Probably done with this game

Didn't went through the whole topic but just wanted to stop by and say that a lot of people seems to forget that it's normal to feel bored after playing hundreds of hours in the same game. Nothing is eternal.

The average game offer what ? A 20-40h story line and then you're done with it ? Some other games like RPG will offer 100-200h ?

You won't spend as much time in those games than in ED (open world / sand box). There is no end and it can get addictive so, yeah, after a couple of hundred hours perhaps that you'll start to feel that the game is getting repetitive and see every small defaults and limits of the game's gameplay / content...and it's normal.

I don't know a single sand box game that don't get repetitive on the long run.

No matter what we'll say, FDev created something amazing with ED. Damn...I'm near 1000h in this game in 18 months...never spent so many hours in a game in my whole life...played WoW for 200h when I was younger and that's it. Usually I get bored pretty quickly in a game.

Each CMDR will eventually feel bored...some will stop playing after 100h and other will reach 1000h + and play until death 💀

It can be good to take a brake. I'm actually en route to Colonia but taking my time and playing Sea of Thieves (this game is a lot of fun !!!).
 

DDastardly00

D
OP,

One question, what were the parts you actually liked about the game? You mostly omitted that from your post.
 
A bit late here. But I still have to comment the OP: Everything you write is true from your point of view. You look at all the extrinsic rewards and all of them are lacking. And honestly, for the game to remain plausible in a multiplayer environment, most of them have to stay that way.

Just like you can't usually become a king in a MMO, no matter how many saves-the-world quests you do. You can't have every player to be a king. So also in ED, no matter what you do and how many credits you make, you always will be one pilot in one ship. Changing this rule would create a completely new game, where piloting would just be a mere stepping stone to success. I wouldn't want that.

Now that we have extrinsic rewards covered, let's look at the intrinsic reward. The most important one wasn't mentioned: fun. It's the very one reason I still play. You can make a long list of negatives. It's very easy. But show me one other game released in the last decade, which gives the same feeling of piloting a spaceship. Not a space taxi, not a on-rails space train, not a pure arcade space-flyer, but something which actually feels like a spaceship.

This is why I am stuck here. There's so much to complain about, from missions and credits over exploration and power play to the fiasco engineers were and the pile of biowaste they still are after lots of fixing. But there's also to see the fine line they found between arcade-enough gameplay to allow mundane people to still operate the spaceships, while having enough simulation-like elements to make it feel like more than an arcade game. Not to forget the great sound work, which contributes a lot to how the game feels.

So for me it really boils down to this: if you enjoy the activity of flying these spaceships, with the feeling of being an future-simulation and accept a few gaps here and there, for accessibility reasons, the game is awesome. All the mentioned negatives can be worked around. If the flying itself is no fun for you, then you better move on. The extrinsic rewards are weak and will stay that way.

This. Star Forge, the entire flight modes (supercruise, etc.) the optical view of the Galaxy/Star Systems and so on, this is the reason I will stay with this game, and just pause it (as I am doing now) if I have no motivation. And motivation is killed easily with this game. Just a look at the grind walls you have to cross just to be 'allowed' to enjoy some content.

But I think I will continue to play.

I think, the problem with ED is, that they have developed a truly remarkable 'Galaxy and Space Flight Simulator'. But only flying around will not keep interest for a long time, so they tacked on a bit of MMO game play. And 'tacked on' it is. To a truly exceptional Space Simulator they gave totally inept world play and after years did not manage to make it better. I suspect, that the game engine does just not give itself to real game play, so NPCs are remarkably dumb and feel dead. There seems no scripting (as in scripts, easily tested and changed), only configuration tables with limited possibilities. True, I do not know that, but it looks like this, because some of the bugs should be easily fixed - but not when every fix means changing the core games code itself.

The entire world feels dead and boring. There are 1000s of factions with no reason, no story, no intent, no targets or objectives going mechanically through the BGS 'modes'. Even the 'dangerous aliens' are completely boring, and since you have to spend weeks of grind to just get the weapons to fight them, many avoid this 'content'.

There could be so many meaningful Missions. We do not need heroes, and they are not really possible in a MMO. And they tried to make nice Missions - but most of them do not work as intended, are buggy and better avoided. There are distress calls, with distressed pilots which just fly away without a word, if you help. And to help you need 3(!!!) full slots, for a cargo bay (limpets) and two limpet controllers (fuel and repair). Can be done with big and expensive ships, but why would I do this? Or you arrive in a system and are interdicted by security forces, and if you submit (because you are clean), they fly around like idiots, saying and doing just nothing.

Everything which goes a bit beyond the pure space simulation is hidden behind walls of grind, the Engineers, the Guardian components, all of it. Grind for days on end to be 'allowed' to use - just the game. So better only do the space simulation, this is at least a bit of fun, until you run into stop gaps, like jump range or other things, or you want to try out other things than exploring - you immediately hit a grind wall and have to cross it or give up.

The only thing that saves this train wreck of a game is the fact, that the core of the game, the space simulation is healthy and unparalleled at this time.
 
Yeah I know that many of you are going to think "right, another complaint post, cya good luck" but I want to give my 2 cent as a normal player that basically is a nullity in this game.

I enjoyed this game, played so much and grinding as well and then I burnt myself, so I took a break before to return later, purchased a Phantom and falling in love again with ED. But afterwards my love started to fade again because I've found this game a little bit boring and then another break on it's way. This time many month passed without even updated it, so I've decided to return again by participating to the CG, helping to unlock a useless multi-cannon. Now FD said that the next CG is going to be in July, which means that "what I'm going to do in June?".

I know there are different game mode I should play but:

1) Exploration: What is a point for that? Jumping hundred of systems to get nowhere in a Galaxy just to scan a Water/Earth-like planet that probably is going to be scanned with few chances by another player, what will gives to me? Is that planet will be colonized? Is that planet will be mine? Will I be honored/priced for such achievement? No, just credit and if the Planet was first discovered by me, my name will be displayed on it (wow!!).

2) BGS: Why should I care about a minor faction instead of another one? For the name? I don't like their name. So why? I know that this is a MMO and interaction with other ppl is a must, but I don't want to talk in discord/skype/or any other software because if I want to be part of a Squadron having a voice interaction is necessary. Also I cannot create my own minor faction if my squadron is not composed by at least 10 ppl, so why should I care about BGS? (PowerPlay is even worst)

3) Thargoids: I know that the game is called Elite Dangerous, but is too Dangerous to fight Thargoids that spawning randomly (by FD willing) and also seems pointless to have them into the space. If aliens like them exist for real, do you think they will be limited to disrupt just Coriolis stations? Planets will be probably disintegrated or even colonized, but not into the ED bubble!

4) Conflicts Zone: Like above, I can probably afford Low or maybe Medium intensity CZ with my non-engineered ship, but if I want to do more (even like Pirate Lord hunting) I cannot, because I need to.....

5) Engineering: a huge grind joke, that's it.

6) Last but not least: Bounty, Mining, Trading - Good way to make credits that probably I will not use at all (after purchased all the ships I want)!

How many of you feel the same as above? I mean, this game has huge potentiality and nice immersion, a very good space sim, but that's about it. In general I don't like the kind of games where "I have the freedom to decide what I want", but even if a game is like that, I still have a meaning, a reason to play it. This game what reason gives to me? At the moment none. I'm just playing a holo-person without the ability to use the legs inside a ship flying into the space looking for something unspecific.
Yep, I feel you brother! Same boat here.
The Thargoids could have wiped out the bubble ages ago. They are not a threat, just the implementation of another game loop/grind to ferry goods to a station.
The BGS is really meh - doesn't really do anything other than a few names change maybe.
Exploration: Jump honk scoop, repeat. Long distance travel is even worse.

