The Truth about Elite Dangerous

You all seem to be doing well. I've just carried some scrap from Elgin to a welsh sounding system and my destination doesn't exist. Again! I help out some Feds with some wanted people and being very careful not to hit any Feds I get wanted! I've now got four ships after me. I could outrun these except I can't jump into Super-cruise because the lady says she cannot comply. This is because of my gear/scoop/ hardpoints being deployed. Which they were not. So, not wishing to run all night, I gave up and would have self destructed if they hadn't got me first.

I dare not take any mission now because so many times the destinations do not exist in the given system. In the above case, the destination was on a planet. Except there were no planets in the system only 3 stars. Everyone else seems to be getting on fine so why have I got all these problems of getting interdicted by feds all the time for no reason and they start shooting at me when I start shooting at the bad guys and no destinations for my cargo? I can't see the problem being with my PC. I'm playing the game quite normally. So what am I doing wrong. I'm 95% in favour with the Feds so I can't see why they are picking on me. I'm not a beta tester so I'm sure I've got the same game as all of you. Are these known bugs or am I doing something wrong. I suppose I could ignore the bulletin board but how would I get any credits to improve my ship. Please help:(

Ah! just thought, is this game a beta and I've got it wrong?

Did you scan the system with an Advanced Discovery Scanner? If you haven't discovered the planet that the target base is on, you won't see the base. Happened to me just a few minutes ago. I jumped into a system and opened the system map. Nothing. I closed it and did a scan. 46 objects detected. I opened the system map and there it was on a planet marked as unexplored. The base even showed as unexplored until I targeted it during glide.
 
If the game is not about credits, then what is the issue with having balanced payouts ?

I means, if you are honest about your argument, the you should have no problems with such proposals, since it
would make the game even less about credits than it is now. This is easy to see, as by removing the invective of
choosing an activity based on credits, players will be left with choosing activities based on fun. Hardly a bad thing.

Does that mean that some part of the game will be deserted ? You bet it will. I think the number of players
doing A<->B trading, for example, would be strongly reduced. Unless A<->B trading is made more fun by FD.
Would that be a good thing ? Oh yeah.

i have no issue with balanced payouts... but no missions should ever equate to the same credit return as trading has IMHO because with the missions there are other 'rewards' that add towards your total payout... such as influence and reputation gains, gains towards military ranking etc... Not all things need to be 'equal' ... If all things were equal you are right that perhaps A <> B trading would not be as heavily 'focused' by some types of players... still I am sure there are players who love nothing more than to do A<>B trading...
 
My opinion of SC is completely different. I'm not 100% sure what they're doing over at Imperium. IMO they've chosen the wrong engine for the job, and it's making it much harder than it should to get the results that they want. They'd have been better going down the ED route and making an engine in-house than trying to shoehorn CryEngine 3 (which is an engine designed for making FPS shooters on small maps) into a space flight sim. They seem to be managing it, slowly, but I can't help thinking things would have been a lot more efficient with a custom built engine. The thing is I think Chris has gotten to the point where he'll absolutely refuse to change his track because doing so would be admitting defeat and it would be a matter of pride.

Just to re-iterate on what I mean about ED. Nothing you do really seems to matter. You don't feel connected to the game world (or at least I don't). I spent the summer months using Wolf 359 as a base, completing missions for one of the factions. And even though I built up my rep with them and became allied, and I helped them towards gaining control of the system, I never really knew who they were. They were just a nameless, generic Wolf 359 faction and I didn't feel that I really belonged, even though I spent months with them. If by completing missions for them I'd started to gain the distrust of the other factions in the system, it might have made me care a bit more for my "family". If they'd started giving me a friendly "Welcome back CMDR Pete Uplink, our trusted ally" or given me some sort of rewards or medals, or maybe if they'd offered me a new ship or invited me to be part of their navy (proper navy careers and actually belonging to a faction would do a lot more to make the player feel part of the world) I'd have cared a bit more for them. But when I got bored I just moved out of the system and I've not been back to see how they're doing. I now treat them with the same "indifference" that they treated me with. There wasn't enough there to actually make me care about them or what happens to them. At the end of the day they were just a mindless, faceless nothing that I did jobs for.

What would go a long way to helping this game out would be if you could actually belong to a faction and build up a friendship with them. Join the navy, get promoted (not in the way we're promoted now by being a "reserve" but actually being IN the armed forces). Be given a command of a ship and proper missions (patrol a sector, escort an emissary, intercept bandits), earn promotions and bigger ships to command.

Or if you don't want to be that well allied you could decide to be a freelance agent doing jobs for them. Now I know you can already do this by accepting BBS missions, but completing them should matter. They should respond to you, give you some feeling that you're interacting with an actual entity and the game isn't just getting its responses from a database. Dealing with factions in ED is about as rewarding as trying to have a conversation with my PC and about as interesting. The game needs some variety, some characterisation. I'm not talking about quests or silly 2d faces on "com screens" but something that makes the faction feel like it's something other than a bunch of stock responses in a database. Even if they made it like "All anarchy systems respond like this. All high tech systems respond like that, etc" at least you'd have some difference in personality between systems.

It's like I said before, all factions are the same. They all give you the same responses, they all offer exactly the same missions. Nobody is unique. I personally think that the Federation, Empire and Alliance should have different personalities. They should offer different mission types. Siding with one should make the others distrust you. The architecture of the Federation stations should be different to that of the Alliance and Empire stations and vice versa. Each faction should have it's own style.

Even minor factions should be different. If you enter a system that's got a dictator government, then they should be more distrustful (if not outright hostile) until you win their trust. Some factions should be war-like, others peaceful. Systems at war should be more dangerous. there should be battles raging around the space stations and on planets, not just in little "combat zone" sectors as if they're having a carefully orchestrated and arranged scrap well away from "civilised" areas.

The game needs to make the player feel like they belong in the universe. At the moment it feels like the player is some wandering nomad who the other factions don't really care about and keep at arms length, communicating with you only through faceless messages and not willing to let you be part of their world. And, as I said, the biggest issue is that ALL the factions are like that. They ALL behave in the same way, as if every faction in the ED galaxy is being run by mindless automatons or the 34th century equivalent of the Stepford Wives.

The game is an amazing technical achievement, but it has absolutely no soul at all.

(sorry I went into another long one there)

Excellent ideas, the sooner Minor Factions have Tier 2 persistent NPC's the better... Faction leaders, generals, executives, crime bosses, etc
 
Every space game ever has been progression through better and better ships.

The difference is this is the first space game to have the next ship cost 100x or 1000x as much as the last one, that's the cause of the grind.
 
Did you scan the system with an Advanced Discovery Scanner? If you haven't discovered the planet that the target base is on, you won't see the base. Happened to me just a few minutes ago. I jumped into a system and opened the system map. Nothing. I closed it and did a scan. 46 objects detected. I opened the system map and there it was on a planet marked as unexplored. The base even showed as unexplored until I targeted it during glide.


Yes I did. Some I've searched for in the map and found them under different systems many thousands of light years away. I know what you mean though as I had the same thing but didn't need an advanced scanner. All should be on the system map and usually you can see the planet bases on the list. This has happened a lot of times. There are either too many bugs or I'm doing something wrong.

I meant to say, if you scan on arrival at the star, the system map appears complete.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Every space game ever has been progression through better and better ships.

The difference is this is the first space game to have the next ship cost 100x or 1000x as much as the last one, that's the cause of the grind.

Very good point
 
My opinion of SC is completely different...
Or if you don't want to be that well allied you could decide to be a freelance agent doing jobs for them. Now I know you can already do this by accepting BBS missions, but completing them should matter. They should respond to you, give you some feeling that you're interacting with an actual entity and the game isn't just getting its responses from a database. Dealing with factions in ED is about as rewarding as trying to have a conversation with my PC and about as interesting. The game needs some variety, some characterisation. I'm not talking about quests or silly 2d faces on "com screens" but something that makes the faction feel like it's something other than a bunch of stock responses in a database. Even if they made it like "All anarchy systems respond like this. All high tech systems respond like that, etc" at least you'd have some difference in personality between systems....

