Content & Gameplay = The stuff I want to see in game. Since I am always right and the most important person in the world, everything that I don't like is a waste of time. If you disagree with my opinion you are a fanboy. Stop being a FDEV apologist, you have no right to like a game that isn't designed by me. If they don't do it my way, the game will die soon.
Please define "content" and "gameplay"
- Thread starter Junky Juke
- Start date
Hard to describe this gameplay and content milarky. You do a good stab at describing what you do not consider gameplay in a feautre and mechanics list.
I'll nick the list and do the same!
Powerplay: An attempt to give some end game. Needs too much committment of time and limits play area (need to review this 2.2.3 onwards). I am interested how/why the positons have changed so much over the last couple of cycles, it was looking static.
Gazillion Systems: Well exploring is not for me, but some people get a kick out of going to places no-one has gone before (a recent expidition). I tend to explore in the bubble and out to Pleiades. Many explorers want more content and gameplay, and actually what they mean by this has come up in those threads, as the terms were being used interchangeably with mechanics.
Piracy: NPC Piracy can be very lucrative (it is what the covoy USS are for),it is not PvP only. PvE is useful to drive state changes in BGS.
Bounty Hunting: I personally find Bounty Hunting quite dull! Did BH and CZ to death first time round getting to Elite. Tools for an objective for me now, fun in short bursts.
PvP: My PvP tends to be me high waking. It looks like fun from the videos. I think the game mechanics do not encourage adhoc PvP very well, so I would put this down as an area where FD should create more content. By the way PvP can include racing, it is not just pew-pew.
Stock Trading: Agreed. I did to death in Beta + Gamma, and Beta , means to an end for me now. Outbreak and Famine do brings some depth compared to 2.1 and earlier. I cannot remember the final DDF proposal, bow to your better knowledge.
Mssion Running: Agreed about early gameplay. Use them for influence, rep and ranking as much as money. Much better now than 1.x, always room for improvement. Multi-crew mssions obvious. Have not found the need to relog, stacking is fairly easy to find by state on galaxy map.
Roleplaying: Clearly you have never tried to roleplay Tetris this is hyperbole. I agree you can approach the game mechanically min/max this module, take these missions with these commodities to Y to force a conflict (which is quite deep), or imagine your character.
Character Creator: Clearly you have not tried roleplaying ED either, as everytinhg you describe is content someone roleplaying would use not gameplay for min/maxers.
Multi-crew: Totally agree. It is new gameplay though however cut down.
Wings: Well I seldom have instance problems (except canisters!) co-op missions would be great.
BGS: Get me entertained with a small group of players for 9 months. Gives all the other mechanics some meaning, not to hard so not incomprehensable - badly documented to be sure. In terms of gameplay- tying mechanics together this is EDs best kept secret.
Outfitting: Ship customisation is good. Multi-role are a little overpowered to trading ships (combat ships were improved in 2.2.3) but well implemented ship customisation mechanics. I have sat there at lunch planning my next upgrade online tools.
Aliens: You forgot the slow burn of UA and Meta-alloys, suggesting 2 aleins. You forgot the (albeit bugged) interaction on the ruins to discover information about the Guardians. Not sure investigation mystery are for you. I'll let you know when you cna shoot it.
Planetary Landings: Well I like scn missions and base assaults, thought they would be up your street - big ones fun in a wing as well. Thought that would be upp your street. More content always welcome though.
Communications: "The chat window is not gameplay". Tell that to a PvP Pirate, only thing seperating them from a griefer in many people's eyes.
Flight Model: Well I would have preferred full Newtonian like FFE/FE2 but its OK for me as well. Skill based - particularly use of FA-off so actually lasts a long time.
Camera: Not gameplay. Not gameplay. So what is it then? I would call it a content creator, as I would not call it content either.
Rapre Goods Trade: Yep see TRading.
Smuggling: Bring back heat - totally agree with you.
Mining: Totally agree with you. Differnet pace, and getting your stuff back to sell can be hairy in my limited experience.
Puzzles: So not for you then fair enough, at least you did not dismiss it like aliens.
VR: Not got VR cannot comment. Those that have it seme to think it makes the game more enjoyable so we will put it down as content then?
Storyline: They are Slow, 5 months to find out what happeneed to Smeaton, I am still not sure why.
News: Local News is good, helps you find those places to stack without you know relogging. I think thr auto-galnet have surved their purpose, the bubble is too big for top 10 approach.
Simon
Ok guys, thank you for the input. I was so nice reading all your posts this morning and a lot of thoughts came to my mind. Of course as someone already suspected I have my own idea of content and gameplay and how it relates to ED. The point of my post was to understand if it coincides with yours. And now it's time to reveal my intent.
Content and Gameplay are "absolute" words in todays videogames vocaulary. Infact, a part from some out of topic posts, the majority of you expressed the same concepts with different words. We all agree on the nature of content and gameplay.
But there is a problem here: the way the game handles "persistent" content and "procedural" content, plus "how" the engine handles them and allows the users to interact with them (gameplay) will often generate tedium in those players whom are used to play videogames on tracks and it will generate satisfaction in those players whom appreciate freedom of action. When some of you say that many aspects of Elite are still barebones, you are true. But it is necessary. Because scripted NPC's battles would put combat on tracks, generating tedium and predictability. Just like non scripted combat generates tedium and predictability because of simplicity.
How Frontier is going to handle all of this is up to them. The modern informatics is still very far away from the perfect AI, infact it is still barebones. And nor me nor you will be able to solve the puzzle. Infact we are not the developers, but the users.
Scripted events are the best way to overcome the problem, but also the worst tool for a game like Elite that pretends to have infinite replayability. So we should hold our tongues when we criticize the boring combat of Elite. Just imagine if all the combat related missions were pre-scripted by the devs, say 10-20 templates. They would generate boredom in the long run just like the actual combat missions do!
That said I agree that other non RNG related aspects of Elite need more work and depth just like exploration. I did a lot of exploration in two years. I've been two times in a row at Colonia recently and I can state that the exploration is the next big thing for Fdevs. We have been put in a huge galaxy with a bare torch in out hands. DB said that he is very attracted by science. Ok, time to focus on this aspect of the game and give us sphisticated tools to explore the galaxy. But then we will discover that the actual galaxy totally lacks of "content" and details.
And here it comes a new puzzle. The procedurally generated galaxy. Again modern informatics is still very far away from complexity. We still don't have enough powerfull algorithms and machines to simulate the diversity of nature. Also mankind is still confined to our solar system. So how can we simulate credible alien life? How can we generate an entire planet capable to host life? And let's say we want to procedurally generate a sci-fi version of alien worlds, how is cobra engine and our own computers going to handle a 1:1 scale detailed world?
Again how Frontier is going to solve the dilemma is up to them.
Fact is that we are still in a primitive form of galaxy wide space adventure game and still Fdevs are doing an impressive job. There are collateral aspects that are being worked on, because they have the technology to do it, but please do not ask for the moon.
In conclusion. Content and gameplay are here, under our noses. The quality is good and sometimes excellent. And that's why we keep firing up the game every day, keeping an eye on the forums and newsletters. We all hope that some day in the near future the Einsteins from Frontier will solve the big puzzle and be able to simulate a living and swarming galaxy featuring biodiversity, geological richness, challenging and unpredictable artificial intelligence and accomplish the dream. By now I'll just wait for my today's free time to play ED.
JJ
Content and Gameplay are "absolute" words in todays videogames vocaulary. Infact, a part from some out of topic posts, the majority of you expressed the same concepts with different words. We all agree on the nature of content and gameplay.
But there is a problem here: the way the game handles "persistent" content and "procedural" content, plus "how" the engine handles them and allows the users to interact with them (gameplay) will often generate tedium in those players whom are used to play videogames on tracks and it will generate satisfaction in those players whom appreciate freedom of action. When some of you say that many aspects of Elite are still barebones, you are true. But it is necessary. Because scripted NPC's battles would put combat on tracks, generating tedium and predictability. Just like non scripted combat generates tedium and predictability because of simplicity.
How Frontier is going to handle all of this is up to them. The modern informatics is still very far away from the perfect AI, infact it is still barebones. And nor me nor you will be able to solve the puzzle. Infact we are not the developers, but the users.
Scripted events are the best way to overcome the problem, but also the worst tool for a game like Elite that pretends to have infinite replayability. So we should hold our tongues when we criticize the boring combat of Elite. Just imagine if all the combat related missions were pre-scripted by the devs, say 10-20 templates. They would generate boredom in the long run just like the actual combat missions do!
