Could Frontier please demonstrate how to use the FSS enjoyably?

[Sylow]

I think a developer has the right to develop their game as they like. If they want feedback they ask for it.

Exactly this. We can provide feedback over the forum. We do so. FD seem to read it, albeit quite likely not all of the spam the forum produces. They sometimes provide feedback.

Apparently the feedback is not enough for some people here. I guess FD would have to hire a dozen babysitters, who each full time takes care of one specific user in the forum?

 

[Riverside]

Except for leading to crazy engineering imbalances which made shields OP.

But I'm off topic.

The basic problem remains unaddressed in all cases. For shield booster stacking, for power play, for meaningful PvP, and for this. There are parallels between these examples.

Lots of people thought exploration was boring, and wanted a more engaging mechanism. A more engaging mechanism was designed & added to the game, but there was nothing wrong with the old mechanism, it worked & could easily have been left in place - it didn't need to be removed for that new mechanism to improve the QoL for new system discovery.

With Shield booster stacking it is a balancing issue - is it better to have more defence than offence available (favouring the meek) or limit defence so fights between meta-ships don't take so long and skill (not getting hit, pip management) plays more of a factor compared to loadout? There are pros & cons either way but the basic problem of combat being grindy with the right equipment and over too quickly without persists.

With Power Play there were a bunch of proposals that would have improved the QoL for all players (I gather from the PP FF, not an area I know much about), then there was the Open Only part that dominated the feedback. Power Play has not been made Open only (yet) which avoids removing agency from existing players. But the lack of meaningful PvP, the reason for considering Open Only in the first place has still not been addressed.

 

[Riverside]

Exactly this. We can provide feedback over the forum. We do so. FD seem to read it, albeit quite likely not all of the spam the forum produces. They sometimes provide feedback.

Apparently the feedback is not enough for some people here. I guess FD would have to hire a dozen babysitters, who each full time takes care of one specific user in the forum?

Feedback is an ongoing process, the issue is not going to go away through inaction. It is remarkably easy to address though, unlike so many far more complex issues there is a win/win solution to this one - just put the old functionality back in an optional way.

 

[Sylow]

The key difference here is a feature was effectively removed and damaged/removed gameplay as a result. There is not a single legitimate technological nor balancing argument that can excuse what has been done.

At least with PP and Engineers gameplay and options were added, regardless of how bad some may think they are.

Reality check: feature was removed, we have less gameplay? Can you please tell me of which game you are talking? I am discussing Elite Dangerous here.

A placeholder was -replaced- by new gameplay. The quality of the new feature can be discussed. Many people seem to be happy about it, while a small but very vocal group is constantly raging against it.

You can do anything the old system provided also in the new one. Some things are a bit faster now, others are a bit slower. But anything can still be achieved. No gameplay was removed.

 

[Riverside]

No gameplay was removed.

It was, it was unnecessary and it is missed. It is still there in explored systems, it just needs to be put back into virgin & partially explored systems in an optional way & everyone wins.

 

[cheesenbiscuits]

Feedback is an ongoing process, the issue is not going to go away through inaction. It is remarkably easy to address though, unlike so many far more complex issues there is a win/win solution to this one - just put the old functionality back in an optional way.

You can’t just put the old system back in,it would undermine the FSS.
Either you’re serious about effecting a change to the FSS to make it better or you’re just arguing the same baseless point.

 

[WR3ND]

Maybe Frontier should just remove all systems except LHS 3447..

I think you may be on to something. Exploration seems to undermined the FSS in general, or you know, piloting spaceships in different systems and finding things in them and all that. Better just to cut their losses and make the game a phone app instead. Seems to be what they're aiming for.

 

[Hanerib]

Having angry fans is a thing that should be celebrated. A game developer simply is not important if they have no angry people ranting about their games. Like Bethesda, all true fans of something they made simply hate them for destroying something of theirs, and everybody buys their games. Ever been to SpaceEngine forums? It's just so boring, they don't even know yet their game is doomed and everything is bad and horrible, so unhealthy. Besides, if Frontier fixed various issues about Elite Dangerous, I think that would be suspicious at least and would keep playing Minecraft for a couple of weeks just in case it's a plot to get some of my hard earned money. Promise.

 

[WR3ND]

Minecraft has a mobile version.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

It was, it was unnecessary and it is missed. It is still there in explored systems, it just needs to be put back into virgin & partially explored systems in an optional way & everyone wins.

No it wasn't removed. Please tell us what gameplay was removed. I know that some reasons to do certain gameplay was replaced with other reasons. But from what I can tell, zero gameplay has been removed. It has in fact been added to. So now there is more gameplay then ever in exploration compared to before which was press a button for 5 seconds, then supercruise to wait for a twirly animation to go round. The 5 second press is still there, super cruising is still there, looking at the system map is still there, landing on planets is still there, hell if you want to use the MK1 eyeball to find POI, that is still there, just don't fit a probe launcher or don't use it, planetary landing is still there, SRVing is still there. I can't think of any other gameplay. Is there something I am missing?

What other gameplay are you talking about?

 

[WR3ND]

You can crack an egg and still have the shell, but it doesn't make for a very good Easter egg any more.

 

[Riverside]

What other gameplay are you talking about?

The functionality of the old discovery modules that were removed. Personally I'm only interested in the ADS, none of them needed to be removed though.

 

[Riverside]

You can’t just put the old system back in,it would undermine the FSS.
Either you’re serious about effecting a change to the FSS to make it better or you’re just arguing the same baseless point.

This is the thing though, it doesn't. People said it would, but it doesn't undermine the FSS. This is my point when I say they didn't need to be removed, there was no incompatibility and we can see this clearly in the game, in systems that have already been tagged by another player but are new to us.

I am making the same point, it isn't baseless. The idea that there was some incompatibility is baseless. You want to relish the gameplay of discovering a system manually? Use the FSS alone & save a module slot - cost & benefit.

You just want to get on with it & have the bodies in a system be discovered but only a basic overview? Fit the Advanced version but is requires an extra slot. You can still fill in the extra detail by using the FSS telescope to find & resolve them if you want, or you can just target the discovered bodies & fly over there instead, or some combination of the two based on preference. Cost & benefit, player has a choice.

I can imagine the Advanced module would be pretty popular, just as the old DSS was despite for most of us only having a gameplay use for revealing the mats on a landable planet and earning extra cash.

 

[marx]

I'd still be curious how the developers expect us to realistically find Glowing Green Giants. Say what you will about rare configurations and extreme cases, but GGGs have their own designation and are marked in the Codex, so it's not an "accident" (anymore?).

As for feedback: well, no sensible developer will ever say "your feedback is being ignored" Players do receive feedback on their feedback, however: how much, if any(!), of it has later been acted upon, or at least replied to. That is the true response, not a canned line thanking you for your feedback.

In the FSS's case, the developer feedback has been woeful. Very little of the pre-beta and beta feedback has been acted upon, including minor feedback from people who liked the FSS. (So it's not just "haters are ignored".) Of course, this is traditionally true with FD, as generally, what we see in the beta is what we're going to get... but half a year and a version later, the FSS and exploration still has not just issues, but a lot of serious bugs too. That's the feedback on our feedback, and that applies to all groups.

Of course, in this same boat, but in a worse position, there's also CQC, PP, and so on.

 

[Riverside]

I'd still be curious how the developers expect us to realistically find Glowing Green Giants. Say what you will about rare configurations and extreme cases, but GGGs have their own designation and are marked in the Codex, so it's not an "accident" (anymore?).

I've never found one (not a big surprise), but this is just the kind of thing that would catch my eye with the old ADS sysmap reveal. I've found quite a few with pink streaks.

My solution is to stop & completion scan every system I pass through that has unresolved bodies (anything on the spectral line that's above the USSs on the far left). It is certainly earning me a lot of money & putting my name on a lot of stuff

"if you don't use it, don't expect it to be improved". I used it, but it was removed.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

They're not the first company in the history of business to shed "bad" customers. My own company has done this before as well. When a customer continues to demand more and more than they pay for and ultimately cost more to maintain than they're worth - well, losing them is ultimately a good thing.

Now Elite is a bit of a different creature - and a different kind of business model. You pay for the right to use the software. They've got your money. If you play again or not isn't their concern - and it doesn't have to be.

Things like "acceptable losses" and "collateral damage" are also applicable to military operations. The loss of 10,000 our of a force of 30,000 might be within the realms of "acceptable losses" for a given operation, but Elite isn't a military operation. It's a game. Nothing more. If you like it, you play it. If you don't, you don't. None of us are important enough that our absence will change anything.

I can see you at the general court-martial explaining the loss of a third of your command...

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

The functionality of the old discovery modules that were removed. Personally I'm only interested in the ADS, none of them needed to be removed though.

There was no gameplay with the functionality of the older modules unless you include the 5 second press of a button which is still there in the nee version. So gameplay has not been removed, correct?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I'd still be curious how the developers expect us to realistically find Glowing Green Giants.

By using the FSS like everybody else has to find stuff in the game.

 

[Darkfyre99]

It was, it was unnecessary and it is missed. It is still there in explored systems, it just needs to be put back into virgin & partially explored systems in an optional way & everyone wins.

Unfortunately, Frontier disagrees with you, and they’re the ones who get to decide if it was necessary or not. I understand it wasn’t the response you wanted, or actually like, but it was a response.

You’re where I was regarding surface exploration, after Frontier obviated SRV gameplay for surface exploration purposes. No amount of complaining to Frontier, no number of suggestions, was able to get Frontier to reverse their decision, and they never bothered to respond to my complaints. Most people were happy with that change, and this is also the case with the ADS.

Personally, I think there’s gameplay in the FSS besides the “minigame.” I think we should, in theory, be able to find the proverbial rare unicorns with the exception of weirdly colored worlds.

I’m still working on that myself, but I’m just one person who only has eight or nine months of “proper” exploration under her belt, and my current RL drama refuses to go away... but I can’t really complain, considering the worst thing that happened is I don’t have time to play video games ATM. At least I’ve recovered my breaks at work to post on the forums.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Three cheers for the exciting compulsory FSS gameplay - hip hip