I won't re-quote your whole post, but that little snippet pretty much does some up one of the issues. Even the original Elite had huge differences between Anarchy systems, corporate systems etc. Fly into an Anarchy system, and you'd better hope you had military lasers, a few missiles, an ECM, and retro rockets...

Dropping into an anarchy system should see you trying to shake off pirate wings pretty much every single time. Being interdicted in a hi-tech, high security system should result in system authority vessels dropping in to rescue you before your FSD is back online. You should be seeing tens of authority vessels just cruising around all the time to make the point.

I quite like your naval career idea too, and, it feels like that is what Powerplay is trying to be, and yet, it seems disconnected to the rest of the game. I can get 15% off bits in the territory of one power, but don't really need to do anything for it (and why the discount is greater than at Founder's world, I'll never know, but I digress...).

Having said that, a lot of things look to me like "placeholders", or, "stage 1" implementations, to be constantly updated and tweaked until there is a meaningful purpose.

So far, I'm quite enjoying the game, and the best part is usually to do with interaction with other players, though bounty hunting in RES zones, zipping between asteroids is fun, too. I'll never understand why combat zones are not located in asteroid belts...

Though, one of my hopes for CQC was that it signalled the coming of conflict zones around space stations - pilots wishing to dock at a station in the middle of a battle would have to do so at their own risk - though potentially with higher payouts (perhaps if you enter the zone, the ONLY way to dock with the station is to declare yourself for that faction - thus making you an instant target.Declaring for the attacking factions means you've lost the ability to dock, as the station simply won't let you).

Seeing a station and a capitol ship in battle, with all sorts of ships buzzing around taking part would be quite cool - it would also be a reminder as to what the pilots are fighting for. The station is right there!

Anyway, as I said, I have hope that more immersive experiences, ones that make you feel like part of the ED galaxy are on the way - perhaps slowly, but still, on the way.

Just remember, compared to a certain other space game, we actually have a game we can play and do stuff in, and we are getting constant updates and tweaks. Not to discredit the other game, which, in all honesty, I hope delivers on it's promises. I want to play it, too, after all...

I, personally, have a lifetime update pack, so I don't have to pay for updates anymore, however, FD can still ge plenty of money out of me. The longer they keep me playing, the more ship skins I am happy to buy - perhaps, like some new Anaconda skins *hint hint*, I'm enjoying ED now, but there will need to be more depth if I am to stick around for the years that are planned. As I said, though, I do have hope.

Z...
 
Last edited:
Though, one of my hopes for CQC was that it signalled the coming of conflict zones around space stations - pilots wishing to dock at a station in the middle of a battle would have to do so at their own risk - though potentially with higher payouts (perhaps if you enter the zone, the ONLY way to dock with the station is to declare yourself for that faction - thus making you an instant target.Declaring for the attacking factions means you've lost the ability to dock, as the station simply won't let you).

Seeing a station and a capitol ship in battle, with all sorts of ships buzzing around taking part would be quite cool - it would also be a reminder as to what the pilots are fighting for. The station is right there!

That does sound quite wonderful. Though if this were to happen, I'd suspect the station weapons would be offline, no? Because station weapons seemed to have been sourced from Concord in the fact that they're accurate and they'll obliterate everything in just a few hits. It doesn't seem very fun having a battle around a space station if the station weapons just splat everything that isn't a part of their controlling faction. I also see an issue with having to declare being with a faction to dock making you a target. That's just more of a headache for the players in trading role ships like the Type series and such since you can't defend yourself all that well. A multi-role ship would fare better but should you be in a Hauler or Type-6...

But I would love to see this implemented in some fashion.
 
