"The path of least resistance"

[Andrew Sayers]

I don't think the education example in the third solution is actually appropriate.

First, because saying that a player must use a certain view mode, which theoretically only affects himself, due to immersion is silly. As long as I'm not harming others, I will play in whichever way I find more fun, which can potentially include doing things that break immersion for myself. (I would avoid breaking immersion for other players, though, because I do see that as potentially harming them, or at least their experience.)

That's a very interesting example of the path of least resistance. I would say a player thinking "hmm, I guess it's more immersive, but I still like it better the other way" is education working.

Prompted by Retrolave, I fired Wing Commander up the other day. I'd never really registered before just how little of the screen you can see, but now I've been educated it's added another level of interest - now moving from the fast, light Hornet to the slow, powerful Scimitar is about retraining myself to navigate with my free eyes instead of my sluggish engines. If I could turn the cockpit off, even if I took the opportunity almost all the time, knowing that little bit about the ships' personalities would let me fill in the blanks in my mind.

Maybe the solution to the cockpit problem is simply to label the option non-roleplay settings > hide ship dashboard while in flight, and re-enable it every time you buy a new ship?

 

[Andrew Sayers]

I think what will happen is you'll get people that will be pvp'ers in the mulitplayer world, but switch to soloplayer when they need to replenish supplies, earn credits to pay off debts/fines, and replace equipment and ships before hopping back into MP - rinse and repeat. There won't be a culture shock at all imho. That's the kind of exploit I can see happening with this system.

This made me realise - I expect my play style will be exactly the opposite. I'll pootle around the core systems in the "all" group, making friends and getting into the occasional scrape with NPCs. Even the odd PvPer trespassing into the core will make for a nice change of pace. Then when I want to go explore the frontier, I'll group up with my new friends and we'll battle waves of tough NPCs that have no strong opinion about our mothers.

 

[Cathy]

I can see my knees! My manly fist on the joystick!

Hard to quantify how much eyestrain this next one generated. Am I focusing on an asteroid-station in the distance? Am I focusing on a display at about four feet? No, I'm trying to focus the lenses in my eyes on a flat monitor at a constant distance on my desk... but my brain doesn't want to grasp that...

 

[withnail]

Heh! That last one is awful.

Forgive my ignorance but what game is that?

 

[Slawkenbergius]

Forgive my ignorance but what game is that?

It's a screenshot of Elite IV in the early stages of development.

 

[PacalB]

Just wanted to pick up on this - the devs have said there won't be a third person pov. That's not going to be a problem.

The discussion centres on screen real estate taken up with cockpit infrastructure like window struts, and being able to toggle that off. My suggestion is that there should be zero or negligible difference to your combat etc. awareness by toggling that off.

They are bang on with that decision, the guys over at MWO (Mechwarrior Online) chose exactly the same path for the same in game combat reasons, thus its good to see it implemented here as well.

Personally, I don't think you should be able to toggle it off the cockpit, period. To me, you loose the individuality of the ship the moment you are allowed to do this (I'm assuming the different ships will have different cockpits and HUD's). If visibility and awareness is lower on certain classes, so bit it. Thats just the hit you get for that class of ship.

As for third person view, it should only be allowed as a cinematic view when no other ships are in the area (for screen shots).

 

[Barns]

It's not that the npcs will be more difficult in single player because we told them to be, they'll just be more of them and their difficulty will scale along with the number of human players available. So even in multiplayer, if you're not near anyone you can expect npcs more difficult than normal. But then again large groups of human players might also allow extremely hard npcs to show up to challenge all the players as a group too.

So if I'm in multiplayer in a system with a number of other players who happen to be friendly and just killing NPCs, those NPCs will all be easier than if I was there solo? That doesn't make any sense at all to me. Surely NPCs should either be exactly the same difficulty whether or not other players are there, or they should be harder when there are more players around to kill them.

Or are you assuming that "players in an actual grouped party are working together -> harder NPCs" and "players just happening to be in same system will probably kill each other -> weaker NPCs", thus assuming that most player->player interactions will be hostile? What about the case where players aren't actually "partied" but are still fighting the same NPCs?

I guess I'm just not happy that solo play is being "tweaked" in this way vs multiplayer. In my mind they should be identical, just with extra players in multiplayer. What's the goal? To discourage players from playing solo as much as possible? Why the need to make solo "as hard" as multiplayer? Shouldn't players be able to choose the level of "hardness" they wish, especially when they're soloing?

If this is the direction the design is taking purely to keep a mythical "balance" between solo and multiplayer "risk/reward" then I might actually be in favor of having a "solo online" play mode where any commander you create in that is forever tied solo and can't be multiplayer, just to avoid these sorts of design fudges to appease the "don't let people solo stuff" crowd.

Oh, and while I'm complaining, cockpits : please please please let us have a HUD-only mode. The cockpit struts etc look pretty in a screenshot but I know for sure they will give me migraines and just become annoyingly in the way (for me). I really don't see this as any more of an "easy mode" than multi monitors, having more time to play, cash to burn on credits, all the other imbalances there are in the game. And it's one that every player has a personal choice over (hud or cockpit), at least!

As for immersion, the latest current fighter jets have cockpit views with zero "architecture" visible, HUDs projected onto the pilot's eyes, external camera views etc. Why wouldn't there be even more of this far in the future? Just seems much more plausible.

And no external 3rd person view? Why would I go to the bother of keeping my paintwork shiny, applying decals, etc if I can never see them? All that "simulated wear and tear and damage" you show off in concept art - I'll never get to look at my own ship while flying to see it all?

 

[PacalB]

Oh, and while I'm complaining, cockpits : please please please let us have a HUD-only mode. The cockpit struts etc look pretty in a screenshot but I know for sure they will give me migraines and just become annoyingly in the way (for me). I really don't see this as any more of an "easy mode" than multi monitors, having more time to play, cash to burn on credits, all the other imbalances there are in the game. And it's one that every player has a personal choice over (hud or cockpit), at least!

:S migraines? Are you sure you should be playing games that involve 3D movement?

As for immersion, the latest current fighter jets have cockpit views with zero "architecture" visible, HUDs projected onto the pilot's eyes, external camera views etc. Why wouldn't there be even more of this far in the future? Just seems much more plausible.

Today’s A-10s, F-15s, F-16s, F/A-18s and F-22s, have so-called “bubble canopies” with good all-round vision but its not zero "architecture", no such thing. The closest you'll get to this is with the Eagle (and likes) in game I suppose. Are you suggesting all ships should effectively be bubble canopies?

And no external 3rd person view? Why would I go to the bother of keeping my paintwork shiny, applying decals, etc if I can never see them? All that "simulated wear and tear and damage" you show off in concept art - I'll never get to look at my own ship while flying to see it all?

Leave that for others to look who are around you, that or a cinematic option when you are not with other pilots. Other than that it just gets used as a way gain an awareness advantage at which point everyone has to use it to compete in multiplayer. Sounds and looks a bit like EvE 2.0 to me once you start down that path. It destroys the 'in ship' immersion basically.

 

[Barns]

Today’s A-10s, F-15s, F-16s, F/A-18s and F-22s, have so-called “bubble canopies” with good all-round vision but its not zero "architecture", no such thing. The closest you'll get to this is with the Eagle (and likes) in game I suppose. Are you suggesting all ships should effectively be bubble canopies?

No I'm suggesting I don't give a rats behind for "immersion", I want it to be fun to actually play (for me). But for those who do want immersion, a HUD view can be really easily explained just by extrapolating today's advanced HUD displays 1000 years into the future.

Leave that for others to look who are around you, that or a cinematic option when you are not with other pilots. Other than that it just gets used as a way gain an awareness advantage at which point everyone has to use it to compete in multiplayer. Sounds and looks a bit like EvE 2.0 to me once you start down that path. It destroys the 'in ship' immersion basically.

Another nice feature removed at the altar of multiplayer "balance" Beginning to wish ED was single player only. So how about I can have my HUD and external views and stuff but only when playing solo? (and I'll stay there)

 

[Cathy]

Heh! That last one is awful.

Forgive my ignorance but what game is that?

Privateer (one). That's your starter ship if I remember right. Upgrades were a bit better, but a number of players couldn't be bothered to struggle through that.

 

[Cathy]

http://w-info.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/hud-head-up-displays-windshield.html

If I remember right from hearing about this stuff in the 80s, the projected display on your windscreen was designed for clarity when your eyes are focused middle-distance on the road ahead. That struck folk as rather clever

 

[insanephoton]

So is the objection to 3rd person view because it's immersion breaking or because of a perceived advantage in situation awareness? If it's the latter, then how do you address the likes of TrackIR , Oculus Rift or even a pov hat switch on a flight stick? They are certainly less immersion breaking and some might even say they are immersion enhancing, but they would also give the advantage to richer players that can afford better peripherals.

I'm also not sure that 3rd person view would be that useful in combat if you stripped away all of the hud displays like targeting reticule etc

 

[Darren Grey]

Everyone should remember that there are different cockpits in the game, each with different manufacturers and supporting different styles of play. It may be that the struts are for a defensive trader whilst a much more open view can be taken at the cost of some defence.

 

[jabokai]

And no external 3rd person view? Why would I go to the bother of keeping my paintwork shiny, applying decals, etc if I can never see them? All that "simulated wear and tear and damage" you show off in concept art - I'll never get to look at my own ship while flying to see it all?

The devs have said there will be ways of viewing the exterior of your ship for screenshots and just for the fun of it, but that third person won't exist as a piloting view. Keep it shiny!

:S migraines? Are you sure you should be playing games that involve 3D movement?

There seems a surprising number of people who have issues with cockpit views (I'm one of them too) but who don't have an issue with a clean, HUD only view.

 

[Fromhell]

That would, in effect, kill the groups system anyway.

and be replaced by a... *gasp*... simple territory based security system?? I'd open a bottle of champagne.

It would be a net loss to the game.

I think that is a fantasy land assumptiom

 

[PacalB]

No I'm suggesting I don't give a rats behind for "immersion", I want it to be fun to actually play (for me).

:S

That way of thinking is truly puzzling taking the game is being designed around player 'experience and immersion'. What makes you think the immersive side of the game won't be fun to actually play (for you)? Because its not being offered up as an EVE 2.0 ship control and viewing system?

Quote David Barben ...

As network connectivity gets ever better, control and input capabilities get ever more sophisticated, then so do the opportunities for our games like to shine and transform the players' experience and immersion. For example, our 2014 game Elite: Dangerous is an unashamedly high-end PC and Mac game, but I have every expectation it will come to new consoles, too.

 

[Tiwaz]

I agree, and that's how I'd want it to be. But its a utopian viewpoint and if going by past experiences is anything to go by (playing games like UO and Eve) unfortunately it won't be like that on the whole. On a personal level, yes. But players will use the path of least resistance to gain an advantage, they always do.

Which generally means ganking, griefing and being general *******s with benefit of superior something (levels, ships, gear etc etc).

Which rather blows the whole idea of "risk vs reward" out of the box.
Gankers and griefers do not take risks, but claim all the rewards if they are permitted to steal some or all of the possessions of their victim. In ED it would mean having roving bands of gankers with ships kitted for combat and escape, who will just blithely attack anything and everything they can beat and run from rest, making their risk minimal unless you get good drop on them. Easier said than done.

Victim loses all progress they have made between their last docking and moment of death, which is not very rewarding to most players and does tend to drive them away from the game.

PvP-people really should drop the "risk vs reward"-argument, as it does not hold water properly, specially if you state that players will always go for route of least resistance. What I have seen in variety of games to this date, all risks are for the victims and all rewards tend to float towards the ganksquads.

Though you are correct that players go for route of lowest resistance. Griefers and gankers tend to be one of the fastest growing groups in games. Often game starts out with smallish number of eager people with good ideas and perhaps even some sense of honour. But once game gets publicity, they are overwhelmed with flood of antisocials who are there just to wreck havoc as soon as they can.
So if we do not want the route of least resistance, how we deal with that issue is what I ask.

Sadly, I do not think there is an answer. This far all attempts to correct this issue have been failures. Each time one issue is fixed, the crowd looks for next loophole and starts to abuse it.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

So if we do not want the route of least resistance, how we deal with that issue is what I ask.

IMHO, the key is whether FD are prepared to let the grouping system ever put people in their own instance when there are instances full of players available.

I'm not interested in spending my leisure time being smack-talked or micro-optimising my ship layout, and I don't have enough leisure time to keep up with all the strategies that will quickly crop up. Players that do like that sort of thing will presumably be easy enough to detect (spends a lot of hours online, uses specific configurations nobody else uses, trades mostly along specific routes with good economies and bad laws, etc.). If Frontier can just make sure I'm never grouped with them, no path in the galaxy will be resistive enough to make me start thinking how to solve the problem myself.

 

[Cathy]

and be replaced by a... *gasp*... simple territoy based security system??

... One definition of hell.

I'd open a bottle of champagne.

Open one anyway. It's thirsty work, playing games Mine's a PG Tips, glass of Shiraz red or real ale.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

And no external 3rd person view? Why would I go to the bother of keeping my paintwork shiny, applying decals, etc if I can never see them? All that "simulated wear and tear and damage" you show off in concept art - I'll never get to look at my own ship while flying to see it all?

You'll be able to see that stuff once the walking in stations and planetary expansion comes along as you'll be able to walk around your ship while its docked / landed etc. Not much of a consolation though since it would have been nice to have a 3rd person external view in space.