So here is my thing with exploration..

I'm only disagreeing on the principle that if fd did a quick fix and just upped the times and reduced the scanning distances it would totally kill it. Pretty much all my criticism towards all the current game mechanics (or most of them) is that there's already a great game sitting there but unfortunately it's in the dda forum. The main reason why I bought the game was from reading the DDA and comparing it to my experiences on frontier back in the 90's.

Exploring should take work and should be meaningful but (respectfully), all STS is describe is drawing out the current process of sitting in supercruise staring at a dot and pressing one button whilst you wait and scan a body.

All the mechanics seem "placeholdery" but at least exploration isn't as frustrating as mining :D

On this then, we totally agree (+1 internet points for you today).

I can see his points, I think it was a very simplistic overview of what could be done but I agree with the general tone and direction - much like your own one.

There ARE quick fixes that can be done, but not to the detriment of the mechanic. For that it needs a complete overhaul, almost I'd say a new expansion (or reworked A LOT when Planetary Landings come along)
 
Last edited:
On this then, we totally agree (+1 internet points for you today).

I can see his points, I think it was a very simplistic overview of what could be done but I agree with the general tone and direction - much like your own one.

There ARE quick fixes that can be done, but not to the detriment of the mechanic. For that it needs a complete overhaul, almost I'd say a new expansion (or reworked A LOT when Planetary Landings come along)

Good to be growing my epeen :)

At least he's making suggestions rather than shooting down everything with some passive aggressive one liner.

You shouldn't have suggested danger though, the next thing you know they'll add a heat mechanic for the discovery scanner where it'll cause damage to the rest of your ships modules ;)
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
I'd just like to add that I am thinking/hoping that there will be a big update to Exploration when the Planetary Landings expansion comes out. Not least because DB has said that he expects the exploration to go into much greater detail when you are looking at a planet's surface for potential sites to land and build bases/starports. Also there's the fact that they've already built in the idea of Level 2 and 3 Detailed Scans.

I agree that no quick fixes should be done. Personally I have enjoyed all of my time exploring so far the most out of anything in the game, but then maybe I'm slightly crazy...
 
Good god that sounds horrible! Things are slow enough as it is. The cash rewards should already be higher than what they are. I made 500k on my first 6 hour exploration trip and totally killed exploration for me.

500K in 6 hours!!! Wow!

During my 10 day trip to the North American Nebula I managed to make a mere 2.5 million and that was scanning everything that moved (except asteroid belts). The highest pay-out per system I've got is about 80K but most are in the 1K-3K range.

I remember during Beta that I seemed to be getting an order of magnitude less than everyone else seemed to be getting. Maybe I should be feeling paranoid. ;)

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

As for quick fixes, I say no, definitely not.

The quick fix to trading at the end of beta broke it and it's still broken, especially if you take any notice of the in game trading tools or descriptions of trade. You have to rely upon external tools, which is pretty bad.

For the record, I'm an early and big backer of this game and will support all the good things that Frontier do but won't shy away from criticism if needs be.
 
I understand OP's feeling about lack of engagement in exploration, but I like to see it as a long, slow, zen experience myself.

[video=youtube;xAbqRvUZGtc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAbqRvUZGtc[/video]

EDIT: the over end of the spectrum as for game experience would be combat in my opinion. I always loved the flight simulator series but always thought it lacked a bit of action and always loved fighter jets simulations like BMS Falcon but always thought it could have done with a bit of down time. Elite Dangerous does exactly this for me.
 
Last edited:
In your first point you make exactly the point many of us have tried to say, that Frontier have pushed out something that was not done.

In it's current state, IMHO exploration as a mechanic should not have shipped - if I shipped a feature in that state to a client, they would not be happy.

We were promised things like being able to sell the exploration data to the highest bidder - then again to another bidder in another faction, causing conflict. Not done.

We were given a glimpse of ideas like going out in to the void and finding old wreckages we can salvage. Not done.

We were fooled into thinking reaching the centre of the galaxy would be a challenge - that it would take many man hours, require players to work together in co-op, slaving drives - players will roles and different ships needed to make these "great expeditions". As it is any Joe Blogs can make it out there in a few days and back with little trouble or wear & tear.

I've defended Frontier and Ed in the past, and will continue to do so where I think they deserve it. Where they don't, I will make my criticism known and no one can turn around and tell me I can't. I will aim to be as constructive as possible but I won't waste my energy on something that Frontier have already got in their mind and won't focus on fixing.

IMHO exploration will be a content patch 1-2 years down the line that will make it anything close to say Eve's mechanic, which actually adds at least an air of discovery and mystery to it (and comes with the shiny rewards that good exploration demands).

Here's how I see it Titus. There are at least two forms of exploration that can be used in any game and I have my own terms to label these, "Natural Exploration" and "Artificial Exploration". To elaborate:

1) Natural Exploration: A good example of this is Skyrim. In order to explore a person simply heads out into the unknown. In the wilds there will be a number of dangers such as beasts or hostile environments. As a player explores, they will find caves, ancient monuments, barrows, abandoned houses, treasure etc. When a player interacts with any of these, it has a chance of unfolding into something larger. Go into a cave for example, and it may turn out to be a hidden bandit den. Upon closer examination and after elimination of the bandits, information of a hidden cache maybe located. Natural Exploration then is a process that mirrors real-life in the sense that one needs to physically participate in the activity itself, and that once embarked upon exploration will lead to discoveries - which unfold into multi-faceted steps. If this was applied to Elite, I could head out to an unknown system, and see some strange and unusual graphical effect within space, as I approach it turns out to be an unknown anomaly, I gather data from it, that I need to turn into a science station for it to be deciphered. The deciphered information points me to another system perhaps, I head there and find the cause of the anomaly. In another example, I explore near a gas giant with a ring system, and pick up an unusual signal. Upon investigation I discover a pirate base, these guys if they see me may hunt me down or perhaps offer me to join them depending upon my reputation within the game. If I am steathly enough I could get away with the location and sell it to bounty hunters, or give it to the authorities for rep. Maybe it unfolds into an assualt I can take part it. All of this should be possible with procedural generation. There is nothing that would require tons of hand crafted design. The sky is the limit.

2) Artificial Exploration: Some people may find this term unfavorable, but it is my personal term. This type of "exploration" is what Eve uses. It relies on mini-games of various types. Instead of physically exploring the environment, I spend my time exploring UI's and Maps looking for icons that lead to mini-games or other UI's and more detailed maps. Eventually these mini-games provide me with a set of co-ordinates which I can go to. When I arrive at the destination, I will find an object or area that triggers another mini-game, which ultimately may provide me with a "success status", of having discovered something of value.

Elite, to me, needs to be all about natural exploration. I don't want to ever see it go down the path of artificial exploration. Sure the above two concepts are black & white, and there is a lot of room for cross-over. Scanner mini-games leading to the pirate hide-out or the anomaly scenario I mentioned for example. However, to me that stuff never truly feels like exploration. If it is driven by mini-games, then I wouldn't give it the time of day. Exploration needs to be a natural process, it needs to evoke the wonder and awe that you describe in your original post. The discovery of American was driven by the wonder of possibilities and the unknown in the natural environment and mini-games can never hope to replicate that. True exploration leads seamlessly from one step into the next - a process of discovery. Elite has the potential to offer that and more. It's a vast galaxy that essentially offers infinite possibilities. So I agree at the moment it is empty and lacking...it needs so much more.

But to keep the spirit of exploration true, it needs to stay away from mini-games and the over reliance on UI's as much as possible and instead rely upon using the environment itself to provide the necessary drive and gameplay mechanics.
 
I left occupied space last night. Only about 4 or 5 hundred or so light yrs away from the fringes. I just went down the galaxy may to try to see the edge of our galaxy. Today I should reach the edge. No idea what I am doing. :) No plans either. Just wandering in a d class hauler. Although I might have to return for a better ship. The hauler is cheap and it feels it.
 
Here's how I see it Titus. There are at least two forms of exploration that can be used in any game and I have my own terms to label these, "Natural Exploration" and "Artificial Exploration". To elaborate:

1) Natural Exploration: A good example of this is Skyrim. In order to explore a person simply heads out into the unknown. In the wilds there will be a number of dangers such as beasts or hostile environments. As a player explores, they will find caves, ancient monuments, barrows, abandoned houses, treasure etc. When a player interacts with any of these, it has a chance of unfolding into something larger. Go into a cave for example, and it may turn out to be a hidden bandit den. Upon closer examination and after elimination of the bandits, information of a hidden cache maybe located. Natural Exploration then is a process that mirrors real-life in the sense that one needs to physically participate in the activity itself, and that once embarked upon exploration will lead to discoveries - which unfold into multi-faceted steps. If this was applied to Elite, I could head out to an unknown system, and see some strange and unusual graphical effect within space, as I approach it turns out to be an unknown anomaly, I gather data from it, that I need to turn into a science station for it to be deciphered. The deciphered information points me to another system perhaps, I head there and find the cause of the anomaly. In another example, I explore near a gas giant with a ring system, and pick up an unusual signal. Upon investigation I discover a pirate base, these guys if they see me may hunt me down or perhaps offer me to join them depending upon my reputation within the game. If I am steathly enough I could get away with the location and sell it to bounty hunters, or give it to the authorities for rep. Maybe it unfolds into an assualt I can take part it. All of this should be possible with procedural generation. There is nothing that would require tons of hand crafted design. The sky is the limit.

2) Artificial Exploration: Some people may find this term unfavorable, but it is my personal term. This type of "exploration" is what Eve uses. It relies on mini-games of various types. Instead of physically exploring the environment, I spend my time exploring UI's and Maps looking for icons that lead to mini-games or other UI's and more detailed maps. Eventually these mini-games provide me with a set of co-ordinates which I can go to. When I arrive at the destination, I will find an object or area that triggers another mini-game, which ultimately may provide me with a "success status", of having discovered something of value.

Elite, to me, needs to be all about natural exploration. I don't want to ever see it go down the path of artificial exploration. Sure the above two concepts are black & white, and there is a lot of room for cross-over. Scanner mini-games leading to the pirate hide-out or the anomaly scenario I mentioned for example. However, to me that stuff never truly feels like exploration. If it is driven by mini-games, then I wouldn't give it the time of day. Exploration needs to be a natural process, it needs to evoke the wonder and awe that you describe in your original post. The discovery of American was driven by the wonder of possibilities and the unknown in the natural environment and mini-games can never hope to replicate that. True exploration leads seamlessly from one step into the next - a process of discovery. Elite has the potential to offer that and more. It's a vast galaxy that essentially offers infinite possibilities. So I agree at the moment it is empty and lacking...it needs so much more.

But to keep the spirit of exploration true, it needs to stay away from mini-games and the over reliance on UI's as much as possible and instead rely upon using the environment itself to provide the necessary drive and gameplay mechanics.

nail-hammer.jpg

Smashed it sir. Your exploration of the Skyrim mechanic actually gets a lot closer to what I had in my head that this game would be.
 
Loki_666 I have to disagree with your analysis, a frank discussion by those who have done a great deal of exploration not only during the month or so since release but also during previous builds is not being "moaning minis". It's merely analysis of our experiences.

You may have noticed that some constructive changes have been suggested. However, the likelihood of any Frontier developers who have an input in the design of the game reading this thread is very low I'm afraid.

Maybe part of the problem is the degree of expectation raised by the videos and comment during the Kickstarter and after? Maybe Frontier were too ambitious and hence so much was left on the cutting room floor that it feels evicerated. Who knows?

Honest, balanced opinions, good or bad, are not wasted comment, they can highlight problems and hence help make the game better.

Having been here here for the whole of the development process so far and seen how in the latter half of last year development was compressed more and more and fewer and fewer of the features which had been enthused about were making it into the game I became concerned. As I see it, what was released was a skeleton of a game with placeholders left as the final solutions and massive bugs in some key areas, such as the trading system, which have not been sorted out. (The trading system bugs seem to have been put in during the transition from Beta to Gamma after player trading was able to flood the system. The solution was worse than the problem.)

Hi Stephen, I totally agree with you (about this particular thread). It has not been like the usual moan fest that has dominated the forums for the last couple of months. For someone like me who has not invested too many hours in the game (partly from not having sufficient time to put aside) it has been very useful to know what the other posters here have concluded after spending long hours exploring and collecting data for sale. Like many beginners I have had the painful experience of running out of fuel with what I thought was a long list of items at the time (about 20!) until I read this post! and lost my ship and data. But I was happy to put that down to a lesson learned and I certainly didn't repeat it.

What has been interesting here is that I have been slowly trading away with the aim of earning enough credits to buy a ship that is more suitable for exploration, a bigger jump range, a fuel scoop and some weapons for defense. Because it was the exploration side of the game that really appealed to me. Only, I was expecting to discover things e.g. remnants of old ships destroyed after a large battle, space stations being assembled, weird artifacts, old technology flying through space launched by unknown civilizations and strange things we would never have expected. Things that FD never mentioned but put there to surprise us. Instead, from what I have picked up from all of your comments this morning is that you have come to the conclusion 'is this all there is?'. FD could argue that in real life it probably is.

If i hadn't read this post, I would have wasted god knows how many hrs buying the wrong ship, and repeating a similar experience you have all had - and been just as disappointed too. I'm at the stage already where I'm quite content to park my ship for 12 months to give the development team time to build on their framework. Plus I don't think I will be going back in with as high expectations as I did the first time.

I'm REALLY looking forward to playing this game when the consumer Oculus rift comes out too. Some of the posts describing DK2 sound fantastic.

Thanks again guys and I'll be keeping an eye on the forums and news releases to see how the game evolves.
 
Loki_666 I have to disagree with your analysis, a frank discussion by those who have done a great deal of exploration not only during the month or so since release but also during previous builds is not being "moaning minis". It's merely analysis of our experiences.

I think you misread my post. That part was aimed at those who feel compelled to post in every single thread that the game is not finished. I have no issue with those making suggestions about how to improve the exploration game and mechanics, even if i personally don't think the idea is good. I mean, i'm really looking forward to the new sell data options in 1.1. I just returned from a medium distance exploration (<10,000LY) and it took me over 2 hours to sell all the data... what a chore!
 
To OP:

Yes exploration is too easy.

Also making absolutely loads of dosh once you get a trading ship (Cobra or better) is also too easy.

Combat, well I do not know as not done so much of that but many also say against npc's also too easy.

The worse thing is they called the game Elite Dangerous.

I am not a troll, actually I love the game and play often and want it to do well. But where is the challenge ?!!!
 
This is why we need space weather, solar flares, ion storms, even strong gravitational waves. I know Frontier want to keep the game close to reality but adding some of the phenomena even if they aren't real would add excitement to the game.
 
The question I have, and it's not specific to Exploration, which is however the most severe skeleton implementation, is, is anything limiting development progress?

We've seen that with the DDF process, FD and those backers involved created a wealth of designs, plans, dreams given shape. And, for reasons that don't matter, FD set a final release date and stuck to it. The difference between the sum of the designs and the game we're playing is effectively a red, negative line in the imaginary spreadsheet of our opinion of the game. Now, if we can see planned features being implemented, we can get an idea of the pace of the project and when it might be a reasonable approximation of the our expectations by the elimination of the feature backlog.

Currently we have 1.1 giving us Community Goals and a wonderful long tail of fixes and minor improvements. But CGs not having been mentioned before release doesn't really allow 1.1 to give me a sense of how fast FD are able to move, and the rest is (AI improvements and friendly fire fixes notwithstanding) a bit 'bitty' to me. Around Offlinegate, DB conjured the grim spectre of the "cutting room floor" which I'm sure haunts you too, piled with the entrails of fallen design components which will never make release (I really hope it's only offline mode and drive slaving which lie there). And we're racing towards Major Expansion territory (Xmas 2015, I bet) and those will add more features to the TBD side of the equation.

So given this lack of data to estimate progress with, I start to wonder if something held things back and if it is still a factor? Did the switch to Supercruise introduce a large block of work that pushed many other features back past Dec 16? Does DB exert a Jobs-like control over every detail but was always on the promo road? Is Cobra hard to create high level features with (lack of scripting in the engine…)? Is the patchwork of p2p islands hung on the galaxy servers a beast to transfer state around, making persistent features like complex missions hard to implement? Did the galaxy map eat Engineering's A team for months, starving other features? Are there significant holes in the staffing? Did the need to address new activities such as marketing, event organisation and order fulfillment sap development?

None of these things are really my business, I don't doubt FD's ability to deliver everything eventually, but the public existence of the feature backlog and no clear feel that things are moving quickly enough engenders uncertainty here. I look forward to 1.2 with Wings as a DDF item as the next God Patch delivering some evidence that the pace is picking up.
 
I quite like the idea of 2 exploring modes. A lite mode that occasional explorers or new explorers can use and a more involved and much higher paying in depth exploring. I bought my first Adder simply by exploring in a sidewinder.

I wouldn't want the ability for newer players to miss out on the ability to play this aspect of the game.

S.
 
My problem with exploring is that it's too fast. Point the ship at a gas giant 100ls away and a few seconds later beep - You know everything about it. Fly in scan, a few minutes later you have pointed at the nearest bodies, ignored the asteroids and are blasting out to your next system.

Exploration need to be slowed down.

- Should have to go into orbit around each item to be scanned.
- Scanning should take a minimum of 30 seconds, the bigger the item the long the scan time.
- Cash should be awarded not only for the type of planet scanned but which might be found on it
- Asteroids could be hiding useful stuff (derelicts, minerals etc)
- Should have to come out of FSD to scan

Scanning a busy system could take an hours game time. Need to make it so that every potentially scannable item could be a big payout. No more "oh I don't scan asteroids or icy moons"

- There would have to be a lot more potentially interesting things to find while scanning
- Cash rewards would have to be much greater to balance the time taken for the extended scanning.

To explore a system you need to feel like you know it, not just flit in and out.

Also need to be able to filter on the galaxy map unknown systems. Systems which are totally unknown should be shown in red (biggest payout). Known systems green (zero payout), stale systems (not been scanned in a while - medium payout) yellow.

S.

Sadly it seems that, at least for now, FD's philosophy is 'go for the easy option'. This is obviously because they're desperately trying to play catch up due to the rushed release. It looks like they are going to do this for tagging discoveries, with everything pre 1.1 being attributed to the Commander who first drooped into a system and hit scan, no surface scanning required. It's a complete joke and as it goes on I worry that the 'easy = good' design philosophy will stick and we will have more and more half baked, shallow gameplay elements foisted upon us.
 
Sadly it seems that, at least for now, FD's philosophy is 'go for the easy option'. This is obviously because they're desperately trying to play catch up due to the rushed release. It looks like they are going to do this for tagging discoveries, with everything pre 1.1 being attributed to the Commander who first drooped into a system and hit scan, no surface scanning required. It's a complete joke and as it goes on I worry that the 'easy = good' design philosophy will stick and we will have more and more half baked, shallow gameplay elements foisted upon us.

Actually, it's been stated that just "pinging" a system won't be enough for the discovery, people will have to scan them, Houghton not a detailed surface scan.
 
Actually, it's been stated that just "pinging" a system won't be enough for the discovery, people will have to scan them, Houghton not a detailed surface scan.

That should be true ongoing from 1.1, but currently does not seem to be the case for systems pinged prior to that. We will see.

My point in mentioning that is that it is another somewhat half-backed implementation, albeit well meaning.
 
Last edited:
It's not at all challenging to scan planets. It's simple, tedious and boring. That's why I skip most planets and only go for the interesting ones. You'll learn to distinguish them quite well after seeing enough systems.

Now if in the future you have to do even more scanning with the current mechanic to get even some recognition as an explorer, it's not going to make things any more challenging, just more tedious and boring.
 
It's not at all challenging to scan planets. It's simple, tedious and boring. That's why I skip most planets and only go for the interesting ones. You'll learn to distinguish them quite well after seeing enough systems.

Now if in the future you have to do even more scanning with the current mechanic to get even some recognition as an explorer, it's not going to make things any more challenging, just more tedious and boring.

I completely agree, the entire exploration mechanic is a joke. To create a game with a 1:1 model of the galaxy, to tout that so heavily and then to implement such a mundane and simplistic version of exploration is the biggest let down of the game at launch, in my opinion. Regardless, to introduce a 'discovered by' tag and then reward players who simply dropped into a system, hit scan once and then left is a terrible idea. If there is no way of distinguishing who surface scanned pre 1.1 they should not give retrospective rewards.
 
Back
Top Bottom