Is it just 'grinders' who feel the game lacks depth?

[Viajero]

*Mod hat off

1. It's not exploration. You can do that anywhere in the game, you don't need to be exploring.
2. It's gameplay, but it's not deep. You could get any game out of its earliest alpha and find you have the ability for your character to move around and enjoy the features of terrain. It's pretty much the first thing the game designers do once everything is down on paper and the engine is rendering something - make a way of moving around a game level.

1. Re what is exploration... Exploration starscapes and landscapes are not random as you seem to feel/suggest though, they are deterministic. But either way, I guess some of those that have managed to see the monolith in Altais 2B and jump all over it, compare Canis Majoris / Betelgeuse side by side by their dwarf companions by positioning yourself at the right spot, see the first gas giant with fluorescence emitted light (only recently btw), enjoy the star studded skybox only available closer to Sagittarius A*, rally in the hills in Miterrand Hollow while New Africa speeds past you in the sky, or reach the opposite side of the galaxy in a sidewinder, and being able to tell us about it will very much disagree with your view. Having said that you can indeed still discover and enjoy great locations well within the colonized bubble too. And all different.

2. Deep. *Shrugs* You again try to force your definition of "deep" on a kind of gameplay that you dont seem to enjoy at all in the first play. The argument I exposed above still holds I am afraid, as it seems we have just started to argue in circles on this point. You are looking for a different kind of depth, the one that is directly translated to gameplay stats and characteristics and possessions and their interrelation. The depth offered by the exploration component of Elite wont give you that I am afraid. The depth of exploration of Elite comes in many other ways that you also need to master to get there, much like those pilots tracing their paths as best as they can to avoid issues en route, preparing the ship accordingly, planning in advance and coordinating way points in the way, rewarded sometimes by enjoying some vistas that no one else will see and interacting with those landscapes without being killed to reach your destination etc. That may not be depth of your liking but it is depth, as deep or more than the one you d probably like to have. Just different.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

1. Re what is exploration... Exploration starscapes and landscapes are not random as you seem to feel/suggest though, they are deterministic. But either way, I guess.

i think there is a valid case to be made that FD bumbled the exploration side of the game a bit. Personally i think it could be reeled back in and fixed, but it would upset a lot of people (and my ideas were as often considered to be terrible as often as they were decent so I guess changes are unlikely to happen)

however I can see why some think it is not really exploration given we can open the galmap from day 1 and see an over view of the entire milky way, and just point our nose and jump...... not really any planning needed, (unlike wha was said back in KSer where we were told exploration would take planning and time before a jump could be made, and we would slowly expand out into the big black. hell iirc some players got to Sag A before the game was even 1 day into gamma. That is a huge missed opportunity imo.

Technically right now i would say ED exploration is more space tourism rather than exploration....... and dont get me wrong, there are some great sights to behold... but imagine how amazing it would be to get to Sag A, if it had took 2 years to map a route there, and a number of different large exploration missions to actually create that route there.
(and as such how much more rewarding if when you sold that route date back to universal cartegraphics it then opened it to other players who could then visit it in the same way that they can now, but had it not been for the 1st pioneers then they would not have been able to get there.

that to me is the spirit of exploration

 

[captain slow]

Personally I think a lot of times depth means affect the world greatly, granted I haven't read this thread fully yet, but the whole idea about depth is weird, what 'is' depth? that you can go into a abandoned space station and save a person? is it the variety of things you can do? what exactly is it? the term has always been confusing to me.

Many people over many different threads have given good definitions of what people usually mean when they say this game is shallow. I won't attempt to define it again but will give an example.

As the game stands you'd get a mission like this:
Red flamingos want you to kill someone from the Purple flamingos. If you do it you get 100k
You take the mission, do it and get 100k. End of story

In a game with more depth:
Red flamingos seek help with purple flamingo tyrant - 100k reward
You take the mission and succeed. You get 100k but now the purple flamingos are mad and send hitmen after you. The tyrants daughter swears revenge. The red flamingos are happy and their leader offers you more jobs. The grey flamingos trade with the purple flamingos and you have options to try diplomacy with the greys to get them to side with the reds or you can attempt force against the greys too.

And so on etc.

 

[Jex =TE=]

So true. That being said, it's easy to fall into the grind pattern, especially if there's something you want (a specific ship or rank), the thing is to question whether you truly want it or are just working because you're used to "level ups". I was aiming at a Python or FDL then realised as long as I could kit it out as I needed, an Asp Explorer did all I need. Now I don't work for the money, I do the jobs that interest me at that time. It's a much better way to work - and explore.

I think the idea that Elite is shallow is absurd. After decades of gaming, it's no way shallow and I find it curious those who often say its dull are those who have farmed excess of a hundred hours on it. That's a lot for any game. Go back 10 years, no space game had this content as a sandbox, the sheer scope and diversity. It may not be for everyone, but within its class, within its mandate, it does a staggering job. Yes, we'd all love to see more nuances, but we don't start demanding every shop in GTA has a story. There are limits, and limits to push, pushing takes time. As it is, it's a great experience. When it gets dull, as all does, take a break or enjoy another game, but there is a lot to do, imo, just we spend so much time on it, even that range of content can get dull for some.

Errrr you do know about Frontier Elite 2 right and it's successor - they were better games than what we have now.

You'd be wrong too in your assertion that people who are bored have grinded for hours. I have an A rated Viper which I'm quite happy with. I have enough money now to buy a DBS. The thought of having to fly around just to find one to buy is off-putting enough. Where's my yellow pages? I don't grind but I hardly play because the content is extremely shallow. How you can say it isn't is beyond me but I can try to explain why it is demonstrably so...

AI - the AI in the game are rubbish.

Bounty Hunting/Combat Zones or any other fighting is an endless amount of the same rubbish AI (that cheats). Here's a CZ in space, why is it there - who knows! - Shallow.

Trading - if you're about to say this is deep then I don't know what to say. This is the most basic you can make it - trading simply cannot get any more basic than this.

Exploring - This should be renamed "Circular Jpeg Gallery Generator" because as far as "exploring" goes, this is not. This is akin to driving down the mototway/highway and driving through all of the major cities where you live and then getting home and telling your mates "Yep - I explored all the major cities of our nation" - this is intellectually dishonest.

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

DO yo honestly think grinders like to grind? , the fact they grind in the first place is evidence of lack of depth, doing the same thing over and over just for money isnt game play, thats just a RL job sim, ild love to know why i was hired to kill some random npc, i want to know why this npc has such a high bounty and if it would be right to kill him,

And the issue there is the BGS....

Bring up BB
Randomly create missions for BB
Assassination Mission - insert RNG location and price
Insert random name
Insert text file "Assassination text 12b"
Assign Elite ranking for AI and base kill fee on that ranking

Now, why is Pirate A who killed 3 people but is Elite ranking worth more to kill than Pirate F who's just murdered 100 people in the system you're in?

 

[Viajero]

*Mod hat off

i think there is a valid case to be made that FD bumbled the exploration side of the game a bit. Personally i think it could be reeled back in and fixed, but it would upset a lot of people (and my ideas were as often considered to be terrible as often as they were decent so I guess changes are unlikely to happen)

however I can see why some think it is not really exploration given we can open the galmap from day 1 and see an over view of the entire milky way, and just point our nose and jump...... not really any planning needed, (unlike wha was said back in KSer where we were told exploration would take planning and time before a jump could be made, and we would slowly expand out into the big black. hell iirc some players got to Sag A before the game was even 1 day into gamma. That is a huge missed opportunity imo.

Technically right now i would say ED exploration is more space tourism rather than exploration....... and dont get me wrong, there are some great sights to behold... but imagine how amazing it would be to get to Sag A, if it had took 2 years to map a route there, and a number of different large exploration missions to actually create that route there. (and as such how much more rewarding if when you sold that route date back to universal cartegraphics it then opened it to other players. that to me is the spirit of exploration

While I agree with you the game has tons of opportunities to improve and exploration is not the least of them (making Sag A* a 2 year trip wont probably be in my list though!), I think you are probably oversimplifying a bit its complexity and challenges, in some cases, in organizing such trips. From ship, build, path, waypoints, jumponium synthesis and jump range optimizing, risks on navigating surfaces etc all aspects converge to add to it. Our explo threads are full of guides and commanders asking for advice to prepare and perform and discuss such trips, and not only in this forum. There is a significant amount of material issues to learn for it, to do it well.

 

[Jukelo]

The depth offered by the exploration component of Elite wont give you that I am afraid. The depth of exploration of Elite comes in many other ways that you also need to master to get there, much like those pilots tracing their paths as best as they can to avoid issues en route, preparing the ship accordingly, planning in advance and coordinating way points in the way, enjoying some vistas that no one else will see and interacting with those landscapes without being killed to reach your destination etc.

I disagree. If what you said was true I would love that, as that's exactly the kind of stuff I want: a game that is deep enough and challenging to force you to plan and prepare, to plot your route in advance... and punishes you if you don't. That's one of the reasons KSP and Orbiter are brilliant games for me, you have to know your stuff and prepare. And all the while you're probably having to learn a lot about orbital mechanics, which I find most enjoyable.

But that's just not Elite. You don't need any special knowledge to do well. You don't need much experience. Experience will only make it even more obvious there's nothing there that you really need to prepare for, since there's hardly any danger.
The first time I took an Adder on an exploration trip, I had read all kinds of horror stories. I now understand they were mostly made up by people thinking there was more to the game than there actually is. People afraid of blach holes. People afraid of fuel scooping and heat and neutron stars and close binaries. So I stocked up on heatsinks and even had an AFM. Ahah, I was still so hopeful for the game.
These days, when I take the Asp, I don't even bother with heatsinks or AFM. I know I only take a couple percent heat damage when the game throws a really close binary at me, and these are rare enough that at no point in any of my trips I have been in any danger of ever losing my ship or taking significant enough module damage to need an AFM to avoid the hassle of limping back home with reboot-repaired modules. It should be telling that exploration only requires one skill, and that is to filter out the unscoopable stars from your galactic map to make sure you always get some fuel at the end of every course plot. I've flown 160k LY, the vast majority of that on exploration trips, and I've yet to find any depth or challenge there. I do it all for the nice vistas, but the whole planning thing is basically limited to playing around with coriolis.io to get the most range out of my Asp. Hardly an intellectually challenging task.

 

[Jex =TE=]

Do:
one trade to another system that you're not currently in
one exploration to an unexplored system
one mission
one act of piracy
one military rank progression
one mining expedition
one planetary landing and subsequent POI discovery
one act of random kindness
one expedition to find alien artifacts
one distress call were you transfer fuel or repair a stranded ship
one battle at a high conflict zone
one battle at a low conflict zone
one bounty hunt of another wanted commander
one time join a "power" and do a mission to help that power
one time play Arena until you get one rank
one of the previous with another commander in multiplayer

Do these things while trying to stay alive and advance your financial standing and or ship components.

When you're done with that come back and I'll give you more content to do because there's more to be done. Most will have already spent more time in ED by this point than you do in other games. I'll see you when you get back.

It's funny because I thought after you posted that list you were going to finish with

"Once you've done them once, you've done them a thousand times because they never change" and what's the difference exactly between a low/high CZ because they play exactly the same to me. Also, a lot of the things in your list are the same thing they just have different text to try to make them look different.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

While I agree with you the game has tons of opportunities to improve and exploration is not the least of them (making Sag A* a 2 year trip wont probably be in my list though!), l.

perhaps i did not explain well... (and yes perhaps i did over egg (a little) how easy exploration is)

it is not that i think it should take 2 years to get to Sag A now....... it is that i think it should have taken 2 years to get to Sag A the 1st time.

once the route is mapped, then i think the travel mechanisms we have now is fine, I just think the 1st time we go to a new destination (or one which has not had the route sold to universal cartographics) that it should take longer and involve some form of "work", and it is that "work" which separates the exploration from mere tourism.

of course that "work" needs to be enjoyable, and embrace some interest/excitement, or at least promise the potential of one or the other of those things.

 

[Viajero]

*Mod hat off

... but the whole planning thing is basically limited to playing around with coriolis.io to get the most range out of my Asp.

