Frontier you talked about the "traveler" style of exploration and misunderstood one key thing

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Red Anders

Red Anders
Genar-Hofoen said:
What do you count as Exploration? What's your True Scotsman?
Click to expand...

Renamed after the reveal thread :D

nxg4GaH.jpg
 

Atlas

A
I so much love the new mechanics of exploration because of several reasons:

1. it reduces the time of finding things of real interest immensely. i cannot summarize how much time i have spent with cruising through a system, hoping to find something meaningful. But all that WAS of any meaning was way too hard to find. now i find trails and i get rewards and i can finally do exploration that makes sense

2. it is so much more atmospheric, using a way of analyzing bodies that feels "astronomical" and "scientific". you can see at a glance if there is something of interest for you, because the signatures you see before honking give you a sense of what yo can expect in the system. The old style of exploring was the typical, 1000wise seen way of finding things: i have a "question mark" (in ED its a star-system) on the map... i go there ... i find something or not. Every game is doing the same thing.

The new style in ED is a mechanic i have been looking for so long. Getting hints, making more decisions, evaluate - instead of fly to system x, scan and having all i need.
i don't want to uncover everything as fast as possible. i want the WAY to uncover to be interesting.

And that's why the decision you made, FDEV, is so f*cking RIGHT.

the best gameplay optimization in ED so far!

Thank you! and do not change it please!
 
Last edited:

Baroness Galaxy

Baroness Galaxy
Adam Waite said:
After the first presentation of Exploration, we received a vast amount of feedback and I personally took the time to read a large amount of this. Having done so, we set out to look at the different types of explorers we have in the game and came up with nearly a dozen different types. One of which was the type presented by the OP here. We then tried to use that information to look at the new mechanics to make sure they would work for as many of those types as possible. Unfortunately we weren’t able to come up with a solution that allowed players, like the OP, to maintain their current flow without severely altering the game play of the other types or changing the design direction of the FSS.
Click to expand...
When you say "types" do you mean "persona" ? Since that is a methodology used in software development. If so, having 12 explorer personas sounds like too much and makes me wonder how you distinct. Since as you say, it's nearly impossible to satisfy all 12 when touching the domain they share.

I'm not a user designer, nor do I have the data you guys have, but I would distinct explorers by their motivation

- The discoverer, a person that aims for finding out new things, money is not very important, time spent is not important, main motivation is the immersive experience of discovery, they can be lone wolfs or social expedition people, they can be veterans or newbies, some are scientific

- The honker, a person that aims to reach elite exploration rank, nice bonus goal is money as well, but for them reduced time spent is most important motivation

- The tagger, a person that aims to find something unique, tag it and return back, shared some motivations with discoverer, but differs in that they do not focus on discovery process

Other then that, I can't think of other types :)
 

Ziggy Stardust

Ziggy Stardust
Fondly remember the time in the exploration forum whenever someone talked about real explorers or real exploration they were ridiculed and laughed out of the forum.

edit: drinking game!

Happy days :)

Baroness Galaxy said:
- The discoverer, a person that aims for finding out new things, money is not very important, time spent is not important, main motivation is the immersive experience of discovery, they can be lone wolfs or social expedition people, they can be veterans or newbies, some are scientific

- The honker, a person that aims to reach elite exploration rank, nice bonus goal is money as well, but for them reduced time spent is most important motivation

- The tagger, a person that aims to find something unique, tag it and return back, shared some motivations with discoverer, but differs in that they do not focus on discovery process

Other then that, I can't think of other types :)
Click to expand...
Full system scanners
Record breakers
ELW hunters
Sciencey explorers
Picture takers
Many more I haven't thought of.


I wouldn't fit in your categories for instance.

edit: Besides, explorers change their methods, or have characteristics from multiple types, so yeah, it's extremely difficult to pigeonhole explorers.
 
Last edited:

babelfisch

babelfisch
CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost said:
And my point was that finding those interesting places on surfaces are not directly connected to the ASD, in case you missed my point ;)
(yes, I now know that the FSS shows what object has interesting surface POIs)

I agree that interesting surface features are part of sight seeing.
Click to expand...

I agreed with that in my initial post (the part that you snipped). ;)
 

Barking_Mad

Barking_Mad
Genar-Hofoen said:
It gave one the agency to come to a snap decision on whether one of those 400 billion star systems was worth time spending in, derp.
Click to expand...


Your issue seems to be the time taken it now takes to do something, which is fair enough. The old honk takes 5 seconds between pressing the scan button and it telling you how many bodies are in the system. You then press a button to bring up the system map.


The new way involves pressing a button to enter the scanning mode and then a wait of 3 seconds for the spectral graph to appear which is essentially shorthand for what bodies are in a system. It also tells you how many there are and what signals are present.


Oh that moon's not landable. Oh that moon's not landable. Oh that one's landable but doesn't look worth visiting. Result: Takes a crapload more time than the current way to come to a conclusion. Now multiply that by 1000's of star systems and the 1-2% of systems worth sticking around in.
Click to expand...


But here's the thing, when atmospheric landings come (Id be amazed if they aren't 2019's big release given the length of time between the first iteration and now, plus current changes and removal of ice and rock and mist/fog upgrades) then many/most those squiggles are going to be landable and many, many more systems will be worth exploring in full, rather than leaving straight away. This is built to be the future of the game, not the past where the quick glance at the system map only worked well because there was little or originally nothing, to land on (or do) on the planets.
 

Bier00t

Bier00t
Adam Waite said:
Hi all,

I just wanted to drop by and clear up a few things:

After the first presentation of Exploration, we received a vast amount of feedback and I personally took the time to read a large amount of this. Having done so, we set out to look at the different types of explorers we have in the game and came up with nearly a dozen different types. One of which was the type presented by the OP here. We then tried to use that information to look at the new mechanics to make sure they would work for as many of those types as possible. Unfortunately we weren’t able to come up with a solution that allowed players, like the OP, to maintain their current flow without severely altering the gameplay of the other types or changing the design direction of the FSS.

We’ve made the FSA as readable at a glance as possible, with a lot of information being presented if you wish to master the system. Also as we showcased on the stream, you can become very proficient and quick with the FSS, and we believe that the additional time required isn’t too dramatic.

The Orrery view also means that you should be able to find interesting orbits or clusters of planets without having to actually visit them.

We would love for you to try out the new mechanics during the beta and provide us with feedback on how it impact the way you play.
Click to expand...


Please at least consider this view for a simple honk - https://imgur.com/a/3vOKIDj
 

-VR- Max Factor

-VR- Max Factor
Barking_Mad said:
But here's the thing, when atmospheric landings come (Id be amazed if they aren't 2019's big release given the length of time between the first iteration and now, plus current changes and removal of ice and rock and mist/fog upgrades) then many/most those squiggles are going to be landable and many, many more systems will be worth exploring in full, rather than leaving straight away. This is built to be the future of the game, not the past where the quick glance at the system map only worked well because there was little or originally nothing, to land on (or do) on the planets.
Click to expand...

This is what I have been saying for some time now, but seems to fall on deaf ears.
 

Genar-Hofoen

Genar-Hofoen
Barking_Mad said:
Your issue seems to be the time taken it now takes to do something, which is fair enough. The old honk takes 5 seconds between pressing the scan button and it telling you how many bodies are in the system. You then press a button to bring up the system map.


The new way involves pressing a button to enter the scanning mode and then a wait of 3 seconds for the spectral graph to appear which is essentially shorthand for what bodies are in a system. It also tells you how many there are and what signals are present.





But here's the thing, when atmospheric landings come (Id be amazed if they aren't 2019's big release given the length of time between the first iteration and now, plus current changes and removal of ice and rock and mist/fog upgrades) then many/most those squiggles are going to be landable and many, many more systems will be worth exploring in full, rather than leaving straight away. This is built to be the future of the game, not the past where the quick glance at the system map only worked well because there was little or originally nothing, to land on (or do) on the planets.
Click to expand...

Ah, but even if/when we get atmospheric landing - there should still be some planets where you can't or wouldn't dare go land on - there are planets out there with atmospheric pressure so yoooj your ship would implode. Therefore - it will be completely necessary to scan every planet to make sure you're not gonna implode on that enticing looking planet. Unless of course yoooooj atmospheric pressures will be handwaved away - but that's a future megathread for sure ;)
 

Maro-Val

Maro-Val
Ziggy Stardust said:
Fondly remember the time in the exploration forum whenever someone talked about real explorers or real exploration they were ridiculed and laughed out of the forum.

edit: drinking game!

Happy days :)


Full system scanners
Record breakers
ELW hunters
Sciencey explorers
Picture takers
Many more I haven't thought of.


I wouldn't fit in your categories for instance.

edit: Besides, explorers change their methods, or have characteristics from multiple types, so yeah, it's extremely difficult to pigeonhole explorers.
Click to expand...

Dont forget black hole hunters and those who try to reach systems at the edges of the galaxy hehe.
 

MadDogMurdock

MadDogMurdock
CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost said:
It will get faster than the current way to find brain trees. A lot faster.

But to find anything interesting on a planetary object the player will have to fly to that object and map it. It has absolutely nothing to do with the system map, the honk or the new FSS.
Click to expand...

Ah, but you'll have certainty before you fly to that planet that there is something there worth finding. That's a massive improvement.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Ziggy Stardust
picommander said:
Yes, why not, shall they! It's not about the money as most of these 'explorers' never hesitate to clarify.
Click to expand...
The people you are referring to are not the same people Frontier were referring to when they talked about travelers. Please, get a clue before you make a fool out of yourself.
My impression is that too many commanders got used to an empty and boring placeholder mechanism and now, where it's finally filled with life, are calling foul and want to throw their toys out of the pram, instead of even considering to adjust themselves to the new methods.
Click to expand...
As we already established, your impression is based on nothing and thus can be dismissed with ease.

By the way, did you forget to defend your claim, or were you aware you were talking bollox? :)
"The only people seriously being hampered will be the travelers who pretend to be explorers. This silly game will be over soon (the pretending part at least)."

Maro-Val said:
Dont forget black hole hunters and those who try to reach systems at the edges of the galaxy hehe.
Click to expand...
I have been hunting black holes as well. Procedural ones. Found one which was 57 Solar masses baby yeah! :)
 

Vorxian

Vorxian
Genar-Hofoen said:
Ah, but even if/when we get atmospheric landing - there should still be some planets where you can't or wouldn't dare go land on - there are planets out there with atmospheric pressure so yoooj your ship would implode. Therefore - it will be completely necessary to scan every planet to make sure you're not gonna implode on that enticing looking planet. Unless of course yoooooj atmospheric pressures will be handwaved away - but that's a future megathread for sure ;)
Click to expand...

I'd like it! I'd like any planet to be visit-able. If humans wanted we could try to land on Venus, or Jupiter... It would be a one way trip, but still possible if one wants an interesting suicide.

There shouldn't be any barriers, just data and information to determine if you will live to tell the tale lol :)
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom