Great New Article About Elite Dangerous

[Red Anders]

I don' see why people have to quit but something seems a TAD off when the entire games design and developer engagement appears to revolve around ~20k players.. out of 1.5 mil?

How exactly does the game's design revolve around Mobius (not even solo players, or those who play in other private groups but specifically Mobius) considering that open mode is part of the game's design?

Note - I'm not a member of Mobius, I just think that comment taken at face value is such a hysterical overreaction that I'd be interested in seeing your working.

 

[Brimstone]

Wait .. what ?! You're an xbox player .. arguing over a PC group ... whom you will never meet even if they did play in open ... you've been trolling me. Well done, and welcome to my ignore list.

This right here is just silly.

 

[Scoopy Doopy]

Ok, I'm making some progress

A lot of people on the forum (PVE, PVP players) want the same single little thing: Play the way they want.

The problem is that when other people mess with the way they play, be it combat loggers, Solo players, Pirate/Murderers, etc.

And then we end-up with hundred of OPEN/SOLO/PG topics, which bring nothings to the table because the same arguments are used over and over.

The problem is that FDev cannot change radically the design (game ecosystem and server infrastructure) of the game.
Example: the failed Criminality update of last year

If there was open only, you wouldn't have many Traders trying to maximize their profit. They would be extremely rare (if combat logging was not possible).

Something which upset me is the Term "Carebear" given to traders, because most of them do like PVPer but not focusing on the pewpew. They select and fit their ship according to their environment:
Jump range, Cargo size, shield selection, chaffs, weapons, etc...

If player piracy was more common, THEY WOULD ADAPT and not try to maximize profit anymore but look to SECURE their profit , ie run Blockade Breaking ships.

That would make PVP piracy even more difficult than PVE piracy, as:
- no sane trade player would use some ships like T7, T9
- the cargo hold would be smaller than what they use in Solo/PG
- most trade ship would run with Shield Cell, Chaffs, etc... so kind of combat proof ships

Is it a shame that Open feels empty?
Yes, it is.

But Open only game mode is really an utopic solution as a lot of things would become broken and the traders population would quickly shrink due to the risk/reward imbalance toward them.

At the end of the day though, FD built a game with 400 billion rooms you can visit. Multiplayer is never going feel that multi is it.

Here's an idea that might work:

First, send solo and group of to some remote server somewhere. Let them take their stupid galaxy with them. Make open a really small galaxy. Maybe five or six locations. Fill it full of interesting environments that you can fly in and out of and hide in. Make it really dangerous. Anybody can shoot anybody. Make the ships really fast and nippy with only minor differences between them. Maybe have power ups sprinkled about the place. You'd have to re-name it of course because "open" sounds a bit silly. I suggest "Athena" or something like that.

 

[Steve50]

If FD had given us the single player offline mode that they 'promised' in the kickstarter, then none of this would be an issue.

Way to go DRM.

 

[Olrik]

Have you actually read the article?

Pay attention, there are players who have family members killed or injured in Brussel terror attacks. THERE IS JUST NO EXCUSE FOR THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOUR!

 

[Scoopy Doopy]

Pay attention, there are players who have family members killed or injured in Brussel terror attacks. THERE IS JUST NO EXCUSE FOR THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOUR!

Anybody who suffered because of Brussels has my sympathy. In fact we all suffered to some extent but I don't believe it should stop people playing Arabic music if they want to.

 

[Boomer Kay]

Have you actually read the article?

I have and I find no controversy.

"We don't care about those people who are going, my dad's dying from prostate cancer you're making a mockery of it!" Alberts laughs.

There's the door. Get out.

Now.

 

[Brimstone]

Pay attention, there are players who have family members killed or injured in Brussel terror attacks. THERE IS JUST NO EXCUSE FOR THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOUR!

Pay attention : ""We've been called terrorists and worse than ISIS," Alberts says. "It's just a mockery of that. Music is music. Just because it sounds Arabic doesn't mean it's ISIS music. ISIS do not represent Islam. You know they burn musical instruments? ISIS doesn't have music."


We're playing a video game, get a grip on reality.

 

[Fracktal]

At the end of the day though, FD built a game with 400 billion rooms you can visit. Multiplayer is never going feel that multi is it.

Here's an idea that might work:

First, send solo and group of to some remote server somewhere. Let them take their stupid galaxy with them. Make open a really small galaxy. Maybe five or six locations. Fill it full of interesting environments that you can fly in and out of and hide in. Make it really dangerous. Anybody can shoot anybody. Make the ships really fast and nippy with only minor differences between them. Maybe have power ups sprinkled about the place. You'd have to re-name it of course because "open" sounds a bit silly. I suggest "Athena" or something like that.

I believe that was the idea behind Powerplay and CQC. To try to satisfy the "bloodthirsty" crowd by "tagging them with target symbol" and "isolating" them respectively.

In my opinion, your suggestion is the best one (and realistic) from the hundred of pages I have read.

