Some kind of "treat every article on its own merits" approach might be a good idea, instead of dismissing *everything* a publisher prints.
Or is that just me?
Article: "Elite’s Distant Worlds 2 expedition proves the game is wildly unbalanced, and that’s OK"
- Thread starter StuartGT
- Start date
- Status
Some kind of "treat every article on its own merits" approach might be a good idea, instead of dismissing *everything* a publisher prints.
Or is that just me?
It is important to be impartial. Which is why it's important to be bias against bias. Which is why I dismiss Polygon. I did actually read the article, by the way. I did note how they called players 'bullies' without actually demonstrating any bullying. And then there's that 'angry PVP players' line, as if PVE players don't ever get angry, no, they're all precious angels. They haven't changed at all.
Last edited:
Oh, Hi Morbad, I just wanted to check with you that you really mean what it looks like you are saying here. By bully do you mean "a person who habitually seeks to harm or intimidate those whom they perceive as vulnerable."??
I was thinking more along the lines of "someone who uses force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate or aggressively dominate others". I wouldn't call my behavior habitual, rather opportunistic, and the target being 'vulnerable' is a given as I'm trying to get something (usually security), not commit suicide. Going against one's equals or betters, on their terms, is not wise.
Fundamentally, I just don't accept that government should have a monopoly on the use of force or coercion to get their way, nor do normally I pretend to (unless dealing with their agents, then it's "Yes, sir. Utmost respect for whatever brand of jackbooted law and order you serve, sir!").
Anyway, social control is ultimately enforced via various forms of bullying, and the same methods can give one's self breathing room if that control becomes stifling.
Last edited:
They didn't call them bullies the only mention of it was this :"Members of Distant Ganks 2 stress that, from their perspective, that doesn’t make them bullies."
So you are factually wrong, you also need to take into account that the strong picking on the weak then enjoying their upset is pretty close to being textbook bullying. Which is exactly what's going on.
Personally I wouldn't class it as bullying, I do think its pretty pathetic though. That doesn't bother me at all as I'll happily plonk anyone I don't enjoy playing with onto block or use modes to avoid them. A problem that's already fixed by FDEV's design.
On your second point about PVP'ers being angry, that's absolutely spot on 100% accurate. They've been raging against the modes since before day one and spend so much time calling other players names they've developed a conspiracy theory that there's actually mod bias against PVP. Whereas in reality they just regularly fall foul of the forums rules through losing their tempers and flinging terms like coward around.
Players angry at being exploded can be equally as bad, but the PVP anti-mode rage has been constant background noise since release in every thread they post in. That's why Hotel California became a thing they are so angry it derails any other thread unless stopped.
Last edited:
I totally want to multicrew into that third seat. Sounds like fun
I was thinking the same thing. I have limited pvp experience in ED, and a Krait Phantom with a little over 300Mj of shields, some tin foil as armour and a couple of medium lightweight beams for 'defence'. So not exactly a murder boat. So the idea of giving a better equipped and experienced Commander a free pip does appeal. I might learn a few things too.
I always felt the pip thing was rather silly, and hope they ditch it at some point when they get around to adding more things for crew to do...not that a good gunner or SLF pilot isn't handy from time to time.
That's how gta5 works. Someone destroys your vehicle, they get to pay the insurance. This actually would be a great idea Imo.
You're not getting it, mate. Everything you are saying right now is just confirming my opinion of Polygon, as well as your bias because clearly you can't see what's wrong with any of that.
yup, touched on this a while ago...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/347727-Howz-to-fix-griefing-(my-take) <my views have change slightly, like the understanding of PvP and griefing... but its along the same lines (its even pree C&P)
They'd need to do exploit prevention on that. Griefers happily suicide to try to cause you bother.
I'm not polygon and I think the article was reasonably balanced, one of your examples of bias in it wasn't accurate to their wording and the other was obviously true. So no I don't get it.
I've also never tried to hide my open contempt for griefers and willingness to happily remove them from my game. I think the modes and block are inspired design, other MMO's will follow suit in future. Choice is good.
It’s not just you and it’s a great idea. It just doesn’t work in practice. Short of going into full-on fact-checker cross referencing mode for every single thing you read (in which case you are no longer consuming journalism you are performing it), chances are you will assign some base line level of credibility to a given source, read the material uncritically, and then apply greater or lesser levels of scrutiny to particular claims depending on whether they appear to confirm or refute your pre-existing understanding of the world.
Polygon has a track record, as does it’s parent site, Vox, which for many people justifiably puts them BELOW the “default” level of credibility they would assign to any random source. Some people have been so burned out on their nonsense that they’d rather dismiss anything from the source altogether than waste their time and energy on an article which has to be read with the same level of skepticism as you’d use for someone with a sandwich board ranting in the street about the end times. Sure you COULD hear them out, but chances are if the world were about to end there would be someone less insane talking about it anyway.
