[Feedback] My honest opinion on X4 and why i'm quitting it

[CBJ]

And once again, discuss the game, not the validity of each other's opinions.

[Hijack_Hornet]

If you are making an empire management game, then it is absolutely crucial to make the part of the game where the player spends the most of his time in, as efficient and easy to read as possible (In this case the Map).

That sums up quite nicely my post. Though i added a bit later that :
- The main game focus might not be managment and its that case it make sense
- Though the rest of the game point toward that direction with a very light progression if skipping the managment which in turns make you driving a ship kinda pointless.

So as you said very well, the "issue" for me is not that "it's missing X feature", but that the games goes in various directions and instead of being very good in one or two things, it is kinda "meh" in lots of things.

Games with a promise of "you can do anything" tends to fall into a design pit because if you split your game focus on 8 completly separate ways to play it, then sure it will please a lot of people, but it also means that you divide your developpement power into 8 different games within the game.

Again, i'm mostly raising what i believe to be game design flows or at least time managment mistakes.

[jlehtone]

a very light progression if skipping the managment which in turns make you driving a ship kinda pointless.

Why would slow progression make piloting pointless?

[Slashman]

Games with a promise of "you can do anything" tends to fall into a design pit because if you split your game focus on 8 completly separate ways to play it, then sure it will please a lot of people, but it also means that you divide your developpement power into 8 different games within the game.

Again, i'm mostly raising what i believe to be game design flows or at least time managment mistakes.

This has always been the way of the X games. They occupy a very specific notch in the space flight genre.

"X4: FOUNDATIONS brings our most sophisticated universe SIMULATION ever. Fly every ship, EXPLORE space or manage an empire; TRADE, FIGHT, BUILD and THINK carefully, while you embark on an epic journey."

That is from the Steam page of X4 Foundations. It never says you can do anything.

The main point of the game is a universe simulation. That's defined by the developers as having as close to a real economy as your PC and design limitations allow. Raw materials are mined and then processed into refined goods and eventually ships.

Under all that it is a space flight sim.

Empire management is never presented as the only option you can pursue. It is one of several and it is NOT necessarily the most important. The size of your empire is controlled by YOU. If you are getting to a point where you cannot control all your ships and stations...you maybe need to think about how to best organize your empire.

I draw your attention to this from your quote: "it will please a lot of people" And it has. The fact that you are not one that is pleased is regrettable but they are not going to please everyone. They need to focus on all aspects of the game not just empire management and that's the correct way of going about it because you can bet that you'd have multiple people crying out about them neglecting one part of it to focus on just one thing...even more than we have now.

From the beginning of the game launch they have added functionality to the map and additional options. They have not just been sitting on it. But every change needs testing and it has to be weighted versus the development of the rest of the game.

[Pares]

Empire management is never presented as the only option you can pursue. It is one of several and it is NOT necessarily the most important. The size of your empire is controlled by YOU. If you are getting to a point where you cannot control all your ships and stations...you maybe need to think about how to best organize your empire.

Sure, there are other things you can do besides deliberately building an empire, but all early-game activities lead to having to manage an empire too. Exploring (finding data vaults and crates), doing generic/war effort/story missions, trading and mining all generate massive amounts of credits and potentially gift you many ships. It is the inevitable evolution of the gameplay that you end up with either massive amounts of credits, assets, or both. And basically the only thing you can do with your credits is to aquire even more assets, which in case of stations, generate even more credits. And there's absolutely nothing to stop or challenge you along the way, only time and the deliberate restraints you put on yourself.

So I would argue that empire management is not really an option. It becomes an integral part of the game if you play enough.

[Hijack_Hornet]

Games with a promise of "you can do anything" tends to fall into a design pit because if you split your game focus on 8 completly separate ways to play it, then sure it will please a lot of people, but it also means that you divide your developpement power into 8 different games within the game.

Again, i'm mostly raising what i believe to be game design flows or at least time managment mistakes.

This has always been the way of the X games. They occupy a very specific notch in the space flight genre.

"X4: FOUNDATIONS brings our most sophisticated universe SIMULATION ever. Fly every ship, EXPLORE space or manage an empire; TRADE, FIGHT, BUILD and THINK carefully, while you embark on an epic journey."

You are missunderstanding my message. I'm generalizing the statement to every game when it comes to game design. I didnt say that x4 goes the road of allowing you to do everything.
And yes it does and please a lot of people. I dont say that its a bad thing to go many roads, i'm saying that it also has drawbacks which has been discussed all along this thread.

