That pretty much sums up what the video author always said, even when he was on this forum. He was always The Lord of Truth, anyone with any different opinion was always immediately dismissed as "not knowing what they were talking about". This type of argumentation rarely attracts much sympathy.
Interesting point of view from a long time ED Streamer on Fleet Carriers
- Thread starter Powderpanic
- Start date
That pretty much sums up what the video author always said, even when he was on this forum. He was always The Lord of Truth, anyone with any different opinion was always immediately dismissed as "not knowing what they were talking about". This type of argumentation rarely attracts much sympathy.
This is why it's pointless talking to you carebears. You just keep pushing your already disproved points, like a goddamn stuck record.
You did not listen to the video. How can you have a valid opinion about something you didn't bother to get to know?
I know..the truth is painful to some people, they just can't handle it
One minute in
"The solo player undermines the multiplayer and it's really frustrating ..."
One minute 45:
"They're just gonna pop their solo carrier around"
2:25 ... the black magic in your flipping face (lol)
" The reason everybody supported the solo carrier ... and you can dispute this all you want and I'll tell you, you are full of stuff ... the solo player outnumbers us because a lot of veterans have left"
3:05 "And there might be a veteran out there that doesn't [red: agree] but they play in solo anyway, right? They're not really caring about the multiplayer part of the game"
3:10 is really interesting, but I'm not allowed to post it.
Did you listen? Because I did., It's hilarious
Last edited:
I watched the whole thing, that's how I know he's talking <self-censored>. Nothing to do with his appearance.
This is about Carriers (primarily). Letting everyone have access to them isn't "focusing on delivering to the carebear screenshotter crowd" (any more grauitous insults you'd like to toss in?). The problem is that certain people want to deny other people access to parts of the game. I own multiple ships, and there's nothing "morally wrong" about having a bigger ship to carry them around in: except that a certain bunch of fanatics want to compel others to play their way by trying to monopolise new content.
I have a full-time job, I have a family, I have kids who hog my computer, I live in a rural area with a medicre Internet connection, I have multiple reasons why can't commit to meet others online for multiplayer gaming sessions. And when I finally get the chance, I want to head out into space and be alone for awhile: free to roam the galaxy, free to do what I like on a whim, free from all committments. That is a perfectly valid way to play Elite, it always has been, ever since 1984.
So why should I be denied access to new content because somebody else wants to bully me into playing HIS game?
This is about Carriers (primarily). Letting everyone have access to them isn't "focusing on delivering to the carebear screenshotter crowd" (any more grauitous insults you'd like to toss in?). The problem is that certain people want to deny other people access to parts of the game. I own multiple ships, and there's nothing "morally wrong" about having a bigger ship to carry them around in: except that a certain bunch of fanatics want to compel others to play their way by trying to monopolise new content.
I have a full-time job, I have a family, I have kids who hog my computer, I live in a rural area with a medicre Internet connection, I have multiple reasons why can't commit to meet others online for multiplayer gaming sessions. And when I finally get the chance, I want to head out into space and be alone for awhile: free to roam the galaxy, free to do what I like on a whim, free from all committments. That is a perfectly valid way to play Elite, it always has been, ever since 1984.
So why should I be denied access to new content because somebody else wants to bully me into playing HIS game?
(looks at five pages of commentary by others). That's not just the negative comments either... there's enough positive, supportive commentary here to get the gist of the video and know that I'm probably going to disagree with it and saved 13 minutes.
By all means, if there's something positive or negative that hasn't been covered here, feel free to let me know.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the post-truth era, where you just pretend whatever you desire is an established fact.
Odd, the game appears to be thriving - even with FD catering for those who see something in the game besides non-stop combat...
But then, with using a derogatory term to those who play differently to you, I guess you already declared your lack of interest for variety
Here's the thing that I'm missing from all of this.
Can someone explain to me how having the carrier available for single players impact other players? And I'm not talking predictions or crystal ball gazing, I'm talking about explicit information about the gameplay involved with carriers that will mean single player access is detrimental to the multiplayer game.
Can someone explain to me how having the carrier available for single players impact other players? And I'm not talking predictions or crystal ball gazing, I'm talking about explicit information about the gameplay involved with carriers that will mean single player access is detrimental to the multiplayer game.
Indeed, just look at the guy who made the video... His "truth" never proved true, and now he's all riled up while nobody else gives a fart...
....but if you're playing in solo you are depriving the other players of your content... simple
(not a fair question Ziggy! You know, as well as I, that it makes absolutely no difference to the game state than already exists, except that the screenies will be more impressive
)So it's like having a heterosexual relation.You won't be able to split the bill.
![[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/234/234580.jpg?1612617334){kind=avatar}
Why does the woman in the video not want me to care for bears?
The guy in the video does have one point though. There isn't any structured multiplayer gameplay whatsoever in the game. I just fail to see where denying carriers to individual players would help with this in any way. Some merry band would buy a carrier and then what? What would be different?
Also I can't understand this fixation a few people have with "needing other people". I can understand "doing some stuff together with other people", but needing? Being self-reliant is absolutely awesome.
Also I can't understand this fixation a few people have with "needing other people". I can understand "doing some stuff together with other people", but needing? Being self-reliant is absolutely awesome.
I think, based on using my magic decoder ring to unravel that steaming bowl of word noodles, that this vein of WorldsGreatestSkid's* arguement is based on on the following... Elite is a multiplayer game - to suceed as a multiplayer game, a game must force/necessitate players to work together to progress/succeed - by availing all content to solo players ie killing Thargoids, BGS/PP impact in solo, ability to fly large ships alone, and now fleet carriers - the potential success of Elite as a multiplayer game is further undermined. He has always advocated for Open Only and forcing players to play together if they want to achieve anything. This video is just more of the same.
As for him being all riled up, it looked more like he was on the verge of bursting into tears as the video progressed. I almost felt sad, but that tiny screen in the background kept distracting me. Does anyone know what was playing on it?
*forum names combined for clarity purposes only
So did I, I'm not completely without empathy... But then I remembered his numerous condescending posts in this forum, and suddenly his salt tasted like chips.
Doesn't Open being the most popular mode torpedo that train of thought?
3:10 cleared that all up, and removed any sympathy I might have had.
Not really - it's more about the game forcing/necessitating players to work together - that seems to be his primary measure of multiplayer success. Within this framework, Open being the most popular mode in the current iteration of the game is mostly irrelevant - you can still have some/many/majority of players essesntially playing solo in Open, because they can fly massive ships alone (Anaconda), kill enough enemies or trade enough alone to affect the BGS, start and maintain a solo squadron, and now own a fleet carrier without being forced to join together with others.
I'm not saying his logic is in anyway sound (it's based on some pretty narrow-minded and fallous a priori assumptions imo), I'm just trying to distill what I saw into something comprehensible.
Access to BGS and PP from solo/pg does undermine multiplayer gameplay. The refusal of understanding it by the carebears and frontier's attitude toward these problems is what's killing this game. Solo and pg should be practice and leveling up modes. Open the full game.