Supercruising to another star system reveals design flaws

[Sterlino]

At this point i am very curious to see how the other competitors (StarCitizen, NomanSky and Infinity) will build
the instances mechanics and how much different (from FD decisions) they will be...

Honestly , and this is only my personal opinion, i hate every kind of instance situation and i would do all the possible (and even the impossible) to avoid
their forced introduction in the gameplay.

My only true hope is that within 10 years this kind of approach to the multiplayer gameplay experience will be totally different.

 

[SvennoJ]

Still waiting on someone to explain how this detracts from the game......please elaborate.

I play this game for the exploration, wandering the galaxy visiting nebulae. The static sky box comes in the way of that. Firstly the default high setting is too low res, the pre-rendered nebulae look worse in game than in the galaxy map. That is solved a bit by changing the GalaxyBackground texture size to 4096 in GraphicsConfiguration.xml
Yet the nebulae remain static because of this. Try the butterfly nebula, it's one of the small ones. You can't get a good view of it from the nearest star, you can't fly out from the actual star to explore the nebula as it is present in the galaxy map.
Sure they limited supercruise to 2001c, yet directly neighbouring stars should move at that speed and a lot of them are reachable without a jump in less time than it takes to visit Hutton Orbital. Also seeing the stars shift during a hyperspace jump wouldn't leave you completely disoriented every time.
I'm also one of those people that leaves their pc running and check how far I've come the next morning.
Plus I would have liked to make time lapse videos of long journeys which simply won't work in the current engine.
So yes, it detracts me from the game as an explorer.

 

[5PIDER]

This was done before release, you should search the forum before-hand.

Every game needs a loading screen.

 

[Xntryk]

instancing every system is not a great idea...then again 400 Billion star systems is also a tremendous waste.... I wish that there was "known" space and "unknown" space no map of jump points to select... scan for stars in jump range... explore the system,,, (occasionally actually find something besides planets asteroids and stars) only after you sell your info to cartographics do those systems show up on the map.

 

[Ayerc]

I would like to point out that having the ability to supercruise to another system is not restricted only to immersion benefits. Celestial bodies lying much further out than the main planets do exist in the galaxy and even in our solar system. The objects of the Oort cloud come to mind, as we do not currently know what is out there apart from comets, but some scientists believe there could be larger bodies, perhaps even planet-sized ones. Having the possibility to actually reach such objects in the ED galaxy and map the region of space between two stars would be a fine addition to the gameplay mechanics of exploration.

The space between stars can be used without employing a seamless instance change. You can already travel LYs in the SC instance, they just need to populate it at the right distances to add what you suggest.

But this is exactly what I'm talking about. If FD decide they want to add gameplay in those deep space areas, they will add it. If they need seamless system transitions to accomplish it, they will add it. In it's current state, ED has no use for it.

I would even go so far to say that spending time/resources on adding such a transisiton at this stage of the game would be a design flaw. You don't build a bridge that no one will need to use.

There is no gameplay reason to have 400 billion star systems but they cared enough to model that.

I disagree. The immense scale of the galaxy is a huge gameplay factor in this game. Granted, astronomical scales are so mind-bogglingly large the difference between us playing with 100B stars v 400B stars is nominal. We know there are approx. 400B stars within the Milky Way, however. Had FD not put in the approximate number, then they would lose their game's identity.

400B stars is an intrinsic, defining feature of the game.

 

[DAYLEET]

That is solved a bit by changing the GalaxyBackground texture size to 4096 in GraphicsConfiguration.xml.

The game comes with 4096kb texture?

 

[Arkku]

The static sky box comes in the way of that. Firstly the default high setting is too low res,

While not directly related to the topic of supercruising to other systems, I agree that the star backdrop is too static and low res, and detracts from the game. Other than adding even a tiny bit of movement to nearby stars, I think the milky way backdrop could use a bit of animation to make it look less like a painting. Perhaps also a little twinkle to the stars (despite possibly being unrealistic outside the atmosphere, it might still look less static).

 

[Sysmon]

Perhaps also a little twinkle to the stars (despite possibly being unrealistic outside the atmosphere, it might still look less static).

Ooooh twinkle! Which beta was it we had twinkling stars in? How well was that received?

S

 

[theriverlethe]

Adding lights to the dark sides of populated worlds is a much bigger immersion feature, in my opinion. I can think of a few dozen things FD should work on before worrying about this.

 

[Penchant]

This. Wanting to SC between systems is such a monumentally stupid waste of time and it would have been a ludicrous decision to include the ability to do so in the game.

SC between systems isn't that ludicrous. I'd have loved a mechanic where unexplored systems couldn't be reached by a jump (no nav beacon) but had to be reached by SC. Then, when an explorer (finally) get to the unexplored system, the explorer drops a new nav beacon and opens up the system to everyone else. Implement a charge for using the nav beacon for a hyperspace jump, proceeds to the explorer who opened up the system. An explorer could make real money providing a more direct route for traders, etc. rather than just going by established systems and routes. Too late now though. The current exploration mechanic is in and it'd mean rolling back players exploration progress, creating a way to seamlessly migrate a player between instances, and would fundamentally alter how CMDRs get around. I can't see it happening but it'd make exploration a far more meaningful activity than it is now.

 

[Johnny Spaceboots]

SC between systems isn't that ludicrous. I'd have loved a mechanic where unexplored systems couldn't be reached by a jump (no nav beacon) but had to be reached by SC. Then, when an explorer (finally) get to the unexplored system, the explorer drops a new nav beacon and opens up the system to everyone else. Implement a charge for using the nav beacon for a hyperspace jump, proceeds to the explorer who opened up the system. An explorer could make real money providing a more direct route for traders, etc. rather than just going by established systems and routes. Too late now though. The current exploration mechanic is in and it'd mean rolling back players exploration progress, creating a way to seamlessly migrate a player between instances, and would fundamentally alter how CMDRs get around. I can't see it happening but it'd make exploration a far more meaningful activity than it is now.

