Define 'depth'?

I have a feeling that ED does have depth now, it used to be thin, but certainly the last release has added a lot more depth into the game. It's not just a simulator and there's a lot going on, and doing things, such as mining and exploration, are quite involved and varied. I suspect what people are mostly concerned about is the payout of rewards - and not just cashing in, in the game. What does mining the fiftieth asteroid give you? Or exploring another world? It can get a little repetitive, and that's probably the sticking point in Elite, variety in the vast vacuum of space.

It's not a multiplayer game in the traditional sense, getting fun / balanced game play out of random strangers in this game is next to impossible. Which leaves the game mechanics to provide the depth. Once you've explored the tourist spots, and mined your way into an end-game ship, what's there to do? Material and data collection to try a different ship, urgh.

There are plenty of deep things in this game, but it's usually left to the few people with way too much time to figure it out for everybody else - we all then come here and read the how-to's. Exploring the Guardians stuff is loads of depth, just we just jump to the deep end after somebody else has enjoyed that depth. I'm not sure if it is possible, but the way to crack it would be to give each player their own way of unwinding a set of stories without other players being able to give it on a platter. Even if they did do this, we'd all weigh it up on maximum cash return and decide whether it's worth the effort or just to go back to blowing up rocks.
 
I instinctively think of depth (in this context) as 'emergent complexity'. That is, a game with a few simple rules that interact in many complicated ways is 'deep'.

So, as per my favorite thought experiment in this sort of thread, chess is pretty deep. As for Elite, there's some depth in the BGS, more in ship loadout planning, even more in, yes, engineers, although that did fail somewhat (I'm probably not thinking of the same reasons other people are there - I consider the failure in this context to be that there is all too often a 'correct' mod for any given thing.).

So 'depth' for me is not the same as narrative immersion, or player agency, or persistence of my actions, or detail in the world, or anything like that. A game could have the greatest most immersive story ever and still be shallow. It's also not really about complexity, though it's related to that - a game could easily be complicated without being deep at all.

Still, my greatest hope for the outcome of this thread is that perhaps we'll have even a tiny bit less of people complaining 'the game needs more depth' without actually saying what they mean, because it's clear that many of us think it means different things.
 
There's yet another 'mile wide, inch deep' threadnaught starting. Ten pages as of 21.00z tonight. I predict much bickering, increasing animosity and ad hominem attacks, followed by a lock. (That's what usually happens. :D)

I don't want to buzzkill on that one, but I am curious. What is 'depth', or what does 'depth' actually mean to you?

For example:

A couple of years back I stated my belief that more busy work is not depth. This was prior to engineering, but engineering is a great example, so I'll use that.

The engineering process involves many different requirements being met- unlocking engineers, gathering materials, trading same, rolling on a RNG generator to apply improvements.

I do not consider any of these activities to add depth to the game.

Engineering and the associated special effects can completely change the character of a ship. Different engineering effects can be combined in a staggering number of different ways. These can compliment or detract from the build's intended use. There's no 'best' build, the min/max of simpler systems doesn't apply.

This I consider to have added considerable depth to the game.

But that's just my opinion, I'm interested to hear yours?


Btw, I'm curious about 'depth', not engineering. I had a great response to an earlier OP on engineering, which I found very educational. I'm grateful to everyone who posted on it, even (heck, especially!) those who disagreed with me. :D

Nope. Just nope. I play the game, I am having fun, if other don't they are either doing something wrong or should do something else. Discussion over. Please.
 
My 60+ beats your 40+ and I agree with you :D

Be quiet the pair of you... bloody old people littering up the world yelling 'git orf ma grass' at ya :D

Seriously

The depth in ED is more suited to a question "How deep do you want it to be?"

On the surface its a simplistic space sim where you are a truck hauler. not much more than that. however, Skyrim could be figured that way too... do a bunch of scripted missions.. walk here.. kill this... talk to that and you've completed it.

Meanwhile , back at ED, I've become a smuggler and a dab hand at causing mayhem for enemy factions... as well as the occasional bug hunter... thargoids that is. because I want to I'll fly in open because I understand and enjoy the risks... followed by a spot of mining because I need a chill out session while having my feet on the desk and a guitar in hand. heck I could even go mad and engineer a PvP ship if I wanted to
This is all because I enjoy the free form style of play that imposes no constraints on what I do in game.
There are aspects I believe could be improved ,more SRVs/surface mining equipment, more thargoid storyline affecting the bubble more and more while starting to make the pleiades a no go zone for humans to mention but 2 things
I'm sure theres others... I like the new mapping tools, and the new 'radio tuning' discovery thing, and the compostion scanner was a surprise.(when I actually thought "what does this do? and why can I bind it into a fire group" :rolleyes:

But back in Skyrim.... I've joined the mages guild.... oh follow the mission, get the data, talk to some people, defeat the evil one.. all spoonfed to you....