But as you wrote in caps, it's SIMULATING the universe. Which is, you cant denied, not neccesary if you're never going to play the management aspect of the game.
If you simply want to be a pirate with a few other ships helping you out, how does the very sofisicated economy simulation helps you outside of taking a lot of computing power ?
Again, because i know i'll be quoted on this, i'm not saying that you should choose between the two options. I'm saying that from a game design point of view it's a dangerous choice as it will impact how each of this game mechanics will be limited. In this very specific case : the management player feel a bit sad because the ui doesnt meet its expectation, and the pirate player will feel troubled by the low framerate that simulating everything implies.

[oddible]

While the OP makes some good points, there is a bit of myopic thinking in many of the posts in this thread - that is to be expected - the game is huge, has a lot going on, satisfies a LOT of different play styles, and it isn't any of our career to work for Egosoft so we're not investing so much time into making sure we've buttoned our arguments down properly. For instance saying that end-game is where Egosoft should be spending their time because of the scope and scale of this game may not align with what ES are seeing in telemetry. Those few of us who do have 1000 hours into the game are a fraction of the number of people who actually play the game. Maybe ES are seeing their sweet spot in the mid game. There are a lot of factors to consider and you can read through these forums and find as many opinions as there are players on what the most important thing to work on.

That said, I'll agree with a couple points but also mention the history. The UI design and information design of such a vast game are definitely challenged. ES has done an ok job with it. Could it be better? Absolutely. Is it dramatically better than previous versions? Most definitely. So I see their progress. They're a small company - do they have the time or resources for a full time design / dev team to dial it in in one perfect swoop?Naw, but I do see them improving it each pass. Would I love to see faster progress with the UI improvements, most definitely, but I recognize that they have a balance to achieve.

Now one thing I suspect we could all agree on is the absolutely terrible onboarding. I want to see Egosoft succeed - if they sell games and get massive stacks of cash, I get a better game. This game has onboarding that sits in good company with Aurora, Dwarf Fortress, and many of the Paradox games. It is a freaking disaster. The CoH expansion dramatically improved the onboarding but it is still a monkey in a clown car. Screw cosmetics of stations, screw UI and info design, screw late game 300+ ship empire management, give us good onboarding. And we, the 1000 hour gamers, none of us need onboarding. We know how to play, but better onboarding means more players, means less Steam returns, means more cash, means more developers, means more resources to focus on UI, cosmetics, and late game management.

Finally, the whole "why play" thing that happens late game when the money hose is pouring cash into your bank account faster than you can spend it. This happens in a lot of sims like this. Transport Fever 2 comes to mind. Then it is about optimization. But that gets boring. Working out economic balancing issues into late game is a HUGE endeavor. They need resources for that - likely it is a different game. X5?

Fix onboarding, fix some of the quirly UI which is a barrier of entry to new players, then use the new found resources to solve problems for us 1%ers with 1000+ hours into the game. That is my selfless take on things. Fortunately Egosoft don't listen to me and are making the game better for me too each release

[oddible]

Which is, you cant denied, not neccesary if you're never going to play the management aspect of the game.
If you simply want to be a pirate with a few other ships helping you out, how does the very sofisicated economy simulation helps you outside of taking a lot of computing power ?
Again, because i know i'll be quoted on this, i'm not saying that you should choose between the two options. I'm saying that from a game design point of view it's a dangerous choice as it will impact how each of this game mechanics will be limited. In this very specific case : the management player feel a bit sad because the ui doesnt meet its expectation, and the pirate player will feel troubled by the low framerate that simulating everything implies.

Except that this is literally their thing. This is literally the differentiator of this game. This IS the definition of an Egosoft X game. Does it work perfectly? No. Do they do it better than everyone else. Yup. Have they gotten a little better with each new game, YES (we don't talk about Rebirth).

If you want a flight sim, go play Elite. If you want a more arcadey game, go play Starpoint Gemini. If you want multiplayer 3rd person go play Eve. If you want a dogfight grind with more realistic interiors, go play Star Citizen. The player has options. X games are what they are. The solution isn't to deny their identity because it isn't done perfectly, it is to keep striving for better and leveraging a intelligent and passionate and diverse community to keep things moving in the right direction. (and build a modding engine so people can mod out or make easier the things they don't like).

[Slashman]

If you want a flight sim, go play Elite. If you want a more arcadey game, go play Starpoint Gemini. If you want multiplayer 3rd person go play Eve. If you want a dogfight grind with more realistic interiors, go play Star Citizen. The player has options. X games are what they are. The solution isn't to deny their identity because it isn't done perfectly, it is to keep striving for better and leveraging a intelligent and passionate and diverse community to keep things moving in the right direction. (and build a modding engine so people can mod out or make easier the things they don't like).

