Page 15 of 20 FirstFirst ... 5111213141516171819 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 225 of 293

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: System map overhaul needed

  1. #211
    Originally Posted by Dale Emasiri View Post (Source)
    I was a tad on the stompy side with those hopes and dreams wasn't I? So let me try to explain. There's a whole load of improvements that can be made to the current system, some additions, some refinement. This could happen in the next year of updates, so I won't say no on that. There's a lot of buzzing going on in the office as people are working hard the game. Loads being done across the game. We don't have unlimited funds, resources, and time so we have to be smart about what we do.
    Ok so FD is saying that they cant develop correctly Elite Dangerous because they are developing another game? The solution is very simple, change the focus to Elite and change its status from mediocre to great!

    Originally Posted by Dale Emasiri View Post (Source)
    What is being suggested and discussed in this thread (by some people) is going into the territory of a 3D orrery map with data points and contextual information accurately plotted. Essentially a to-scale replica of the system as an interactive (or at least a move/pan-able) entity.

    Rebuilding the entire mapping system is an unlikely thing right now, which is what would probably be required (again, speaking from the perspective of a layman) for such a gargantuan task. Improvements and refinement, I could see that happening as you sometimes see in milestone updates. Rebuilding...? not for the foreseeable.
    Then FD should take their time in developing the game instead of rushing half backed features and closing their doors for future improvement.

    Im really dissapointed, again... But thanks anyway for response.

    So it seems we have one of those permanet placeholders

  2. #212
    Originally Posted by Chris Simon View Post (Source)
    For example?
    using probes for scaning and locating ships on the map, then filter to big hauling ships for do some piracy.

  3. #213
    Dale, now this does not make sense...Rebuilding the entire mapping system?? I don't understand this. Why would you need to rebuild the entire mapping system? We are not asking you to rebuild what already works - we just want an additional view!

    Don't scratch what is already there, just add an additional 3D Orrery view. At the very least and at the beginning, all it has to do is do exactly what the current 2D inventory list view does except give us a 3D view so we can visualise how the system is laid out. You may not think this is worth it but I can tell you that there'll be a lot of people that will benefit from this. I mean, my god, you've created this incredibly stunning Galaxy Map in 3D yet you can't add an additional 3D System Map. Something's not right here.

    If someone can do it with a website that is completely separate from the game then why can't you do this in-game? Saying you have to rebuild the whole mapping system just makes absolutely no sense at all. I repeat - don't remove what is already there - just add an additional view.

  4. #214
    Originally Posted by Hyde View Post (Source)
    From it's BBC Micro origins, Elite pioneered a 3D radar widget that's still present in the game today. Considering the game's iconic imagery the inability to present a pleasing system map seems curious. It's the sort of decision an engineer would make, not an artist. Some astronauts were both.
    Explorers clamour for a more interactive way of exploring systems, a new tool-set for 3D system maps seems obvious.
    I think this is mainly the problem at Fdev, they've got a company of programmers, mathematicians and engineers, no dreamers (who probably left once the base game had been finished).
    Nothing since 2.1 indicates a single person working at Fdev works from a visual mindset - I mean, I guess there must be some, artists and what not but they don't have a voice in the upper echelons; an orrery is a necessity for anyone who works from a visual perspective, a mathematician can see the solar system from the numbers dancing on the screen, a logician doesn't require the visual fidelity, the facts tell him everything he needs... It's why the story telling of 2.4 ....s, there's no one there who knows how to construct a quality narrative (even with Drew Wagar <sp?> in the wings).

    Originally Posted by Mengy View Post (Source)
    Obsidian Ant mentioned his disappointment over this thread today in his newest 3303 video, and the sadness that no Orrery is planned at all from Frontier:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kRrdWNdihY&t=0s
    Normally this would make me happy, a youtuber would push upper management at Fdev to respond in a positive way, but I finally believe this isn't even on a distant todo list - it ain't happening - endof. This makes me sad.

  5. #215
    Originally Posted by Straker View Post (Source)
    We have a 3D view of the galaxy yet we have a 2D Inventory list of a system. Its never made sense to me that this is our primary in-system view.
    It makes perfect sense to me that you'd want a schematic map as the primary view - it allows you to see quickly all the bodies in the system and their relationships within one screen without need for scrolling, panning or zooming.

    Imagine if you went to London, Paris or New York and the subway map was in realistic 3D. Do you think you'd find it easier to plan a route or get an overview of all the stations?

    Now, a 3D orrery style map would definitely be cool, but it should certainly not be the primary view.

    The fact that Frontier won't do it for perceived lack of gameplay reasons is absolutely astonishing.
    Astonishing? Really?! Have you not read this forum? Every other thread is someone demanding Frontier implement their pet idea, whether it be atmospheric planets, new ships, legs, better missions etc. etc. They can't possibly do everything. Whilst a 3D map would be cool, it's really not essential to gameplay and therefore its perfectly reasonable for them to not prioritise it. Feel free to argue it's important to you, but loose the hyperbole.

  6. #216
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    It seems to me that for a lot of people, an orrery view would be a pretty thing to look at then largely unused (depends on how many USPs are added of course).
    Again, this is just blatently incorrect for any explorer out there as has been stated many times, but you seem to ignore. It would be used on a daily basis I suspect.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Planet surface bookmarks/waypoints could make quite a large QoL improvement to any Cmdr looking for or returning to rich material sources, crash sites etc (again, depending on what useful benefits it turns out to have).
    I don't expect to see planet bookmarks anytime soon. I can see us putting in co-ordinates to go to a sepcific place, but I doubt they will be saveable. Also I doubt they will be used as much as the Orrey Map.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    We currently have a way to view & navigate our way around a system (whether explored or not) that some are bored with from familiarity. We also have a planet surface waypoint system that works for missions, but is much less mature for non-mission activity.
    No we do not. The "map" we have now does not help much with navigating our way around a star system, it has very limited value for that. I wouldn't even call it a map, more like a pictatorial interactive list.

  7. #217
    Originally Posted by Franc Kaos View Post (Source)
    Normally this would make me happy, a youtuber would push upper management at Fdev to respond in a positive way, but I finally believe this isn't even on a distant todo list - it ain't happening - endof. This makes me sad.
    The truly strange thing about it is…that four years ago it very much was on Frontier’s to do list. It was shown in the newsletter, they stated it was in development, even David himself commented on the 3D orrery map. At launch Frontier noted that the orrery would not make it in but that it would come in a later update. Cut to today, three years later, and now Frontier is telling us that it’s not planned and probably won’t ever happen.

    So what changed between four years ago to today? Was it ever actually in development, or was Frontier lying about that? And if they did actual work on it but later scrapped it, then why?

    The evidence and statements paint a muddy picture which is very unclear. One thing is clear though, a large portion of the players would love to have it and use it daily, so it’s not like this is a feature that would be a waste of dev time. Frontier’s development priorities really perplex me sometimes; they spend lots of time developing content which most people can’t or won’t enjoy, yet ignore features that many people clamor for.

  8. #218
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    "map"
    Snipped for brevity.

    Last point first: What it is called has nothing to do with the discussion, it doesn't matter how you define the word 'map'.

    On a related note, questioning whether someone is an 'explorer', or is other words a 'true scotsman' is pointless too. A system view/summary/map (of whatever type) will be available to all player types. By all means ask specific questions as tests to determine how much weight my (or any other player that holds a different view) opinion is worth to the reader. I'll answer any specific question as frankly as I can if others do too. There is no need to assume that all true explorers hold one view, and anyone holding a different view clearly therefore cannot be a true explorer.

    Explorers like to discover places and solve puzzles, to find glitches in the game & reach places that perhaps were never intended to be reached. I like to solve puzzles, I like to see how much I can achieve with sub-optimal equipment, or all-purpose equipment rather than specialising. To me, a 'true explorer' would scoff at being given an easier way to achieve a goal, their satisfaction is derived from the challenge of completing the incomplete dataset.

    Achievers look to min/max, to achieve targets set either by the rules or by themselves. If you are out in a 60+ly Conda you are an achiever, pushing the upper limits of what you can get the equipment to do. An achiever would want to optimise stuff, travel as fast as they can, beat personal records, save time. An Achiever wants more tools so they can better optimise their routine.

    Socialisers want to meet people, they want to go where everyone else goes, they want to know where others are, whether they be like-minded or enemies. A socialiser wants more tools so they can interact more with others.

    Griefers want to meet people too, but for different reasons. Their requirements are similar to socialisers as far as this discussion is concerned, but their biggest gift to the community is their ability to break the game, to find bugs & exploits, and use their knowledge at the expense of others. They would love more tools, because more tools means more stuff to take advantage of.


    So out of the lot of us, Explorers as a demographic are the ones least likely to benefit from adding another way to view a system. We currently have SuperCruise (eyes out the window and scanner), the left nav panel and the system view (sysmap). The Explorer can put the info together & solve the 'puzzle' of where they are in relation to everything (and everyone) else.


    So. What type of player are you?

  9. #219
    Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
    Again, this is just blatently incorrect for any explorer out there as has been stated many times, but you seem to ignore. It would be used on a daily basis I suspect.


    I don't expect to see planet bookmarks anytime soon. I can see us putting in co-ordinates to go to a sepcific place, but I doubt they will be saveable. Also I doubt they will be used as much as the Orrey Map.


    No we do not. The "map" we have now does not help much with navigating our way around a star system, it has very limited value for that. I wouldn't even call it a map, more like a pictatorial interactive list.
    I'm an explorer.
    I have no wish to have an orrery view.
    Navigating around systems isn't particularly complicated and I'm REALLY not concerned about whether or not I take the most efficient path.
    The current schematic view makes it very easy to check which bodies I've visited, which an orrery wouldn't do.

    So, from at least one Explorer (and we're important, you know) it's a 'meh'.

    Edit
    Mostly ninja'd ny Cmdr Riverside, who's clearly had more coffee than me.

  10. #220
    Originally Posted by DrewCarnegie View Post (Source)
    I'm an explorer.
    I have no wish to have an orrery view.
    Navigating around systems isn't particularly complicated and I'm REALLY not concerned about whether or not I take the most efficient path.
    The current schematic view makes it very easy to check which bodies I've visited, which an orrery wouldn't do.

    So, from at least one Explorer (and we're important, you know) it's a 'meh'.

    Edit
    Mostly ninja'd ny Cmdr Riverside, who's clearly had more coffee than me.
    Well I don't think we need to get rid of the current view. It has its uses, but I can certainly see both being extremly useful. To me being efficient is needed. At times it has taken me over 3 hours to scan a system. Having an orrey map could have halved that.

  11. #221
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Snipped for brevity.

    Last point first: What it is called has nothing to do with the discussion, it doesn't matter how you define the word 'map'.
    I do think that it is important, as the current view is not a map and is not very usefull for navigating around the system.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    On a related note, questioning whether someone is an 'explorer', or is other words a 'true scotsman' is pointless too. A system view/summary/map (of whatever type) will be available to all player types. By all means ask specific questions as tests to determine how much weight my (or any other player that holds a different view) opinion is worth to the reader. I'll answer any specific question as frankly as I can if others do too. There is no need to assume that all true explorers hold one view, and anyone holding a different view clearly therefore cannot be a true explorer.
    I have never questioned whether someone is an explorer or not.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Explorers like to discover places and solve puzzles, to find glitches in the game & reach places that perhaps were never intended to be reached. I like to solve puzzles, I like to see how much I can achieve with sub-optimal equipment, or all-purpose equipment rather than specialising. To me, a 'true explorer' would scoff at being given an easier way to achieve a goal, their satisfaction is derived from the challenge of completing the incomplete dataset.
    I beg your parden. Your deifinition of an explorer seems a bit off. Explorer definition: a person who explores a new or unfamiliar area. It has nothing to do with puzzles or finding gliches in the game. The other two are correct though. I am sorry, but when I explore somewhere I want the optimal equipment. Being prepared for your expedition is vital, and a true explorer I suspect would think that you are mad to not be fully prepared for your journey.

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Achievers look to min/max, to achieve targets set either by the rules or by themselves. If you are out in a 60+ly Conda you are an achiever, pushing the upper limits of what you can get the equipment to do. An achiever would want to optimise stuff, travel as fast as they can, beat personal records, save time. An Achiever wants more tools so they can better optimise their routine.
    What has this got to do with an orrey map?

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Socialisers want to meet people, they want to go where everyone else goes, they want to know where others are, whether they be like-minded or enemies. A socialiser wants more tools so they can interact more with others.
    What has this got to do with an orrey map?

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    Griefers want to meet people too, but for different reasons. Their requirements are similar to socialisers as far as this discussion is concerned, but their biggest gift to the community is their ability to break the game, to find bugs & exploits, and use their knowledge at the expense of others. They would love more tools, because more tools means more stuff to take advantage of.
    What has this got to do with an orrey map?

    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    So out of the lot of us, Explorers as a demographic are the ones least likely to benefit from adding another way to view a system. We currently have SuperCruise (eyes out the window and scanner), the left nav panel and the system view (sysmap). The Explorer can put the info together & solve the 'puzzle' of where they are in relation to everything (and everyone) else.
    Erm what has solving puzzles got to do with exploration. Nothing, thats what. And I fail to see why explorers would be the least ones to benefit. As an example it sounds like you think I should go hiking in scotland without a map and just a list of what mountains there are in the area and what height they are and try to figure where to go from that because I should enjoy the puzzle. Sorry but no. I want enjpy finding new areas, amazing mountain ranges, black hole with amazing effects etc, but I don't want it take a stupid amount of time to do that but figuring out unnecessary puzzles. Exploration takes too long as it is.

    To be honest your post here is frankly bizarre. While I do like puzzles in games, i like some tools to work those puzzles out. I have no wish to look out the window and start faffing about trying to decipher what the best route to scan the planets are when we have the technology now to do this now, even my smart phone has the power to do it with ease.

    So instead of taking 3 hours to scan a large system, I can do it in 1 or 2 hours. It still gonna take a long time, but not as stupidly long as it would normally take. And that 3 hours is not an exaggeration.

    I also find that link of what player are you to be completely rubbish as it doesn't give enough options.
    My results are:

    You are 100% Explorer

    What Bartle says:

    ♠ Explorers delight in having the game expose its internal machinations to them. They try progressively esoteric actions in wild, out-of-the-way places, looking for interesting features (ie. bugs) and figuring out how things work. Scoring points may be necessary to enter some next phase of exploration, but it's tedious, and anyone with half a brain can do it. Killing is quicker, and might be a constructive exercise in its own right, but it causes too much hassle in the long run if the deceased return to seek retribution. Socialising can be informative as a source of new ideas to try out, but most of what people say is irrelevant or old hat. The real fun comes only from discovery, and making the most complete set of maps in existence.
    You are also:

    47% Socialiser

    40% Achiever

    13% Killer

  12. #222
    Originally Posted by Riverside View Post (Source)
    So out of the lot of us, Explorers as a demographic are the ones least likely to benefit from adding another way to view a system. We currently have SuperCruise (eyes out the window and scanner), the left nav panel and the system view (sysmap). The Explorer can put the info together & solve the 'puzzle' of where they are in relation to everything (and everyone) else.
    So. What type of player are you?
    Dominant left brain users identify better with logic, structure, language, rationality whilst right brainers get more information from a visual medium than from textual. Broad generalisation of course and most people fall on a scale somewhere between the two, but not all explorers can put the info we get at present & solve the 'puzzle' of where they are in relation to everything (and everyone) else.
    So. What type of player are you?

    BTW:
    The Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology


    You are 87% Explorer


  13. #223
    Originally Posted by killminster View Post (Source)
    For everyone getting nostalgic about the orrery in Elite 2 it's only functionality was for selecting auto pilot/navigation target lock. All of the useful information was provided in the schematic view.
    I strongly disagree here. I was an avid explorer in FE2, the orrery map was priceless for quickly getting a sense of which planet would give you the best views. Spent hundreds of hours in that game just playing with the orrery view.

  14. #224
    Originally Posted by Franc Kaos View Post (Source)
    Dominant left brain users identify better with logic, structure, language, rationality whilst right brainers get more information from a visual medium than from textual. Broad generalisation of course and most people fall on a scale somewhere between the two, but not all explorers can put the info we get at present & solve the 'puzzle' of where they are in relation to everything (and everyone) else.
    So. What type of player are you?

    BTW:
    The Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology


    You are 87% Explorer
    Pretty sure I'm both.

    edit: apparently I'm 50/50

  15. #225
    Originally Posted by taotoo View Post (Source)
    Pretty sure I'm both.

    edit: apparently I'm 50/50
    We're all all of them to some degree. I've just done the test again & I score:

    You are 93% Explorer

    What Bartle says:

    ♠ Explorers delight in having the game expose its internal machinations to them. They try progressively esoteric actions in wild, out-of-the-way places, looking for interesting features (ie. bugs) and figuring out how things work. Scoring points may be necessary to enter some next phase of exploration, but it's tedious, and anyone with half a brain can do it. Killing is quicker, and might be a constructive exercise in its own right, but it causes too much hassle in the long run if the deceased return to seek retribution. Socialising can be informative as a source of new ideas to try out, but most of what people say is irrelevant or old hat. The real fun comes only from discovery, and making the most complete set of maps in existence.
    You are also:

    73% Achiever

    20% Socialiser

    13% Killer

    There was a thread on the Bartle test a month or two ago, my score was similar then too.

    If anyone is interested in what this is about there's a good link at the end of the test that goes into far more detail than I ever could

Page 15 of 20 FirstFirst ... 5111213141516171819 ... LastLast