Say what you like. It is impossible to agree to something you know nothing about. And the simple fact is that nothing in the EULA or the menu says anything about 'agreeing' to PvP. No such agreement exists.
Last edited:
Simple Fix to Combat Logging
- Thread starter Garbarrage
- Start date
- Status
Say what you like. It is impossible to agree to something you know nothing about. And the simple fact is that nothing in the EULA or the menu says anything about 'agreeing' to PvP. No such agreement exists.
The fact you, or anyone else didn't read up on the game they spent money on to play, is not mine or anyone else's fault. Knowledge is power
Also do you realize how ridiculous it is that you are citing the EULA (which I bet 99.99999999999% of players NEVER even look at and in the same breath are claiming players won't see the multiple advertisements of the game showcasing PVP as a major gameplay component?
It may well be intended. That doesn't alter the fact that there is no 'agreement to PvP' stated anywhere. Personally I think it would help matters no end if the menus actually told players what to expect - but they don't.
There could be a warning stating that "gameplay experience may change during online play", but I hardly think it's necessary though.
The point you're missing is that the mechanics of the game are something you adhere to, or you merely decide not to play. That's why everything under the sun is acceptable within the game, from buying fuel to stacking missions to slaughtering new players. You can complain that it doesn't work or make sense and you may very well be right, but until it's changed it's a feature of the game (right down to the combat logging...bite me, entire thread.
)
Last edited:
The same they do when they want to treat me as loot.
There could be a warning stating that "gameplay experience may change during online play", but I hardly think it's necessary though.
The point you're missing is that the mechanics of the game are something you adhere to, or you merely decide not to play. That's why everything under the sun is acceptable within the game, from buying fuel to stacking missions to slaughtering new players. You can complain that it doesn't work or make sense and you may very well be right, but until it's changed it's a feature of the game (right down to the combat logging...bite me, entire thread.
It may well be a feature of the game. That is however irrelevant to the point I'm making - that no 'agreement to PvP' need exist in order to play in open.
The devs stated that PvP is supposed to be rare and meaningful. Randomly attacking players is exploiting the open nature of the game, which doesn't do anything to validate your targets except place a bounty on you after the fact, in order to do something the devs never intended, and should therefore be a bannable offense.
Piracy, by the way, was stated by the devs to be intended as a PvE activity. You aren't supposed to pirate other players.
No such agreement exists. It is a figment of your imagination.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
No, they don't, but they can't claim that there was prior agreement. Because no such agreement exists. Anywhere.
The devs have also stated that killing newbies is unfortunate but not against the rules, and in fact want that to be an option for players. That includes piracy against players.
....could you cite a source for the bolded statement? I'm curious about this..
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
What's your point though? Who cares if you agree to pvp with me or not if you're in open and susceptible to attacks from other players?
Who cares? The people who keep claiming that everyone playing open has agreed to PvP, presumably. A claim they make to justify more or less anything except combat logging (which is of course contrary to the EULA that Vyrsai has just told us that nobody reads....)
The game has 3 modes you can select from to play, Solo, Group and Open, and Open is where all things can happen at any time in online games, which means PvP can happen if PvP is allowed in the game, which is happens to be in Elite: Dangerous.
Now, if you want to try this in a court of law, I really don't think you'll get far with your argument, but hey, I'm not a lawyer, Gluttony could probably give a better read on that, but since the precedent of Open being the wild wild west in online games is well established...
Generally speaking, courts of law base decisions on evidence. And no evidence has been offered in this thread that supports the assertion that you have to agree to PvP in order to play in open. This 'agreement' is a figment of peoples' imaginations...
You are consenting to the mechanics and gameplay design. That includes pvp. Again, you're not explicitly consenting to the fact that you must have fuel in order to run your ship, but that's how the game is designed. It's also designed for player to player interaction. You don't need to sign a waiver to pvp.
You grasp of what the word 'consent' means is more than a little tenuous...
I have a slightly different idea, a sort of follow up on the OP. How about instead of explosions, when a player disappears from the game in combat situation (be it because of the connection loss or combat logging), a doppelganger NPC with the same name, ship, stats, cargo, bounties, route plotted etc. is created at the very same moment. Complete with player-like radar marker. AI kicks in and the dopelganger either continues combat or runs. Attacked ship either gets blown up in combat or disappears after making a jump. Attacker is none the wiser. Everybody's happy.
PvP is an intended game mechanic, there is no more evidence needed to be given, and Open is where all things that can happen are allowed to happen.
As for the rules of the game, if you'll look closely at the EULA and Code of Conduct that FD has for Elite: Dangerous, you'll find that many of the rules FD has put in place for Elite: Dangerous aren't mentioned at all, such as combat logging. They are none the less the rules FD has put in place, which can be found on these forums, FD's official site for the game. Again, you could try your argument in a court of law, but I don't think it'll go in your favor here.
- Status