Elite: Dangerous is a text-based adventure game for the 21st century.
I have never had so much hope in a more beautiful game.
I have never spent more time trying to love a game as dull than this one.
I genuinely believe that the amount of mud slinging that occurs on this forum is directly related to the frustration we as a community feel towards the current state of Elite: Dangerous as we take it out on each other.
I was really hoping this game would become a 3D version of the game FTL: Faster Than Light. A true spaceship sim, rather than a text based adventure with great sound design and beautiful assets spanning the entire Milky Way galaxy. The game is a desk job in space. Broken up by the occasional dogfight, you spend an overwhelming majority of the game reading text, looking at menus, waiting in loading screens, and traveling in super-cruise while alt+tabbed. If not for the wonderful players, mods, and devs I've met on Reddit and this Forum, I'd have given up hope for this game long ago. We have fun discussing what this game can one day become; more than text, math, and procedurally generated nothingness both in terms of level design and missions/story telling.
Mechanics - What do I actually spend time doing in game with Combat, Trade, and Exploration?
Advice to the Dev team:
Know your target demographic.
Is this a game, or is it a SIM?
A game involves engaging story telling (NOT TEXT), relate-able events and characters, and hand-crafted plot. Games are typically fun and favour entertainment over effort.
A SIM involves complex, meaningful, and predictable mechanics (with written guidebooks explaining every mechanic) as well as fully fleshed out ships that allow you to live every aspect of a space-sailor's life. SIMs are challenging in nature, and the only reward is pretending to live an experience you couldn't otherwise have.
I guess what I'm saying is... don't remake Elite from 1985... make something new that has never been done before.
Don't be afraid to try something creative or expressive that comes from your artistic side rather than relying on procedural generation for everything.
The best sandbox games are successful because players were allowed to modify the game.
Elite: Dangerous will not survive as a text-based sandbox game unless you plan on handing us the keys at some point. I mean, look at what players did with OOlite.
I have never had so much hope in a more beautiful game.
I have never spent more time trying to love a game as dull than this one.
I genuinely believe that the amount of mud slinging that occurs on this forum is directly related to the frustration we as a community feel towards the current state of Elite: Dangerous as we take it out on each other.
I was really hoping this game would become a 3D version of the game FTL: Faster Than Light. A true spaceship sim, rather than a text based adventure with great sound design and beautiful assets spanning the entire Milky Way galaxy. The game is a desk job in space. Broken up by the occasional dogfight, you spend an overwhelming majority of the game reading text, looking at menus, waiting in loading screens, and traveling in super-cruise while alt+tabbed. If not for the wonderful players, mods, and devs I've met on Reddit and this Forum, I'd have given up hope for this game long ago. We have fun discussing what this game can one day become; more than text, math, and procedurally generated nothingness both in terms of level design and missions/story telling.
Mechanics - What do I actually spend time doing in game with Combat, Trade, and Exploration?
Exploration can be broken down to 5 actions, each involving nothing more than text and time. First, you read the Gal-map to find a system you would like to visit. Next, you travel to that system through a series of loading screens. Moving on, once you arrive in that system you will hold a button for about 10 seconds to receive a map of the system which you will use to read descriptions of stellar bodies within the system. Step 4 involves pointing your ship at a stellar body you find interesting, full throttle, and basically "auto pilot" while you alt+tab to read the forums or Reddit as this step can last anywhere between 2 seconds to 2 hours from what I've done. The final step has you scanning the body so that you may obtain more words to look at as well as the possible bonus of having your name on that system for others to come by and read.
Trade involves mostly looking at menus, loading screens, and the fourth step of the exploration walk-through with a bit of a twist. You start by reading through a list of commodities and prices to determine which one you would like to invest in. Once you have purchased your goods from the market menu you will open the map menu and select a destination. You then leave the station and enter a loading screen. Depending how far you are traveling you may encounter several more loading screens. Once you've arrived at the destination system you will spend some time drifting in a straight line towards your target station. At this point you may be interdicted by a pirate which will trigger a mini-game where you chase a circle with another circle. Depending how much effort you choose to put into evading the pirate the event/excitement will not last more than 30 seconds tops as you will either escape or die. If you win, you will see a new market menu. If you lose, you will see the old market menu. Either way, you end up looking at a market menu.
Combat is fun. It's nothing to write home about though, as the huge amount of potential is wasted by forcing players to grind for ships. I wish we could have scenarios that spawn players in fleets of ships of all sizes with objectives. Maybe 6 on 6 anaconda (or any combo of ships) battling in a hand crafted asteroid field filled with massive asteroids, wreckage, and space mines. I genuinely believe people would spend more time playing hand crafted scenarios, with free access to every ship in the game, than they would spend playing the actual game as it is now.
Grinding - What is it? We need to define some terms. Skip this if you don't want a lecture on game-design theory.
Development - I've been a part of the Elite: Dangerous Community since 1.1 Here is my take on the past year. Skip this if you've had your fill of wall-o-text
Trade involves mostly looking at menus, loading screens, and the fourth step of the exploration walk-through with a bit of a twist. You start by reading through a list of commodities and prices to determine which one you would like to invest in. Once you have purchased your goods from the market menu you will open the map menu and select a destination. You then leave the station and enter a loading screen. Depending how far you are traveling you may encounter several more loading screens. Once you've arrived at the destination system you will spend some time drifting in a straight line towards your target station. At this point you may be interdicted by a pirate which will trigger a mini-game where you chase a circle with another circle. Depending how much effort you choose to put into evading the pirate the event/excitement will not last more than 30 seconds tops as you will either escape or die. If you win, you will see a new market menu. If you lose, you will see the old market menu. Either way, you end up looking at a market menu.
Combat is fun. It's nothing to write home about though, as the huge amount of potential is wasted by forcing players to grind for ships. I wish we could have scenarios that spawn players in fleets of ships of all sizes with objectives. Maybe 6 on 6 anaconda (or any combo of ships) battling in a hand crafted asteroid field filled with massive asteroids, wreckage, and space mines. I genuinely believe people would spend more time playing hand crafted scenarios, with free access to every ship in the game, than they would spend playing the actual game as it is now.
Grinding - What is it? We need to define some terms. Skip this if you don't want a lecture on game-design theory.
False replay value
This is typically referred to as "grinding" in layman's terms. False replay value is anything that causes you to play the game for any reason other than enjoyment, one example being chanced based loot. This particular type of FRV comes in many forms but essentially they all end up being a coin toss after some amount of effort is made by the player. Rather than have a player fail due to lack of skill or effort, the game will randomly decide whether or not the player is rewarded. If you win, you get to move on. If you lose, you have to replay the game again for another chance at the coin toss. This applies to both random encounters like signal sources or missions, as well as crafting RNG or random loot drop. This can also apply to the BGS as it is designed to work differently than you would suspect. For example, trading 1 item at a time is more effective than trading 100 items all at once. This is because the game measures the amount of transactions rather than the actual amount sold. The way that frontier hide the mechanics shows they don't want players to be successful, and this is causing hours of wasted time and false replay value. Your average player who does not use Reddit or the forums would never know this. It shouldn't be that way.
Progression
This is another mechanic that is commonly referred to as grinding. Progression occurs naturally as a player enjoys content over time. You can define a game's progression by simply looking at what factors cause a player to "game over" and in Elite: Dangerous we find that having a lack of credits on death means you lose your ship and have to revert to a stage when you had fewer credits before your last death. In this way we can define progression in Elite: Dangerous as credit balance. I understand things like rank don't disappear, but that's progression within 1 aspect of the game. Failing to become King or Elite will not revert you back to a sidewinder. Only loss of credits can revert your save, or in layman's terms, "game over" your save. In summary this game is a second a job, in space, where your only real threat is not having enough money for insurance.
This is typically referred to as "grinding" in layman's terms. False replay value is anything that causes you to play the game for any reason other than enjoyment, one example being chanced based loot. This particular type of FRV comes in many forms but essentially they all end up being a coin toss after some amount of effort is made by the player. Rather than have a player fail due to lack of skill or effort, the game will randomly decide whether or not the player is rewarded. If you win, you get to move on. If you lose, you have to replay the game again for another chance at the coin toss. This applies to both random encounters like signal sources or missions, as well as crafting RNG or random loot drop. This can also apply to the BGS as it is designed to work differently than you would suspect. For example, trading 1 item at a time is more effective than trading 100 items all at once. This is because the game measures the amount of transactions rather than the actual amount sold. The way that frontier hide the mechanics shows they don't want players to be successful, and this is causing hours of wasted time and false replay value. Your average player who does not use Reddit or the forums would never know this. It shouldn't be that way.
Progression
This is another mechanic that is commonly referred to as grinding. Progression occurs naturally as a player enjoys content over time. You can define a game's progression by simply looking at what factors cause a player to "game over" and in Elite: Dangerous we find that having a lack of credits on death means you lose your ship and have to revert to a stage when you had fewer credits before your last death. In this way we can define progression in Elite: Dangerous as credit balance. I understand things like rank don't disappear, but that's progression within 1 aspect of the game. Failing to become King or Elite will not revert you back to a sidewinder. Only loss of credits can revert your save, or in layman's terms, "game over" your save. In summary this game is a second a job, in space, where your only real threat is not having enough money for insurance.
Development - I've been a part of the Elite: Dangerous Community since 1.1 Here is my take on the past year. Skip this if you've had your fill of wall-o-text
1.1 Community Goals
An interesting idea, but the only form of story telling we get are text based narratives. There are no cut-scenes or even trailers to go along with events in the game. We get no context outside of Gal-Net. No in game scenes to witness. The trailers we do have blatantly lie about content. Things like power-play decals, fighting near stations, in-systems jumps, and even flight mechanics are lied about in the trailers.
1.2 Wings
We still suffer from comms and instancing issues over a year after this patch was added to the game. Never in my life have I had to look at my router settings to play a video game with someone in the same house as me, even in other P2P games.
1.3 Power-play
We are given cardboard cutouts of leaders with no context other than text based news media for exposition. This is literally the worst form of story telling in any genre of video game. The mechanics are also overly complex and often lead to an outcome that players did not want, which then creates false replay value as they try again. There is difference here to wanting things on a silver platter, and just wanting things to make sense.
1.4 CQC
In my opinion this patch was not worth the massive amount of effort put in by the devs and was likely only added to entice Microsoft or to compete with Star Citizen in an attempt to preserve the lifespan of the game through capitol gains as an advertising gimmick. For an arena shooter, it's pretty bad. The level design is okay but not very intuitive. Killing each other with no objective is basic. Even free to play FPS games come with more objective types. Killing is a means to an end, not the goal itself. A hand crafted scenario with voice actors, reactive level design, and a unique goal will make the CQC reviews on steam more positive.
1.5 Ships
This should have taken 1.3's place. My only complaint about this patch is how late it came in the development cylce. More ships are always better for a game about spaceships.
2.0 Horizons
Easily the most hyped up patch while realistically containing just over a week's worth of content until you end up doing the same thing over and over again. I've spent hours on the surfaces of planets both in the bubble, and the far side of the galaxy, and have found more tea than I know what to do with. There are maybe 10 POIs at most, and none of them are particularly interesting. The only interaction with Barnacles has been to shoot them. This is likely so that frontier can say "humans shot first" well that's not our fault, the game lacks other methods of interaction. Any future war with space whales is on you, Frontier. Not us. We would have done peaceful science if you made that an option.
An interesting idea, but the only form of story telling we get are text based narratives. There are no cut-scenes or even trailers to go along with events in the game. We get no context outside of Gal-Net. No in game scenes to witness. The trailers we do have blatantly lie about content. Things like power-play decals, fighting near stations, in-systems jumps, and even flight mechanics are lied about in the trailers.
1.2 Wings
We still suffer from comms and instancing issues over a year after this patch was added to the game. Never in my life have I had to look at my router settings to play a video game with someone in the same house as me, even in other P2P games.
1.3 Power-play
We are given cardboard cutouts of leaders with no context other than text based news media for exposition. This is literally the worst form of story telling in any genre of video game. The mechanics are also overly complex and often lead to an outcome that players did not want, which then creates false replay value as they try again. There is difference here to wanting things on a silver platter, and just wanting things to make sense.
1.4 CQC
In my opinion this patch was not worth the massive amount of effort put in by the devs and was likely only added to entice Microsoft or to compete with Star Citizen in an attempt to preserve the lifespan of the game through capitol gains as an advertising gimmick. For an arena shooter, it's pretty bad. The level design is okay but not very intuitive. Killing each other with no objective is basic. Even free to play FPS games come with more objective types. Killing is a means to an end, not the goal itself. A hand crafted scenario with voice actors, reactive level design, and a unique goal will make the CQC reviews on steam more positive.
1.5 Ships
This should have taken 1.3's place. My only complaint about this patch is how late it came in the development cylce. More ships are always better for a game about spaceships.
2.0 Horizons
Easily the most hyped up patch while realistically containing just over a week's worth of content until you end up doing the same thing over and over again. I've spent hours on the surfaces of planets both in the bubble, and the far side of the galaxy, and have found more tea than I know what to do with. There are maybe 10 POIs at most, and none of them are particularly interesting. The only interaction with Barnacles has been to shoot them. This is likely so that frontier can say "humans shot first" well that's not our fault, the game lacks other methods of interaction. Any future war with space whales is on you, Frontier. Not us. We would have done peaceful science if you made that an option.
Know your target demographic.
Is this a game, or is it a SIM?
A game involves engaging story telling (NOT TEXT), relate-able events and characters, and hand-crafted plot. Games are typically fun and favour entertainment over effort.
A SIM involves complex, meaningful, and predictable mechanics (with written guidebooks explaining every mechanic) as well as fully fleshed out ships that allow you to live every aspect of a space-sailor's life. SIMs are challenging in nature, and the only reward is pretending to live an experience you couldn't otherwise have.
I guess what I'm saying is... don't remake Elite from 1985... make something new that has never been done before.
Don't be afraid to try something creative or expressive that comes from your artistic side rather than relying on procedural generation for everything.
The best sandbox games are successful because players were allowed to modify the game.
Elite: Dangerous will not survive as a text-based sandbox game unless you plan on handing us the keys at some point. I mean, look at what players did with OOlite.
would have no alternative to this and SC is not the same and buggy as hell for me.... I think\hope they do what they can and is makeable. 
