I understand that it can be very easy to forget any sense of etiquette on the web (yes I am guilty). But if we are talking about ways in which to improve a game that we all obviously wish to succeed. Why then can't we take away ideas from even games that we don't like. There is something about EVE that I have never liked. No I never got very far into the game, as it just didn't grab me when I did play it. But, the original post in this thread had some valid ideas as to how one could go about reducing some griefing. Slamming the game they came from is.....well, lame. Instead why not argue the validity of the methods proposed?
Lessons in anti griefing.
- Thread starter Ghostickles
- Start date
Uh. I have played in Open 100% of the time since I bought the game in December. I have tons of hours in it, too.
If you mentioned EVE then do not forget that in EVE you can bribe concord with "clone soldier tag" to enter guarded zone.
Then kill an old farmer in anaconda and your friend grab his 250mil powerplant while your suicide bomber - sidewinder perish in CONCORD's fire. Or you can terrorize him so he have to pay 25% of his profits to you. ( the last is not true for guard zone)
Or you can pay to the CONCORD to start "official war" against definite guild of players, then start complete mayhem killing not only anacondas but the sidewinders as well, you can even track where they are.
Last edited:
StarCitizen has a PvP slider so you can choose to be instanced with players or NPCs and No Man's Sky is essentially a single player with some very limited multiplayer features.
[opinion]
I (desperately want to) believe that ED's target audience is definitely on the h4rdc0re pvp d00dz side of the line. Based on my interpretation of the ABOUT page and some of the design decisions made throughout the game (the afterthought known as SOLO), I think it's clear that the 'carebear' side of the line is somewhat being accommodated for because it's profitable. But the target audience is and should remain the hard core seasoned players - not the casual family players. For these reason, things like ship teleporting because you want to play with friends but you're busy exploring kind of things will never make it into the game - there is far too much impact on the target audience. By comparison, mechanics like power-power murder and merit decay has made it into the game, because the effects on the casual players who want none of that are less important than the boons for everyone else.
Please do not get upset with me for using generalized terms.
[/opinion]
Last edited by a moderator:
I get the distinct impression that FD Marketing have a different target audience to FD Development.
Last edited:
We have this for explorers. You lose all your data if you die.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Further use of pejorative terms for players / play-styles will result in this thread being closed. Please be civil and respectful of all players / play-styles.
So much complaining about supposed griefing... I've played Elite since launch, always on Open because even though I rarely play with wings, I like to play in a universe with other real people. And in all this time, I've only been killed twice by human players, one time by a role-playing pirate (it killed me because I tried to run... in my Type-7...), and by an angry CMDR from which I kill-stealed two targets at a RES (I deserved that one). Two other times I've been interdicted and attacked but escaped. In 6 months of open playing, this was it.
I've lost Clippers, Pythons, been back to Sidewinder, last time lost a Python in a fight against a wing of NPCs and I am back to a Cobra as I did not have enough credits for insurance. And this is fine by me, risk and reward, profit and loss. It's called Elite Dangerous after all. I Like to have to be mindful of dangerous areas like rare trading hubs, system security, having to mind the scanner for potential threats, and having to thinck about risk vs reward. I like to think that a target may be more trouble than what is worth, and I like the feeling of permanent potential (although rare) danger when I'm cruising about.
This is not Truck or Train Simulator after all!
People just can't stand to lose every once in the while.
I've lost Clippers, Pythons, been back to Sidewinder, last time lost a Python in a fight against a wing of NPCs and I am back to a Cobra as I did not have enough credits for insurance. And this is fine by me, risk and reward, profit and loss. It's called Elite Dangerous after all. I Like to have to be mindful of dangerous areas like rare trading hubs, system security, having to mind the scanner for potential threats, and having to thinck about risk vs reward. I like to think that a target may be more trouble than what is worth, and I like the feeling of permanent potential (although rare) danger when I'm cruising about.
This is not Truck or Train Simulator after all!
People just can't stand to lose every once in the while.
I think you're mistaken about the target audience - and I agree with Steve that on the face of it there are mixed messages coming from the marketing which does conflict with the reality of how the game works.
I think the target audience is the bit in the middle - not the forced PVP at all costs make everything ultra hard brigade - nor is it the other end of the spectrum that would probably like it easier than it is now.
They are trying to please everyone which doesn't always end well but that seems to be the direction they are taking.
It's clear some that some stuff does penalise a casual player - but on the other hand PVP is almost entirely optional as legitimate avoidance or escape is always available.
someone kept ramming me everytime I left the station untill I had to pretty much start from afresh, makes grinding pointless, I can understand players having a really unhappy experience playing this game and legitametly not liking it for that reason but people arent sympathetic..
game or not it feels terrible for some people.
game or not it feels terrible for some people.
I don't really think forcing PvP is a quality of a hardcore game or a hardcore gamer's likes, I think that's more of a competition thing. Being able to leave combat is extremely important, especially so for games that feature player on player combat.
You had a million other options than to just keep trying to leave the station.
Last edited:
Correct! In the past I have murdered players, not because I am a griefer but it was a bit of fun cos I was bored and wanted to test my flying skills against players that's all. I don't kill anymore as it proves nothing anymore. If I ran into these playground bullies that make these videos then I may have a go at them but that's it!
Last edited:
It would be relatively easy to accommodate both types of player, the pure PvE people who just want to trade and the PvP crowd who love the rush of doing things in a potentially dangerous environment. Just like EvE does it.
Why do most of the issues with the game come down to "EvE does it this way and it works okay"... ?
Why do most of the issues with the game come down to "EvE does it this way and it works okay"... ?
At no point in this thread have I mentioned 'casual' players. That particular term is too easily misunderstood in context, from applying to 'an hour a week' players all the way to being used pejoratively as 'those unwilling to play difficult games'. I don't mean to comment on how or why people play this game only that many people do for many reasons and no one is more right or entitled than anyone else. I've repeatedly made the calls for the game being available to all players, from the most dedicated and skilled all the way through to the most time-constrained and least talented dog-fighter, simply because there is already an identifiable pattern of inclusivity and a broad range of styles for many kinds of players. There is only conjecture and interpretation as to precisely who the intended 'audience' is, or should be, indeed I would argue that given the inclusivity in attitudes presented within the game itself the audience is so broad as to entirely defy definition right now. Even now Elite is so, so much bigger than a one-dimensional shooter; options abound for all styles of game play with only the most basic of mechanics tying them together, to pigeon hole it as one thing and demand that it cater to just your wishes is condemning it to be less than the gloriously wide-scale game it could continue to be.
i like the idea of a insurance discount, growing if you get destroyed less.
also i think the possibility of players adding money from their own account to a bounty on a player who shot them could do something good.
i always play open, and i never experienced "griefing". but i'm playing on the edge of the bubble. had some pvp - in the beginning a player shoot me and than tried to explain how to handle thrusters. than pirates - one was able to shoot me, half a dozend had to let me slip away. those interdictions are still some of the best elite minutes of play.
also i think the possibility of players adding money from their own account to a bounty on a player who shot them could do something good.
i always play open, and i never experienced "griefing". but i'm playing on the edge of the bubble. had some pvp - in the beginning a player shoot me and than tried to explain how to handle thrusters. than pirates - one was able to shoot me, half a dozend had to let me slip away. those interdictions are still some of the best elite minutes of play.
(Again) please don't be upset over me using general terms. This is a request, not an accusation.
[opinion]
We are only pilots. I have no idea what the planetary landing or first person action will be like, but that's irrelevant until they release more information anyway. For now, we are pilots. We are pilots in a cut throat galaxy. We are pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence. We are pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence and other pilots. It's absolutely bigger than a one dimensional shooter. But should match three elements be added for the match three audience? No, says I. Should block building elements be added for the block building audience? No, says I. Why? Because ED should remain true to ED - pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence and other pilots. A large amount of people are not going to have the chops to participate in this.
That means yes, if someone wants to push that cobra into the side of the station wall and blow them up, absolutely go for it. It's rude, but alas, we are not pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence and other respectful pilots. Yes, more can be done to punish less than admirable behavior. But it's not against the rules.
That also means that people who don't have the time to put many hours into powerplay are going to be left behind. If you don't find that fun, you can do one of the many other things that are more accommodating. But by no means should the game change because I want it to be more accommodating to any particular audience other than the intended one, at the expense of the intended one.
Usually it happens anyway. A result of greed. Personally I do not feel that greed should get in the way of fun. The only way that is going to change is if us, the gamers, ask for quality first, player count second. There are many aspects of ED that I absolutely detest, but are extremely true to the core mission and target audience of the game - I would rather them not be removed just because I or a hundred thousand others don't enjoy it.
[/opinion]
[opinion]
I've underlined the bits that don't really fly. Do you feel ED is going to be like SAO? There's a reason SAO exists only in an anime - because it can't exist as a game, not to that effect, not with today's gamers, and not with today's resources.
We are only pilots. I have no idea what the planetary landing or first person action will be like, but that's irrelevant until they release more information anyway. For now, we are pilots. We are pilots in a cut throat galaxy. We are pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence. We are pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence and other pilots. It's absolutely bigger than a one dimensional shooter. But should match three elements be added for the match three audience? No, says I. Should block building elements be added for the block building audience? No, says I. Why? Because ED should remain true to ED - pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence and other pilots. A large amount of people are not going to have the chops to participate in this.
That means yes, if someone wants to push that cobra into the side of the station wall and blow them up, absolutely go for it. It's rude, but alas, we are not pilots in a cut throat galaxy full of consequence and other respectful pilots. Yes, more can be done to punish less than admirable behavior. But it's not against the rules.
That also means that people who don't have the time to put many hours into powerplay are going to be left behind. If you don't find that fun, you can do one of the many other things that are more accommodating. But by no means should the game change because I want it to be more accommodating to any particular audience other than the intended one, at the expense of the intended one.
Usually it happens anyway. A result of greed. Personally I do not feel that greed should get in the way of fun. The only way that is going to change is if us, the gamers, ask for quality first, player count second. There are many aspects of ED that I absolutely detest, but are extremely true to the core mission and target audience of the game - I would rather them not be removed just because I or a hundred thousand others don't enjoy it.
[/opinion]
I am really sorry i cannot rep you again for this post; this sums up pretty much all i expect from this game.
I agree there should be some systems with effective policing.
With nearby systems also effectively policed, so if someone wants to trade in relative safety they can. But, commodity levels should be lower.
And, there should be increased profits for smugglers to these systems too though!
john
Doesn't this thread show us perfectly how difficult it is for FD to tackle griefing? If you ask every person who has posted on this thread to define "griefing" I bet you wouldn't get more than two agreeing, what's griefing to one is "pvp fun" to another, even people on the wrong end of what some call griefing can't agree on what it actually is. The OP was asked what his definition of it is but didn't reply, I have no idea what it actually is but I don't play in Open, mainly due to when I've tried the performance is really poor, it becomes unplayable in busy systems. So how can FD tackle griefing when no one knows what it actually is?