Can we drop the "ED is not EVE" moaning?

[Toumal]

"ED is not EVE online!"
"Let's not turn this into EVE"
"Oh this is becoming EVE now, I'm out!"

This has been a topic brought up multiple times in the past, but never as often as recently, after FD announced the upcoming player "Squadrons" being able to own what's essentially a mobile base. So essentially a guild system.
A lot of people have long since argued that for long-time players to remain invested, you need to create something for them to care for, to maintain and own. On the other side of the argument, often times more of a reflex than an articulated opinion with reasons behind it, was the "ED is not EVE" movement. And to be perfectly honest I'm sick of hearing the same old complaint to be brought up time and again.

Yes, ED is not EVE. And a guild system won't turn it into EVE either. There's no way for player groups to restrict your movement in Elite. Space is really really big and you can always get to wherever you want. This is in sharp contrast to EVE online, with its less than 10.000 star systems. And here's the thing: Few people are even able to say anything beyond that initial "ED is not EVE" complaint. It's this weird reflex that anything EVE-like is bad, without justification.

Is it the ganking? We already got that here. At least ED has private groups and/or solo, so problem solved.
Is it the toxicity of the community? No game feature will make that better or worse. In fact, I'd argue that a proper C&P system does more to fix that, than a guild system could do to make it worse.
Is it elitism in game events? Well, remember Salome? Remember "all defending ships must be unarmed"? Tell me more about how there isn't already at least some scum and villainy, and how having actual player organisations in the game will make it "bad like EVE"...

No seriously. Stop moaning about Squadrons "turning ED into EVE". It's not.

Or if you think it is, and you have arguments to back up your complaint, bring them up. If they are able to stand on their own, then you probably don't have to mention EVE in the process, as if it was some kind of stigma.

 

[Andrew Gaspurr]

The economy in EVE is almost completely player driven and relies heavily on the cycle of resource management and manufacturing. You also have a decent chunk of research. Destroyed ships have to be replaced and player factions can own and defend their own 0.0 turf. Or they can oust others from theirs. The mission system is somewhat different and also has loot tables of 'special items' that can be used or sold. EVE also has a system of jumpgates and chokepoints.

So yes, ED is quite unlike EVE and that's okay.

 

[Hadarmil]

"ED is not EVE online!"
"Let's not turn this into EVE"
"Oh this is becoming EVE now, I'm out!"

This has been a topic brought up multiple times in the past, but never as often as recently, after FD announced the upcoming player "Squadrons" being able to own what's essentially a mobile base. So essentially a guild system.
A lot of people have long since argued that for long-time players to remain invested, you need to create something for them to care for, to maintain and own. On the other side of the argument, often times more of a reflex than an articulated opinion with reasons behind it, was the "ED is not EVE" movement. And to be perfectly honest I'm sick of hearing the same old complaint to be brought up time and again.

Yes, ED is not EVE. And a guild system won't turn it into EVE either. There's no way for player groups to restrict your movement in Elite. Space is really really big and you can always get to wherever you want. This is in sharp contrast to EVE online, with its less than 10.000 star systems. And here's the thing: Few people are even able to say anything beyond that initial "ED is not EVE" complaint. It's this weird reflex that anything EVE-like is bad, without justification.

Is it the ganking? We already got that here. At least ED has private groups and/or solo, so problem solved.
Is it the toxicity of the community? No game feature will make that better or worse. In fact, I'd argue that a proper C&P system does more to fix that, than a guild system could do to make it worse.
Is it elitism in game events? Well, remember Salome? Remember "all defending ships must be unarmed"? Tell me more about how there isn't already at least some scum and villainy, and how having actual player organisations in the game will make it "bad like EVE"...

No seriously. Stop moaning about Squadrons "turning ED into EVE". It's not.

Or if you think it is, and you have arguments to back up your complaint, bring them up. If they are able to stand on their own, then you probably don't have to mention EVE in the process, as if it was some kind of stigma.

People will complain when FD invests in things that are not them - hell, people complain that as a developer they work on things that are not Elite! People also complain when their coffee is cold. Or too hot. Or have too much cream or too little but I trust FD to notice the chaff.

Besides people love popcorn. No reason to prevent them from having some nice entertainment to go along with it.

 

[metatheurgist]

I will (not that I have) if people stop assuming Squadrons = Guilds.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I see squadrons as extension what already exists in game - people doing BGS stuff and rolling initiatives together. so this is for them.

If you are susprised that people do that...well, people do lot of things in ED other people don't know about. It is a huge game.

 

[obliterator]

I think the main thing that makes eve this "toxic" is the fact that the game facilitates buying in-game currency with real money. When the in-game currency begins to have a "real" value in the mind of the players, they suddenly stop seeing the game as a game, and that's when the toxicity begins.

While it's technically possible to trade credits for money in elite, it's not something that is made very easy by the game,

 

[tagos]

Can we stop posters trying to tell other posters what then can and cannot say while we are at it?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

ED is also not Age of Empires!

 

[Vasious]

ED is also not Age of Empires!

It is the Age of the Empire!

 

[obliterator]

Can we stop posters trying to tell other posters what then can and cannot say while we are at it?

He's telling people they're wrong to say it. There's a difference.

And he's right. Saying "elite is not eve" as an argument against specific features is just wrong, because those features wont turn elite into eve anyway.

 

[Vasea Azure]

I agree, carriers wont turn ED in to EVE. To even start getting closer to EVE FD would have to make economy player driven and allow for credit purchase/transfer. So same as SRV did not make ED a racing game, carriers wont turn it in to EVE clone.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

He's telling people they're wrong to say it. There's a difference.

And he's right. Saying "elite is not eve" as an argument against specific features is just wrong, because those features wont turn elite into eve anyway.

Yes. Because features can be implemented differently with different results.

 

[Franc Kaos]

I think ED could do with copying more stuff from Eve in all honesty. The only thing I hated about Eve is no actual space flight (in VR), other wise I'd be playing that game right now - it's far deeper (if smaller) than Elite.

 

[c00ky1970]

Can we stop posters trying to tell other posters what then can and cannot say while we are at it?

But that will reduce the forum content by 90%!!!

 

[Harley Quinn]

There are grounds for concerns to be raised. The Elite franchise has always been about you, a lone pilot, making your own way and reputation in a hostile universe.

I for one don't want that to change and do not want it like Eve that effectively forces you to form groups to gain access to services and bases etc.

Been there and done that, and while we were more of a loose association of players with isk who could create our own corporations and alliance to access the content we needed we were still forced to become a group to gain access. I don't want ED going that way.

Enabling guilds I'm not against, if players want to work together under a group identity that's fine and should be allowed. But the day the game gives advantages or services to a group that an individual player cannot access (other than the benefit of increased numbers working together obviously) it creates a situation where it starts to force groups on people.

Obviously allowing a squadron of 1 is all that is needed to not force people down that path. If a carrier is 10 billion then while it would take longer to get a 1 player than 100 it is still an option and a choice. It should also allow that lone player to attempt squadron missions even if they realistically have no chance of completing alone.

But if it removes choice so that options only apply to those who form groups, I think the game will lose something of its core legacy.

We don't have any real details yet so I'm reserving judgement. But while introducing better guild mechanics is a good thing in my opinion, it's a valid fear for lone commanders to question whether they will be excluded from content and advantages unless forced to join a guild.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yes, ED is not EVE. And a guild system won't turn it into EVE either. There's no way for player groups to restrict your movement in Elite. Space is really really big and you can always get to wherever you want.

Guilds aren't an issue for ED. Support for communication and other features are fine.

Player owned stations is where I draw the line, and I have no idea whether you can own stations in EVE, because I don't know, don't care and don't want to hear about EVE. I looked into EVE years ago and found it a dreadful game.

 

[Toumal]

Can we stop posters trying to tell other posters what then can and cannot say while we are at it?

Wait wait wait. Wait. Are you trying to tell me what I can tell you to tell others?

But seriously, I'm all for legitimate discussion of the Squadron feature - which at the moment is kinda hard because we don't know anything about it other than the name and that you'll be able to get some sort of mobile base. But the details are everything: Does that capital ship appear in all instances? Is it going to be a POI in the system? Can it be damaged or destroyed by other players? Does that work in solo mode too? etc. etc.

But people posting "Squadrons turn ED into EVE", perhaps with an added "I'm done with this game"? That's just a shotgun ranting. A drive-by-debate.

Discuss why you think this is so, but don't do the above thing please.

 

[Nara]

I think it's a bit deeper than what's being assumed here. Eve is just the catch-all expression for it.

The point that the people who use this are trying to make is that Elite in all it's previous incarnations was a solo experience. It was one man/woman against the universe. So to move to a squad/guild system destroys that original ethos.

I think these people do not understand though, was that once FD had decided to make an online version (and kill offline) this was always inevitable. I'm firmly in the camp of multiplayer games encouraging multiplayer activity. The content has to come from somewhere, and the best content comes from good player interaction.

 

[Toumal]

Player owned starbases is where I draw the line

That depends very much on what owning means. Can you put your name on it and customize the interior and/or available services? Can you raise trade taxes? Can you do that for specific player groups or only for everyone? Can you deny docking to certain player groups or otherwise restrict features?

There's definitely a variable line here. I do believe the validity of your concerns depends very much on those details and how FD would choose to implement player owned starbases.

 

[Goose4291]

Player owned stations is where I draw the line, and I have no idea whether you can own stations in EVE, because I don't know, don't care and don't want to hear about EVE. I looked into EVE years ago and found it a dreadful game.

You can own them in Eve. I'm curious, what is it specifically about the idea of player owned stations that makes you draw a line?