Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?

[Sylow]

From a gameplay perspective the new process feels disjointed and tacked on in a way that the old one did not.

And I guess that this is why we will never agree. For me the new process, while taking you out of the cockpit mode, feels a bit like the StarTrek scanner.

And while we're at it: if the FSS should be an in-cockpit thing, then the galaxy map, the system map, squadron management, PP screen, etc. also should not be separate screens. People don't complain about the galaxy map and system map taking you out of the cockpit. Why is that? The only explanation I can come up with is: because it already was like that during the beta, so they are used to it.

Anyway, while the old ADS always felt like a placeholder to me. It always was like "press button for a few seconds, we will add gameplay later" to me. So for me feels more integral to the game than the old ADS. By far not perfect, still in need of several improvements, but more integral to the experience of flying a spaceship than the "press button for success" of the ADS.

But yes, I guess now we're down to "this feels better to me while that feels better for you". We again have to agree to disagree here. Feelings are hard to back up with facts, so I can just stay with "FSS feels better to me, although it still could use some work".

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

I don't mind the 2D panning.

This was probably the core difference between those that like the fss and those that don't. This is the one issue that in all our past fantasy that could never be worked around.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

[

One way that could return some elements of the original gameplay would be to extend the FSS to the star systems within a determined range around the player. And allow the ability to send probes through witch space to scan the systems remotely.
This would allow for a time sink to be added so as not to step on the toes of the FSS.
The information gleaned from the probes could be limited enough to give the player incentive to travel to the system and perform the FSS scan.
This would add to the exploration gameplay as you would remove the randomness I currently experience and add more tools to exploration.

Probes! I REALLY wanted probes and gravity slingshotting and strategic positioning of my ship to maximize coverage. We got a telescope

 

[Ian Skippy]

Probes! I REALLY wanted probes and gravity slingshotting and strategic positioning of my ship to maximize coverage. We got a telescope

And probes.

 

[Riverside]

But yes, I guess now we're down to "this feels better to me while that feels better for you". We again have to agree to disagree here. Feelings are hard to back up with facts, so I can just stay with "FSS feels better to me, although it still could use some work".

Quite. I gave a fuller response in the other thread.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

And probes.

You mean the DSS?
That's throwing rocks at a melon.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

No, it really is called a circular argument and yes, it is one because the conclusion is within a premise itself.

And the rest of your post is completely irrelevant.

Good thing I don’t need your approval huh? There are also things called “being facetious”, and “intentionally difficult.” both can be a lot of fun.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

When the first sentence contains a fallacy, the rest of the post is garbage - much like exploration gated behind the FSS.

But I'm not going to waste any more pixels, the dev gods have spoken - the faithful are satisfied.
The unbelievers are cast into the wilderness to find new games to play.

There is no fallacy in a stated opinion. Thanks for playing “what I read on the internet”. All respect lost.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

There is no fallacy in a stated opinion. Thanks for playing “what I read on the internet”. All respect lost.

Let's think about how this would actually have to work to be viable..

The bold text is not an opinion - you are stating that is has to be the way you are about to describe.
What you described was utter garbage and it wouldn't have had to work that way at all.

That is a fallacy.

 

[Sylow]

You mean the DSS?
That's throwing rocks at a melon.

I also agree that it's badly lacking. But it is what you described: sending probes. And using gravitation to affect their flight path.

But while that sounds great, it plays boringly. Unfortunately I also don't see how you could make "shot probes, let gravitation pull them in" much more interesting. Randomizing gravitation doesn't seem too logical, after all.

 

[cheesenbiscuits]

[


Probes! I REALLY wanted probes and gravity slingshotting and strategic positioning of my ship to maximize coverage. We got a telescope

I wanted a telescope,you can blame me

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I also agree that it's badly lacking. But it is what you described: sending probes. And using gravitation to affect their flight path.

But while that sounds great, it plays boringly. Unfortunately I also don't see how you could make "shot probes, let gravitation pull them in" much more interesting. Randomizing gravitation doesn't seem too logical, after all.

Probes, bullets, rock, small children - doesn't matter with the implementation we have, because you're simply painting circles of the surface of a sphere. It's gameplay for the sake of gameplay, rather than being skillful or engaging - at that point you may as well not bother.

Just having to fly around the planet would have been better - at least it requires some skill and doesn't force you to park the ship.

 

[askavir]

The exploration "update" is the perfect example of why FD should stick with park building games...

They took something that was boring and empty, and just added a repetitive brainless chore while keeping everything else exactly as boring and empty as before.

 

[Sylow]

The exploration "update" is the perfect example of why FD should stick with park building games...

So what you are saying is that FD should never have made this game at all?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Probes, bullets, rock, small children - doesn't matter with the implementation we have, because you're simply painting circles of the surface of a sphere. It's gameplay for the sake of gameplay, rather than being skillful or engaging - at that point you may as well not bother.

Just having to fly around the planet would have been better - at least it requires some skill and doesn't force you to park the ship.

Why does it need to be skillful to be fun. I do many things that require little skill, but still have fun with it.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Why does it need to be skillful to be fun. I do many things that require little skill, but still have fun with it.

It doesn't need to be skillful, but I generally find repetitive things are more fun if they require skill - otherwise they're just a timesink. Just my opinion.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

It doesn't need to be skillful, but I generally find repetitive things are more fun if they require skill - otherwise they're just a timesink. Just my opinion.

For me it depends what I get out of it and I don't honestly find it that repetative. Sure the controls are, but thats the same with everything, but when I am looking and interested in what I am discovering, I don't really think about the controls, they become unimportant. Just how it works for me.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

One suggestion for the FSS - why do the blobs need to be blue?
Why not also use colour variation on the blobs themselves to differentiate body type?

 

[space voyager]

The exploration "update" is the perfect example of why FD should stick with park building games...

A clear cut case of "this game is not for you" syndrome.

EDIT

One suggestion for the FSS - why do the blobs need to be blue?
Why not also use colour variation on the blobs themselves to differentiate body type?

Because FD decided to do this same effect with symbols.

 

[Riverside]

A clear cut case of "this game is not for you" syndrome.

I liked the game I bought. I want to be able to continue to play that game if there is no technical or balancing issue that prevents it. This is not an unreasonable position.

Suggesting that someone bought the wrong game when the problem is with gameplay removed for no good reason years after it was purchased isn't a reasonable position, it is churlish.