This is well said. I can definitely see an improvement from X3 in the interface and handling of many things UI related. Its not perfect but progress has been made. I don't miss having to memorize a gazillion hot keys and key combinations. I do accept that the interface will not be perfect for every situation, but by and large it is workable and even decent for most of the game.

And even now...things get added like mass crew management that were not there before.

[delilah wild]

Indeed, the UI including map, lists, tabs, fonts, colours, symbols are atrocious. A barrier to new player entry and a stain on an otherwise promising game.

[gorgofdoom]

Some of what you have stated is contradictory. You've also sorta railroaded your opinion of the title based on your personal gaming style.

If we're to spend most of the time in the map why does it matter if the stations aren't defined visually (in person) as to their specific faction? Not to mention that FRF stations are supposedly owned by ZYA-- It would be a very complicated task for the denizens of X to change them.... especially those part of a slave population who (on the very best day) have no say about their stations livery. Perhaps this would make sense for the other factions, but it's not a priority in my opinion as i already know the faction who owns any station I find myself approaching.

I spend about 90% of the time out of the map as most of the high earning activities cannot be automated. Lots of X:4 players seem to fall into the 'always in the map' trap and then find themselves with 400 hour long games where they have earned only 1bn. I did that once, and will never go back, because it's just... really... boring.... anyway.

I definitely like your idea of changing up the faction management buttons. That exact problem plagues me every time.

[Hijack_Hornet]

Removed the part related to faction differenciation skins from original post as it was more of a suggestion for immersion improvement but was not essential anyway. Another thread was already tackling this subject.

I'd rather keep the thread on the topic of Game design choices and UI UX issues. (The "boarding" of new players being part of the UX).

Also i'd like to point out that arguments of type "this has always been like that" do not provide any real input to the discussion. It's like discussing about AAA games with a 6h campaign for 60$, you could say "it's always been like that", it doesnt mean that it should, nor that its now ok to do so. It's just not an argument. Try and explain why you think that it's a good or bad way of doing things.

Same goes for things like "if you dont like it, go play something else". Sure we can. But if we're here today is because we'd rather see this game succeed than just boarding out and play something else. In the end we are all on the same side, remember that.

[Slashman]

I'd rather keep the thread on the topic of Game design choices and UI UX issues. (The "boarding" of new players being part of the UX).

On the matter of boarding new players, the X games have always been horrible at getting new players into the experience that were not willing to be invested. That's something that Egosoft have been universally bad at. I remember when I started playing X3 Terran conflict and a few years before that messing with X2...yes...I had to come to the forums and ask questions and try stuff and ask more questions and figure out why some things which were said to work didn't work the way I thought etc. etc.

The thing is that ultimately my interest in the game made me triumph over whatever difficulties were present with the interface and lack of information. That is something that will always be a challenge because Egosoft doesn't have a large enough team to put time into making new tutorials and changing existing ones to include all the changes that the game goes through throughout its life. But X4 has been better at that than X3 for sure...unfortunately as time goes on and more things are changed or added...the gulf opens up again and we are back to almost where we started. I don't have a solution for this that doesn't involve a huge time and money cost to the developers.

Also i'd like to point out that arguments of type "this has always been like that" do not provide any real input to the discussion. It's like discussing about slavery in 1845 and argue that "it's the american way, it always been like that". It's just not an argument. Try and explain why you think that it's a good or bad way of doing things.

I'd also say that those two things are in no way equivalent. You're likening the discussion of an institution that enforced human chattel slavery to the discussion of a video game. One has lasted over several generations from the 17th century and had its effects extend through to today, and the other is a purely optional piece of entertainment that costs less than $50. As a black man, though not an American, I find it rather insulting that you'd draw any kind of equivalency (no matter how tangential) between those two very different topics.

Same goes for things like "if you dont like it, go play something else". Sure we can. But if we're here today is because we'd rather see this game succeed than just boarding out and play something else. In the end we are all on the same side, remember that.

Where do you see that the game has failed? Its had 2 expansions so far and we're heading for a third right now. "It doesn't do the things that I want" is not the same as saying that a game has failed.

[Hijack_Hornet]

I didnt say the game failed. I said it would be better discussing WHERE it fails or WHERE it works. I'm not making a statement, i'm saying that we need to use real argumentation.

That you feel yourself offended by my comparaison, i feel sorry for. I've edited the post so i take another example that won't be so dramatic.
But no matter if the overall scope of the discussion is a 50$ game or a very serious matter, the way an argument works or not, is the same.
My only goal was to show that by using such arguments we wouldnt have moved forward a better situation in the past.