I can haz ur stuffz?
Player to player trading comes in 2025 with the next expansion pack to revolutionise the gameplay of ED.

The good things:
Mining is really intuitive. The sub surface mining is a bit pointless and I'd love to blow up more, but that's just me. Also the Wave scanner needs some loving. Show asteroids with cores in RED, sub surface yellow, surface deposits blue! AND DONE!! Not this mix and match and hope for the best.

Trading is fine for the first hour until you get the hang of it, then you move on to mining.
Surface scanner: Space golf! Actually fun.

The OK things:
Combat: Space jousting simulator!
The Deep Space scanner: Fun for a bit, becomes a radio button simulator after the 10th system.

The bad things:
Engineering material - grind baby grind!
Combat ranking - love thy grinder!
Unnecessary SC travel times - watching Netflix should not be the standard recommendation to ANY game! This is a space simulator, not a waiting simulator.
Long distance travel - Can we have a fast travel to places we've been to? Or a ferry to hire? Like a mega ship that jumps every 2 hours to certain places?
Powerplay component lock wall - I think I covered the waiting simulator? Really not needed. Unlock once, buy as needed.
Guardian materials & Data - Log fest! Login, scan, log off, repeat! That's just terrible game design.
 
Last edited:
Just like you can't usually become a king in a MMO, no matter how many saves-the-world quests you do. You can't have every player to be a king. So also in ED, no matter what you do and how many credits you make, you always will be one pilot in one ship. Changing this rule would create a completely new game, where piloting would just be a mere stepping stone to success. I wouldn't want that.
Actually, you can have many kings in this game. Rank up, become king - but no kingdom. And there is PLENTY of space to allow people to have their own kingdom. Sell planets off to players, make it a money sink. The game really needs it now.
Sadly, the rank is meaningless. You are a king, you are a valued ally of many system, you are an admiral... yet you are no one!

Now that we have extrinsic rewards covered, let's look at the intrinsic reward. The most important one wasn't mentioned: fun. It's the very one reason I still play. You can make a long list of negatives. It's very easy. But show me one other game released in the last decade, which gives the same feeling of piloting a spaceship. Not a space taxi, not a on-rails space train, not a pure arcade space-flyer, but something which actually feels like a spaceship.
X3
X3 Albion Prelude
X4 Rebirth was a dud, so not that one
X5 Foundations

So for me it really boils down to this: if you enjoy the activity of flying these spaceships, with the feeling of being an future-simulation and accept a few gaps here and there, for accessibility reasons, the game is awesome. All the mentioned negatives can be worked around. If the flying itself is no fun for you, then you better move on. The extrinsic rewards are weak and will stay that way.
Other space sims do the same thing, as stated above - you can have your own home base, you can have an invasion (and you get to see the ships too) and you can watch a sector burn. If you want to impress the invaders, start shooting alongside them, they will notice you and become friendly with you. You can destroy a station, you can void a sector of all live, you can re-populate a sector if you wish the way you see fit.
And there is a difference in flying different space ships, not just different cockpits. Also, you can fly and own capital ships. Dock at said ships, equip them, board them! So really... X series...
 

dxm55

Banned
The BGS could be improved. But making the game universe completely open to changes from players would make it unstable. Imagine a very large group of players banding together and demanding atmospheric landings from Frontier. They threaten to destroy every station in the game until they have atmospheric landings - now that fleet is very powerful, and station defense weapons or security vessels pose no threat to them. They go into the Pilots Federation District and destroy all the stations in there. Very large groups would have a very large influence on the game, which could potentially ruin its universe, or disbalance it.

Player and NPC interaction could be improved, but not to the extent of actually being able to destroy stations - otherwise, as I described earlier, there would be large, influential, powerful groups of players ruling the galaxy.

Well, stability is relative.

