exploration minigame 6 months later

[Rat Catcher]

Unless the definition of game play = time sink?

Of course it is...
If one didn't want to 'waste time' one wouldn't be playing a silly video game and would be doing something constructive instead.

 

[Nihila Vex]

ED is not a simulator. Its a galaxy sim with a game added into it.

SpaceEngine is a galaxy sim. And then some. And you can land on planets with atmosphere, too. If it ever gets procedurally generated vegetation and settlements and stuff I for one will be lost.

I'd love to see a game added to SpaceEngine.

Right. So reducing the materials grind, speeding up SC travel, and increasing JD ranges, reverting FSS to honking, doesn't REMOVE gameplay.
It merely changes it. For some, it would be so much better.

Unless the definition of game play = time sink?

Yeah... So much of the 'gameplay' in ED is arbitrary or false difficulty. Flight Assist Off can't have a kill rotation button or a flight path indicator because it would make the game 'too easy'. Well, no: it's just that not including them makes it artificially hard. They could be added, and actual genuine challenge put into other, more meaningful, areas of the game.

In the end what some people see as a pointless busywork time-sink, others will see as legitimate gameplay, and vice-versa. It's like that scene in Father Ted where Mrs Doyle's being dismissive of football, and then various other things:

"Football, football, football, football, football, football, football, football, football. What you men see in it, I don’t know. A load of men kicking a bit of leather round a field. You men - the things you think are 'great fun'. Like going to the films. A load of men sitting around looking at films. And rollercoasters. a load of men in a rollercoaster going up and down on a big metal track! And sailing! A load of men in a big boat floating around in the sea! And shouting! A load of men going around shouting... And so forth.

In the end everything can be reduced to absurd nonsense if we decide to describe it in those terms. Any gameplay element can be described as meaningless if someone who doesn't like that element breaks it down to its parts and obscures the sum those parts actually make. But what is gameplay and what isn't really all comes down to what choices the developers make and whether the players agree to accept those choices as legitimate.

 

[Enderby]

Hopefully they’ll fix their exploration ‘improvements’ at some point and people can start exploring again.

The FSS is by far the most epic mis-step in ED’s illustrious list of mis-steps

 

[Nihila Vex]

Yes, everyone is extremely happy about these changes. They are like sweet mangoes gifted to us by the exalted Chairman Mao. There is no dissent, neither are there counter-revolutionary elements in our ranks.

I don't get this. Since FSS was released there has been constant complaining about it on the forums. Every change or update FDev make, there's complaining about it on the forums. This isn't me being a fangirl, by the way: I happen to really like FSS, but here I'm not saying whether or not any of the complaints are justified. But I am saying I don't understand how people can perceive that "there is no dissent" when the entire forum system is basically made out of dissent.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Right. So reducing the materials grind,

What grind?

speeding up SC travel,

Not much different apart from the fact it trivialises the size of the 1-1 scale systems. Not something I want to see.

and increasing JD ranges,

You potentially remove gameplay that can be found between those places. Personally I think jump ranges are too high, I would reduce them. Again it trivilises the scale of the galaxy.

reverting FSS to honking, doesn't REMOVE gameplay.

Yes it does. It removes the FSS gameplay, while the FSS does not remove any of the gameplay that was there before.

It merely changes it. For some, it would be so much better.

No, it would be a million times worse. Thank god you are not in control of game development.

Unless the definition of game play = time sink?

Whether you find that gameplay a timesink or not is a matter of opinion.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

SpaceEngine is a galaxy sim. And then some. And you can land on planets with atmosphere, too. If it ever gets procedurally generated vegetation and settlements and stuff I for one will be lost.

Well, its a not complete galaxy sim, but what is there is still simulated (with some flaws).

I'd love to see a game added to SpaceEngine.

It would be interesting.

 

[Spaceman Si]

I don't understand how people can perceive that "there is no dissent" when the entire forum system is basically made out of dissent.

I think that post you refer to was perhaps at the extreme end of the sarcasm scale

 

[StuartGT]

I like the FSS, and so do FDev:

Hello Commanders,

I wanted to drop in and let you that we have been reading your comments and are aware how some of you feel about the FSS.

When first designing the FSS, we wanted to ensure that it was engaging for as many different player types as possible, but also understood that it would not be possible to design a system that would work for everyone. Before the FSS was implemented, we also collected feedback from discussions on the forum and the beta.

Today, in its current iteration, we’re happy with how the FSS operates and feel that reinstating the ADS would be detrimental to the experience of exploration as it is now.

At the current time, we won’t be making changes to the core of the FSS. While we understand that this may be disappointing for some of you, we would like to thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and feedback with us.

That's about it really

 

[marx]

I for one explore in spite of the FSS, although I explore far less than I used to. I have a second account set up for exploring, and sometimes pop onto that to slowly make my way through the galaxy, but my main's back in the bubble after DW2. I gave the new mechanics a fair go, somewhere between 5,000-8,000 systems IIRC, but all that didn't change my mind.

Speaking of DW2: since the expedition finished, exploration activity (based on EDSM, which did account for half of the roster, and 69% of those who finished) has dropped like a rock, to between a third or a half (depending on which statistics you look at) of what it was. If people are so happy with exploration now, how come most of them didn't persist with it after the expedition was over?

Also, let me quote two excellent posts from Jackie Silver and Allitnil, both still relevant:

My take on the new mechanics, after a little live time.

Preamble: I'm dancing the Mamba Mambo right now, which means I'm in a short-legged ship traveling a medium-haul route at roughly 40 jumps per Kylie. I am, of course, constitutionally incapable of traveling in a straight line, so this will be a roughly 20 Kylie round trip.

I say "the new mechanics", because taken as a whole there are a lot of good features to this update, and I want to be clear that I am reserving the bulk of my criticism for the FSS itself, not the 3.3 update.

Those good points:

1) The switch to collaborative exploration is a highlight for me; it's something that's been on my personal wish-list since the beginning. It makes sense that if I sell my discoveries to the galactic mapping service then that data will become public domain and visible to others. It's great.
2) The ability to discover planetary POI is very useful and a welcome addition.
3) The new lighting system makes star systems prettier.
4) The "telescope zoom" to view planets without needing to super cruise to them is handy; under the previous system the optimal approach was to get just close enough to scan, which didn't lend itself to sightseeing.

The mediocre:

1) The planetary probing is thoroughly pointless. There's no special skill involved, it's a just a time-sink, and the requirement to approach the body very closely increases travel time on approach and departure.
2) The stellar anomalies and planetary POI are underwhelming. Interesting, but not varied or especially interactive.
3) The Codex, which appears to function primarily as a short lived race for tags instead of a general search and information tool.
4) The move away from a science-based approach to the design of exploration - the Forge is a thing of (flawed) science - towards sci-fi woo-woo. Blue cockpit! Wiggly lines! Probe me, baby! Obviously, this is a sci-fi game, but it's a shame to see the existing scientific core further brushed aside. Tbh I'm puzzled that DB agreed to the direction that the game has taken post-release, given that the shift away from arcade shooter to Milky Way sim in FE2 through E: D was his approach.

The bad:

1) Lack of consultation by FD, and the clear contempt evident in the way that the new mechanics were pushed out by fiat without space for feedback or accommodation. The subsequent split and bad blood in the community.
2) The FSS is a time sink. It is a simplistic mini game - if there's any difficulty and challenge involved in the FSS I have yet to encounter it - dropped in as an excuse for removing the ADS, which - as noted upthread - was Sandro's stated aim all along. If the rest of the new mechanics had arrived sans FSS, all would be well. Finding truly interesting systems is much harder with the FSS, as to discover the sort of chance oddities that make exploration truly rewarding now requires a great investment in vacuous busywork - if anyone can stomach it long enough.

In summary, I'm not against 3.3 as a whole, but the stinking turd of the FSS is enough to dampen the draw of the good stuff, and more than that, the way this has been done has badly soured my feelings for FD, and alas! for some people in our formerly happy corner of the game.

I'm really not sure that detailed feedback is either useful or welcome as far as FDev is concerned. After all, the main criticism of the ADS was that it was an over powered God honk. But the favourable comments for the FSS mostly boil down to how it makes it easier and quicker to find things.

Reading though threads like this just makes me view the proponents with ever less credibility. They are very happy to be able to dismiss systems as "not interesting" based on a 2 second view of the FSS but they decry that we could do similarly with the ADS. They love that the FSS shows them stuff that they would have needed to actually work at to find with the ADS. But their overriding complaint against the ADS was that it made things too simple. And if you dare to argue that the FSS isn't the be all and end all of exploration then they resort to the "you cannot learn or adapt" argument even though they are admitting to not being able to learn or adapt to the ADS way of exploring.

At the end of the day, if the FSS didn't give first discovery tags or scanning credits so trivially, it is very hard to believe that more than a small percentage of CMRDs would welcome it. It is the ultimate God honk, just temporarily hidden behind a rather obvious make work mechanic. Give it the same number of "quality of life" passes the ADS / sysmap had and even it's most ardent supporter will turn against it. And, whether you want to believe it or not, that is where we will end up since any logical analysis cannot help but notice that the FSS already "knows" all that we are forced to make it reveal.

It would also be great if the Codex's many bugs were finally fixed.

But as things are now, I don't see the Chapter Four exploration changes as having been good for the longevity of exploration.

 

[marx]

"Any great feature, device, software or application will be discontinued shortly. Any crappy feature, device, software or application will remain on the market for years. (c)2010-WRR".

To be fair, and just to be clear, I don't think the ADS system was good. Still better than the FSS, but that's not praise. I think Frontier could do better gameplay mechanics than either.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

It would also be great if the Codex's many bugs were finally fixed.

Agreed

But as things are now, I don't see the Chapter Four exploration changes as having been good for the longevity of exploration.

Done wonders for me. I all but gave up on exploration with the old style ADS. Thankfully the FSS and in some degree the Codex have revitalised it for me. I now look forward to getting in my ship in the middle of nowhere when before I utterly dreaded it. Whether I will feel the same about the FSS three or four years down the line I don't know. But my hope is that they will refine it and add more stuff to find and more stuff to visit in system which will help keep it all fresh.

 

[Nadreck]

On the whole, I'm OK with it.

My main gripe is with the lack of info regarding the signal sources revealed by the "honk". If there are 18 signals in a system with 12 bodies, then what are the other 6? Usually I just assume that a planet or moon has geysers or whatever, and move on. It's quite possible that I have failed to notice new Guardian sites, new alien species, or even the ruins of an entirely unknown civilisation because of this.

Just give us a heads-up: 3 Geological, 2 Biological, 1 Other. We get that when we DSS a body, but not when honking a system.

 

[marx]

Whether I will feel the same about the FSS three or four years down the line I don't know.

Years of real time elapsed is not really a good measure: after all, you might have to stop playing for a year, or maybe you'll just play two hours weekly, and so on.
It should be better to see how you feel about it after a couple hundred hours of gameplay.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Years of real time elapsed is not really a good measure: after all, you might have to stop playing for a year, or maybe you'll just play two hours weekly, and so on.
It should be better to see how you feel about it after a couple hundred hours of gameplay.

That is being a tad pedantic. I have gone to beagle point and now currently on my way back without it feeling like a grind. So far so good.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

On the whole, I'm OK with it.

My main gripe is with the lack of info regarding the signal sources revealed by the "honk". If there are 18 signals in a system with 12 bodies, then what are the other 6? Usually I just assume that a planet or moon has geysers or whatever, and move on. It's quite possible that I have failed to notice new Guardian sites, new alien species, or even the ruins of an entirely unknown civilisation because of this.

Just give us a heads-up: 3 Geological, 2 Biological, 1 Other. We get that when we DSS a body, but not when honking a system.

The honk count is the number of bodies - it has nothing to do with the number of POIs.

If you've scanned everything but the FSS doesn't say 'System scan complete' then you haven't scanned everything. Unless you've accidentally managed to use the old-DSS to explore a body.

 

[Old Duck]

Anyway, now that we've had some time to get used to (or tired of it), what's the current consensus?

I still enjoy it, however the bugs have become more and more annoying over time because of the very repetition you speak of. These include:

• Stupid messages covering planet type text (adaptive zoom failure, endless asteroid belts, etc)
• Planet details failing to display without zooming out and back in
• Stupidly long POI scanning times
• Severe framerate drop / lag in certain systems
• Unmapped planets displaying as mapped in the DSS
• The inability to turn off "Matrix view" (glowing blue planets) as viewed out the window when in analysis mode

So like all most things Elite Dangerous, I love the concept, but the implementation is both buggy and unoptimized GUI-wise. Still, I personally find it a huge improvement over the old ADS.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Years of real time elapsed is not really a good measure: after all, you might have to stop playing for a year, or maybe you'll just play two hours weekly, and so on.
It should be better to see how you feel about it after a couple hundred hours of gameplay.

Some people love the FSS, even though it's repetitive. It really depends on what your goal is when you drop into a system. If you want to play a game of "Let's build a map of the system" it's great. If you're looking for something specific, not so much.

Just to mess up your stats, I explore more bodies than I did with the ADS, but I find them by parallax and resolve them by fly-bys.

 

[marx]

That is being a tad pedantic. I have gone to beagle point and now currently on my way back without it feeling like a grind. So far so good.

"I have gone to beagle point" isn't very informative though. After all, one can get to Beagle Point even in under seven hours. How many jumps was that, and how much time did you spend exploring? Then there are other unknowns: maybe you're taking a long way back, maybe you're rushing via chain-boosts.

 

[sewerratuk]

SpaceEngine is a galaxy sim. And then some. And you can land on planets with atmosphere, too. If it ever gets procedurally generated vegetation and settlements and stuff I for one will be lost.

I'd love to see a game added to SpaceEngine.


Yeah... So much of the 'gameplay' in ED is arbitrary or false difficulty. Flight Assist Off can't have a kill rotation button or a flight path indicator because it would make the game 'too easy'. Well, no: it's just that not including them makes it artificially hard. They could be added, and actual genuine challenge put into other, more meaningful, areas of the game.

In the end what some people see as a pointless busywork time-sink, others will see as legitimate gameplay, and vice-versa. It's like that scene in Father Ted where Mrs Doyle's being dismissive of football, and then various other things:



In the end everything can be reduced to absurd nonsense if we decide to describe it in those terms. Any gameplay element can be described as meaningless if someone who doesn't like that element breaks it down to its parts and obscures the sum those parts actually make. But what is gameplay and what isn't really all comes down to what choices the developers make and whether the players agree to accept those choices as legitimate.

I can only read that quote with a Mrs Doyle voice in my head

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

"I have gone to beagle point" isn't very informative though. After all, one can get to Beagle Point even in under seven hours. How many jumps was that, and how much time did you spend exploring?

My ship only has a jump range of 43ly. Took me 6 months real time, I have no idea about in-game time, but it was substantially longer then 7 hours. I spent the vast majority exploring apart from right at the end when I had to buckyball it to get to beagle point for DW2 in time. I remember going through the Abyss was problematic the first time, but this time it was easy. Shame really, I liked the challang of finding the route through.