I'm concerned – the direction of the game.

[jabokai]

With all due respect I do not agree with your solution or agreement. It in effects limits the scope of play by forcing you to behave legally and handicaps any player that wishes to experience life as a pirate. It's already hard enough to be a pirate in that you are forced to pay off your debts upon death without compounding that onto an alt.

Piracy should be making enough money to pay off that stuff AND have money to spare if it's working as it should alongside the other professions. Repeated mindless killing would be the one where your debts/bounties rose to more than you could pay off.

As for not wanting to tie that to an account, I can understand the desire not to do that. So another way might be to make it that you simply cannot delete a character that is in debt. If someone racks up huge bounties through griefing, for example, they get the standard in-game consequences, but they also cannot just delete and start again. Until they've paid off the character's debt/bounty that character remains in play - no delete. Someone wants to play just to PK for no in-game reason then their 3 character slots will all be screwed in fairly short order.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

If I may say so, with all due respect, you don't seem to wish to give any ground at all.

That was more a response to someone loudly proclaiming that they had understood the issue when they clearly had not understood MY issue. And I don't seem to be alone in having that issue. Perhaps Andrew was just a little loose with his wording.

I am happy to consider and accept any compromise that does not become a charter for people to attack other players with no in-game reason. You know my argument by now: it is really very simple. I want to play the game as if I am in-game. Things like a PC/NPC status make no sense in game, so I obviously do not want them. I have no problem being attacked for in-game reasons. I have every problem being attacked for reasons that are not in-game.

You have a different perspective on how you want to play the game. That's fine. If we all agreed on everything the world would be a boring place. But how you appear to want to play seems to be directly contrary to the way that I want to play it. I'm sure we both think our way is 'right'. I happen to think that how I want to play the game is more inline with the vision that FD have articulated than what I understand your way to be. Perhaps you think the opposite.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

How can the game be social IF I CAN'T SEE ANYBODY?!

You will see everybody - NPCs, pilots. You just wouldn't be able to make one another without some leg work. Also hailing in chat/voice in broadcast channel will definitely be a feature (it was in FE2/FFE). I really think you overreacting and jump to conclusions before seeing actual implementation in the game.

 

[jabokai]

The LAST thing I want is your puzzle

And yet... that's what your solution gives me.

I happen to think that how I want to play the game is more inline with the vision that FD have articulated than what I understand your way to be. Perhaps you think the opposite.

Not sure how you can justify that when multiplayer has been THE biggest feature for the entire journey from Kickstarter to now. And you want a game where you can't tell the difference!

 

[Mazhurg]

How can the game be social IF I CAN'T SEE ANYBODY?!

Please...

You can see everybody, you just have to work at identifying them a bit. Hyperboles don't really advance the conversation.

 

[Cosmos]

That was more a response to someone loudly proclaiming that they had understood the issue when they clearly had not understood MY issue. And I don't seem to be alone in having that issue. Perhaps Andrew was just a little loose with his wording.

I am happy to consider and accept any compromise that does not become a charter for people to attack other players with no in-game reason. You know my argument by now: it is really very simple. I want to play the game as if I am in-game. Things like a PC/NPC status make no sense in game, so I obviously do not want them. I have no problem being attacked for in-game reasons. I have every problem being attacked for reasons that are not in-game.

You have a different perspective on how you want to play the game. That's fine. If we all agreed on everything the world would be a boring place. But how you appear to want to play seems to be directly contrary to the way that I want to play it. I'm sure we both think our way is 'right'. I happen to think that how I want to play the game is more inline with the vision that FD have articulated than what I understand your way to be. Perhaps you think the opposite.

I have no problem in you playing the game how you wish to and fully understand you have a differing desire for what you want to get out of the game.

Which is why I suggested a pvp style group that would offer that kind of play-style. Given we have several groups already surely one more might be a way to make us all happy?

 

[jabokai]

I really think you overreacting and jump to conclusions before seeing actual implementation in the game.

Let's not forget that they haven't actually told us how it will be implemented in game yet. They may go to EITHER extreme, use the compromise, or come up with something new... so I wouldn't assume you were getting what you want either yet!

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

In context, all your actions above are part of the risk / reward puzzle. In that sense, it is a puzzle.

Indeed. But not the puzzle that Andrew quoted of working out whether a ship is a PC or NPC. That is still something that I would never actively seek to solve, though it may well become obvious.

And yet... that's what your solution gives me.

Apparently so. I still don't get it, but you have been making 'immersion' comments that I don't get for many months, so I understand that you are consistent. Immersion really does mean completely different things to different people.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

And yet... that's what your solution gives me.



Not sure how you can justify that when multiplayer has been THE biggest feature for the entire journey from Kickstarter to now. And you want a game where you can't tell the difference!

But multiplayer IS THERE. You just can't distinguish between NPC and players. Yeah, it is a little puzzle. I find it interesting from both personal and game play POV.

Your assumption about MP seems to be (i can get it wrong of course) more like current open PvP arena type (CoD, TF2 - you name it) - everyone sees everyone, NPCs to be damned. We have played this style for months (alpha 2 and 3) and obviously targeting players especially without caring about NPCs have been quite regular complain we have heard on forums. It also feels immersion breaking. We should be able to differentiate, but not at first sight. It is still multiplayer. It never have been promised as multiplayer shooting gallery.

 

[Katkon]

Adding my voice the mix - just because.

I'm an avid multiplayer (let's call it MMO) PvEer who occasionally enjoys PvP. I'd like to PvP in Elite (and will play in the all-group pool), but would prefer not to be obviously (and "too" easily) singled out for griefing. At the same, it helps with my personal immersion to see lots of activity around me - whether NPC or PC (I prefer seeing/recognizing a healthy dose of both - even if it takes a bit of effort).

All that being said I think I'd prefer for all NPCs and PCs to have the Commander pre-fix for the sake of realism. I'd like to be able to hail them via ship comms - and if I get no answer (or a canned answer) would assume they're either an NPC, or a PC who wants to be left alone. I can still decide what to do at that point - my choice. This would be my personal preference.

Switching gears: if the opt-in proposal were to be implemented, I'd want to ensure it's 2 way. In other words, someone who decides to remain indistinguishable from an NPC to other players should similarly not be able to discern whether another ship is piloted by a PC or NPC. Otherwise every/many griefer(s) will portray themselves as NPC in order to get the upper hand on unsuspecting PCs.

Now - if neither of these tactics is implemented AND FD do a great job of limiting griefing through bounties and solid police work, that'd make me happy as well. So really - I supposed for now I'm just easy to please.

I'm also confident this IS a top-of-mind issue for Frontier, and I'm equally confident they'll figure it out.

I just want to play the game!

 

[smsKONG]

For what it's worth I'd prefer the scan to reveal name being the key identifier. No need for fancy radar symbol changing- you just have to remember who is who; memory use in a modern computer game!? I know it's certainly a wacky idea but I think you might like it!

I don't really like the in or out nature of the transponder idea but I will go along with it if the masses do.

What I really don't want is what we have in alpha - it is far too easy to gank and grief (bounties and other deterrents won't stop a true pilgrim of the grief fold path!). I know that the alpha cannot be used as an indication of how this system will work in the full game - alpha 4 may be a better indication of that; but I expect beta will be where the proof is.

Hopefully beta will start without option and will FD will add the opt in/out system after a period so we can all compare the pros and cons in a working environment.
Then we can all conclude that neither system works and go with commander name on scan at short range

 

[Ayo]

Not sure how you can justify that when multiplayer has been THE biggest feature for the entire journey from Kickstarter to now. And you want a game where you can't tell the difference!

Who said multiplayer isn't important :S

The difference will manifest in MANY ways. The most obvious way is how people will be sharing information about live in game events. The fact that any contact on your scanner could suddenly do something unpredictable will always be interesting to me. Getting together with friends from the other side of the world, and yes even making new friends. It's not like interaction between players is suddenly being banned.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

Not sure how you can justify that when multiplayer has been THE biggest feature for the entire journey from Kickstarter to now. And you want a game where you can't tell the difference!

Yeah, this one has been trotted out by many of the folks that want to know who is a PC immediately. And I will respond in a similar way to several others: it is still multiplayer. You can still interact with other players, you can still all do stuff that affects the way the galaxy evolves. Multiplayer does not mean that you only interact with PCs, and in my book does not mean that you need to know who is a PC and who is an NPC. I still want a multiplayer game. I just want to treat all other ships exactly the same as each other, and I would certainly prefer that other players do the same. Other than your (opposite to mine) immersion issue, I do not know why people want to immediately identify other PCs other than 'so I can attack them'. Yes, I accept that interacting with PCs will be inherently more interesting than interacting with NPCs. But I still do not want to be attacked for no good in-game reason. The downsides of immediately putting "flashing blue lights" on PCs seem obvious to me. I still await any coherent explanation of the upsides that proponents obviously see, but I don't.

 

[JeffRyan]

Please...

You can see everybody, you just have to work at identifying them a bit. Hyperboles don't really advance the conversation.

Quit the high and mighty act as wll then please. I've convod out this argument in three threads. And the game really is going the way that most of the playerbase will be hidden.

PS. Sorry, this is the only topic that has managed to get me emotional because for me, the arguments being proposed weakening the playerbase yet again is (as I mentioned before) really the straw that broke the camel's back in terms of this being a 'rich multiplayer experience'. It really is a game changer for me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jln3mi0vfJU

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

So another way might be to make it that you simply cannot delete a character that is in debt.

Perfect

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

I have no problem in you playing the game how you wish to and fully understand you have a differing desire for what you want to get out of the game.

Which is why I suggested a pvp style group that would offer that kind of play-style. Given we have several groups already surely one more might be a way to make us all happy?

If the choice is between another split in the player base, and us losing piles of players who would otherwise play, then of course I would agree. But that split might have to be permanent, in the way that 'normal' vs 'ironman' is (and for similar reasons), so I would see that as a last resort. but if there really is no compromise that satisfies both sides, then of course I would agree.

 

[k10]

ECM
ECCM

buy it, steal it, whatever.
move along now

 

[Gibbonici]

I do not know why people want to immediately identify other PCs other than 'so I can attack them'.

Well, here's one very good reason - communicating with other players to find out what's happening in neighbouring systems so that you can avoid pirate gangs, griefers or any other players you'd prefer not to meet while you're hauling that belly-load of computers and luxuries.

Not knowing who's a player or an NPC is a great anti-griefing measure, but it comes at the cost of being an anti-any-kind-of-interaction measure.

 

[jabokai]

Apparently so. I still don't get it, but you have been making 'immersion' comments that I don't get for many months, so I understand that you are consistent. Immersion really does mean completely different things to different people.

You want to be immersed in the game world, I want to be immersed in the game. Never once, playing games, do I lose myself in the fantasy of the thing and yet 10 hours can pass in the blink of an eye I'm so immersed in the game. Perhaps that's the difference.

Your assumption about MP seems to be (i can get it wrong of course) more like current open PvP arena type (CoD, TF2 - you name it) - everyone sees everyone, NPCs to be damned. We have played this style for months (alpha 2 and 3) and obviously targeting players especially without caring about NPCs have been quite regular complain we have heard on forums. It also feels immersion breaking. We should be able to differentiate, but not at first sight. It is still multiplayer. It never have been promised as multiplayer shooting gallery.

No, compare it more to an MMO (even though I don't see ED as an MMO) where there is FAR more to do than just combat... As I've said I've next to no interest in combat.

Yeah, this one has been trotted out by many of the folks that want to know who is a PC immediately. And I will respond in a similar way to several others: it is still multiplayer. You can still interact with other players, you can still all do stuff that affects the way the galaxy evolves. Multiplayer does not mean that you only interact with PCs, and in my book does not mean that you need to know who is a PC and who is an NPC. I still want a multiplayer game. I just want to treat all other ships exactly the same as each other, and I would certainly prefer that other players do the same. Other than your (opposite to mine) immersion issue, I do not know why people want to immediately identify other PCs other than 'so I can attack them'. Yes, I accept that interacting with PCs will be inherently more interesting than interacting with NPCs. But I still do not want to be attacked for no good in-game reason. The downsides of immediately putting "flashing blue lights" on PCs seem obvious to me. I still await any coherent explanation of the upsides that proponents obviously see, but I don't.

I don't see that explaining why you consider your view more aligned with FD's vision. Let's not forget that their first port of call in the game was to distinguish between PCs and NPCs... Whether that was interim I don't know. But if I was a developer I'd probably debut a departure from the "norm" at the earliest opportunity to trial it, rather than give what's expected and than drastically change it.

 

[Olrik]

We will still be able to be as social or not in the game regardless ... Sorry I cant see where you are coming from currently with such a broad statement.

From EVE.