June Update: Landing Sequence

from StarControl Forums

I really think this landing sequence is a mistake.  For one thing, the unique "Woosh" sound as your lander left for the planet while your finger was still on the button was actually one of the more memorable things from SC2 for many people.  But that really is a small issue.  The really issue I have with this is more of a game design philosophy thing again.  There is a *perfect* example of what I am talking about here, Elite: Dangerous.  Elite: Dangerous is a perfect example, like like a dozen different ways, of how to a game designer can trick themselves into believing that they are adding "coolness" or "depth" to a game when really all they are adding is monotonous periods of boredom.  Elite: Dangerous is unplayable bad in this regard, everything some lengthy sequence that you know the designers were envisioning as "mini-games" and talking how "flying a ship in our game will be like playing a series of mini-games".  I've never read their design docs, assuming they ever even wrote any, but I'd bet anyone $100 right now that almost those exact phrases were in the early documents for Elite: Dangerous.  I don't have to have even been there to know that was what they were saying about how it was going to work.  How does it actually work?  At least 1 hour, 50 minutes of which is repetitive monotonous boredom, to do pretty much whatever it is that you have decided to do.  It all sounds really great on paper, maybe even like you might be on to something special, but is actually just a bunch of unplayably bad repetitive and monotonous boredom.

The player is going to land on 100 or more planets over the course of the game.  A "stay between the lines" using "baby's toy ILS system", if done exceptionally well, might be interesting the first 5 or 6 times you do it.  Maybe even 10 or 12.  By 15 it is certainly getting old.  By 30 you are cursing at the screen.  At 60 you may actually quit playing the game just because you are sick of having to stay between the lines for 30 seconds to land on every planet you want to visit.  At 100 you manage to make it through the game, and one of your most memorable experiences of the game will always be how much you hated the landing procedure with every fiber of your being by the time you were doing it for the 80th time.

This type of system in a spaceship game is more of an alluring trap for inexperienced designers than it is a valid game element.  And I don't mean to be insulting, I've been designing games for almost 40 years now so almost everyone is an "inexperienced designer" from my vantage point.

 

84,422 views 38 replies
Reply #1 from StarControl Forums Top

100 is actually on the extreme low end of estimates about how many planets you'll land on. And if you're trying to send your ship down through rectangles for the 500th time, instead, you're going to be chewing off your own face. 

To which I say: if I don't care about where I land, can I just skip it and land anywhere? Make a button - kind of like an auto-calculate battle button in Total War, where you get to skip to the end, so I don't have to run the same rectangular obstacle course for the millionth time. 

But the real argument is: if you have to include a skip-button for one of the "features" of your game - should you really be including this feature in the first place? 

Reply #2 from StarControl Forums Top

I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. If there is really good incentive on *some* planets to land at particular spots then it could be worth it - while the rest of the time I'll be happy to land wherever.

 

Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from StarControl Forums Top

If this landing procedure lasts only 5 seconds and happens only on the planets that have extreme conditions (weather/gravity etc) I'm on board with this mini game. Otherwise, it's a complete time waster. Why do I need to go through this when I land on the moon? Does it reward me if I make a perfect touch down? If it does and it makes sense - I'm on board. If I achieve nothing then f. this.

P.S. We need to see WIP of this landing procedure and possible outcomes to judge more fairly TBH.

Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

Even if the screens were spruced up and exciting, with debris flying at you, and ducking by asteroids and nebulae and other "exciting" thing - I can't see the point or the draw of this mini-game. Even if it's very fast-paced and exciting. It all seems like it would just have negative impact on the player - like a complete loss. Your ship gets damaged, you lose some crew before even landing on the planet, or even get destroyed on your way in. What could possibly be the benefit? Land in a good spot? The planets being so small, couldn't you just fly 2 seconds over to the spot you wanted to be at in the first place? Or some sort of resource-multiplier? That would make little-to-no sense. How would nailing a landing multiply the amount of resources? Or maybe it calms the storms or fire on the surface? But that makes zero sense either. 

That's what I mean by negative impact - it's an added segment that only TAKES AWAY power from the player. It's there to drain your ship, rather than buff it. Can anyone think of a way it would make your experience on the planet better?

Reply #5 from StarControl Forums Top

I've not yet played the new Elite but I played the original on the Commodore 64. I distinctly remember getting frustrated as I tried to rotate my ship to keep it aligned with the spinning space station to dock. But then low and behold after earning somewhere around 10,000 credits I was able to afford the docking computer. After that all I had to do was get close enough to turn it on and in I went. It was actually kind of humorous after that because I can recall numerous occasions where I would dock but the alignment was SO poor. I'd have been dead if I'd been flying manually. Thing is after knowing how hard it was to dock I never became bored watching the computer do it. Now if you were to add an upgrade to either the ship or a pilot that allowed it to land automatically you could give it different upgrade levels. Different worlds could require more sophisticated landing computers based on the hazards on the world and/or you could make the sweet landing spots with bonus resources / goodies harder to hit so you'd need a better computer or do in in manual! This way most of the time after you've purchased the upgraded earlier on in your game you can just let the craft land itself but from time to time you would have a challenge to land manually. 

Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting CivHunter, reply 5

I've not yet played the new Elite but I played the original on the Commodore 64. I distinctly remember getting frustrated as I tried to rotate my ship to keep it aligned with the spinning space station to dock. But then low and behold after earning somewhere around 10,000 credits I was able to afford the docking computer. After that all I had to do was get close enough to turn it on and in I went. It was actually kind of humorous after that because I can recall numerous occasions where I would dock but the alignment was SO poor. I'd have been dead if I'd been flying manually. Thing is after knowing how hard it was to dock I never became bored watching the computer do it. Now if you were to add an upgrade to either the ship or a pilot that allowed it to land automatically you could give it different upgrade levels. Different worlds could require more sophisticated landing computers based on the hazards on the world and/or you could make the sweet landing spots with bonus resources / goodies harder to hit so you'd need a better computer or do in in manual! This way most of the time after you've purchased the upgraded earlier on in your game you can just let the craft land itself but from time to time you would have a challenge to land manually. 

Don't you see, though? That's a design FLAW that permeates every garbage, free-to-play mobile game on earth these days. Paying to skip playing the "game". It's like a friggin coin-vacuum that you can buy for $2.99 in every F2P game ever. Oh! You no longer have to use any skill to gather coins, they just get sucked into you from anywhere on the screen, so now you don't have to try! Yay! Or the games that let you skip levels you find too hard, by paying?

The point is: If your players are paying, even in-game money, to skip sections of the game - it's a fail.

Reply #7 from StarControl Forums Top

Let's go ahead and clear up some assumptions about the planet gameplay. 

Where you land on a planet matters. Just landing anywhere on the planet can work for some planet environments, but landing in the wrong spot can doom your lander crew to an untimely death. Landing in the middle of a lava lake, or into the jaws of a critter for example is probably not conducive to a long lander life. The type of planet makes landing more or less hazardous and present different challenges when trying to land.

Landing on the planet is still a quick affair and you will be doing it a significant amount. I am very keenly aware of this, as I've already had to land on more planets than anyone else in the office. I have been doing it several times daily for 8+ months. Since I'm not ready to shoot myself then I think the mechanic is working fine. 

 

Reply #8 from Stardock Forums Top

Sure you don't want to SHOOT yourself, but is it exciting and doesn't feel like a time-waster/mini-game? Also, what does it ADD to the experience, making you WANT to play this part, as opposed to wishing you could skip it? Again, it only seems like negatives. Crash-landing, into the mouth of a beast, lava lakes, etc. What's the motivation for WANTING it to be included in the game, rather than wanting to purchase an upgrade, so a computer can do it for you?

Let us know!!

Reply #9 from StarControl Forums Top

Well Vaelzad if you've been doing it for 8+ months and it hasn't been removed I'd say it must not detract from the enjoyment of the game. :)  Thanks.

Reply #10 from StarControl Forums Top

You have a good point, Vaelzad.  If the sequence is short enough, and it has real meaning, this could work in a good way.  You could even keep the classic "Whoosh" sound as the lander is first leaving the ship.  The sequence has to be very short though, probably like 8-12 seconds or so at most (i'd probably be trying to make it happen in 6 seconds).  If it is taking 30 seconds or more people are going to grow to hate it over time.  The speed that it happens can be what makes it a little hard to do, so that in my phrasing "inherently" helps make it work.  The fact that is has very real and important meaning, assuming that it does, does make a very big difference.  But I would still put this near the top of my checklist of things I wanted to know about during playtesting, and it really does have to happen very very fast for it not to become hated by the 100th time you are being forced to do it.  Are players complaining about it?  What is their complaint?  Does nobody ever even mention it?  Ask just about everyone who tries the game so you make sure that you hear from everyone you can if they notice it as any kind of issue or not, and what their issue is.  I would treat this like dynamite and something that could potentially be very bad and I just don't realize it.

 

Reply #11 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting CivHunter, reply 5

I've not yet played the new Elite but I played the original on the Commodore 64. I distinctly remember getting frustrated as I tried to rotate my ship to keep it aligned with the spinning space station to dock. But then low and behold after earning somewhere around 10,000 credits I was able to afford the docking computer. After that all I had to do was get close enough to turn it on and in I went. It was actually kind of humorous after that because I can recall numerous occasions where I would dock but the alignment was SO poor. I'd have been dead if I'd been flying manually. Thing is after knowing how hard it was to dock I never became bored watching the computer do it. Now if you were to add an upgrade to either the ship or a pilot that allowed it to land automatically you could give it different upgrade levels. Different worlds could require more sophisticated landing computers based on the hazards on the world and/or you could make the sweet landing spots with bonus resources / goodies harder to hit so you'd need a better computer or do in in manual! This way most of the time after you've purchased the upgraded earlier on in your game you can just let the craft land itself but from time to time you would have a challenge to land manually. 

 

I played my Elite in color on 286 in my school. Got my Elite status and all. I've purchased the auto-docker, but never used it as after about 10 times I could dock coming at the portal at any sensible angle. Just roll a little, decrease speed, pitch, roll, you're in. But after those 10 times it turned into a must do chore. Nothing exciting about it or any sense of accomplishment.

 

Quoting Vaelzad, reply 7

Let's go ahead and clear up some assumptions about the planet gameplay. 

Where you land on a planet matters. Just landing anywhere on the planet can work for some planet environments, but landing in the wrong spot can doom your lander crew to an untimely death. Landing in the middle of a lava lake, or into the jaws of a critter for example is probably not conducive to a long lander life. The type of planet makes landing more or less hazardous and present different challenges when trying to land.

Landing on the planet is still a quick affair and you will be doing it a significant amount. I am very keenly aware of this, as I've already had to land on more planets than anyone else in the office. I have been doing it several times daily for 8+ months. Since I'm not ready to shoot myself then I think the mechanic is working fine. 
 

Vid or didn't happen. XD

Reply #12 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting Hunam_, reply 11

Quoting CivHunter,
reply 5

I've not yet played the new Elite but I played the original on the Commodore 64. I distinctly remember getting frustrated as I tried to rotate my ship to keep it aligned with the spinning space station to dock. But then low and behold after earning somewhere around 10,000 credits I was able to afford the docking computer. After that all I had to do was get close enough to turn it on and in I went. It was actually kind of humorous after that because I can recall numerous occasions where I would dock but the alignment was SO poor. I'd have been dead if I'd been flying manually. Thing is after knowing how hard it was to dock I never became bored watching the computer do it. Now if you were to add an upgrade to either the ship or a pilot that allowed it to land automatically you could give it different upgrade levels. Different worlds could require more sophisticated landing computers based on the hazards on the world and/or you could make the sweet landing spots with bonus resources / goodies harder to hit so you'd need a better computer or do in in manual! This way most of the time after you've purchased the upgraded earlier on in your game you can just let the craft land itself but from time to time you would have a challenge to land manually. 



 

I played my Elite in color on 286 in my school. Got my Elite status and all. I've purchased the auto-docker, but never used it as after about 10 times I could dock coming at the portal at any sensible angle. Just roll a little, decrease speed, pitch, roll, you're in. But after those 10 times it turned into a must do chore. Nothing exciting about it or any sense of accomplishment.

 

Quoting Vaelzad,
reply 7

Let's go ahead and clear up some assumptions about the planet gameplay. 

Where you land on a planet matters. Just landing anywhere on the planet can work for some planet environments, but landing in the wrong spot can doom your lander crew to an untimely death. Landing in the middle of a lava lake, or into the jaws of a critter for example is probably not conducive to a long lander life. The type of planet makes landing more or less hazardous and present different challenges when trying to land.

Landing on the planet is still a quick affair and you will be doing it a significant amount. I am very keenly aware of this, as I've already had to land on more planets than anyone else in the office. I have been doing it several times daily for 8+ months. Since I'm not ready to shoot myself then I think the mechanic is working fine. 
 



Vid or didn't happen. XD

So Hunam, are you saying the landing segment of Elite was actually awesome and enjoyable? That would be amazing!

Reply #13 from StarControl Forums Top

^ It was fine and fun the first dozen of times. Then it's a chore. But again, in Elite you spent 99% of your time dog fighting and traveling to stars to refuel (that's at least what I did). So, maybe, it wasn't a biggie... SCO could go the same way (landing auto-pilot) which would suck, 'cause there's not really a gameplay enhancement.

In SC though, I'd wanna land on nearly every planet. Imagine going through TEN 15 seconds landings like that in only 1 system!! If it's anything longer than 5-7 seconds, I'm gonna shotgun myself in the face after 3 system visits. Unless..... there's sensible reward for it, not simply avoid negative effects to get the candy, that's not even guaranteed...

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #14 from StarControl Forums Top

I agree with the OP entirely, but I'm glad Vaelzad has first hand experience and gave some reasurance.  I'm interested to try it out, but I hope it's not a long/time consuming process each time one lands.

Reply #15 from StarControl Forums Top

Most games deal with the cool factor becoming tedious by giving you both options.

At first you have to do everything manually cause your tech/ship is basic.

But as you upgrade, or run into melnorme traders you eventually get a landing computer that does it for you. While still allowing manual control if necessary.

+1 Loading…
Reply #16 from StarControl Forums Top

If Starcontrol reboot gets some RPG flavoring to it manual controls could be a way to increase XP for the main character or the crew.

 

So autopilot will reducing accuracy will not grant any XP but it is automatic and quick.

 

Manual pilot can be very accurate if successful and will grant XP depending on the accuracy of the landing.

 

So either way you get your piece of cake.

 

Those who enjoy planet landing will get XP earnings.

 

Those who are not good at or don't like planet landings will get their thousands of seconds back, and save them hours of billable therapy at the psychiatrist.

Reply #17 from StarControl Forums Top

The big thing to avoid is the idea that "procedural activities" make a space ship game fun, or "realistic".  Many games make this mistake because it can sound like such a great idea...

It will be like you are Captain Kirk!  "Charge Capacitors!!!  Lock Phasers on Target!!! Load Torpedoes!!!  Acquire Torpedo Lock... Open outer doors!!!  Wait for it... Fire!!!"  It will be great!!!

And it will be... the first three or four times.  After that you will be begging for the Star Fleet Universe way of saying all of that... "Weapons Status-III.... Fire!!!"  That is something you can say over and over again without it becoming monotonous or boring.

The worst offender I know of with this is Elite Dangerous.  Everything you do in that game is some long drawn out procedure that could have happened in 15 seconds and it is mind numbingly boring.

 

Reply #18 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Xenove, reply 16

If Starcontrol reboot gets some RPG flavoring to it manual controls could be a way to increase XP for the main character or the crew.

 

So autopilot will reducing accuracy will not grant any XP but it is automatic and quick.

 

Manual pilot can be very accurate if successful and will grant XP depending on the accuracy of the landing.

 

So either way you get your piece of cake.

 

Those who enjoy planet landing will get XP earnings.

 

Those who are not good at or don't like planet landings will get their thousands of seconds back, and save them hours of billable therapy at the psychiatrist.

 

That is actually called "grinding" because you would be forcing people/forcibly encouraging people to go through a mechanism they don't like. If you need an incentive for a game mechanism, then it means the game mechanism isn't fun.

Further, if there would be XP, then you'd have people that would level up solely by landing/taking off... which is completely contrary to the spirit of combat and exploration of SCR.

Anyways, I thought that XP were ruled out by SD, weren't they? 

Reply #19 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Tovanion, reply 18

Anyways, I thought that XP were ruled out by SD, weren't they?

 

Correct. There is no XP system in Star Control. 

Reply #20 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Vaelzad, reply 19


Quoting Tovanion,
reply 18

Anyways, I thought that XP were ruled out by SD, weren't they?



Correct. There is no XP system in Star Control. 

Buuuuut... the mod-system can do XP?

 

Reply #21 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Vaelzad, reply 19


Quoting Tovanion,
reply 18

Anyways, I thought that XP were ruled out by SD, weren't they?



 

Correct. There is no XP system in Star Control. 

 

This is good. 

I agree  that there should be an option to skip the manual landing.  In a universe with thousands of planets to explore it's going to get tedious real fast.  Maybe the option becomes unlocked after 25 perfect landings or something to that effect.

Reply #22 from StarControl Forums Top

I still think it can work even with a lot of landings as long as it happens really quickly, in like 6 seconds or so.  Then it is so fast it never seems tedious, and if you just want to ignore it you don't die or anything, you just don't land on target.  So you get the benefit of doing it, no huge deal for not succeeding... and then you make it "1980's arcade game hard" to do in an interesting way so that it is a fun thing to do if you get it down anyway.  The 1980's arcade game thing is perfectly appropriate to Star Control, too.

Like this I think it is very cool, and doesn't detract from the experience from anyone.  If you want to ignore it, that 6 second break between space and landing is actually a good thing too you.  It lets you quickly "reset" to be ready for the very different land combat game now.  Actually now having written this... I would move on if this was a design document for a game I was writing.  This seems perfect too me from what I understand of their game:-)

 

Reply #23 from StarControl Forums Top

No no, if there is xp gain it will be minimal. Minimal enough that it will not be a viable option for grinding. The xp gain would an icing for those who enjoy planet landing. Alternatively a badge system could be used. You do 100 manual landings and get a "Planet rider" badge that increases accuracy of autolanding by 50% because the landing AI has "learnt" from your 100 perfect landing sequences.

Reply #24 from StarControl Forums Top

Quoting Vaelzad, reply 19


Quoting Tovanion,
reply 18

Anyways, I thought that XP were ruled out by SD, weren't they?



 

Correct. There is no XP system in Star Control. 



Xenove, the case is closed, so forget grinding or minimal XP gains.  If it happens, it will be with a different game, so moot to discuss it here.

Reply #25 from StarControl Forums Top

Hello Tovanion,

 

Hence my other suggestion on a badge system where you can perform 100 perfect landings that will make the autolander improve its accuracy by 50% because it has collected the data from the manual landings and has learnt from them.

 

That is not minimal xp gain or xp grinding. Its an added bonus that you may choose to have or not.

 

Because be it grinding for XP or for farming for resources. Some sort of grinding/farming will creep into the game anyway...... so you can increase the accuracy of the autolander by buying Mark XXXXX autolander? And you buy the upgrade with resources.... which you have farmed.... which is no different than XP grinding.

 

XP is just another measure of a resource which is character specific.

 

If you don't want grinding (or farming) in the game then we have to get rid of ALL resources.