Elite Dangerous is not a sandbox

[JeffRyan]

My Story in Elite and Frontier (and mainly in FFE) was my own. My search for Earth in Elite, my continuous trade runs to Barnards Star and my attempts at exploring the galaxy in Frontier and FFE were my stories. In my head. With no limitations on them.

In other games, my story is a variation on a very select theme and the ending is the same.

In the Elite series my story was unique to me. It was only mine, because Elite was my sandbox.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That comparative analysis in turn helps us understand where literally EVERYONE is coming from and how to communicate about our ideas about where the game should go. That is, the sliding scale analysis is a practical tool, not an absolute definition of sandbox for every other situation on the internet.

It's an artificial comparison - first the criteria set needs to be reviewed, then the scoring mechanism, then some field testing and benchmarking. The results as presented are highly subjective and have been compiled in a one sided manner.

If there is a story path that has to be completed in the game, it's not a sandbox.

 

[Oddball]

Precisely. ED needs to offer more than mere trade, combat and exploration.

It will! Have a little faith baby, have a little faith.

It is still early days yet and FD have a lot of ideas to put into the game that have not been implemented yet. Just because there will be minimal management type game play doesn't mean that the game will not be rich.

FD are good games designers. They know what makes a good game because they are experts at it.

Be patient.

 

[Gibbonici]

But the people on this very thread who agree with you that ED is indeed a sandbox game, disagree with you on what that definition is. And again, applying the sandbox sliding scale at least gives you a comparative analysis between games, such as games that are, say, FPS first person shooters with some sandbox features such as an open world, vs true sandbox games like DnD, minecraft, etc. That comparative analysis in turn helps us understand where literally EVERYONE is coming from and how to communicate about our ideas about where the game should go. That is, the sliding scale analysis is a practical tool, not an absolute definition of sandbox for every other situation on the internet.

The bottom line is that the sliding scale analysis helps us organize the genre from left to right, right most being less sandboxy, left being more. Or however you want to arrange it.

To tell you the truth, I think you're overthinking it.

 

[Memnoch]

Exactly. We were given a game world, an entire galaxy, to play with and do what we wanted in. Saying you couldn't do such and such within it doesn't detract from that.

 

[Tobytyke1972]

This sandbox scale is just an invention in your mind. Nobody has ever mentioned this scale you have invented apart from you.

Does it really what you think is a sandbox game or not, Sure the main issue is what the actual game plays like.

Also as you have said countless number of times, you don't limit the ED gaming model you find it too limited, so why are you still here flogging a dead horse. All you seem to want is for everybody to agree with your opinion, and anybody that disagrees is naturally wrong.

You also tend to start flamewars and ignore questions (not from me I must add) that do not allow for your little bit of fun you're having here to continue.

 

[Sisyphus]

I love that attitude you've got going on there, others have to be shoved out of the universe because the game is not built (or being built) on the model you deem fit for you and your mates? Spoken like a true SA member there sir, well done.

I think you're taking it out of context - first of all, ED already allows you to group yourself with friends or play solo. That is not my suggestion, but a planned feature. So I'm saying that if someone is worried about getting griefed (somehow, by other players "dominating" a tiny part of an enormous galaxy), then you can use the features ALREADY PRESENT in the game to avoid it.

You win, we win. Don't see a problem with that.

And as for me personally - I wouldn't want to grief anyone even if I could. In fact, I don't think adding more sandbox features to this game will make others feel "griefed". I just don't see how that is an inevitable, probable or even remote outcome.

 

[Lestat]

I think Sisyphus just trying to make EVE look better then it really is.

Why not add -5 for Point and click combat.

While Elite dangerous you have to fight or retreat. My pvp combat lasted 25 Mins. Two starter sidewinders. one pulse laser each.

 

[Sisyphus]

It will! Have a little faith baby, have a little faith.

It is still early days yet and FD have a lot of ideas to put into the game that have not been implemented yet. Just because there will be minimal management type game play doesn't mean that the game will not be rich.