Bill

"dont get me wrong.. I did enjoy skyrim... but its not better than elite dangerous"
 
Distance from apex to nadir.

Or more accurately how far in something goes. As it can be measured laterally and vertically. (E.g. a cave and a well)
 
Last edited:
Nope. Just nope. I play the game, I am having fun, if other don't they are either doing something wrong or should do something else. Discussion over. Please.

I enjoy Pepperoni pizza.

Pepperoni pizza can be improved (for me) via the addition of black olives and jalapenos.

Enjoying something and discussing ways that thing can be improved further are not mutually exclusive.
 
When a number of simple elements combine with emergent or unpredictable results, requiring skill or strategy to master.

See some crafting/resource management games, some RTSs, some 4X games.

Pew pew grind grind rank rank? Games that need "imagination" to fill in the gaps? Not so much.
pretty much this^^^^
Game with a depth have elements of suprise, danger, mission complexity and all that mixed together....etc.
ED is nice when it comes to represent galaxy with it's size and graphics, but thats it! No enviromental danger from space what so ever and everything is fully predictable, only danger in ED is when player decide to get involved in it and provoke it (NPC,PvP), elements other than grind should be challenge in game.
 
Depth is finding the 'why?' to what you do. 'Why do we engineer our ships?' 'Why do we play with the BGS?' "Why is Li Yong Rui failing at PP, even though he saves as nearly as much money for everyone as Shinrarta?' (OK that one isn't really a reason...but, really, 'WHY!')

If you engineer your ship for no purpose other than to engineer it..then the whole of the game play is shallow.

If you engineer your ship for PVP or distance or defense or etc. some part of the game play in vanilla ships becomes better because of the changes....if not better, then different in some way to make you desire to do the engineers.

That is what depth means....delving deeper into the aspects of the game to find a different or better way to do something.
 
Last edited:

Guest193293

G
Obscurity, and a grind process which is positively fractal, aren't the same things as depth.

It's always going to be a subjective judgement. Me, I think this game has all the depth of gossamer. You can write as many essays about your experience as you want, it won't change mine.

Logging and relogging at Dav's Hope or a crashed ship POI for an infinite stream of engineering materials: not depth

Three different layers of government - superpower, power and faction - on top of a broken "background simulator" which might as well be pure RNG for all the difference it makes: not depth

Unlocking an engineer by ferrying back and forth an astonishing quantity of cigars which only magically appear a small amount at a time for absolutely no earthly reason: not depth

Getting 16x the payouts for mass murder, for 1/4 the time investment, just because you winged up with 3 other similarly spec'ed out murderers: not depth

Being able to control a fighter in real time 100,000 light years away but not being able to pull up the trading prices at another station in the same system because that would be too easy: not depth

dsL6nSb.png


I think CMDR QOHEN LETH should have also added "expect an endgame and burn out in a few weeks or after 2000 hours" lmao.

As for the topic; example between Need for Speed Payback and Need for Speed Underground 2:

No depth
need-for-speed-payback-live-tuning-drift-rcm992x1082.jpg
Depth:
t8CLvnV.png

RPsfgiP.png

snDLGVa.png

FwanpQj.png

Vzks3OU.png

fG1MXYU.png

hoVB6is.png

No depth:

FZyA4FA.png


Depth:

XBp5s8i.png


Got it?

Game with a depth have elements of suprise, danger, mission complexity and all that mixed together....etc.

Ever heard of Isinona?

[video=youtube_share;KbaLJTGHkj8]https://youtu.be/KbaLJTGHkj8[/video]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When a number of simple elements combine with emergent or unpredictable results, requiring skill or strategy to master.

See some crafting/resource management games, some RTSs, some 4X games.

Pew pew grind grind rank rank? Games that need "imagination" to fill in the gaps? Not so much.

Yep you've nailed it with the "imagination" comment. That's been the fallback excuse by many faithful since release - that this game doesn't lack content but requires that you use your imagination to enjoy it. Errr.. Okay...

Op: Assuming you're being sincere with your request I'd suggest looking at the other forum thread that shows SC and what space legs should be. The video in that thread is an example of content, and that's from a game in alpha and not one that's been released for almost 5 years. Doesn't matter that it's still in alpha since at least that company recognizes it's not done yet. They do not want to ship a game that lacks content.
 
Last edited:
I think CMDR QOHEN LETH should have also added "expect an endgame and burn out in a few weeks or after 2000 hours" lmao.

As for the topic; example between Need for Speed Payback and Need for Speed Underground 2:

No depth
Depth:

No depth:



Depth:



Got it?



Ever heard of Isinona?

Lol that's width. Seriously. A bunch of simple tasks that one can choose - but all are simple, and require the same few button presses and minimal skill to accomplish.
 
Back
Top Bottom