A mile wide and an inch deep...

[Stealthie]

I've been listening to podcasts where this phrase keeps popping up and there's something about it that occured to me.

In one podcast, particularly, they took the analogy a bit further by pointing out that an area 1 mile x 1 mile x 1 inch has a volume of "around 26 Olympic sized swimming pools" and suggested that's the "volume of content" in ED, implying that's a lot of content - even if it's spread thinly.

I don't really want to get into whether or not the "volume of content" in ED is sufficient or not.
Personally, Ienjoy ED for what it is (although, like most other people, I'd like to see more stuffz added) but I can understand why some people might have a different opinion.
But, I digress.

Point is, if we're going to use this analogy to describe ED's content then it's worth considering that a very small increase in the "depth" will yield a gigantic increase in "volume".
Basically, if ED is "an inch deep" and has a "volume of content" equivalent to 26 olympic swimming pools then simply making it two inches deep will double the "volume of content" to 52 swimming pools.

That's actually a pretty good position to be in.
It means you've only got to make small additions that have an effect on everything and you've doubled, tripled or even quadrupled the "volume of content".

I mean, compare that to the opposite scenario, where you have a tightly-focused game with a lot of depth.
In that scenario, you've got to add a helluva lot more depth in order to double the "volume of content".

Looking at ED since launch, we've had engineering, planetary landing and legs which have all added to all facets of the game and, thus, multiplied the depth of the game.
That means, if the original "volume of content" of ED was 26 swimming pools, it's increased to over a hundred swimming pools during it's lifespan.
That's not bad at all and, because of it's breadth, any future increases to it's depth will continue to give us masses more "volume of content" overall.

Just thought I'd share that cos I keep hearing the "mile wide and an inch deep" thing as if it's a terrible thing and I don't really think it is.

 

[HRDiagram]

Irony aside, what you say is quite deep!

In any case, my personal stance is that when I encounter trite expressions, like "a mile wide an in..." yawn, sorry, can't help it, I just skip the comment/article altogether, because when people use those expressions, they are not going to say anything beyond platitudes and shallow things themselves.

 

[Riverside]

Play ED to it's strengths; if there is some game breaking bug in one part of the game you can do some other activity & that bug will barely affect your play time

On an unrelated note I've been almost entirely out exploring since Odyssey launched.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The problem is that all the content in ED revolves around ships and modules, and not enough with what you do with those ships.

As always the promise of something epic is always there, its just never been realised in favour of layering more ship / module acquisition loops.

 

[Riverside]

The problem is that all the content in ED revolves around ships and modules, and not enough with what you do with those ships.

As always the promise of something epic is always there, its just never been realised in favour of layering more ship / module acquisition loops.

I'm not sure you're on the mark there.

We have progression activities, and we have endless activities. Ranking up is progression, engineering is progression, accumulation of wealth & assets is progression.

Sure plenty of players I meet get frustrated at the progression taking so long or being grindy, but the idea (as I see it) is that the targets are really big to give the progression focused player more to do. They don't need to keep going to the end, but if they want to, well here's an enormous target, go for it if you want.

But then we have endless play. Faction support, powerplay, PvP (meaningful or otherwise), exploration (the game map is so large it is effectively endless). The player doing these activities may be motivated to do some progression work in order to improve their competitiveness, I have five mission runner Pythons because it's quicker to grab the nearest one than to wait for one to be shipped to my location and I have nothing else to do with my billions of credits.

There is no promise of something epic, it's just the players imagining how an activity could be better or more engaging than it currently is, but it's engaging enough already, and without a subscription model FDev have no incentive to actively encourage players to keep playing once they get bored.

The game as it is is already good, it just isn't perfect. I play with the bits I enjoy, there are usually enough of those that if I fancy a change there is something else I can do. I don't do the bits I find frustrating for any reason. For example I have never pledged

 

[Leadfoot]

The problem is that all the content in ED revolves around ships and modules, and not enough with what you do with those ships.

As always the promise of something epic is always there, its just never been realised in favour of layering more ship / module acquisition loops.

All the "something" is locked away inside the COL 70 Sector.

 

[Kzak]

All the "something" is locked away inside the COL 70 Sector.

Speculation: The permit-locked systems in COL 70 is where the Guardian AI has its (currently dormant) fleets.

 

[Leadfoot]

Speculation: The permit-locked systems in COL 70 is where the Guardian AI has its (currently dormant) fleets.

Or the dreaded AI they call Chuck Norris waits for us there, sleeping, waiting to be awoken by the call of ....

 

[Rubbernuke]

I'm not sure you're on the mark there.

We have progression activities, and we have endless activities. Ranking up is progression, engineering is progression, accumulation of wealth & assets is progression.

Sure plenty of players I meet get frustrated at the progression taking so long or being grindy, but the idea (as I see it) is that the targets are really big to give the progression focused player more to do. They don't need to keep going to the end, but if they want to, well here's an enormous target, go for it if you want.

But then we have endless play. Faction support, powerplay, PvP (meaningful or otherwise), exploration (the game map is so large it is effectively endless). The player doing these activities may be motivated to do some progression work in order to improve their competitiveness, I have five mission runner Pythons because it's quicker to grab the nearest one than to wait for one to be shipped to my location and I have nothing else to do with my billions of credits.

There is no promise of something epic, it's just the players imagining how an activity could be better or more engaging than it currently is, but it's engaging enough already, and without a subscription model FDev have no incentive to actively encourage players to keep playing once they get bored.

The game as it is is already good, it just isn't perfect. I play with the bits I enjoy, there are usually enough of those that if I fancy a change there is something else I can do. I don't do the bits I find frustrating for any reason. For example I have never pledged

Everything is to do with your ship- buying ships, buying modules, upgrading modules, getting money. For what? In the old games all that was to get Elite ranking- now, in ED, whats that for?

But then we have endless play.

Which is all the same, with no real outcome to it- where is the human / NPC interaction? Being allied with a faction results in.....not much. Your crew- where are they? What do they do outside of SLF stuff? Where is the human side to the galaxy? Exploration- whats it for? Surely it should be about surveys for expanding the bubble, but its just another cash drop leading nowhere. Powerplay is the only part of ED which holds more promise than its constituent parts- but again, its bare bones when it could be so much more than A to B trucking.

ED is still driven by its ships when it could be so much more all driven by the BGS with better missions with more outcomes / wrinkles....but we never get them.

What do I mean about promise? Imagine taking a mission for a faction at war, then getting a counter proposal to meet at a temporary camp, landing, chatting to the NPC like you do with engineers, agreeing to a new mission because you empathize with the person . Have more visible effects of war, of regime change so the NPCs we see are less stand in and more relevant. This is what I mean about inch deep, because ED via abstraction has insulated far too much of the human outcome of the game to give it soul (and a reason for you to care about what you do). Concourses are identikit 3D menus, with no real use. Where are the shady guys? The Powerplay contacts? Everyone stands in the same places with the same animation cycle.

In short ED needs less unlocking engineers and more reasons to do the things we do, otherwise 'endless play' is just doing the same shallow things repeatedly for no real reason.

 

[Brrokk]

I've been listening to podcasts where this phrase keeps popping up and there's something about it that occured to me.

In one podcast, particularly, they took the analogy a bit further by pointing out that an area 1 mile x 1 mile x 1 inch has a volume of "around 26 Olympic sized swimming pools" and suggested that's the "volume of content" in ED, implying that's a lot of content - even if it's spread thinly.

I don't really want to get into whether or not the "volume of content" in ED is sufficient or not.
Personally, Ienjoy ED for what it is (although, like most other people, I'd like to see more stuffz added) but I can understand why some people might have a different opinion.
But, I digress.

Point is, if we're going to use this analogy to describe ED's content then it's worth considering that a very small increase in the "depth" will yield a gigantic increase in "volume".
Basically, if ED is "an inch deep" and has a "volume of content" equivalent to 26 olympic swimming pools then simply making it two inches deep will double the "volume of content" to 52 swimming pools.

That's actually a pretty good position to be in.
It means you've only got to make small additions that have an effect on everything and you've doubled, tripled or even quadrupled the "volume of content".

I mean, compare that to the opposite scenario, where you have a tightly-focused game with a lot of depth.
In that scenario, you've got to add a helluva lot more depth in order to double the "volume of content".

Looking at ED since launch, we've had engineering, planetary landing and legs which have all added to all facets of the game and, thus, multiplied the depth of the game.
That means, if the original "volume of content" of ED was 26 swimming pools, it's increased to over a hundred swimming pools during it's lifespan.
That's not bad at all and, because of it's breadth, any future increases to it's depth will continue to give us masses more "volume of content" overall.

Just thought I'd share that cos I keep hearing the "mile wide and an inch deep" thing as if it's a terrible thing and I don't really think it is.

I've heard that expression a lot and I don't buy it. This is a game where people play for thousands of hours; it can't reasonably be described as shallow. I think a better description of the frustration is that it's such a great game, but after a few thousand hours you find that you've done it all. It's finite; it ends. This is a nasty point to get to, but when you think about it, it's inevitable.

 

[Riverside]

In short ED needs less unlocking engineers and more reasons to do the things we do, otherwise 'endless play' is just doing the same shallow things repeatedly for no real reason.

Marketing could put more emphasis onto the activities I described as endless - they are the reasons to use different ships.
I can do faction support work with only a 192t Frag Python and a CZ Corvette, but I could do most of it in almost any ship. I flipped a system in a T-7 once (it was an election).
I can explore in a 75ly Conda that wants for nothing but better supercruise handling, or I can fly an eagle and get stressed about fuel if I jump through two brown dwarfs in a row.
I can (and have) PvP in a meta FDL or I can jump into a busy system in a 720m/s iEagle made of paper and packing tape and laugh at the interdictors, or use a shieldless T-9 in solo all but risk free. I can set my own challenge.

All of these things, reasons to build and fly different ships, or to try to do everything in one ship are all endless play - you do it until you get bored.

Exploration has almost nothing to do with faction support, or PvP. I can build a ship capable of all three (and took one to Beagle Point in 2017). These activities are absolutely not 'all the same', they are barely connected and this is what the thread title implies is a shortcoming of the game. But for years when I explored it was because I had picked up a bounty and needed to 'lay low' for a week (3.0 removed that incentive with convenient IFs & Notoriety), and I used the explo data I gathered to help the factions I wanted to support. It's barely connected but it is connected already.

You want to take a mission & be offered a counter proposal - this already happens but almost nobody does them. You do BGS stuff, you know why you don't take them too. Interacting with NPCs might be lovely but you can already chat to other players, form alliances, make enemies. The human side of the galaxy is other players

If you're allied (or even just cordial) you'll see the rozzers as green in the high RES so you can kill steal more easily or just more easily avoid hitting them. You get better missions too.

It all fits together, or it can do. Or these endless play activities can be treated more or less as standalone games if the player prefers, an advantage of the game being as the thread title implies.

There are bits that seem too grindy sure, some of the engineering unlocks lack imagination, and surveys to expand the bubble, or the ability for players to somehow turn unpopulated systems into populated ones that succeed or fail would be a great way to retcon the benefit to Universal Cartographics of multiple players submitting the same data, just as new 'engineered' drugs could come from bio samples but these are things that could be added to what's already there, not a fix to something that could otherwise be considered incomplete.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Now you just have to teach the developers how exactly to increase that one inch to two inches and you'll be golden!

I'm sure @Bottom Hat would love to hear how to do this as well!

 

[Bottom Hat]

I'm sure @Bottom Hat would love to hear how to do this as well!

Those are rookie numbers!

 

[Rubbernuke]

Marketing could put more emphasis onto the activities I described as endless - they are the reasons to use different ships.
I can do faction support work with only a 192t Frag Python and a CZ Corvette, but I could do most of it in almost any ship. I flipped a system in a T-7 once (it was an election).
I can explore in a 75ly Conda that wants for nothing but better supercruise handling, or I can fly an eagle and get stressed about fuel if I jump through two brown dwarfs in a row.
I can (and have) PvP in a meta FDL or I can jump into a busy system in a 720m/s iEagle made of paper and packing tape and laugh at the interdictors, or use a shieldless T-9 in solo all but risk free. I can set my own challenge.

All of these things, reasons to build and fly different ships, or to try to do everything in one ship are all endless play - you do it until you get bored.

Exploration has almost nothing to do with faction support, or PvP. I can build a ship capable of all three (and took one to Beagle Point in 2017). These activities are absolutely not 'all the same', they are barely connected and this is what the thread title implies is a shortcoming of the game. But for years when I explored it was because I had picked up a bounty and needed to 'lay low' for a week (3.0 removed that incentive with convenient IFs & Notoriety), and I used the explo data I gathered to help the factions I wanted to support. It's barely connected but it is connected already.

You want to take a mission & be offered a counter proposal - this already happens but almost nobody does them. You do BGS stuff, you know why you don't take them too. Interacting with NPCs might be lovely but you can already chat to other players, form alliances, make enemies. The human side of the galaxy is other players

If you're allied (or even just cordial) you'll see the rozzers as green in the high RES so you can kill steak more easily or just more easily avoid hitting them. You get better missions too.

It all fits together, or it can do. Or these endless play activities can be treated more or less as standalone games if the player prefers, an advantage of the game being as the thread title implies.

There are bits that seem too grindy sure, some of the engineering unlocks lack imagination, and surveys to expand the bubble, or the ability for players to somehow turn unpopulated systems into populated ones that succeed or fail would be a great way to retcon the benefit to Universal Cartographics of multiple players submitting the same data, just as new 'engineered' drugs could come from bio samples but these are things that could be added to what's already there, not a fix to something that could otherwise be considered incomplete.

Your reply has just illustrated my point- everything revolves around building ships, when it could be so much more than playing to unlock. In the end one cargo mission is the same as the next, when each (via the BGS and wrinkles) could be unique and varied. But for years its remained the same impersonal trudge- an impressive feat considering FD went to great lengths with the concourses which serve little purpose other than window dressing.

You want to take a mission & be offered a counter proposal - this already happens but almost nobody does them. You do BGS stuff, you know why you don't take them too. Interacting with NPCs might be lovely but you can already chat to other players, form alliances, make enemies. The human side of the galaxy is other players

The vast majority of EDs core is PvE, which to this day is routine and superficial.

I know, and its this which is the problem. Every mission is the same, when it should be this + BGS + wrinkles all the time, with actual NPCs giving us a human dimension to endless cargo stacking / massacre missions. Places are starving / on fire- so what? Where is that expressed to me as a refugee asking for transport, or a rebel base POI that might get attacked / get blasted by me? Or what about criminal gameplay? Or military careers, or engineers where you have to choose who to unlock because some hate others? What about NPC crewmen, managing them, helping them out? Having missions based on who you employ? Proper superpower grudges? Dodgy Powerplay contacts / missions? Exploration that expands the bubble? Have it so systems were 'dark' and had to be properly scouted before you could jump to them? Thargoids that waged a proper BGS war like Civ barbarians, roving pirate lords in megaships, FCs that could be driven away? Hell, just having a balance pass would be welcome.

Its fine that you enjoy ED, but for me the game is a wasted opportunity that makes serial underachievement its only real claim to fame.

 

[Chaparral]

There is a ton of content in ED. The Lore is rich, easter eggs abound, there's the BGS, scenarios, missions, Thargoids, career-specific mechanics, etc. etc.

From my armchair point of view, it is progression templates and communication tools set on top of that content that are an inch deep.

 

[Kahldris]

I think there is some truth to elite being as wide as a ocean and as deep as a puddle (that's how I put it). I enjoy elite and like to play with or without vr depending in what im doing and how I'm feeling. However there are so many mechanics that could use some looking at and made to be deeper or more interesting.
Whether it's trading, (trading really needs to be looked at) or the wingman thing, exobiology, missions, power play, ect the list goes on. And let's not forget that while legs on the ground is great making a separate island of content that didn't play with the main content of the game is not helping. The 2 separate engineering is not a great way to do it either.
Don't get me wrong I enjoy elite and I often op to do something in a way that I'll get less of what I'm doing (credits or mats whatever) but that makes it more fun and engaging because im figuring it out myself and thinking.
However I personally think that what elite needs is for more resources to be dedicated to it (it seems obvious the current amount of resources dedicated to fdevs main game is not enough) and look at mechanics already in game and try to figure out how to make those mechanics deeper, more engaging, and interesting. That's why I was so excited when they said they were going to look at engineering. However it is close to the end of February and we still have silence... sigh.
Also it's been so long since new ships. Hire some more people, dedicate more resources to your main game and look at ships. Maybe look at their utility and balancing, consider how to make each ship more interesting (I like that only some ships can have fighter bays maybe have more of that kind of thing) and give us some new interesting ships.

