Sounds awesome!
Now, if only i could get my hands on a REAL ship, i doubt very much i would be on this rock right now
Now, if only i could get my hands on a REAL ship, i doubt very much i would be on this rock right now
News 2.3 Dev Update
- Thread starter Edward Lewis
- Start date
Same here, but unfortunately we probably won't get one. :/
People still riding the Realisem/Immersion excuse Train ?
This post sums it up on how it is.
This post sums it up on how it is.
Easy Solution
Star Trek solved this with teleport...
EvE Online has solved the player/capsuleer instant transfer with installing clones on a system medical facility.
Elite can use the medical cloning facility of a Capital Ship nearby for example, or to the medical cloning facility of your currently docked station that has one. So you just need to make for example some jumps to a Corriolis high tech station to purchase a clone and spawn to a similar facility some jumps close to your buddies that only have to come pick you up, and i reckon all mindsets will be glad and content with it. Problem solved
PS: You can rename the Commander Avatar creation/modification interface as the Cloning's Facility interface, and for immersion and for future content, win-win anyway you look at it.
Tyrian Prime has left the cloning facility
Star Trek solved this with teleport...
EvE Online has solved the player/capsuleer instant transfer with installing clones on a system medical facility.
Elite can use the medical cloning facility of a Capital Ship nearby for example, or to the medical cloning facility of your currently docked station that has one. So you just need to make for example some jumps to a Corriolis high tech station to purchase a clone and spawn to a similar facility some jumps close to your buddies that only have to come pick you up, and i reckon all mindsets will be glad and content with it. Problem solved
PS: You can rename the Commander Avatar creation/modification interface as the Cloning's Facility interface, and for immersion and for future content, win-win anyway you look at it.
Tyrian Prime has left the cloning facility
Last edited:
Funny you mention that, since I recall one of the advertising blurbs containing "Choose your career". Has it not occurred to you that the immersion types may actually be looking for a sim that offers the job we'd have if we lived in 3303?
Perhaps that's difficult to appreciate if you've never had a job? Perhaps it's a repeat of that old fave: "Trolls go out of their way to ruin as many other people's fun as possible and relish in the salt" while shooting unarmed traders in the back...
Time was taken away from the main game to build CQC, to appease the insta pew pew crowd, who aren't playing it. Where are they? Why did they make such a fuss about it, only to abandon the arena like in so many other games?
If you don't want to play a game that's too hard, don't. I hear Tetris is easier.
Oh and moderators, can this one have a warning for name calling as well please?
You think travelling 30 mins is hard?
I mean I can do it while watching telly and browsing the forums at the same time.
Last edited:
Many of the arguments against what is perceived as only "immersion" forget that a lot of the complexities of this game have opened up avenues of fun and interesting gameplay not originally considered of any importance.
For instance: fuel. It can be considered annoying to have such a realistic limit to traveling the galaxy, to stop and refuel at starports or to fuel scoop from stars. It takes some time, a measure of planning, and care when in less civilized space to avoid running out of it. But what happens when you run out of fuel and you don't want to lose what you're carrying? You call for help, which is what an organization like the Fuel Rats sprung up for.
Emergent gameplay isn't something that's usually planned for, it just happens. I feel that relying purely on an almost unlimited "telepresence" system will inhibit this kind of gameplay.
If we're to keep a telepresence system, then I would suggest it be limited to a certain distance within the host player's ship, say within a solar system (that would be my suggested maximum allowance, I know others might push it further, but as long as it's a reasonable limit), to be able to "board" it. Some have said that telepresence isn't a problem in regards to basically jumping across the galaxy at will, comparing it to what they say is the ease of space travel via ship anyway, so if that's the case, then surely limiting the initial access range wouldn't be a big deal.
Though I would much prefer a more realistic but game-enhancing approach, that doesn't necessarily mean we have to do away with telepresence either.
Others have suggested as well to mix and match a telepresence system AND a more realistic "you meet me at the same starport I'm at so we can board the same ship" method (I'd add that you could expand it to the same solar system and have a fee for it the further out you are, representing "travel" via some other unseen means to reach the host player ship's location, but yeah). I wouldn't mind having both, with telepresence limited in ways a "physical" visiting crew wouldn't be. For instance, being able to actually ferry said physical crewmembers to drop them off at other locations. Some of my favorite games had similar mechanics, and some of the most spontaneous fun I had was from something like that, so I don't want those possibilities ignored because others hadn't even considered them.
Obviously there could be drawbacks to being physically aboard another player's ship, as well. Going up in flames with them could have a negative impact, but not in such a way as to discourage a player from doing it this way instead of purely telepresence.
Player passengers for taxiing or other expanded mechanics that require physical player passengers/crew is a great opening for emergent gameplay, and could result in a whole new set of player-run businesses not directly built into the game, in addition to actual gameplay systems added to enhance what grows from this later on to the benefit of all.
I'm also not sure of the idea of telepresenced crew being able to skip out if they cause trouble for the host player, even if they stand to lose positive bonuses as a result of it. I feel if a crewmember commits a crime in my ship, they should accept the risk of taking a share of the blame, regardless. I understand a commander could also run amok and cause the crewmember to also receive bounties/fines/etc., but the crewmember should accept that risk when signing on, especially with an unknown commander.
My major disappointment with this, however, is the lack of less combat-focused roles for multi-crew. When I first heard of this, I was expecting a useful co-pilot mechanic in a variety of situations, such as when exploring uncharted space or doing cargo runs. I've been longing to take my friend along in my Cobra and get all "Han and Chewie" on the universe, basically. However, this system seems geared more towards much larger ships for combat-heavy purposes, and that doesn't seem all that interesting in the long run, so I hope this isn't all there's going to be for this system.
Having someone who could temporarily take over flying while I handle other things, who could plot my course, manage subsystems, do more detailed scans, point out secondary targets, target subsystems, etc. would have interested me more greatly than just purely being there as a glorified gunner.
Don't have too much else to say on this, but I really hope this isn't all multi-crew is going to amount to, otherwise I'll tire of it fairly quickly. This game isn't hyper realistic or anything, but it has a great deal of realistic (at least for the universe it takes place in) aspects to it that help make it fun and interesting, and I'm afraid of it being too "arcadey" at the expense of what drew me to it in the first place. I'm not looking for a life-sucking "game" like EVE Online, just something that lets me feel like I'm a part of a world and having fun in it.
Immersion and gameplay are not mutually exclusive things. We can have both, and I feel this game has done a fairly good job at having both in it.
For instance: fuel. It can be considered annoying to have such a realistic limit to traveling the galaxy, to stop and refuel at starports or to fuel scoop from stars. It takes some time, a measure of planning, and care when in less civilized space to avoid running out of it. But what happens when you run out of fuel and you don't want to lose what you're carrying? You call for help, which is what an organization like the Fuel Rats sprung up for.
Emergent gameplay isn't something that's usually planned for, it just happens. I feel that relying purely on an almost unlimited "telepresence" system will inhibit this kind of gameplay.
If we're to keep a telepresence system, then I would suggest it be limited to a certain distance within the host player's ship, say within a solar system (that would be my suggested maximum allowance, I know others might push it further, but as long as it's a reasonable limit), to be able to "board" it. Some have said that telepresence isn't a problem in regards to basically jumping across the galaxy at will, comparing it to what they say is the ease of space travel via ship anyway, so if that's the case, then surely limiting the initial access range wouldn't be a big deal.
Though I would much prefer a more realistic but game-enhancing approach, that doesn't necessarily mean we have to do away with telepresence either.
Others have suggested as well to mix and match a telepresence system AND a more realistic "you meet me at the same starport I'm at so we can board the same ship" method (I'd add that you could expand it to the same solar system and have a fee for it the further out you are, representing "travel" via some other unseen means to reach the host player ship's location, but yeah). I wouldn't mind having both, with telepresence limited in ways a "physical" visiting crew wouldn't be. For instance, being able to actually ferry said physical crewmembers to drop them off at other locations. Some of my favorite games had similar mechanics, and some of the most spontaneous fun I had was from something like that, so I don't want those possibilities ignored because others hadn't even considered them.
Obviously there could be drawbacks to being physically aboard another player's ship, as well. Going up in flames with them could have a negative impact, but not in such a way as to discourage a player from doing it this way instead of purely telepresence.
Player passengers for taxiing or other expanded mechanics that require physical player passengers/crew is a great opening for emergent gameplay, and could result in a whole new set of player-run businesses not directly built into the game, in addition to actual gameplay systems added to enhance what grows from this later on to the benefit of all.
I'm also not sure of the idea of telepresenced crew being able to skip out if they cause trouble for the host player, even if they stand to lose positive bonuses as a result of it. I feel if a crewmember commits a crime in my ship, they should accept the risk of taking a share of the blame, regardless. I understand a commander could also run amok and cause the crewmember to also receive bounties/fines/etc., but the crewmember should accept that risk when signing on, especially with an unknown commander.
My major disappointment with this, however, is the lack of less combat-focused roles for multi-crew. When I first heard of this, I was expecting a useful co-pilot mechanic in a variety of situations, such as when exploring uncharted space or doing cargo runs. I've been longing to take my friend along in my Cobra and get all "Han and Chewie" on the universe, basically. However, this system seems geared more towards much larger ships for combat-heavy purposes, and that doesn't seem all that interesting in the long run, so I hope this isn't all there's going to be for this system.
Having someone who could temporarily take over flying while I handle other things, who could plot my course, manage subsystems, do more detailed scans, point out secondary targets, target subsystems, etc. would have interested me more greatly than just purely being there as a glorified gunner.
Don't have too much else to say on this, but I really hope this isn't all multi-crew is going to amount to, otherwise I'll tire of it fairly quickly. This game isn't hyper realistic or anything, but it has a great deal of realistic (at least for the universe it takes place in) aspects to it that help make it fun and interesting, and I'm afraid of it being too "arcadey" at the expense of what drew me to it in the first place. I'm not looking for a life-sucking "game" like EVE Online, just something that lets me feel like I'm a part of a world and having fun in it.
Immersion and gameplay are not mutually exclusive things. We can have both, and I feel this game has done a fairly good job at having both in it.
Re. the instantaneous travelling to another ship; ED is a simulator more than a game, which is why immersion is important to a lot of players. But, if there is a break in immersion, it is only for a few seconds while you make the jump. Then you can get immersed again. Just like when you ‘die’ your ship is instantly recreated at the last station you visited and your Commander is also reincarnated – no matter what the distance. The Commander is not you – it is an avatar. The Commander is not real. The ship is not real. The ‘space’ it travels through is not real. Therefore something that is not real can easily ‘travel’ instantly through space that is not real. If you’re arguing for realism – you’ve got it. If you’re arguing for ‘realism within context’, you have to remember it’s a game and some functions lie outside of the fourth wall.
Erm, no? If I jump into an unexplored system my OCD won't let me out until I've level 3 scanned every single body, including the asteroid belts we get nothing for, but that's a rant for another day. Surely somebody will pay something for mining data? It's a navigation hazard, isn't safety worth a few CR, no? Please?
I remember my first visit to Maia, HONK! OMG, how many!? Still my highest paying system
Edit: Waiting while the original game loaded from magnetic tape took about that long.
Last edited:
Thewholebloodythingscouldbesosordid
On the issue of crewing with friends across the galaxy, I don't see how insta-crewing is detrimental to the enjoyment of those who prefer a more immersive experience. Thus I think that FD should give players the freedom to choose.
Let them insta-crew if they want to, or travel around before crewing up if they're more into inmmersion. This way everybody could be happy with his gameplay without messing others' gameplay. Live and let live!
Let them insta-crew if they want to, or travel around before crewing up if they're more into inmmersion. This way everybody could be happy with his gameplay without messing others' gameplay. Live and let live!
Immersion versus 'I have just come in from work and want to relax on a session of Elite' are seemingly incompatible. I would love to see a compromise between the two. I have neither the time nor the implication to spend hours sating the 'immersion' needs of people who clearly have way too much time on their hands to burn.
My tuppence worth.
