Elite Dangerous is the Largest Empty Sandbox Ever Made

[Genar-Hofoen]

A lot of valid points and things that have been brought up in the past before, but that doesn't make it any less relevant or valid as feedback goes.

These comments were limited but let's not go down the route of "another of these threads," "oh, another white knight defending FD," or "it's just a bunch of whinging" folks. It's not especially constructive and just derails things unnecessarily.

The volume of sand, or lack thereof as far as the feedback on this and the reddit thread goes, is something I see comments about a lot. There's not much I can comment on it just yet but I thought it prudent to drop in and at least acknowledge it. We see it a bunch, and while I'm not always in agreement, it's hard to really deny people's perceptions of it... both sides of the argument make a good case for their side. I can't say that this will be resolved completely because that's a bit of a stretch when a lot of it is also down to what people want at the individual level. That said I am hopeful that future updates in the Beyond updates and (for lack of a better word) beyond will go a long way to address many people's umbrage with ED.

I appreciate that 2.4 wasn't well received (which the reddit thread was talking about.) We said from the very beginning that it was a different way of doing things. Criticism is an opportunity to learn, so this is what we will continue to do. Feedback is gathered regularly so as we move forward we will keep a note of what aspects worked and which parts received the harshest reception to help inform future content releases. We're immensely proud of what we've done but humble enough to learn and do better every time.

All very good but do keep in mind one simple thing: Elite is not and should not ever be an executive control game, it's about 'one pilot and his ship in a huge galaxy', and any attempt to turn it into the thing which Cosmo and a couple of other posters are wanting, is going to turn this game into something not-Elite.

You really do not want to go down that route. A majority of us do not want to be playing some redesigned executive control game which merely has an Elite skin.

 

[Stigbob]

All very good but do keep in mind one simple thing: Elite is not and should not ever be an executive control game, it's about 'one pilot and his ship in a huge galaxy', and any attempt to turn it into the thing which Cosmo and a couple of other posters are wanting, is going to turn this game into something not-Elite.

You really do not want to go down that route. A majority of us do not want to be playing some redesigned executive control game which merely has an Elite skin.

I think the executive control thing is just the plan for cap-ships.

 

[Arindor]

This reddit thread is just one long winge from entitled nobodies.

Which is kind of mirrored in the ED forum too.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

All very good but do keep in mind one simple thing: Elite is not and should not ever be an executive control game, it's about 'one pilot and his ship in a huge galaxy', and any attempt to turn it into the thing which Cosmo and a couple of other posters are wanting, is going to turn this game into something not-Elite.

You really do not want to go down that route. A majority of us do not want to be playing some redesigned executive control game which merely has an Elite skin.

+1 virtual Rep. I completely agree.

 

[S3B4ST13N]

Oc handful was a bit extreme, I like exaggeration sometimes to make a point.
While this isn't the topic, I just wanted to ad an explanation to my last post.

It has not much to do with Planet Coaster or Jurassic World, having some programming experiences myself I highly doubt many people work on multiple projects.
It is more a conclusion I drew from the content of the recent updates and the fact that every update since 2.2 was in a very questionable state, ridden of bugs, and the fact that bugs just don't get fixed, or take forever to fix.
Ofc that is all speculation on my part, there might be other explanations like a very poorly managed code that would explain the state of the updates, but I sincerely hope that's not the case.

Thanks for the clarification.

They mentioned at the expo that there are just as many, if not more, people working on ED right now as there were at launch. I have no reason to doubt this. I don't recall the numbers, but one good way to check is get a copy of the credits on the various products and look for duplicate names - that will give a good indicator of the dev team size.


I'm not impressed with the quality of their code either (except for SJA who makes amazing AI); the sound and graphics quality is top-notch though. Some of the stuff they've released.. lawd, I'd be hauled up before a disciplinary hearing if I were to release code that bug-ridden.

They need a much stricter testing team, and be under instructions to fix reworks before release.. if that means push out the release date a week or so, so be it.
Releasing something that's patently broken.. just.. no.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I think the executive control thing is just the plan for cap-ships.

Yeah it'll be whatever Frontier come up with for this time next year - Squadrons & fleet carriers.

But my post was more to remind Frontier - IF they need reminding - that if they caved in to the minority who are calling for the additional stuff proposed in this thread, that would alter the game to such an extent that it would no longer be an Elite game, just some other game with an Elite skin.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Yeah it'll be whatever Frontier come up with for this time next year - Squadrons & fleet carriers.

