Should Elite Dangerous add clans/player factions in the future

[relayer]

Mass riots like this one to this magnitude?

It started on 12th Clair Mount that morning
It made the, the pig cops all jump and shout
I said, it started on 12th Clair Mount that morning
It made the, the pigs in the street go freak out

The fire wagons kept comin', baby
But the Black Panther Snipers wouldn't let them put it out
Wouldn't let them put it out, wouldn't let them put it out


Well, there were fire bombs bursting all around the people
Ya know there was soldiers standing everywhere
I said there was fire bombs bursting all around me, baby
Ya know there was National Guard everywhere

I can hear my people screaming
Sirens fill the air, fill the air, fill the air

Is this a pitchfork I see before me or art thou but a pitchfork of the mind, a false creation?

I see thee still, And on thy blade and dudgeon gouts of blood,
Which was not so before.

+virtual rep, bacon & etc for the "Scottish Play."

 

[GluttonyFang]

I see thee still, And on thy blade and dudgeon gouts of blood,
Which was not so before.

+virtual rep, bacon & etc for the "Scottish Play."

Hah... I'm not ever going to escape the haunting of the classics...

 

[Roybe]

Right, but the issue is that MP is hardly MP other than its most technical description, which is why there are so much complaints.




Right, but many question the point of it when it can all be done without interference, this creates a vicious cycle that leads to no one participating in it in Open. It's quite similar to the dilemma Anthony Downs introduced in his model of rationality and the paradox of voters in a democracy.



And that attitude changed as we saw in the Hutton incident.



Which is why I implicitly mentioned the need of in-game polls.

On this point...and a generality. Code did a great thing with their 'blockade'. The gameplay they brought to the game was fun to watch...and the forums were aflame! They also did a 'bad' thing. They showed people why the existence of Private mode is important and problematic. Any large scale action in this game forces people to make a choice. You can either play in Open...or you can win the 'event' (whatever you decide that activity is). PvP is a side attraction that allows people to have a different experience...but as far as the game is concerned...it is unrewarded time.

Even the Code vs. Trucker event held in beta (I was there...there are films!) was memorable. But....if that event was held in the 'real galaxy'...what would the reward be? A free skin to the winning side? I'm in! But how could the devs have created that event to be meaningful for everyone..in Solo, Group, Xbone, etc.? And herein lies the problems being discussed. Multiplayer fails in the face of PvP in this game....completely and utterly. It only works through the indirect PvP of trophy collection. To advocate for PvP to be meaningful in rewards for play means that people are left out of the system...when they were promised they never would be.

To solve this issue..there is no answer available. The devs have created a place where PvP can occur...but in no way can it have any major affect on the galaxy. Yes, there are missions that accept input if you kill another PC...but the fact that you would have to kill that player in a certain system makes the waiting to painful to bother. Past that...PvP is a great, fun activity within the game...just like base jumping SRV's off mountainsides...and has just as much reward provided.

 

[GluttonyFang]

On this point...and a generality. Code did a great thing with their 'blockade'. The gameplay they brought to the game was fun to watch...and the forums were aflame! They also did a 'bad' thing. They showed people why the existence of Private mode is important and problematic. Any large scale action in this game forces people to make a choice. You can either play in Open...or you can win the 'event' (whatever you decide that activity is). PvP is a side attraction that allows people to have a different experience...but as far as the game is concerned...it is unrewarded time.

Even the Code vs. Trucker event held in beta (I was there...there are films!) was memorable. But....if that event was held in the 'real galaxy'...what would the reward be? A free skin to the winning side? I'm in! But how could the devs have created that event to be meaningful for everyone..in Solo, Group, Xbone, etc.? And herein lies the problems being discussed. Multiplayer fails in the face of PvP in this game....completely and utterly. It only works through the indirect PvP of trophy collection. To advocate for PvP to be meaningful in rewards for play means that people are left out of the system...when they were promised they never would be.

To solve this issue..there is no answer available. The devs have created a place where PvP can occur...but in no way can it have any major affect on the galaxy. Yes, there are missions that accept input if you kill another PC...but the fact that you would have to kill that player in a certain system makes the waiting to painful to bother. Past that...PvP is a great, fun activity within the game...just like base jumping SRV's off mountainsides...and has just as much reward provided.

The reason I brought up the point is because Maryland said that blockades are something FD/DB dislikes when the reaction was contrary. Zac personally informed me that FD's CCO enjoyed his encounter with us, and DB's twitter post in response to our parcel was positive and echoed the CCO's experience. The news letter also classified our action as "opposition to the CG" instead of the accusation of griefing.

I will never forget that I got called a furry Osama wana-be for trying to be civilized and take in the input of the community, and how it became the stopping word for our in-house duels. Let no body tell you Gluttony was always cynical and pessimistic.

But on point, yes, I agree that it's good that other modes exist for people who do not seek/want to encounter the blockade (despite some might disagree).

Edit:

The way I look at it, the dilemma we're looking at is this:

Are players' joy derived from the credits they make per hour or immersing themselves within the galaxy?

If the former, anyone that plays in Open must be irrational.

If the latter, why isn't everyone playing in Open for the most diverse experience?

Clearly it's a mix between the two, and depending on the person, the split between the two factor can have infinite combination and thus generate endless types of players. I agree, trying to solve this issue is improbable.

 

[Roybe]

The reason I brought up the point is because Maryland said that blockades are something FD/DB dislikes when the reaction was contrary. Zac personally informed me that FD's CCO enjoyed his encounter with us, and DB's twitter post in response to our parcel was positive and echoed the CCO's experience. The news letter also classified our action as "opposition to the CG" instead of the accusation of griefing.

I will never forget that I got called a furry Osama wana-be for trying to be civilized and take in the input of the community, and how it became the stopping word for our in-house duels. Let no body tell you Gluttony was always cynical and pessimistic.

But on point, yes, I agree that it's good that other modes exist for people who do not seek/want to encounter the blockade (despite some might disagree).

This is also true..in a sense..but because of the way they designed the game...blockades are completely acceptable gameplay. If blockades did their job..actually stopped people from attaining entrance to an asset..then yes, the game would be considered broken and the problem addressed. DBOBE does not want that to occur. The aspersions that were cast towards Code for their PvP antics were unfortunate. Those casting those aspersions were wrong in their assessment to the activities and the outcomes. My small attempt at non-violent protest, notwithstanding.

<stage whisper> If there was an Open PvE option available...there would NEVER have been complaints! LOL!

And I am pretty sure that whatever safe word you guys use between yourselves will bring a smile to the person's face that instigates the proclamation!

 

[GluttonyFang]

This is also true..in a sense..but because of the way they designed the game...blockades are completely acceptable gameplay. If blockades did their job..actually stopped people from attaining entrance to an asset..then yes, the game would be considered broken and the problem addressed. DBOBE does not want that to occur. The aspersions that were cast towards Code for their PvP antics were unfortunate. Those casting those aspersions were wrong in their assessment to the activities and the outcomes.

It was quite traumatic of an experience of me >_>... Despite that I didn't even participate in the whole incident... nor plan it... How could they ever be so mean to a harmless hound ;-;

<stage whisper> If there was an Open PvE option available...there would NEVER have been complaints! LOL!

*Whispers* That flag system though... flag system... This way we bring people together instead of separating them... Make it only toggle-able at stations... *Whispers*

 

[Roybe]

there has always been PKs camping just outside the safety zones in open - occupational hazard?
"If there was an Open PvE option available...there would NEVER have been complaints!"
There is...kind of...the Mobius group.

Meh...so few to worry about, really. There are much more elegant ways to separate players from their ships these days...and it is actually legal to do.

I won't derail the thread to answer the Mobius suggestion. Just know that that is actually a much more complicated issue...at least for me.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

It was quite traumatic of an experience of me >_>... Despite that I didn't even participate in the whole incident... nor plan it... How could they ever be so mean to a harmless hound ;-;

I certainly understand the problems you faced!

*Whispers* That flag system though... flag system... This way we bring people together instead of separating them... Make it only toggle-able at stations... *Whispers*

I actually agree with this!

 

[Yokoshima]

Right, and if MP is just a meaningless/less meaningful add-on, what qualifies it being a MP game?.

The ability to play with friends. And it is honestly easier if you do (most of the time). However the meaningful addition of NPCs wings/multi-crew would allow for more group content without gimping solo players, something that is needed imo as the multiplayer experience is quite lack luster.

 

[GluttonyFang]

The ability to play with friends. And it is honestly easier if you do (most of the time). However the meaningful addition of NPCs wings/multi-crew would allow for more group content without gimping solo players, something that is needed imo as the multiplayer experience is quite lack luster.

I'm not against NPC crew, but I don't feel that the MP features are anywhere near the standard of anything remotely close to a MMO, or anything that holds up in its own light other than relying solely on the single player experience.

 

[Yokoshima]

... I don't feel that the MP features are anywhere near the standard of anything remotely close to a MMO, or anything that holds up in its own light...

If it wasn't obvious in my previous posts, including the one you quoted, I agree on that point. I just don't want to see MP activities like you do in most MMOs, where if you want to do anything meaningful/get to build/see the really cool stuff you are forced to group. But that's the great thing about ED. Right now they have a chance to build a game where both sides win. Though I expect it to take a few years before the "core" of the game is in place.

 

[stephanov]

After reading through the abundance of novels written since only yesterday evening, in the usual idiosyncratic cubism surrealist Frontier Forums (literary) style, sprinkled with a dash of the authors' passion and melancholy for the subject, I really have to probe the soul of the writers and ask:

WHERE THE HELL DOES IT SAY "OWNERSHIP OF SPACE" IN THE ABOVE POLL ????!?!?!?!?!?

I ask this question as I fear that the authors of the aforementioned novels are getting ahead of themselves in projecting their own fears as opposed to providing a simple answer for a simple question:

DO YOU WANT ED TO ADD CLANS/PLAYER FACTIONS IN THE FUTURE? (If you find the words "ownership of space" in the above poll, please take a screenshot and then I will provide you with a postal adress, you will mail it to me and I will eat the paper)

That being said, let me conclude by suggesting we take things one step at a time and settle the issue, while maybe reconvening this book club on further issues (like space ownership) at a later time.

Oh and by the way, space ownership is possible even without group support and it's part of the "pirate" gameplay anyway (the pirate demanding a tax for passage is in fact taking ownership, even though temporary, on an area subjected to merchant traffic "give me money -payment- and thou shall pass -service-" where the service is not possible without ownership of the area which in turn entitles the pie-rat to merrily destroy the naysayer). The fact that pie-rats are seen as criminals is the fact that their temporary possession on the aforementioned area is in fact interpreted to be an infringement on another party's sovereignity over the area, thus the saying: One person's pie rat is another one's privateer.

So again, my suggestion is to treat "Clans/player factions" as a separate concept than "ownership of space". This poll was made in order to probe the community about the first. Please don't try to turn it into the second, it's off topic.

CHEERS!

P.S. And there are no details on what kind of group support is to be added, only the fact that one will be abble to assume a group identity. I don't get it why people are so scared that they read their own tormenting demons into this subject, when it is quite simple: it's about groups/clans = collective identities becoming a possibility (at anybody's disposal to use -or not-).

 

[AJW]

Given the complete lack in the poll of any definition of what adding "clans/player factions" would entail, it isn't surprising that there is little evidence of consensus here. There is no prospect of 'settling the issue' unless someone can explain what exactly the issue is. It seems that there is little opposition to clan/faction/guild tags being added to CMDR labels, but beyond that any agreement seems beyond reach. Though frankly I doubt that FD are going to take much notice of a badly-worded and ambiguous 'poll' anyway - there is nothing to suggest that an anonymous poll (open, as has been noted, to people who don't even own the game) is any way representative of players as a whole, and if FD were to 'agree' with the results, nobody would know what they had agreed to...

 

[kilvenny]

After reading through the abundance of novels written since only yesterday evening, in the usual idiosyncratic cubism surrealist Frontier Forums (literary) style, sprinkled with a dash of the authors' passion and melancholy for the subject, I really have to probe the soul of the writers and ask:

WHERE THE HELL DOES IT SAY "OWNERSHIP OF SPACE" IN THE ABOVE POLL ????!?!?!?!?!?

I ask this question as I fear that the authors of the aforementioned novels are getting ahead of themselves in projecting their own fears as opposed to providing a simple answer for a simple question:

DO YOU WANT ED TO ADD CLANS/PLAYER FACTIONS IN THE FUTURE? (If you find the words "ownership of space" in the above poll, please take a screenshot and then I will provide you with a postal adress, you will mail it to me and I will eat the paper)

That being said, let me conclude by suggesting we take things one step at a time and settle the issue, while maybe reconvening this book club on further issues (like space ownership) at a later time.

Oh and by the way, space ownership is possible even without group support and it's part of the "pirate" gameplay anyway (the pirate demanding a tax for passage is in fact taking ownership, even though temporary, on an area subjected to merchant traffic "give me money -payment- and thou shall pass -service-" whare the service is not possible without ownership of the area which in turn entitles the pie-rat to merrily destroy the naysayer).

So again, my suggestion is to treat "Clans/player factions" as a separate concept than "ownership of space". This poll was made in order to probe the community about the first. Please don't try to turn it into the second, it's off topic.

CHEERS!

Your poll doesn't say it, but there is a lot of experience on this forums and people read between the lines and see the implications. Whilst I am in favour of guild content being added I see two major impacts for those players who play alone

1) Playing in open in guild space will be impossible
2) Adding Guild content means less development on other content.

I have played a number of MMO's and in every case they suffer from the big fish eats plankton effect. At the moment people can group and control out of game so its happening, but its not obvious. Once the mechanics are in game it will be easier and visible and hence the complaints.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Right, but the issue is that MP is hardly MP other than its most technical description, which is why there are so much complaints.

While the game is described as an MMO (among other possible play modes) it is only in the minimalist sense - it does not include the typical trappings of MMORPG games.