If Polygon tells you the sky is blue, you better go outside and check, because it means something AMAZING has just happened.
Dude that’s even worse. That phrasing implies that the correct default starting point is “they are bullies” to such a degree that it doesn’t even need to be asserted.
I could write a profile of Stigbob, where I described his history of dropping into discussions and posting provocative, dismissive statements which derail conversations and which the Frontier Forums community finds irritating, and ONLY describe him exclusively in those terms, and then I could throw in “Stigbob stresses that, from his perspective, that doesn’t make him a troll.” Followed by “To me, that statement is incredibly sad.”
If I did that, it would for sure be fair to say I was calling him a troll and that I wanted my readership to view him as a troll, but one could always dance around the topic the way you’re doing here.
And, y’know, it’s just video games, so it doesn’t matter that much, but Vox media does this for EVERYTHING, employing the “when did you stop beating your wife?” style of rhetorical misdirection at every opportunity. Which is why trying to glean anything of value from their publications is at best exhausting and more frequently infuriating.
Can anyone explain this, without being nasty and calling them a bunch of emotionally stunted brats (which they’d probably laugh at hearing anyway)? I’ve engaged in comms with some of the known scum of the galaxy, and they seem like normal people, and I’ve had normal conversations. I was a bit surprised when I found out “wow, I could totally be this guys friend...if I didn’t have to sleep with a sidearm at my side”. But then I see the active subculture of salt & salt-mining: there seems to be an us vs them mentality on both sides.
I love flying in Open, even when there’s a risk of running into a bad-guy: after all, human bad-guys are more interesting than getting chased around all day long by NPCs going after your “big haul”. Good guys vs bad guys could lead to some amazing, emergent gameplay, as well. Can anyone think of a way to improve the good guys vs bad guys aspect, and make Open a more interesting place for both the good guys AND the bad guys (and make the things more interesting and emergent)?
Last edited:
That's just it, the other wasn't 'obviously true' at all, unless you already agree with them. As for the 'accuracy of their wording', there's a lot that they haven't written, but could have, to clarify their meaning. It's what you're not seeing between the lines that helps you ignore it. That's my point. YOU are their audience. YOU are who they're pandering to.
This is what you're not getting. The only reason you're unable to handle my criticism of Polygon, and you're taking it so personally, is because they affirm your preconceived beliefs.
As for that rubbish you wrote earlier about how it's okay for some people to be angry, but not for others, as if you or Polygon own the monopoly on mood arbitration, and only you get to determine what is and isn't justifiable anger, all of that is just excuses. What's good for one is good for all. Otherwise, it's good for none.
Last edited:
Indeed. And I agree. But it is what it is, and it is in game. Therefore if a anti-ganker requests such a service, I would be happy to take a short break from travel and exploration to offer it.
This is in reference to DW2, and what was streamed. We got to see/hear their motive. Don't confused PvPer, pirate and people just having a giggle with what went on at DW2.
love flying in open and getting into fights, and it's never been about the salt. the 13th,Code and other i don't know who they belong too... all good guys and we had fun. The DW2 thing was for different reasons... just going of what i saw on selected persons streams (no names
) and the chatter among their cagoules.(in bubble) Even had a wing of 3 come after my hauler, what good fun
on all sided - and i had put my self in a situation where i would be interdicted; at a CG, with opposing powers flying around.also, when in one thread (lets call it an article about yoga pants) there was a bit of upset that i would suggested the salt from player was imagined. They admitted to such actions and how they where getting salt and that i should come an look at the discord. But apart from a reference in the thread, the original have been removed (by who, i don't know)
hope that help clear things up
Last edited:
You could do that, but we both know I'd just laugh and disagree with you.
I know honesty isn't really your thing, but you need to source where I said it was OK for some people to be angry and not others. As it stands it looks like you are very upset and inventing things for emotional reasons.
To clarify I think its just a video game and anyone getting genuinely angry about it is either a child or a little bit bonkers.
K
In the very accurate observation of Benjen Stark: "nothing anyone says before the word 'but' ever really matters."
Again, the only reason you're coming to their defence is because you already agreed with them before they wrote it. And they know it. That's why they wrote it. For you, and others like you. That article is loaded with anger, and every word you write is dripping with it.
I'm going to add you to my ignore list now. All I've done is explain to you why your own bias is making it look like a shared bias is not actually bias. But I've begun to accept that you're incapable of seeing the forest through the trees, and you're only going to get madder and more personal as this goes on.
Last edited:
You can't rewrite the article and what I wrote inside your head and then expect me to agree.
- Status