Imagine if this game was supported and updated like NMS man that would be sick. Don't get me wrong elite is more my thing then NMS but man.

Anyway that's what I think I'm not hating just think that fdev needs to finally man up and step up to the plate. Commit the resources to really making this game what it could be and not just a base for what could be a great game, because this game really is a great base.

 

[Riverside]

Your reply has just illustrated my point- everything revolves around building ships,

You have it completely the wrong way around Rubbernuke

The other stuff, the endless play is an opportunity, an excuse to build different ships. Fundamentally, I don't play to beat other players, or even to interact. I play to fly the ships just as I might play world of tanks to drive tanks. The different playstyles are a reason to use the different ones & discover what they are good at, what they are not so good at.

If you didn't get this game to fly a spaceship & have reasons to do things with them I don't think any proposal for change is going to turn this game into something you want.

 

[myothershipisacobraiv]

I definitely think a lot of this is people wanting to play Elite longer than they can. I don't think that time consumption always equates to depth, though. Plenty of folks that don't play videogames can log bajillions of hours on those little candy crush thingies. I've always held that Elite's emphasis on busywork is excessive, and could be taken down a notch. I have a big task just engineering my AX Mamba before I punch a single Thargoid in the face with it.

All of Elite's content, and all of its development, is concentrated down into what happens in a few moments. Just the being in your ships, the hearing it go, the pushing of a button, now the walking around a concourse. So you would think that Elite is this gigantic sprawling procedural game but all of the actual meaty stuff happens in a second or a few. Then the game makes you repeat this over and over and when you grow weary of that moment to moment stuff, then I think the game can just seem rote. It's like where a more "normal" game would be a bigger chunk of stuff connected to other chunks by a longer thread, Elite would be a smaller chunk connected with a smaller thread, and then this is repeated many times. That tiny link method could make the chain end up feeling more detailed, but you need to do something to it to take advantage of their granularity and make them feel different from each other.

I've long held that Elite needed a people element to it. Some kind of element of the heart. This is something Roberts has always been so good at. If you connected people and their ways and aspects to this stuff, it would go a long way to making the grind more seem more varied and be more palatable. We kind of do that already with the mission board, but it's not... it's not there yet.

But then, I think I was wrong about Odyssey. I remember saying in the run-up to Odyssey that I think they should enhance the entire game. My thinking was that they shouldn't try to support consoles on a nearing-previous generation that had even been refreshed once already, if it meant hamstringing themselves. I thought embracing higher requirements would make it easier on them to do something that would grab people. Now, obviously nobody saw the crypto bullchip happening. That hurt them. Still, I didn't realize that Frontier's ability to do fancier stuff was finite and problems arising from this might overtake the novelty of what they would do. And I underestimated the importance for a legacy game of keeping its playerbase together. So what do I know. More expansions means another shot at a certain ship so I'm always up for it.

 

[CMDR Serra]

...
Its fine that you enjoy ED, but for me the game is a wasted opportunity that makes serial underachievement its only real claim to fame.

Savage. And true.

I play ED in spite of these issues.

I can be top rank with Imperials and Federation. That's crazy. I can take a mission from a faction that I just opposed in a war. That's silly. I know: "gameplay", but it still grates.

I suspect I'll eventually I'll get bored, but currently I have a group I play with and a mission. Not a "take X to Y" type mission, but a long term strategic goal.

If it wasn't for this, I'd be gone.

 

[Disemboweled Ego]

There is content, but a lot of it feels "hidden" because it's so unrewarding and unappealing, hard to stumble on randomly and even harder to find deliberately in some cases (USS micro-scenarios).

Part of it is the simulation/sandbox nature that Elite is going for so uncompromisingly and often needlessly at the expense of fun. After a while it just gives off a sense of a cruel yet boring universe instead of a Dangerous one.