Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?

[Sylow]

They already had the ADS...

You seem to have problems following a conversation if not everything is packed into one single posting?

They HAD the ADS. It's very likely that they re-used existing code. They did not re-invent the wheel, but use what was already there, change it and adapt it to the new system. That's what any reasonable developer would do at least. Which might very well result in the changed code not (at least not without further changes and adjustments) being compatible with the old system any more.

It's not that we know that this has happened. But it is a likely thing and thus a very plausible explanation why FD doesn't want to do all the work to bring an old placeholder back.

 

[lenna]

Whilst ADS scan and maps same time, you had to SC to each body to complete the process. Separating FSS from DSS simplified and accelerated the scanning process but not mapping which I believe gives us the option to scan an entire system without mapping. Plus this opened up the new feature for CMDRs to be named first to map a body.

False - the FSS combined the ADS/DSS and imposed a ridiculous and grindy mechanic. The DSS was mutated into a ridiculous space-golf mechanic enabler - the later did not exist pre-3.3.

 

[lenna]

Hello Commanders,

I wanted to drop in and let you that we have been reading your comments and are aware how some of you feel about the FSS.

When first designing the FSS, we wanted to ensure that it was engaging for as many different player types as possible, but also understood that it would not be possible to design a system that would work for everyone. Before the FSS was implemented, we also collected feedback from discussions on the forum and the beta.

Today, in its current iteration, we’re happy with how the FSS operates and feel that reinstating the ADS would be detrimental to the experience of exploration as it is now.

At the current time, we won’t be making changes to the core of the FSS. While we understand that this may be disappointing for some of you, we would like to thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and feedback with us.

I would like to highlight that having been engaged in at least some of those discussions your perceptions and conclusions are fundamentally flawed. The FSS is ultimately nothing like anything that was proposed or discussed.

This matter will not go away, and unless FD are going to be issuing compensation or refunds they should ultimately rethink their position on this matter. In implementing the FSS and completely removing the ADS, arguably FD have broken their change management covenant with their end-users.

If you and your colleagues have actually been paying attention to the discussions during the Beta and since release of 3.3, while people like myself have opposed the removal of the ADS in the first place there have been suggestions that would result in roughly the same end effect without "reinstating the ADS as-was".

Your assertions are beyond disappointing and are below borderline in terms of being acceptable.

 

[Flimley]

The devs have spoken. Everyone go home now. Nothing to see here. ...or above me

Flimley

 

[Spaceman Si]

Hello Commanders,

I wanted to drop in and let you that we have been reading your comments and are aware how some of you feel about the FSS.

When first designing the FSS, we wanted to ensure that it was engaging for as many different player types as possible, but also understood that it would not be possible to design a system that would work for everyone. Before the FSS was implemented, we also collected feedback from discussions on the forum and the beta.

Today, in its current iteration, we’re happy with how the FSS operates and feel that reinstating the ADS would be detrimental to the experience of exploration as it is now.

At the current time, we won’t be making changes to the core of the FSS. While we understand that this may be disappointing for some of you, we would like to thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and feedback with us.

“Before the FSS was implemented, we also collected feedback from discussions on the forum and the beta” - really? Because the negative feedback I and others gave on it during beta (when it was obviously already implemented and a fait accomplait) was met with almost exactly the same response you’ve just given, which boils down to “Too bad, we won’t even consider your concerns”.

I had been looking forward to the exploration update, and the promised exploration focussed feedback, which could have mitigated or avoided this sort of design problem, but it was denied to the explorers, and instead of new additional content, they got a new way of finding the same old content. The fact that previous explorers who had taken the time and effort to survey 200kls+ subsystems effectively had that effort disrespected by the new ability of subsystems at any distance to be scanned in short order and the rewards gained for it without even leaving the vicinity of the local star didn’t even seem to be acknowledged.

Since I have gone much more into combat and mission / USS hunting, I can see how there is far more utility and engagement generated by the FSS in an inhabited system, and how integral it is to the new gameplay of scenarios etc. Cynically, I could see how the design of the fss had far more to do with satisfying this requirement than it did with being thought of as an exploration mechanic.

The real enjoyment and peace I got from exploring prior to 3.3 has been removed, and although I have adapted to being forced to deal with the FSS by either ignoring it and using parallax, or just ploughing through hunt the blob to build the system map I wanted in the first place, I still feel cheated out of a part of the game I bought.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

You seem to have problems following a conversation if not everything is packed into one single posting?

They HAD the ADS. It's very likely that they re-used existing code. They did not re-invent the wheel, but use what was already there, change it and adapt it to the new system. That's what any reasonable developer would do at least. Which might very well result in the changed code not (at least not without further changes and adjustments) being compatible with the old system any more.

