Stop playing games and get a proper job?
Saving the world or something.
It's a game, not a real life.
Do I win £5?
Saving the world or something.
It's a game, not a real life.
Do I win £5?
Immersion and Why Elite FEELS so...Gamey
- Thread starter Blackcompany
- Start date
I agree, also lets remove FSD travel as well it isnt scientifically real and feels a bit gamey, lets travel at 500km/h between stars..
basically lets remove what ever little fun left in ED for sake of immersion. God im starting to hate that word in space sims.
basically lets remove what ever little fun left in ED for sake of immersion. God im starting to hate that word in space sims.
Well, I think it says a lot about the level of immersion Elite provides that there are still people out there who are only just now realizing that this entire time, they've just been playing a game.
This is the bit I always struggle to understand. I pick up various materials along the way, do what ever I need to do, and get my engineering done - I'm playing the game as designed. Why do some folks appear to believe that this isn't gameplay?
Is it just that games in general push a mentality that you need to max everything you can, before you can start to have immersive "play"?
I've been playing since shortly after the PC release, moved the PS4, and now on Xbox. I just do stuff, and enjoy doing it.
I've never made Elite, I've cleared my save multiple times, just to role-play something different.
I think the OP makes some very fair points.
Personally, I'm also having this awkward dualism. At one moment, you feel like you're really out there, thousand years in the future. And a few minutes later, it's that "oh yeah, totally just a game" thing again.
3.x should indeed improve things, but that's more than about time isn't it?
Just like you'll never see stations actually being build, or goods actually being mass-transported from surface to starbase and back, or ships being carried for players, or real activity at occupied/manned bases, or a war being resolved... and many more of these iittle things that makes it indeed feel empty. Up till now, almost everything that can happen in-game is extremly binary and some even require the devs to push a button to make things happen.
Frontier added voices to station crew. That's how you breath life into a game. Should have more of that. Not rngesuz or whatever it is spelled. Not having to hunt for ship parts and digital signals (for f's sake) that would be so bloody common in this sci-fi setting you'd be hitting your head on them at every corner in a space station. Also not having to scoop up low level common elements on random lifeless planets because most of it would be literally on sale everywhere. Sure.. some of these things add to gameplay, but so would adding Tetris to the ship's computer. Don't add game elements just for the sake of adding game elements. Make it believable in the setting that is created.
Also wondering if the majority of forum-ers actually understand what critisism is and why people are critisizing things. Looking at most of the replies in this thread...
Personally, I'm also having this awkward dualism. At one moment, you feel like you're really out there, thousand years in the future. And a few minutes later, it's that "oh yeah, totally just a game" thing again.
3.x should indeed improve things, but that's more than about time isn't it?
Great example to proof OP's point! And here is why: you'll never see them fly.
Just like you'll never see stations actually being build, or goods actually being mass-transported from surface to starbase and back, or ships being carried for players, or real activity at occupied/manned bases, or a war being resolved... and many more of these iittle things that makes it indeed feel empty. Up till now, almost everything that can happen in-game is extremly binary and some even require the devs to push a button to make things happen.
Frontier added voices to station crew. That's how you breath life into a game. Should have more of that. Not rngesuz or whatever it is spelled. Not having to hunt for ship parts and digital signals (for f's sake) that would be so bloody common in this sci-fi setting you'd be hitting your head on them at every corner in a space station. Also not having to scoop up low level common elements on random lifeless planets because most of it would be literally on sale everywhere. Sure.. some of these things add to gameplay, but so would adding Tetris to the ship's computer. Don't add game elements just for the sake of adding game elements. Make it believable in the setting that is created.
Also wondering if the majority of forum-ers actually understand what critisism is and why people are critisizing things. Looking at most of the replies in this thread...
Last edited:
Mostly agree with OP.
I do use some self made explanations for such stuff to allow some self posed immersion...
For long range missiles, perhaps they were abandoned due to their speed limitation, since during the time between fire and impact, the target can simply high wake...
And that could pretty much explain why we fight in short ranges. Any weapon that travels to the target in more time than the FSD takes to boot, has turned obsolete in 3303.
