Kinda dissapointed we still only have 3 minerals

[samoja]

1-You can already mine crystals for big payday times. Maybe if you had played the game you would know.
2-Survey missions shouldn't be the focus of an X-game at all. And that should be a base assumption of every X-player...
3-Adding more minerals for the purpose (and the way) you propose would just add up many more goods for the sake of nothing. You don't really need more money from middle game on, nor you need more goods to crap up the economy even more.

1.I know that, i just think that's a silly way to go about it, you just break some nodules and credits magically appear in your account.
2.Says you.
3.Some of us like the game with a bit of complexity, because some of us can understand economy that is based on more then two resources.

The same old heated up soup. We have discussed this millions of times and the conclusion is always the same: it's pretty useless, since it doesn't really add anything to the game, except just another "big" station…

This is pretty nonsensical statement, it quite obviously adds a lot to the game, you just don't like the addition, don't try to reframe the argument.

Yeah, you're right. And that's why I won't even buy the game, but I'd like developers to add in X-wings and may be even the Enterprise, just for me getting fun when I'm zapping through YouTube videos...

If you had read my original response you would know that at this moment i am not in a position to play the game, but that will change in time, just because i don't have the game RIGHT NOW, does not mean i won't buy it when i can actually, you know, play it, not everyone is super wealthy and can afford the latest gaming computer, this argument is pure red herring.

[Kadatherion]

Gameplay and realism *always* have to find a compromise. 100% "Realism" would imply having dozens, if not hundreds, of different mineable minerals and various resources, that'd then need to translate into *thousands* of different mid and end wares and products. That would be, for obvious reasons, not just impossible to simulate, but also impossible to play. So no, more wares isn't always "better", quite the opposite: there's a very clear breaking point where having more wares would become actually *worse*, hindering gameplay and accessibility.

It's fair though to wonder if the current number of base mineable resources is enough to have the best gameplay complexity possible before becoming "too much": this is subjective, of course, but to me for once it seems pretty much alright. Having more different kinds of ore or gasses would objectively add nothing significant to the current gameplay, unless more end wares were added correspondingly, and I can hardly think of much that would justify a whole new mineable resource just for that (also given we already have a pretty much unused resource with Nividium). In previous X iterations, even with many more end wares the basic mineral resources were usually just two, ore and silicon, in various quantities: a simplification, of course, but it already seemed a fair compromise between realism and playability. X4 actually expands on that, although in a relatively minor way, even though there are fewer end products in the economy, so - for once - I can hardly complain about Egosoft's choices. With the current game balance (and UI/controls accessibility) adding new mineable resource would only add the annoyance of micromanaging more ships doing the very same task, just labeled differently for a different resource, with little to no real gameplay, aka fun, payoff. Complexity just for the sake of it, without a specific reason, goal and end payoff, is simply, objectively, bad game design.

Maybe, just maybe, if we were to get some decent weapon variety back, then it could be interesting to have a special resource and production line just for special weapons, something like, I don't know, let's say uranium or whatever (but why, when we could actually just use the nividium that's already in, if we really felt the need to?), that could differentiate the gameplay a bit with something that actually does give a significant payoff in the end. But still, even in this case, I'd say the real priority and the whole point is to have more weapon types, the actual needed resources to build them would at most be the cherry on top.

[samoja]

Gameplay and realism *always* have to find a compromise. 100% "Realism" would imply having dozens, if not hundreds, of different mineable minerals and various resources, that'd then need to translate into *thousands* of different mid and end wares and products. That would be, for obvious reasons, not just impossible to simulate, but also impossible to play. So no, more wares isn't always "better", quite the opposite: there's a very clear breaking point where having more wares would become actually *worse*, hindering gameplay and accessibility.

It's fair though to wonder if the current number of base mineable resources is enough to have the best gameplay complexity possible before becoming "too much": this is subjective, of course, but to me for once it seems pretty much alright. Having more different kinds of ore or gasses would objectively add nothing significant to the current gameplay, unless more end wares were added correspondingly, and I can hardly think of much that would justify a whole new mineable resource just for that (also given we already have a pretty much unused resource with Nividium). In previous X iterations, even with many more end wares the basic mineral resources were usually just two, ore and silicon, in various quantities: a simplification, of course, but it already seemed a fair compromise between realism and playability. X4 actually expands on that, although in a relatively minor way, even though there are fewer end products in the economy, so - for once - I can hardly complain about Egosoft's choices. With the current game balance (and UI/controls accessibility) adding new mineable resource would only add the annoyance of micromanaging more ships doing the very same task, just labeled differently for a different resource, with little to no real gameplay, aka fun, payoff. Complexity just for the sake of it, without a specific reason, goal and end payoff, is simply, objectively, bad game design.

Maybe, just maybe, if we were to get some decent weapon variety back, then it could be interesting to have a special resource and production line just for special weapons, something like, I don't know, let's say uranium or whatever (but why, when we could actually just use the nividium that's already in, if we really felt the need to?), that could differentiate the gameplay a bit with something that actually does give a significant payoff in the end. But still, even in this case, I'd say the real priority and the whole point is to have more weapon types, the actual needed resources to build them would at most be the cherry on top.

Ok i think the issue here is how much value individual players put on the whole simulation aspect of the game, some players don't really care, they just care about gameplay, while others value simulation a great deal, adding more resources would make the gameplay more complex but it would add to the simulation, hence the divide.

[Tomonor]

The rework that you're hoping for would be too complicated to address in X4. Maybe in X5 we will get such complexity (I too like your idea) but X4 has a different game design and had a different goal to accomplish, thus most of the things were re-simplified from Rebirth.

[Solflame]

Ignoring the whole bit about whether or not buying the game gives you the right to actually say what the game should have, actually having firsthand experience with the game means we have more experience with how it runs.

Also, you're ignoring the biggest problem with your idea: time and money. To put together a solid, proper economy simulation like that would require a lot of testing and ideas, not to mention people purely devoted to it. Hell, Egosoft would probably have to hire an actual economist. I don't think they can afford to do that. Even if they could, it would take quite a while for them to make the simulation.

[samoja]

Ignoring the whole bit about whether or not buying the game gives you the right to actually say what the game should have, actually having firsthand experience with the game means we have more experience with how it runs.

Also, you're ignoring the biggest problem with your idea: time and money. To put together a solid, proper economy simulation like that would require a lot of testing and ideas, not to mention people purely devoted to it. Hell, Egosoft would probably have to hire an actual economist. I don't think they can afford to do that. Even if they could, it would take quite a while for them to make the simulation.

Now come on, i am not asking for 100% accurate economic simulation with exact amounts of each of 266 elements accurately represented, i was just asking that the number of materials be expanded a bit, probably a bit at a time, a dozen extra materials and a few more trade goods would be enough, you are making of it more then it is, there could even be completely separate tacks of production wholly unrelated to the main ones, apart from using energy cells, producing goods just to make money, like jewelry or medical supplies. It's really not rocket science, even older X games had such items although they were few and far between. A few extra resources would certainly be doable, it's just that some people naturally jump to the worst possible conclusion.

[Falcrack]

1.I know that, i just think that's a silly way to go about it, you just break some nodules and credits magically appear in your account.

They don't magically appear in your account, they break off, you collect them, then you have to go to a station, talk to the trader, and sell them manually. Perhaps you had a misconception.

[Solflame]

It's really not rocket science, even older X games had such items although they were few and far between. A few extra resources would certainly be doable, it's just that some people naturally jump to the worst possible conclusion.

The problem is the older X games did have such items, and they caused issues so the developers moved away from them. It takes time to do it properly.

[radcapricorn]

Ok i think the issue here is how much value individual players put on the whole simulation aspect of the game, some players don't really care, they just care about gameplay, while others value simulation a great deal, adding more resources would make the gameplay more complex but it would add to the simulation, hence the divide.

I think you're overlooking one crucial aspect: Egosoft failed at economy simulation at release, and they're still yet to bring it up to speed. Traders make pitiful deals, miners mine useless resources as their managers witlessly let production lines starve, AI expends tremendous amounts of materials on mindless station spam, letting their own shipbuilding facilities stall... If more resources were to be added to the game as is, it wouldn't expand anything, only make things worse.
Now, if the above problems were actually solved, then I'm two hands up. More resources could bring more strategy, more production variety, more trade, more piracy opportunity for players. More cowbell.