That does sound quite wonderful. Though if this were to happen, I'd suspect the station weapons would be offline, no? Because station weapons seemed to have been sourced from Concord in the fact that they're accurate and they'll obliterate everything in just a few hits. It doesn't seem very fun having a battle around a space station if the station weapons just splat everything that isn't a part of their controlling faction. I also see an issue with having to declare being with a faction to dock making you a target. That's just more of a headache for the players in trading role ships like the Type series and such since you can't defend yourself all that well. A multi-role ship would fare better but should you be in a Hauler or Type-6...

But I would love to see this implemented in some fashion.

I guess the battles around stations could begin after the attacking forces have taken out the stations defences and the station is calling for fighter assistance?
 
I think noone who's asking for changes here wants linear gameplay. They just ask to get tools that enable us players to create an emergent, breathing galaxy with a fantastic, meaningful multiplayer game experience. That's what a lot of players are missing. The basic game does not provide it. But it could if things were implemented in the right way.

There are 2 kinds of players (gamer "factions" ;-) ) playing this game. The ones who are happy with NPC-based gaming, repetitive gameplay and missions and a procedurally generated game environment. And the ones who want more. For them the NPC-based game is empty, dull, repetitive and it gets boring after a while. A lot of elements, characters and Power Play gaming tasks are meaningless. All your activities are meaningless. Everything you have to do is absolutely repetitive. That's a big issue for player group no. 2, including me, and they are absolutely right to ask for more.

to bad at some point everything is get to be boring after a while :)
 
After about 20 hours playing Elite: Dangerous it started to remind me (and not in a good way) of two other newer games I have played in the last two years; Destiny and Beyond Earth.

I purchased all three of these games based mainly on my good experiences with previous games produced from these developers/studios. On the wider internet, critical customer reviews of Destiny, Beyond Earth and Elite: Dangerous share many similar (and familiar) phrases such as “Lack of depth”, “repetitive”, “a grind”, “soulless”, “boring”, “disappointing”, “uninteresting”, “a chore”, “unfinished”, “mediocre”, “lifeless”, “hollow”, “tedious”….

Now some on this forum repeatedly advance an argument along the lines that these criticisms are just a sign that some gamers are whiny, impatient, don’t understand WIP, instant-gratification-seeking egotists which need hand-holding in a linear story mode, generally have a lack of imagination and who don’t appreciate the slow progression and vastness/awesomeness in games such as Elite…..

My counter-arguments is basically a serious concern that 'They are not making games like they once did'
and that I support the opinions of a considerable portion of the various customer bases which indicates that these game developers are starting to go down a wrong (shallow with extra nonsense) path with their design priorities.

“Depth” can be a difficult concept to pin down in a game but…

Beyond Earth lacked the “depth” that Alpha Centauri had.

Destiny lacked the “depth” that say Halo: Reach had.

Elite: Dangerous currently lacks the “depth” that the earlier Elite/Frontier games had (and hopefully this will change in 2016).

Given that older games made by these studios/developers had more apparent “depth”, I am starting to think that “depth” is something deliberately not being added to these newer games as part of some troubling industry trend. I have suspicions that some slick marketing consultants in expensive suits are touring game studios preaching that customers don’t want “depth” instead we customers all actually want more game mechanics which resemble those psychological experiments done on rats which often involve treadmills and/or narcotic addictions.

Now I am posting on this forum (and I suspect the others like the OP do this for similar reasons) as some customer feedback to explain/reinforce the fact that (at-least-some) customers would definitely prefer more “depth” over more shallow mechanics/features such as how Powerplay was implemented.

As Elite is still a ‘work in progress’ there is still scope (and hope) for it to change direction (or return to something more like the original vision, more DDF ideas implemented maybe?).

As a purchaser of games (one of those customers) and as a mostly solo-player I would prefer if Elite became more like Alpha Centauri (look to that game in terms of how to give 2D bitmap, text-based factions/leaders memorable personalities and letting them have major, credible in-game impacts because of their character) and more like Mount & Blade: Warband (in-terms of how players interact with NPCs and how player actions can have a realistic/proportional impact on a dynamic game world). I think both these games have a number of other good examples of well-implemented, relatively simple mechanics to build on for solving the ‘procedurally generate me some meaning/depth/soul’ problem.

The release of features such as Powerplay (and if Horizons surface content is more along the lines of ‘similar insignificant, meaningless, repetitive tasks with some different, pretty background scenery’) then Elite : Dangerous is going down a path where it becomes more like the worst (in my opinion) parts of other newer games such as Destiny.

[I would add my own long list of constructive suggestions for ‘how to add depth’, however this post is getting very long. Peteuplink’s , Muetdhiver’s and Orfeboy’s suggestions earlier on this thread
(along with the many, many other similar sets of suggestions I have read on other forum threads) are great and cover a large amount of what I would write anyway].
 
just a thought for those who are saying I can do this or that in EVE or I could do this or that in EVE 10 years ago... Umm this is not eve...

Elite Dangerous has stayed true to its roots... Yes the whole premise of the game has not changed much in 30 years and personally i do not see that as a bad thing... it is what we paid for afterall...

Yes it does have a long development plan, and yes a lot of us are accepting that as fact and are patient enough to wait for the additional content we all want to appear in the game...

I don't see any need for it all to be in the game at this minute and tend to see a lot of people complaining about things that either are there by design or complaining about things they wish were meeting their own expectations...

Remember this everyone... FDev are developing the game they want, not the game you want, not the game I want... the game they want... If that coincides with what you or I want, then that is great... if not... oh well so sad too bad...

@peteuplink you touched on a few aspects that do need improving on... But there are some things that are probably never going to happen according to FDevs own statements, player owned bases won't likely happen anytime soon if at all and if they do it will be in a way that does not allow it to be abused by groups. As nice as it might be to be able to build our own bases I do not see it happening at all personally... Player affected BGS - at the moment it is still early days and there are ways for us players to affect the BGS which does impact on the areas of space we play in... Yes it will be nice when there is more depth to the BGS manipulation and more 'responsive' things that happen in the foreground as a result of manipulating the BGS... As for factions getting upset or hostile with you because you take on jobs for another faction... that does happen, has been happening for months now... I get regularly interdicted by a certain pirate facton because I tend to kill a lot of their faction members in my home system, and I am hostile to them as a result... Another system where my minor faction has expanded, I am wanted and hated by almost all the other minor factions because I do missions there to improve my minor faction which often tends to upset the other factions... Could it be better yes it could... Will it be better, I hope so and I have faith in FDev to further develop the BGS in thier time...

As we get older and grow up (I am older than you by a little bit) our 'expectations' and things that keep us 'interested' change and develop... That is the way of life, even the original elite, frontier FFE etc did get 'boring' after a while and I concur that ED does at times too... and that is when I do like I used to do in the other games... Either I put it down for a little while, or I do a different 'thing' in the game... When I am totally and completely bored of it, I will just put it down for a long while and pick it up later after playing another game and getting bored of that...
 
I guess the battles around stations could begin after the attacking forces have taken out the stations defences and the station is calling for fighter assistance?

That would be the most logical answer. Though I'd see that as being some sort of inside job (Perhaps a virus of some sort or malfunction), since taking the defenses head on in a ship would be suicide.
 
Yes, Grinders are going to grind, they'll also power level whenever and however possible, already happening in Elite, but the devs don't like it and take steps to prevent it. Wings sharing missions is wide open to exploitation and power leveling currently, things FD doesn't like the players doing, they may be a bit slow about fixing it sometimes, but you may have noticed they DO fix the things that allow it. Obviously they don't like it, or they wouldn't do things that prevent it when it's done. I don't care if you see a problem with it or not, the DEVS do, their vote means something, yours does not.

Exploration in Elite is like nothing else in any other game, so how do you do exploration missions? If you've got actual concrete ideas that take in account the mechanics of exploration, I'm all ears. Simply saying 'it needs to be done' is absolutely useless, so either come up with an idea that works or stop complaining about it. I've designed things like this and I'M stumped, evidently FD isn't having much luck in figuring it out either, so please, enlighten us.

And the DDF, you think they have to implement them despite saying they weren't promising to do so...really....I see your problem Helgarth, ain't the game.

Do you really think that they will restrict the wing stuff? If they do that, the forums will burn even more and for a right reason! Anyway, only time will tell us after all because if you don't care, I do as well.

Do you really want me to provide a TON of link that leads to the exploration forum discussion with a lot of suggestions in? I bet you can do it alone no?

What made the players getting interested to the game at the first place? What has frontier discussed with them about the future of Elite? Those suggestion made the game going into the market, they HAVE TO implement them EXCEPT for the technically impossible ones. That's why it was not a promise. Do you really think that they just trolled their base community?

BTW I'll be happy if you can tell what my problem is.
 
Last edited:
There is no real interaction with other players, other than the occasional PvP that is. Explore, trade or fight. That's it.
 
The thing with the game is that it is just an MMO grinder.

Fights are high risk, low difficulty, low reward.

What if instead of dropping in a random ring and find hundreds of pirates, you have to track one specifically? What if the fight was hard? What if it took an hour or two to track him? What if the payout would be as good as farming loads of pirates in a RES for those two hours?

What if there were quest chains with tailored missions from time to time? I know Braben said it was a problem when everyone in an MMO saves the same princess, but having every ring in the bubble populated with hundreds of pirates, or having distant planets completely covered in wreckages is just as bad, and since most of the activities end up pontless, repetitive and boring, its even worse than the "everyone saves the same princess" quest types.

In this sense, Community Goals are the only thing in the game that makes you feel like you are doing something.

Also, the special characteristic of it being an MMO, is that you are not playing alone, so if the game is centered around that concept, having a single player mode in the same universe kinda breaks it, because it removes the real danger and tension from the equation.
 
Last edited:
I think some really good points have been made in this thread with regards to depth. The depth comes from having an effect on the system and that there are consequences to your actions.
Imagine making it to Admiral in the Federation and being considered an ally.
Now take a ship full of Imperial Slaves to Sol, jettison the cargo and shoot the hell out of it in front of the Abraham Lincoln space station.
I should expect to get a bit more of a reaction than a fine for littering.
 
The thing with the game is that it is just an MMO grinder.

Fights are high risk, low difficulty, low reward.


Also, the special characteristic of it being an MMO, is that you are not playing alone, so if the game is centered around that concept, having a single player mode in the same universe kinda breaks it, because it removes the real danger and tension from the equation.

Really, on one hand you are saying there is no danger or tension, but on the other you are saying combat is high risk while also stating that solo breaks the universe???

Reality check... NPC's can and will kill you, they can be hard to fight no matter what ship you are in on occasion you get outgunned... That adds a definite danger and tension element to the game IMO and no matter if it's solo or open mode as that is just the same when playing mostly PVE with the exception of solo requiring less network bandwidth and having higher res screen shots and seeing only NPC's.

Solo exists NOT just for people who don't want to socialise or who want to avoid PVP, it also exists for people on low bandwidth connections where open play would be an immersion breaker due to rubber banding every time they fly near another commander and for people who don't feel the need or want to be engaged with other people on any level for whatever personal reasons... Something I can appreciate and understand fully even if I really only play in open myself...
 
Last edited:
Solo exists NOT just for people who don't want to socialise or who want to avoid PVP, it also exists for people on low bandwidth connections where open play would be an immersion breaker due to rubber banding every time they fly near another commander ...

Exactly. When the internet is perfect, with low latency high bandwidth connections across the whole world (like a LAN) then Frontier can relax the 32 limit (which is just an arbitrary limit imposed to limit maximum bandwidth) and we can have hundreds of commanders in one instance.

Until that miracle day occurs, I'm afraid we have to live in the real world and have limited grouping.
 
You need an imagination to play a game like this. I grew up in an age when your imagination was your best toy, compatible with all other toys.

I find it incredible that this super cheap and lame catchphrase is still being used as a defending argument.
Says a lot about those who defend this title, although people like the OP nail the problem(s) spot on without attacking anyone.
 
Back
Top Bottom