Exactly! good find, been posting the full kicktarter vid on every forum I can, this is a clear development list we all expected.
Why is ship interiors something that is not planned to be included if at least half the player base wants it?
- Thread starter Deyangelo7
- Start date
I’m sorry i don’t understand the shotgun thing - help me understand
They broke aiming down sights. Its a gun specific bug. I got 3 shotguns, 2 of which I cant change livery without getting a black adder and both do not aim down sight.
The other one is fine.
Yes, that's prohibitively difficult, it can't work with the current ship models.
Remember Elite is currently set in 3307.
Planes are now modular.
Ships are modular. Littoral Combat Ships anyone? Let alone cruise liners.
Buildings are more or less pre-fabricated.
4 cargo bays from 4 different planes. C-5, C-17, C-130 and a Boeing 777. Also attached some LCS info. We are doing this now in 2021. Imagine the possibilities in 1200 years.
Think of the ships in Elite that other than the cockpit.
The question however is not whether people want something, it's whether it is worth the effort of doing something, which comes down to finance. I would assume Frontier have an idea of how money it would take to implement the interior of player ships, and can think about whether it's worth the financial investment. Many players might want it, but it might not be worth it if it's a lot of work: few existing players would leave the game without it, few non-players would be inspired to buy the game with it, and they are not confident it could be monetised with additional paid-for interior decorating. There's more bang for their buck doing something else (like bug fixing 
)
I wonder if detailed ship interiors aren't in fact incredibly difficult. Where is the class 7 compartment on an Ananconda? There isn't a set place on the ship for it. If it's a cargo hold, it needs to be around the cargo hatch, but if it's a fuel scoop or hangar or shield generator, somewhere else. And varied in size - maybe you only fitted a size 5 module in a class & compartment. If there are multiple cargo compartments, maybe they don't exist as separate compartments, they just sum together as one big cargo space - which makes a lot more sense. It's not hard to consider that the compartments were designed as an abstraction for gameplay and ship customisation: but this means to encode them as places a player can wander around is in fact a frickin' nightmare given the enormous variability. (That said I'd like Frontier to make some basic ship interior designs for derelicts that the player could explore, which should be much simpler.) A way round this is to simply block player access to most of their own ship. Every ship has a generic core "stem" of cockpit, crew cabin(s), airlock(s), maybe a galley/rec room, all linked by corridors, and that's all you're allowed to see. But I could imagine a lot of players finding this very unsatisfactory.
I also like "teleporting" between on foot and the ship, because I really cannot be arsed wasting 30 seconds of my life walking through a ship every time I want to get on/off it. So if they did create interiors, I'd still like the option of just appearing outside.
)I wonder if detailed ship interiors aren't in fact incredibly difficult. Where is the class 7 compartment on an Ananconda? There isn't a set place on the ship for it. If it's a cargo hold, it needs to be around the cargo hatch, but if it's a fuel scoop or hangar or shield generator, somewhere else. And varied in size - maybe you only fitted a size 5 module in a class & compartment. If there are multiple cargo compartments, maybe they don't exist as separate compartments, they just sum together as one big cargo space - which makes a lot more sense. It's not hard to consider that the compartments were designed as an abstraction for gameplay and ship customisation: but this means to encode them as places a player can wander around is in fact a frickin' nightmare given the enormous variability. (That said I'd like Frontier to make some basic ship interior designs for derelicts that the player could explore, which should be much simpler.) A way round this is to simply block player access to most of their own ship. Every ship has a generic core "stem" of cockpit, crew cabin(s), airlock(s), maybe a galley/rec room, all linked by corridors, and that's all you're allowed to see. But I could imagine a lot of players finding this very unsatisfactory.
I also like "teleporting" between on foot and the ship, because I really cannot be arsed wasting 30 seconds of my life walking through a ship every time I want to get on/off it. So if they did create interiors, I'd still like the option of just appearing outside.
That's very cool, thanks, it's pretty telling the amount of people putting in that amount of work to see something added to the game they love
I don't understand how anyone can imagine that this could be a problem.
@Agema
It seems to me that the big ships have 2 cargo hatches.
With regard to the difficulty of modular set ups, I suspect you could sidestep that by not making all of the ship accessible... What's really important though is what content would you put inside? I think décor is one of the obvious things Frontier could continue to build and monetise, but it won't hold attention on it's own.
Functional stuff would be good, I'm sure this is in the 19 pages somewhere but I'll ask what about KOTOR style weapons work benches? Places where you could swap out mods would make sense. Analysis stations might also be a good fit, perhaps some sort of supplement to surface scanning or artefacts examination? You could see how community goals and story arcs might benefit from that. Similarly, a crafting station for on foot items is hardly unknown in various games and in keeping with Elite's simulation-style.
Oh last thing, about "boring" walks... Elite is a sim, a good portion of the player base run it in "space trucker mode". I think it's safe to say elements of realism are not off-putting to the target audience.
Functional stuff would be good, I'm sure this is in the 19 pages somewhere but I'll ask what about KOTOR style weapons work benches? Places where you could swap out mods would make sense. Analysis stations might also be a good fit, perhaps some sort of supplement to surface scanning or artefacts examination? You could see how community goals and story arcs might benefit from that. Similarly, a crafting station for on foot items is hardly unknown in various games and in keeping with Elite's simulation-style.
Oh last thing, about "boring" walks... Elite is a sim, a good portion of the player base run it in "space trucker mode". I think it's safe to say elements of realism are not off-putting to the target audience.
Whatever you want. That's the point. That's what makes star citizen so fun with friends, that true multi-crew experience. Experiences are better and more enjoyable shared than by yourself, interiors would actually open up that opportunity. The multi-crew functionality that's in the game isn't much of an experience, you sit there and watch someone else play essentially. Interiors are fun to just explore while you are traveling as well, or even take a camping trip, it gives that social space to hang out. It gives more tools for roleplaying opportunities and is far more immersive than fading to black and into that same cockpit you've sat in for a thousand plus hours. It also very much adds to the replayability. We only have 32 ships, so having interiors would make those same ships feel new and exciting again and lastly, it opens up being able to Eva without having to shoot yaself off a planet with a geiser.
I get that some people find playing with other people enhances their game experiences, and good for them. I don't. I find it a hindrance to my enjoyment. That said, I am all for interiors so long as the things I can do right now and have been able to do since the game launched, instantaneously from the pilots seat remain a full option. Such as, I want to be able to use my FSS, DSS, AFMU, Repair Limpets, loading cargo, taking and completing missions, just as I do now.
But you can do all that at stations, settlements, bases, mega-ships etc (or will soon) in ED.
Delete, too hostile.
I ranted about VR in previous post, about how console players have no news versus PC VR players not having any news at all. I was too nasty to Frontier, so deleted original post. Didn't mean to attack business practices exercised by most all corporations.
To console users, us PC VR players are standing in line "behind" you.
I ranted about VR in previous post, about how console players have no news versus PC VR players not having any news at all. I was too nasty to Frontier, so deleted original post. Didn't mean to attack business practices exercised by most all corporations.
To console users, us PC VR players are standing in line "behind" you.
Last edited:
While I understand what you're saying to some extent, the real multicrew fun should come from doing stuff together, not standing around on a ship saluting each other in your underpants.
While the ship is in flight, its not like there is anything to do with ship interiors or even when landed. Its mainly just an immersion thing (although nothing wrong with that per se).
There could be more mechanics added to make multicrewing a ship more interesting, whether it be for mining or combat or whatever, but that doesn't require interiors either, just enhancement of existing multicrew.
You bring up roleplay, and again, nothing wrong with it per se, and doing in within ships, fair enough, but how many players are into that? How many want to spend their time standing around saluting each other in their underpants? (or whatever their roleplay consists of).
The fun for most i would say comes from actually working together to achieve some sort of goal. There are no goals provided by interiors.... unless FD add something like ship wreckage that can be boarded to obtain something. But own ship interiors.... not so interesting.
So, immersion, ok, roleplay, for those who are into it, ok, but the value for actual gameplay is limited.
Not saying they shouldn't do ship interiors, but they do have to balance the cost of implementation vs the added value.
I am in total agreement. I personally think they messed up with the AMFU and Hull limpets. I never liked them as it makes everything too easy.While I understand what you're saying to some extent, the real multicrew fun should come from doing stuff together, not standing around on a ship saluting each other in your underpants.
While the ship is in flight, its not like there is anything to do with ship interiors or even when landed. Its mainly just an immersion thing (although nothing wrong with that per se).
There could be more mechanics added to make multicrewing a ship more interesting, whether it be for mining or combat or whatever, but that doesn't require interiors either, just enhancement of existing multicrew.
You bring up roleplay, and again, nothing wrong with it per se, and doing in within ships, fair enough, but how many players are into that? How many want to spend their time standing around saluting each other in their underpants? (or whatever their roleplay consists of).
The fun for most i would say comes from actually working together to achieve some sort of goal. There are no goals provided by interiors.... unless FD add something like ship wreckage that can be boarded to obtain something. But own ship interiors.... not so interesting.
So, immersion, ok, roleplay, for those who are into it, ok, but the value for actual gameplay is limited.
Not saying they shouldn't do ship interiors, but they do have to balance the cost of implementation vs the added value.
If they were just band aids and degraded quickly over time, then ship repairs would be a viable option. Personal synthesis tool to synthesise equipment needed for repairs, having to hunt down for rare materials etc for a more permanent repair.
Expand on the multirole roles and you'd have a good reason for ship interiors.
But nope, we have a one button fix all system which is just too overpowered in my view.
Last edited:
There's two sides to what you suggest, both valid i would say.
On one side, at least AMFUs and Hull limpets allow repairs easily by a solo player.
On the other side, for multicrew to be somewhat desirable, then there needs to be benefits to it. One thing i think FD didn't do well with multicrew is how they tried to turn away from making multicrew a force multiplier.
As things stand, the power of two separate ships is twice higher than a single ship whether its solo or multicrew. I feel if two or more commanders are going to multicrew then the benefit (through whatever mechanism, whether it be repair, SLFs, Turrets, needs to be stronger (not 2x, but more than it is now). SLF is somewhat there, as you can also release an NPC as well if you have two of them. Turrets are a little better (but you can only have 1 turret) as it overcomes chaff. But there still needs to be more i think.
The question is, should FD go in this direction. I'm sure some would say yes and some would say no.
The main thing for me is that multicrew shouldn't become too desirable. Let's say (just as an example) that FD removed AMFUs and hull limpets and required you to get out of your seat to fix things. As long as you could do that solo, and not be dependent on multicrew, then ok. You could do post battle repairs (or just fly to a station, but whatever) but the advantage for mutlicrew would be that repairs could be carried out mid-battle. That does create an imbalance between a solo player and a multicrew ship, but there is already an imbalance in a two vs one situation anyway if they are instead flying two ships.
Last edited: