∞ probes?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Good point. The moon should be made out of cheese and our FSD powered by unicorn farts....

Hate to break this to you but both the moon and FSD are both made out of software. They're not actually real either. What we're trying to achieve here is make a video game better. Not more realistic.

Oh wait, were u being sarcastic?
 
Speaking for myself, even though I believe the new planet pointing minigame to be a turd sandwich for various reasons, I do like pretty much all of the other things shown so far, the lighting changes, the day/night cycles, night vision, the codex, the added POIs and the fact eyeballing planets is gone, the fact exploration will be a shared experience across all players, etc.

Exactly where I'm at with it.
 
Finite probes breaks my immersion. For the 23 hrs a day I'm not playing, I want to roleplay my commander eating, drinking, sleeping and synthesising probes... y'know, all those boring things that don't need to be in a game. :D
 
Just about to watch the related livestream so I'm speaking from a position of ignorance, here, but still...

I'm disappointed at the way the FDev seem to lurch from one extreme to the other with this stuff - either making things way too hard or too easy.

You would have thought this'd be the sort of thing where they could sit down and go through all the consumable stuff in the game and decide whether they want it to be possible to replenish that stuff and, if so, how easy it should be.

This already creates some anomalies such as, for example, SRV fuel being infinitely available whereas heatsinks aren't.
Sure, you can stock-up on mat's before you go exploring but you are, ultimately, limited in your ability to synthesse them.
That means these always going to be a finite number of reloads available and, thus, a finite limit to your exploration if you're using heatsinks.

Really seems like FDev might want to go through all this stuff and decide which things should be sustainable and which shouldn't.

Alternatively, perhaps they could expand the functionality of the Refinery module (perhaps with a class of engineering mod) so that it can refine mat's to create the things necessary for various reloads?
 
Hate to break this to you but both the moon and FSD are both made out of software. They're not actually real either. What we're trying to achieve here is make a video game better. Not more realistic.

Hate to break it to you, but your words are just pixels on my screen. They are not actually real, either. So I can dismiss them as quickly as you dismissed my good buddy SenseiMatty :p
 
Hate to break this to you but both the moon and FSD are both made out of software. They're not actually real either. What we're trying to achieve here is make a video game better. Not more realistic.

Oh wait, were u being sarcastic?

Well the moon actually looking like a moon instead of being made of cheese, and the FSD using hydrogen instead of unicorn farts, or spaceships not being purple dragons do make the game better, just as completely nonsensical things do make the game worse, no matter how many times "it's a just game" is invoked.
 
Well the moon actually looking like a moon instead of being made of cheese, and the FSD using hydrogen instead of unicorn farts, or spaceships not being purple dragons do make the game better, just as completely nonsensical things do make the game worse, no matter how many times "it's a just game" is invoked.

After launching a handful of probes just pretend you're crafting more. And dump out some mats. Problem solved.
 

Jenner

I wish I was English like my hero Tj.
the FSD using hydrogen instead of unicorn farts

I lol'd.

5IOXMgE.gif
 
Its not immersive unless other preferably unwilling people do it too.

Do you use the same logic for invincible ships? Why not have all ships free and g5 mods available too?. Good games have rules it's what makes them fun (for me). It is why I don't play pure sandbox games

Edit arguably I quoted wrong post tho it sort of fits for this one too
 
Do you use the same logic for invincible ships? Why not have all ships free and g5 mods available too?. Good games have rules it's what makes them fun (for me). It is why I don't play pure sandbox games

I rarely use my corvette as I don't like overpowered ships so I choose to use other ships that cater to my own preferences.

I've never and would never demand the corvettes removal though.
 
I rarely use my corvette as I don't like overpowered ships so I choose to use other ships that cater to my own preferences.

I've never and would never demand the corvettes removal though.

I don't have a.corvette
Are you saying it is invincible and the only way you can die it it is by self destructing? Even if that is the case would you say that is good game design?.

Note I have accepted infinite probes are likely to happen but I am just calling foul on the logic being used against those who don't like it.

I meant to quote the guy suggesting manually dump materials if people want probe synthesis however
 
I don't have a.corvette
Are you saying it is invincible and the only way you can die it it is by self destructing? Even if that is the case would you say that is good game design?.

Note I have accepted infinite probes are likely to happen but I am just calling foul on the logic being used against those who don't like it.

I meant to quote the guy suggesting manually dump materials if people want probe synthesis however

That was me, and I was quoting Stig from an earlier post, so technically you quoted the right guy.

Also, the Corvette is mostly invincible, to NPC's at least. I did watch a video today of a dude in a Beluga beating one, he took out the shields and PP with Torpedos, ran out of ammo and then just rammed it to death. Took like 20 rams. Was the most ridiculous battle I'd ever seen.
 
That was me, and I was quoting Stig from an earlier post, so technically you quoted the right guy.

Also, the Corvette is mostly invincible, to NPC's at least. I did watch a video today of a dude in a Beluga beating one, he took out the shields and PP with Torpedos, ran out of ammo and then just rammed it to death. Took like 20 rams. Was the most ridiculous battle I'd ever seen.

Expensive repair bill even for the winner, I guess. On the other hand, we do have, for all practical purposes, infinite sidewinders.
 
Hate to break this to you but both the moon and FSD are both made out of software. They're not actually real either. What we're trying to achieve here is make a video game better. Not more realistic.

Oh wait, were u being sarcastic?

Games, like films and other forms of story telling, need to create an internally logical and consistent universe. There needs to be rules, limitations and challenges as well as creative possibilities. Even in narratives that invoke magic. Because (you guessed it): immersion, a.k.a. suspension of disbelief.

Anything that violates the internal consistency or logic of a narrative universe creates instant disbelief, and breaks the spell.

If ED were a game of magic, sure, you could have infinite probes in the shape of magic spells being cast, with their energy drawn from the Great Force that flows through the universe or some logic like that. But ED is a game of science fiction, so laws of physics apply, including the laws of thermodynamics and the basic fact that you can't magic physical probes from thin air. Not even from Bussard ram-scooped cosmic dust. So they are finite, physical objects that have to be replenished.

Similarly: materials and cargo are physical stuff that is lost when your ship is destroyed. Cartographic data is information however, so --as long as it is on some compact data storage medium that you can take with you-- would be preserved. SRVs run on electricity or fuel. Your ship has a big power plant and a big fuel tank. It makes sense that SRVs are refuelled from the ship, as they are repaired on the ship.

All these technical details need to have an inherent logic at least loosely based in scientific fact. Else ED is not a science fiction game.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom