Does complexity equal fun?

[Spacecat]

I think a lot of the complaints lately have to do with the complexity of the game. Granted, the main flight mechanics and module upgrading isn't bad, but other portions of the game seem needlessly complex, to greater or lesser degrees. The biggest example is engineers, with a billion materials and commodities and multiple layers on layers of unlocking and upgrades. And now that engineers made a complicated mess, it needs a complicated fix. But there are other examples too. The surface scanner could be a lot simpler, just have blips fade in when in range and have a marker indicate direction, like most other game compasses. Mining could be simpler. Location of commodities could be simpler (yes I know there are "hints") but you should just be able to check all stations in a system. Most of these things aren't really hard, but many just seem more complex for the sake of being complex than they need to be. Meanwhile, core gameplay remains very simplistic (fly here, shoot/scan something/fly back). I understand there's a balance between making things too easy and making them rich enough to be interesting, I just think the balance of some aspects of the game is off. Sometimes people just get married to an idea of how something should work, when something simpler would work just as well, and I see this at work and in everyday life too.

 

[CMDR Endincite]

It's a tough balance to find, to be sure.
Just as one example: trade.
Yes many players just want the simplest means to effectively play trucker and make satisfying profit. Others want it as complex as can be. I think I'm somewhere in between.

There is something to be said for complexity of action vs. complexity of finding information, though, so I'll agree with that. What we actually *do* ingame can at times be beyond simplistic. They often appear to use complexity in finding information (e.g. wavescanner, as mentioned) to gloss over incredibly simple actions (driving around finding rocks). At times it feels they go too far in that direction.

 

[Marc_Hicks]

I think a lot of the complaints lately have to do with the complexity of the game. Granted, the main flight mechanics and module upgrading isn't bad, but other portions of the game seem needlessly complex, to greater or lesser degrees. The biggest example is engineers, with a billion materials and commodities and multiple layers on layers of unlocking and upgrades. And now that engineers made a complicated mess, it needs a complicated fix. But there are other examples too. The surface scanner could be a lot simpler, just have blips fade in when in range and have a marker indicate direction, like most other game compasses. Mining could be simpler. Location of commodities could be simpler (yes I know there are "hints") but you should just be able to check all stations in a system. Most of these things aren't really hard, but many just seem more complex for the sake of being complex than they need to be. Meanwhile, core gameplay remains very simplistic (fly here, shoot/scan something/fly back). I understand there's a balance between making things too easy and making them rich enough to be interesting, I just think the balance of some aspects of the game is off. Sometimes people just get married to an idea of how something should work, when something simpler would work just as well, and I see this at work and in everyday life too.

I find the mixture of complexity & simplicity in this game to be pretty much spot on.

 

[Gunnet]

Like every question of what is and isn't fun, it varies from person to person. Speaking only for myself; complexity doesn't equal fun, but may very well contribute to it.

For example, the way we currently navigate to certain surface coordinates is relatively complex (by video game standards). It's also completely unrealistic that our ship can't aid us with a marker, or at least by providing the correct heading, considering that it always "knows" precisely what coordinates we're currently at. But I enjoy that little bit of complexity. Because despite being neither realistic nor actually difficult, it feels more like navigating a ship on a desolate rock than just flying at another augmented reality marker would. But at the same time I realise many people just want the marker, and when that eventually happens it won't ruin the game for me.

Don't even think about touching my mining with the simplicity brush though

 

[Wylie28]

Not really. My design philosophy is make a game where the player can comprehend the entirety of the mechanics at any given time. Also generally what happens when you make things complex is people ignore anything they don't understand and say the game 'has the depth of a puddle". Sound familiar? Ive always enjoyed games with well designed game mechanics where the focus is more on the interactions of all the game mechanics, rather than making each individual mechanic complex. Pacman is always a great example of this. Each little ghost follows a very very simple pattern, however together they feel really like complex behaviors. A practiced player is able to learn what each ghost does and avoid each one by its behavior. Its fun, engaging, feels complex, but at the same time it can be mastered because of its root simplicity.

Elite does a great job at this when it comes to flying the ship itself. Everything isn't quite as good, they either fall into the too complex category where every one complains that "there isn't enough depth" or they fall into the category where things just don't interact with everything else well and its just not very fun. Now are is the balance off as much as people say? No... people are putting thousands of hours into the game obviously people enjoy the game just fine, I merely saying that most section of the game aren't up to the standards of the ship flying.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

It's a tough balance to find, to be sure.
Just as one example: trade.
Yes many players just want the simplest means to effectively play trucker and make satisfying profit. Others want it as complex as can be. I think I'm somewhere in between.

There is something to be said for complexity of action vs. complexity of finding information, though, so I'll agree with that. What we actually *do* ingame can at times be beyond simplistic. They often appear to use complexity in finding information (e.g. wavescanner, as mentioned) to gloss over incredibly simple actions (driving around finding rocks). At times it feels they go too far in that direction.

I do wish the markets were a little more complex.... not complex. But rather a little more logical.

The rest I think is pretty good.

 

[CMDR Endincite]

I do wish the markets were a little more complex.... not complex. But rather a little more logical.

The rest I think is pretty good.

Indeed, though elements of commodity markets are so often misunderstood and the tidbits of dev information about how to interpret the data so rare and unclear, that I think I've unfortunately settled into an "it is what it is" mode on the topic.

 

[Spacecat]

Don't even think about touching my mining with the simplicity brush though

Granted, if it wasn't for the need to manually sort materials, you'd probably fall asleep doing it.

 

[Roasted1982]

You think elite is complex? Someone in the PC section posted a link to a game called rogue system. Look it up. Now THAT is complex. I like the depth of engineers. It allows for crazy amount of tweaking. I like looking at stats, adjusting things and making interesting builds. Mining is really not that complicated. Compared to most console games, yes, elite is complex but check out any realistic flight sim on PC and elite pales in comparison. This is actually what attracted me to space sims as they strike a balance but elite is actually the first space sim I fully got into and in that category it's somewhere in the middle.

Edit: damn, I thought I was in the Xbox section. Lol

 

[Ignition]

I think a lot of the complaints lately have to do with the complexity of the game. Granted, the main flight mechanics and module upgrading isn't bad, but other portions of the game seem needlessly complex, to greater or lesser degrees. The biggest example is engineers, with a billion materials and commodities and multiple layers on layers of unlocking and upgrades. And now that engineers made a complicated mess, it needs a complicated fix. But there are other examples too. The surface scanner could be a lot simpler, just have blips fade in when in range and have a marker indicate direction, like most other game compasses. Mining could be simpler. Location of commodities could be simpler (yes I know there are "hints") but you should just be able to check all stations in a system. Most of these things aren't really hard, but many just seem more complex for the sake of being complex than they need to be. Meanwhile, core gameplay remains very simplistic (fly here, shoot/scan something/fly back). I understand there's a balance between making things too easy and making them rich enough to be interesting, I just think the balance of some aspects of the game is off. Sometimes people just get married to an idea of how something should work, when something simpler would work just as well, and I see this at work and in everyday life too.

I think the core gameplay mechanics need to be far more complex. Scaning a ship/planet/whatever is a joke. "Mining" on a planet is a joke, yeah shot the rock as a skimmer really deep. Mining is a joke as smuggling and passanger missions. Exploring is a joke, theres no exploration mechanics, everything is there to "discover" without any mechanic.

The key is making the mechanics complex so playing the game could involve actually doing something, operating your ship systems, scanners, utilities. Complexity in the mechanics would end the grind. I don't think engineers is complex. The problem is there's no mechanic to gather materials, its just RNG. You cant modulate a frequency in your scanner to find certain items, you cant use a probe and search items through a UI like a map. Theres no gameplay involved in the process, its all magic.

Im saying this since a long time on the forums and people say to me "Use your IMAGINATION". "You don't have enough IMAGINATION".

Its really funny.
The state of the game is a joke and I don't see it improving but getting bigger.
The thing is FD is focusing in other things and are very happy of the simplicity of their game.

 

[CMDR Zhon Daeli]

Addressing a few of your examples:

To me, engineers is needlessly complex. Were I designing the game, I'd have simply introduced "sub-modules" that can be attached to existing modules that modify their stats with positive and negative effects. Some modules can have more than one sub-module, however each sub-module impacts the performance of the other, somes in a good way, sometimes in a bad way. It would also remove the needless introduction of RNG ( which pretty much nobody really likes anyway ).
It's complex but it's more enjoyable because you can now fine tune your ship without RNG and without wasting time running around the galaxy looking for rare minerals.


Mining is complex in a way I don't enjoy.
Humans are lazy. If we can think of a better way to do things, we will do it.
Foot > Horse > Carriage > Train > Car > Plane.
Hand > Pickaxe > Automated mining equipment.

Here's a modern prototype of an asteroid miner. Modern. As in, recently.

Spoiler

So why introduce a system as needlessly complex as velcroing a laser to the front of your ship and then manually scooping minerals as they separate from the asteroid, or sacrifice cargo space with limpets and then still have to refine the material? Why can't a miner simply sell the raw stuff, why does he have to fashion gold bars? Needless complexity.

What's wrong with a mining drone ( see above ) that extracts the minerals, dumps them into a cargo container which you then have to collect from the asteroid with your limpets?
And it can get more fun if you can have multiple mining drones at once. Complex, but uncomplicated and easier to manage.


Trading, IMHO, needs a massive overhaul.
To begin with, I should not have to go outside of the game to find better trading routes because trying to find them in-game is needlessly tedious, needlessly complex, needlessly needless.

There is no reason, at all, why humans can travel through space at FTL speeds but not have discovered a way to communicate with each other in a more effective manner. We're already studying ways of creating FTL communication systems. It makes absolutely no sense for humanity to spread across the stars and NOT have an effective communication system in place first. That literally goes against who we are. Would we have sent people to the moon if our only form of communication was morse-code on a flashlight? No.

Instead, we have an economy that denies logical explanation. Hundreds of star systems in the bubble, and the economy is run by traders because there is "no other way" to communicate with allied or competitor stations? Really?
Of course, this inability to communicate is further compounded by the fact that some random mission giver can send you a text message 200ly from away, but stations next door to each other can't.

Needless complexity results in disjointed elements of a game.


Complexity can be a good thing but in moderation and not just implemented "because we felt like making it complex for the sake of teh gameplay."
If there's a valid reason for the complexity, it's implemented well and keeps you entertained as you do it.. I'm all for it. Otherwise it's just .. a pain.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Yes. Making thigs complex is challenging to understand and fun. Complicated on the other hand is bad. The difference here is that the level of depth increases with complexity while with complicated stuff it doesn't but both make content more difficult to understand.

Example: In NMS you had to recharge your shields manually through the UI. In Elite this happens automatically and you even have some charge times and different kind of shields. So NMS is complicated while Elite is complex.

 

[Roasted1982]

I will agree that trading sucks now but it's not cause it's too complicated but because there is a lack of tools to find good trade roots in game. We should Be able to download price lists from stations we visit automatically (or even manually) and there should be some in game interface to compare price date we have downloaded from various systems fairly easily. This way finding great routes would actually be possible from within the game. Currently the trades route map is decent for finding commodities for CG's and "source x tons of y" missions but it's practically useless for calculating profits forcing players to use out of game trading tools.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Complex doesn't necessarily mean fun. For instance having a DSS scan show stuff on the surface map like POI's doesn't make it more complex, if anything it makes it easier. But what it does is give us more compelling reasons to go and explore that planet instead of not bothering.

The same for missions. On their own, they are not very compelling and no real reason to do them apart from credit and rep/influence. If you give missions a real purpose like mini CG's sort of thing then things can get far more interesting. Again, not more complex, just better and more compelling reasons to things.

 

[Kayweg]

If complexity becomes impenetrable it will only add to frustration, not enjoyment.
ED isn't exactly a self explanatory game, often leaving the player to his own devices.
BGS and powerplay being the prime offenders here.
For me "easy to learn, tough to master" is what makes complexity enjoyable, and ED falls way short here.
And this has nothing to do with hand holding, nothing whatsoever.

 

[Insomnia]

No, complexity doesn't always equal fun. But complexity in some occasions equal depth.
Look at the core game mechanics. They aren't very complex. And I t believe this is why the game is largely considered to be shallow.

We have Engineers which is quite complex in itself, and very time consuming but very rewarding in the end.
We have Powerplay which is also quite complex and feels very deep.
Crew members which adds another layer and makes Elite feel a little more "human" and intimate.

But we don't have a complex foundation in which these features would make up a deep context.
We have 3 basic game mechanics: Trade, Combat and Exploration. That's it. They don't offer anything in terms of complexity or depth.

 

[NW3]

Personally, I would say that more complexity makes a game less fun. My work involves complex details, so I want a game to be relaxing and not too complicated. ED is the most complicated game I've ever played. In general, I avoid games with complicated inventories and crafting, which just makes it less fun for me. And actually, I wouldn't call ED particularly fun; challenging and rewarding, yes, so I continue to play.

 

[Wylie28]

Personally, I would say that more complexity makes a game less fun. My work involves complex details, so I want a game to be relaxing and not too complicated. ED is the most complicated game I've ever played. In general, I avoid games with complicated inventories and crafting, which just makes it less fun for me. And actually, I wouldn't call ED particularly fun; challenging and rewarding, yes, so I continue to play.

Totally agree. I don't really play ED for fun. (in fact I don't really play any games for fun) I play them for a sense of accomplishment. This is probably why I hate most mainstream super high rated games. They are too focused on instant gratification for me to feel any sense of accomplishment. Just like short repetitive gameplay gets boring to those after fun, constant rewards and unlocks get "meh" for those looking for the feeling of accomplishment.

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

Complex doesn't necessarily mean fun. For instance having a DSS scan show stuff on the surface map like POI's doesn't make it more complex, if anything it makes it easier. But what it does is give us more compelling reasons to go and explore that planet instead of not bothering.

The same for missions. On their own, they are not very compelling and no real reason to do them apart from credit and rep/influence. If you give missions a real purpose like mini CG's sort of thing then things can get far more interesting. Again, not more complex, just better and more compelling reasons to things.

Missions can be very important regarding the BGS.
So, there is a reason to do them and it can be worked out through trial and error...or go to help forums regarding same.

Reasons to go have a look at things would be a good thing, however they may incorporate that...one mission leads to another or something like that.

I am a bit weird because I went and scanned my local area which helped a lot a good while back because I wanted to know what was around me. I also "kinda" understand how the different states effect certain things regards price and availability.
A lot of players won't do that, even when it's a lot easier now with the Nav Beacons and such.

I just like working things out and if the game was super easy, where I didn't have to think or go look, then a greater amount of how I play the game would be lost and it might just become a meaningless grind...not something I would like to see happen in this game.

I actually thiink that giving players too much information is not good for the game and would stop them trying to understand how it works or just grind the best way to make profits or rank, which are already common topics on these forums.

So yeah, I like complexity or in simple terms, games that make me think or work out how they work.
I do not like to grind.

 

[Wyaston Hypatia]

Yes. Making thigs complex is challenging to understand and fun. Complicated on the other hand is bad. The difference here is that the level of depth increases with complexity while with complicated stuff it doesn't but both make content more difficult to understand.

Example: In NMS you had to recharge your shields manually through the UI. In Elite this happens automatically and you even have some charge times and different kind of shields. So NMS is complicated while Elite is complex.

This is how I feel. I want complexity and to have to work things out and discover better ways to do things. If anything I'd say ED needs more complexity.
The thing is however that with complexity you need the tools to be available to deal with it, and this is where ED falls down in certain areas.