FD are good games designers. They know what makes a good game because they are experts at it.

Be patient.

Keeping my fingers crossed!

 

[Herik]

Of course - however that is not to say that the game should adopt all of the mechanics of games that have followed on from Elite.

Then play single player. Or with a few friends... your gameplay experience doesn't have to impacted because a few people are crafting weapons and ships, or driving a station's market, etc.

But it is unfortunate you'd alienate this possible multiplayer, by requiring him to play in this players run corporate galaxy.

 

[Sisyphus]

This sandbox scale is just an invention in your mind. Nobody has ever mentioned this scale you have invented apart from you.

Does it really what you think is a sandbox game or not, Sure the main issue is what the actual game plays like.

Also as you have said countless number of times, you don't limit the ED gaming model you find it too limited, so why are you still here flogging a dead horse. All you seem to want is for everybody to agree with your opinion, and anybody that disagrees is naturally wrong.

You also tend to start flamewars and ignore questions (not from me I must add) that do not allow for your little bit of fun you're having here to continue.

I'm sorry you feel this way - please ignore me.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And as for me personally - I wouldn't want to grief anyone even if I could. In fact, I don't think adding more sandbox features to this game will make others feel "griefed". I just don't see how that is an inevitable, probable or even remote outcome.

For you personally, no. For others, creating these mechanics could allow griefing on a much grander scale. Corporations thrive on domination - do you think that the dominated enjoy it much?

 

[tooterfish]

I love that attitude you've got going on there, others have to be shoved out of the universe because the game is not built (or being built) on the model you deem fit for you and your mates? Spoken like a true SA member there sir, well done.

What makes you think he's from SA?

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

What makes you think he's from SA?

He's got a goon radar like mine

 

[Sisyphus]

For you personally, no. For others, creating these mechanics could allow griefing on a much grander scale. Corporations thrive on domination - do you think that the dominated enjoy it much?

Okay, so how exactly would corporations "dominate" in a way that would push individuals away? You would still be able to trade, explore and fight. How would each of these three things be negatively affected for you? (I'm just trying to understand how you see this developing...)

and how will corporations dominate the massive galaxy?

 

[Brett C]

The personal insults stop here.
There is no need to be naming and shaming one another.​

 

[ubermick]

Oh, for fu…

Look, if we all agree to never ever ever call Elite Dangerous a sandbox game, and call it open worldy, non sandbox (kiddie pool?) or even a bowl of jelly and custard, will that make you feel better instead of complaining about semantics?

I mean, you've even acknowledged that the game's path is following what was advertised since day one, so frankly I don't see what the problem is. Elite Dangerous is doing exactly what it said on the tin, so complaining that it's not like other games that you personally seem to like is a wee bit pointless.

 

[Lestat]

Okay, so how exactly would corporations "dominate" in a way that would push individuals away? You would still be able to trade, explore and fight. How would each of these three things be negatively affected for you? (I'm just trying to understand how you see this developing...)

and how will corporations dominate the massive galaxy?

How do Passengers be Trade goods? They can give valuable info. While trade good can't.

 

[Sisyphus]

Oh, for fu…

Look, if we all agree to never ever ever call Elite Dangerous a sandbox game, and call it open worldy, non sandbox (kiddie pool?) or even a bowl of jelly and custard, will that make you feel better instead of complaining about semantics?

I mean, you've even acknowledged that the game's path is following what was advertised since day one, so frankly I don't see what the problem is. Elite Dangerous is doing exactly what it said on the tin, so complaining that it's not like other games that you personally seem to like is a wee bit pointless.

The first part of the discussion was what is a sandbox? The second part is that the game would be better off by adopting a few more features from the sandbox genre. Many examples were given, such as crafting, player run markets, empire building and many more. But some folks who are new to the thread are bringing up the definition part again. Just be patient.

 

[tooterfish]

He's got a goon radar like mine

You need to get it fixed mate, it's not working very well.