It's not that we know that this has happened. But it is a likely thing and thus a very plausible explanation why FD doesn't want to do all the work to bring an old placeholder back.

I'd take such conjecture more seriously if they hadn't done what we suggested to mining, and the FSS is hardly similar to the ADS.

 

[zegram33]

Same here.

me too
interesting system, requires actual gameplay to scan things, low enough skill floor that no ones excluded but high enough that practice makes you noticeably better at it

 

[Ralph Vargr]

“Before the FSS was implemented, we also collected feedback from discussions on the forum and the beta” - really? Because the negative feedback I and others gave on it during beta (when it was obviously already implemented and a fait accomplait) was met with almost exactly the same response you’ve just given, which boils down to “Too bad, we won’t even consider your concerns”.

I had been looking forward to the exploration update, and the promised exploration focussed feedback, which could have mitigated or avoided this sort of design problem, but it was denied to the explorers, and instead of new additional content, they got a new way of finding the same old content. The fact that previous explorers who had taken the time and effort to survey 200kls+ subsystems effectively had that effort disrespected by the new ability of subsystems at any distance to be scanned in short order and the rewards gained for it without even leaving the vicinity of the local star didn’t even seem to be acknowledged.

Since I have gone much more into combat and mission / USS hunting, I can see how there is far more utility and engagement generated by the FSS in an inhabited system, and how integral it is to the new gameplay of scenarios etc. Cynically, I could see how the design of the fss had far more to do with satisfying this requirement than it did with being thought of as an exploration mechanic.

The real enjoyment and peace I got from exploring prior to 3.3 has been removed, and although I have adapted to being forced to deal with the FSS by either ignoring it and using parallax, or just ploughing through hunt the blob to build the system map I wanted in the first place, I still feel cheated out of a part of the game I bought.

It was patently clear to a number of us that the FSS was designed to be The One Scanner To Find Them All, and that the entire gameplay mechanic had been brought down from Mount Sinai on stone tablets from far above Adam's level.

It's Holy Writ. Like someone had an idee fixe about a stellar exploration method. Or, had written a game for radio astronomy already....

The consequences were also seen in advance. And reacted to, at full volume. No use. Elvis Had Spoken.

Those of us who foresaw the strip-mining of the galaxy had the stone tablets thrown down on us.

Now, the Holy War is Officially Over.

Additionally, Frontier has blatantly shown us their "tell" on community management. We have a Killer DM running a railroaded game. Some of the community were kind of blind to this.

Time to give up on suggesting anything. Time to play only limited portions of the game. Those who believe 2020 will make things better are entitled to their opinion.

The good thing is that my small ships have lots more slots. Being a Cobra 4 owner has never been better.

 

[SystematicChaos]

Since I have gone much more into combat and mission / USS hunting, I can see how there is far more utility and engagement generated by the FSS in an inhabited system, and how integral it is to the new gameplay of scenarios etc. Cynically, I could see how the design of the fss had far more to do with satisfying this requirement than it did with being thought of as an exploration mechanic.

FD are not interested in any part of the game that doesn't involve shooting things or blowing things up and haven't been for quite some time.

 

[ThatSmileyGuy]

I guess we've come to this part again where FD have used up all their time to respond to any queries.
What mildly infuriates me most is not their decision. I'm fine with that.
My problem lies where they give one response and then promptly ignore all further questions within premises of the same thread.
When giving a statement one should expect follow up questions right?

 

[Darkfyre99]

While real life has hit me with another dose of related drama I am trying to catch up with the thread. Haven't had much to say that hasn't already been said, but this kind of stuck out to me:

Out in virgin systems the vulnerability of being stationary in supercruise is reduced compared to populated space, but the frustration of which direction to fly and how far to travel before stopping comes to the fore. I regularly find myself having to exit the FSS Scanner Screen to move the ship to another location so I can scan bodies blocked by the star. Having nearby bodies that auto-scan really helps here, because it gives me an idea of the system plane so I can put the ship in a convenient location when I enter the FSS Scanner Screen. I always honk before entering the FSS Scanner Screen, for the FSS Scanner screen to require a honk on entry (if you haven't yet done one that session) is pure waste of time imo. If you log off part way through scanning a system it requires a fresh honk too, which doesn't make much sense to me.

