Now that is a tough choice. But I would probably go to the orrey map as I would probably use it everyday. Planetary waypoints would be every so often. But it all depends on the gameplay that gets implements with planetary waypoints and an orrey map. They both have a huge amount of potential for good gameplay. But if it is as of right now, then it would an orrey map.
System map overhaul needed
- Thread starter Darkslayer
- Start date
Now that is a tough choice. But I would probably go to the orrey map as I would probably use it everyday. Planetary waypoints would be every so often. But it all depends on the gameplay that gets implements with planetary waypoints and an orrey map. They both have a huge amount of potential for good gameplay. But if it is as of right now, then it would an orrey map.
Regardless of practicality, it was a promised feature that is missing and FDev don’t seem to care enough.
What I'd really like is improvements to our ship displays so we don't need to go to the system map at all. You wouldn't really need much - just offer some more communicative icons for planets (even unscanned) to broadly distinguish between planet types and a new tab to look at planet details and it'd probably be OK
Good honest answer. We disagree obviously, but I respect your candour
If you were to guess, how do you suppose the community as a whole would vote?
It seems to me that for a lot of people, an orrery view would be a pretty thing to look at then largely unused (depends on how many USPs are added of course), whereas planet surface bookmarks/waypoints could make quite a large QoL improvement to any Cmdr looking for or returning to rich material sources, crash sites etc (again, depending on what useful benefits it turns out to have).
We currently have a way to view & navigate our way around a system (whether explored or not) that some are bored with from familiarity. We also have a planet surface waypoint system that works for missions, but is much less mature for non-mission activity.
Eat your stupid facepalm you troll-mod. You have no idea what a map is then. The catalogue that we have in game only shows the planets in order according to their distance relative to the star, but not their locations. And even as such, the distances in the catalogue are all the same, providing not even an approximation of where things are. Is just a sequence of bodies placed one next to the other, from the closest to the furthest.
The irony lies in the fact that they promised to work in exploration and to start working on new tools for it, while at the same the orrery map becomes another scrapped concept with all its potential.
Last edited:
I'm absolutely with you on this one. Great post, well spotted. That newsletter is from July 2013, it took them four years and a half to realize they cannot do it, and to reach the conclusion that it doesn't provide meaningful gameplay. Frontier is coming up not only as incompetent, but also as blatant liars.
Obsidian Ant mentioned his disappointment over this thread today in his newest 3303 video, and the sadness that no Orrery is planned at all from Frontier:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kRrdWNdihY&t=0s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kRrdWNdihY&t=0s
We have a 3D view of the galaxy yet we have a 2D Inventory list of a system. Its never made sense to me that this is our primary in-system view. The fact that Frontier won't do it for perceived lack of gameplay reasons is absolutely astonishing. Perhaps some questionable gameplay decisions on Frontier's part is due to them thinking in 2D.
Ok so FD is saying that they cant develop correctly Elite Dangerous because they are developing another game? The solution is very simple, change the focus to Elite and change its status from mediocre to great!
Then FD should take their time in developing the game instead of rushing half backed features and closing their doors for future improvement.
Im really dissapointed, again... But thanks anyway for response.
So it seems we have one of those permanet placeholders
Last edited:
using probes for scaning and locating ships on the map, then filter to big hauling ships for do some piracy.
Dale, now this does not make sense...Rebuilding the entire mapping system?? I don't understand this. Why would you need to rebuild the entire mapping system? We are not asking you to rebuild what already works - we just want an additional view!
Don't scratch what is already there, just add an additional 3D Orrery view. At the very least and at the beginning, all it has to do is do exactly what the current 2D inventory list view does except give us a 3D view so we can visualise how the system is laid out. You may not think this is worth it but I can tell you that there'll be a lot of people that will benefit from this. I mean, my god, you've created this incredibly stunning Galaxy Map in 3D yet you can't add an additional 3D System Map. Something's not right here.
If someone can do it with a website that is completely separate from the game then why can't you do this in-game? Saying you have to rebuild the whole mapping system just makes absolutely no sense at all. I repeat - don't remove what is already there - just add an additional view.
Don't scratch what is already there, just add an additional 3D Orrery view. At the very least and at the beginning, all it has to do is do exactly what the current 2D inventory list view does except give us a 3D view so we can visualise how the system is laid out. You may not think this is worth it but I can tell you that there'll be a lot of people that will benefit from this. I mean, my god, you've created this incredibly stunning Galaxy Map in 3D yet you can't add an additional 3D System Map. Something's not right here.
If someone can do it with a website that is completely separate from the game then why can't you do this in-game? Saying you have to rebuild the whole mapping system just makes absolutely no sense at all. I repeat - don't remove what is already there - just add an additional view.
I think this is mainly the problem at Fdev, they've got a company of programmers, mathematicians and engineers, no dreamers (who probably left once the base game had been finished).
Nothing since 2.1 indicates a single person working at Fdev works from a visual mindset - I mean, I guess there must be some, artists and what not but they don't have a voice in the upper echelons; an orrery is a necessity for anyone who works from a visual perspective, a mathematician can see the solar system from the numbers dancing on the screen, a logician doesn't require the visual fidelity, the facts tell him everything he needs... It's why the story telling of 2.4 ....s, there's no one there who knows how to construct a quality narrative (even with Drew Wagar <sp?> in the wings).