But my post was more to remind Frontier - IF they need reminding - that if they caved in to the minority who are calling for the additional stuff proposed in this thread, that would alter the game to such an extent that it would no longer be an Elite game, just some other game with an Elite skin.

Evelite.

 

[GunnerBill]

All very good but do keep in mind one simple thing: Elite is not and should not ever be an executive control game, it's about 'one pilot and his ship in a huge galaxy', and any attempt to turn it into the thing which Cosmo and a couple of other posters are wanting, is going to turn this game into something not-Elite.

You really do not want to go down that route. A majority of us do not want to be playing some redesigned executive control game which merely has an Elite skin.

I couldn't think of anything worse, well perhaps "Guilds", either of those would be a show stopper for me and end my Elite playing days.

 

[Darkfyre99]

The EVE devs called it a fake sandbox at the last fanfest. That just goes to show.

• No player driven economy.
• No tools to build clans, corps and alliances..etc
• No ways to manufacture stuff and sell them.
• No ways to influence the universe in a meaningful manner.
• No industry focused gameplay.
• No player owned contracts.
• No player owned outposts.
• No player owned stations.
• No player owned space.
• No real player career progression with reputation and consequences to your actions.
• No player driven narrative stories based around meaningful interactions.

The list goes on.

Even the BGS is adjusted by the devs when there's enough cry babies crying on the opposite side of the spectrum.

It's a cheap theme park with the illusion of a sandbox. The poor implementation of gameplay mechanics is what is holding Elite Dangerous to become a "Good" game.

For which I am eternally grateful. If I had wanted a second job, I would be playing EVE.

 

[Jockey79]

Apologies if this has been asked-and-answered elsewhere, but what's GSP?

I don't call those seeking to force folks into open PvPers, as I find that to be unfair on real PvPers.

GSP is the more correct term for people who want to "Gank Single Players". Because that is what they are demanding. People in unarmed trade and exploration ships forced in front of their engineered combat ships.

It has nothing to do with why Cosmo started the thread, Cosmo wants more content, more things to do and work for which is spot on. Wanting to add to the game is what we should all want.

 

[Daffan]

For which I am eternally grateful. If I had wanted a second job, I would be playing EVE.

Implying you have zero self control.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

The really BASIC things I personally miss most from Elite Dangerous, falling into the "missed opportunities" and "unrealised potential" categories were/are:


1. The way ED did not deliver on the galactic "Security Topology" potential

What might have been:
- Really dangerous systems that offer really high rewards
- Really safe systems that offer low rewards
- Everything in between.

Missing gameplay from this: Core systems being safe and dull, with minimal work required on skills/ships/equipment, so good "Starter Systems". Appeal of missions taking you to "dangerous places" as you progress, challenging your skills and ship setup. Ability to self-manage difficulty levels. Feeling of variety as you travel, ie. need to actually LOOK at Security Level.


2. The way no new outpost or station ever comes into existence unless The Hand of Frontier places it.

What might have been:
- Major/minor factions automatically colonising empty systems
- Colonisation taking into account EXPLORATION scans sold, resources available, distance (cost/benefit), strategic concerns, etc.
- Player involvement like "expansion state", but more weighty and meaningful than system-flipping.
- "Wild frontier" feel to the expanding edge of populated space.

Missing gameplay from this: By now, humanity's bubble could have just started reaching and colonising the Pleiades nebula. Yes, natural conflict with Thargoids based on organic colony growth. Players working the BGS to push the boundaries, work towards new ELWs. New resources like PRISTINE RINGS making Fed/Imp/Alliance/minor factions more or less influential.


3. The way every single star system in the galaxy was an open book on Day One

What might have been:
- Exploration actually BEING exploration, not just "census data collection and reporting".
- New hyperspace jumps and routes needing to be built by players themselves.

Missing gameplay from this: The First Great Expedition actually being a thing. Cooperative (ie. not pew-pew-exclusive) gameplay opportunities. The galaxy gradually revealing itself to the playerbase. "Near" stars actually meaning something, in terms of having manual "discovery" jump plotting required the first time. Note: FD deliberately rendered new stars differently, for "reasons" they declined to elaborate on at the time - I reckon it was an expectation that only the populated and nearby stars would be "insta-jump" accessible, and that ACTUAL WORK would be required to go further.


These are just 3 things I thought / hoped would be in Elite in 2014.

So far, in 2017, FD have made some progress towards #1. Some.

Oh well...

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I couldn't think of anything worse, well perhaps "Guilds", either of those would be a show stopper for me and end my Elite playing days.

For sure. I'd just leave, and I'm sure a significant part of the existing player base would too. It would definitely be a counterproductive move for Frontier, but I'm sure they realise this already.

I backed an Elite game, not some abomination with an Elite skin.

 

[Enderby]

...I backed an Elite game, not some abomination with an Elite skin.

Isn't that exactly what it is?

 

[Darkfyre99]

Ah, pvp vs pve.
I personally think, FDev should develop entirely new single-player story-driven Elite game and leave ED in maintenance mode while also removing solo & private from it for PvP fans

We're not even talking about PvP vs PvE. We're talking about GSP (Gankers vs Single Player).

It really burns the typical GSPer that the only people in Open are the PvPers and players who are tolerant to their crappy "emergent content." The former will kill them in an eye link, while the latter consider them an annoying interruption, as opposed to a threat. They desperately want to feel they are powerful, but it's hard to feel powerful in an environment where there are no easily killable targets.

Which is why they keep whining about solo and private groups. All the soft targets are having fun in other modes, and not "generating salt" like they would be in similar games of the past. In one fell swoop, Frontier's policy of all modes being equal has deprived them of their prey, and so they generate salt in the forums instead.

*holds popcorn bucket under nearest GSPer*

Tasty, tasty salt.

 

[Cosmo]

All very good but do keep in mind one simple thing: Elite is not and should not ever be an executive control game, it's about 'one pilot and his ship in a huge galaxy', and any attempt to turn it into the thing which Cosmo and a couple of other posters are wanting, is going to turn this game into something not-Elite.

You really do not want to go down that route. A majority of us do not want to be playing some redesigned executive control game which merely has an Elite skin.

For which I am eternally grateful. If I had wanted a second job, I would be playing EVE.

Elite Dangerous is already a glorified Elite + Frontier: Elite II with the graphics of a game from 2017.

Frontier has been catering to old school fans who staunchly refuse any deep meaningful sandbox gameplay.

Three years later, the vast majority of the player base doesn't play anymore, the daily active players has declined dramatically and the game is gradually going into obscurity.

This game must move beyond the shallow sandbox and theme-park features if it is to last another couple of years and grow like other much more successful sandbox games. It will still be Elite, but a much richer and deeper game in the series.

We're not saying that it should be exactly like other space sims, but it needs a lot more depth and tools to play with sand in the sandbox so players can mold, create and manage things and be vested into this game for the long-term. This includes the addition of (brace yourself) "executive control" and the ability for players to build and control the proverbial CASTLES!

 

[Arindor]

The really BASIC things I personally miss most from Elite Dangerous, falling into the "missed opportunities" and "unrealised potential" categories were/are:


1. The way ED did not deliver on the galactic "Security Topology" potential

What might have been:
- Really dangerous systems that offer really high rewards
- Really safe systems that offer low rewards
- Everything in between.

Missing gameplay from this: Core systems being safe and dull, with minimal work required on skills/ships/equipment, so good "Starter Systems". Appeal of missions taking you to "dangerous places" as you progress, challenging your skills and ship setup. Ability to self-manage difficulty levels. Feeling of variety as you travel, ie. need to actually LOOK at Security Level.


2. The way no new outpost or station ever comes into existence unless The Hand of Frontier places it.

What might have been:
- Major/minor factions automatically colonising empty systems
- Colonisation taking into account EXPLORATION scans sold, resources available, distance (cost/benefit), strategic concerns, etc.
- Player involvement like "expansion state", but more weighty and meaningful than system-flipping.
- "Wild frontier" feel to the expanding edge of populated space.

Missing gameplay from this: By now, humanity's bubble could have just started reaching and colonising the Pleiades nebula. Yes, natural conflict with Thargoids based on organic colony growth. Players working the BGS to push the boundaries, work towards new ELWs. New resources like PRISTINE RINGS making Fed/Imp/Alliance/minor factions more or less influential.


3. The way every single star system in the galaxy was an open book on Day One

What might have been:
- Exploration actually BEING exploration, not just "census data collection and reporting".
- New hyperspace jumps and routes needing to be built by players themselves.

