Braben’s Vision and It’s Implications

[kilvenny]

I have said this before in other threads.

Games have lasting appeal generally when there is a social element that transforms the game into a social experience. Adding proper player factions that can be added by players that fit into the background simulation. That have communication facilities and the ability to set objectives. Even taking the power player functionality into player factions would be a big step, allow those player factions to choose where they undermine and spawn player faction missions that support the activity that players can take. If a system is being undermined it can be defended and again missions are spawned that players can take for the defence of that systems. Spawning instances where this conflict could take place and making them finite rather than "infinite" would bring players together in conflict. Those player factions should be able to build their own stations subject to limits to the number that can be built per system for a tactical benefit, stations would be part of the BGS so could change hands.

If you make those stations instanced for everyone and allow player stations you suddenly have emerging content in the galaxy that if they are instanced for everyone to see means there will be developing content in the galaxy.

If you allow explorers to mark places they have visited on a planet eg with great views and those poi's appear when you scan, then again you have things for explorers to find. Limit them to one per landable planet and there is no fear of getting too many.

I would also remove the random from Engineers and make it dependent on quality of materials. Then when you mine materials or purchase, you purchase the goods at a quality. eg instead of gold you have 5 carat gold, 10 carat etc. Make the high quality goods scarce in stations and force people to mine. Develop mining so it becomes more scientific so you have to work out where to mine and the area can get exhausted forcing the miner to move on.

For me its all about creating elements that a player can use to develop content individually or as a group that can be leveraged by another player.

 

[Andovar]

Much as I don't think Sandro would lie about this, I also find it very difficult to believe. So after 3 years and atmospheric landings (and by extension earth-likes and ammonia worlds) being arguably the most highly anticipated feature, Sandro is saying (unless misquoted?) that nothing has been even started? If that's the case, and space legs are also a long way off, just what exactly are we going to see in the post-2.4 period (short to medium term)? I mean, for explorers in particular, little can match the scale of improvements in exploration that atmospheric landings (including earth-likes and ammonia worlds) would potentially provide (assuming gameplay content comes with it of course), not to mention the additional gameplay potential for non-explorers. Yet they haven't even commenced work on atmospheric landings? <insert very grumpy face if it's true>

Hopefully we'll see exactly what they said they'll deliver, which is core game enhancements.

This game doesn't need more blank slates, which is exactly what atmos-landings and space-legs would bring at this point. More places to go with little to no gameplay content.

Improve the mechanics and gameplay behind non-pewpew professions like exploration, mining, smuggling and trading.
A more robust chained mission system.
An actual Crime and Punishment system.
Winged missions.
More multicrew roles.
Heck, even a powerplay overhaul would be welcome.

They made commitments to deliver on certain content for season 2, which is why they were stuck with delivering these things, even if there were more pressing issues in the game.
Now that the season is done (almost), they're free to do what needs to be done instead of being locked into some specific development schedule because they sold a DLC that was guaranteed to have features A, B, and C.

2.5 can't come soon enough...

 

[cmdr m0kn]

So visions... I have a dark vision too...
It's almost been 2 years now with Horizons, and we have 2 types of appearance (icey and beige) for about 60 billion planets and 1 type of SRV...and we have a really long list of missing/half-baked game elements. But I think the biggest problem with Elite is the need of alt-tabbing all the time (Thank God for Steam overlay).
Sometimes instead of playing the "GAME" I rather watch videos of it on youtube. It is more fun, more relaxing and has exactly the same amount of gameplay mechanism... sadly.

 

[Han Zulu]

I genuinely feel sorry for the people who have paid for those ships with real money, especially the expensive ones. CR will be facing an extremely angry mob if he fails to deliver, which he probably will, given how impossible the task has become. But then again, he can just buy a mega yacht and sail away into the sunset, laughing all the way... if he hasn't already done so.

At least FDev delivered a product, and on time. There's a lot to be said for that; SC is still a tech demo after five years of 'work'.

Exactly. That's why I have much higher hopes for ED. Braben has at least tried to make a playable game all the way while developing the features everyone wants, while SC is a product that's not "finished" until everything is in. Two different approaches. One is the trickle process, the other is all-or-nothing. No one wants to wait in 2097 to get the first official release. Frontier is doing it the right way, even if we at times feel that things are missing, incomplete, or broken.

 

[CMDR-AD]

Hopefully we'll see exactly what they said they'll deliver, which is core game enhancements.

This game doesn't need more blank slates, which is exactly what atmos-landings and space-legs would bring at this point. More places to go with little to no gameplay content.

Improve the mechanics and gameplay behind non-pewpew professions like exploration, mining, smuggling and trading.
A more robust chained mission system.
An actual Crime and Punishment system.
Winged missions.
More multicrew roles.
Heck, even a powerplay overhaul would be welcome.

They made commitments to deliver on certain content for season 2, which is why they were stuck with delivering these things, even if there were more pressing issues in the game.
Now that the season is done (almost), they're free to do what needs to be done instead of being locked into some specific development schedule because they sold a DLC that was guaranteed to have features A, B, and C.

2.5 can't come soon enough...

My exact hopes for Elite going forward.

 

[Han Zulu]

I know I'm opening a real can of worms with this.. but maybe ED does need to get a tad more cliche. I don't mean REALLY cliche, but, a little more.

Bring out the MMO dark side.

For me, there's no better multiplayer content than... yes.. I know.. I'm about to say it.. A DUNGEON! I don't really mean gloomy cellar type dungeon, but, the kind of multi player instanced session that allows a group of players to join up to defeat a challenge that any of them may not be able to accomplish by themselves.. I say may not.. perhaps for the likes of o7o7, stitch, morbad etc... that could probably solo this (note the name and fame, not name and shame!)

Back on track: For the rest of us.. to be able to team up.. and actually be able to present a team to face a challenge would be great. The cliche part is ship to ship support. Do you take a heavily tanked cutter.. do you take ships sacrificing damage for healing beams.. do you have ships sacrificing all for all out DPS, incorporating multicrew.. Unfortunately it's nothing but cliche... but alas it can sometimes be the most engaging.

I cannot help feel there's not enough engaging group tasks available... most, if not all things in ED are quite lonesome endeavors.. A little spice up would be a great addition.

EDIT: no sooner posted... Aashenfox above me beat me to it wish I could rep, but i need to spread more around first.

My suspicion is that the group activity, that's what 2.4 is about. That battles with Thargoids will be a group event system. Every version that's come out has been about some core mechanics introduced with some lore/story on top to introduce it (kind'a), so I think that you're getting your wish in The Return. That's how I at least interpreted the info about it.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The biggest challenge the developer faces, is electing to make us part of the machine, and giving the player base the ability to actually influence outcomes in-game.

I certainly approve of the idea, but the question is ... is the player base ready for it?

There have been a few cases previously where player actions have definitely made a difference to outcomes - on a smaller scale, I think, to what you're hoping for, and largely aside of the main plot ... but large enough that players could come along afterwards and see the effects.

- UA bombing
- directly competing Federal/Imp CGs
- Dangerous Games
- the Salome event
- the ongoing attacks on Sirius

One thing they all have in common is that a very loud portion of the losing side (whichever that is perceived to be at any point in the event) generally accuses Frontier of having deliberately rigged the event against them and/or demands that Frontier intercede by hand-of-god and make them the winners, creating multiple forum threads over the course of the event and its aftermath to make their case.

And these are things with fairly localised outcomes, reversible outcomes, low-stakes outcomes or some combination of the three. Imagine how bad it would get if it was anything really important to the game world...

 

[dubsdj]

best game I have ever owned, no doubt on that when I look at the hours I put into it!

I do think the game is really for a particular set of people though, not everyone's taste.
I hate to use the term nerds though, lets say enthusiasts..

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Large reams of Lore do not make science fiction Hard. Hard sci-fi has a well defined definition which is also my definition..... (taken from the wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction)

"Hard science fiction is a category of science fiction characterized by an emphasis on scientific accuracy."