My tuppence worth.
Last edited:
No, thats just giving the insta gratification pew pew gamers what they want to turn elite dangerous into at the expense of those who bought the space simulation this is.
Then when those insta gratification gamers go on to the next new shiny its those who bought the simulation who will be left with the messy gaming system they left behind over the simulation we bought.
Last edited:
Isn't this all about defining what counts as "a session of Elite"?
If it means a session of one particular activity like shooty shooty then maybe a space combat game is a better choice? Much of these arguments, and most of the grind/rng/etc arguments, have been pretty much ignoring the elephant in the room that there are people who want to be able to press fast forwards through most of the game and get on with the fighting.
Rather than massacring the rest of the game why aren't FDev focusing on fixing CQC/Arena so it actually gives them what they want??? It needs developing into an 'instant action' and 'career mode' type fighter game based on the car racing game archetypes but with all the ships, all the weapons, all sorts of combat metrics and special options that can't be made to fit into the main game.
Give the PvP people exactly what they want and let the 99% of the rest of the game get on with being Elite.
Strange as wings still need you to travel to the same location so have multicrew do the same . have the option for srvs to load up commanders in to the main ship if theres is destroyed . a whole new twist to fuel rats . Instant travel ,and the lack of confirmed content is already a poor implementation of this Multi crew update . there is no fun to be had here . "Have fun with your friends on your ship " i dont think so wings are more fun than this worthles introduction to Multi-crew. Naming ships has been asked and been confirmed it was comming to the game 3 years ago and later again by david braben . instead they waste time on bobble heads, paintjobs and ship kits . these should be lowest priority and get the promised features of kickstarter alpha and premium beta and confirmed features in the game first before doing these useless things. As it stands now it looks like consumer fraud. Elite is turning in to no mansky and with the vision of X-Rebirth just horrible.
Well said!
Just for the record i like exploring and trading (Elite ranked in both), occasionally pew-pew when a CG offers cash. No this is about time versus game demands not my need to play a quick session of a shooter. if I wanted to do that id boot up Wolfenstein New order etc etc and go FPS.
Lets not generalize eh? And lets not shoot down informed, experience based opinion. Especially when you know squat all about the poster.
As I said, my Tuppence worth.
(To share one's opinion, idea, or point of view, Primarily heard in UK, Australia.)
Clearly I am an ill-informed idiot, but its my opinion anyhoo.
Lets not generalize eh? And lets not shoot down informed, experience based opinion. Especially when you know squat all about the poster.
As I said, my Tuppence worth.
(To share one's opinion, idea, or point of view, Primarily heard in UK, Australia.)
Clearly I am an ill-informed idiot, but its my opinion anyhoo.
Last edited:
That post is also wrong.
Immersion isn't about realism. Its about sticking to the rules and constraints of the established universe. The proposed mechanics go against these constraints in an attempt to make the game what it isn't....a dropin dropout casual affair....when CQC already exists for that.
This is because of inherent contradictions in the entire multicrew setup.
The ships we have are designed for use by one player.
Multicrew would require either additional capabilities to be added or existing ones shared. FD chose to share. But pilots aren't overworked so this means noone will have much to do. The system also constrains CMDRs in how they configure their ship. It doesn't add anything new.
The casual drop in and out approach is being added in simply to alow for casual play. Its not a bad goal but it is one which has consequences and costs inpacting other areas of the game.
But how can you add drop in and out while keeping within the constraints of the universe?
How can you share what is already seen by many as a light workload without making the workload too light to be interesting?
How can you make Multicrew competitive with Wings without introducing balance and gameplay issues?
And so on.
The answer is you can't.
Multicrew is a good idea....but it isn't one the current game and ships can support without introducing problems.
Multicrew needs either dedicated multicrew ships or it needed dedicated multicrew stations that added....not shared, but added to....the existing capabilities of existing shops. And multicrew should come with multicrew missions and be open to non combat professions.
Ftontier chose to share the existing workload and buff the host vessel. Which is the laziest and worst solution available to it.
But equating immersion with realism is totally missing the point and shows an ignorance of what "immersion" actually is.