The Planetary landing and planetside missions discussion Thread

[beelbeebub]

At the moment the SC transition to and from an instance takes some time as various computers have to sync data and establish communications. It is highly unlikely that this will be reduced to a small enough delay to be "seamless".
.
That leaves covering up the transition. IIRC Halo covered up these transitions by having the player walk down a corridor via a few doors (hence the number of corridors in the maps) rather than a non-interactive loading screen. S
.
Someone has suggested replacing the "drop" animation with a "mini game" similar to interdiction where the pilot has to fly down an "approach tunnel" in order to drop and MB seemed interested in the idea. Of course they would have to work out what to do if the pilot made a hash of the game (not drop out?, drop out with damage? drop out 25km from station?). Personally, I'd like to see the drop out distance from the target (and possibly heat signature) as the variable affected by your success at the "drop out" mini game. if you are a good pilot you can drop close to the stations (say 7.5km) for a quick transit and well within any no fire protection. if you fail, you drop out 25km from the station and have to slog you way there exposed to any pirates lurking...
.
How does this relate to planetary landings? Well, I imagine the architecture of the game would give two options:
.
The first would be that planets become another PoI in SC that can be dropped into. So you would approach the planet as you do now but at the appropriate time drop out into the planet instance. In this case the "mini game" would be the re-entry into the upper atmosphere (flames, heat management, buffeting etc.) and when complete you ship would be at a (say) 10 km altitude and traveling at 0-few km/s. This "planet" instance would be like SC as everyone would be travelling at "supersonic" speeds and wouldn't interact very much. In order to land or explore you would target a PoI (as in SC) and "drop out" on the landing strip/city/USS instance.
.
The other alternative would be to treat the destinations on the planet as PoI themselves and drop directly into them. With this method, any fast travel around the planet would have to be achieved by going back into SC and traveling in SC before dropping down on the other side of the planet i.e. there would be no high speed travel in the planets atmosphere

 

[SgtLennin]

i would love to see a game , where we need to hit the atmosphere and according to the size of the planet , atmosphere thickness etc, we need to navigate and manage speed acoordingly or blow up

Try Orbiter, install the DeltaGlider IV and/or some other great extra shuttles and do i.e. a trip ISS to Cape Canaveral. Graphics are a bit outdated (there are great 3D cockpits though) but this is the most realistic space travel possible on your PC. The experience is thrilling as you descent into Earth's atmosphere, bleed off energy, keep your temperatures stable and keep track on your destination instead of landing in the ocean. Here are links and instructions to install orbiter + nice spaceships + nice board computers.
http://gemnets.blogspot.nl/2014/03/orbiter-space-flight-simulator.html
David Courtney has excellent tutorials teaching you everything. You should be able to fly to the ISS and back with just a few hours practice. Well, I did and I am not that good. A round trip to the moon and a round trip to other planets is also exciting when you achieve it for the first time. A rewarding sim that actually teaches you real things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-zaubu3RgU

 

[OnePercent]

At the moment the SC transition to and from an instance takes some time as various computers have to sync data and establish communications. It is highly unlikely that this will be reduced to a small enough delay to be "seamless".
.
That leaves covering up the transition. IIRC Halo covered up these transitions by having the player walk down a corridor via a few doors (hence the number of corridors in the maps) rather than a non-interactive loading screen. S
.
Someone has suggested replacing the "drop" animation with a "mini game" similar to interdiction where the pilot has to fly down an "approach tunnel" in order to drop and MB seemed interested in the idea. Of course they would have to work out what to do if the pilot made a hash of the game (not drop out?, drop out with damage? drop out 25km from station?). Personally, I'd like to see the drop out distance from the target (and possibly heat signature) as the variable affected by your success at the "drop out" mini game. if you are a good pilot you can drop close to the stations (say 7.5km) for a quick transit and well within any no fire protection. if you fail, you drop out 25km from the station and have to slog you way there exposed to any pirates lurking...
.
How does this relate to planetary landings? Well, I imagine the architecture of the game would give two options:
.
The first would be that planets become another PoI in SC that can be dropped into. So you would approach the planet as you do now but at the appropriate time drop out into the planet instance. In this case the "mini game" would be the re-entry into the upper atmosphere (flames, heat management, buffeting etc.) and when complete you ship would be at a (say) 10 km altitude and traveling at 0-few km/s. This "planet" instance would be like SC as everyone would be travelling at "supersonic" speeds and wouldn't interact very much. In order to land or explore you would target a PoI (as in SC) and "drop out" on the landing strip/city/USS instance.
.
The other alternative would be to treat the destinations on the planet as PoI themselves and drop directly into them. With this method, any fast travel around the planet would have to be achieved by going back into SC and traveling in SC before dropping down on the other side of the planet i.e. there would be no high speed travel in the planets atmosphere

Like I said before I believe we will be super cruising into the atmosphere and then be able to drop out of SC anywhere in the atmosphere (and also enter it, say above a certain altutude that doesn't take long to get to at top speed..), there is really no other alternative to a networked instanced approach.

 

[Jetkar]

Most probably Planetary landing, planetary modules will be part of forthcoming DLC for ED

 

[Sacman]

Most probably Planetary landing, planetary modules will be part of forthcoming DLC for ED

Yes i guess ... you just approach the planet and activate the modul.
Nothing more to do.
Its like automatic planet docking.

 

[lysan]

i would love to see a game , where we need to hit the atmosphere and according to the size of the planet , atmosphere thickness etc, we need to navigate and manage speed acoordingly or blow up

I agree, it must be a bit difficult and not just point a click magic too many games have this dump down mechanics.

That would likely be when I stop playing the game.
I still consider the current "loading screen" from SC to normal space a temporary solution that hopefully will disappear when the proper implementation of the seamless universe is released.
The seamlessness has been done before in other games, so it can be done, come on FD!! It's such an immersion killer now and it would be worse when going down to a planet.

Yes, we know it can be done right! so that is the benchmark to aim for.

 

[Alric]

I don't really have a problem with the transitions - I mean other than the omg it's not seamless reaction I don't think it matters. Most sci-fi has some transition to high speeds where there is a brief period in which the ship isn't being steered or actively controlled. So if the end result isn't a problem I'm not going to quibble over the technical implementation.

I'm looking forward to planets a lot. I expect we will be able to super cruise in to the upper atmosphere, and from there we'll be free to fly across the planet's surface. With all the different types of moons and stars there will be some spectacular sights.

 

[dreamer1986]

Yea, a good transition would be nice, maybe with a nice minigame.

But more important for me is what will there be to do on the planets, like the activities you could do. Sightseeing is nice, but maybe some shoother type bounty hunting would be good, attacking with your marines a planetary pirate base, or be a pirate and attack a planetary fortress to steal valuable stuff...

Some researching of native lifeforms would be fun. And maybe finding lost treasures, and exploring lost archeological sites

 

[Im_Lost]

I think you should have to SC to the upper atmosphere and then switch to normal engines and do a re-entry (with flames and everything)

It will be hard to make it like the old Elites because you can't speed up time, it would take ages to go from space to ground.

 

[gammauser]

Do we REALLY need planetary landings and ship/hangar walkabouts

Reading through a lot of the forum posts, this feature seems to be among the top of the ED wishlists. However I'm wondering whether this is a lot of development effort for something players will use maybe a couple of times. Yes the first time you walk about looking at your ship or land on a planet may be awe inspiring but after a while will it not just get boring and something you won't bother with?
For instance, say you're wanting to earn enough credits to upgrade your ship or buy a better one (and let's face it, that as the ONLY reason for earning money in this game). Well every time you land on a station are you really going to get out of your ship look around it just because you can? First couple of times yes, but after that is there any point?
it would be like playing a 1st person shooter where all you do is walk around the level looking at scenery. Even if the scenery was sufficiently varied and detailed after a while it would just become boring would it not ?

i think the developers should weigh up the time and effort it would take to implement this against the actual enhancement to gameplay it would actually provide. Maybe concentrate on providing the ability for players to actually interact more that would provide a more varied and rich gameplay.
some suggestions(apologies if these were already suggested but just writing them off the top of my head)

1/ allow players to create missions. For example, I need a certain piece of equiment for my ship but can't be bothered running around star systems looking for it, post a mission that will reward someone for delivering it.

2/ allow players to post a bounty. Someone's randomly killed you for the heck of it-post a big reward to incentivise other players to find and kill them in return (more than just the standard bounty would yield)

3/ allow players with lots of money to be able to lend money to starter players (with intrest) so they can get a quick start. If the money isn't paid back within an agreed time or agreed instalments then 2/ above can be invoked.

4/ allow players to employ others to do trading for them-that way they can make money even when off line as other players are doing their trading. In return the players doing the trading maybe get a percentage of the profit plus a large cash injection to allow them to get more storage space or weapons on their ships to aid in said job without them having to fork out the money for them.

5/ players can offer other players better insurance rates based on player stats. this works like a real insurance company allowing you to give better rates to a 'careful driver' that's less prone to taking risks. This could be a whole other line eg. Trade, fight, explore, mine, INSURE!

6/ players could buy and then hire out ships or equipment to other players say for one off missions or endeavours that need a bigger ship

7/ ability to hire out other players to escort you in a particularly dangerous missions or to do a particularly nasty illegal thing.

8/ ships/equipment should degrade over time forcing you to replace them after a certain time just like in the real world. Also their value should depreciate over time meaning that you need to think carefully when outfitting rather than being able to just get the original value back. Also how abouts being able to auction off second hand equipment/ships to other players?

9/ ultimately maybe ED credits could be exchanged for real-world rewards eg. money-off future expansion packs to incentivise players to keep playing and making more money.

So in summary, the eye-candy of walking round your ship or landing in a planet may require a lot of development for very little usage once you've experienced it once. I think suggestions along the lines of the ones given above would maybe set it apart from star Citizen which is already going for this persistent universe as they call it but which may have little long-lasting appeal. The original Elite was a great game when played as a single player but since ED is a multiplayer game I think that's what should be focused on as its the interaction with others and the unpredictability of human nature which will give it longer lasting appeal.

 

[Commander_Tin]

However I'm wondering whether this is a lot of development effort for something players will use maybe a couple of times.

Not if Frontier does it properly. I'm expecting entirely new gameplay to come with this.

 

[Ydiss]

FD have said they won't do something unless they can do it the right way. They won't add either feature unless it has a reason.

In short, the answer is "you don't know enough".

 

[Joe Spivey]

I like a lot of the suggestions you make but as far as the walking around outside your ship is concerned, i think you have missed the point. Eye candy is a minor part of what is planned to be an FPS style environment. With this in place, your assassination mission might take place in the target's apartment or anywhere on a station or planet. Then there is ship boarding. Imagine doing EVA from your ship to the target for some on-board FPS? Fancy a spot of big game hunting while planetside? As for development time, remember that FD already have a FPS that was developed but never released and it was built with the Cobra engine just like ED. Big things are coming to the game, enjoy the ride

 

[S~P]

I can see the attraction for planet landings, but walking around stations can't see the point.

 

[noodle]

Yeah. I don't want anything that might distract me from grinding credits. Grind grind grind grind grind grind grind. I'm really worried about this getting in the way of my grinding. Only yesterday, I accidentally had some fun and forgot to grind. It was very annoying.

 

[dr.zli]

2/ allow players to post a bounty. Someone's randomly killed you for the heck of it-post a big reward to incentivise other players to find and kill them in return (more than just the standard bounty would yield)

3/ allow players with lots of money to be able to lend money to starter players (with intrest) so they can get a quick start. If the money isn't paid back within an agreed time or agreed instalments then 2/ above can be invoked.

so me and my friend take each a couple of mil from you. Of course, we don't intend to pay off the loan. You post bounties. I kill my friend and he kills me and we pick up additional money.

Please, I want this mechanic in ED

 

[Britannkic]

Planetary landings as part of missions, yes

otherwise to do it properly would require a whole new game effectively. I'd expect to be able to fly across the world and enter Arctic regions, mountains, desert, tropical, subtropical, temperate, alpine... And what about weather?? How much interaction could I have? Could I start logging? Mining? Grow crops?

walking about ships is a yes, especially for boarding other craft and taking over in a piratical way. That I think would. Be easier to implement well.
itd also be cool to exit the ship in a repair pod or powered spacesuit and be able to circle the ship, do repairs etcetc

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Do we REALLY need planetary landings and ship/hangar walkabouts

Hells bells! Yes we do! Or at least, i want.

One thing to keep in mind though, the difference between expansions and new features.

Both planetary landings and EVA are highly likely to be paid for expansions. In other words, they should cover their own devleopment time and efforts. The points you raised are more in the way of new features which could be delivered as part of the regular development cycle.

I see a number of issues with your ideas, but new ideas are cool anyway, maybe there are things devs can consider although i guess some of them are not in line with FDs planned direction.

 

[Armand]

I agree with OP. As for "FD have said they won't do something unless they can do it the right way" - I've heard it a million times before; there are plenty of examples of FD doing it wrong.

Walking around is pointless if there's nothing to do or people to meet. Planetary landings may be fun, but not on the top of my priority list.

What I'd like it see first is more variety and a less mechanistic approach. Missions that start in other ways than from the BB. More interesting missions - adventure/quest kinds. More space events (gamma radiation, gravitational anomalies, weird stuff that happens while in SC); System-wide chat (could be used for missions, too). More space station designs, including interiors. Secret stations hidden in asteroids with unique designs. I could go on and on.

The thing is, as it stands, I already lost interest in E: D. I played it since Premium Beta and stopped in Gamma, when it became clear it's not going to offer much more. I'm sick of its uniformity. Same stations. Same actions. Same USS mechanics. Combat is fun but that too gets boring as nothing changes, you just go to the same war zone or nav beacon and do the same thing over and over again. I'd rather go out and have fun with the kids in the snow.

 

[Zhang]

I say we don't need it for now, not until and unless FD fixes and fleshes out what we have already now. We have this vast expanse of a shallow ocean, please FD can you like make it deeper? My ankles are not even wet.