Maybe they could expand the bubble, and create a PVP conflict/expansion area and make it permit restricted. With the permit only active when OPEN Play is selected.
Maybe they could create specific economic incentive (traders) and criminality tracking (bounty hunting).

 

[Guywired]

Ok, I'm making some progress

A lot of people on the forum (PVE, PVP players) want the same single little thing: Play the way they want.

The problem is that when other people mess with the way they play, be it combat loggers, Solo players, Pirate/Murderers, etc.

You left off the most important part of my argument from that list of how people mess with others.

Via the BGS.

We all share it. But we don't all share the same access to it.

The problem is that FDev cannot change radically the design (game ecosystem and server infrastructure) of the game.
Example: the failed Criminality update of last year

They can't do something because they failed at something before? I can't.. I mean.. how is that a viable argument?

If there was open only, you wouldn't have many Traders trying to maximize their profit. They would be extremely rare (if combat logging was not possible).

You say that as if it were a bad thing...

Something which upset me is the Term "Carebear" given to traders, because most of them do like PVPer but not focusing on the pewpew. They select and fit their ship according to their environment:
Jump range, Cargo size, shield selection, chaffs, weapons, etc...

Dude.. I'M A CAREBEAR. No cares.

I'm the guy who when WoW booted up for the first time was that my quest giver was either being killed by the horde or I was when all I wanted to do was PvE stuffs.

I'm the Agent who solo's the Dark Zone in The Division and gets ganged up on when I'm ready to make an extraction.

I'm the Guardian in Destiny who despite all my raid skillz/killz I will never visit the lighthouse.

I'm the CMDR who ran his butt off in his Python when two Fed Corvett's didn't like me PP'ing in their system.

If you find the term "carebear" is an insult, the problem is with you and your own doubts about your own skills.

If player piracy was more common, THEY WOULD ADAPT and not try to maximize profit anymore but look to SECURE their profit , ie run Blockade Breaking ships.

That would make PVP piracy even more difficult than PVE piracy, as:
- no sane trade player would use some ships like T7, T9
- the cargo hold would be smaller than what they use in Solo/PG
- most trade ship would run with Shield Cell, Chaffs, etc... so kind of combat proof ships

GOOD! Up the risk and reward for everyone. Inject a little adrenalin into the ole'milk run.

Is it a shame that Open feels empty?
Yes, it is.

But Open only game mode is really an utopic solution as a lot of things would become broken and the traders population would quickly shrink due to the risk/reward imbalance toward them.

Then don't latch on to me going ham with "Open only play" Look at my other posts with half-measures. Work with me, don't drive me to the other end of the spectrum because you don't like changing something that challenges "Because" "KS promised" "X people would quit"

Be better than that.

 

[Julio Montega]

I believe that was the idea behind Powerplay and CQC. To try to satisfy the "bloodthirsty" crowd by "tagging them with target symbol" and "isolating" them respectively.

In my opinion, your suggestion is the best one (and realistic) from the hundred of pages I have read.

Maybe they could expand the bubble, and create a PVP conflict/expansion area and make it permit restricted. With the permit only active when OPEN Play is selected.
Maybe they could create specific economic incentive (traders) and criminality tracking (bounty hunting).

Did you get the "arena" hint he hid in his last sentence?

 

[JosiahD]

Interesting read indeed. However, there is no doubt that what certain SDC members did to the Mobius group was indeed harassment, no matter what spin they themselves want to put on it. Similarly, some of the actions against charity streamers was also harassment. Harassment because these actions were deliberate, planned, premeditated, intended to disrupt for the purposes of out-of-game jollies. Simple as that. Individuals from other groups have also carried out similar actions in the past. What such individuals forget though is that as much as they might try to separate their actions in a game from real-life, they can't - such actions simply identify the sort of people they are, regardless of the environment in which such attitudes are demonstrated. They forget that their actions in-game, and their arrogant attitude that others should simply 'get better' at playing the game their way, are just as reflective of who they are as a person in terms of their attitudes towards others as if they'd carried out such actions in real life. Sure, they might not actually commit such acts in real life (due to the consequences), out-of-game, but their attitude that it's ok to harass people just because it's in a fictitious environment is misguided and erroneous, and a sad indictment on who they are as a person, despite what they may claim to the contrary. They will disagree with such an assessment of course, just as a criminal might claim he's innocent despite the evidence to the contrary. At the end of the day though, I reserve the right to not have to play with thugs, bullies, arrogant ats and the like (even if that ultimately means not playing a particular game at all). I still primarily play in open, but there is no incentive on earth that will entice me to intentionally and knowingly provide content for such lacklustre individuals when the tools are provided to avoid them (and thankfully Frontier has provided those). Indeed, if the opportunity is there to undermine them from solo or private group, I will do so, even if that does nothing more than simply deny them the opportunity to interact with me or I with them.
.
I'm actually a little ashamed to think that one of SDC's co-founders is a fellow Australian.......

 

[GluttonyFang]

Does making waves on an internet forum still actually count as an achivement in 2016? Who knew.

Depends on the context, SDC did earn itself some notoriety, so I think it's something worth congratulating.

Unless you have a standardized metric for measurement of accomplishment that is universally accepted, which I doubt.

 

[anikaiful]

Interesting read indeed. However, there is no doubt that what certain SDC members did to Mobius was indeed harassment, no matter what spin they themselves want to put on it. Similarly, some of the actions against charity streamers was also harassment. Harassment because these actions were deliberate, planned, premeditated, intended to disrupt for the purposes of out-of-game jollies. Simple as that. Individuals from other groups have also carried out similar actions in the past. What such individuals forget though is that as much as they might try to separate their actions in a game from real-life, they can't - such actions simply identify the sort of people they are, regardless of the environment in which such attitudes are demonstrated. They forget that their actions in-game, and their arrogant attitude that others should simply 'get better' at playing the game their way, are just as reflective of who they are as a person in terms of their attitudes towards others as if they'd carried out such actions in real life. Sure, they might not actually commit such acts in real life (due to the consequences), out-of-game, but their attitude that it's ok to harass people just because it's in a fictitious environment is misguided and erroneous, and a sad indictment on who they are as a person, despite what they may claim to the contrary. They will disagree with such an assessment of course, just as a criminal might claim he's innocent despite the evidence to the contrary. At the end of the day though, I reserve the right to not have to play with thugs, bullies, arrogant ats and the like (even if that ultimately means not playing a particular game at all). I still primarily play in open, but there is no incentive on earth that will entice me to intentionally and knowingly provide content for such lacklustre individuals when the tools are provided to avoid them (and thankfully Frontier as provided those). Indeed, if the opportunity is there to undermine them from solo or private group, I will do so, even if that does nothing more than simply deny them the opportunity to interact with me or I with them.
.
I'm actually a little ashamed to think that one of SDC's co-founders is a fellow Australian.......

*shrug* what SDC did would be ground for perma-banning in some circles. But as they didn't break any actual EULA, or laws or regulations, so far... Practically all the fault falls on Mobius for being too trusting in accepting people - it's not something FD could or should do anything about. "Could" being one keyword here - FD can't by any means regulate anything which isn't their own territory - and all player groups fall outside of their "jurisdiction", they can't truly do a thing.

 

[Scoopy Doopy]

Did you get the "arena" hint he hid in his last sentence?

I would have felt guilty if he'd rep'd that post.

 

[Jaggedmallard]

Pay attention, there are players who have family members killed or injured in Brussel terror attacks. THERE IS JUST NO EXCUSE FOR THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOUR!

I don't see how playing Arabic music is somehow condoning terror, seems a bit racist to make that connection to me

 

[Boomer Kay]

Depends on the context, SDC did earn itself some notoriety, so I think it's something worth congratulating.

Unless you have a standardized metric for measurement of accomplishment that is universally accepted, which I doubt.

It's the internet. Of course there's a standardized metric for measurement of accomplishment. It's called views:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jofNR_WkoCE 578.000.000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhliSBWWghs 00.002.957

 

[Roycie]

Give cold blooded murder a bounty equal to the target rebuy.
Make life with large bounties comparable to robigo smugglers with 10+ missions (this could be in the form of a legal status sliding scale - offender to fugitive etc).
Let us pick routes "including low sec" and "excluding low sec".
Make police response respect system security.
Make piracy more viable. Declaring pirate intention upon interdiction. If the pirate declares piracy, then commits murder, the bounty is doubled. If the victim drops an appropriate level of cargo, the pirate is forced to disengage, or xxx. If the victim just wallows then... i don't know, make limpets work better?
Make Anarchy systems or similar hotspots lucrative for pvp (get target rebuy in bounty for every player killed missions?)

THEN i'll consider going into open in anything less than my 'vette.

If you want PVP without consequence you can play arena. Elite dangerous has a considerable underlying threat in that dying can cost you 2-3 hours (of grinding, not gameplay). In the open world, there should be more than a 6K fine for murder. Frankly i think current crime and punishment is a joke.

Also, favour instancing wings with other wings. PVPers don't want single players to fight, surely?! They want equal sized wings to have a REAL fight with!!


^
(the above should be considered my vodka fueled rant. I would love to do more pvp, but i'm not sitting trading for 10 hours for 2 hours solo pvping...)

 

[Scoopy Doopy]

I don't see how playing Arabic music is somehow condoning terror, seems a bit racist to make that connection to me

No it isn't.

Although he is actually wrong in my view, he is certainly in the majority when it comes to letting their feelings getting in the way of facts.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I don't see how playing Arabic music is somehow condoning terror, seems a bit racist to make that connection to me

Well, SDC makes the connection. They defend it by saying they mock those who compare them with ISIS this way. Anyway, while I normally dont like to speak for others, I might make an exception here: as I am typing this in Brussels I feel safe to say 'we' couldn't care less about SDC. The .00000001% of us who even heared of SDC (thats basically me and a mate I guess) dont think what they did compares in any way to what terrorists have done, never mind it being worse, and none of us couldn't care less about their choice of music under their little youtube videos. Please leave us out of this discussion.