It's too bad that people seem to think that a seamless galaxy is a waste of time, when it could open up so many more possibilities than the overly instanced mediocre "rooms in space" thing we have right now. Exploring is just.. lame. You know of all the stars in the galaxy, can effortlessly jump to all of the unexplored ones, and then you 'explore' a static room. And by explore, I mean you pop your advanced scanner, look at the map, see if anything worthwhile is there, and leave.

 

[SvennoJ]

The game comes with 4096kb texture?

No, it generates a 360x360 degree bitmap of the sky from the galaxy map each time you hyper jump. The default 'high' preset is 2048. It doesn't specify 2048 what, but doubling it helps to get less blurry stars.

 

[Mr_Blastman]

It isn't just a skybox, it is a skybox that changes in every system you visit depending on the position of those stars.

 

[Johnny Spaceboots]

It isn't just a skybox, it is a skybox that changes in every system you visit depending on the position of those stars.

That's still just a skybox. Doesn't matter if it's a procedurally generated skybox or not.

 

[WalterHWhite]

I don't get how the system positions being procedurally generated has a lot to do with the geometric accuracy of the stars in the sky from your frame of reference.

Anyways, allowing cruising between systems would be 'nice' to know that it's possible, but not really useful.

Johnny S, from the other thread it seems like you've had better experiences in other games with instancing (or lack of). The instancing of systems here currently (and the limit of human players) is at the very least convenient (likely one of the least complex solutions). How would you change instancing if it were done another way?

 

[Toscaner]

i wished for a long for a simulation/game of the real galaxy and i wished it were seamless, from planets and rings to the whole galaxy, and much to discover inbetween.
FD gave me the first thing, which is pretty cool.

i guess i take it gratefully and leave one more dream to fulfill.

 

[5PIDER]

Adding lights to the dark sides of populated worlds is a much bigger immersion feature, in my opinion. I can think of a few dozen things FD should work on before worrying about this.

That is coming in 1.1 it was confirmed by PC Gamer

 

[OnePercent]

Not a design flaw just a decision to allow multiplayer.

 

[Johnny Spaceboots]

Not a design flaw just a decision to allow multiplayer.

Unsubstantiated. Though if that were the case, and considering all the other missing/poorly implemented features that people commonly attribute to the game being multiplayer, I would have to wonder if perhaps multiplayer was the design flaw since it's apparently the source of all evil, though I don't agree with that assessment.

 

[Dbrn47]

Thank you for this comment. Exploring interstellar space, as opposed to merely the region closest to a star, combined with the possibility for making a stealthy approach towards an adjacent system, both could benefit the gameplay mechanics of ED immensely. Furthermore, it is exactly the way you put it - whether they make the galaxy be fully seamless or just appear fully seamless is basically the same thing, as long as the appearance is believable enough.



I appreciate where you are coming from, as everyone is suited to their own playstyle. However, if it were possible to actually implement a solution without using up too many of FD's resources, would you be against that? I am referring to the many examples that have already been suggested here by fellow commanders concerning the way a more believable transition could be made to occur, e.g. by using an automatic jump somewhere on the border between two star systems.

If it were possible no, I wouldn't be. However, it's clearly not possible as we can't even get a proper list of known issues they are going to fix, only hints and tidbits, and what is intended when there's many reports, posts etc and they keep fixing things that don't seem like big issues (I'm not a game designer, so I don't know, that's why I said seem). We don't even know how certain major systems in the game work because it's just not documented, so we don't even know if things are bugs or not sometimes. We are already looking at balance when there's bugs still in the game from beta because people want pee vee pee right now and feel entitled to both live and get kills. I'm actually incredibly disappointed that I can't be a proper Mercenary because of the mission inconsistencies and bugs and I can't use Dumbfire Missile Racks because they fire backward and waste money, being a Smuggler is dull and not very lucrative due to how the black market works, being a Pirate makes 10 cr an hour, Mining is clearly an after thought due to the lack of tools that should be there in the year we are playing in, etc... These are the things that are important to me and actually end up making up big chunks of the core game play but just don't seem important enough based on what I've read (and I do a lot of reading).

With the threads that are being made in this community along with what gets responded to by Staff and what doesn't, I look at something like this and others thinking: how is this something that matters right now? With how much game there is and could be, with how much you actually can explore already, how is this particular thing a problem right now? I just really question what's important to the community and the devs, suggestions are always great and there are amazing suggestions, but these things are being argued with a passion over things that are actually broken and affect everyone instead of being a very niche expansion request. I mean, the OP was disappointed simply at the fact that you can't do what he was trying to do, but then it branched off into this weird "but I want to explore" argument... There's really nothing there and they would have to add something to make it interesting and worth it which would consume more resources. If it's something that could be added in a much later expansion after things are working properly and we have a complete game where everyone is happy with it as a base game, do it. Right now, I just can't fathom how it's important to anyone, but I can say that about the guys trying to get everything rebalanced or nerfed into oblivion for the sake of pvp as well. I can't even tell if anyone is aware of the things I have reported, part of the vocal community sure as hell doesn't seem to know or care or "has zero issues". People have different priorities, what's for me isn't for you, I get it. I just feel that broken features need to be fixed before adding features or rebalancing.

Sorry, I know that turned into a diatribe that you didn't ask for. I just want to love the game but I'm getting pretty bothered by how things are, where they've been and where they seem to be going. I can't stream the game with the same confidence I started with right now. Talk about being mostly irrelevant to the conversation now, again, sorry.