That said I agree that other non RNG related aspects of Elite need more work and depth just like exploration. I did a lot of exploration in two years. I've been two times in a row at Colonia recently and I can state that the exploration is the next big thing for Fdevs. We have been put in a huge galaxy with a bare torch in out hands. DB said that he is very attracted by science. Ok, time to focus on this aspect of the game and give us sphisticated tools to explore the galaxy. But then we will discover that the actual galaxy totally lacks of "content" and details.
And here it comes a new puzzle. The procedurally generated galaxy. Again modern informatics is still very far away from complexity. We still don't have enough powerfull algorithms and machines to simulate the diversity of nature. Also mankind is still confined to our solar system. So how can we simulate credible alien life? How can we generate an entire planet capable to host life? And let's say we want to procedurally generate a sci-fi version of alien worlds, how is cobra engine and our own computers going to handle a 1:1 scale detailed world?
Again how Frontier is going to solve the dilemma is up to them.
Fact is that we are still in a primitive form of galaxy wide space adventure game and still Fdevs are doing an impressive job. There are collateral aspects that are being worked on, because they have the technology to do it, but please do not ask for the moon.
In conclusion. Content and gameplay are here, under our noses. The quality is good and sometimes excellent. And that's why we keep firing up the game every day, keeping an eye on the forums and newsletters. We all hope that some day in the near future the Einsteins from Frontier will solve the big puzzle and be able to simulate a living and swarming galaxy featuring biodiversity, geological richness, challenging and unpredictable artificial intelligence and accomplish the dream. By now I'll just wait for my today's free time to play ED.
JJ
Thank you for posting this. I made sure to read it before posting here because I would undoubtedly have used the word "gameplay" without realising how useless it is.
I think in the context of ED, people are generally happy with the amount of content - there is plenty of stuff in the game: a variety of different ships with different abilities, plentiful outfitting options, trillions of planets to land or look at, the new features like multi-crew, camera suite, avatar creation, crafting options, the SRV and on, and on, and on. There's a hell of a lot in this game.
I think what people struggle with most are depth, loops and ways to interact with the content. Ships are fine for interaction - we have outfitting, scanning, shooting, pirating, ramming, customisation options for our own ships out the wazoo - paint jobs, decals, ship kits, degradation, modules, power management etc... But interaction with the world is limited. For example, you find something on a planet surface, like an occupied escape pod; your options are, 1) Pick it up and sell it on the black market, or 2) Destroy it. Extra interaction would be, say, scanning it with the SRV scanner and receiving a procedural set of data from it - Name, Age, Vital Signs, System of Origin, Name of Ship etc... Then you could pick it up and take it to the specified system where you wouldn't sell it on the black market, but turn it in at the mission board for maybe a bigger reward and some story text - maybe the family saying thank you for returning their son/daughter or whatever. Or you could sell it on the black market and receive flavour text saying [Insert Name Here] will make a fine Imperial slave, or a fine meat specimen or something.
Another example of deeper interaction would be receiving ship logs when scanning black boxes, rather than just turning them in, which would trigger a mission to affect retribution by destroying the attacking ship, which in turn would give extra rep with the mission giving faction.
Still another more exploration focused example would be not just shooting off the fungal growths from the brain trees, or the crystalline structures from geysers, but scanning or harvesting the trees themselves or the fungus or the crystals for deeper analysis - maybe your ship analysing it makes it easier for your sensors to detect more on other planets, or you learn what they're made of and how they came to be where they are... Dare I say harvesting to plant more elsewhere by finding the planet that matches the right conditions for growth?
Things like that, that go beyond simply picking up and shooting and scanning. Make the scanning and picking up mean something more than credit rewards; make the shooting the last resort option.
So I think when people talk about content, they mean gameplay, and when they say gameplay, they mean ways to interact with the world around them.
All is said ! Thanks for the link
Content - Things to do in a game. The more varied and unique the things to do, the greater the value of the content. So 100 missions to deliver data is really one piece of content. In ED, there is a lot of content, including the major professions, the varied mission types, Engineers, Powers, CGs, the collection game for engineers and of course the universe itself. Because the content in ED is there to be found and not shoved in your face with a breadcrumb quest advertised by a giant ! shining in your face, a lot of people think there is less to do than there is.
Gameplay - This is how it feels to play the game, and how easy it is to do stuff. This is also linked to the rewards, as humans like to get a food pellet when they press the right button. There is a fine tuning process around gameplay, so that we don't get all the food when we press the button once, and also so that we haven't starved before we get our first pellet. The tuning changes as the game matures, and people forget or don't realise how important this tuning is for the community and especially for new players. In raw terms, the quality of gameplay can only really be measured by game sales and player volumes. FD are the only entity with accurate figures on those stats, so will have an idea how they are doing. I know they read these forums, but I would guess only a tiny percentage of players post here, so what feels like "the whole community" when looking here, really isn't.
So, If a player is enjoying the content and gameplay, they should keep playing. If not, they should stop. As the game is not subscription based, they can dip in again in the future at no risk. Suggesting stuff on these forums is valuable, but expecting anything to change purely because CMDR Toddler is stamping his/her foot is unrealistic.
Gameplay - This is how it feels to play the game, and how easy it is to do stuff. This is also linked to the rewards, as humans like to get a food pellet when they press the right button. There is a fine tuning process around gameplay, so that we don't get all the food when we press the button once, and also so that we haven't starved before we get our first pellet. The tuning changes as the game matures, and people forget or don't realise how important this tuning is for the community and especially for new players. In raw terms, the quality of gameplay can only really be measured by game sales and player volumes. FD are the only entity with accurate figures on those stats, so will have an idea how they are doing. I know they read these forums, but I would guess only a tiny percentage of players post here, so what feels like "the whole community" when looking here, really isn't.
So, If a player is enjoying the content and gameplay, they should keep playing. If not, they should stop. As the game is not subscription based, they can dip in again in the future at no risk. Suggesting stuff on these forums is valuable, but expecting anything to change purely because CMDR Toddler is stamping his/her foot is unrealistic.
Gameplay relates to the part of game where you are interacting with the game, playing, making decisions etc.
A complaint about ED is that supercruise is still more of a "cutscene" than gameplay. Also things like "exploration" are very immersive but lack in gameplay, whilst combat has gameplay but lacks immersion.
Content is a very awkward topic in a game with procedural generation.
A complaint about ED is that supercruise is still more of a "cutscene" than gameplay. Also things like "exploration" are very immersive but lack in gameplay, whilst combat has gameplay but lacks immersion.
Content is a very awkward topic in a game with procedural generation.
I would call that playability. It seems that gameplay is a wider concept.
Yeah, its so wide its probably not even a concept. Like "potential", or "immersion" or "fidelity".
We all have different look on things what we would like to have in game, thats why suggestion section is good thing and we will need to rely on devs to decide.
Fact is game is still in development with new mehanics on the way, and those game mehanics will give it's needed depth. If devs think otherwise they would just add new ships and skins instead core game mehanics.
We must realise and take in considiration scale of the game and that game rely on procedural generation so only way to add it depth is those mehanics.
Loading screens is something that can't be avoided with current tech and i'm fine with them.
For me gameplay and content are game mehanics like landing and complexity to land on atmo planets, legs, flight model and obstacles they will carry. And they will demand from player more actions and risk to do, result is depth.
Atmo planets will give new places to explore, new tools will give new things to do, legs will give new kind of interaction with game.....hopefully all those things are on the way and will enable us more complex and deeper missions. It will still be repetitive but that's the way it is and can't be avoided.
That is what gameplay and content means for me.
Fact is game is still in development with new mehanics on the way, and those game mehanics will give it's needed depth. If devs think otherwise they would just add new ships and skins instead core game mehanics.
We must realise and take in considiration scale of the game and that game rely on procedural generation so only way to add it depth is those mehanics.
Loading screens is something that can't be avoided with current tech and i'm fine with them.
For me gameplay and content are game mehanics like landing and complexity to land on atmo planets, legs, flight model and obstacles they will carry. And they will demand from player more actions and risk to do, result is depth.
Atmo planets will give new places to explore, new tools will give new things to do, legs will give new kind of interaction with game.....hopefully all those things are on the way and will enable us more complex and deeper missions. It will still be repetitive but that's the way it is and can't be avoided.
That is what gameplay and content means for me.
Because people hope for a positive change.
Because some people have issues stopping to play a game with a specific amount of time invested.
look here http://astats.astats.nl/astats/Steam_Game_Info.php?AppID=359320
thats the average playtime of those who own the game via steam, even if not all paly via steam, its a valid sample of nearly 10k people. and if you know there are people with 1k+ hours then you can easily estimate how many people stopped early, Elite isn't out only a few month, which makes those averages not very good considering the scale the game is baed on.
Now when youw ant to analyse the issues people have with the game, the steam reviews are a good source. All you need to do is filter out the nonsense hater non informational reviews. And then see how many similar issues appear regulary. Becaue people who look into reviews often want to see the issues a game has.
And for elite it comes up with 3 categories:
The boring repetitive gameplay we often enough also talked here in the forum.
The controls and Tutorial. Most PC gamers use a M + KB and elite was a pain to get into the controls. The default choices are basicalyl the worst I have EVER experienced in a space sim. And the tutorial does not help to get into them. So you have to sit down there with they control settings and going through this superlong list of stuff which even there isn't explained well. I guess n one at the devs ever played the game with M+KB, otherwise the default key setup would have never been chosen like it was. So I spent the first two hours reconfigurating a lot in the controls. And i had gladly someone to help me explain a few features as the game also lakcs this. this feedback comes mostly form people with around and less than 1hour of gameplay, so basically people who gave up due to this. and I cna understand them, Elite is very much more complictaed in it's controls than it would have to be.
mechanical bugs (so no hardware related ones)
these 3 things are repetitively appearing issues creating negative feedback on steam, and so they are things the devs should care about. At least if you want to make a great game.
To me, it all come down to this :
Some people will open a book, read the story, picture the characters, feel something about what is happening.
Some other people will open a book, see words, sentences, and paragraphs and grind through them to the end.
The firsts will dream about the universe they discovered, imagine other stories, prequels, epilogues, will try to understand and discuss about hinted side-stories or even write fan-fictions.
The latters will close the book and feel it was a waste of time because in the end, they did not gain anything usable or tangible.
Every sandbox is as deep as you make it be.
While some are grinding rep for their corvette, some others are supporting the federation because they feel linked to their principles, or because they feel attached to Sol's faction. While some are stacking massacre missions, some others are fighting for the ideal of communism in their home system. While some are just click "Accept" on an assassination mission, some others are hunting this scum of a deserter who gave up on their cause... And I could go on.
Saying E
is shallow and repetitive is like saying pen and papers RPGs are dumb because it all come down to this : throw dice, add skill value, check results... rinse and repeat.
TL;DR : While some people are grinding numbers (and are bound to eventually feel some shallowness), some others are trying to write a story in a neverending interactive fiction.
Some people will open a book, read the story, picture the characters, feel something about what is happening.
Some other people will open a book, see words, sentences, and paragraphs and grind through them to the end.
The firsts will dream about the universe they discovered, imagine other stories, prequels, epilogues, will try to understand and discuss about hinted side-stories or even write fan-fictions.
The latters will close the book and feel it was a waste of time because in the end, they did not gain anything usable or tangible.
Every sandbox is as deep as you make it be.
While some are grinding rep for their corvette, some others are supporting the federation because they feel linked to their principles, or because they feel attached to Sol's faction. While some are stacking massacre missions, some others are fighting for the ideal of communism in their home system. While some are just click "Accept" on an assassination mission, some others are hunting this scum of a deserter who gave up on their cause... And I could go on.
Saying E
is shallow and repetitive is like saying pen and papers RPGs are dumb because it all come down to this : throw dice, add skill value, check results... rinse and repeat.TL;DR : While some people are grinding numbers (and are bound to eventually feel some shallowness), some others are trying to write a story in a neverending interactive fiction.
I'm pretty sure everyone sees this vast potential and see it good. [yesnod]
But, it seems that a lot of folks also sees this potential wasted.
Wasted by decisions made by the developers.
Thus we have much to discuss in the forums! [yesnod]
What I don't want: Missions like you find in all MMOs. And like in Star Citizen - I LIKE the idea of missions as found in SC, but my issue has always been that feeling of everyone else has done the exact same thing, and it just never really 'works' for me.
What I DO want: Reasons to be in the game.
There is one thing that is stopping the game from being more than it is - and it's the fear of gold mining and spammers. It stops the game from being interactive.
I've yet to have my morning coffee, so my explanation is most likely going to be less eloquent than usual, but here goes.
In any game that has money as a reward, there are always things to buy with it - and that's great. However, unlike virtually every other game I can think of, in ED, you cannot FIND anything useful. Oh sure, you find all sorts of non-interactive stuff that can either be sold for more money, or used to give to engineers, which costs money. But you can't clear out a pirate base, say, and find something 'cool'. Like a ship. Or modified weapons. Or a module that isn't strictly speaking, legal.
These are just ideas my mind popped out as I type...
In fact, I don't recall stumbling across a pirate den. I know they supposedly exist, although I have no idea if you can 'clear' one. So that's one idea - tip off's that eventually lead to something like this - maybe use these mega ships or other existing POI's with structures to give the impression of 'finding something'. This can easily be done within the current game mechanics, and yes they would be one-time deals, that you can't just share with everyone. Tip offs might come from you doing some other missions for a specific faction, or when you scan a crashed probe. Point is - give a GOOD reason to actually find these crashed items - it would sure make trundling around the endless beige more interesting.
I need something to DO with the money I make, besides buy more ships and more modules and more rebuys, I want to feel I can make money and DO something with it. So it's time to start allowing engineers who you are pally with, to train you in creating your own module upgrades. It's logical - after all, engineers just like to tinker, and if you get a high enough rating with one, it makes sense to have new 'missions' that as an end result, allow you to make your own stuff - perhaps minus the random effects.
This would be great for your own use, however now I'm getting to the bit where the sound of million voices all sigh in unison. Selling to other players.
There is no crafting in this game. Engineers don't count because you have very little control over the end result, and the level of randomness is frustrating. Being able to create your own gear after learning from the engineers is a great way of creating solid upgrades without the extra whizzbang you get from experimental effects. And being able to offer this as a service to other commanders is the next logical step. Perhaps you can set up shop in specific stations, and sell what you've created on a new section of the station system menu. OR you could simply advertise on the bulletin board you can make X and Y modules, and you just need this, that, and 2million credits.
The first way would be better as the transaction would be handled internally by the game, thus you don't directly give credits to another player, which will reduce any possible spamming exploits.
You might notice that everything I just mentioned is non-combat orientated. This is deliberate as I think those who partake in the murder of other innocent players have enough toys to be getting on with. It's the rest of us who need a reason to keep playing, to find something new and rewarding to do, rather than do whatever it is we're currently doing. Nothing I just described is groundbreaking, nothing will upset the balance of the game, and nothing is difficult given the current game mechanics.
It will give new reasons to buy Horizons, land on planets and feel like you might just find something cool 'this time'. And isn't that what we want?
What I DO want: Reasons to be in the game.
There is one thing that is stopping the game from being more than it is - and it's the fear of gold mining and spammers. It stops the game from being interactive.
I've yet to have my morning coffee, so my explanation is most likely going to be less eloquent than usual, but here goes.
In any game that has money as a reward, there are always things to buy with it - and that's great. However, unlike virtually every other game I can think of, in ED, you cannot FIND anything useful. Oh sure, you find all sorts of non-interactive stuff that can either be sold for more money, or used to give to engineers, which costs money. But you can't clear out a pirate base, say, and find something 'cool'. Like a ship. Or modified weapons. Or a module that isn't strictly speaking, legal.
These are just ideas my mind popped out as I type...
In fact, I don't recall stumbling across a pirate den. I know they supposedly exist, although I have no idea if you can 'clear' one. So that's one idea - tip off's that eventually lead to something like this - maybe use these mega ships or other existing POI's with structures to give the impression of 'finding something'. This can easily be done within the current game mechanics, and yes they would be one-time deals, that you can't just share with everyone. Tip offs might come from you doing some other missions for a specific faction, or when you scan a crashed probe. Point is - give a GOOD reason to actually find these crashed items - it would sure make trundling around the endless beige more interesting.
I need something to DO with the money I make, besides buy more ships and more modules and more rebuys, I want to feel I can make money and DO something with it. So it's time to start allowing engineers who you are pally with, to train you in creating your own module upgrades. It's logical - after all, engineers just like to tinker, and if you get a high enough rating with one, it makes sense to have new 'missions' that as an end result, allow you to make your own stuff - perhaps minus the random effects.
This would be great for your own use, however now I'm getting to the bit where the sound of million voices all sigh in unison. Selling to other players.
There is no crafting in this game. Engineers don't count because you have very little control over the end result, and the level of randomness is frustrating. Being able to create your own gear after learning from the engineers is a great way of creating solid upgrades without the extra whizzbang you get from experimental effects. And being able to offer this as a service to other commanders is the next logical step. Perhaps you can set up shop in specific stations, and sell what you've created on a new section of the station system menu. OR you could simply advertise on the bulletin board you can make X and Y modules, and you just need this, that, and 2million credits.
The first way would be better as the transaction would be handled internally by the game, thus you don't directly give credits to another player, which will reduce any possible spamming exploits.
You might notice that everything I just mentioned is non-combat orientated. This is deliberate as I think those who partake in the murder of other innocent players have enough toys to be getting on with. It's the rest of us who need a reason to keep playing, to find something new and rewarding to do, rather than do whatever it is we're currently doing. Nothing I just described is groundbreaking, nothing will upset the balance of the game, and nothing is difficult given the current game mechanics.
It will give new reasons to buy Horizons, land on planets and feel like you might just find something cool 'this time'. And isn't that what we want?
Well, when I ask you to define playability, then you can put that. When you ask me to define gameplay, guess what? You get my definition of gameplay.
To me, playability is a part of gameplay, just the mechanics. So we both agree that gameplay is a wider concept than just playability.
- - - Updated - - -
Wasted means irretrievably lost. Untapped potential =/= wasted potential.
I actually don't have a problem with controls at all. I play on Xbox, and find pad controls more than adequate. Took a while to get used to, sure, there's a lot of hotkeys, but no problem at all now. Putting boost on B and landing gear on B+down on d-pad was a bad idea, but you can change it. I recently just started mapping SLF hotkeys as well. Dead useful. Didn't even know Xbox could do that.
"Content" is how you feel after an enjoyable session of "game-play."
This is a pretty comprehensive explanation of the reasons why some players get frustrated with ED's limited and oft-called shallow gameplay.
As for definitions, see below:
Content: In its broadest sense is "the stuff that is in the game" - e.g. assets and models (i.e. ships, stars, stations, SRVs etc), systems, modes and gameplay options (e.g. BGS, mission system, progression systems - e.g. PF rank, Empire rank etc).
Gameplay: In its broadest sense encompasses the ways the player can interact with the game's content.
Gameplay can essentially be broken down into two categories, with one possessing some overlap with our content definition:
- Gameplay Mechanics
- Gameplay Systems
Gp mechanics deal with the physical mechanics of play within the game, e.g.:
- Flight mechanics
- Combat mechanics
- SRV driving mechanics
- Docking mechanics (a derivative of flight mechanics)
- Interdiction mini-game (a derivative of flight mechanics)
- Station menu navigation
As you can see, taking the most reductionist view, the game's physical play mechanics are fundamentally limited. This isn't a bad thing on its own, as a set of simple fundamental interactivity mechanics can make for excellent gameplay when coupled with a plethora of deep and engaging 'gameplay systems'. It is in this area, however, where many would argue that ED currently falls down.
Gameplay systems, really encompass the various ways the above list of simple interactivity mechanics can be utilized to provide a range of unique gameplay experiences. These are the systems that provide the player:
- A gameplay task
- A gameplay task objective
- An overall objective
- Gameplay challenge to oppose the player's achievment of that objective
- And a task reward (and perhaps even an overall multi-task reward)
This is essentially the "gameplay loop".
The quality and depth of these mechanical gameplay systems correlate directly with the quality of an overall gameplay experience. Every element is important and should be tuned to provide the best possible experience for the player.
In ED, the game isn't specifically lacking in game systems content. There are lots of systems as you noted, therefore a lot of content. The way in which players interact with that content, however, (i.e. mechanical gameplay systems) are where the game's biggest weaknesses are currently. The procedurally generated nature of the content means that although there seems to be much in terms of the quantity of said content, the limited ways that players can interact with it in meaningfully unique and inventive ways eventuates in a play experience that just starts to feel dry and samey after a while.
The quoted post above, details much of why this is the case. How many of the "seemingly" different game systems, end up amounting to much of the same thing, or even offering limited to no player interactivity when you start to look below the surface.
Content and gameplay are linked. If there is no content, then there is no gameplay. Gameplay is all about how you interact with the games content.