Guest193293
G
I talked about 'depth' not 'complexity'.
Last edited by a moderator:
Define 'depth'?
- Thread starter Bill Clement
- Start date
I talked about 'depth' not 'complexity'.
Yeah, but according to some people, you aren't allowed to enjoy pizza unless you have it the way they like it.
Depth in this game is that you have to grind your socks out to unlock an engineer, in order to get to another engineer.. and that will get you an invite to.. another engineer.
Depth in this game is to let thousands of players to get aboard a megaship, in order to make a jump to an area that no man has been before, to reveal the most hidden secrets of the galaxy and, and, and.. don't let it happen lol.
Depth in this game is to let thousands of players to get aboard a megaship, in order to make a jump to an area that no man has been before, to reveal the most hidden secrets of the galaxy and, and, and.. don't let it happen lol.
I think most people in the "I already quit but I'm still here" category don't like the game. I myself quit the bugs, not the game, and this time I really had no choice, because ED is causing PS4s to lock up hard (requiring a power cycle and a drive scan to recover from) since this last update. Fix the bugs and I'll be back
Last edited:
A power cycle and a drive scan. Sounds like bad sectors on a failing hard drive.
Define drive scan a bit better.
Define drive scan a bit better.
He has to cold reboot his PS4 using the power button which probably causes fsck/chkdsk to kick in. No need to defend FD on this one as the issue is confirmed by other PS4 players...
Thanks, was looking at it from a PC users experience.
These are the three things ED desperately needs.
Well I maybe something someones could define as fanboi for this game but for me there is enough depth. Not everyone can be a galaxy saving hero (or country saving hero in real life) most of existence is mundane work, and well IF we really had society and tech of Elite Universe now what would you think life of that kind of private pilot would be? Hauling stuff, trying to get some living in shadow of megacorporations and big guys by trading stuff and so on. Perhaps problem for some players is that game is somewhat too realistic in that sense.
Never in this thread has anyone requested "saving the princess" as "depth" iirc. As for a "private pilot", well this one is a Duke of the Empire and sitting on a billion Cr. Not enough to get out of a megacorp shadow, yet enough to cast a shadow on "less fortunate" players / npcs. Nothing like that happens in the game. Also if a game starts simulating mundane work and resembling a job, someone took a wrong turn on the whiteboard in the planning session.
Well Empire has pretty many Dukes nowadays, eh (And Federation has pretty many admirals...) And billionaire in such society may not mean even same as millionaire in ours, truly rich people own multiple planets.
(And Federation has pretty many admirals...) And billionaire in such society may not mean even same as millionaire in ours, truly rich people own multiple planets.
Last edited:
For me, "depth" is Tracer in Overwatch, Fox in Melee, or a Rogue in WoW; it is the entire gameplay experience of Tony Hawk's Pro Skater. Depth is the ability for players to layer abilities/features in interesting or creative ways that--in many ways--go beyond what the developers originally intended. Depth is finding yourself in novel situations and being able to engineer your way out of them through clever use of game mechanics.
Last edited:
It depends on which feature you're refereng to, for example depth in the story or gameplay mechanics. In the case of gameplay mechanics, depth in a game is how complex it is, how deep it can go in its gameplay.
It has nothing to do with the imagination or story.
For example, bounty hunting is shallow because its just going to certain places and kill many ships with bounty. They just continuously spawn so you can kill them. There's no "bounty hunting", its just a fishtank with cash.
If for example, you had to chase the bounty through different locations, stations, talking/bribing NPCs, use equipment on your ship like satellites or probes, look at station logs, hear bar rumours or hacking datacenters to find your target, then that would be Depth.
But no, this game doesn't play like that because its simple.
It has nothing to do with the imagination or story.
For example, bounty hunting is shallow because its just going to certain places and kill many ships with bounty. They just continuously spawn so you can kill them. There's no "bounty hunting", its just a fishtank with cash.
If for example, you had to chase the bounty through different locations, stations, talking/bribing NPCs, use equipment on your ship like satellites or probes, look at station logs, hear bar rumours or hacking datacenters to find your target, then that would be Depth.
But no, this game doesn't play like that because its simple.
I always thought this line of argument was such a bizarre non-sequiteur. First of all it has nothing to do with any discussion of depth. But more importantly it’s just plain wrong. We could ALL be galaxy-saving heroes if Frontier wanted to design their game that way. There’s no reason each connected player can’t be simultaneously working through their own epic campaign while also playing an ancillary role in someone else’s. This is especially easy to do in a heavily instanced P2P game (see Dark Souls), arguably easier than what Frontier seem to be trying to do with their whole fake MMO thing. Nothing about multiplayer prevents epic player-focused campaigns it’s just not something Frontier have chosen to do. Which . . . Fine.
But the other frustrating thing is it’s such a disingenuous argument. Most of us don’t need to save the galaxy but wouldn’t it be nice if you could save one really cool guy in some backwater system, and later you’d run into him again and he’d do you a favor? Forget saving the princess how about the video game equivalent of saving someone’s cat from a tree? There are no characters in this game, no NPCs, and hence no relationships of any kind which legibly affect the player or can be affected by the player. We have the exact same problem that everyone was complaining about with Fallout 76: no NPCs, just text and audio logs for a story that has nothing to do with you.
“Gameplay” is a meaningless buzzword. “Depth” is not. Problem is depth in game design is an entirely different discussion from depth in art or literature. Since however video games are ASLO art and literature, the discussion of their depth AS GAMES can easily get swept aside into a critique of their thematic and narrative qualities. Which, yes, you CAN have a productive discussion about narrative and thematic depth in Elite, but that’s not the “deep” we’re talking about when we’re accusing it of being “a mile wide” (Elite is neither artistically/narratively wide OR deep)
This! How many of you even reads what the avatar of the minor faction representative is saying above mission board? I don't, it's canned repeating fluff. Well, it would be different (if not tedious) if you would need to approach that person and start a chat to get to the "goodies". Maybe with space legs someday. Also that chatter would tie in nicely with events happening in the system, for example mentioning problems with rival minor faction or shortage of some commodities pointing you to more lucrative or influential missions. All of this is missing from the game.
A little off-topic - I couldn't really get into Bioshock 1 for exact same reason. There are only monsters in rapture, and all "interactions" are with murderous lunatics with disfigured or masked faces. The only "normal" (sheesh) people you see are in the cutscenes. I get that it's an artistic design decision but it made the whole game depressing and repulsive for me. I finished it and never bothered with the next parts. Maybe someday.
For me it's very simple :
1. How many ways are there to perform a given task. Can I get creative or is there strong railroading/siloed gameloops ?
2. Are the consequences for success and failure meaningfull for the player and do they open multiple compelling followup ?
3. Are the game mechanics at the core of the game crunchy enough (enough complexity for finding fun in their mastery)
For ED :
1. Multiple siloed paths.
2. No.
3. Yes.
Which makes it average.
ED has the additional issue of having a progression system mainly delivering reduced game challenges.
Instead of introducing the tried classic : new tools to master coupled with new challenges to overcome with said tools.*
*that has started to change with wing assassination and thargoids.
1. How many ways are there to perform a given task. Can I get creative or is there strong railroading/siloed gameloops ?
2. Are the consequences for success and failure meaningfull for the player and do they open multiple compelling followup ?
3. Are the game mechanics at the core of the game crunchy enough (enough complexity for finding fun in their mastery)
For ED :
1. Multiple siloed paths.
2. No.
3. Yes.
Which makes it average.
ED has the additional issue of having a progression system mainly delivering reduced game challenges.
Instead of introducing the tried classic : new tools to master coupled with new challenges to overcome with said tools.*
*that has started to change with wing assassination and thargoids.
Last edited: