Frontier needs to decide: Game or Simulation

[StiTch]

But do go ahead and provide even just a small list or example of your idea of multiplayer content that would be good for ED. That way, we actually have something of substance to work with other than vague rhetorical questions and resultant sniping.

I actually made brief reference to multiple roles already. If you can't handle a topic without resorting to childish snipes then fair cop, but don't pretend it's anyone else's fault. You know very well Open/Solo is in reference to game modes, because I knew some people would struggle to engage in the conversation without resorting to cries of "GRIEF0RZ ALURT!"

From a very straightforward perspective, Hazardous RES sites in Anarchy systems featuring wings solo players cannot conceivably take on unless they are absolute gods. So multiple NPC ships sporting modifications and abilities that stop them being effectively plinking targets.

From a more involved perspective, tasks that require multiple roles to be employed. An example could be "haul this large delivery to x destination while fending off attacks that cannot be avoided solo", or "complete these objectives in a base while fending off NPC ships dropping in to stop them". So tasks that are nigh on impossible to achieve solo because more than one task has to be fulfilled at once.

It has nothing to do with PvP/PvE or being forced to see other CMDRs. I am in fact very explicitly referring to co-op PvE content.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

<snip even more pointless sniping>

From a very straightforward perspective, Hazardous RES sites in Anarchy systems featuring wings solo players cannot conceivably take on unless they are absolute gods. So multiple NPC ships sporting modifications and abilities that stop them being effectively plinking targets.

From a more involved perspective, tasks that require multiple roles to be employed. An example could be "haul this large delivery to x destination while fending off attacks that cannot be avoided solo", or "complete these objectives in a base while fending off NPC ships dropping in to stop them". So tasks that are nigh on impossible to achieve solo because more than one task has to be fulfilled at once.

There we go. That wasn't too hard was it.

I agree with you. Incredible as it seems.

Also, I'm pretty sure such content has been recently mentioned by Frontier as being in this upcoming Chapter 1 beta and subsequent release in the form of Wing Missions.

Whether or not those go any way to satisfying your good self, me, or anyone else? Well, we'll see when the beta is released.

 

[Avago Earo]

If it were a simulation, how far would it have to go to meet that criteria? Is one person's simulation, another person's Gorf?

Newtonian Physics: If it was full Newtonian, I don't think I'd be able to play it. I'm sure there are people who could, and maybe with practice so could I, but would that attract a wide audience at such a difficulty level?

No sound except inside the cockpit, impacts on the hull and within space stations that have an atmosphere: This would be more realistic, but at the cost of situational awareness (and entertainment) perhaps?

No visible lasers (except in atmospheres): Well, that would be the Frontier store out of pocket In that case, you would have to rely on the scanner to track the position of an attacker, as there would be no visual cue relating to the origin of fire (unless you can see your foe from the canopy, of course).

Einstein: 99% C maximum speed might add to the 'grind' Also, communication would be limited, as any broadcast would have to adhere to the limitations of C.

Escape pods: With the limitation of below light speed travel, waiting for your pod to reach its destination could be seen as a bit boring by some... Well, me at least -I can't speak for anyone else and my drive may not cope with that many screen shots whilst I bide my time.

So, what I'm getting at (I think; therefore I spam) in a rather long winded way, is that at which point is something considered a simulator, rather than a complicated game, and vice versa.

Apologies in advance for any confusion, I confuse myself often enough, so I won't be surprised if this comes across as mad to anyone else.

 

[StiTch]

There we go. That wasn't too hard was it.

I agree with you. Incredible as it seems.

Also, I'm pretty sure such content has been recently mentioned by Frontier as being in this upcoming Chapter 1 beta and subsequent release in the form of Wing Missions.

Whether or not those go any way to satisfying your good self, me, or anyone else? Well, we'll see when the beta is released.

*shrugs* I wasn't sniping at anyone to start with. I am always constructive to begin with...*angel face*

At the end of the day, regardless of what work I'm contributing to in the background with others, I want to be able to call my mate up to ask for a night of playing and not spend half an hour "uuhming and aahing" at what we're actually gonna do, knowing that anything we go for will just be five seconds of melting even a 'conda to death and repeating.

Believe it or not, us PvP folk want engaging PvE too

I'm also hoping that these "wing missions" will spice things up, but I'll be sorely disappointed if it is yet again "do this simple activity together and we'll just split the rewards". I also wouldn't mind some natural challenging circumstances...Anarchy HazRES sites should really not be a comfortable place to be.

Apologies in advance for any confusion, I confuse myself often enough, so I won't be surprised if this comes across as mad to anyone else.

Very coherent to me. The game doesn't approach realism and shouldn't. FD have made multiple concessions on realism in favour of gameplay, since the day they implemented speed restrictions and range limits to promote dogfighting style combat, and that's the way it should be.

 

[Lori Jameson]

-snip-
That's content completed by a collection of single players, which I already referenced above.

The thargoids were pointed out, and that is the closest we have - I'll agree that for all intents and purposes, most people cannot solo thargoids. However it is not true for everyone, and not very diverse - the activity itself is incredibly straightforward and repetitive - and does not ask for multiple roles. It's also important to note thargs won't likely be around forever, and not everyone is anti-thargoid.

What I gave as examples required high levels of communication and cooperation between multiple players at best and a concerted effort between multiple players at worst. Most of the high level puzzles and mysteries required (so far) multiple people with different perspectives and specialties (roles) to figure out and complete. Just because all of those involve weren't 'winged up' or instanced together dosen't mean it wasn't multiplayer content.

If you are playing Battlefield while not in a squad, is it still multiplayer? I'd say so.

 

[StiTch]

What I gave as examples required high levels of communication and cooperation between multiple players at best and a concerted effort between multiple players at worst. Most of the high level puzzles and mysteries required (so far) multiple people with different perspectives and specialties (roles) to figure out and complete. Just because all of those involve weren't 'winged up' or instanced together dosen't mean it wasn't multiplayer content.

I thought it was clear the game should be multiplayer, not the forums

As I said, I just want to be able to load the game up, wing up with a mate, and do something that challenges us. But this is arguably a topic for a different thread either way. Sorry for the derailment OP.

 

[Lori Jameson]

I thought it was clear the game should be multiplayer, not the forums

As I said, I just want to be able to load the game up, wing up with a mate, and do something that challenges us. But this is arguably a topic for a different thread either way. Sorry for the derailment OP.

I'll agree to disagree. My apologies to the OP as well.

 

[Avago Earo]

FD have made multiple concessions on realism in favour of gameplay, since the day they implemented speed restrictions and range limits to promote dogfighting style combat, and that's the way it should be.

I, for one, also agree that this was a good decision by FD. It's not realistic, but Spitfires in space is fun isn't it? When I played Elite on the BBC, to me it was a simulator. That was because most games were up down left right in 2D. It wasn't really a simulator, just more interesting with roll climb dive. When I got Revs (Acornsoft game for the Beeb), I got frustrated with the 'realism', because it was too difficult for me at the time and that ended the fun.

I'm sure there are people who would prefer that level of 'realism' (realistically, we've sent some probes outside the Solar System and put men on the moon (I think)), but it's the enjoyment that should come first imo.

[video=youtube_share;L18wG4p5fQE]https://youtu.be/L18wG4p5fQE[/video]

[video=youtube_share;iqGcL5QW97o]https://youtu.be/iqGcL5QW97o[/video]

 

[sollisb]

Regardless of people 'claim'.. It is not a game. Is there anything in E.D. that is 'winnable' ?


Surely the definition of any 'game's is to be able to win? or indeed, lose? You can do neither in E.D.

It is not a simulation, because it cannot be controlled nor can you choose. Any choice is backed by a caveat. Sure, I can put a size 3 shield where I could also put a size 5 shield. But if a simulation, I should be able to lash on a size 5 shield and the ship should just refuse to move..

Additionally; Most good/real simulators can be interfaced with. For example; I over a period of 3-5 years built an entire 737 cockpit around FlightSim, using 5 servers and some 500+ switches and interfaces. That's a simulator!

If I wanted to build a simulator around E.D. (and I have had some success), I'd require a whole lot more information from the software that is not currently published. The information is there, but not available. For example, what is my current speed, current spacial co-ordinates and system. FlightSim, made all of this trivial back in 1999.

If anything; E.D. is an individual experience. You make your own and it allows you to do so. (most of the time)

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Regardless of people 'claim'.. It is not a game. Is there anything in E.D. that is 'winnable' ?

That would rule out a lot of things commonly defined as computer games - Tetris, Space Invaders, Pacman, etc. from the classics, as well as many more recent ones - which have "endless wave" styles of gameplay and the only "win" is getting further than you did before.

On the other side, there are a lot of puzzle-style games (whether computer implementations of Sudoku-like pen-and-paper puzzles, or some of the text/graphic adventures from the 80s and 90s) which don't have a 'lose' condition. You can never lose the game, you can only give up on it before figuring out how to win.

Looking at other more modern games, I'm not sure *any* persistent multiplayer game could count as either 'winnable' or 'losable' in that sense. For that matter, would something singleplayer like e.g. Skyrim? - sure, there's a "main" quest which you can complete, but doing so doesn't end the game as a win, and not doing so never in itself causes a loss.

(Conversely, you have something like the old Sim Earth - which had both "win" and "loss" conditions in terms of reaching the exodus to populate the galaxy or not doing so before the sun wiped out the planet - which even its own developers didn't think was a game according to the manual)

 

[Cageman]

Please explain what multiplayer content the game has - i.e. not solo content that multiple people can happen to gang up on at once - without diverting this into a PvE/PvE/Open/PG debate as a smokescreen.

I'm excited to see this. Go!

Has anyone managed to solo-kill a Medusa class Thargoid yet? If not, then, that is probably an example where the only option is to do it together with other players... anyways... looking forward to Wing missions in Beyond.

 

[Sylveria]

It's a Gamulation.

There. Now you have your singular reference category and should be completely satisfied.

 

[Avago Earo]

It's a Gamulation.

There. Now you have your singular reference category and should be completely satisfied.

Oh, I thought it was a Sime. I'm dissatisfied now.

 

[Sylveria]

Oh, I thought it was a Sime. I'm dissatisfied now.

Not true... a Sime is still a singular reference category as well.

 

[Iskariot]

Frontier needs to decide: Game or Simulation
Decide, Frontier, decide

I call that a false dichotomy.

 

[Avago Earo]

I call that a false dichotomy.

I raise you a floccinaucinihilipilification

 

[2Karl]

Oh awesome another one of these threads. This might be a controversial suggestion, but what the hey, it's worth a shot: If you like the game, play the game. If you don't like the game, don't play the game. FIXED!

 

[Ceitidh]

There's no way ED is a simulation. To mention just a few points:
Faster-than-light travel.
"Hyperspace".
No relativistic effects.
Frame shift drive, apparently compressing the space in a whole system, while being unnoticed by all the inhabitants.
A few tons of fuel getting from one system to another.
A top speed in normal space.
Gatling guns on spaceships (yay, steampunk!)
Instant refuelling.
Non-material shields stopping solid objects.
Spaceships carrying armour.
Random elements having unexpected uses for randomly improving the performance of ship components.
... etc.

So it's a game, one among many. The only reason to play it is if it's a good game; I happen to think it is.

You know a simulation doesn't have to be a comprehensive simulation of every element of everything to qualify as a simulation, surely?

I mean, by this metric you could find reason to deny the existence of simulation as a genre altogether. Really. There're shortcomings, or deliberate gameplay decisions simplifying, omitting or modifying some aspect of the model, in literally everything that's ever been called a simulation. Orbiter isn't a simulation because it supposes a viable single-stage-to-orbit spaceplane. Microsoft Flight Simulator is wrongly named because it allows time acceleration and doesn't ban you from flying if you're drunk at the controls. Find me a single simulation in computing history that doesn't either have limits as to what it models, or simplifies some part of the model in some way.

Come on, be reasonable. ED is a game with strong simulation aspects. Not nearly strong or extensive enough, I'd agree, and I'd love to see those elements expanded greatly. But if I didn't think it counted as a simulation at all, I probably wouldn't be playing it.

 

[Anon Sin]

@Kofeyh; actually if you had read to the end of what i wrote,i said it was both in that it is "A mixed bag of both".
Also it only started to become game like with the introduction of the Engineers with their RNG,then tele-presence so on and so forth.
Please try and keep up Commander! o7

 

[=71st=RuSh]

I think when people ask about simulation are referring to:

- Flight realism in zero gravity and atmospheric planets
- Real UAV suits/robots to walk in high density/gravity planets (considering anti gravity plates in the SRV to avoid be crushed by the planet mass and atmosphere)
- be consistent with the science used, for example the heat that emanates in a burning station, can never damage the shields/hull of a ship that is able to leave the hyperspace at the given distance from a sun and not be damage, as in the game
- All that fiction science simulated in the game, must be consistent with the science/theory/etc applied on it
- And many other things, I think that turn the flight assist off, should be a point of depart for the reality in the game.

Sorry for my bad english