Can we maybe not change ARX cosmetics on-the-fly, please?
- Thread starter WR3ND
- Start date
I don't like ED becoming too gamey. First we have holo-crap avatar that is simply duct-tape because we don't have in-game shops and surgery to customize our characters whenever we want. Second we have holo-crap telepresence for multicrew because there's no ship-to-ship docking and because people want multicrew in one click. Third we have holo-paintjob. Those things look too artificial and less immersive (yes that word), and ED becomes less sci-fi and more fantasy with all these magic tricks. Yeah I get it and nowadays people want everything instantly everywhere, hence the holo-crap thing, but ED was expected to be a hard sci-fi game, old-school like game, and remembering mr Braben's pre-release videos I would like to feel my character isn't a simple holographic image but a real person, and I would like to interact with npcs and real people by going into their ship, not just teleporting to it. Now we have zero interaction, you can't do anything with other CMDRs (real or not) except to kill them or ignore them. No trading, no credit mugging, no chit-chat, no sudden quests, no guard job offers. And game designers further push this isolation and unimmersiveness with all these cheap gamedesign decisions. I hope with spacelegs this will change a bit.
I'm just hoping we can float/walk around our ships and stations and such with space legs among the likely arcade shooter and MMO fort building aspects of the thing.
Wouldn't mind getting a pint and the martini Jaques owes me at his station sometime either.
We'll see...
Last edited:
I have zero issues with their plans to allow changing cosmetics anywhere. It doesn't affect me much either way, and I think the added convenience is good for the game.
Reading the OP's thoughts, I feel his assumptions regarding how paintjobs work in Elite are incorrect. Just simply watching how they're applied in-game seems to indicate that it's not actually paint, but some sort of "nano" coating that can be altered and rapidly "applied" or changed. The idea that you could swap it, on the fly, from your own ship doesn't feel like a stretch to me from a gameplay, lore or immersion standpoint just based on how it appears to work currently (and has always worked). I feel this is backed up by the fact that your paintjob still appears worn when changing them. The nano coating has worn off and needs to be repaired separately at a station while the ship's software can still alter the appearance of whatever coating remains.
Ship kits appear a bit more difficult from an immersion standpoint, but the fact that they don't appear on the holo image of your ship in the cockpit UI and can't be targeted leads me to believe they're not real, physical pieces on the ship.
Anyways, that's my two cents.
Reading the OP's thoughts, I feel his assumptions regarding how paintjobs work in Elite are incorrect. Just simply watching how they're applied in-game seems to indicate that it's not actually paint, but some sort of "nano" coating that can be altered and rapidly "applied" or changed. The idea that you could swap it, on the fly, from your own ship doesn't feel like a stretch to me from a gameplay, lore or immersion standpoint just based on how it appears to work currently (and has always worked). I feel this is backed up by the fact that your paintjob still appears worn when changing them. The nano coating has worn off and needs to be repaired separately at a station while the ship's software can still alter the appearance of whatever coating remains.
Ship kits appear a bit more difficult from an immersion standpoint, but the fact that they don't appear on the holo image of your ship in the cockpit UI and can't be targeted leads me to believe they're not real, physical pieces on the ship.
Anyways, that's my two cents.
What assumptions are those? We currently need to go to stations and the like to change them, presumably for some game-play reasons, not just the immersion of the thing or whatnot.
Oh well, I understand some will prefer the convenience of the thing more either way. That's to be expected.
Cheers.
Oh well, I understand some will prefer the convenience of the thing more either way. That's to be expected.
Cheers.
In addition to the gameplay aspect, you mentioned immersion. I'm simply pointing out that the assumption that, from a lore/immersion standpoint, you'd always have to be at a station may not necessarily be true from looking at the animation when applying "paintjobs." It appears to be some sort of coating on the ship and the idea that your ship's software could receive an update that allowed you to apply it directly doesn't seem like much of a stretch.
From a gameplay perspective, I don't personally see anything compelling about it, whether it's in a menu at a station or in a menu anywhere. You're still just clicking buttons.
As I said above, the lore/immersion explanation I provided along with the shift in menus allowing you to change it anywhere goes together well. It's just a shift in gameplay with a reasonable in-universe explanation that's supported by the effect we see when we currently change paints.
Yeah, we have a difference of opinion on the matter, and fair enough.
Part of my issue with it is that it's going against intended game-play design that we've had in the game so far, that is, having in-game contextual reasons for it. If everything becomes arbitrary, the game we'd be left with wouldn't be much of a game at all, really. Point being, the line should be drawn somewhere, and for contextually compelling game-play reasons as well as immersion.
Just giving feedback on where I'd prefer that line to be and why. Frontier seemed to have agreed in the past, but for whatever reasons have unfortunately changed their minds.
In 2015 I had an idea of the sort of game I thought I was buying. As it terns out, I was perhaps somewhat mistaken, as was Frontier. https://www.youtube.com/user/FrontierDevelopments/videos?view=0&sort=da&flow=grid
Cheers.
Part of my issue with it is that it's going against intended game-play design that we've had in the game so far, that is, having in-game contextual reasons for it. If everything becomes arbitrary, the game we'd be left with wouldn't be much of a game at all, really. Point being, the line should be drawn somewhere, and for contextually compelling game-play reasons as well as immersion.
Just giving feedback on where I'd prefer that line to be and why. Frontier seemed to have agreed in the past, but for whatever reasons have unfortunately changed their minds.
In 2015 I had an idea of the sort of game I thought I was buying. As it terns out, I was perhaps somewhat mistaken, as was Frontier. https://www.youtube.com/user/FrontierDevelopments/videos?view=0&sort=da&flow=grid
Cheers.
Last edited:
So in your opinion, what is the in-game contextual reason for having to be physically at a station to change your paint. I understand your personal misgivings, but I'd like to hear the contextual reasons.
As I posted above, I think the universe easily supports the Pilot's Federation pushing out a software update that allows Commanders to change their ships livery directly as it's just a nano coating (based on the logic in my previous post).
Thus far, they've obviously been intended to be applied in dock as with loading cargo and the like.
If you want to hand wave that away for the sake of the convenience you'd prefer anyway, suit yourself.
Of course we can pretend the game is whatever we want it to be, which has nothing to do with whether or not the game is actually worth its salt in the first place.
I'd love it if ship kits were physical objects like hollow fibreglass bodykit type things that you'd normally expect from some racer in a honda civic
keep them within the bounds of the shield, but if they take an unshielded hit they can be broken off and smashed
to keep the racer aesthetic, add giant ugly "NO FEAR" canopy decals
keep them within the bounds of the shield, but if they take an unshielded hit they can be broken off and smashed
to keep the racer aesthetic, add giant ugly "NO FEAR" canopy decals
The main issue with making everything "virtual" is that the game is ultimately virtual and requires us to play along with being pretend spaceship pilots in a future. The more aspects of the game are handwaved away with telepresence or holographic projection, the less present we are as pilots, and the more gamey the game becomes.
We are supposed to "experience life as a starship commander in the dangerous galaxy of the 34th century" (from the game decription on Elitedangerous.com). However, the more instant conveniences are added, the more the "experience life" part diminishes and we might as well be experiencing life as basement jockies remote piloting space-flight capable drones in the 34th century. And the more I'm lead to wonder why we have life support in the ships if we can just telepresence in and out to other vehicles and other ships.
Holographic paint jobs are just another set of features that removes credibility. Why bother with these? Why don't they draw power? What happened to realism?
S
We are supposed to "experience life as a starship commander in the dangerous galaxy of the 34th century" (from the game decription on Elitedangerous.com). However, the more instant conveniences are added, the more the "experience life" part diminishes and we might as well be experiencing life as basement jockies remote piloting space-flight capable drones in the 34th century. And the more I'm lead to wonder why we have life support in the ships if we can just telepresence in and out to other vehicles and other ships.
Holographic paint jobs are just another set of features that removes credibility. Why bother with these? Why don't they draw power? What happened to realism?
SAgain, I totally understand your personal misgivings with the change. I think they're perfectly reasonable and you're entitled to them. However, that doesn't answer my question about what in-game, contextual reasons there are for having to change your paint at a station (and you brought that up). Simply stating "because FDev originally built the mechanic into the station UI" doesn't answer the question of in-game context.
It appears the underlying gameplay mechanics of cosmetics will be mostly unchanged, perhaps arguably expanded. The only change is where you access this mechanic.
Above, I believe I provided a reasonable explanation of why and how the in-game context easily supports this shift. Of course, you're welcome to disagree.
I get the impression it's really a combination of your personal misgivings and head canon that's driving your feelings than gameplay. Please correct me if I'm wrong! I'm just simply trying to get a better understanding of it from your perspective.
Why would we need to go to a station in the first place? Ship kits are added on and paint is painted or otherwise applied or changed. This was the obvious intent. Instead, we're left with halo-everything or no reason whatsoever. At least the latter would be more honest for Frontier's changed intents for the game, shame that it is, and we wouldn't have to deal with a hand-waved, otherwise inconsequential and arbitrary farce of game lore.
I mean, you know, it is called a "paint job" and not a ship display projection. This isn't rocket science, as they say.
For game-play reasons, see the OP.
I mean, you know, it is called a "paint job" and not a ship display projection. This isn't rocket science, as they say.
For game-play reasons, see the OP.
Last edited:
That's goes back to what I've previously said regarding paint and how it appears to be applied, from an in-game perspective. Looking at the animation used by FDev when you apply paint, it looks a lot like a skin or coating being programmed to change appearance rather than actual paint being applied. If it's simply a coating, there's no in-game reason why you couldn't "program" the paint from your own ship. Hey, I could be wrong about this, but it sure looks like what I'm describing.
As I mentioned, ship kits are more difficult to explain.
Gameplay wise, I don't see it. The livery mechanic itself is unchanged. I completely understand it takes away that carrot on a stick that acts as motivation for you to finish a long exploration trip as well as the ability for you to recognize specific ships on a community expedition. However, I don't see how any of that is gameplay. It certainly could affect your personal motivation and ability to ID ships, but again, I don't see how that's gameplay.
When I play this game, I have my own personal RP and head canon. For me, it fits and doesn't affect how I play or "live" in the game's universe. Obviously for you, it does and that's fine. As you said before, agree to disagree! I just wanted to better understand your position, so thank you.
I do understand the points you make! It might surprise you, but I think we agree on more than you'd think. When it came to ship transfers, I pushed for travel times and cost, but I advocated for abbreviated times. I felt it was a good compromise between gameplay and lore/immersion. Instant transfers, I felt, nullified the intentional design choice by FDev that combat ships were harder to move around and made it too easy to move ships. However, long transfer times were cumbersome and did nothing to enhance gameplay and simply appeased the realism crowd at the expense of good gameplay. Hence, abbreviated travel time as a compromise.
Now, Holo Me? Don't get me started. I understand the lore behind it, but to me, it raises for more questions than it answers and feels like a hastily conceived concept to explain a new game mechanic. Now, I wouldn't have advocated having to physically go to the same stations to crew up either, as that's overly cumbersome. But telepresence just feels odd.
Anyways, that's the end of my rambling.
It's not realism. Because you can load cargo in an instant docked at a station.
But more of plausibility.
You have to dock to rearm, refuel, repair, and repaint.
Otherwise, why can't I refuel my ship out of nothing in deep space? I mean I can change my paint anywhere right?
Why can't I just snap my fingers and have my entire fleet appear in Beagle Point?
I already addressed this so please go back and actually read my previous posts.
I think my in-universe explanation lines up with current game mechanics perfectly and quite plausibly. When you "repaint" a ship, does the paint job go back to 100%? No, it doesn't. And why is that? If we're actually repainting it, wouldn't it make sense for it to repaint everything back to 100%? Yes, but it doesn't do that. Instead, you have to repair your paint to actually restore it.
That lines up nicely and plausibly with the idea that it's some sort of nano coating that wears off and must be repaired at a station while the "repainting" is simply reprogramming the coating to a different appearance.
I'm not seeing what's implausible about that, especially since it's backed up by current game mechanics (and this concept is not foreign in sci-fi).
The idea that this idea is somehow as ludicrous as allowing us to refuel, rearm and repair our ships anywhere is a pretty sensational argument to make.
You appear to feel differently, but I have a hard time understanding where you're coming from.
WR3ND, on the other hand, makes some valid points that I can totally understand, whether I agree with them all or not. But what you're suggesting is absurd, and blows this way out of proportion.
Last edited:
Repair paint is basically the same as "Touching up" your paintjob. Like you do when you get a fender bender and bring your car in.
They don't respray the entire car, do they? They'll just repair that portion and then proceed to touch up the original paintjob around the affected area.
I don't buy the nano coating story, period.
Because like dead pixels on an LED screen, damaged paintjob won't appear like normal wear. You'd just end up with pixelation or a bright spot somewhere on your ship.
After all, you can see paint wear on the ships. And also there are some paintjobs that intentionally looks like a ship has been put through the grinder, presumably for some players to want their ships to appear as if they "poor space truckers", or renegade raiders.
So nope. To me this change paint on the fly, along with nano coating, goes into the same bin as Telepresence.
The game might be set in the future, but FD seems to be arbitrary in their lo-fi and hi-tech application throughout the game.
You supposedly have a chameleon nano-paintjob... but your FSS is still an antiquated sextant with a radio dial.
I can't stop FD from implementing it. But my opinion is that it is just a bit rubbish.
I just see this as a game mechanics purely built around supporting ARX as the new in game currency. They want you to buy ARX, so they dumb down the paint job bit just to cater to explorers far out in the bubble who have no access to stations for some time to come yet. You can't see it?
Sorry, I'm not the type who makes excuses or narratives to cover up some inconsistencies or flaw I see in the game. I don't make believe there's a beautiful flight attendant in the empty seat next to me in my Cutter and write novels in the forums about her.
That's about it.
Last edited:
I don't recall an outcry because of the possibility to change engine trail colour, but the rest seems to be problematic... I'm happy we're able to change the looks as it has zero impact on gameplay and you can always choose not to do it.