Ok. And I still disagree with you

A minute ago exploration was just honking. Now we are adding looking at your jump ranges and looking for ways to optimize! This is some progress! Starting to look like the Monty Python sketch with the jews are plotting against the romans Slowly but surely some of you will soon come around!

Joking aside, please note that I do not dismiss the fact there are many issues that can be improved or add upon in many aspects of Elite, including explo. My main argument was that in its current state explo offers a different kind of depth as represented by the players enjoying themselves in the couple vid examples I showed above. I get that kind of content/depth may still not be your cup of tea, but if, as it is, explo does not already grasp your attention a bit then I highly doubt that a further refinement or addition in some transactional mechanics in the activity as you suggest may win you over.

 

[Jex =TE=]

I think it's just a matter of 'why?'.

If you can imagine a 'why?', then the game has lots to do to reach the intrinsic reason you asked the question.

If you want the game to provide the answer to your question, 'Why should I play the BGS?', 'Why is it important that I kill this NPC?', 'Why does it matter if I....<fill in the blank>? then the game will come across as shallow.

Not sure it there is a right or wrong here...it's just a matter of personal feelings towards what a game does. This game does not give you any reasons for 'why?' whether you enjoy creating those reasons or not is entirely up to you as a player.

Another new guy to the forums! Welcome

I just need to point out (again) how your argument is invalid. We're not asking why we should do things we're saying the things that are there we've done and they're repetitive and boring.

 

[Jex =TE=]

Actually, going by current state of neuroscience, playing pretend is the most intellectualy stimulating thing you can do with your brain.

Cite your source and do you mean as a child or an adult?

 

[Roybe]

I respect you a lot Roybe but I'm at a loss that you don't recognise that motivation is a powerful tenet of the human condition. I would go as far as to say it's our primary drive for food, water etc

I do not disagree with the idea that motivation is a powerful tool in the toolbox of game designers, and that there is a balance that can be struck between personal motivation and game provided motivation. All I can do is say 'This is where the game is at.' at this point. No one knows how much the devs will add to the game to add motivator's...we do know crafting is coming....but what will not change is the expectation that players will provide some of the reason for actions and activities within the game.

My point really is that this game provides a canvas...and people have to provide the motivation for doing something. There is 'grind', but the grind is a means to your ends....you only have to work on it as much as you want to, once you make enough to do 'what you want', you can ignore it.

My only 'wish' is that the game had some level of internal connection from the topmost Political powers to the factions.

 

[Wedgetail]

*Mod hat off



Ok. And I still disagree with you

A minute ago exploration was just honking. Now we are adding looking at your jump ranges and looking for ways to optimize! This is some progress! Starting to look like the Monty Python sketch with the jews are plotting against the romans Slowly but surely some of you will soon come around!

Joking aside, please note that I do not dismiss the fact there are many issues that can be improved or add upon in many aspects of Elite, including explo. My main argument was that in its current state explo offers a different kind of depth as represented by the players enjoying themselves in the couple vid examples I showed above. I get that kind of content/depth may still not be your cup of tea, but if, as it is, explo does not already grasp your attention a bit then I highly doubt that a further refinement or addition in some transactional mechanics in the activity as you suggest may win you over.

Exploration is a good example. Despite not being everyone's cup (or inexplicably spawned 1t canister) of tea, it is one of the few areas that a player can actually impact the galaxy, even in a such miniscule way as getting the first discovery tag, that he (or she) and every other players can see. i.e. everyone making a pilgrimage to Sag A* will know the name Zulu Romeo, likewise Erimus/Kamzel for Beagle Point - and although my own little list of "discovered by Wedgetail"'s may never be visited by another player, I know that I have left my mark on the galaxy somewhere

The other one (that I can think of at the moment) is (was?) the bounty board. Although I have been relatively law-abiding for the last year or so, I remember getting a little rush of excitement when I saw my name on a system's 5 top bounties one time (was promptly killed shortly thereafter )

Both of these are relatively small touches, resource- and programming-wise, that actually made me feel a part of the in-game universe

Not many other things around in-game (yet) that make you feel a part of things that way

 

[Roybe]

Another new guy to the forums! Welcome

I just need to point out (again) how your argument is invalid. We're not asking why we should do things we're saying the things that are there we've done and they're repetitive and boring.

This is actually true in any game. Once you know the mechanics, how things work, there's not much left to do but beat the game and move on. Except, Elite has no 'win' scenario. Then the question for this game is 'What next?' I can certainly give you lots of answers to that...but they only are expansions using the same basic mechanics. On that, I have no answers. You have to find a way to keep enjoying playing the game.

 

[Arkantes]

perhaps i did not explain well... (and yes perhaps i did over egg (a little) how easy exploration is)

it is not that i think it should take 2 years to get to Sag A now....... it is that i think it should have taken 2 years to get to Sag A the 1st time.

once the route is mapped, then i think the travel mechanisms we have now is fine, I just think the 1st time we go to a new destination (or one which has not had the route sold to universal cartographics) that it should take longer and involve some form of "work", and it is that "work" which separates the exploration from mere tourism.

of course that "work" needs to be enjoyable, and embrace some interest/excitement, or at least promise the potential of one or the other of those things.

Basically: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6418

Spoiler

Players explore to build up the details on their galaxy map
When starting a new commander the player will have some details on their galaxy map
This will allow the player to travel to any locations they have map data to, without having to explore
Players can buy map data from authorities to expand their ships computers library of maps
New map data will allow the player to travel to new locations without needing to explore
Map data that is bought from authorities is not to the highest level of detail and can be improved with player gathered data
Map data includes hyperspace routes to systems and major points of interest in that system

Players can use scanning equipment and probes to detect systems and record new hyperspace routes
Scanners are used to detect any nearby systems that are within the players jump range
Scanners will give the player a vague indication of the direction of a system
High end scanners can give the player a better details of the system they have detected (is it a star, an asteroid field etc.)
Players can then launch hyperspace probes that will give the player more information on the part of space they are looking at
Probes will give the player heat-map style data to help guide the player to the correct co-ordinates for a jump
Different probe ammo can provide different information, or react based on objects in the target system
Using the data they have gathered the player must align their ship as best they can with the target system and activate the hyperdrive to jump to the system
The player’s ship records data of any successful jumps the player makes
The pilots federation will always pay players for the first successful jump they make using the exploration method (If the player bought the map data for the jump they cannot sell the data), even if the player is not the first person ever to make the jump (the pilots federation use the data to improve their telemetry and keep maps up to date)
If the player is the first person to ever make the journey they receive a bonus for discovering the hyperspace route
The closer the player lines up their jump to the target system, the higher quality the data the players ship will gather on the jump. Higher quality data is worth more money when sold to authorities
If a player’s jump is not accurate enough they may suffer a miss jump
Longer distance jumps require a higher level of accuracy
A systems contents may also affect how accurate a players jump must be to avoid mis-jumping

 

[Hellhawk666]

...
it is not that i think it should take 2 years to get to Sag A now....... it is that i think it should have taken 2 years to get to Sag A the 1st time.

once the route is mapped, then i think the travel mechanisms we have now is fine, I just think the 1st time we go to a new destination (or one which has not had the route sold to universal cartographics) that it should take longer and involve some form of "work", and it is that "work" which separates the exploration from mere tourism.

I tend to agree with your view, Mike. It has always felt to me that exploration was a rushed mechanic. So much effort was poured into the networking aspect of the game to have it ready for gamma release that many features were temporarily cut, that much is common knowledge. What I strongly suspect happened to exploration was that FD simply ran out of time to implement the system they originally envisaged. We definitely did not get the system that was proposed in the DDF.

Both David and Michael said in print during alpha that exploration in deep space would be something you could only do with the aid of other players, or at least it would be much easier and more efficient as a group. There was also a more extensive wear and tear system proposed. These features would have contributed to an exploration mechanic that was fundamentally more dangerous and interesting than the one that was eventually released.

The lack of feedback from exploration data being fed into the community is also a missed opportunity. I think FD are aware of the issues these simplifications created, but have either decided to ignore them as just unavoidable, or else are hoping that adding further layers of complexity to the existing mechanic will make make up for its deficiencies.

 

[Soliluna]

*Mod hat off



1. Re what is exploration... Exploration starscapes and landscapes are not random as you seem to feel/suggest though, they are deterministic. But either way, I guess some of those that have managed to see the monolith in Altais 2B and jump all over it, compare Canis Majoris / Betelgeuse side by side by their dwarf companions by positioning yourself at the right spot, see the first gas giant with fluorescence emitted light (only recently btw), enjoy the star studded skybox only available closer to Sagittarius A*, rally in the hills in Miterrand Hollow while New Africa speeds past you in the sky, or reach the opposite side of the galaxy in a sidewinder, and being able to tell us about it will very much disagree with your view. Having said that you can indeed still discover and enjoy great locations well within the colonized bubble too. And all different.

2. Deep. *Shrugs* You again try to force your definition of "deep" on a kind of gameplay that you dont seem to enjoy at all in the first play. The argument I exposed above still holds I am afraid, as it seems we have just started to argue in circles on this point. You are looking for a different kind of depth, the one that is directly translated to gameplay stats and characteristics and possessions and their interrelation. The depth offered by the exploration component of Elite wont give you that I am afraid. The depth of exploration of Elite comes in many other ways that you also need to master to get there, much like those pilots tracing their paths as best as they can to avoid issues en route, preparing the ship accordingly, planning in advance and coordinating way points in the way, rewarded sometimes by enjoying some vistas that no one else will see and interacting with those landscapes without being killed to reach your destination etc. That may not be depth of your liking but it is depth, as deep or more than the one you d probably like to have. Just different.

I appreciate what you're saying but you're migrating the features of gameplay towards the artistic and technical merits of the experience. I love the art, the sound and the technical achievements throughout the game. It's astonishing how beautiful the game can be, however this is distinctly not gameplay. Certainly important in the playability of the game, but not the gameplay.

With regards to the depth of the systems in exploration, where is the profundity? The list of things you need to consider when exploring is incredibly short and each one is arguably not even a consideration. There is a "best" way of going about things that is quite obvious for anyone not completely new to the game. I'm not saying that people don't find that enjoyable, but deep =/= enjoyable, and it is not deep...

Deep is learning a game like Dota 2 where you need to consider the 100+ heroes and their stats and stat growths. The 1000+ abilities including their effects, who has them, cooldowns, damage or healing and the 200+ items, their stats, effects, cooldowns, damage, healing and how they combine together. The potential builds for each and every hero (thousands), the ways they interact with each other and what compositions work against certain heroes, why each may be picked or banned in a game. Learning the timings of each build in each game and how important they are, how they can change the dynamic of each game and how certain plateaus determine when a teamfight should and would occur. Learning when it's time to push, split push or defend, when you can gank, how to gank and how to jungle. How to farm, flash farm, support, ward, counter ward, how to combo, how to stack, how to pull, how to deny, how to pressure, how to zone, how to bait. The list just goes on and on and on and it's a game with only one map, each item on the list above has choices involved and each choice greatly affects the game - and there is no right choice, no "obviously this is the correct answer" choice. It's a game that I've played for several thousand hours and still not learnt or experienced all of the depth on offer. There are heroes that I have only played once or twice, still. That is gameplay depth - certainly, the things I listed may not make much sense to someone who has never played Dota or a moba, however these are intrinsic to the design of the game and a testament to its success.

If you were to list what you needed to consider (that was not obvious) in Elite, the list would end rather abruptly by comparison. The equipment in a loadout is obvious, the stars you want to scoop are obvious, the commodities you want to trade are obvious. That is because it is not deep and has been designed that way on purpose. It is being addressed in some respects and I imagine this will only benefit the enjoyment it provides most players. But it could go a lot further, it could provide far more opportunities for learning, for satisfaction, for interaction, for efficiency, for motivation and for immersion. And it could do all of that without impacting the playstyles of players already enamoured to the experience.


Gameplay depth is clearly very difficult to describe and I'm useless at describing things. Gameplay depth is not about how many choices there are to approach a given challenge (variety) it's about how your choices impact the games outcome or the outcome of that challenge. Everything I listed above for Dota, everything is in a typical game, all of those features will impact a game greatly, you are constantly exposed to these meaningful choices. It's also important to consider that a deep game does not allow you to skim the surface and immediately know how best to approach a situation, which is what occurs in Elite for almost every part of it. Depth in games is about not having "always right" ways of going about things. Take the exploration scanner for example - there is a best one - there is no alternative. It is an obvious choice.

Consider these (off the top of my head):

Bio Scanner - Better at scanning for biological life or the potential for biological life. (More CR from earthlikes and ice worlds)
Mineral Scanner - Better at scanning for minerals (More CR from rocky worlds and rocky belts)
Precious Metal Scanner - Better at scanning for metals. (More CR from high meta worlds and pristine rings)

If you had a choice of which scanner to equip before going on a trip and each one provided a unique benefit, exploration gameplay would have more depth. There would be no "right" scanner, there would be a choice of scanners that greatly effected how you approached the game and what rewards and satisfaction you would get from the game. Not only that, it would completely change the routes you might take having the knock on effect of giving you more of the exploration gameplay you already love.

Then consider the scan itself, currently you click one button and it goes ahead and does it, great - for discovering objects within the system. What if also, you could fly around in a system dropping scanner drones. Certain configurations of drones would lead to better scans and more profits, however the probes would be limited to being within a certain range of each other and/or your ship. The better the scan of an object in the system, the more credits you make, it could have the added effect of showing up certain signal sources that may be worthwhile investigating based on the type of drones used.

Suddenly it's no longer a hop and scan, you would make decisions based on your type of scanner and what bodies are in the system. You might travel out to see that beautiful black hole but on the way drop some scanner probes around a few of the planets to scan them, scanning them might reveal a signal source containing more data for you to pick up. These are just off the top of my head thoughts - I would expect a design team to have many more ideas (better ones at that).

 

[Jex =TE=]

*Mod hat off



I think this response is precisely an example why the OP is right on the money in many respects. If you agree with the quote above then you may be very close to enter in full the "grinding" mode and "gaming the game" territory. Which is also a perfectly valid way to play the game, dont get me wrong, but one that I suspect will make you burn out faster imho.

On the other hand you have players who currently enjoy exploration in a very very different way to what you would imagine or expect from more traditional MMO´s and very differently to what the quote above suggests, i.e. emergent actions and activities that have their own depth and fun in the sand of this great sandbox. And by their standards, there seems to be depth a plenty, plenty of things to learn and decisions to make. Just not the way you may like it to be.

There are plenty of things that can be done to improve many aspects of the game and its mechanics (including exploration), no doubt, but thinking of exploration (as the quoted example) as shallow because it is just honking and jumping is a bit disingenuous:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOn-JF-MJBA&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io1-5B6YNpE

In my game I can't land on planets - what do you suggest I do?

 

[Ian Phillips]

Buy Horizons ?

 

[Jex =TE=]

In the same way, going to the shop around the corner can be just going to the shop around the corner, or it can also be a tac op milsim as I dress up like a commando and shoot imagined targets with my invisible gun and bullets. (Nothing wrong with that either, my trips around the shop are definitely fun)

There is emergent gameplay possible in most online games, I've seen similar things happen with tonnes of mmo's - I've seen it happen in games like L4D2 on random servers.

But that doesn't really change what the gameplay is. It is enter a system and "honk". That is the "game", all of the other stuff is social interaction and imagination - not the game.

Yes you can make up games in COD if you wanted. It's something you can do in any game you can think of in fact but that doesn't make it fun. So basically what the answer is "ED is a boring grindy game if you play the game and don't make up your own things to do"

I don't really know how you can have that position about a game and say it's a good game. Also, why would I want to do the things in ED that I can do and do a lot better with other games I have and do it with my friends. Why would I turn to a mediocre game to make my own fun when I can turn to much better games and have even more fun? The logic here is missing.

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

For me i think VR helps. Much like I enjoy just getting in my car and going for a drive in the country on a nice sunny day, I can get much of the same enjoyment of just flying my ship when in VR. ED in VR is bordering on a different game than ED on a monitor, you pick up on so much more detail that is just not there on a flat screen and the feeling of being there is quite compelling in and of itself..

This is something us non VR users probably can't get our heads around and about the only argument I would agree as being positive and worth experiencing. I'm big on immersion so this is something I would enjoy a lot.