Apart from the fact that it happens in space, Star Wars has almost nothing even remotely connected to scientific accuracy. Its more about fantasy Knights and Wizards transplanted into space. Nothing wrong with that but its about as far from hard sci-fi as you can possibly get, lore or no lore.

ED has some elements of scientific accuracy (notably the distances and geography of space) but is vastly overshadowed by its many many areas of blatant illogical fantasy and outright ignorance of scientific reality for game purposes. Not saying that's an inherently a bad thing, games have to be fun, but one thing it most certainly is NOT is hard and if Braben is under the mistaken impression that his universe is hard sci-fi then that already explains a lot of its most serious problems.



I think it could work, but the audience would be very niche and it would be far more difficult from both a technical and game design standpoint.

Emphasis does not confer adherence though. Some liberties do have to be taken or it would get pretty boring, pretty fast.
Let's start with the audio portion.
Sound does not travel in a vacuum. So a flight through space would consist entirely of the sounds within your ship - the hum of things running and your own breathing. Not very exciting at all.
Ships wouldn't go "boom" when blown up - you'd see it, but hear nothing. Again, not very exciting.
Ship explosions wouldn't be that interesting either. Check this:

[video=youtube;Fts8iIwn5HE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=RDKFXlrn6-ypg&v=Fts8iIwn5HE[/video]

A nuclear explosion in space, as viewed from the ground - the most spectacular explosion we can make, is far less impressive this way.

So some ambiance is added - sounds to hear, perhaps simulated within the ship and not really external sounds at all. But it does make it more interesting.

Even adherence to Newtonian physics in a game like this would be both incredibly difficult and exceptionally hazardous, not to mention resource-intensive. Who would want to have to build a 64-core PC with 2 TB of RAM to play? Because all that physical data would have to be tracked to remain accurate, making weapons like Cannons, Multi-cannons and Rail guns some of the most dangerous objects in space.

It's never been said better that it was in Mass Effect 2:

[video=youtube;hLpgxry542M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLpgxry542M[/video]

It would take some time, to be sure, but those stray multi-cannon rounds, that cannon shell or that rail gun dart that missed its mark would have to go somewhere - which means six months or six years later, some distance away from where that battle takes place, someone may well get hit with those shots that missed their marks. How would you like to take a critical hit to your brand new Cutter as you pull out of a station from a barrage that was fired off last year, half a light year away?

So, we can only harden our Sci-Fi so much before it really becomes unplayable, unwatchable and unenjoyable.

And that's not even touched the surface of things we cannot predict, as we have no precedents for them - like FTL travel, or crossing an Einstein-Rosen bridge. We have no idea what psychological or physiological effects this could have on a human body. We already know the human body is not suited for long-term stays in space - bone loss and muscle loss being the most common effects of prolonged stays in space. Yes, we have a clever bit of Science-fictioning that says we're sustained on a steady diet of supplements and injections to keep us from shriving up and wasting away, and that's generally acceptable. But again, we can only "Hard Science" so much before playability suffers.

 

[ChrisT]

I honestly think, that if Frontier want to deliver on DB's vision, in a timely manner. And by that, I mean a timeline WE are happy with, and not Frontier. Then they seriously need to consider a new round of "funding". Kickstarter or whatever you want to call it.

Star Citizen has the funds to deliver on their vision. Probably more funds than they need (whether they will ever release a product is another thing...). IMHO, it appears that Frontier need a pretty large cash injection to deliver...

Atmospheric Landings (including basic flora/fauna, cities). You know, so we can land on Earth etc...
Space Legs, including enough ship and station, building interiors to get things rolling.

I've stopped playing ED, Im a founder, but its just not developing fast enough for me. I've been playing it for YEARS. It needs a big injection of the new for me to return. I keep a weather eye on things via Obsidian Ants vids. How is the Thargon plot unfolding. But its just soooooooo glacial.

Im nearing 50 now. You know, getting on. I might actually die before some of the promised features are delivered. I dont feel I can wait 5 years for a game to deliver.

Cmon Frontier, go into much higher great please....

 

[Morbad]

Emphasis does not confer adherence though. Some liberties do have to be taken or it would get pretty boring, pretty fast.

Liberties are taken for story and flavor reasons, not because they are necessary to make an enjoyable game or setting.

Even adherence to Newtonian physics in a game like this would be both incredibly difficult and exceptionally hazardous, not to mention resource-intensive. Who would want to have to build a 64-core PC with 2 TB of RAM to play?

There is nothing about Newtonian physics that would imply a need for increased computational resources. Indeed, the calculations are already there, the flight model just capped inside some arbitrary parameters for the sake of the sort of gameplay they want to cater to and networking limitations. You'd only need that if you were making the simulation vastly more granular than it is now.

There are titles that are fully Newtonian, with vastly more detailed physics simulations, that are also considerably less demanding than Elite: Dangerous.

How would you like to take a critical hit to your brand new Cutter as you pull out of a station from a barrage that was fired off last year, half a light year away?

Even if all the ordinance expended in human history was fired into space, the odds of this occurring would infinitesimally small, and could easily be abstracted.

So, we can only harden our Sci-Fi so much before it really becomes unplayable, unwatchable and unenjoyable.

Tell that to the people that enjoy hard sci-fi.

And that's not even touched the surface of things we cannot predict, as we have no precedents for them - like FTL travel, or crossing an Einstein-Rosen bridge.

If it's beyond our ability to credibly extrapolate based on what we already know, it cannot be a part of hard sci-fi.

 

[Andovar]

I honestly think, that if Frontier want to deliver on DB's vision, in a timely manner. And by that, I mean a timeline WE are happy with, and not Frontier. Then they seriously need to consider a new round of "funding". Kickstarter or whatever you want to call it.

Star Citizen has the funds to deliver on their vision. Probably more funds than they need (whether they will ever release a product is another thing...). IMHO, it appears that Frontier need a pretty large cash injection to deliver...

You've just proven why more funds doesn't necessarily fix anything.
SC has the funds, and yet has failed to deliver anything close to a playable game.
Adding large chunks of unallocated funds seems to have the effect of "hey, now that we have all this money, we can try to implement (insert pie-in-the-sky idea here)"

 

[Han Zulu]

I like your link in the tagline. Awesome ideas from CMDR ToCoSo.

 

[Andovar]

I like your link in the tagline. Awesome ideas from CMDR ToCoSo.

Thanks. I like to believe that these will be a thing in 2.5
Probably deluding myself. But it wouldn't be the first time...

 

[PiLhEaD]

An interesting insight as to how DBOBE views ED. As with all visions it has to fit in to what can reasonably be achieved, so I hope that now the PS4 port is done some more focus can get applied to the game.

I do wish 2.4 would get properly announced, scheduled and done. If only to get FDEV focussed on 3.0 and the core gameplay again.

Whilst I very much enjoyed 1.5 ships, and 2.0, where landing on moons really did extended the game massively for me (I consider 2.0 a must buy tbh) quite a few releases have left me utterly cold for their headline features, e.g. CQC, PP, Wings, Multicrew - they are just not how I want to experience the game - and I do wonder if these had more to do with FDev being stung by the 'not a proper MMO' criticisms.

Engineers and SLF I quite like too, esp now engineering is not quite such an endless drudge, along with many other numerous add ons.

For me I'd like to see much more focus on shared gameplay. Much like CGs. For example, why there is not an SRV racetrack designer with associated set of league tables, seems amazing, esp given that a functioning example was produced by a player quite some time ago. We don't need to be in the same instance nor timezone to enjoy the company of other CMDRs, and I certainly don't need to be pew-pewing [with or at] them.

I could easily ramble on, but I think the rather fragile air of waning excitement is already palpable enough.

For my part I stopped playing a good number of months back and I'm not expecting the glacier-paced rollout of 2.4 to bring me back.

Well, not unless 2.4 includes hula girl bobbleheads, a genuine competitor to the Python and a reduction in beige. Here's hoping.

 

[Enderby]

Why didn't Brabers just create this as galaxy model that he can run, watch and whoop at the BGS?

A little like a train-set back in ye olde days.

