevant facts may be impossible for you to achieve, and it's kinda unfair.  But if you want to play the "Calling out your opinion with my facts," game please bring facts that are up to snuff.

Edited April 14 by Ramalina

[Nee-Elder]

28 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

Yeah, sort of. 

As i suspected.

28 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

My post was primarily about the general pressure devs face in the game industry, and how if your for profit software project fails to build the parts needed for actually generating profit, it tends to kill further development. 

Like i said above:  We're pretty much arguing the same point in different ways lol  ( typical forums )

29 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

Just because YOU really wanted more of a JTL type experience and were advocating hard for it, doesn't make anything in my post incorrect.

First:  it wasn't just "me"  ( and you know it ) .  Nice try though.

Secondly, you never mentioned  JTL in your original comment,  so yeah i corrected  that omission with additional  facts & intel.

Does it really matter in 2024 SWTOR?  Nope.   Game is....well.... obvious is obvious.

32 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

  If you want to back your opinion up with facts, then go get facts that actually back it up. 

i already did , but you just don't like/accept them.  The links were from BIOWARE  themself  and i provided them more for other  readers,  so they would have something way more substantial  record-wise to go on  besides just  "Ramalina said: "

36 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

   Just don't expect me to accept marketing teasers as insights.

i don't expect , nor desire, anything from  you, since i don't know you.    Once again, i posted the links for OTHER  people to reference as context.

Your  acceptence, or lack thereof,  is merely incidental.

50 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

   One of the sad things about Bioware was how the institutional culture was dead set against sharing any information with the customers if it didn't absolutely have to be shared, unless it could be protected with an NDA.

uh, welcome to basically any company/corporation in existence.

51 minutes ago, Ramalina said:

So I realize that asking you to back up with relevant facts may be impossible for you to achieve,

i don't work for BioWare ( i only helped them unofficially ) and therefore i don't need to "achieve" anything on SWTOR forums.

At this point  you're just trying to bait & troll me  with your silly  goalpost-moving  "prove MORE to me!!!"  tactics.

These forums are pretty barren & bleak  these days, but not so much to fall  for your tricks.

Particularly when i don't even know why/what  we're arguing about anymore  LOL.

[StrixHiraeth]

This is fascinating to read.  Pretty sure the debate started when I suggested it's incumbent on players, not devs, to grow the GSF playerbase.

Edited April 14 by StrixHiraeth

[Nee-Elder]

1 hour ago, StrixHiraeth said:

This is fascinating to read. 

Forums, as antiquated & unnecessary as they supposedly are,  still  provide fascinating entertainment value to augment the game.

1 hour ago, StrixHiraeth said:

 I suggested it's incumbent on players, not devs, to grow the GSF playerbase.

Truth is, it's both because they aren't mutually exclusive.  A symbiotic relationship, they must be.

One problem to remember though:  Players can't code & release  EXPANSIONS.