Elite Dangerous is the Largest Empty Sandbox Ever Made

[Genar-Hofoen]

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

Frontier has been catering to old school fans who stanchly refused 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 and the game is gradually going into obscurity.

This game has to 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 space sims that you don't like. 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!

The problem is that you and others are proposing to transform it into EVE-in-a-cockpit. And this would turn it into not-Elite. Simple as that. You want to turn it into some other game but with an Elite skin.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

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

Frontier has been catering to old school fans who stanchly refused 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 and the game is gradually going into obscurity.

This game has to 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 space sims that you don't like. 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.

I agree the game needs to develop.. just that i dont think it needs to go in the direction you want..... YET!. imo there is plenty in the DDF they could add to flesh out the game with content which will benefit everyone and not just the guildy / EVE type players.

once all that is done, then sure, after all as you pointed out exec control ships WAS on the list, just it was meant to be way down it AFTER the core features.

The question isnt whether FD need to add content, we all agree there, it is what direction they should go with it. I want to see fleshing out the npc features like in the DDF.. . you dont, or at least not as a priority. Time will tell what happens but imo FD have neglected the npc side of the game for far to long focussing too much on group features.

I would say the numbers in the "kill thargoid" CGs hint that not that many play in an organised group... but then that could be my bias talking./

from what i can tell you want your guild to own stations and cities etc.... where as i want more power to be able to help an npc faction that i support to expand THEIR station or base or city.... and to be honest, if this was stored just on my personal HDD having no effect on the BGS and only visible to others when they happen to be in my instance, i am fine with that.

imo building to MP only content and locking everything to FDs servers is holding the gmae back, and is the cause of everything being like a lifeless statue... because obviously its not reasonable to expect FD to track every player base / damaged station server side, so instead they just dont have localised damage and what not... and i think this is sad.

the worse thing FD could do is add more content which is essentially only available to big groups of players. apart from anything else... who will benefit? it will be those who have hammered the likes of quince etc, and personally i would stop playing before i would go down the road of having to exploit that kind of thing, or join a guild with those kind of players if that was the only way to get to the new shiny stuff in the game.

 

[Cosmo]

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.

Yes and design philosophy is not set in stone. This game is still evolving and, I hope, still improving not just on the shallow mile wide side.

I agree the game needs to develop.. just that i dont think it needs to go in the direction you want..... YET!. imo there is plenty in the DDF they could add to flesh out the game with content which will benefit everyone and not just the guildy / EVE type players.

once all that is done, then sure, after all as you pointed out exec control ships WAS on the list, just it was meant to be way down it AFTER the core features.

The question isnt whether FD need to add content, we all agree there, it is what direction they should go with it. I want to see fleshing out the npc features like in the DDF.. . you dont, or at least not as a priority. Time will tell what happens but imo FD have neglected the npc side of the game for far to long focussing too much on group features.

"Everyone" is subjective. Yes the core features need improvement. The sandbox itself is a core feature too. They can work on both during 2018 and beyond. BTW I mentioned I support NPC crew. I would love to see Mass Effect level NPC interaction in the cockpit.

Theme park type content is consumed by people in a few weeks. But sandbox and emergent gameplay can keep people entertained for much longer, because it offers deeper and more meaningful gameplay.

from what i can tell you want your guild to own stations and cities etc.... where as i want more power to be able to help an npc faction that i support to expand THEIR station or base or city.... and to be honest, if this was stored just on my personal HDD having no effect on the BGS and only visible to others when they happen to be in my instance, i am fine with that.

I would like to see both too. All styles of gameplay should be optional so it doesn't clash with those who don't want to partake in it.

For example the Fleet Carrier will be a player owned mobile base.. which is great... from there on it can be expanded to small outposts in space or on the surface of planets.

imo building to MP only content and locking everything to FDs servers is holding the gmae back, and is the cause of everything being like a lifeless statue... because obviously its not reasonable to expect FD to track every player base / damaged station server side, so instead they just dont have localised damage and what not... and i think this is sad.

the worse thing FD could do is add more content which is essentially only available to big groups of players.

They should work on both things for solo gamers and people who play in groups (squadrons). They're both important. The solo players and big groups are the real fans. They keep Elite Dangerous alive and are the ambassadors of this game to attract new players.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

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 stanchly refused 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 that you don't like. 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!

https://static.planetminecraft.com/...screenshot/1252/2012-12-27_183434_4505511.jpg

You can keep saying sandbox gameplay = building and executive control as many times as you like.

That doesn't make it true or make it the type of game ED should be.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Guilds and player owned ballcocks would be the death of Elite. Frontier knows this. They'll placate the would be Napoleonic pillocks with squadrons and a mega ship they can have executive *straight face* control over. They can go: As CEO of this megaship I order it to move to that system. And they can delegate *straight face* this to lesser peons. And within 1 day we'll have threads: My executive control needs more executive and more control, because they won't be satisfied until they can own a planet. If Frontier make the incredible mistake of going down the guild/owned asset slippery slope, I'll be happy to drop it and will enjoy the resulting trainwreck with glee.

But I judge Frontier to be more intelligent than that

 

[Rock-Hermit]

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

Frontier has been catering to old school fans who stanchly refused 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 and the game is gradually going into obscurity.

This game has to 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 space sims that you don't like. 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!

I think ED: Beyond is Frontiers attempt to readdress that (not the castles bit ). I think it could be the most important series of updates so far as it'll be the last straw for a lot of die hards if its still an inch deep afterward.

As for the old school fans gibe, I don't think that's a fair comment. The old school fans were the ones who backed this game from the beginning and these forums back then were full of people imagining a deep and meaningful game because that's what FD were selling them with their promotional videos and design discussion. Something changed not long after release and F.D. pretty much went the simplistic and gimmicky gameplay route.

 

[M00ka]

Yes and design philosophy is not set in stone. This game is still evolving and, I hope, still improving not just on the shallow mile wide side.

All good huh, as long as the game evolves in the direction you want it to, otherwise all the community will see is more threads like this.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

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.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks.

I call them parasites, personally.

 

[Enderby]

It does feel a little as if ED is fading into obscurity.

Which is a great shame when one considers the lovely graphics and the feeling of flying that they created.

If only they'd given the gameplay and fun aspects the same attention, then they could've potentially had a really amazing game. Or, at least, a game. Maybe, I dunno, like having some player interaction with things in this massive galaxy. Beyond the paltry interactions that we currently have which sort of render the vastness of the galaxy kinda ridiculous.

It's big, great! What can I do in it?!
Erm... shoot, scan, deliver.
Oh.

I've been hoping that ED would become a game since I bought it. I have been playing it only, really, so that when that happened I'd have a nice ship and some spare credits with which to enjoy the fun.

But, as I said already, once again we can all wait in hope for the forthcoming updates.


Oh well, fingers crossed.

 

[Darkfyre99]

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

Gankers vs Single Player.

Some of us consider calling this kind of debate PvP vs PvE an insult to actual PvP enthusiasts, and so we're using an acronym that better reflects the kind of player who wants to force PvE players into Open. PvP enthusiasts, and those who lean in that direction, are already in Open, and the typical GSPer has a hard time killing targets that are prepared for an attack.

Thus all the salt about how Solo and Private Groups are "ruining" the game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes and design philosophy is not set in stone. This game is still evolving and, I hope, still improving not just on the shallow mile wide side.

I'd expect that some aspects of it are firmly set.

As to direction - I expect that we all want different things - Frontier cannot satisfy all of us (or players just buying the game now) at the same time - we'll see, in due course, where the next year takes us in terms of new features....

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

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 stanchly refused any deep meaningful sandbox gameplay.

This is just not true at all.

Three years later, the vast majority of the player base doesn't play anymore

Just like every other game in existance

the daily active players has declined dramatically and the game is gradually going into obscurity.

There are no metrics out there that tell how many active players there are in a day.

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 that you don't like. It will still be Elite, but a much richer and deeper game in the series.

That depends on what is added. Some of the stuff you want, will not add a richer game world for me and others.

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!

This depends on what castles you want to build. Me and load of others have no wish to see executive control of systems, space, stations, or the ability to construct these. That in my view will not make elite dangerous any better, for me it will be a whole heap of dev time to turn it into a corporation management game. That doesn't give more sand, it changes the type of sand that there is.

I agree that we need more tools to mold the sand that we have (which I hope is coming in the beyond series of updates), but most of what you want isn't going to do that.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I like NHL, Elite has ice planets.

If this game doesn't introduce depth into the game like planet wide hockey it will fizzle out like the Bruins did against the Oilers. Just check out the success of NHL 18.

Now I'm not saying Elite needs to become NHL in space, but they could look at NHL 18 what they did right and adapt that into their game.

 

[Cosmo]

You can keep saying sandbox gameplay = building and executive control as many times as you like.

That doesn't make it true or make it the type of game ED should be.

This depends on what castles you want to build. Me and load of others have no wish to see executive control of systems, space, stations, or the ability to construct these. That in my view will not make elite dangerous any better, for me it will be a whole heap of dev time to turn it into a corporation management game. That doesn't give more sand, it changes the type of sand that there is.

You can keep saying, lets keep on doing what we've been doing for the last three years and keep the sandbox shallow, but that will be the gradual demise of this game.

If that is what you want Frontier then keep listening to these guys who staunchly oppose a deep sandbox.

There are no metrics out there that tell how many active players there are in a day.

Do I need to bring up the revenue and active player count (per day) of Eve Online again? Aside from the game copy sales (many people only buy the game once, not the expansions), ED literally pales in comparison. The micro-transaction revenue of ED is a lot less than Eve Online's micro-transactions and monthly paid subscriptions per month. It doesn't come close to the amount of active players per day. It does NOT come close to the annual revenue that Eve Online (CCP) makes per year.

 

[Goose4291]

Well, I went to the pub and ended up staying in a Chinese Casino till 5am eating Dim Sum and drinking Tsing Tao.

Good to see this discussion hasn't moved at all forward in any sort of manner in that time.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

You can keep saying, lets keep on doing what we've been doing for the last three years and keep the sandbox shallow, but that will be the gradual demise of this game.

Pretty sure I've been reading that or something similar to it since 2014.

 

[Dale Emasiri]

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.

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

 

[Robert Maynard]

... but that will be the gradual death of this game.

The death of the game has been prophesied for a long time now - some have stated that features needed to be added / removed "or the game will die".

It will happen at some point - that's an odds-on certainty. When and why it will happen is open to speculation, however.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

The direction and decisions - for the most part - will be dictated by us based on what we feel is best. There's a whole load of focused feedback sessions planned for the near future with Sandro for the Beyond series of updates, but ultimately the decision will remain with us.

What's important to make note of from our side, however, is how it's been received overall. Also not just look at the vocal feedback of the community on the forums and reddit, but also how people are interacting with the game and meaningful data from that side.

Hi
can you confirm you will still be looking at the DDF archives and trying to implement that stuff as well ? FD have been worryingly silent imo about the likes of hirable npc wingmates, npc crew (not just the slf pilot) and missions such as escort and protect npcs etc.

I would be happy as a pig in muck if this came in and i am not the only one.

thanks

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Hi
can you confirm you will still be looking at the DDF archives and trying to implement that stuff as well ? FD have been worryingly silent imo about the likes of hirable npc wingmates, npc crew (not just the slf pilot) and missions such as escort and protect npcs etc.

I would be happy as a pig in muck if this came in and i am not the only one.

thanks

The thought that springs to my mind is this: improvements to the single-player aspect of game benefit everyone playing. Improvements to the multi-player aspect, however, only benefit a subset.