And if they run out of stars...then they can always add Andromeda or smaller satellite galaxies.
(idea for DLC )Couldnt have said it better.
400 billion starssystems...is that 399.99bn too many?
- Thread starter Altissimus
- Start date
(idea for DLC )
Well, at leat all the "skybox" is real and I think it's something "romantic" that you can see a little star and say "one day maybe I can reach that place" ^^
I touched on player spread in another thread about, bizarrely enough, overcrowding. My expectation was that the availability of three character slots would result in known space being reasonably busy even if players also want to explore. The only problem I can see in the long term is that players who explore a lot may have so much invested in that character that they won't spend much time around the home systems.
The post mentioned in my quote is here
The nice thing about ED in my eyes is the flexibility of a huge game universe: if you want player interaction you can have it, if you want your own piece of sky it's out there for the taking.
Edit: ninja'd for some of the sentiments by preceding posts :smilie:
Last edited:
I think you're somewhat missing the point. The billions of stars aren't "redundant". They provide the scale and backdrop for the game world that we're able to explore. The beauty of this is that it allows for a truly unique experience - you will be able to visit places that other players have never visited, and witness sights that other players have never seen. You will not be contained in a sandbox within which everyone is grinding through the same zones, doing the same thing.Interesting feedback from others too though....just so long as the redundant 399.99bn stars don't detract from anything else, then cool
Imagine if Frontier seed one-off events or discoveries in random star systems. The chance of you finding them is minuscule, but you'll know they're out there, and every fresh jump will carry the excitement of the possibility that you'll discover something unique. Imagine procedurally generated life, and discovering new creatures unlike anything that other players have ever seen. The possibilities are endless, and it's for that reason that many (possibly most) of us backed this game. It's precisely what makes it different and unique - the lack of boundaries, and the endless potential.
Afraid I skipped most of the replies in here, but
Apart from procedural generation taking the bulk of the strain and thereby minimizing overheads, I think the main reason is thus:
To make the night sky LOOK accurate.
It does not matter that we will only visit a fraction of the stars, nor does it matter that it is unlikely that many of the stars will never be frequented by anyone, ever.
What matters though, is that in a game that is trying to get realism as good as it can, the night sky looks right. And as the night sky is comprised of actual moving stellar bodies and not just a painted backdrop, it would look rather empty with only 1 billion stars.
Apart from procedural generation taking the bulk of the strain and thereby minimizing overheads, I think the main reason is thus:
To make the night sky LOOK accurate.
It does not matter that we will only visit a fraction of the stars, nor does it matter that it is unlikely that many of the stars will never be frequented by anyone, ever.
What matters though, is that in a game that is trying to get realism as good as it can, the night sky looks right. And as the night sky is comprised of actual moving stellar bodies and not just a painted backdrop, it would look rather empty with only 1 billion stars.
No, I'm not missing the point. But let's just take a look at what you've said here, in the general scale of things.
I understand that. Practically, however, doing that with 400 billion stars vs ten million stars (or, what you have left after you remove 399.99 billion, like I said) is, for all intents and purposes, exactly the same. Everything you've said above applies equally to ten million as it does to 400 billion.
Miniscule - so small as to be insignificant.
Insignificant - having little or no meaning.
Which is exactly my point. If they seed one-off events or discoveries in random star systems, the chance of finding them is so miniscule and insignificant that they may as well have not bothered. Better off to go buy a lottery ticket instead.
That's fine, and I get that, and it appeals to me too. Ten million vs 400 billion.
But the galaxy doesn't contain only ten million stars
And I disagree. The sense of scale is derived from the fact that we can journey anywhere in the galaxy without hitting an artificial wall.Little meaning to you, maybe. Not to a lot of us.
Depends how many they seed, and how they seed them surely?
Then given that the majority of content is entirely procedural, I'm not sure what your point is?
Different strokes for different folks I suppose, because that's not the way I see it. If I was in the explorer mindset then just the fact that I could explore virtually never ending new star systems with never ending new planets and new planetary surfaces (when planetary landing comes into effect) Well that would be a strong enough incentive for me to keep pushing out further.
Hell, it's early days yet who knows what FD will be implimenting in the future planetary wise? Shake and bake colonies out in the middle of nowhere? Who knows? But it's all there to play for. Fact is, that amount of stars means the story will never end.
Given all that this game has to offer, meeting other players is very low on my list of interests. I haven't minded helping to test the multi-player aspect in the PB so far (even with the lag and crashes - that's part of what we're testing for), but when the single player release comes around I'll be quite satisfied to dispense with the multi-player aspect entirely. But maybe that's just me.
Yeah, all those billions of star systems are a waste.....
Maybe it would be better if there were say <10,000 systems and they could all be linked by hyperspace portals. Perhaps also they could be arranged into convenient to visit regions, with handy choke point gates between them. Then everyone can have a jolly good time mingling with their neighbours and everyone will be happy with no lag and huge fleets, because it can all sit on a big client-server instance........oh wait a moment, I've stepped in something
Long live the Golden Path and welcome to The Scattering (let's hope Melange doesn't get implemented
Maybe it would be better if there were say <10,000 systems and they could all be linked by hyperspace portals. Perhaps also they could be arranged into convenient to visit regions, with handy choke point gates between them. Then everyone can have a jolly good time mingling with their neighbours and everyone will be happy with no lag and huge fleets, because it can all sit on a big client-server instance........oh wait a moment, I've stepped in something
Long live the Golden Path and welcome to The Scattering (let's hope Melange doesn't get implemented
Reasons against a full sized Galaxy (or similar spacial limitation).
Interestingly, a variation of this actually cropped up when DB and IB were creating Elite. Because each Galaxy reused memory when you Galactic Hyperspaced, the algorithms used to produce each galaxy gave them an unlimited number of galaxies to explore.
So why limit the game to 8?
The conclusion was that they wanted to maintain the illusion of the game having limits. It was felt both by DB/IB and Acornsoft (the publisher) that having unlimited galaxies would break the 4th wall of gaming, they wanted gamers to still find the game as believable (for the time) and having a limitation would reinforce this rather than detract from it.
Reference for this is in the Francis Spufford book "The Backroom Boys".
It applies here in reverse for ED.
Not having a full size galaxy in a game set in the Milky Way with supposed open world gameplay would break the 4th wall.
In addition, several posters have mentioned content for this vast quantity of systems, I feel that the truth is that many of those star systems will be padding and it's important that they are there for that very reason. It would (for me) start to feel odd after a while if every new system I entered was the equivalent of finding the Holy Grail. Having such a large quantity of systems permits ED to have many major discoveries and many more minor ones, enough for hundreds of thousands of players to experience the opportunity of unique finds without the feeling of tripping over the Ark of the Covenant every two minutes..
That's not to say that "padding" systems will be pointless, it is still essential that they are explored and discovered - if only that they provide prosaic resources to further exploration (base camps) or open new routes for hyperspace travel - allowing short cuts for trade or access to that "Holy Grail" system.
Just my thoughts.
Interestingly, a variation of this actually cropped up when DB and IB were creating Elite. Because each Galaxy reused memory when you Galactic Hyperspaced, the algorithms used to produce each galaxy gave them an unlimited number of galaxies to explore.
So why limit the game to 8?
The conclusion was that they wanted to maintain the illusion of the game having limits. It was felt both by DB/IB and Acornsoft (the publisher) that having unlimited galaxies would break the 4th wall of gaming, they wanted gamers to still find the game as believable (for the time) and having a limitation would reinforce this rather than detract from it.
Reference for this is in the Francis Spufford book "The Backroom Boys".
It applies here in reverse for ED.
Not having a full size galaxy in a game set in the Milky Way with supposed open world gameplay would break the 4th wall.
In addition, several posters have mentioned content for this vast quantity of systems, I feel that the truth is that many of those star systems will be padding and it's important that they are there for that very reason. It would (for me) start to feel odd after a while if every new system I entered was the equivalent of finding the Holy Grail. Having such a large quantity of systems permits ED to have many major discoveries and many more minor ones, enough for hundreds of thousands of players to experience the opportunity of unique finds without the feeling of tripping over the Ark of the Covenant every two minutes..
That's not to say that "padding" systems will be pointless, it is still essential that they are explored and discovered - if only that they provide prosaic resources to further exploration (base camps) or open new routes for hyperspace travel - allowing short cuts for trade or access to that "Holy Grail" system.
Just my thoughts.
Elite Galaxy is huge. Doesnt mean every system is a potential trade hub. So you have your small part of the galaxy that is "Known" and you find there civilisations.
The rest is Unknown and open for explorations. I really dont know what the problem is.
Its completely normal for "explorers" to be alone or in a team, and actually finding other players while you are exploring is a big exception. Atleast the more away you are from the "Known" part of the galaxy.
Its a sandbox, if you want to interact with players alot, you will probaly be more in civilised space then in a god forsaken rim in the galaxy.
The galaxy is huge that is good.
The rest is Unknown and open for explorations. I really dont know what the problem is.
Its completely normal for "explorers" to be alone or in a team, and actually finding other players while you are exploring is a big exception. Atleast the more away you are from the "Known" part of the galaxy.
Its a sandbox, if you want to interact with players alot, you will probaly be more in civilised space then in a god forsaken rim in the galaxy.
The galaxy is huge that is good.
How many games nowadays proposes a 400 billion systems galaxy, planetary landings, real scale ojects and star systems?
This may be the only game to make that bold choice. i'd say let them try.
This is what i've been waiting for so long, i'm not sure i would have backed it if it was any less. i dont care between 100 or 400 billions, as long as it is trying to get closer to the real thing i'm in.
But i dont see the point in making it smaller. It will be hard to leave the inhabited region anyway, most players will be there or forced to stay somewhat close to it. Explorers will try to go further, but they'll need to equip their ships, organize themselves and take a lot of risks. it's not like everyone will be at the other edge of the galaxy in the next couple of week after release. though i'm sure some will have already tried, and failed.
we may not find a lot of players because of the size? nice I find that better like this than to simply play solo.
And when events occur many players will probably get the info and try to get there, so it may not be that hard if you know where to look.
And if they can procedurally generate 10 million systems properly, then they can do it just as well with 400 billions or 1 billion billion, that's maybe simplistic but it's probably just a variable to change at that point, at least not much to change.
This may be the only game to make that bold choice. i'd say let them try.
This is what i've been waiting for so long, i'm not sure i would have backed it if it was any less. i dont care between 100 or 400 billions, as long as it is trying to get closer to the real thing i'm in.
But i dont see the point in making it smaller. It will be hard to leave the inhabited region anyway, most players will be there or forced to stay somewhat close to it. Explorers will try to go further, but they'll need to equip their ships, organize themselves and take a lot of risks. it's not like everyone will be at the other edge of the galaxy in the next couple of week after release. though i'm sure some will have already tried, and failed.
we may not find a lot of players because of the size? nice
I find that better like this than to simply play solo.And when events occur many players will probably get the info and try to get there, so it may not be that hard if you know where to look.
And if they can procedurally generate 10 million systems properly, then they can do it just as well with 400 billions or 1 billion billion, that's maybe simplistic but it's probably just a variable to change at that point, at least not much to change.
Last edited:
Exactly my point. And the beauty is the 400 billion stars is that everyone can have that sense of discovery... not just the first few players, who map, document and Wiki every system in a matter of weeks.
Just look at what happened to Eve Wormhole space... that was supposed to be the 'unknown'....
People here on elite forum are very much fixated on this vastness of space.
Non exploring is a corridor game or arena like games.
Example halo. cod SP and MP.
Even then even in a corridor game you can explore.
Exploring that room or corridor.
In tombraider I explore. Due to freedom a decent sized map there is a reward for exploring.
In a zombie invested open world you explore for finding weapons and other primory needs and shelter. Exploring is core part of the gameplay.
For gameplay focus of exploring the game world or universe need to be big enough to wander and find things. With good density and diversity of things to find.
For game as farcry a island is enough. Lots of exploring. Whole africa is to much. Whole earth!.
What that PG deliver is affordless quantity makes extreem quatity of entity feasable. And the only solution to get huge quantity.
PG is a very old solution very known but there is reason only specific games use that extensivly. And others it is not even noticed. The speedtree midleware for games.
Because often there is no need for insane huge amount of quantity.
But does a game need the full galacy? No. A decent chunc might be still to big.
Game with 25 stars and each on average 5 planets as sector.
And a 100 boarder stars with some mining sectors and early status of colonisation.
With a 1000 stars where there would be hidden artifacts
Will fit full fledge space sim exploring game.
1 milion stars is insanly huge to explore. The first 1 to 10 mil stars is problem to reach and 10 mil stars you don't notice much of those other 399,99 bilion in the background.
In real space there is this wall of speed limit and huge distance that is as a practical wall.
The greatest example of this insanity is ARMA3 its fPS sim but then using a huge island. Do we need a contigent. Or the whole earth. We don't.
If those pro 400Bil. People disagree.
Does reddeadredemtion.
Farcry
aRMA
Needs to have the whole earth as playground.
Also ED with its Planetside landing and fps walk around.
Are figuring out how to do that. And prospone those technical desision after first release. I wonder what comprises the take.
Non exploring is a corridor game or arena like games.
Example halo. cod SP and MP.
Even then even in a corridor game you can explore.
Exploring that room or corridor.
In tombraider I explore. Due to freedom a decent sized map there is a reward for exploring.
In a zombie invested open world you explore for finding weapons and other primory needs and shelter. Exploring is core part of the gameplay.
For gameplay focus of exploring the game world or universe need to be big enough to wander and find things. With good density and diversity of things to find.
For game as farcry a island is enough. Lots of exploring. Whole africa is to much. Whole earth!.
What that PG deliver is affordless quantity makes extreem quatity of entity feasable. And the only solution to get huge quantity.
PG is a very old solution very known but there is reason only specific games use that extensivly. And others it is not even noticed. The speedtree midleware for games.
Because often there is no need for insane huge amount of quantity.
But does a game need the full galacy? No. A decent chunc might be still to big.
Game with 25 stars and each on average 5 planets as sector.
And a 100 boarder stars with some mining sectors and early status of colonisation.
With a 1000 stars where there would be hidden artifacts
Will fit full fledge space sim exploring game.
1 milion stars is insanly huge to explore. The first 1 to 10 mil stars is problem to reach and 10 mil stars you don't notice much of those other 399,99 bilion in the background.
In real space there is this wall of speed limit and huge distance that is as a practical wall.
The greatest example of this insanity is ARMA3 its fPS sim but then using a huge island. Do we need a contigent. Or the whole earth. We don't.
If those pro 400Bil. People disagree.
Does reddeadredemtion.
Farcry
aRMA
Needs to have the whole earth as playground.
Also ED with its Planetside landing and fps walk around.
Are figuring out how to do that. And prospone those technical desision after first release. I wonder what comprises the take.