Are we over-egging the custard a wee bit?

[ubermick]

Not to be confused with yet another person complaining that the game is too hard, but wondering if implementing as many features and requests as possible might be currently - or will potentially in the future - lead to things becoming overly complex.

I didn't play the original Elite - well, I did for a little bit, but was too young at the time to appreciate it - but fell head over heels in love with Frontier. It was a massive game, bloody difficult (try docking in Newtonian physics without autopilot!), and hugely immersive. But it was also, for want of a better way of putting it, "right there". Everything you needed in Frontier was accessible via two mouse clicks, if not one. When approaching a station, you could just click the wee phone icon or press F4, and you're cleared to dock - cue Strauss' Blue Danube. Now you need to look to your left, tab to communications, find the relevant station, scroll down to it, click on it, and then request permission from there. And am noticing other things are often similarly... not difficult, that's the wrong way of putting it, maybe cumbersome?

I'm assuming that down the road, there'll be hotkeys galore for many of the functions, and as such started working on a little arduino-based control panel (there's a separate thread banging about on these, won't get into it) but am already well over two dozen keys for the various functions, and that's not even getting into any potential new things that are added, like different scanners, etc.

Is it possible that the massive, massive level of functionality currently on the table is sacrificing gameplay for simulation?

 

[ZeeWolf]

The designers have stated they want a ship that feels complicated with immersive controls you have to find in the cockpit and interact with. You are essentially dropped into a space ship in the future and left to your own devices.

In some ways, Elite Dangerous is survival horror

I think there is a good market for old-school intellectual challenge now, look at the likes of DayZ and Kerbal Space Program - these are not main steam game designs. The whole point of crowd funding Elite Dangerous is that it wouldn't get past a publisher.

 

[Alric]

Certainly something to beware of, but I don't think we're there yet.

For one thing I think that many conveniences - like autopilot - will be in the game but just aren't done yet. Probably there will be a lot of optional stuff that you can fit to your ship as modules for convenience at some cost.

For another, I think people do expect more depth to that side of the game these days. We have more sophisticated controls, much more detailed display hardware and responsive user interfaces. There's endless information, tutorials and people to answer questions, etc. We have the ability to read up on the game when we're not home, all sorts of things that make complexity easier to digest than it used to be.

So I do think there's still a line there, but it's moved considerably over the past 2 decades.

 

[Skadar]

I just don't find this game difficult or complex at all, so I have some trouble empathizing with those who do.

Here is one suggestion. Buy Voice Attack for $8 and use it. It allows you to create slick voice commands for virtually every function in the game. This way, you don't have to memorize keys and such. You can just say "landing mode" and your landing gear will deploy and your ship lights will come on... and any various other things that you would require.

Voice Attack seriously simplifies the game.

 

[JughedJones]

The designers have stated they want a ship that feels complicated with immersive controls you have to find in the cockpit and interact with. You are essentially dropped into a space ship in the future and left to your own devices.

In some ways, Elite Dangerous is survival horror

I think there is a good market for old-school intellectual challenge now, look at the likes of DayZ and Kerbal Space Program - these are not main steam game designs. The whole point of crowd funding Elite Dangerous is that it wouldn't get past a publisher.

I'm so glad they have said that.

I would be bummed out beyond belief if they simpled down the cockpit. I would actually prefer it becoming more interactive and 'complicated.'

Flying a space ship through the galaxy should be anything but easy. It shouldn't be something you're completely comfortable with right away. Especially landing!

 

[Skadar]

In some ways, Elite Dangerous is survival horror

This is the first time I've seen this mentioned, but you are correct! E is very much like Rust or DayZ. When you find yourself near another human player in a conflict zone, you can either trust them or take them out. Almost always, the best (and most brutal) thing to do is to destroy them. Same thing in Rust and DayZ.

 

[ubermick]

The whole point of crowd funding Elite Dangerous is that it wouldn't get past a publisher.

That's a bloody good point. And not to say that I would want it dumbed down, or reduced to a point where when approaching a station or planet (oooh, I can't wait for planets!) I could dock with a single click - but I would imagine that 1,300 years from now, along with warp drives and the like, we'd have invented a way to do things without drilling down through a small pile of submenus. I see it as a bit cumbersome at the minute, and once we add in more features, toss in leaving your ship and walking about, I can see it getting more so which might potentially drive away the next generation of players.

Again, not saying it needs to be dumbed down - and not saying we should be catering to the "now now now" crowd - but don't want to cross the line, and feel that there is indeed a line.

 

[Iskariot]

Not to be confused with yet another person complaining that the game is too hard, but wondering if implementing as many features and requests as possible might be currently - or will potentially in the future - lead to things becoming overly complex.

I did not get the impression at all that FD tried to implement as many features and requests as possible.

When you look at the current features they just make sense in a game like this and personally I feel they are not overly complex at all.
And future features will be added logically and make sense in their context too.

And once you truly dive into a game like this things will come to you slowly, you will learn and get better and get a feeling of accomplishment and satisfaction.
With modern games this is very rare I know. Many games are simplistic, bordering on retardation. ED will be different and you will be grateful for it in the end.

 

[alchemy42]

I just don't find this game difficult or complex at all, so I have some trouble empathizing with those who do.

Agreed.

It's a very fine line between simulation and gameplay, and I think FD are doing a pretty good job walking it.

I've said a number of times on this forum that I love that I have to LEARN to fly, and dock and work the trading board and so on.

I honestly think the people who are having problems aren't just willing to invest the time and effort.

 

[Adept]

The designers have stated they want a ship that feels complicated with immersive controls you have to find in the cockpit and interact with. You are essentially dropped into a space ship in the future and left to your own devices.

In some ways, Elite Dangerous is survival horror

Epic post! +1 rep, and I wish I could give you more!

 

[Seonid]

but wondering if implementing as many features and requests as possible might be currently - or will potentially in the future - lead to things becoming overly complex.

Everything I have seen and heard from FD is that they have a clear idea of what they want, I have drawn parallels to the Path of Exile developers more than once, for the same reason. Once it was suggested that an arrow could indicate the direction of a locked target that was off screen, FD actually implemented that and tried it, but decided that it didn't fit what they wanted as combat devolved to a simplistic "follow the arrow" situation which was not what they had in mind for the game. Yes, you see lots of wishlists (usually derived from other games) but I think that original clear idea will hold.

 

[trekman]

For one thing I think that many conveniences - like autopilot - will be in the game but just aren't done yet. Probably there will be a lot of optional stuff that you can fit to your ship as modules for convenience at some cost.

Have a look at the frontier developers log thread. Bad news There will be no autopilot. There will be some assist aid but it wont be like it was in previous games so that means we'll just have to knuckle down and learn how to fly our ships.

 

[Zero]

When I'm playing this game, I want to be in 100% full immersion mode. bring on the complexity in all its forms.

 

[Gwydion]

For one thing I think that many conveniences - like autopilot - will be in the game but just aren't done yet. Probably there will be a lot of optional stuff that you can fit to your ship as modules for convenience at some cost.

I remember reading in another thread one of the devs stating that there wouldn't be an autopilot, docking computer yes -autopilot no.

 

[metatheurgist]

The designers have stated they want a ship that feels complicated with immersive controls you have to find in the cockpit and interact with. You are essentially dropped into a space ship in the future and left to your own devices.

I'm not sure I understand that vision. Complexity is one thing, but I don't think they've ever designed a cockpit where you had to go to different levels of access just to engage the landing gear. Pretty much everything in a cockpit is immediately available (except the weapons trigger), the complexity comes from there being lots and lots of dials and switches.

 

[ubermick]

I'm not sure I understand that vision. Complexity is one thing, but I don't think they've ever designed a cockpit where you had to go to different levels of access just to engage the landing gear. Pretty much everything in a cockpit is immediately available (except the weapons trigger), the complexity comes from there being lots and lots of dials and switches.

Well, you can bind the landing gear to a button (I did) but without any sort of feedback from the GUI or voice, you have no idea if it's deployed or not. I've had instances where I've come in to land, hit the gear button, and then proceeded to bang around on the pad.

But your point is still right - if you're flying a plane and are on approach, you contact the tower on a universal frequency that your radio is set to by default. But as mentioned, we currently have to drill down through a menu tree to get permission to land - which if you've got a cracked canopy and are losing oxygen, could be the difference between life and death. Since comms are still being worked on, hopefully that's something that'll be simplified at least.

 

[erxcwrestler]

Personally, I love the complexity. Can't get enough of it. I love being able to control every little component or system, tweak settings, etc. No other game has satisfied this craving, and it helps with immersion.

It's cool that people can still operate their ships without fully utilizing the available controls, yet learning and mastering them can make you incredibly more efficient (e.g. learning to put power to engines/weapons/systems as needed).

I guess as a marine engineer, being the one who starts and stops engines, generators, pumps, motors, moves fuel, etc., this is right up my alley.

 

[Pembs]

After a few hours play of beta, I personally don't think the game is over complicated. The majority of the controls are second nature to me now. I can flip through those ship menus like a pro. They're ultra responsive and it feels cool to use them.

We need to remember that they're not trying to make a triple AAA game here, so they don't need to appeal to a perceived lowest denominator. They're making a very specific vision and hoping players will be intelligent enough to 'get it'.

If you read the enthusiast game press there is a feeling these days that modern games don't give gamers enough credit; that gamers are capable of figuring complex games out for themselves and actually that challenge, if not obtuse, can be very satisfying. Personally I think Frontier have this aspect of complexity balanced well and I do think the wider audience will enjoy the game if they try it.

 

[Schnittertm]

Well, you can bind the landing gear to a button (I did) but without any sort of feedback from the GUI or voice, you have no idea if it's deployed or not. I've had instances where I've come in to land, hit the gear button, and then proceeded to bang around on the pad.

But your point is still right - if you're flying a plane and are on approach, you contact the tower on a universal frequency that your radio is set to by default. But as mentioned, we currently have to drill down through a menu tree to get permission to land - which if you've got a cracked canopy and are losing oxygen, could be the difference between life and death. Since comms are still being worked on, hopefully that's something that'll be simplified at least.

I also disliked that I had no immediate way of knowing if my gear is down and locked, whereas in an airplane I just look for a few lights in my field of view or slightly off center and if they are all green or not.

As for communications complexity, well, there is no one universal frequency for airport towers. Many have different frequencies for air traffic control, ground control and approach, each airport also has its own set of frequencies and you'll only get those frequencies from current airport charts (or maybe from googling). If the airport has an Instrument Landing System (ILS), that, too, has its own frequency and then you can also add TACAN for military aircraft for navigation and landing purposes and you'll already have a lot of frequencies to deal with, just to get to the airport, get permission to land, land and then be assigned a parking spot on the ground.

ED is simple by real world standards in almost every way. You just contact the station and ask for permission to land and they auto assign you even a landing pad. No having to deal with communications prodcedures and such (e.g. giving the right call sign, calling your intent in the correct way, etc.).

I do agree that there should be some complexity, so that the game feels at least authentic and immersive, but if we should try to add realism into that, well, there you have the option to go really all out if you want to. A true study sim type simulation of an aircraft, for example, means that you have to follow most real world procedures to the letter (where possible within the means of computer simulation) and even something simple as starting up the engine can become a daunting task in something like an A-10C or a Boeing 777. That, however, is a level of complexity that is not needed in ED, at least in my opinion or would any of you like to spend 10 minutes to start up the engine, onboard systems and align navigation and spend an equal amount of time, shutting down the ship after each landing?

 

[Spiggs]

The designers have stated they want a ship that feels complicated with immersive controls you have to find in the cockpit and interact with. You are essentially dropped into a space ship in the future and left to your own devices.

In some ways, Elite Dangerous is survival horror

I think there is a good market for old-school intellectual challenge now, look at the likes of DayZ and Kerbal Space Program - these are not main steam game designs. The whole point of crowd funding Elite Dangerous is that it wouldn't get past a publisher.

Agreed, I played ARMA for years and Op Flashpoint before that and always had difficulty convincing friends to play due to the complexity of the controls and the game itself. However, once they put their toe in the water and gave it a go they soon got to grips with it and the complexity became something they loved because of the flexibility it gave you and it exercised their intelligence.

Nevetherless, despite their being a great and thriving community around the games, I never really saw the ARMA series of games appealing to the mainstream gamer. However, no one saw DayZ coming and the effect that a brutally ruthless and complex game model coupled with what many mainstream gamers would describe as and impenetrable interface would have. No publisher would have gone a country mile near that proposal and yet, as a mod it sold by the bucket load, and was the fastest selling game on Steam when it was released only in its beta.

I think many publishers underestimate the intelligence of the dedicated gamer, they love a challenge and will sink hours and hours into a game to get the satisfaction of solving problems and finding solutions. Just look at how creative and expansive the modding community is.

So is Elite Dangerous complex and the interface a bit clunky, personally I don't think so, but the interface has to work cross-platforms and as DayZ and ARMA have proved, complexity should not be an obstacle to success.