And naturally, I feel the exact opposite, regarding the analysis of the orbital planes of virgin systems and "pre-explored" systems. Needing to make a snap decision from my initial glance at the wave spectrum is much more interesting than being told where the star's orbital plane is. This decision is based on whether I saw the proverbial "orbital plane" of the system, as well as if there are any stellar or sub-stellar bodies. Since a system's "orbital plane" seems to be heavily influence by mass, and the Stellar Forge is heavily influence by our understanding in 2012 of how systems are formed, it's possible to deduce where a star's orbital plane is. More importantly IMO, it's possible to be wrong, which not only reveals more information about a system's potential history, but it's also a pleasant surprise when I am.

OTOH, I'm kind of on the fence about needing a second honk if you need to log out before you're done exploring a system. On the one hand, I feel it makes sense to require a fresh scanning pulse of local Witchspace to detect nearby sources of mass that are constantly on the move, but whose orbits have yet to be mapped in sufficient detail. On the other hand, I can see the appeal of "once then done."

 

[Darkfyre99]

And the 'gist of it' is throwing rocks at a melon

Which is still better than throttling down while the planet isn't even close enough to resolve as a sphere visually, and sitting doing nothing for however long that took.

While I very much wish there was an option to map a system by flying over it, and being able to resolve geological and biological POIs by flying within range without mapping the entire thing, even "throwing rocks at a melon" is better than sitting there doing nothing at all.

Especially since we do have the option of throwing said rocks when moving past said melon at a decent rate. Hitting a moving target is so much more fun.

 

[Darkfyre99]

“Before the FSS was implemented, we also collected feedback from discussions on the forum and the beta” - really? Because the negative feedback I and others gave on it during beta (when it was obviously already implemented and a fait accomplait) was met with almost exactly the same response you’ve just given, which boils down to “Too bad, we won’t even consider your concerns”.

There's a difference between collecting feedback, and agreeing with said feedback, especially when most of the feedback is overwhelmingly positive.

 

[Spaceman Si]

There's a difference between collecting feedback, and agreeing with said feedback, especially when most of the feedback is overwhelmingly positive.

There is also a difference between collecting and discussing, and collecting and ignoring

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Which is still better than throttling down while the planet isn't even close enough to resolve as a sphere visually, and sitting doing nothing for however long that took.

While I very much wish there was an option to map a system by flying over it, and being able to resolve geological and biological POIs by flying within range without mapping the entire thing, even "throwing rocks at a melon" is better than sitting there doing nothing at all.

Especially since we do have the option of throwing said rocks when moving past said melon at a decent rate. Hitting a moving target is so much more fun.

C'mon Dark, the 'wait for the scan' was replaced by 'press the zoom button', not the melons

What I find interesting is that the 'fun' ways to use the new tools involve not using them the way FDev want us to.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

There is also a difference between collecting and discussing, and collecting and ignoring

Yeah, the fact that the new statement was essentially a copy/paste of the original statement shows us how much they 'value our feedback'.

Statement 1: Sucks to be you.

Statement 2: We listened to your feedback and after taking it on board we've decided that it sucks to be you.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

C'mon Dark, the 'wait for the scan' was replaced by 'press the zoom button', not the melons

It's a bit of both.

What I find interesting is that the 'fun' ways to use the new tools involve not using them the way FDev want us to.

How do we know how FDev wanted us to use it?

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

It's a bit of both.


How do we know how FDev wanted us to use it?

The information gained from the old DSS is now returned by the zoom. New DSS is all new. Not even close to 'a bit of both'.

If FDev had wanted me to use parallax to discover planets they wouldn't have bothered with the blue blobs or tune-n-zoom.

If they'd wanted me to use proximity auto-resolve in explored systems they'd have either fully removed the old-DSS or made it work with the FSS so that a body resolved at long range updated the FSS, instead of the FSS not counting it as having been explored.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

The information gained from the old DSS is now returned by the zoom. New DSS is all new. Not even close to 'a bit of both'.

You get a tag from it like you did before, its just a different name. The information in the old DSS is neither here or there as it doesn't hold any valuable in-game meaning. I suppose the only meaningful information it gave was whether the planet was volcanic, but as the process for finding anything on the surface was so tedious I pretty much ignored that anyway.

If FDev had wanted me to use parallax to discover planets they wouldn't have bothered with the blue blobs or tune-n-zoom.

It is entirely up to you what you do. FDev give you the tools, use them how you want to. If you want to parallax, go for it. Its why its called a sandbox.

 

[Old Duck]

Yeah, the fact that the new statement was essentially a copy/paste of the original statement shows us how much they 'value our feedback'.

Statement 1: Sucks to be you.

Statement 2: We listened to your feedback and after taking it on board we've decided that it sucks to be you.

Statement 1: Sucks to be the one of the 10 people who don't like the FSS.

Statement 2: We read the same 10 people posting the same thing over and over for months and we've decided that it sucks to be you 10 people.