Eg, PVP is allowed in the game, some players think it's ruining their game in Open, but then again pirating and murder is part of the game, along with crime and punishment.


But as I said.. we have no impact in this game .... other than crying in the forums about something in the game that we hate, and FDev responds accordingly... or perhaps just "pride and glory'' fluff stuff like having an in-game asset named after you.

The real impact in this game is the shaping of the game universe, the borders, the lore. All of that is really decided by FDev. And we are merely voters in a decision tree that they set out for us. They set some CG or challenge, and then we pick a side.

A or B. That's our only impact in the game. They give us a fork in the path, and we fight over which path to take.

I'm not holding out hope for FDev to ever change the backend side of the game. There will be no single persistent server, and hence there will be no hope of 1000 players ever banding together in a fleet to mop up this lonely corner of the Milky Way.

This is at its very base level a trading space sim.




OK scratch the "destroy stations" idea, because I think the gimpy weapons on our ships wouldn't be up to the task anyway. You'd need a nuke for that. Didn't Galnet said something about some hokey cult which plotted to destroy a station with a nuke? They called it a Lucifer device or something. LOL....

But if players can at least damage stations, it would be a big bonus to player agency in the game. They could shut down a station, or impair some of its functions. After all, if the 'Goids can damage stations, why not players? Ditto capital ships... which IIRC we already can in some missions or CZs. If you take out some of its modules / turrets / whatever, they jump out in retreat.

And the appropriate response to an all out player attack on a station/megaship/capship could be a large force of Alliance/Federal/Imperial naval vessels jumping in to defend said asset from player actions.

This above, is a feature that FDev can add, because it can be built upon existing mechanics. But will they?
Are we really blazing our own trail, or just given the illusion of it?
 
The BGS could be improved. But making the game universe completely open to changes from players would make it unstable. Imagine a very large group of players banding together and demanding atmospheric landings from Frontier. They threaten to destroy every station in the game until they have atmospheric landings - now that fleet is very powerful, and station defense weapons or security vessels pose no threat to them. They go into the Pilots Federation District and destroy all the stations in there. Very large groups would have a very large influence on the game, which could potentially ruin its universe, or disbalance it.

Player and NPC interaction could be improved, but not to the extent of actually being able to destroy stations - otherwise, as I described earlier, there would be large, influential, powerful groups of players ruling the galaxy.
This is what I'd call a living and breathing universe!

Your action could ACTUALLY have an impact in the game.
Federation lost 5 stations last week. Whip up a new CG to build new ones. Player CG is to build new torpedoes. Bombing runs, defend the station, new set of missions... When can we have this?
 
I still like many aspects of this game ... but I have to agree that my enjoyment of exploration has taken a big hit with the addition of the 3.3 stuff. It's not that I think it's too hard, it's that I think the new 3.3 exploration mini-games are to fiddly to be enjoyable. More challenging can be more fun if done right, but it can be just more annoying if done wrong.
 

dxm55

Banned
I still like many aspects of this game ... but I have to agree that my enjoyment of exploration has taken a big hit with the addition of the 3.3 stuff. It's not that I think it's too hard, it's that I think the new 3.3 exploration mini-games are to fiddly to be enjoyable. More challenging can be more fun if done right, but it can be just more annoying if done wrong.

Well, the definition of challenge in ED appears to be more grind.
AKA: Introduce more stuff, or materials into the game... and then make you run around looking for it, and then collecting and bringing it somewhere else.

:D
 
This is what I'd call a living and breathing universe!

Your action could ACTUALLY have an impact in the game.
Federation lost 5 stations last week. Whip up a new CG to build new ones. Player CG is to build new torpedoes. Bombing runs, defend the station, new set of missions... When can we have this?
But wouldn't the universe be very unstable and disbalanced then? If a large group of players destroyed a popular station, there was a CG to rebuild it; what would stop them from destroying it again, after every CG?
 
Well, stability is relative.

Eg, PVP is allowed in the game, some players think it's ruining their game in Open, but then again pirating and murder is part of the game, along with crime and punishment.


But as I said.. we have no impact in this game .... other than crying in the forums about something in the game that we hate, and FDev responds accordingly... or perhaps just "pride and glory'' fluff stuff like having an in-game asset named after you.

The real impact in this game is the shaping of the game universe, the borders, the lore. All of that is really decided by FDev. And we are merely voters in a decision tree that they set out for us. They set some CG or challenge, and then we pick a side.

A or B. That's our only impact in the game. They give us a fork in the path, and we fight over which path to take.

I'm not holding out hope for FDev to ever change the backend side of the game. There will be no single persistent server, and hence there will be no hope of 1000 players ever banding together in a fleet to mop up this lonely corner of the Milky Way.

This is at its very base level a trading space sim.




OK scratch the "destroy stations" idea, because I think the gimpy weapons on our ships wouldn't be up to the task anyway. You'd need a nuke for that. Didn't Galnet said something about some hokey cult which plotted to destroy a station with a nuke? They called it a Lucifer device or something. LOL....

But if players can at least damage stations, it would be a big bonus to player agency in the game. They could shut down a station, or impair some of its functions. After all, if the 'Goids can damage stations, why not players? Ditto capital ships... which IIRC we already can in some missions or CZs. If you take out some of its modules / turrets / whatever, they jump out in retreat.

And the appropriate response to an all out player attack on a station/megaship/capship could be a large force of Alliance/Federal/Imperial naval vessels jumping in to defend said asset from player actions.

This above, is a feature that FDev can add, because it can be built upon existing mechanics. But will they?
Are we really blazing our own trail, or just given the illusion of it?
Every MMO I ever played has very tight restrictions on the things you have mentioned. Again, imagine a large group of players banding together and destroying a popular station. There is a CG goal to repair it. It is now repaired. What would stop this group from destroying the station after every CG?

I agree that our impact could have a more noticeable impact on the game, for example, votes on names for new stations or maybe a war between two large squadrons or something but the things you described would neither be logical nor possible to implement into the game.

Yes, we are blazing our own trail, but remember, this is more of a simulator. How many things did you do today to make a noticeable impact on Earth? As you said, since 1,000 players will not be able to band together, small groups can't have a large impact on the galaxy, considering that lore-wise the galaxy has a population of 6.6 trillion people.

So anyway, our impact as a player base could be improved, I agree with that, but not to the extent of reshaping the galaxy completely. That would be a mess.
 

dxm55

Banned
But wouldn't the universe be very unstable and disbalanced then? If a large group of players destroyed a popular station, there was a CG to rebuild it; what would stop them from destroying it again, after every CG?

But wouldn't a stable and static universe be utterly boring?
If you couldn't change a thing, why play in the first place?
 

dxm55

Banned
Every MMO I ever played has very tight restrictions on the things you have mentioned. Again, imagine a large group of players banding together and destroying a popular station. There is a CG goal to repair it. It is now repaired. What would stop this group from destroying the station after every CG?

I agree that our impact could have a more noticeable impact on the game, for example, votes on names for new stations or maybe a war between two large squadrons or something but the things you described would neither be logical nor possible to implement into the game.

Yes, we are blazing our own trail, but remember, this is more of a simulator. How many things did you do today to make a noticeable impact on Earth? As you said, since 1,000 players will not be able to band together, small groups can't have a large impact on the galaxy, considering that lore-wise the galaxy has a population of 6.6 trillion people.

So anyway, our impact as a player base could be improved, I agree with that, but not to the extent of reshaping the galaxy completely. That would be a mess.

Like I said I don't disagree with you.

I was just pointing out the shortcomings of this game and its P2P architecture and backend. And how that has resulted in very limited options for true multiplayer interaction.

No point for us to go around in circles.
This is a Space-Trading Sim.

Though I wish I could do more, but I accept that for what it is and am playing within the confines of it.
ie. Earn lots of cash to get nice ships and guns to blow other stuff up.
 
Actually, you can have many kings in this game. Rank up, become king - but no kingdom. And there is PLENTY of space to allow people to have their own kingdom. Sell planets off to players, make it a money sink. The game really needs it now.
Sadly, the rank is meaningless. You are a king, you are a valued ally of many system, you are an admiral... yet you are no one!

Yes, in pure words these titles are in game. They are honorary titles, no more. So yes, you win on the semantics side, while missing the point on what it was all about.

X3
X3 Albion Prelude
X4 Rebirth was a dud, so not that one
X5 Foundations

X5? Interesting, not not worth riding that train. But all in all yes, the X-Series are nice games. Yet they "feel" smaller and are a bit more on the arcade side for me. Good games, but not carrying the same atmosphere as ED.

Other space sims do the same thing, as stated above - you can have your own home base, you can have an invasion (and you get to see the ships too) and you can watch a sector burn. If you want to impress the invaders, start shooting alongside them, they will notice you and become friendly with you. You can destroy a station, you can void a sector of all live, you can re-populate a sector if you wish the way you see fit.
And there is a difference in flying different space ships, not just different cockpits. Also, you can fly and own capital ships. Dock at said ships, equip them, board them! So really... X series...

Hmm. Come again: how many players do the X-Series games support? For that was kind of my point there: yes, ED is a multiplayer environment. Like it or not. I mean I also don't need that aspect too much. I would also be happy with it being single player with four player coop mode. But hey, it is what it is. And as long as we have the BGS and multiplayer aspect, the game can't reasonably go the way you propose.

There's a number of online games which tried to do things like that. One is still alive: EvE. It's the absolute white elephant here, while any other game of such design died, and usually quickly.

ED already now has a rather small playerbase. Pushing it into yet another corner of game design, which reads as "all but one of them died, and game designers still don't really know how and why that one actually managed to survive and do well enough" might not be the best idea.

But wouldn't the universe be very unstable and disbalanced then? If a large group of players destroyed a popular station, there was a CG to rebuild it; what would stop them from destroying it again, after every CG?

And considering how FD usually designs things, a wing of four could destroy a base every other hour, while it would require a dedicated group of 200 people to rebuild a station per month. Easy and predictable victory for the trolls who just want to see the world burn.
 
But wouldn't a stable and static universe be utterly boring?
I don't think it would. First of all, as you mentioned earlier on, we can have an impact on the universe.

But, I am repeating this for like the fifth time - a universe that can be totally reshaped by the player base is a horrible idea - have you ever heard of trolls? Or maybe there are people who couldn't care less and want to ruin the game for everyone? And I'm sure that if they implement the destruction of stations, a few hundred would be destroyed in the first day.

Yes, it's kind of a space trading-based simulator with exploration, mining, combat and a few other things mixed in. Some people like this, others don't. Don't get me wrong, I have some concerns regarding Elite too, but I am more or less happy with the current state of the game. You can't like every game, and if you don't, move on. Or wait until the 2020 update.

Good luck! ;)
 
I don't think it would. First of all, as you mentioned earlier on, we can have an impact on the universe.

But, I am repeating this for like the fifth time - a universe that can be totally reshaped by the player base is a horrible idea - have you ever heard of trolls? Or maybe there are people who couldn't care less and want to ruin the game for everyone? And I'm sure that if they implement the destruction of stations, a few hundred would be destroyed in the first day.
Have you ever heard of Wikipedia?
 
Have you ever heard of Wikipedia?
Yes, it's an online resource which can be edited by anyone. If you're trying to compare an encyclopedia and a game, there's 2 things: People often do change the information on Wikipedia to something stupid, but it is moderated and changed back. Who's going to moderate a game? Secondly, would you rather spend your time editing articles on Wikipedia or destroying stations in Elite Dangerous? Think about that. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom