<grins> I have a soft spot for Mason and Dixon due to the 1761 transit of Venus. Ever read Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon?
Exploration & What's Missing: A Ranger's Perspective
- Thread starter Amazing Mr. X
- Start date
Explorations first and foremost needs to be fun and interesting. It should also be as scientifically accurate as possible, but first it needs to not be quite so boring.
Adding elliptical orbitss, new objects, and better classification schemes would be nice, but it is window dressing at this point.
The core mechanic of scanning and discovery is just too bare bones. There is no skill or player involvement in scanning or interpreting data. There is barely any danger of any kind. Most people watch TV or listen to audio books while exploring because it is so hands off. I have heard that people have created bots programs to explore because it is so brain dead that an amateur computer AI program can solve it.
Adding elliptical orbitss, new objects, and better classification schemes would be nice, but it is window dressing at this point.
The core mechanic of scanning and discovery is just too bare bones. There is no skill or player involvement in scanning or interpreting data. There is barely any danger of any kind. Most people watch TV or listen to audio books while exploring because it is so hands off. I have heard that people have created bots programs to explore because it is so brain dead that an amateur computer AI program can solve it.
No, but I'm aware of the pair's work. I'll check it out. Didn't they randomly fall out never to speak to each other again?
As others have said, I also disagree with you here. Exploration has been trivialised as it is, let's not make it worse.
I agree with the OP on all accounts. It's why after my first 10,000 LY trip out, I've yet to go again. There needs to be more to exploration, more accuracy, which will lead invariably to more wonder and therefore, more enjoyment. Better gaming
The sheer size of the galaxy is one of the few things that have not yet been dumbed down in E: D for the sake of the MMO quick fix mentality.
Thankfully FD seem to be proud of their galactic model, and are against people short-cutting the need to actually travel from place to place. Hence no in-system jumps or ferry operations AFK.
In the original Elite the max jump range was about 9ly, so even increasing to 35-40 has been a compromise.
If there was a mechanic to be able to jump to almost any point of the galaxy in zero time, then the whole concept of a full size galactic model goes in the dustbin.
Apologies to OP, all this nonsense about easy-galactic-travel-button are off-topic in what started as a very interesting thread.
What's missing? Longevity.
FD made a fatal mistake not implementing the exploration mechanism from the DDF and instead leaving the galaxy wide open. Sag A* done within a week of Beta, full galactic circumnavigations a not infreqent occurence.
For a game with aspirations of being live for 10 years, having these achievements 'done' within a few weeks of release is a travesty.
FD made a fatal mistake not implementing the exploration mechanism from the DDF and instead leaving the galaxy wide open. Sag A* done within a week of Beta, full galactic circumnavigations a not infreqent occurence.
For a game with aspirations of being live for 10 years, having these achievements 'done' within a few weeks of release is a travesty.
Aye, and it's probably safe to say that they weren't the best of friends at any time - but they worked together well. That Pynchon novel I mentioned: obviously, it is a work of fiction, but the background history is accurate. A very good read, once you adjust to the 18th century prose.
Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space. --Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
The reason that people feel so passionate and yet so frustrated about ED is that it is a game with many flaws and gaps, but also truly unique, stunning "wow" features. The sound design, the flight dynamics, and above all the sheer size of the playing field are definitely "wow". ED gives you a proper sense of the mind-boggling vastness of space, partly by how long it takes to travel in-system and how hard it is to jump further afield. And even then I share the opinion that it is too easy to get to Sagittarius A*. So I think that the FSD and jump dynamics are just fine, thanks.
Another thing that is fairly "wow" is the graphical rendering of space. The fact that every star you see is a visitable system in game. The stars with their shimmering surfaces and coronal mass ejections. The planetary rings (which are actually really hard to do! People forget that!). But at the same time it is also unfinished and a lot of graphical features definitely are work in progress. What is possible is demonstrated by Space Engine; a project that has been around longer than ED and obviously has concentrated purely on the PG of space and its graphical rendering so is ahead in that department (it contains some ships but they are purely props). As such it is lush and detailed, with accurate light and shadow, impressive gravitational lensing, auroras, a wide variety of astronomical bodies and planetary surface rendering so detailed you can 'land' on them. It has the whole look absolutely perfect (but stars, interestingly, don't look as good up close as in ED).
Exploration needs more eye candy like that. You need to be able to sit on the mountain range of a moon, watching its ringed gas giant parent loom over the horizon through swirling clouds and a shimmering aurora. That is possible in Space Engine. There also needs to be more variety and as Fantastic Mr. X says, more reasons to go exploring by e.g. spotting threatening asteroids and vagrant planets. Imagine the community goals you could have for the miners/prospectors amongst players: "our intrepid explorers have identified a large asteroid body that is on a collision trajectory with Lave. We need a group effort of miners to blow up/disassemble this asteroid before it enters traffic lanes. We have two weeks. Get cracking, commanders!".
I mentioned before how game play could introduce probes launched from orbit to gather surface scan data. Seismic/geological drill probes could be fired into the surface. Autonomous minisubs could be dropped into seas (and sub-ice seas). Atmosphere analysis balloons could be released in low orbit to gracefully descend into the cloud deck of gas giants and earth-likes. All could send back photos of what they find (screenshot palooza!). Because a ship can carry only a limited complement of these probes, you need to choose your targets carefully, but it also makes detailed exploration more challenging as you have to travel back and forth to civilisation to stock up on more probes.
A later (expensive) game objective for explorers could be to buy and outfit an Explorer edition Anaconda, which has swapped its cargo bay for an automated workshop which can construct its own probes on the fly from materials mined with your own mining laser. You'd be an autonomous flying research facility, with your own lab and workshop. Scoop fuel from stars, mine ores from rings and asteroids, build probes as you fly along and explore.
Level up? Buy autonomous mining units, leave them in orbit around a suitable ring nearby, occasionally come back to collect the ores, build probes, drop them on some other interesting planet, occasionally come back to collect data. This way you can fly back and forth between a cluster of systems you are exploring in parallel.
Level up again, sir? Very well. You are now a terraformer. Either solo or as a community goal effort you drop terraforming units on a suitable planet. You mine surrounding systems --either yourself or by dripping autonomous units-- and scoop fuel and occasionally drop fuel and ore pods down to your terraforming units to supply them with the resources they need to keep going. This is a long-term game objective: terraforming will take years, although of course there will be small exciting wins all along the way.
What wins? Why, more level ups! You are now a bio-collector: discover earth-likes with suitable life on them; collect samples, examine whether they have the right properties needed/prescribed by your terraforming project ("Terraforming Unit AZ125 reports the need for bacterial life that can convert methane to CO2 at 50% efficiency. Operating parameters are: sea environment, 1 to 25 bar pressure -10 to 50°C temperature. Find bacteria that fit these parameters. Good luck, commander!"). So off you go, finding water worlds with the right surface pressure and temperature and an atmosphere rich in methane and CO2...
That's what exploring can be like in the Elite Dangerous universe. Pew-pew is nice and all, but this should also be a game that strongly appeals to scientists and would-be scientists.
The reason that people feel so passionate and yet so frustrated about ED is that it is a game with many flaws and gaps, but also truly unique, stunning "wow" features. The sound design, the flight dynamics, and above all the sheer size of the playing field are definitely "wow". ED gives you a proper sense of the mind-boggling vastness of space, partly by how long it takes to travel in-system and how hard it is to jump further afield. And even then I share the opinion that it is too easy to get to Sagittarius A*. So I think that the FSD and jump dynamics are just fine, thanks.
Another thing that is fairly "wow" is the graphical rendering of space. The fact that every star you see is a visitable system in game. The stars with their shimmering surfaces and coronal mass ejections. The planetary rings (which are actually really hard to do! People forget that!). But at the same time it is also unfinished and a lot of graphical features definitely are work in progress. What is possible is demonstrated by Space Engine; a project that has been around longer than ED and obviously has concentrated purely on the PG of space and its graphical rendering so is ahead in that department (it contains some ships but they are purely props). As such it is lush and detailed, with accurate light and shadow, impressive gravitational lensing, auroras, a wide variety of astronomical bodies and planetary surface rendering so detailed you can 'land' on them. It has the whole look absolutely perfect (but stars, interestingly, don't look as good up close as in ED).
Exploration needs more eye candy like that. You need to be able to sit on the mountain range of a moon, watching its ringed gas giant parent loom over the horizon through swirling clouds and a shimmering aurora. That is possible in Space Engine. There also needs to be more variety and as Fantastic Mr. X says, more reasons to go exploring by e.g. spotting threatening asteroids and vagrant planets. Imagine the community goals you could have for the miners/prospectors amongst players: "our intrepid explorers have identified a large asteroid body that is on a collision trajectory with Lave. We need a group effort of miners to blow up/disassemble this asteroid before it enters traffic lanes. We have two weeks. Get cracking, commanders!".
I mentioned before how game play could introduce probes launched from orbit to gather surface scan data. Seismic/geological drill probes could be fired into the surface. Autonomous minisubs could be dropped into seas (and sub-ice seas). Atmosphere analysis balloons could be released in low orbit to gracefully descend into the cloud deck of gas giants and earth-likes. All could send back photos of what they find (screenshot palooza!). Because a ship can carry only a limited complement of these probes, you need to choose your targets carefully, but it also makes detailed exploration more challenging as you have to travel back and forth to civilisation to stock up on more probes.
A later (expensive) game objective for explorers could be to buy and outfit an Explorer edition Anaconda, which has swapped its cargo bay for an automated workshop which can construct its own probes on the fly from materials mined with your own mining laser. You'd be an autonomous flying research facility, with your own lab and workshop. Scoop fuel from stars, mine ores from rings and asteroids, build probes as you fly along and explore.
Level up? Buy autonomous mining units, leave them in orbit around a suitable ring nearby, occasionally come back to collect the ores, build probes, drop them on some other interesting planet, occasionally come back to collect data. This way you can fly back and forth between a cluster of systems you are exploring in parallel.
Level up again, sir? Very well. You are now a terraformer. Either solo or as a community goal effort you drop terraforming units on a suitable planet. You mine surrounding systems --either yourself or by dripping autonomous units-- and scoop fuel and occasionally drop fuel and ore pods down to your terraforming units to supply them with the resources they need to keep going. This is a long-term game objective: terraforming will take years, although of course there will be small exciting wins all along the way.
What wins? Why, more level ups! You are now a bio-collector: discover earth-likes with suitable life on them; collect samples, examine whether they have the right properties needed/prescribed by your terraforming project ("Terraforming Unit AZ125 reports the need for bacterial life that can convert methane to CO2 at 50% efficiency. Operating parameters are: sea environment, 1 to 25 bar pressure -10 to 50°C temperature. Find bacteria that fit these parameters. Good luck, commander!"). So off you go, finding water worlds with the right surface pressure and temperature and an atmosphere rich in methane and CO2...
That's what exploring can be like in the Elite Dangerous universe. Pew-pew is nice and all, but this should also be a game that strongly appeals to scientists and would-be scientists.