Give us freedom, the same as EvE. Consigne the universe to the players, FD

[Ideas Man]

32 player instances to hold players in one system is pretty dull compared to having five thousand systems with players all at once.

I still remember the day when I realised the whole game was a series of loading screens dressed up as wooshy space travel that join up little pockets of places you can do stuff in and I remember thinking 'well, that sucks'

Then I remember seeing:

There will not be loading screens in Elite

And I remember thinking 'wow that's a crazy lie right there'

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I was watchign it myself. Where is the station building? or the skeltons? or the proper asssination missions? famines? aid coming in simulation? contract?? what am i even watching here.

You are watching a salesman pitch pie in the sky to potential backers

 

[Asp Explorer]

You're going to struggle getting that firmware I'd think in this day and age.

Not really - back in the day - I helped write it

Alas, those days are gone now, and in the past they must remain.

 

[Ideas Man]

Not really - back in the day - I helped write it

Alas, those days are gone now, and in the past they must remain.

Don't go saying that things from the past belong in the past on these forums man, it's not worth it.
See whut I did thar?

 

[Asp Explorer]

Don't go saying that things from the past belong in the past on these forums man, it's not worth it.
See whut I did thar?

WHAT? You've never seen this? http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=7E4EFA5B3A9AA4786C627E4EFA5B3A9AA4786C62

 

[Darkwolf]

32 player instances to hold players in one system is pretty dull compared to having five thousand systems with players all at once.

Have you ever _been_ in a major battle in EVE? Ever played under TiDi? It's _way_ duller than "only" having 32 players in a single instance of a system.

Frankly, I prefer the concept of having player counts in a single area limited and instanced. It discourages the mass zergfests that happen in large scale battles in EVE, which brings with it ridiculous lag. How'd you like the idea of having your lasers only fire once every few minutes?

That's TiDi for you. Don't believe the marketing blurb about EVE battles. They don't work in any seriously engaging manner beyond up to about 60ish players or so. It's all lag and delays beyond that.

 

[ChrisUK27]

I keep seeing this one come up again and again. It's bunk.

Elite has 400 billion stars, however the populated region of space is MUCH more constrained. You know, the region that actually has NPCs, stations, places to dock, refit, and engage in content besides just scanning? Also the region you get sent back to if you lose your ship?

Populated space is only about a 200ly radius slice. Couldn't give you an exact star count, but it's orders of magnitude less than 400 billion. The galaxy might be big, but the playable area isn't.

The playable area IS 400 Billion systems and that's the point of this thread.

A player owned outpost could be on the edge of populated space if not deep in the galaxy. So if a group want to make one and run it (It's going to be small scale, not an Orbis) why not? To another poster who asked why would they want to? Well there's groups of players who would love this sort of thing - each to their own. All these are ideas for the future not next week. ED has plenty of other fundamental issues to sort out first.

And no, players would not need to be at it 24/7 - Automation and hired NPC's cover the menial tasks. Which by the way already happens right now in ED. Unless you get out and fix your own ship, re-arm it, paint it, refuel it, load it with cargo etc?... Thought so.

 

[Ideas Man]

Have you ever _been_ in a major battle in EVE? Ever played under TiDi? It's _way_ duller than "only" having 32 players in a single instance of a system.

Frankly, I prefer the concept of having player counts in a single area limited and instanced. It discourages the mass zergfests that happen in large scale battles in EVE, which brings with it ridiculous lag. How'd you like the idea of having your lasers only fire once every few minutes?

That's TiDi for you. Don't believe the marketing blurb about EVE battles. They don't work in any seriously engaging manner beyond up to about 60ish players or so. It's all lag and delays beyond that.

That's just one example though, plenty of other games handle it fine.
Texan is also talking about having them spread out over five thousand systems, not all squished together.
But the P2P nature of Elite limits things as it stands apparently (lol) so there you have it.

 

[Darkwolf]

That's just one example though, plenty of other games handle it fine.
Texan is also talking about having them spread out over five thousand systems, not all squished together.

They won't be spread out. Not uniformly, even in the slightest. Look at EVE again. There's a lot of systems, but you'll notice if you examine the population map that they are largely concentrated.

Here's a map; https://thethirdn.wordpress.com/2014/06/30/population-density-in-eve/

Admittedly this is a little old. I'd go and grab a chart myself, but my account is cancelled at the moment. Anyway, you can clearly see there that in spite of there being quite a lot of systems to explore and set up in, populations are concentrated in a few key areas.

You will also notice that during any kind of significant engagement, population density deviates by a LARGE amount. So all those people who are, in this ideal world, evenly distributed throughout the game world tend to congregate together when there's something of note going on.

This has been clearly visible in Elite with the Beta Sculptoris frenzy - something's happening of note, so everyone congregates there.

Guess what I'm saying is, players aren't a gas. They don't evenly disperse to fill the available space. Instead they tend to stick to each other and aggregate around notable objects. Like mud.

 

[TheSpaceTexan]

Have you ever _been_ in a major battle in EVE? Ever played under TiDi? It's _way_ duller than "only" having 32 players in a single instance of a system.

Frankly, I prefer the concept of having player counts in a single area limited and instanced. It discourages the mass zergfests that happen in large scale battles in EVE, which brings with it ridiculous lag. How'd you like the idea of having your lasers only fire once every few minutes?

That's TiDi for you. Don't believe the marketing blurb about EVE battles. They don't work in any seriously engaging manner beyond up to about 60ish players or so. It's all lag and delays beyond that.

Yes, I have _been_ in one of the major battles in EVE. It handled _way_ better than I thought it would. The surprising amount of coordination and chaos is really _appealing_ to the eye.

Personally, I stand on the side of, give players more incentives to play and coordinate and reward them as such. Limiting players to only playing with just a measly 32 players in a given system is just not going to quite cut it.
Hell, as much as I dislike SOE for their screw-ups at least they figured out how players flow and move towards any given fight in a lattice links in any continent; and boy, let me tell you about how massive those fights got, imagine how amazing this would be within this universe.

edit: Look at that chart again, you'll notice players ARE like gas dispersing in EVE. Some players are going to go explore, others find trade systems that pays the bill, some will find regions of space with purely combat. Hell, you might find a system with all three somewhere out in the known habitable systems or outside (thargoids).

And quite frankly, we are literally all ants looking for a bit of sugar to bring back home.

 

[Ideas Man]

They won't be spread out. Not uniformly, even in the slightest. Look at EVE again. There's a lot of systems, but you'll notice if you examine the population map that they are largely concentrated.

Here's a map; https://thethirdn.wordpress.com/2014/06/30/population-density-in-eve/

Admittedly this is a little old. I'd go and grab a chart myself, but my account is cancelled at the moment. Anyway, you can clearly see there that in spite of there being quite a lot of systems to explore and set up in, populations are concentrated in a few key areas.

You will also notice that during any kind of significant engagement, population density deviates by a LARGE amount. So all those people who are, in this ideal world, evenly distributed throughout the game world tend to congregate together when there's something of note going on.

This has been clearly visible in Elite with the Beta Sculptoris frenzy - something's happening of note, so everyone congregates there.

Guess what I'm saying is, players aren't a gas. They don't evenly disperse to fill the available space. Instead they tend to stick to each other and aggregate around notable objects. Like mud.

Good points!

Edit: Just read Texans reply and now I think yours are bad points, boo hisssss!!!

 

[TheSpaceTexan]

Also how could you forget about this with your chart.
http://evenews24.com/verite-renditions-sov-map/
Mind some of the profanity, but that's systems owned by no one, the players AND zones owned by CONCORD (The game's police force baaabbby)

So, in short, the point I'm making is that there are loads of lessons to be learned from games like EVE and the latter, which would easily contribute to the multiplayer aspect this game kinda needs.

 

[Ideas Man]

Also how could you forget about this with your chart.
http://evenews24.com/verite-renditions-sov-map/
Mind some of the profanity, but that's systems owned by no one, the players AND zones owned by CONCORD (The game's police force baaabbby)

So, in short, the point I'm making is that there are loads of lessons to be learned from games like EVE and the latter, which would easily contribute to the multiplayer aspect this game kinda needs.

Please don't mention Eve on these forums thank you

 

[TheSpaceTexan]

Please don't mention Eve on these forums thank you

Making a point here son.

 

[Goilveig]

I'd also be in the 'no, thank you' camp. Not because I hate EVE (although I wouldn't rate it among my favorite MMOs), but because it's just not the point of what the Elite series is all about. It's not about large groups of people banding together and reshaping the world, it's about one guy/gal trying to survive and thrive in a dangerous universe.

It would be like taking the next Grand Theft Auto and adding city-building mechanics a la Sim City. There's nothing wrong with city building games, of course, but it's fundamentally not what the GTA series is all about.

 

[Ideas Man]

Making a point here son.

Ok as you were then

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I'd also be in the 'no, thank you' camp. Not because I hate EVE (although I wouldn't rate it among my favorite MMOs), but because it's just not the point of what the Elite series is all about. It's not about large groups of people banding together and reshaping the world, it's about one guy/gal trying to survive and thrive in a dangerous universe.

It would be like taking the next Grand Theft Auto and adding city-building mechanics a la Sim City. There's nothing wrong with city building games, of course, but it's fundamentally not what the GTA series is all about.

I don't think people want to load up Elite and there is the Eve loading screen with 'Eve Online' scribbled out in paint and 'Elite Dangerous' scrawled underneath it, they just want a sprinkling of the features they enjoyed blended into ED and I think that could be doable.

Like, scripted crime events from GTA in Sim City could be fun, using your example there

 

[Darkwolf]

Also how could you forget about this with your chart.
http://evenews24.com/verite-renditions-sov-map/
Mind some of the profanity, but that's systems owned by no one, the players AND zones owned by CONCORD (The game's police force baaabbby)

So, in short, the point I'm making is that there are loads of lessons to be learned from games like EVE and the latter, which would easily contribute to the multiplayer aspect this game kinda needs.

I "forgot" it because it wasn't relevant to the point at hand (ie, player distribution). Sov maps don't show player distribution whatsoever since the majority of those "owned" systems aren't even populated. However, woe be unto you if you're a smaller entity and try and take away one of those systems that aren't even in use by the owners.

This is a serious problem in EVE, and something that CCP has been working to put a stop to - people stopping others from being able to capture and use territory that they aren't using at all. That map is a fantastic example of just why player-run sovereignty is not a good thing.

 

[TheSpaceTexan]

I "forgot" it because it wasn't relevant to the point at hand (ie, player distribution). Sov maps don't show player distribution whatsoever since the majority of those "owned" systems aren't even populated. However, woe be unto you if you're a smaller entity and try and take away one of those systems that aren't even in use by the owners.

This is a serious problem in EVE, and something that CCP has been working to put a stop to - people stopping others from being able to capture and use territory that they aren't using at all. That map is a fantastic example of just why player-run sovereignty is not a good thing.

Their problem is that they have a finite amount of stars available to give to players, which is why that's a problem.
However, this game does not have that problem, hell, everyone would be able to own their own system in theory.

 

[Ideas Man]

Their problem is that they have a finite amount of stars available to give to players, which is why that's a problem.
However, this game does not have that problem, hell, everyone would be able to own their own system in theory.

I just did some quick maths and there are enough stars in game for like everyone on Earth to have 10 of them or something ridiculous.

 

[Ghostickles]

I'd also be in the 'no, thank you' camp. Not because I hate EVE (although I wouldn't rate it among my favorite MMOs), but because it's just not the point of what the Elite series is all about. It's not about large groups of people banding together and reshaping the world, it's about one guy/gal trying to survive and thrive in a dangerous universe.

It would be like taking the next Grand Theft Auto and adding city-building mechanics a la Sim City. There's nothing wrong with city building games, of course, but it's fundamentally not what the GTA series is all about.

I had to smack my head on the desk, GTAV has a map editor, so you can build in it, although not houses, and Elite has been a singleplayer franchise until NOW so of course it never had group content. WTFBBQ

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I just did some quick maths and there are enough stars in game for like everyone on Earth to have 10 of them or something ridiculous.

They are all mine, get back. Stop looking at them, don't think I wont. I will.

 

[Herik]

Here's a question, what does everyione think of these planned features:



I am in two minds about some, why would I be chasing dinosaurs again? lol Some of it sounds way more out there than having guilds!

Those features sound fine; and hunting dinosaurs?...Why not; it's content and would be fun. Other things? A huge quest; Finding alien ruins, either above water level or below. Perhaps just a trace, (a settlement); indicating a path of alien visitation based on previous discoveries in other systems. This of course entails following their path; perhaps never finding 'the ancient ones'; but finding select bits of their technology, and/or discovering the wrecked remains of their expedition after a long old fierce battle with the 'Thargoids'...

Great stuff!