Right, but many question the point of it when it can all be done without interference, this creates a vicious cycle that leads to no one participating in it in Open.

Powerplay was not designed to require direct player opposition.

And that attitude changed as we saw in the Hutton incident.

The mention of opposition was just that - a mention - has the man himself made official comment somewhere?

Which is why I implicitly mentioned the need of in-game polls.

Missed that, sorry. However, I would expect that only Frontier would be able to create polls on topics that they sought player feedback on.

I would posit that is occurring because people are losing interest in playing the game currently or have left the forums for other pursuits, at a minimum...particularly those that are interested in functional, social experiences within an advertised multiplayer game.

If players seeking Guild play are losing interest in the game because of the lack of that specific feature that has not been included in the design or advertising of the game then that is unfortunate but understandable from their perspective. Hopefully, Frontier will introduce QoL improvements for the player groups that sponsor Minor Factions in the not too distant future.

Given the complete lack in the poll of any definition of what adding "clans/player factions" would entail, it isn't surprising that there is little evidence of consensus here.

Exactly - there is no clear agreed scope to the request for "clans / player factions" - it is left up to the imagination of each voter as to what is included in the proposal.

 

[Hurricane Moon]

I voted hell no oddly enough..

main reason,since coming back from my break I have been playing solo......its a carefree less stressfull world when you only have to worry about ones self and not "do I have to be on patrol somewhere for my crew",been with a few now,done all that....game is not designed for multiplayer crews...not enough to do.....and only small wings.

played the original and frontier and wing commander growing up......don't recall them being online and having clans,so in spirit and respect to the old ways..

Hell no....not with what Elite is meant to stand for,and especially because the game mechanics are not there for a great mmo online game imo

 

[stephanov]

Your poll doesn't say it, but there is a lot of experience on this forums and people read between the lines and see the implications. Whilst I am in favour of guild content being added I see two major impacts for those players who play alone

1) Playing in open in guild space will be impossible
2) Adding Guild content means less development on other content.

I have played a number of MMO's and in every case they suffer from the big fish eats plankton effect. At the moment people can group and control out of game so its happening, but its not obvious. Once the mechanics are in game it will be easier and visible and hence the complaints.

Look, first of all this is not my poll. I tried to make one but it seems the option is disabled but that may end up to be a very good thing in the current state of affairs.

I too have experience playing mmos, especiall space sim ones (not eve). Just as I said, maybe it's better (putting all the experience aside) to take things one at a time. ED is on new ground, with new technology and new approaches.

First of all, nothing is impossible. You just have to find solutions but that doesn't happen if you're too afraid to even try. Plus, I thought the "space ownership" issue was already settled...

Second, while adding guild content indeed means less dev time on other content in the short run, you forget that once group support will be implemented there will be more human-generated content and even possibly responsibilities which would free up dev time in the long run.

 

[Firestarter]

I belong to a player group that have played with the background simulator to increase the influence and range of the minor faction named after us to two systems controlled.

The only thing I miss is that our own ships don't also belong to that faction. It would be nice if it did, at least when we were in one of the systems we have expanded into.

 

[stephanov]

I voted hell no oddly enough..

main reason,since coming back from my break I have been playing solo......its a carefree less stressfull world when you only have to worry about ones self and not "do I have to be on patrol somewhere for my crew",been with a few now,done all that....game is not designed for multiplayer crews...not enough to do.....and only small wings.

played the original and frontier and wing commander growing up......don't recall them being online and having clans,so in spirit and respect to the old ways..

Hell no....not with what Elite is meant to stand for,and especially because the game mechanics are not there for a great mmo online game imo

You do know that ED is sold as a "definitively epic multiplayer" and as an MMO therefore legally and morally "stands for" these things, right?

 

[Hurricane Moon]

You do know that ED is sold as a "definitively epic multiplayer" and as an MMO therefore legally and morally "stands for" these things, right?

yeah of course,i totally understand...my friend I have been in some very well known player groups...been there....but also got bored as there isn't anything exciting for player groups to really do once you get through the fog..not with the current game mechanics.

I generally prefer offline games as that's what I grew up with,a game sometimes best enjoyed alone like a good book or a movie

keep it as it is...if we do allow more control to groups then we will see the knightmare that is EVE.....and Elite is not a MMO greifer pew pew game...history tells us that....at least lets keep one of our classic games a bit old school eh?....why does it have to go like every other game out there.

id never thought id say this,but most of us who grew up with this franchise know what its about....I don't care what advertising they stick on it lol.....the name alone sold it to me....Elite.

it means something to some of us older gamers...and it doesn't mean COD in space imo.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You do know that ED is sold as a "definitively epic multiplayer" and as an MMO therefore legally and morally "stands for" these things, right?

What does MMO mean, besides "massively", "multi-player" and "online"?