Normally this would make me happy, a youtuber would push upper management at Fdev to respond in a positive way, but I finally believe this isn't even on a distant todo list - it ain't happening - endof. This makes me sad.
It makes perfect sense to me that you'd want a schematic map as the primary view - it allows you to see quickly all the bodies in the system and their relationships within one screen without need for scrolling, panning or zooming.
Imagine if you went to London, Paris or New York and the subway map was in realistic 3D. Do you think you'd find it easier to plan a route or get an overview of all the stations?
Now, a 3D orrery style map would definitely be cool, but it should certainly not be the primary view.
Astonishing? Really?! Have you not read this forum? Every other thread is someone demanding Frontier implement their pet idea, whether it be atmospheric planets, new ships, legs, better missions etc. etc. They can't possibly do everything. Whilst a 3D map would be cool, it's really not essential to gameplay and therefore its perfectly reasonable for them to not prioritise it. Feel free to argue it's important to you, but loose the hyperbole.
Again, this is just blatently incorrect for any explorer out there as has been stated many times, but you seem to ignore. It would be used on a daily basis I suspect.
I don't expect to see planet bookmarks anytime soon. I can see us putting in co-ordinates to go to a sepcific place, but I doubt they will be saveable. Also I doubt they will be used as much as the Orrey Map.
No we do not. The "map" we have now does not help much with navigating our way around a star system, it has very limited value for that. I wouldn't even call it a map, more like a pictatorial interactive list.
The truly strange thing about it is…that four years ago it very much was on Frontier’s to do list. It was shown in the newsletter, they stated it was in development, even David himself commented on the 3D orrery map. At launch Frontier noted that the orrery would not make it in but that it would come in a later update. Cut to today, three years later, and now Frontier is telling us that it’s not planned and probably won’t ever happen.
So what changed between four years ago to today? Was it ever actually in development, or was Frontier lying about that? And if they did actual work on it but later scrapped it, then why?
The evidence and statements paint a muddy picture which is very unclear. One thing is clear though, a large portion of the players would love to have it and use it daily, so it’s not like this is a feature that would be a waste of dev time. Frontier’s development priorities really perplex me sometimes; they spend lots of time developing content which most people can’t or won’t enjoy, yet ignore features that many people clamor for.
Snipped for brevity.
Last point first: What it is called has nothing to do with the discussion, it doesn't matter how you define the word 'map'.
On a related note, questioning whether someone is an 'explorer', or is other words a 'true scotsman' is pointless too. A system view/summary/map (of whatever type) will be available to all player types. By all means ask specific questions as tests to determine how much weight my (or any other player that holds a different view) opinion is worth to the reader. I'll answer any specific question as frankly as I can if others do too. There is no need to assume that all true explorers hold one view, and anyone holding a different view clearly therefore cannot be a true explorer.
Explorers like to discover places and solve puzzles, to find glitches in the game & reach places that perhaps were never intended to be reached. I like to solve puzzles, I like to see how much I can achieve with sub-optimal equipment, or all-purpose equipment rather than specialising. To me, a 'true explorer' would scoff at being given an easier way to achieve a goal, their satisfaction is derived from the challenge of completing the incomplete dataset.
Achievers look to min/max, to achieve targets set either by the rules or by themselves. If you are out in a 60+ly Conda you are an achiever, pushing the upper limits of what you can get the equipment to do. An achiever would want to optimise stuff, travel as fast as they can, beat personal records, save time. An Achiever wants more tools so they can better optimise their routine.
Socialisers want to meet people, they want to go where everyone else goes, they want to know where others are, whether they be like-minded or enemies. A socialiser wants more tools so they can interact more with others.
Griefers want to meet people too, but for different reasons. Their requirements are similar to socialisers as far as this discussion is concerned, but their biggest gift to the community is their ability to break the game, to find bugs & exploits, and use their knowledge at the expense of others. They would love more tools, because more tools means more stuff to take advantage of.
So out of the lot of us, Explorers as a demographic are the ones least likely to benefit from adding another way to view a system. We currently have SuperCruise (eyes out the window and scanner), the left nav panel and the system view (sysmap). The Explorer can put the info together & solve the 'puzzle' of where they are in relation to everything (and everyone) else.
So. What type of player are you?
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
I'm an explorer.
I have no wish to have an orrery view.
Navigating around systems isn't particularly complicated and I'm REALLY not concerned about whether or not I take the most efficient path.
The current schematic view makes it very easy to check which bodies I've visited, which an orrery wouldn't do.
So, from at least one Explorer (and we're important, you know) it's a 'meh'.
Edit
Mostly ninja'd ny Cmdr Riverside, who's clearly had more coffee than me.
Last edited:
Well I don't think we need to get rid of the current view. It has its uses, but I can certainly see both being extremly useful. To me being efficient is needed. At times it has taken me over 3 hours to scan a system. Having an orrey map could have halved that.