[CBJ]

Now that the OP has taken steps to make the first post less dramatic, which is definitely appreciated, perhaps we can get back to discussing the topics they've raised rather than continuing to talk about the nature and validity of the argument.

[Slashman]

I didnt say the game failed. I said it would be better discussing WHERE it fails or WHERE it works. I'm not making a statement, i'm saying that we need to use real argumentation.

That you feel youself oftended by my parralele i feel sorry for. I've edited the post so i take another example that won't be so dramatic.
But no matter if the overall scope of the discussion is a 50$ game or a very serious matter, the way an argument works or not, is the same.
My only goal was to show that by using such arguments we wouldnt have moved forward a better situation in the past.

No problem. Apology accepted and we can move on now.

I still think that the real problem is that the X games have always been ambitious. Always reaching for more than they can achieve and falling short of the ideal, but still achieving greatness. To me, that is part of their charm and Egosoft's odd niche where they occupy a spot that no other game company does is very appealing to me.

In an ideal X game...we'd have a full RTS interface that allows you to order your ships easily and present all the information that you need at a glance. It would be full of customizable options for the UI and have a range of selectable options as to whether you want to control an empire spanning many sectors or just a tight squadron of ships. The programming and interface work for that would be monumental and I doubt that Egosoft will ever have anything like it.

I'm the kind of person who works with what the game gives. As long as there is away to achieve what I want to do, I'll do it unless it is extremely tedious, boring or the results aren't worth my time or effort. When the game becomes a job, that's the signal to me to restart and try a different start or to play another game and wait for the next expansion. I don't know why some players are so hell bent on continuing a game long past the point where there is no challenge or all that's left to do is expand your empire with more more more. That's the ultimate snore fest for me and its why I stop playing so many 4x game sessions near to the end where my winning is a foregone conclusion.

Sure this game can theoretically be played forever in a single session. You have to ask yourself if that is something you really want to do and in the same way all the time. And if the answer is yes...then expect that you will be met by limitations of the interface.

[Maebius]

Haven't posted in a while, but for me, in all games that can be played "forever", it's the "little things" that always put me off eventually.

X4 is no stranger to "little things gone wrong", it's probably the king

I'm far more annoyed by constantly needing to zoom out when entering map mode, than any other major balancing issue. Super poor notification system, bad map filter, assigning pilots, getting crew etc etc... these little annoyances and hurdles to my enjoyment, really add up

But that's just me. I'm rooting for Egosoft to do better, best of luck.

[aurumgallente]

I'm a 25yo ...

if you know better way to represent important strategic data on the map, you are welcome to make and show some blueprints of UI/UX, I'm sure dev.team will examine it and apply if it will be better than existing one. This game, just like any other game, can't be good for all players, if it doesn't suit you, it's OK.
And it's very weird that you are "computer science engineer with a strong passion for game design", but you didn't mention other problems of X4 like absence of public modding tools for modmakers and single core process of the game while world uses multi-core processors.
No offence, but your arguments are very controversial and subjective, also you didn't provide any sketches of better data design. Usually if X players don't like something, they make mods to ix it, but in your case I wouldn't recommend this because UI is the hardest thing of X4 to mod.

As 35yo software engineer and modmaker I can tell you that many of hated by you aspects of the game should be taken as given. Saves are huge but I can understand why, game development is Agile process (just like any other commercial software), you don't know what you will face next year, so you have to take some actions to be able to handle any situation. I don't say that as player and modmaker I like 18000000 lines of code in save file, but I understand why save files are like they are and I hope, you will gain this knowledge too if you want to continue your career. X4 isn't perfect project but it is better than many products you can buy for same money.

[Hijack_Hornet]

absence of public modding tools for modmakers and single core process of the game while world uses multi-core processors.

First, i dont think an official modding tool is a must have, even though i modded the game as well.
Second of all, yes the game is multithreaded.. Multithread has its limit and no matter how good it is there is always one core that will hit the 100% before the other. But i dont find X4 to have issue with multithread. It is CPU heavy yes, but that doesnt means its because its not multithreaded.

Also i dont think you need to make the best strawberry pie to say that someone else pie isnt good. I dont have to work for free on a UX design that will not be implemented anyway, just so that i can make my point.
I did not mention data design either.

Agile doesnt mean you dont know where you are going. It only means you make smaller cycles with ajustements based on the client review.

Also i've dig into the save file and i know why its this big. Though i disagee on the neccesity of a big part of its content.

Finally i will just ignore the rest of your post as it is not focused on the topic but on your opinion of me.

[Alan Phipps]

How many times must we ask this? Please discuss the game and thread topic, and not other posters nor speculation about the reasons for others' opinions.