If I wanted a 'radio-tuning' game I would have rather bought an old radio.

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
You gotta ask frontier that.. im pretty certain during beta people were asking for mining gear to effect ships.. for fun then self defense. No idea why you can't.

Actually you bring up a really good point. Both mining and exploration changes were done with completely different attitudes. Mining took a live and let live approach and amazingly the feedback earned has been exclusively positive.

Exploration has landed with both insane opposites of not required and force fed at the same time, and there wow there are issues. Not just from the regulars but from dozens of people who have quickly dropped by and left their feedback.

I can't imagine how frontier built 2 systems with such drastically different attitudes (i know they probably didn't care and thats just how it turned out).

Because mining was a basic system they wanted to build upon, and exploration was a placeholder they replaced. Its no rocket science, really. Why not just accept you happened to like the shallowest of placeholders? No shame in that, just a preference.
 
Last edited:
Exploration has changed from 'traveling' to 'astronomy' and while I understand why people like astronomy (I have an astrophysics degree) I'd just like the OPTION to go back to traveling mode.
Errr no.
Mapping is something completely different - but thanks for playing.

[weird]

Those goalposts moved so quickly I assume they had their own FSD....


Frontier have already done what everyone has been suggesting for combat players in the bubble.

Its easy to get sidetracked on words and quotes, but how could you ignore functionality frontier has currently built as part of the fss... but only extended to a chosen player demographic, not all.

If the exploration mechanics functioned as they do in the bubble outside the bubble (not conditionally but in practice) im sure everyone would be happy.

Just in case.. you must see that if you never mapped the fss button and stayed in the bubble, there would be zero impact on your gameplay. You can even take full advantage of every other feature that came with the exploration changes without ever.. turning the fss on. Im pretty sure frontier didn't say "no".

EDIT: I wish frontier were brave enough to fully implement the fss to all players. I've read alot of valid feedback on how awesome it is.. why is there a need to exempt the majority of players from such a great system? People need to be forced to use it as with former explorers!

I don't know if it's even worth replying to such a bad-faith argument, but just in case it isn't the pile of it looks like; the idea behind the FSS is that it's a discovery mechanic, specifically used to discover things. Inside the bubble you don't need it, because those have been 'discovered' already.
People in 'known' space should have to re-discover a location in order to fly there. The fss is gameplay added specifically for people who want to discover locations that no one has ever seen before.
 
Actually you bring up a really good point. Both mining and exploration changes were done with completely different attitudes. Mining took a live and let live approach and amazingly the feedback earned has been exclusively positive.
Exploration has landed with both insane opposites of not required and force fed at the same time, and there wow there are issues. Not just from the regulars but from dozens of people who have quickly dropped by and left their feedback.

I can't imagine how frontier built 2 systems with such drastically different attitudes (i know they probably didn't care and thats just how it turned out).

Because the mining placeholder was only ever for one thing: mining... The discovery scanner was a stand-in for more than one system... route planning/navigation and discovery/exploration. The new system separates those and lets discovery be it's own thing, rather than have it exclusively piggyback on the navigation function. The fss is focused solely on discovery/exploration, while a simple discovery blast is now used for route planning/navigation within known/discovered space.
 
The fss is focused solely on discovery/exploration, while a simple discovery blast is now used for route planning/navigation within known/discovered space.

If you could use the energy pulse for route planning and navigation i personally would not have said one word about the topic (except perhaps for great praise). But you can't. That's the problem.

Try giving the fss a go and see what you make of it then :)

Because mining was a basic system they wanted to build upon, and exploration was a placeholder they replaced. Its no rocket science, really. Why not just accept you happened to like the shallowest of placeholders? No shame in that, just a preference.

Nope. Because all the people who are complaining built themselves a game with what was beyond the placeholder. Holding the trigger for 10 seconds obviously wasn't the point of prior exploration that people grew to love.
 
Last edited:
I can't imagine how frontier built 2 systems with such drastically different attitudes (i know they probably didn't care and thats just how it turned out).

It is as if there were two development groups, (maybe more than two, there were ships to build also) one developing mining, the other developing exploration, and then the two results were brought together into the final update. It probably reveals how FD was working. How else would you keep 100+ developers occupied efficiently except to divide them into task groups?
 
Last edited:
If you could use the energy pulse for route planning and navigation i personally would not have said one word about the topic (except perhaps for great praise). But you can't. That's the problem.

Try giving the fss a go and see what you make of it then :)



Nope. Because all the people who are complaining built themselves a game with what was beyond the placeholder. Holding the trigger for 10 seconds obviously wasn't the point of prior exploration that people grew to love.

What is it that you want to see improved/altered then? I'm genuinely asking here.
Because I get what Riverside and DrewCarnegie are saying; I might not agree with them, but I get what their problems with the current system are.
 
What is it that you want to see improved/altered then? I'm genuinely asking here.
Because I get what Riverside and DrewCarnegie are saying; I might not agree with them, but I get what their problems with the current system are.

From having watched the majority of livestreams my impression is that suggesting stuff to frontier doesn't work. You have to inspire them to own then problem and let them come to a solution that they see fit... that's what they've always ever done, even with the new features (this is fine).

Having said, however it happens, having the option to plot a ship route as an alternative to the fss, or not requiring full discovery before flight if you want to look at it that way, is all that i want to do. Whatever solution frontier (and any people on the forums who need to approve it) find fitting and achieves that is totally fine.

How this worked in prior exploration:

1. Honk pulse.
2. Go to nav panel full of unknowns.
3. Target unknown and fly there.

That's it. The joy comes from looking around while you're going, and when you arrive.
 
Last edited:
I've been having a look through the thread Ian Skippy linked to in post #3042.

It's not a thread I participated in, and it contains only one Dev post. If anyone is interested in looking at the breakdown of contributors & post counts it's currently on page 127 of Dangerous Discussion, it was closed on the 26th October 2018 if anyone wants to find it in the future.



So what we have here is a legitimate concern that FDev acknowledged was a problem and there was an intent during the design phase to retain the system reveal on initial entry (ie full or partial backward compatibility regardless of the discovered state of the player location), but were seemingly unable to (this is summarised by the OP of that thread in an edit at the top of the first post on or before Oct 19th).


Now during beta there were a few tweaks to the way the new discovery process works, those changes remain in the live game right now (currently 3.3.03). Namely:

  • The FSS Scanner became an integrated ship component rather than a separate module. Regardless of the reason for making this change this meant that the previously planned replacement of players ADS/BDS/IDS module with the new FSS module was no longer required.

This change alone did not eliminate any potential incompatibility between the ADS/IDS/BDS and FSS. However a second change did:

  • The discovery process in already tagged systems was changed so that the previous behaviour (targetable but [unexplored] bodies are shown on the HUD and nav panel, and the system map shows all bodies with basic data (identical to what would be provided by an initial ADS honk before the 3.3 update)) was retained.

My proposal is that the ADS module is reinstated into the game, functionally unaltered so that the same behaviour we see in explored systems can be optionally achieved in virgin and partially explored systems. This does not affect the new discovery process, it provides no advantage that is not compensated for by the small mass & power requirements, and it consumes a valuable internal slot (just as it did before).

There is nothing unreasonable in this proposal. It is easy to implement (relative to implementing a new idea from scratch), it introduces no balancing issues with any kind of competitive tagging events (jump range utterly dominates any race to reach & return from a virgin system), there are no downsides to implementing this proposal. It would also provide a significant QoL improvement for existing customers that miss the old style of play, and any player has more agency if they want it.

This is no longer a new game and there are players who have waited a long time for new content. The last thing any player needs is for anything to be removed if it can be avoided, and in this case it can be avoided.






As a final note, have a look at the reason why that other thread was closed, the OP of that thread provides some reasoning in post #977:

I wish people on these forums were capable of reading. If they were, we'd have about 10 pages total.


Originally Posted by Max Factor View Post (Source)
Unfortunately Burke seems to think that everyone wants the old system back apart from a few trolls.

Burke is only speaking for themselves and others who may agree. If you read their posts and come to the conclusion that they think otherwise then the schooling you must have gotten must have been incredibly bad.

Text only lacks nuance sure, but if you used your brain you would realize that even if one doesn't include a disclaimer in their post, that one could assume they aren't trying to speak for everyone.

The only shocking thing in this thread is this forums sheer inability to read. The only words I could use to describe the sheer collective of ignorance are all words that are banned. Honestly speaking I'm probably going to ask the mods to close this thread soon because you people are literally, LITERALLY incapable of reading and understanding the most BASIC of posts.

People have stated OVER AND OVER AND OVER DOZENS OF TIMES and you all insist on making stuff up that nobody said, argued for, or believes.

Not a single one of us believes the "vast majority" of people want the old system back. We don't know what the "vast majority of people want" and NEITHER DO YOU. The only people who claim to know though, are you because you continually claim without any evidence that the vast majority agree with you somehow.

Not A SINGLE ONE OF US dislikes 99% of the changes FD made to exploration. Yet somehow, SOMEHOW you all manage to derail the thread into countless mini detours about things we don't even dislike. Time and time again you people have proven that you don't care for opinions, that you don't care about how other people feel.

Even though it's ONE THING, ONE THING, ONE LITTLE NITPICK OUT OF EVERYTHING ELSE WE LIKE. And you feel the need to rush to the defense of this silent majority, of FD, of this game that apparently only you like, of this mode of playing the game.

The fact is, you're offended that someone was critical of something you like. This is the problem with gaming culture. People are so invested into their products that anything critical is taken not as a criticism of the game, but a personal attack on you. Hell, look at the reviews for red dead redemption 2 where people state things like "if you voluntarily miss out on this game, you're not a real gamer". This is the kind of culture that gaming perpetuates. As a kind of tribal community where an attack on one thing is an attack on all of you. This is a game, a product of consumerism. It is NOT your personal identity and FD does not need you to defend their honor.

Which is why you don't bother reading what people say despite dozens of posts explaining it, which is why you are literally incapable of understanding what people are saying.

How many dozens of times now has someone read my original post and said "The exploration changes are good for the game. Like you don't have to fly all the way to scan a planet" DESPITE ME SPECIFICALLY STATING IN THE OP THAT THIS IS A CHANGE THAT I LIKE.

It is INCREDIBLY rude of people here to continually mislead, derail, and straight up misrepresent everything people like me are saying.

And the ONLY people in this thread who have honestly belittled, attacked, and insulted others is the ones coming into here and not bothering to read or understand us. I've seen so many posts, just directed to me saying I don't actually play this game. That I don't actually explore. That I contribute nothing. That I'm a hater. That my way of playing is WRONG and I'm not a REAL EXPLORER.

And we have 66 pages of this because I was concerned this new system might take longer in one regard.

NOWHERE has anyone said they wouldn't adapt. That they would stop exploring. That they would stop playing the game. But we get told over and over and over THAT WE JUST HAVE TO ADAPT AND GET USED IT.

IT'S NOT AS IF WE HAVEN'T STATED MANY TIMES OVER AND OVER THAT WE WOULD ADAPT.

But why does that matter? Because we dared to be worried about one thing.

ONE THING that FD has stated was a concern for them. That ObsidianAnt and other big explorers stated as a concern.

66 pages because I was worried about one little thing.

Oh and one last thing. If you read this post and get defensive, you're a part of the problem.

People who listened, read the posts, etc. They have the nuance to understand I'm not talking about them and that there is nothing to get upset over. Whereas if you feel defensive, it's because you know I'm talking about you.
 
Last edited:
From having watched the majority of livestreams my impression is that suggesting stuff to frontier doesn't work. You have to inspire them to own then problem and let them come to a solution that they see fit... that's what they've always ever done, even with the new features (this is fine).

Having said, however it happens, having the option to plot a ship route as an alternative to the fss, or not requiring full discovery before flight if you want to look at it that way, is all that i want to do. Whatever solution frontier (and any people on the forums who need to approve it) find fitting and achieves that is totally fine.

How this worked in prior exploration:

1. Honk pulse.
2. Go to nav panel full of unknowns.
3. Target unknown and fly there.

That's it. The joy comes from looking around while you're going, and when you arrive.

And now that flow is a little different.
1. Honk
2. Take a preliminary look around to populate nav panel.
3. Select target that is now named, but otherwise still unknown.
4. Fly there.

Enjoy looking around at stars in the background that look just the same as they did before while you're going, and have a closer look when you arrive, and even map said planet, discovering even more about it than you did before you arrived.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom