DEVS: Why no social features like chat channels, guilds / corps and parties?

[LukeP]

I know it's probably a pipe dream, but since the devs said that there is no way you will be able to destroy stations I really hope to see some sort of station "takeover" when they release the FPS expansion. For example, maybe the Empire is invading a system and you failed to hold them back, so you, your groups, and the rest of the station authorities try to fight them off from inside the station - and if you fail again, the Empire will then enslave the local population and turn it into Empire territory. Maybe players can take over a low population/security station and charge people/NPC's that are outside of your group/faction taxes and terrifs.

The low pop system thing would be really great. After all it is not hard to corner such small market, control incoming and outgoing traffic etc.

Then of course there is a chance that previous owner would decide that tax revenues and or "image damage" from loosing such system justify military escalation (as those systems are essentialy feudal tax farms for bigger entities)

Then if players would incur enough damage (count cost replacemet of lost ships, cargo etc) to rethink further involvement, it would withdraw military forces, and instead post missions in surrounding system against said crew. Not to mention bounties and "outlaw" status for identified members of "liberation wing"

And ofc the pushback could succeed if players would turn tail.

And it all just begs for actual logistics support operation (ships and modules for both sides) that can be intercepted , affecting shooting war.

It's but a blip in major scope of things, but it could turn quite epic for players involved.

 

[fourty6to3]

The low pop system thing would be really great. After all it is not hard to corner such small market, control incoming and outgoing traffic etc.

Then of course there is a chance that previous owner would decide that tax revenues and or "image damage" from loosing such system justify military escalation (as those systems are essentialy feudal tax farms for bigger entities)

Then if players would incur enough damage (count cost replacemet of lost ships, cargo etc) to rethink further involvement, it would withdraw military forces, and instead post missions in surrounding system against said crew. Not to mention bounties and "outlaw" status for identified members of "liberation wing"

And ofc the pushback could succeed if players would turn tail.

And it all just begs for actual logistics support operation (ships and modules for both sides) that can be intercepted , affecting shooting war.

It's but a blip in major scope of things, but it could turn quite epic for players involved.

Exactly. Logistics would be a thing to behold. Now that I think about it, part of the reason why the game feels so empty, and a bit of a break in immersion, is the lack of logistics for the system. Where are all the supply ships bringing in aid, food, and most importantly, water for these star ports? Where are all the fuel tankers and resupply ports outside of the stations? Just about every system you go to has a fully functioning station with a population in a location that doesn't have any indigenous life, or even a habitable planet that supports these resources for that matter. It doesn't make sense to me. Occupying 100,000 star systems seems to me like it would be a logistical nightmare.

I would love some missions for taking out a supply ship that is on it's way to re-arm your enemies, or smuggling in some illegal communications/equipment to an inside group of members planning a coup, corporate espionage, etc. Even better with social features. When DB talked about the richness of the universe I had in my head that we could spend our entire careers in a handful of systems. But sadly it's all hollow and generic.

 

[Dejay]

Occupying 100,000 star systems seems to me like it would be a logistical nightmare.

After the empire has conquered the whole galaxy we'll need to have a whole planet turned into a giant city just to manage all the governing. And through the application of psychohistory

But seriously, I'm sure FD wants to build towards all that. It's just gonna take years. What would really help in the meantime to keep players coming back is to enable players and communities to create their own gameplay.

PS: I really like the "just a blip in major scope of things" because that is really something that sets ED apart. You could allow a lot of things for players and groups that would be impossible in static content games, simply because it's such an incredibly vast game world. Even if we could blow up planets - there are just so many of them!

 

[n13L5]

Get over it. Time to move on.

Let it go.

No.

Trading a proper game for a temporary permission to log into one. no. sorry.

I can't even count the disconnects every day. On jumping, on bringing up a mission from the bulletin board, trying to purchase something.

 

[Dejay]

Has anyone yet been able to test the 6 player group voice chat feature? How does it work?

 

[Avnas]

to those who say FTL communication isn't possible:

we have an FTL scanner

and we can travel FTL

 

[UW-SoulReaper]

The whole " I don't want chat it will ruin the experience" mindset comes from... It's just nuts.. why wouldn't folks want to talk to each other unless it was a Single player game with only computer controlled players? I mean there would be an option to turn chat off for those who didn't want it. The biggest thing I see is no chat in a "multiplayer" game is like cutting it's legs off. I can't play in beta so I have no idea what it's like but I think it's gonna feel like Single Player game, so why not just save money and scrap the servers and give everyone an Offline game. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Herik]

The low pop system thing would be really great. After all it is not hard to corner such small market, control incoming and outgoing traffic etc.

Then of course there is a chance that previous owner would decide that tax revenues and or "image damage" from loosing such system justify military escalation (as those systems are essentialy feudal tax farms for bigger entities)

Then if players would incur enough damage (count cost replacemet of lost ships, cargo etc) to rethink further involvement, it would withdraw military forces, and instead post missions in surrounding system against said crew. Not to mention bounties and "outlaw" status for identified members of "liberation wing"

And ofc the pushback could succeed if players would turn tail.

And it all just begs for actual logistics support operation (ships and modules for both sides) that can be intercepted , affecting shooting war.

It's but a blip in major scope of things, but it could turn quite epic for players involved.

Yeah; It would be quite different if I just ignored any 'blockade' and went in and did my business Solo'.

 

[agent1138]

I think for the multiplayer to survive, we will need Guilds/Organisations at some point soon.

 

[philux]

I think for the multiplayer to survive, we will need Guilds/Organisations at some point soon.

I agree. Even the best game gets dull when you don't have a community of like-minded people to chat and play with.

 

[MikeyTT]

Ok, so I'm not a social animal at all. I was quite happy with the offline, solo, my universe thing. But if I were to look at the global comms issue, as one part of the puzzle, with an open mind then I would think a twitter-esque style solution would fit very well.

You have various channels you can sign up to (Traders, Bounty Hunters, Federation, local system, Pirates Anonymous etc,). If you subscribe you could then see the comms chatter for those channels. If you then posted in the channel you could then be directly targeted with a response using the @Username style reply, or just reply all back to the channel. If these channels were available outside of the game on the official mobile apps, you could then keep up to date via that method. Maybe even giving players the ability to create their own channel would be start of the logical step to any wider grouping, guild, faction, whatever you want to call it.

It might even be good to drag players back into the game. If they see that something is going down then they could fire up ED and get into the action (life permitting).

But the key is that if you don't want the social aspect then you don't subscribe to any of the channels.

 

[DaveB]

I think for the multiplayer to survive, we will need Guilds/Organisations at some point soon.

Good luck with that.. Player factions (or guilds/corporations/whatever) have been explicitly out since day one. Hope it's not a deal-breaker for you because you're extremely unlikely to get that feature.

 

[Panzer]

For a guild to exist, it only needs two things - a way to communicate and exist in the game visible to all its members mutually.

Even using today's means, it is more than possible to set up groups specializing in any number of activities, as long as they use a third party comms too like Xfire, mumble or TS. instances make things only marginally more annoying, but for most purposes it's irrelevant anyway.

Why then shouldn't there be ingame social tools? it only hurts the game by making things that bit more annoying (not difficult) on the players.

 

[Dejay]

You have various channels you can sign up to (Traders, Bounty Hunters, Federation, local system, Pirates Anonymous etc,). If you subscribe you could then see the comms chatter for those channels. If you then posted in the channel you could then be directly targeted with a response using the @Username style reply, or just reply all back to the channel. If these channels were available outside of the game on the official mobile apps, you could then keep up to date via that method. Maybe even giving players the ability to create their own channel would be start of the logical step to any wider grouping, guild, faction, whatever you want to call it.

It might even be good to drag players back into the game. If they see that something is going down then they could fire up ED and get into the action (life permitting).

That is a great idea! Even though I hate twitter in real life I think this could be great for ED.

1. Asynchronous communication, meaning someone can send you a message when you are offline and you'll see it when you get online
2. It also blurs the lines between news items and player chat. You could even reply visibly to news items or players could their own news. I think the guys from lave radio would go bananas!
3. Maybe you can even send photos of what you're eating right now (stardust) / the star you've stumbled upon / the guy you are about to murder! Imagine a player sponsored photo of the day contest

There is so much sandbox things you could do with the right tools.

And while we're thinking outside the box you might even use this system to add notes to a certain system, equipment or station. Add tips and tricks that others can read and vote on. Community tools like for example thottbot / wowhead extended MMO's greatly. So if you could browse tweets about a certain topic you could integrate that ingame. But maybe that is another topic haha.

BTW star citizen uses a protocol called XMPP an open chat protocol so you can use an abundance of chat apps on mobile of PC to connect to your guild in game. Personally I find that absolutely brilliant!

 

[davelister]

For a guild to exist

Why?? i dont need it because u cant trade with others Engineparts or Money sow for what is it good in ED?

 

[Dejay]

Money sow

I'd prefer a cash cow but I'd be happy with a money sow as well!

 

[agent1138]

Good luck with that.. Player factions (or guilds/corporations/whatever) have been explicitly out since day one. Hope it's not a deal-breaker for you because you're extremely unlikely to get that feature.

It's not a deal breaker, but its a little disappointing considering the near limitless possibilities.

 

[Dejay]

It's not a deal breaker, but its a little disappointing considering the near limitless possibilities.

Don't worry. FD has in fact stated that guilds / corps are not "explicitly out". They said they'll look at it later. But the lack of info and priority is concerning.

 

[davelister]

I'd prefer a cash cow but I'd be happy with a money sow as well!

Answer the Question For what need we Guilds?

 

[Dejay]

Answer the Question For what need we Guilds?

Well ok if you insist Guilds will make the game better. More options to socialize or just have fun chatting. And have a reason to go online not solo.

Of course it goes hand in hand. We also need parties, guilds and multiplayer activity. That's why I also list "Cooperative multiplayer missions" in the OP. Shared bounty hunting. Things like slaved supercruise drives are planned already but don't work yet.

But even without more multiplayer content, ED is supposed to be a sandbox game. You could "make up" activities in a guild and good ingame support helps with that.