As I said, the semantics of what multiplayer and group play mean is irrelevant. I wasn't aware this was a roleplaying game though. Is that what this game is being designed around? Roleplaying?
ED vs PvP
- Thread starter robo
- Start date
As I said, the semantics of what multiplayer and group play mean is irrelevant. I wasn't aware this was a roleplaying game though. Is that what this game is being designed around? Roleplaying?
We are now a week into the Beta & as a result there has been an influx of new players who've joined in on the fun, but it does seem quite a few of them are also quite new to this forum, as such they are unawares of what has been discussed before. People seem to be of the impression that ED is a raw PvP game, a game with the same mentality of Call of Duty/Titanfall, where killing another player in the game just for the sake of it, this is not ED, the spirit of Elite, or what Frontier Developments have intended for ED, hence policing within the game WILL be put in place eventually.
Yet killing is part of ED, but for a REASON:
Pirate - Using comms to tell a trader to dump their cargo, failing that blast off cargo hatch. Last resort, as in pirating of old, destroy ship.
Bounty Hunter - Destroying a ship to profit for the bounty on it’s cmdr’s head.
Assassination - Employment to kill someone, payment upon success.
Factions Skirmish - Fighting on behalf of a faction, for either a navy or freelance, again for payment, or navel career advancement.
But for someone to graft their way up in the game, to the point where they are flying a Lakon 6, fully laden with a cargo worth over 90000 credits, just for some cmdr to sneak up behind them & blow the helpless trader to bits, not even bothered about the trader’s floating cargo. Costing the trading cmdr, 24000 credits (10% insurance, that’s if they’re fortunate to have it) + 90000 credits = 114000 credits & for what purpose, to kill some cannon fodder trader simply for kicks, for nothing else, certainly not for gain, then boasting as if taking down a cumbersome trader was a skilful act.
If you are a pure PvP who wishes to kill other players for no other reason than there is another human being on the other end, then Elite Dangerous is not for you, stick to your Call of Duty’s where you can call everybody a noob, if you like the idea of PvPing in space, try Eve, or even wait for Star Citizen/No Man’s Sky.
So let me get this right....
You're complaining about pvp space combat in a pvp space combat game?
I don't think it's us that picked up the wrong game...I think it's you that picked up the wrong game. As far as I'm concerned, if you click 'multiplayer' and undock from station, you consent to 'player generated content' no matter what form it takes.
I haven't got serious into playing ED yet (time constraints), but I like playing the 'bad guy'. I LOVE blowing up guys like you and getting hate mail or rants on voice coms.
And since you brought up Eve.
To quote a famous player.... "I'm not here to ruin the game, I'm here to ruin YOUR game."
Any game can be made into a roleplaying game. You can conceivably roleplay in Halo, even, with use of the Forge tools. I was using 'roleplaying' as an example of a group that could conceivably be constructed to allow both cooperative and competitive multiplayer aspects within the same overarching group. There's an RP thread elsewhere on this forum that could very likely implement this exact idea, letting people who enjoy RP do so within their own splinter universe and letting others who don't go about their own business without interference. Isn't that the point? Someone else likes something you don't, so let them play their game while you play yours, and neither forced to compromise what they like for what the other likes?
That's irrelevant to design of the game though. Frontier would be pretty foolish to explicitly cater to roleplayers, and roleplaying should always be an after thought. Probably 95% of people don't play video games to roleplay.
"Would please those that want it"...is just another phrase that PvP, no, not only PvP, but the entire MULTI-PLAYER aspect of the game would become a joke. You know this. If this happens, I am out.
I am sick of this PvP debate where people argue about things which are not even set into stone. They complain about "grievers" and thugs which don't even exist yet, they complain about PvP, the entire multi-player without even knowing how it will be implemented.
In NO GAME I know there is PvP where you don't have a choice to enter/initiate PvP and you can well choose to continue playing PVE without *ever* touching PvP. It works in any other MM/O/RPG game.
Do you seriously think the devs here are so stupid they would make some oranges PvP mode in the game which would result that traders who don't even intend to PvP get blown up left and right? There are 1000 ways to solve this, without a need to divide the game into two separate modes, SP and MP.
I said it already many, many times, there is no need for a safe "solo mode" in the game if PvP is smartly implemented in the game. For god's sake it could be as simple as a simple flagging system like in WoW.
I absolutely hate the idea that the game COULD go a direction that PvPers are forced into an "extra mode" (basically an arena)..which would only be testament for a poor multi-player implementation in the game. HOWEVER, there is no reason to suspect so unless you think the devs are not capable to think this over.
ANY (!) debate today about the "horrible pvp" in the game is based on hypothetical assumptions, on "worst case scenarios" and a hypothetical extremely poorly made multi-player where "thugs" and "noobs" for some reason would be able to do horrible things to traders. I don't believe that the devs are that dumb and don't think about those things.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hah! Frontier are far from foolish, I've met and chatted with some of the devs including the mighty Micheal Brookes and they didn't stroke me as foolish. What is foolish is assuming frontier are making a game in the same mold as the twitch reaction pvp games you have cut your teeth in. Go watch some David Braben interviews on YT and a very common statement you will find is that they are not interested in making a game to please the masses they are making a game that they want to play.
Another useful piece of information for you, when David Braben wrote elite back in 84 major publishers told him and Ian Bell that people didn't want to play that game, they said they wanted 3 lives and levels to progress through. Luckily he ignored them. Think that was foolish not going with the conventional game design of the day?
Nice to have such lively debate though, I'm currently laid up in bed with a major back spasm and unable to play the game, this is almost as much fun
I....think you might be confused.
One: nobody said anything about catering anything. *Roleplayers* can turn any game into a roleplaying game, and there need be no additional work on the developer's part to do such. It is a *sandbox,* which gives plenty of freedom for players who would like to play as their own version of Firefly when walking-around becomes available. That takes zero away from the people who just want to fly around as themselves and blow up whoever and whatever, nor does it require anything of anyone else but the players involved.
Two: Made up statistics mean nothing, so don't bother putting arbitrary numerical values on anything unless you have a census of some kind.
Three: The point flew past you at 100C if you think that I was making a case for roleplay as being relevant to this discussion at all. I said as much; it is *one* example of how you can construct a private group which incorporates both PvP and PvE, both cooperative and competitive, all in the same group. But since you appear to need another example, how about the "Anyone over 30" group? Everyone here is guaranteed to be over the age of 30, so you don't have to worry about little kids who are constantly looking to get into ing contests? How about the 'working moms and dads' group? People who are exclusively parents and have limited amounts of time to play? How about the 'traders only' group, filled with people that ONLY fly trader ships and thus makes PvP that much more challenging? None of these groups necessarily require people to know each other before hand nor does it require strict PvP or nonPvP behavior. Set up a group that has a common set of rules to engage in, and your job is done. Me, it'd be roleplayers--people who are free to PvP so long as they hold to in-universe justifications, and aren't just looking to blow things up. You don't have to be part of my private group. You don't have to agree with it. I'm just happy--for the both of us--that it's an option and intend to use it as designed.
//edited to add: In my RP PvP group (hypothetical currently), the rule is "don't take advantage of respawning. You have 1 life in this world, and people who squander it don't live long. The fact that you CAN 'respawn' means you got lucky and survived, but that's not how it works in the in-game universe. Make your decisions accordingly."
Last edited:
Well you know, one of the biggest problems you have is that you type a whole lot of nothing. So I just skim your posts for the relevant details.
The roleplay discussion is completely irrelevant. You do what you want to do in a video game.
Is that a real statement? Of course it means nothing.
I would respond, but for some reason you felt the need to insult me in the middle of your paragraph. I'm sorry you can't handle people have different opinions than you, but that doesn't mean throwing thinly veiled insults at me is appropriate.
Last edited:
Try reading a post you've just quoted, I'm not against PvP, just not for PvP without reason, just try reading before you post.
Oh Mr Bad Guy, my in game name is cmdr Robo, what's yours, c'mon brave lad, tell me who you are, let's go toe to toe in the game, or are you just all mouth, a guy who hides behind his forum name, I'm thinking the cowardly latter.
NO ONE TELL THIS GUY YOUR NAME. You can block people, and it will prevent the blocker from being able to join the instance the blocked is in instance, but the blocked person won't be able to join the instance the blocker is in either.
It can be used to collectively exclude people from being able to play with other players. Do not give out your names.
I'm guessing your forum settings are to not show signatures?
I'm just warning people. If they want to give out their names they can, but people should be aware it can hurt them.
Last edited:
I endeavor to be as thorough as I can precisely because brevity leads people to mis-read. If you aren't interested in reading what I write, that's not really MY problem. I don't blame you, by the way, but I'd much rather give you too much information than too little and let you decide. I'm going out of my way to give you the respect YOU deserve by giving as thorough an explanation as I can, to prevent miscommunication as best I can, but it's up to you how you use that information. I've been around this internet a while, and while others have said the same as you, just as many have gotten bananas when I try to be succinct. I'd rather waste my time being too thorough than waste it trying to explain later down the road.
It's also up to you if you want to read something as an insult or not--there's a difference between going out of one's way to be insulting and going out of one's way to be insulted. So if you actually have a graph somewhere that says that "Probably 95% of people don't play video games to roleplay," then I whole-heartedly apologize. No sarcasm. ...of course, I don't think this is a true statistic, considering the fact that I can point to a couple good sized forum threads (here, here, and here) and can point to several large communities that I have been part of over the years that would beg to differ. Many of my friends play video games to roleplay. But none of that matters anyway because I was using it merely as a singular example, not as a demand that the game be built to accommodate it. If that's not your bag, that's more than fine. We can still be neighbors. I actually have zero problem disagreeing and leaving it at that, hence my FIRST post in this circle-jerk thread that said that while I don't like PvP myself, I'm glad I have options to participate or not, and to each their own.
Last edited by a moderator:
Here you are writing a whole lot of nothing. The role play aspect of the game is irrelevant, and I'm not even going to bother talking to you about it. The statistic was clearly hyperbole, I'm sorry saying you were in a minority upset you so much.
There's the gist of your opinion, and it's the only thing you needed to say. Instead you typed two paragraphs of nothing. Woo.
Are you sure? I've shot and killed people who declared for the other side, and am still "clean".
Once they're red to me, then it's all on with no penalties.
He's completely wrong, you don't get penalties for attacking players declared for the other side in a conflict zone. The biggest problem with the conflict zones is ratio of AI to player. Fighting 9 NPCs and 1 player isn't very fun.
You would probably get a bounty for attacking a player who hadn't declared.
You don't, so choose sides quickly. I tend to see who the other players are shooting at. Some people don't like to share, if they attack you while your on the same side after enough shots they will become a target for that side as well as enemy.
If you haven't chosen and a player attacks you, you become an enemy of the attacking player faction.
In essence it is a free for all. You can if you wish attack anyone without recourse.
If you haven't chosen and a player attacks you, you become an enemy of the attacking player faction.
In essence it is a free for all. You can if you wish attack anyone without recourse.
Last edited:
Tell that to D. Braben. Once again,
"Most of the ships you encounter will be AIs - and in many cases you will kill them - which is why we want the majority to be AIs"