Not a perfect explanation for our extremely short range of combat, since a missile travelling say 1000 km/h should be able to travel 11 km in the 40 sec it takes to boot FSD.
On the other hand, Lasers that face no power loss in vacuum should hit from further away, but I guess its a matter of targeting mechanics, even fixed weapons would misalign due to forces during tight turns that slightly deform the hull, thus the laser weapon platform as well. Not perfect explanation either but I ll take it for now...
I do use some self made explanations for such stuff to allow some self posed immersion...
For long range missiles, perhaps they were abandoned due to their speed limitation, since during the time between fire and impact, the target can simply high wake...
And that could pretty much explain why we fight in short ranges. Any weapon that travels to the target in more time than the FSD takes to boot, has turned obsolete in 3303.
Not a perfect explanation for our extremely short range of combat, since a missile travelling say 1000 km/h should be able to travel 11 km in the 40 sec it takes to boot FSD.
On the other hand, Lasers that face no power loss in vacuum should hit from further away, but I guess its a matter of targeting mechanics, even fixed weapons would misalign due to forces during tight turns that slightly deform the hull, thus the laser weapon platform as well. Not perfect explanation either but I ll take it for now...
tho i may not agree with the solutions op listed i agree that this game keeps dropping the ball. theres so many things that dont make sense or are a chore to do. this game could be so much more. even so i will continue to hold hope and buy stuff from fd.
my number one gripe is not the game its the community. elite caters to an older crowd and most of us play solo and dont traffic the forums much so most of the people you deal with in the community are the loud ignorant and toxic ones. thats why open is awful. your not going to have positive player interactions. those players are in solo.
ps sry if this looks like crap im on my phone.
my number one gripe is not the game its the community. elite caters to an older crowd and most of us play solo and dont traffic the forums much so most of the people you deal with in the community are the loud ignorant and toxic ones. thats why open is awful. your not going to have positive player interactions. those players are in solo.
ps sry if this looks like crap im on my phone.
It's hard to take seriously comparisons of "gamey" when there are other genre games like NMS with cartoony graphics out there or space games that have a hundred thousandth smaller scope. Even FSX's air traffic of hundreds of "NPC" planes and flightplans don't kick in until after a limit threshold radius from the player instance location. And if you want a full simulated cockpit system with over a hundred working buttons and circuit flow systems that's another $90 where it took the addon several years to develop. http://www.pmdg.com/pages/product/FSX/744QOTSII.html Oh wait, there's cig-arrets' Star Citizen which purports to be able to do everything, someday. (I guess if one can't wait for the seven or more years for ED to improve from being done "(badly)".)
Last edited:
Of all the things NOT going for ED the "feel" is as it should be for a game like this and I like it. It has an arcade feel. Star Citizen (if ever released) will be much more in-depth. My main gripe would be the lack of content. Horizons was supposed to bring explorers more to explore but really only added non-atmospheric landings, RNGineering and the Thargoid content has been less than slowly released and teased.
Once you've acquired one of the Big 3 (or 4 if you want to include the T10) there's nothing "new" to do with your huge ship other than what one has been doing. You can haul more, have more fire power and what-not but that's about it. It would be nice to have missions that accommodate you new purchase or rank. I don't get missions that a Vice Admiral would have access to. Maybe, go and kill ships bigger than yourself? The title is just a grind to get the fancy faction ship, nothing more (also a RNGineering grind to get it to your specs).
PVP is almost worthless! You don't get any possibility of cool or special loot from your victims (maybe grab that C2 - G5 MC that, luckliy, dropped from the wreckage), no in-game leader-boards to prove who's the best PVPer (I'm the best BTW, now prove it!) [where is it]
Another Perspective:
Since Fdev mentioned the Thargoids around 8 months ago, Eve Online has re-balanced several ship types (Battle-cruisers, Assault ships and Strategic Cruisers), made the game free to play, released a new line of player owned structures and have recently done a re-balance of those structures as well as released the second batch of structures, improved the NPE (New Player Experience) with better tutorials (Eve has a steep learning curve not ED) and upgraded their servers. Granted, CCP probably has a much bigger staff and more money than Fdev. This is while I was only playing ED for 6 months so, yeah, I'm playing Eve now full-time again. I'd rather pay 15-30USD a month for content than to pay another one-time 30USD for another bland release of ED.
It's sad that the only thing players were excited about and actually received was the holiday ship skins (Black Friday - black & New Years - chrome). The only thing Fdev had to do was un-comment some lines of code for more cash.
Once you've acquired one of the Big 3 (or 4 if you want to include the T10) there's nothing "new" to do with your huge ship other than what one has been doing. You can haul more, have more fire power and what-not but that's about it. It would be nice to have missions that accommodate you new purchase or rank. I don't get missions that a Vice Admiral would have access to. Maybe, go and kill ships bigger than yourself? The title is just a grind to get the fancy faction ship, nothing more (also a RNGineering grind to get it to your specs).
PVP is almost worthless! You don't get any possibility of cool or special loot from your victims (maybe grab that C2 - G5 MC that, luckliy, dropped from the wreckage), no in-game leader-boards to prove who's the best PVPer (I'm the best BTW, now prove it!) [where is it]
Another Perspective:
Since Fdev mentioned the Thargoids around 8 months ago, Eve Online has re-balanced several ship types (Battle-cruisers, Assault ships and Strategic Cruisers), made the game free to play, released a new line of player owned structures and have recently done a re-balance of those structures as well as released the second batch of structures, improved the NPE (New Player Experience) with better tutorials (Eve has a steep learning curve not ED) and upgraded their servers. Granted, CCP probably has a much bigger staff and more money than Fdev. This is while I was only playing ED for 6 months so, yeah, I'm playing Eve now full-time again. I'd rather pay 15-30USD a month for content than to pay another one-time 30USD for another bland release of ED.
It's sad that the only thing players were excited about and actually received was the holiday ship skins (Black Friday - black & New Years - chrome). The only thing Fdev had to do was un-comment some lines of code for more cash.
Yea, this is why the galaxy of ED feels so static to me, literally the only moving pieces are other ships and some station misc*. The star animatics still glitch after three years, gas giants and cloudy earth likes are simple static bitmaps and every thursday we get a galactic tic which changes things.
@OP: Can't give you more forum rep but mostly agree.
EDIT * and of course the slow dance of the planets, moons and stars - which we could totally see if we'd been given an orrery instead of say, anaemic powerplay / out of game CQC / bareboned MC / unbalanced RNGineering etc...
Last edited:
When I read the OP my first thought is that all the complaints involve things which, if revised, would make the game much easier.
There are at least as many, if not more, things about ED which would make it much, much, harder to play if they were "realistic".
When people complain about the stuff that limits their opportunities but ignore the stuff which assists them, I can't help thinking that they're just trying to justify wanting more powerful toys.
"Limited boost is silly and unrealistic".
Okay, let's look at this a bit more carefully.
From a gameplay POV, obviously perma-boost would be a bit over-powered 'cos it means running away would just be a matter of boosting and then, possibly, going FA-off to maintain that momentum.
That became clear when it was originally implemented, and then revised.
But what about from a "lore" perspective?
Well, our ships do all sorts of things, from adjusting the opacity of our canopies depending on ambient light to adjusting the power of our thrusters depending on gravity and adjusting our speed in SC depending on proximity to objects.
That being the case, it seems plausible that our ships would also limit boost in order to maintain safe thruster operation.
I guess it might be interesting if they gave us the choice of momentary boost, which would work as it currently does, or allow us to change it to a toggle, which would cause the thrusters to overheat after 5 seconds and then cause them to take damage and eventually fail after another 10 seconds.
Personally, I'd be interested to explore how that might be useful but I suspect a lot of people would simply wail about how the damage doesn't allow them to boost for as long as they want, completely ignoring the fact that they can always revert to momentary boost if they want a "safe option" and the "perma-boost" is intended to be a dangerous thing to use.
People want to have their cake and eat it.
They want to get rid of the stuff that prevents them from becoming all-powerful but they don't to get rid of the stuff that prevents them from being crushed like an insect.
There are at least as many, if not more, things about ED which would make it much, much, harder to play if they were "realistic".
