Planet Xploration?

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

26072013
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri, 26. Jul 13, 11:04

Post by 26072013 » Fri, 15. Dec 17, 14:06

immortalfrieza wrote: Dismissing a feature as bad under the logic that the time and effort spent on it could be or could have been better used to make another feature better is nothing more than a excuse to get rid of a feature you personally don't like, and a poor one at that.

That's obviously not true.

Money and time are limited. Developers can use their time to focus on the core features of their game and refine them to be as good as possible, OR they can spend their resources on adding dozens of different features and dilute their game to a disconnected mess of mechanics.

You simply can't have all the things, and you have to decide what's worth to have and what not. The station interiors in X:R were an awful idea, because they did cost several months or years of developer time and they made the game actively worse in every aspect.

And the thing is: We haven't seen interesting planets in a game yet. We also haven't seen a game where planets made actual sense for the game design and enriched the experience. And the reason for that is, that it's fricking hard to make it work.

It's hard to procedurally generate interesting planets of realistic sizes with different biomes.
It's hard to fill those planets with varied content like cities, road networks and other structures. It's so hard that it hasn't been done yet.
It's currently impossible to simulate economies and societies on a planetary scale in a meaningful way.
And how to balance all that while still keeping it believable in terms of population, resources, economy, etc.?

And all this can't be done in a few months of developer time; each of these points would potentially take years to get it right. Perhaps 'Star Citizen' with its currently >170 million dollars and hundreds of devs will create interesting planets for the first time, although I wouldn't bet 5 cents on it.

But for Egosoft with their limited resources it would be a huge mistake to even try to add planets, because instead of a better core experience we would get the next version of (Elite D.-like) huge barren rocks with no meaning for the core gameplay at all.

No, it would be awful. I hope X4 fully concentrates on space.

Slashman
Posts: 2073
Joined: Tue, 12. Oct 10, 03:31

Post by Slashman » Fri, 15. Dec 17, 18:04

This sounds like yet another "add multiplayer" thread.

Planets are not necessary in X games. Hell it took so many iterations to even get planets to be interesting in the Evochron series and I still am not inlove with them there either.

Right now we are finally getting a proper X game sequel with a lot of potential for new avenues to explore. That in itself is HUGE. I do not see the need to try to add planetary landings at this point.

Now economically to have planets perform an abstract function or present a resource is something Egosoft COULD look at. But this is definitely not a necessary feature.

I feel like Egosoft has finally gotten things together with X4. We don't need pointless detours right now. Lets leave that for expansions down the road.
If you want a different perspective, stand on your head.

LTerSlash
Posts: 1320
Joined: Mon, 27. Oct 08, 03:19

Post by LTerSlash » Fri, 15. Dec 17, 18:19

NO. There is no need to planets.

monster.zero
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue, 16. Feb 16, 23:11

Post by monster.zero » Fri, 15. Dec 17, 18:50

Don't care about landing on planets...I just want to ORBIT them.

Proper orbital mechanics would be number one on my list.

Visit a moon and see what's in orbit on the far side.
DEC BC ; Decrease the counter
LD A, B ; Load one byte of the counter into the accumulator
OR C ; Bitwise OR with the other byte
JR NZ, Loop

User avatar
spankahontis
Posts: 2210
Joined: Tue, 2. Nov 10, 22:47

Post by spankahontis » Thu, 21. Dec 17, 18:56

26072013 wrote:
immortalfrieza wrote: Dismissing a feature as bad under the logic that the time and effort spent on it could be or could have been better used to make another feature better is nothing more than a excuse to get rid of a feature you personally don't like, and a poor one at that.

That's obviously not true.

Money and time are limited. Developers can use their time to focus on the core features of their game and refine them to be as good as possible, OR they can spend their resources on adding dozens of different features and dilute their game to a disconnected mess of mechanics.

You simply can't have all the things, and you have to decide what's worth to have and what not. The station interiors in X:R were an awful idea, because they did cost several months or years of developer time and they made the game actively worse in every aspect.

And the thing is: We haven't seen interesting planets in a game yet. We also haven't seen a game where planets made actual sense for the game design and enriched the experience. And the reason for that is, that it's fricking hard to make it work.

It's hard to procedurally generate interesting planets of realistic sizes with different biomes.
It's hard to fill those planets with varied content like cities, road networks and other structures. It's so hard that it hasn't been done yet.
It's currently impossible to simulate economies and societies on a planetary scale in a meaningful way.
And how to balance all that while still keeping it believable in terms of population, resources, economy, etc.?

And all this can't be done in a few months of developer time; each of these points would potentially take years to get it right. Perhaps 'Star Citizen' with its currently >170 million dollars and hundreds of devs will create interesting planets for the first time, although I wouldn't bet 5 cents on it.

But for Egosoft with their limited resources it would be a huge mistake to even try to add planets, because instead of a better core experience we would get the next version of (Elite D.-like) huge barren rocks with no meaning for the core gameplay at all.

No, it would be awful. I hope X4 fully concentrates on space.

Again that's a matter of opinion.
Had it been done right, station walking would have been more interesting if more features were added to it that gave you a reason to explore the stations (Which Rebirth failed in).

To not exploit Planets for their material wealth goes against everything X as a game represents.
Building an economic empire yet people don't want to colonise planets/moons and asteroids.
Complete lunacy!

I'm confident that Egosoft will eventually introduce this into future X Titles, it's just not high on their priorities at the moment.
All we know is other space sims take planetary exploration seriously to implement it to their games.
If Egosoft shied away from this because it was "Too hard" then it would be embarrassing for them that they couldn't do what other companies, some with smaller teams than them could.

Simply need to draw the plans on what they want to do and what they can do?
Not go overboard with ambition and deliver something that's simple but fun that they can expand on.
There is no.. WaaaHH!!

siboda
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri, 15. Jul 11, 04:22

Post by siboda » Sun, 24. Dec 17, 17:09

No planet exploration please. Can we focus on a solid X4 that is worthy of the name X? If I want to explore a planet more closely, I play Empyrion. What X is good at is space combat, fleet management and empire building. I think we should let Egosoft get back on track with what worked really well from X3 (from their streams that seems to be the case).

Maybe someday we can have an X:Jack of All Trades game, but X4:Foundations is not that game.

Seanchaidh
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun, 10. Sep 17, 04:20

Post by Seanchaidh » Mon, 25. Dec 17, 02:37

Yeah, planet exploration is a huge project that I don't see being anywhere near satisfying enough to justify.

If you want planet exploration, go full sim and make X with the Orbiter 2010 flight model.

Berhg
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed, 25. Mar 09, 14:37

Re: Planet Xploration?

Post by Berhg » Sat, 30. Dec 17, 16:28

Cooper5567 wrote:Could there be any possibility of planet activity?
Be careful what you ask for.
Save the bunnies! RTFM

Image

PleXD
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri, 29. Nov 13, 14:21

Post by PleXD » Wed, 3. Jan 18, 07:15

I would say no to Planet exploration but I do think that some interaction with planets should be in place and it does not require much additional features.

Like have a (or Multiple) planet linked station(s) where they offer certain goods that the planet produce and request certain goods that the planet needs.

Each planet has 3 components Population, what resources it produces/needs and GDP.

If you provide the required resources the planet population grows at a faster rate. If you buy planet resources the GDP goes up.

Higher GDP means the more ships that can be purchased to defend.
Higher population means more resources it has to sell and requires.

You can destroy the planet linked station and depending on how high the population and GDP depends on how fast they can rebuild the planet linked station.

You can lower the planet population and GDP by buying planet bombarding weapons.

However this would ensure that if you do wipe out a faction they will eventually start rebuilding.

Kinscar
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue, 2. Jan 18, 17:25

Post by Kinscar » Wed, 3. Jan 18, 10:58

I agree with the general sentiment in this thread, the game should focus on space. Making ship and station interiors is already a massive undertaking.

Requiemfang
Posts: 2743
Joined: Thu, 16. Jul 09, 12:24

Post by Requiemfang » Thu, 4. Jan 18, 03:53

Yeah no to planet landings and exploration... if I want to do that I have plenty of other games I could play for that. NMS, Empryion, ect. X-series of games focus has always been about space not planets, sure we can have planets for visuals and eye candy but other than that, nope.

Post Reply

Return to “X4: Foundations”