Missing gameplay from this: The First Great Expedition actually being a thing. Cooperative (ie. not pew-pew-exclusive) gameplay opportunities. The galaxy gradually revealing itself to the playerbase. "Near" stars actually meaning something, in terms of having manual "discovery" jump plotting required the first time. Note: FD deliberately rendered new stars differently, for "reasons" they declined to elaborate on at the time - I reckon it was an expectation that only the populated and nearby stars would be "insta-jump" accessible, and that ACTUAL WORK would be required to go further.


These are just 3 things I thought / hoped would be in Elite in 2014.

So far, in 2017, FD have made some progress towards #1. Some.

Oh well...

Pretty much spot on with regard to points two and three. Rather than FD injecting CGs in order for stations to appear and handcrafting them once completed, the game should automatically, and over a period of time build these assets for the factions concerned. As for point three, you couldn't have said it better. Imo, You lock onto an unknown mass x light years away, jump, and scan the system. Upon returning to a station, all data added to the stations cartographic database allows the controlling faction to plan their next expansion.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Isn't that exactly what it is?

Not really, it's actually managing to be a pretty good remake of the original, with some aspects of Elite II. It needs a lot of fleshing out though.

 

[Arindor]

The really BASIC things I personally miss most from Elite Dangerous, falling into the "missed opportunities" and "unrealised potential" categories were/are:


1. The way ED did not deliver on the galactic "Security Topology" potential

What might have been:
- Really dangerous systems that offer really high rewards
- Really safe systems that offer low rewards
- Everything in between.

Missing gameplay from this: Core systems being safe and dull, with minimal work required on skills/ships/equipment, so good "Starter Systems". Appeal of missions taking you to "dangerous places" as you progress, challenging your skills and ship setup. Ability to self-manage difficulty levels. Feeling of variety as you travel, ie. need to actually LOOK at Security Level.


2. The way no new outpost or station ever comes into existence unless The Hand of Frontier places it.

What might have been:
- Major/minor factions automatically colonising empty systems
- Colonisation taking into account EXPLORATION scans sold, resources available, distance (cost/benefit), strategic concerns, etc.
- Player involvement like "expansion state", but more weighty and meaningful than system-flipping.
- "Wild frontier" feel to the expanding edge of populated space.

Missing gameplay from this: By now, humanity's bubble could have just started reaching and colonising the Pleiades nebula. Yes, natural conflict with Thargoids based on organic colony growth. Players working the BGS to push the boundaries, work towards new ELWs. New resources like PRISTINE RINGS making Fed/Imp/Alliance/minor factions more or less influential.


3. The way every single star system in the galaxy was an open book on Day One

What might have been:
- Exploration actually BEING exploration, not just "census data collection and reporting".
- New hyperspace jumps and routes needing to be built by players themselves.

Missing gameplay from this: The First Great Expedition actually being a thing. Cooperative (ie. not pew-pew-exclusive) gameplay opportunities. The galaxy gradually revealing itself to the playerbase. "Near" stars actually meaning something, in terms of having manual "discovery" jump plotting required the first time. Note: FD deliberately rendered new stars differently, for "reasons" they declined to elaborate on at the time - I reckon it was an expectation that only the populated and nearby stars would be "insta-jump" accessible, and that ACTUAL WORK would be required to go further.


These are just 3 things I thought / hoped would be in Elite in 2014.

So far, in 2017, FD have made some progress towards #1. Some.

Oh well...

Pretty much spot on with regard to points two and three. Rather than FD injecting CGs in order for stations to appear and handcrafting them once completed, the game should automatically, and over a period of time build these assets for the factions concerned. As for point three, you couldn't have said it better. Imo, You lock onto an unknown mass x light years away, jump, and scan the system. Upon returning to a station, all data added to the stations cartographic database allows the controlling faction to plan their next expansion.

 

[Robert Maynard]

We're not saying that it should be exactly like other space sims, but it needs a lot more depth and tools to play with sand in the sandbox so players can mold, create and manage things and be vested into this game for the long-term. This includes oh my gosh "executive control" and the ability to build CASTLES!

It doesn't need to be exactly like other space sims, I would agree - it is a descendant of one of the first.

As to depth, I strongly suspect that Frontier have their own views as to how to offer enhancements to content that is compatible with the game's design philosophy.

It is obvious that players want more content - it is equally obvious that players don't all have all the same things on their wish-list / "don't want" list. Frontier's task is to develop and introduce what they think is best for the game going forward.