When people complain about the stuff that limits their opportunities but ignore the stuff which assists them, I can't help thinking that they're just trying to justify wanting more powerful toys.
"Limited boost is silly and unrealistic".
Okay, let's look at this a bit more carefully.
From a gameplay POV, obviously perma-boost would be a bit over-powered 'cos it means running away would just be a matter of boosting and then, possibly, going FA-off to maintain that momentum.
That became clear when it was originally implemented, and then revised.
But what about from a "lore" perspective?
Well, our ships do all sorts of things, from adjusting the opacity of our canopies depending on ambient light to adjusting the power of our thrusters depending on gravity and adjusting our speed in SC depending on proximity to objects.
That being the case, it seems plausible that our ships would also limit boost in order to maintain safe thruster operation.
I guess it might be interesting if they gave us the choice of momentary boost, which would work as it currently does, or allow us to change it to a toggle, which would cause the thrusters to overheat after 5 seconds and then cause them to take damage and eventually fail after another 10 seconds.
Personally, I'd be interested to explore how that might be useful but I suspect a lot of people would simply wail about how the damage doesn't allow them to boost for as long as they want, completely ignoring the fact that they can always revert to momentary boost if they want a "safe option" and the "perma-boost" is intended to be a dangerous thing to use.
People want to have their cake and eat it.
They want to get rid of the stuff that prevents them from becoming all-powerful but they don't to get rid of the stuff that prevents them from being crushed like an insect.
Another blackcompany special I see. It's a game. That is all that needs to be said. Anyway, I also disagree that the stuff said breaks my immersion.
I'll have to take your word for that because:
I don't have the time, or inclination, to sit down and read a thesis on the nature of irrelevancy.
Better cook it quick because you can't refreeze it.
the galaxy has been simulated zillions of times in games. you mean at scale. maybe the problem is to provide gameplay at that scale. elite doesn't fare very well in that (yet), maybe that's what's breaking people. then again people is often oversensitive if you ask me
but actually, if you think of it, elite would work mostly the same with, say, less than 1000 stars. the rest is overkill. "i've been to beagle point" has some ring to it, but it's actually just a few hundred button presses away from any other star, nothing different there, gameplay is the same.
yeah, you can role play. last time i checked you don't even need pencil and paper for that, not to mention a computer.
unless stated otherwise, the tl;dr is usually the subject line.
I'm not going to slate the OP for thinking about the game, it's potentially weaker points, ideas for possible improvements and simply engaging with a community about a shared pleasure - despite some interesting points I personally disagree with many of them, possibly with some exception(s) of us having to suspend disbelief in factors such as the ED Universe not having mechanics that already exist in the 20th and 21st centuries.
However, games need us to place our imaginations before all else to make the game work, and we use our imaginations to hide things as much as to provide things. The incredible Lego space base that I built in my bedroom as a child was surrounded not by a sea of 1980s' black, grey and red 'boys' decor but by stars, luna landscapes and PlayMobil people that despite being three times the size of a Lego figure found a suitable place in my imagined world - I didn't just make stuff up, I hid stuff away.
Immersion is provided by imagination. Personally, if between the game's mechanics and my imagination nothing fires up it's a sure sign the game isn't for me.
I'm not suggesting that the game isn't for you OP. I'm simply stating that I hear so much of immersion when discussing games but so rarely hear anyone mention imagination. We expect it of young children but not of ourselves. Seems weird.
However, games need us to place our imaginations before all else to make the game work, and we use our imaginations to hide things as much as to provide things. The incredible Lego space base that I built in my bedroom as a child was surrounded not by a sea of 1980s' black, grey and red 'boys' decor but by stars, luna landscapes and PlayMobil people that despite being three times the size of a Lego figure found a suitable place in my imagined world - I didn't just make stuff up, I hid stuff away.
Immersion is provided by imagination. Personally, if between the game's mechanics and my imagination nothing fires up it's a sure sign the game isn't for me.
I'm not suggesting that the game isn't for you OP. I'm simply stating that I hear so much of immersion when discussing games but so rarely hear anyone mention imagination. We expect it of young children but not of ourselves. Seems weird.
Last edited: