The problem with Elite's content is that the best of it is locked behind a grindwall of unrelated activity. Remove those barriers to fun, and 90% of Elite's problems vanish in a puff of fun...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.
A mile wide and an inch deep...
- Thread starter Stealthie
- Start date
Yes, but if I fight against a faction in even one CZ they should turn hostile. None of this: "well it was only one or two battles you fought against us, so we're now only cordial".
How many did you kill to get that rank though? But I do get what you're saying. I just always thought that society has become real big by Elite's time and everything is on a different scale. This is all facilitated for us by the Pilots' Federation.
It's like, being a member of the Pilots' Federation makes us almost like "otherworlders" to the wider galactic society. Maybe 'what have you done for me lately' might count more if you weren't a member of this hyper-secret incredibly-powerful organization with its own private army of super-doers that is basically at the side of the heart of everything.
Last edited:
Such as proper s.power reputations that force you to juggle / ignore them?
Proper military ranks and unique missions (that also trigger greater rewards / dangers)?
Proper use of Powerplay territories / relations between Powers (i.e. allied Powers becoming neutral due to Galnet / CGs)?
Proper consequences of flying complex s.power ranked ships in rival s.power space?
Actual criminal gameplay loops, with notoriety used to lock / unlock certain missions?
A proper C+P that makes independent space / anarchies important?
Proper branching missions that leverage legs / SRV etc (as I previously described?)
A proper engineer system where certain engineers hate other engineers, so players have to think about who they side with (rather than just unlock them all)?
A proper Thargoid menace that act like barbarians in Civ, and not simply DM tools
A C+P that is based on proximity to starports 'zone of space (i.e. deep space / shipping lane) making SC much more tactical
Much more made of SC generally (exclusion zones for non allied ships, smuggling gaps leveraging more agile ships)
Powerplay avatars based on the engineer 3D tech, allowing for smiles / frowns and more flexibility (for example use in holographic propaganda)
Better leveraging of BGS state PP on station appearance - graffiti, power reps appearing for expansions etc.
Better use of concourses- shady mission givers / random non affiliates in the hangar waiting areas, less fixed mission givers above
And these are just a few areas that would add complexity and depth to general gaming. You could have many, many more with exploration, surveying, CGs.
Don't you think that Odyssey has opened the door to all of that? With Fleet Carrier interiors we get to see our crew, it's not beyond the realm of reckoning that seeing your own crew in your ship won't be coming after that at a point only known to FDev, we already have a teaser of that when taking an Apex or Frontline ride.
You're quibbling over petty issues with the mission templates Rubbernuke. You know how to play the game, you know what it takes to beat your opposition. You may lack the resources to beat them or you may beat them easily but you know how much work you have to do. There is inevitably going to be repetition in that, because you are competing against other human players and the side that does the most work wins. That requires some skill & experience, an experienced player contributes far more than inexperienced ones, there's no way around that it's just how conflict & competition works.
I have attacked factions by doing no bad actions. Simply by helping all the other factions in a system I can pull a controlling faction back into conflict with whichever of the other factions ends up with the highest inf. Another player might achieve the same result by harming the controlling faction, yet another might start a conflict with another large faction as misdirection.
That's depth. That's the ability to use one's initiative to achieve a goal in different ways. Not mission templates and interactive NPCs. Going on an interactive adventure is going to be great the first couple of times then just become boring/grindy after a while just the same as any other mission template. I really enjoyed the engineer unlocking process (well some of it lacked imagination as I said earlier), it pushed me to try things I hadn't done before like mining and looking out for specific mission rewards, teaching me or at least encouraging me to think about more aspects of the game than only what I had been doing. But having done it, I learned those things & if I did it again it would just feel grindy imo. And even if FDev keeps adding new adventure templates there's only really 5 story types anyway (or 6? Can't remember).
ETA Wikipedia says 7
The Seven Basic Plots - Wikipedia
Last edited:
It has opened the door- however this is typical FD behavior where they lay excellent foundations and then do very little else with it.
If it is "a mile wide and an inch deep", how long is it? After all, everyone knows how long something is, is important...
Thanks - a bunch of good ones there.
As long as it's not long in the tooth!
Its not a petty issue when every mission follows the same outcome. Every pirate lord I kill, every general go through the same motions. Why can;t the pirate lord beg for his life and offer me a treasure map / or have backup? Why is it I wind up with no reprisals when killing generals? Why can't deserters convert me to their cause?
I know full well how to play the game- my issue is that by playing the BGS I'm forced to go through the same missions over and over and over and over with hardly any variation between each one. There are no ripples on the pond so to speak, each rock splashes and I then have to throw another identical rock.
You are not getting what I'm saying- its how core activities like missions don't leverage wrinkles enough to be varied and have outcomes you might not expect. They remain simple when all the bits for something really compelling are inches from coming together and being something really special.
Again, I'm mainly talking about the PvE in ED, the basics when you land, walk about or on the message boards. BGS work does indeed have depth, but its built on repeating activities that don't draw on the huge amount of information that shapes our commanders. Of course there are limits to this, but there are huge gaps that for me need filling in to really make ED more satisfying.
That's a lazy trope, sorry, I'm not saying it hasn't been true, to be fair, but as a catch all I think that's npc level response. I recall when people were like is Odyssey going to be legs or atmospheric worlds, well we got both to a decent degree, yes the launch was was problematic, due to many reasons no doubt, but there's been some additions that I don't think anyone would have guessed FDev would have done, and there's more to come as they likely fill out the full feature list of what Odyssey was to contain.
It is in reality a finite equation of time vs money vs developers, Elite is still be set up as a framework and what there is already is pretty amazing if you're open to think about it. I acknowledge that there will always be differences of opinion on what is good enough vs bare bones but I am happy that FDev are dedicating their time to upgrading core features rather than showing videos of ice rolling around in a glass, even though they are also adding more flesh to bone as it were as well. It's all well and good saying this and that feature would be cool, I love your idea of chatting with NPCs and there being some backstory that causes you to flip, but that needs dialog trees which we've barely gotten and are now starting to be fleshed out, something like it could happen, it's way too early to say it won't.
Though just imagine if the SC backers had invested in Elite instead, I think it's painfully clear that FDev would have given inordinately more return on their money, but hey, ice rolling around in a glass, amirite? Though let's not talk about sandworms..
That's actually a misnomer, usually due to receding gums...
Then you must be new to FD. All the stuff I've talked about (ranks, S.power rep etc) has never been touched since. Powerplay? CQC? How many SRVs have we had in so many years?
FD promised more complex missions with more branching and we barely progress. Balance is all out of whack, its a mess.
And I'm not talking about dialogue trees or anything like that- all I'm asking for is for FD to add wrinkles that are meaningful. In that example- kill a general, the general could offer me a counter proposal which I accept (or not)- I get a message that points to a POI (or set of co-ordinates) where I land and I meet the guy at his base. Now, I could wipe them out by hand, I could take his counter mission, I could be caught in a raid by my employers (all RNG) without anything other than what we have now.
There is so much in ED that can be extended by just what we have- supercruise, Powerplay, BGS, superpowers, just by taking what already exists and use it to its full potential.
Again I feel you are exaggerating for effect here, clearly every mission does not have the same outcome, nor does every mission follow the same template. I agree it would be nice if some Elite pirate lords flew a cutter for example, but different missions have different ranks (difficulty), and there are at least 2-3 wrinkles with some sending in thugs, some attacking some clean NPCs, some just open fire immediately.
I accept that you have mainly PvE in mind, but many of the issues you describe are already handled (or can be) by other players. Not least of which is more challenging combat. Reasons to PvP are somewhat lacking, something I always tried to do was give some meaning to PvP (either try to kill me, or by me hiring griefer-types to intimidate others etc). It wasn't easy.
The main mistake of FD, IMO but the absolute Truth nonetheless, is that they went big with all major update. Each expansion is adding a whole new experience to the game, or a whole new game.
Granted, for many aspects of the game that aren’t just flying the ship, exploration in particular, there really wasn’t anything there to begin with. However, they could have added minor elements of Powerplay, Engineering, Beyond, etc, heck even bits from the DDF, and gradually built them up to their end goal.
That might have given them some time to connect all the bits properly.
The game, while wonderful, feels like someone piled a bunch of two-strokes into a beetle and is wondering why it doesn’t run like a V8.
SI like that analogy a lot better than the mile wide, inch deep one
(imagine it's a cylinder btw, someone above asked how long it was)
We went from long to receding oh dear. Come to think of it I have had some receding of fps on planetary settlements that were engaged in a combat. And then I got blew up by a single rocket. If I see the word leaking I'm probably gonna wet myself.
We'll see where FDev spend their manhours...
Mission wrinkles, and branching, and all kinds of different actions (whether mission, or sandbox) all contributing to BSG outcomes, all aside: Procedural dialogue trees, governed by a plethora of factors, such as NPC power affiliations, rank, current occupation, health level, and so on, and so on, is absolutely doable -- I have a soft spot of remembrance for the conditional hypertext dialogue system in the Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind, even if I also remember what an absolute minefield it could be to set up for a character -- complexity arises alamingly fast. :7
Mission wrinkles, and branching, and all kinds of different actions (whether mission, or sandbox) all contributing to BSG outcomes, all aside: Procedural dialogue trees, governed by a plethora of factors, such as NPC power affiliations, rank, current occupation, health level, and so on, and so on, is absolutely doable -- I have a soft spot of remembrance for the conditional hypertext dialogue system in the Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind, even if I also remember what an absolute minefield it could be to set up for a character -- complexity arises alamingly fast. :7
Well, every pirate lord I've fought has been in the same Corvette, FAS or FDL with 3 Vultures, all with the same weapons. I don't care about who else is there, because it does not matter- it all plays out the same way with no repercussions BGS wise / wrinkle wise. When I used to play the BGS seriously I'd be stacking these guys, killing 50 cops a day, smuggling drugs, doing CZs etc when even simple things like an RNG pirate loadout would help.
All I'm asking for is for chained missions to be less of a joke and have consequences here and to form a loose actions based narrative. ED has all of this, just none of it is joined up. It all sits apart.
The only meaningful PvP in ED is Powerplay, and even thats busted because you have simplistic NPCs or sidestepped players- so even here a deeper PvE is required.
Last edited:
Well its only really now where FD see how disconnected it all is and start adding in more multi environment missions leveraging space / legs / surfaces. I just hope they don't stop there like they normally do and keep on.The main mistake of FD, IMO but the absolute Truth nonetheless, is that they went big with all major update. Each expansion is adding a whole new experience to the game, or a whole new game.
Granted, for many aspects of the game that aren’t just flying the ship, exploration in particular, there really wasn’t anything there to begin with. However, they could have added minor elements of Powerplay, Engineering, Beyond, etc, heck even bits from the DDF, and gradually built them up to their end goal.
That might have given them some time to connect all the bits properly.
The game, while wonderful, feels like someone piled a bunch of two-strokes into a beetle and is wondering why it doesn’t run like a V8.