"You there, yes, excuse me. I am terribly sorry, but this is a Passive Resistance protest. No grumbling, I'm sorry. You will have to move to the Active Resistance Protest group. They meet on Tuesdays."
The ADS
- Thread starter Demsit
- Start date
- Status
"You there, yes, excuse me. I am terribly sorry, but this is a Passive Resistance protest. No grumbling, I'm sorry. You will have to move to the Active Resistance Protest group. They meet on Tuesdays."
Indeed, sir!
No.So is it possible they asked the console kiddies (no offense) how to make exploration better and they all chorused "more cwedits yaaaaaayy!" and explorations fate was sealed?
Or, like, they dont wanna do what you wanna happen because they either 1) dont agree with you (gasp!), or 2) prefer to put their resources elsewhere (e.g. next era). Of course you can just run around pretending that whenever you dont get what you want other people are meanies and poopypants, if that is how you cope with disappointment.
So is it possible they asked the console kiddies (no offense
If you are going to insult people at the very least be honest about it.
It's just the Burke way. First it was the PvP people and now its the console people's fault.
True, IIRC most explorers always said that they don't care for the credits. However, I also remember that almost everyone was always in agreement that exploration pays next to nothing. It was buffed in 1.2 and 2.3 for a reason...Uhm, the general consensus in the exploration forums has always been that credits are mostly irrelevant to exploration. I think the reason for this is that exploration doesn't take a high end ship with very expensive modules.
I have been an active member there for quite some years, and I don't recall masses crying "Exploration pays garbage". So, sorry, I have to call Shenanigans on that one.
That doesn't mean the sentiment you responded to was true. But I suspect that sentiment was in jest
What about "Us", who do care about the "gameplay", who do care about "populating the system map" and consider it "desirable gameplay", and do consider it part of "exploration". What about those of "Us" who do not see the System map as a starting point, but rather as a finished product, and what about those of "Us" who cannot make sense of the last part of this, which those of "Us" cannot even conceptualize.
Would it do any good, whatsoever, if "we" told "you" that the actual star system is still here, along with all its celestial bodies and planets, and that "you" can still go there, that nothing stops you from going there, wherever there might be, and you can still imagine touching it, appropriately or otherwise, with your imaginary hands? Would you believe me if I told you that your Unusual Systems still exist, and can still be found, and just because you haven't found one recently doesn't mean they're not still there to be found?
Again, I must ask, what makes "You" so much more important than "Us", that we should have to suffer again, as we suffered before, under the tyranny of your oppressive system, that made "Our" exploration a tedious, mindless, unenjoyable chore? Arrogance? Narcissism? Ego? Can you offer up anything other than "We" don't like it, that the rest of "Us" can actually counter with anything other than "Well 'We' Don't Like That"? Or will finally cede this is merely a matter of preferences and let it go at that point.
I will also challenge your position that the update did not bring anything new with actual evidence of new things:
1. POI Markers revealed by Probes
2. Mapping Probes
3. A brand new means of locating signal sources within systems.
4. Lagrange Clouds that did not exist before the update.
5. Space-based biological life that was not present before the update.
These are just five items that are indisputable facts that something new was introduced with the Exploration update.
I also challenge "You" to prove that "Your Fun" is somehow more important than "Our Fun". And I wish you luck with that.
I'm saving this quote to pin to the top of every future thread like this.
The main one for me, is that they just don't make any sense to both exist lore wise. And for me lore is very important in a game like ED.
Powerplay doesn't break the lore, rebuy and respawn is an unfortunate neccessity but is explained, but telepresense does completely break lore and I really dislike that. Addng more stuff that breaks the lore, just makes the game poorer. Just because there is stuff that breaks lore doesn't mean its okay to add more. The more that happens the more stupid the game will be.
You're conflating playstyle with higher efficiency. It was also more efficient to shoot down immobile enemy NPCs.
In this same line of logic, pursuant to the FSS adding time being "worse", would you consider it to be "better" if a scan wasn't necessary at all? If you jumped into a system and got the full map without the honk, and got the discovery credit just by passing through, would that be superior?
Meandering to the orbit of the point, it's Elite Dangerous. It's not exactly an instant gratification game, so expecting Exploration of all things - the choice where people can spend between days and years in the dark of space - to contain a fast-moving mechanic is a little inconsistent.
Cruising back a bit, let's bounce off of that combat comparison just slightly. A "good" fight isn't regarded as one where you just blow the target into a memory in a couple seconds flat. Challenge is a factor in satisfaction with outcome; it's why puzzles exist and aren't just a picture in a box.
Keeping that in mind, what was the challenge in the ADS? At best, there was a chance to get what you were looking for when you jumped into a system, and outside of stellar-forge related factors, finding it was binary; push the button and you find everything in the system. Nested orbits, planet configurations, even the stuff on the other side of the star(s) in your face. The "explore system button" showed everything just like that, no mystery or challenge.
At the very least, the FSS has you scoping around, specifically angling for what it is you're finding in the system. But more, there is the chance something can be missed - something unimportant to another explorer could be just what you wanted to put your name on. Or you could breeze right by something somebody else was looking for.
You spend a far lower percentage of your time waiting for your FSD to charge and cool down with the FSS compared to the ADS. Faster is not always better; clearing more systems faster is not "more exploring", because a vast majority of time is going to be dedicated to jumping from one star to another. The biggest variable in honk-jumping is pointing toward the next jump.
There are mechanical requirements for these to exist, except for Powerplay, which exists solely for some people to complain about.
Similarly, it makes no sense for both ADS and FSS to exist in the game. That's like having all the weapons and also the option to have your loadout include a "kill enemy ship" button.
Pointing at a circle and clicking a button after maybe moving back and forth a little is literally the same as jumping from system to system with FSD.
I can't imagine exploration is much fun for you in the first place if you hate that.
Also just pointing at a coloured orb which you cant actually see and floating towards it to watch a circular animation start and finish before you even get to see it. Sounds great.
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
You see, this is the problem with this whole thread. If people could just accept that other people find different things fun, then there'd be much less argument.
One doesn't have to like dogs to accept that other people like dogs, so why is the FSS or ADS so different?
I think the problem is more people taking something out of context so it better suits their response. Or is that just you?
- Status