There was about as little reason for FD to cave into the ADS-dislikers as there are for any childcare institution to build their structure on the rantings from a few loud schoolyard bullies.https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...-to-use-the-fss-enjoyably.514074/post-7854638
There's about as little reason for FD to cave into the FSS-dislikers as there are for any childcare institution to build their structure on the rantings from a few loud schoolyard bullies.
S
Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?
- Thread starter CMDR Karrde Sun
- Start date
- Status
Not really, but we are supposed to piloting a space ship not being a dedicated science officer with other crew responsible for weapons, comms, and other stuff.Do we actually know what Spock was looking at in that inverted periscope thing of his?
Given FD have already foisted the pointless "Analysis Mode" on us the FSS blobs should naturally be overlaid on the HUD and tuning should be via one of the MFD tabs. The "sky hunting" view which requires you to idle the ship could still be there BUT it should not be the ONLY way of doing it.
There are other blindingly obvious (at least to some of us) fundamental design and implementation flaws with the 3.3 exploration changes that any reasonable person should be calling foul where FD's "ostrich manoeuvre" over the 3.3 exploration changes as a whole (and specifically the FSS) are concerned.
We are commanders of our ships which will mean using tools of the ship.
I take it you are also against the system and galaxy maps too as they stop you from piloting your ship and we are not astro navigators, we are pilots who only pilot our ships. Surely combat should be done by an NPC as we are not gunners, we are pilots.
That argument is very poor. Please try harder.
I do not believe any of the ADS dislikes actually asked it to be removed.
I have come to the conclusion that some on here think the universe revolves around them.
No, i pretty much like it exactly as it is now.
Maybe adjust its sniping requirement when you have the target in the circle but still get the message that you cannot zoom in
What furor is that. The same suspects saying the same things again and again. No there isn't any real furor at all.
Yes, and the time that the targeting failed message hangs around (to shorter!). And maybe the slowness of the scanned body announcements. We don't have much reason yet to care for dozens of announcements of asteroid clusters found...
S
There's no difference between asking for it to be removed and objecting at every available opportunity to the suggestion of putting it back.
Honestly we've been sidetracked since beta out of desperation of finding the path of least resistance for frontier who find change difficult.
Having the fuss completely in the cockpit would probably be the actual solution (but it would never be allowed because of some business manager demanding multi crew support).
Having the blobs rendered in cockpit, plus the ability to target them like you currently do for any other body, even unexplored ones, would be the real solution.
Hang on, I've never actually used multi crew. Could it work like combat seems to work now? i.e.;
- FSS rendered in cockpit for pilot, panning done by ship.
- multicrew gets the current fuss interface?
Last edited:
Would that really be so different from now? Whether to render it as-is or render it in-cockpit doesn't seem all that important to me. But it's not like I'm against the idea of rendering it in-cockpit, I would just not care too much, I guess. I'd rather have the existing FSS polished a bit more. They should solve the issues pointed out e.g. by Sysmon.
Also, I kind of like Merkir's idea, which would probably work well in-cockpit too:
One would just need to make sure that it works well in VR, too.
Also, I kind of like Merkir's idea, which would probably work well in-cockpit too:
One would just need to make sure that it works well in VR, too.
Someone had the idea for the FSS carved into stone tablets, and nothing and nobody was ever going to change it. Somebody who writes paychecks.
There's no use in trying to change the FSS, or wish it away. We're stuck with it. We don't have to like it, but we have to use it. It could be a lot better, but I doubt it will change before 2020. The many good suggestions made for improving it are unlikely to to be implemented.
I am not objecting to it being put back in some kind of form.
What I do object with is the stupid and dumb comments that people sprout like the above.
So Fdev find change difficult but are the ones that have completely changed how exploration works. Another silly comment.
Depending on implementation, it should have no bearing on multicrew.
Nah, sounds a bit rubbish.
That is not how multicrew combat works. Maybe I have misunderstood what you are trying to say.
Yet you seem to put the max factor approval on anyone who suggests visual parallax searching.
The resulting gameplay would be exactly that but with a kick. Or serverely nerfed depending on how you look at it.
Pan and zoom is completely rubbish.
I get you’re pretending to use a telescope. I tried that too. If they rendered some of the background stars around the zoomed in body could probably pretend. Doesn’t work as it currently is.
You would replace twiddling by moving your ship, and having another targeting subsystem on blobs, with a really generous targeting angle so you would spend a greater percentage on “discovering” than panning.
Last edited:
FD have an obligation to existing customers to treat the various complaints about the FSS as a matter of priority IMO. They are almost certainly in at least technical breach of the intent of Trading Standards with their Ostrich Manoeuvre over further changes to it. With FD being a British company, I expected a higher standard of customer relations - I am not talking about level or speed of response here, just a more customer friendly approach to their communications. The blatant Ostrich Manoeuvre class response(s) we have had so far on this matter is unacceptable.Someone had the idea for the FSS carved into stone tablets, and nothing and nobody was ever going to change it. Somebody who writes paychecks.
There's no use in trying to change the FSS, or wish it away. We're stuck with it. We don't have to like it, but we have to use it. It could be a lot better, but I doubt it will change before 2020. The many good suggestions made for improving it are unlikely to to be implemented.
That brings up the question of whether frontier are actually able to. First lets rope in everything, cheating, power play, multi crew, bugs, cobra 4.
Assuming good faith that frontier are taking running ongoing games seriously.. the only conclusion is there's something to do with with business process or organisation thats actually preventing them from doing anything. We don't know, but is everything including inbetween, really low acceptable quality standards (they know they have bugs), no budgeting for anything apart from iteration 1, really expensive and inflexible or inadequate SLDC (if they just created a job opening for someone to manage builds..).
I think we as players should also assume good faith, because otherwise we might be wasting our time, but has there ever been any seeing vs 100% believing?
Is expecting high standards / the best the objectively correct approach with frontier? We all have to go away and decide. I say that with being completely addicted at the moment.. (what you need is 3 accounts.. one to go mining, one to go exploring, and one to play 'classic wow' elite).
Ultimately, we are not talking about "high standards" but what historically has been a cultural norm IME. When dealing with British run/owned companies of substance the quality of customer relations has historically been better, and when such companies get bought out by non-British owned entities one of the first things that deteriorates is the quality of customer support/relations - seen it happen all too often. There are of course some exceptions to this but they are more the exception than the rule IME.
However, that aside - there is still the obligation element. Of course they are able to do it, the question is whether they are willing to foot the cost of their mistakes.
I hate parallax. Another silly comment which isn't true.
See above.
What's pan and zoom?
I a not pretending I am using a telescope. Can you please stop making this crap up about me.
Moving your ship is still twiddling with your controller of choice. No that is not how I would like it to work.
I would like a holographic window that pops up Infront of you. But I accept that there could be performance issues doing that.
Last edited:
I think something like this would be the solution. It would require more work and good game design, but I would take it over the current FSS which I find low-effort, ugly and tiring. (Sounds are nice though). In-cockpit type of FSS would also fill the captcha requirement. I don't know how much weight should multicrew have in this, I hope they realize it's current state.
Also Frontier should stop having those meetings, we all know how those workplace meetings are, resources spent on presentations, lots of talk and acting, then not much happens. Did you read the memo from april? Maybe, but nobody remembers what's on it.
You either have an obligation or you do not. In this case they do not, no matter your opinion. Beyond that, I myself feel the world should consider my wishes to be a priority, and its shameful I don't always get what I want.
Semantics statement slapped in answer to a customer relationship problem, just junk talk.
- Status