[Kadatherion]

Ok i think the issue here is how much value individual players put on the whole simulation aspect of the game, some players don't really care, they just care about gameplay, while others value simulation a great deal, adding more resources would make the gameplay more complex but it would add to the simulation, hence the divide.

If there's no tangible objective to the simulation, no increase in how it interacts with the game as a whole, then there also is very little to divide: it's pointless. This is a videogame, not "a simulation", what is simulated is only there to offer a gaming experience, henceforth: gameplay.

It could be a relatively different thing if X was a game such as Anno, where the whole point - and thus the very gameplay - is about juggling and balancing the resources needed to build and maintain certain buildings and relative production lines for processed goods (which are resources themselves, and so forth). So more resources (still up to a reasonable number) can expand the gameplay, which is pretty intricate in Anno for that very reason.

This isn't X's case though, X games are space sims. The economic simulation in X is meant to support and interact with the rest of the game, AI and player trade ships flying in a place instead of another, wares being produced to supply the construction of ships that actually bring "life" in the universe, and so on, which itself opens different way to approach the meat of the game (where are going to be the most traffic heavy trade routes to plunder? How removing access to a certain good to a faction placing a blockade would affect the war and the behaviour of those AIs? Etc). Only adding more resources would still contribute NOTHING to X's gameplay, simulation or not, because the player would not be challenged with anything different: he wouldn't have to build and manage a different kind of ship, station or production lines that work differently somehow, he'd just need to do more of the same: order yet another mining ship to mine resource X, Y or Z. The end.

Since X is not a game about that and only that, any element of the economic simulation needs a reasonable integration in the game as a whole, a precise role. Like in my example about weapons variety, to justify the addition of a resource you HAVE TO build upon that. It might be, as stated, new gameplay expanding wares or equipment (AKA: that do things that the game doesn't already do) needing new specific resources, or again new resources having to be harvested in a different way (with a different kind of ship for instance - which, incidentally, is exactly what X4 already did with mineable gasses - that requires a specific and particular behaviour, or additional challenge - for instance because of resources only spawning in specific areas, which however would be pretty hard to do well and reliably in X4, since it went down the procedurally generated path). All this would require a pretty heavy developing effort, that goes MUCH farther than just throwing a few minerals in and rebalancing the requirements of a few already existing wares (which already would be a daunting effort, currently).

Given what X4 is, and arguably is meant to be, just adding more resources - even just one or two resources would need quite a major redesign of the whole system to justify them, let alone "a dozen" that would also exponentially increase the complexity of it all - without doing all that would make no difference, objectively: it would just add *more of the same*, only differently labeled. It's not a matter of tastes, "jumping to conclusions" or whatever, it's the game's nature (also relative to its current state: radcapricorn is absolutely right, the game can't yet handle even its current complexity, throwing even more complexity at it for no reason could only make things worse: by all means, if one day the game will realistically be able to handle it, with everything else fine tuned, then we'll have the leisure to add on top of that: currently we don't).
Honestly, long story short it would seem to me you just wish for another game, not X4. Go for it, the latest Anno is awesome.

[samoja]

Ok i think the issue here is how much value individual players put on the whole simulation aspect of the game, some players don't really care, they just care about gameplay, while others value simulation a great deal, adding more resources would make the gameplay more complex but it would add to the simulation, hence the divide.

If there's no tangible objective to the simulation, no increase in how it interacts with the game as a whole, then there also is very little to divide: it's pointless. This is a videogame, not "a simulation", what is simulated is only there to offer a gaming experience, henceforth: gameplay.

It could be a relatively different thing if X was a game such as Anno, where the whole point - and thus the very gameplay - is about juggling and balancing the resources needed to build and maintain certain buildings and relative production lines for processed goods (which are resources themselves, and so forth). So more resources (still up to a reasonable number) can expand the gameplay, which is pretty intricate in Anno for that very reason.

This isn't X's case though, X games are space sims. The economic simulation in X is meant to support and interact with the rest of the game, AI and player trade ships flying in a place instead of another, wares being produced to supply the construction of ships that actually bring "life" in the universe, and so on, which itself opens different way to approach the meat of the game (where are going to be the most traffic heavy trade routes to plunder? How removing access to a certain good to a faction placing a blockade would affect the war and the behaviour of those AIs? Etc). Only adding more resources would still contribute NOTHING to X's gameplay, simulation or not, because the player would not be challenged with anything different: he wouldn't have to build and manage a different kind of ship, station or production lines that work differently somehow, he'd just need to do more of the same: order yet another mining ship to mine resource X, Y or Z. The end.

Since X is not a game about that and only that, any element of the economic simulation needs a reasonable integration in the game as a whole, a precise role. Like in my example about weapons variety, to justify the addition of a resource you HAVE TO build upon that. It might be, as stated, new gameplay expanding wares or equipment (AKA: that do things that the game doesn't already do) needing new specific resources, or again new resources having to be harvested in a different way (with a different kind of ship for instance - which, incidentally, is exactly what X4 already did with mineable gasses - that requires a specific and particular behaviour, or additional challenge - for instance because of resources only spawning in specific areas, which however would be pretty hard to do well and reliably in X4, since it went down the procedurally generated path). All this would require a pretty heavy developing effort, that goes MUCH farther than just throwing a few minerals in and rebalancing the requirements of a few already existing wares (which already would be a daunting effort, currently).

Given what X4 is, and arguably is meant to be, just adding more resources - even just one or two resources would need quite a major redesign of the whole system to justify them, let alone "a dozen" that would also exponentially increase the complexity of it all - without doing all that would make no difference, objectively: it would just add *more of the same*, only differently labeled. It's not a matter of tastes, "jumping to conclusions" or whatever, it's the game's nature (also relative to its current state: radcapricorn is absolutely right, the game can't yet handle even its current complexity, throwing even more complexity at it for no reason could only make things worse: by all means, if one day the game will realistically be able to handle it, with everything else fine tuned, then we'll have the leisure to add on top of that: currently we don't).
Honestly, long story short it would seem to me you just wish for another game, not X4. Go for it, the latest Anno is awesome.

How do you like your boxes?

[Techedge]

1-You can already mine crystals for big payday times. Maybe if you had played the game you would know.
2-Survey missions shouldn't be the focus of an X-game at all. And that should be a base assumption of every X-player...
3-Adding more minerals for the purpose (and the way) you propose would just add up many more goods for the sake of nothing. You don't really need more money from middle game on, nor you need more goods to crap up the economy even more.

1.I know that, i just think that's a silly way to go about it, you just break some nodules and credits magically appear in your account.
2.Says you.
3.Some of us like the game with a bit of complexity, because some of us can understand economy that is based on more then two resources.

The same old heated up soup. We have discussed this millions of times and the conclusion is always the same: it's pretty useless, since it doesn't really add anything to the game, except just another "big" station…

This is pretty nonsensical statement, it quite obviously adds a lot to the game, you just don't like the addition, don't try to reframe the argument.

Yeah, you're right. And that's why I won't even buy the game, but I'd like developers to add in X-wings and may be even the Enterprise, just for me getting fun when I'm zapping through YouTube videos...

If you had read my original response you would know that at this moment i am not in a position to play the game, but that will change in time, just because i don't have the game RIGHT NOW, does not mean i won't buy it when i can actually, you know, play it, not everyone is super wealthy and can afford the latest gaming computer, this argument is pure red herring.

I don't like the mechanic of crystals but, seriously, I don't understand how that should feel any different from "finding a relatively large deposit of some less common mineral could feel like a payday big time" as per your original post.
Your "lifter station" idea won't add anything to the game and is no different than the old Trading Stations. It's not that I don't like additions, but you are proposing that those stations should just act as security valves (sinks or fillers) when the economy needs them. Given the new way the economy works (everything is "produced" and nothing is "created" nor "deleted" - except some minor cases, I think -) that seems a pretty much useless (and silly) proposal.

It's not a question of who has the "right to speak", you just have to understand that, having you not played the game*, you can't really understand the way it works and the balances that are in place (and the problems we are still facing).

*I assume you have played other X games, or that would just adds another layer to the problem.

[samoja]

1-You can already mine crystals for big payday times. Maybe if you had played the game you would know.
2-Survey missions shouldn't be the focus of an X-game at all. And that should be a base assumption of every X-player...
3-Adding more minerals for the purpose (and the way) you propose would just add up many more goods for the sake of nothing. You don't really need more money from middle game on, nor you need more goods to crap up the economy even more.

1.I know that, i just think that's a silly way to go about it, you just break some nodules and credits magically appear in your account.
2.Says you.
3.Some of us like the game with a bit of complexity, because some of us can understand economy that is based on more then two resources.

The same old heated up soup. We have discussed this millions of times and the conclusion is always the same: it's pretty useless, since it doesn't really add anything to the game, except just another "big" station…

This is pretty nonsensical statement, it quite obviously adds a lot to the game, you just don't like the addition, don't try to reframe the argument.

Yeah, you're right. And that's why I won't even buy the game, but I'd like developers to add in X-wings and may be even the Enterprise, just for me getting fun when I'm zapping through YouTube videos...

If you had read my original response you would know that at this moment i am not in a position to play the game, but that will change in time, just because i don't have the game RIGHT NOW, does not mean i won't buy it when i can actually, you know, play it, not everyone is super wealthy and can afford the latest gaming computer, this argument is pure red herring.

I don't like the mechanic of crystals but, seriously, I don't understand how that should feel any different from "finding a relatively large deposit of some less common mineral could feel like a payday big time" as per your original post.
Your "lifter station" idea won't add anything to the game and is no different than the old Trading Stations. It's not that I don't like additions, but you are proposing that those stations should just act as security valves (sinks or fillers) when the economy needs them. Given the new way the economy works (everything is "produced" and nothing is "created" nor "deleted" - except some minor cases, I think -) that seems a pretty much useless (and silly) proposal.

It's not a question of who has the "right to speak", you just have to understand that, having you not played the game*, you can't really understand the way it works and the balances that are in place (and the problems we are still facing).

*I assume you have played other X games, or that would just adds another layer to the problem.

Yes, i have, as i stated, i played X2 and all expansions of X3 although Reunion only briefly, i did not touch X Rebirh, it was not exactly praised, so i waited to see what would come next.

[Kadatherion]

How do you like your boxes?

Great argument, but very much, thanks, in this case they are called knowledge. And first hand one at that, btw. You know, as you haven't even played the game you are talking about, your whole argument could have been dismissed just with a "I'm not a doctor but I think vaccines are [insert ludicrous speculation here]", but I've given you a little lesson in game design for dummies instead. And an arguably very good purchase suggestion to top it off. If I were you I'd be thankful for that, it's not an everyday thing on the internet to be offered explanations instead of contempt when you talk about things you don't know. The net ain't a very welcoming place usually, don't waste your luck. See? Another good suggestion free of charge!

[Solflame]

OP, you really need to take a breath and walk away for a day or two I think. You're getting really aggressive towards anyone who disagrees.

[samoja]

OP, you really need to take a breath and walk away for a day or two I think. You're getting really aggressive towards anyone who disagrees.

I am only aggresive towards people who don't provide proper arguments, and no, ad hominem attacks and appeals to tradition (which is basically what the poster above did) are not arguments.

[samoja]

How do you like your boxes?

Great argument, but very much, thanks, in this case they are called knowledge. And first hand one at that, btw. You know, as you haven't even played the game you are talking about, your whole argument could have been dismissed just with a "I'm not a doctor but I think vaccines are [insert ludicrous speculation here]", but I've given you a little lesson in game design for dummies instead. And an arguably very good purchase suggestion to top it off. If I were you I'd be thankful for that, it's not an everyday thing on the internet to be offered explanations instead of contempt when you talk about things you don't know. The net ain't a very welcoming place usually, don't waste your luck. See? Another good suggestion free of charge!

I am a Games Tech student, what if i might ask are your credentials for schooling me on game design? Game genres are descriptions, not rules, otherwise no game could ever make anything differently. Game design is not a hard and rigid science, you can't just say "it's X so Y is not possible", that sort of thinking reveals you are unable to think creatively, hence the boxes.

[CBJ]

This thread is rapidly descending into unpleasantness. And yes, OP, you are just as much responsible as anyone else. If people can't be civil then the discussion will be brought to an end.

[samoja]

This thread is rapidly descending into unpleasantness. And yes, OP, you are just as much responsible as anyone else. If people can't be civil then the discussion will be brought to an end.

https://youtu.be/Hz1JWzyvv8A?t=302

[CBJ]

Suit yourself. I suggest you take another look at the forum rules before you post again.