Should Elite Dangerous add clans/player factions in the future

[saremun]

What made me decide whether i wanted to play Elite Dangerous or not is the large scale of the world, when ever i see what EVE Online has done with the player owned factions/corporations i get really excited for the possibilities in this game, i want to see our group controlling systems and building stations, i want to see big ships which can carry other ships offering long range jumps, i want to see player "clans" with their own logos in game or even paint jobs, i want to see in game player housing on Stations, sooooooooo many cool things can be done with this game!

The game has to have player factions, we formed our player factions in the game with out the proper tools in the game sadly because ED wasn't designed for Multiplayer at first but happily this is not the case anymore, we are still waiting for the ability to have a group list/ clan list in the game where we can see all the members.

For those who don't like it, please you have a solo play so no need to dictate (At the end this vote means nothing because there is a silent majority in almost every game) how the rest of the community play the game, if you don't like the multiplayer aspects then don't use them and use Solo instead, simple as that...

/Cmdr morry

 

[Robert Maynard]

For those who don't like it, please you have a solo play so no need to dictate (At the end this vote means nothing because there is a silent majority in almost every game) how the rest of the community play the game, if you don't like the multiplayer aspects then don't use them and use Solo instead, simple as that...

You seem to be conflating opposition to Guilds / Clans / Corps with players not wanting to play in multi-player. I doubt that the two are necessarily linked.

 

[Louella]

What made me decide whether i wanted to play Elite Dangerous or not is the large scale of the world, when ever i see what EVE Online has done with the player owned factions/corporations i get really excited for the possibilities in this game, i want to see our group controlling systems and building stations,

Define controlling systems, and what you feel would be the limits of such control.

Are Sol and Achenar off-limits to player control ? If not, why not ? If so, then consider the following: Group A pleads allegiance to the Empire, ends up being the controlling minor faction in Achenar, then, switches allegiance to the Federation.

Federation now controls Achenar. The Empire is conquered. End of several years worth of backstory.

For those who don't like it, please you have a solo play so no need to dictate (At the end this vote means nothing because there is a silent majority in almost every game) how the rest of the community play the game, if you don't like the multiplayer aspects then don't use them and use Solo instead, simple as that...

Control of systems dictates to the rest of the community how they may play the game, by altering which missions are available. You're not going to get Federation Navy promotion missions in an Empire system now, are you ?

 

[GluttonyFang]

it creates that us vs them mentality.

To be honest I think FD is the culprit for nurturing that mentality.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

To be honest I think FD is the culprit for nurturing that mentality.

This. x1000.

Fdev has created an 'us vs them' mentality with their poor choice of game design. the combined open/group/solo sharing the same universe was a terrible decision from the get go. the only people who are actually happy about it are the solo/private players who like being able to effect the open background sim whilst in 'invincibility' mode because they feel they are making 'the pirates and the griefers cry' etc.

While it can be intellectualized away as a 'good design choice', ultimately it isn't.

 

[Yokoshima]

I like this.

I still can't understand the people who want to have a huge online space game, but not have any social interactions... basically nothing like what it would be like if humans populated space.. i mean the storyline of elite... i mean... yea..

Social interactions with NPCs is fine enough for a large amount of people, doubly so when you look at the type of people who play vidya. Not the ED has good NPC interaction though...

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

You seem to be conflating opposition to Guilds / Clans / Corps with players not wanting to play in multi-player. I doubt that the two are necessarily linked.

I can't rep you anymore. So just imagine I did.

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

What made me decide whether i wanted to play Elite Dangerous or not is the large scale of the world, when ever i see what EVE Online has done with the player owned factions/corporations i get really excited for the possibilities in this game, i want to see our group controlling systems and building stations, i want to see big ships which can carry other ships offering long range jumps, i want to see player "clans" with their own logos in game or even paint jobs, i want to see in game player housing on Stations, sooooooooo many cool things can be done with this game!

The game has to have player factions, we formed our player factions in the game with out the proper tools in the game sadly because ED wasn't designed for Multiplayer at first but happily this is not the case anymore, we are still waiting for the ability to have a group list/ clan list in the game where we can see all the members.

For those who don't like it, please you have a solo play so no need to dictate (At the end this vote means nothing because there is a silent majority in almost every game) how the rest of the community play the game, if you don't like the multiplayer aspects then don't use them and use Solo instead, simple as that...

/Cmdr morry

The issue is, depending on how it is handled, it can affect solo/private groups. For example what if owning a station meant you could impose taxes or get good discounts? Solo/private group players would likely have to pay the taxes, or not use that station. What's more they wouldn't be able to enjoy discounts unless they joined a clan.
.
Bottom line player created stations/capital ships/etc. is major content. I have no problem letting guilds do that, but not if it means it is realistically impossible for solo/small group players to do the same.

 

[Garbarrage]

To be honest I think FD is the culprit for nurturing that mentality.

Why do you think that? The way I see it, is that people's preconceptions have created it. Many players (myself included) come here with a preconceived notion of what an MMO is. The reason is that for over a decade, they have all broadly followed the same path as WoW (and its many clones). I came here from a PvP centric P2W game, where new players were thrown in amongst the sharks on their first day. The retention rate was abysmal, and the toxicity of the friction between territorial players was just a part of the game. They did some group aspects very well though. Much like EVE.

I came here and my first thought was, "Why isn't this game like those games? It could do it so much better..." You get the idea. The same thoughts every PvP centric player has after a week or so here. I came on the forums with my great idea, and unbelievably was met with much resistance. Shock and horror. Had I entered the Twilight Zone? What is with these players who don't want to troll each other and shoot each other in the face all day... or the back.... or gang up and gank the guy in the expensive ship? Bunch of flippin weirdos.

And then I took a breath and looked at all the other stuff players were doing that didn't happen in those other games. My attention was brought to it by the less dramatic posters in that thread. The Buckeyball guys, Fuel Rats and so on.... Could you imagine a Fuel Rat in EVE? How long before someone decided to infiltrate them, then go around killing stranded CMDRs? Or ambushing them for fun?

FD have tried to do something different. They have every right to, and I'm glad they are. It just takes an open mind to see it.

Why don't the PvP guys set up their own anti-Mobius? Choose some systems close to each other, and make your own rules? Claim your own systems, and have your own wars? The sandbox is there... the buckets and spades are there... go play in it.. I'll even join in from time to time.

 

[CMDR Dumbfries]

The problem would be if that content is limited to guilds/clans/etc. For assets like that I believe that they should be NPC owned, PC supported. Guilds/Clans/Etc. can form to support some factions and reap the benefits, just as solo players could. Basically better PP and BGS.

I don't think it would be a problem if it was confined to a separate area outside the main bubble. Just create a new clan/guild bubble a reasonable distance away from the main area and test it out. Have players actually directly battle for control of a system and stations. I'd even go as far as suspending insurance in those areas to facilitate conflict.

 

[Ghostickles]

ROFLMAO
This thread is a repeat.
Do people multi-play this game?

 

[relayer]

It's already happening with PP ain't it? The only difference would be that humans will defend their space more actively and aggressively against opposing sides.

No, ownership of in-game assets is not happening; won't happen according to FD. How would such players "defend their space" given the mechanics of the game structure?

Hey, I'm just trying to guess the reason why those people who're vehemently opposed to clans and/or clan-owned assets, stations or systems in the game would do so.

You'd have to study the development of games with "clan ownership of in-game assets" for the last, oh... 20 years or so to have some idea worth making a guess about, or it's just the clan/guild/cult party line to push for "moar."



I was responding to different posts. Did you have some other reason for picking out my posts and wasting forum space or was it just to give me a slap? Either way, HAVE A NICE DAY!

 

[relayer]

I for one have no issue with certain player owned game assets. It's a pretty big universe after all.

I'd be happy to let people "own space" - on the other side of Sag A*. Far enough from the core so as not to be a base for harassing and/or killing unarmed explorer ships. Like, as far away as the human Bubble is to the core.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Fold

When a company advertise their game, they should be attracting a playerbase that will relatively understand each other and accept one another's style of play, or segregate PvP and PvE so that both communities are relatively content. What ED did was bringing a much larger crowd than it could handle, then throw them into a pit together and just shrugs and tell people to figure it out.

And the result of that is what we have now, people trying to kill one another over the fundamental design and direction of the game because both community's enjoyment depends on it. Unlike other games where PvP and PvE are relatively segregated.

Sure, doing new things and trying new things are fine and should be encouraged. But what saves a game from criticism/negative reviews for being unconventional is its redeeming value for the players it attracted that did not receive a relatively conventional reflection of a genre the game company advertised. And evidently that failed terribly with the MMO tag.

If people's preconception of a genre is at fault, it usually means the redeeming value in an unconventional approach have paid off and it satisfied the majority expectation of people purchasing the game for particular tags. ED did not do that, thus it's the advertisement/game design in question.

Edit:

Think of it this way, I advertise an apple that weigh a ton and is huge, you purchase it expecting some serious content within the apple, but you realized after purchase that I inserted an incredibly dense, but hollow ball in the apple that is of no use to you no matter what. Sure, other people who are looking for massive object/heavy object are probably content with their deals, but you are not. You come back to me and tell me that my advertisement is questionable, I tell you your preconception is at fault. You want a refund, but I tell you the time it took for you to discover that the apple had a dense ball in it exceeds the allotted time for a refund.

What would your expression look like?

Edit 2:

To clarify, this isn't even just tension between PvP and PvE, it's the conflict between Offline players and MP players, it's even worse than PvP vs PvE arguments. It's the conflict of interest between lone wolves and wolf packs, trying to resolve something like that by using one universe and only modes to segregate the two parties is suicidal.

Edit 3:

That just made me think of something... maybe FD's goal is to see how much hatred they can breed by mixing the three incompatible types of players that have their own respective categories together and see what happens, it's a sinister social experiment!

*Chuckles in the background*

 

[relayer]

FD has stated that griefing is legal gameplay.

Yes; and they've also stated, many times in clear language, that there will be no ownership of in-game assets in E|D. That doesn't stop the clanners from push-push-pushing their agenda, which always seems to break down into ownership-of-space issues.

 

[Garbarrage]

When a company advertise their game, they should be attracting a playerbase that will relatively understand each other and accept one another's style of play, or segregate PvP and PvE so that both communities are relatively content. What ED did was bringing a much larger crowd than it could handle, then throw them into a pit together and just shrugs and tell people to figure it out.

And the result of that is what we have now, people trying to kill one another over the fundamental design and direction of the game because both community's enjoyment depends on it. Unlike other games where PvP and PvE are relatively segregated.

Why should they segregate PvE and PvP players? You're not children. You should be perfectly capable of doing it yourself. Why don't CODE and the other PvP-centric groups band together, pick a corner of space, organize your rules, and play by them.... the same as Mobile, but with more shooting in the face?

If there is appetite for it, it should be easily done. How can the Mobile crowd pull 17000 players together and decide a rule set, stick to it and enforce it, but those that are so vocal about PvP can't manage their own version?

Or is it a necessity to be able to kill a portion of players who don't want anything to do with it to be "real"?

Sure, doing new things and trying new things are fine and should be encouraged. But what saves a game from criticism/negative reviews for being unconventional is its redeeming value for the players it attracted that did not receive a relatively conventional reflection of a genre the game company advertised. And evidently that failed terribly with the MMO tag.

If people's preconception of a genre is at fault, it usually means the redeeming value in an unconventional approach have paid off and it satisfied the majority expectation of people purchasing the game for particular tags. ED did not do that, thus it's the advertisement/game design in question.

Well it seems that some people are suffering from confirmation bias. ED gets twice as many positive reviews as negative. Which isn't to be unexpected for a niche game. Particularly one that is trying to break down the conventions. It has factually satisfied a majority. It's just that the minority are loud and entitled.

I have found it to be everything it said it was going to be, once I step back from my preconceptions, and I see how they define things. Is it massive? Tick. Multiplayer? Tick. Is it epic? I would say so.

It's a new approach. One which I've learned to appreciate. It seems there's no shortage of people here who do also.

 

[relayer]

No, I think FD just need to make it clearer that although PvP isn't forbidden the primary means of competing with another group is going to be indirect (via the BGS).

This has been said, clearly and multiple times by FD, and also @Roybe in several threads. It is not accepted by a contingent of players. Why? Because they want the game to play their way, not FD's way - they want pvp to rule despite it being marginalized by the creators themselves. +rep

 

[GluttonyFang]

Why should they segregate PvE and PvP players? You're not children. You should be perfectly capable of doing it yourself. Why don't CODE and the other PvP-centric groups band together, pick a corner of space, organize your rules, and play by them.... the same as Mobile, but with more shooting in the face?

If there is appetite for it, it should be easily done. How can the Mobile crowd pull 17000 players together and decide a rule set, stick to it and enforce it, but those that are so vocal about PvP can't manage their own version?

Or is it a necessity to be able to kill a portion of players who don't want anything to do with it to be "real"?

I'm not complaining about the content I received, I'm criticizing the advertisement for the sake of those continuous getting misled and giving FD negative reviews that aren't exactly fair. Also, what I mean by segregating PvE and PvP is the conventional approach of MMOs, of course, there's open world PvP that has PvE elements to it. However, the issue I'm pointing out is that ED doesn't fall into any of these categories with its design. The issue most people have currently with ED's MMO aspect is that it doesn't provide people the tools necessary in-game to organize. I already brought up these points pages back.

I can't speak for other groups, but The Code focuses on Piracy more than PvP. We care about RP and only PvP when we encounter player resistance/challenge. And from what I understand, we have a 18+ recruitment policy, so no, we are not children, and simplifying PvP down to non-contextual fighting is truly saddening. Also, I believe you are making a reference to "Mobius," not "Mobile."

I am questioning the advertisement for FD and a portion of the playerbase, simple as that.

Well it seems that some people are suffering from confirmation bias. ED gets twice as many positive reviews as negative. Which isn't to be unexpected for a niche game. Particularly one that is trying to break down the conventions. It has factually satisfied a majority. It's just that the minority are loud and entitled.

Citation please, and drop that attitude.

I have found it to be everything it said it was going to be, once I step back from my preconceptions, and I see how they define things. Is it massive? Tick. Multiplayer? Tick. Is it epic? I would say so.

Sure, you can interpret it however you wish, but the reviews and feedbacks tend to speak otherwise about the MMO tag.

It's a new approach. One which I've learned to appreciate. It seems there's no shortage of people here who do also.

Sure, then attract those people instead of misleading people with the MMO tag.

Edit:

Confirmation bias? That term has little to no meaning if you really understand psychology thoroughly, and before you try to go into depths of psychology and philosophy, I'll remind you that those subjects and semantics in general are my strong suit, don't play with them unless you are prepared to have a serious debate.

 

[relayer]

Why should they segregate PvE and PvP players? You're not children. You should be perfectly capable of doing it yourself. Why don't CODE and the other PvP-centric groups band together, pick a corner of space, organize your rules, and play by them...

This has been proposed many times in this and other threads. The clanners won't accept it. The best guess as to why is that they'd be matched pretty equally with each other. It appears as if "a fair fight" isn't what's wanted though. Keep peeling the onion and you get to "there's not enough targets that way."

I'd be happy with one suggestion from this thread: put the "guild-space" way, way out; further than Sothis, further from the Pleiades, perhaps as far from the Core as "Known Space" is, but the other side of Sag A*. Of course, there'd be no soft trader targets out there...

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

That just made me think of something... maybe FD's goal is to see how much hatred they can breed by mixing the three incompatible types of players that have their own respective categories together and see what happens, it's a sinister social experiment!

*Chuckles in the background*

XBOne only has Open and Solo, you could play over there since it promotes Solo at the same level as Open. No quasi Solo/Open like Private Groups

 

[Jypson]

I'm not complaining about the content I received, I'm criticizing the advertisement for the sake of those continuous getting misled and giving FD negative reviews that aren't exactly fair. Also, what I mean by segregating PvE and PvP is the conventional approach of MMOs, of course, there's open world PvP that has PvE elements to it. However, the issue I'm pointing out is that ED doesn't fall into any of these categories with its design. The issue most people have currently with ED's MMO aspect is that it doesn't provide people the tools necessary in-game to organize. I already brought up these points pages back.

I can't speak for other groups, but The Code focuses on Piracy more than PvP. We care about RP and only PvP when we encounter player resistance/challenge. And from what I understand, we have a 18+ recruitment policy, so no, we are not children, and simplifying PvP down to non-contextual fighting is truly saddening. Also, I believe you are making a reference to "Mobius," not "Mobile."

I am questioning the advertisement for FD and a portion of the playerbase, simple as that.



Citation please, and drop that attitude.




Sure, you can interpret it however you wish, but the reviews and feedbacks tend to speak otherwise about the MMO tag.



Sure, then attract those people instead of misleading people with the MMO tag.

Edit:

Confirmation bias? That term has little to no meaning if you really understand psychology thoroughly, and before you try to go into depths of psychology and philosophy, I'll remind you that those subjects and semantics in general are my strong suit, don't play with them unless you are prepared to have a serious debate.

IMHO, there is a lot of misleading advertising from FD about Elite. Sure, potential players should do their due diligence in researching a potential purchase, but I think a lot of the negative reviews should lay at FD's feet.

...Sure, then attract those people instead of misleading people with the MMO tag.

That's a great example, and I would also point toward the official trailers as well.

[video=youtube;I6peGu2yG6o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6peGu2yG6o[/video]

Do you feel that this is an accurate portrayal of what you can expect in-game? As it goes, 'build it and they will come". But don't build a baseball stadium and advertise it as cricket grounds.

 

[GluttonyFang]

XBOne only has Open and Solo, you could play over there since it promotes Solo at the same level as Open. No quasi Solo/Open like Private Groups

Different experiment for different platform, splendid.