Oh, yes, because he needed people to fund it.

 

[Toumal]

Thanks. I like to believe that these will be a thing in 2.5
Probably deluding myself. But it wouldn't be the first time...

I want to /sign your signature.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Liberties are taken for story and flavor reasons, not because they are necessary to make an enjoyable game or setting.



There is nothing about Newtonian physics that would imply a need for increased computational resources. Indeed, the calculations are already there, the flight model just capped inside some arbitrary parameters for the sake of the sort of gameplay they want to cater to and networking limitations. You'd only need that if you were making the simulation vastly more granular than it is now.

There are titles that are fully Newtonian, with vastly more detailed physics simulations, that are also considerably less demanding than Elite: Dangerous.

Like XO?
https://jmpdrv.com/games/

It's too hard to look at to want to play.

There's Hellion, if it ever gets done - and you want Call of Space Duty.

But how Hard is any of their Sci-Fi?

As for machine requirements - that will largely depend on how accurate you require your physics simulations to be. Running a decent benchmark tool, like 3D Mark, you can easily see how complex game physics can impact a system, let alone more complex systems such as those used for simulated destructive testing for architectural engineering. You can look at some profession simulators, like SimulationX to see how the system requirements grow almost exponentially, based on the complexity of the models - and this is far beyond the scope and capabilities of most commercial gaming applications - the majority of which use Havok physics. And while Havok is good, it's far from perfect, and certainly not of the same kind of caliber as a more robust, but non-gaming physics simulation system. I could go on for hours here, but I think I've made my point.

Even if all the ordinance expended in human history was fired into space, the odds of this occurring would infinitesimally small, and could easily be abstracted.

True, though those odds increase exponentially the closer to something like a High Intensity Conflict Zone you happen to be, and these do often appear around populated areas, planets and stations. Sure the odds of getting hit by a stray shot fired in Maia when you're hanging around Achenar are nearly infinitesimal, but the odds of the same thing happening while hanging around Obsidian Orbital are considerably higher.

Tell that to the people that enjoy hard sci-fi.

Honestly with the exception of, I would assume, yourself, I don't know anyone else on this world or nine other inhabited worlds across three parallel dimensions, that actually enjoys this. Not saying they don't exist - I just know of none. Of course, there are those players - back in my table-top gaming days, who would quote and dictate to those running the game, that "because it says "this exact thing, phrased this exact way, on this exact page, of the current rules compendium, then this thing you've described cannot possibly happen, unless the rules do not matter." - we called them "Rules Lawyers" and they were rarely invited back for subsequent sessions, for good reason.

And I'm still looking for an example of what you consider "Hard Fiction" - you've ruled out Star Wars, I'd wager Star Trek, Babylon 5, Dr. Who, and The Expanse are out too.

If it's beyond our ability to credibly extrapolate based on what we already know, it cannot be a part of hard sci-fi.

Which sounds to me like "if it's not writ in the rules book, it cannot be." Miracles cannot happen, the Unexplained cannot exist. That which is Unknown is unreal. There's no place for imagination and wonder, and to me, that's a pretty sad existence.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

My suspicion is that the group activity, that's what 2.4 is about. That battles with Thargoids will be a group event system. Every version that's come out has been about some core mechanics introduced with some lore/story on top to introduce it (kind'a), so I think that you're getting your wish in The Return. That's how I at least interpreted the info about it.

All of you dismissed my tinfoil theory that the whole thing was about the Thargoids, and getting them out the door.

Invest in Krylon Spray Paint. Avocado.

Wings
Power Play
Engineers
NPC's and Groups On Ships (Holo's)

All to fight one Thargoid. You will need groups/Wings, with re-grinded stuff, in Open, to keep Somebody Happy.

 

[NW3]

A minor nitpit but... refactoring doesn't mean what you think it does

I'm not sure I understand your nitpick. As a software engineer working with an agile programming team, refactoring is defined as "The process of restructuring existing computer code without changing its external behavior.". Are you saying that the code eventually needs a full rewrite instead? If so, I agree, but refactoring is usually the first step of a rewrite.