If your tactic is to misrepresent what I have been posting previously then that says a lot about you, and not in a good way.
I've never misrepresented your conspiracy. Your conpiracy has always and is still based on hypotheticals that require the perpetrators to exist entirely in a reason of "because they just want to do this"
They have no logical motivation for review bombing odyssey but not the base game. This is the crux of why your conspiracy is unlikely to be real. Limited to a small inconsequential number of people that wouldn't sway the numbers in any direction.
The rest of this nonsense is just circling around and avoiding the massive inconsistency in your own reasoning for the motivation for your own conspiracy to exist.
Again, you are misrepresenting what I have said, if you continue to do so, I can't accept that it is not intentional, and therefore you are engaging in lyring and deception.
I've mentioned multiple times that a proportion, to a lesser or greater degree, of the reviews are legit.
No. Saying "a proportion" are from real players but then constructing this conspiracy theory that odyssey is being review bombed and that's why it's mostly negative requires that the conspiracy is the majority ...steering the rating. If it was a tiny portion that didn't really matter, this wouldn't have been something worth even talking about. Nobody questions that there are no perfect review systems that can weed out all nefarious reviews. The point of making a an accusation that this conspiracy exists is to state that the review would be significantly different if it didn't happen.
Your analogy doesn't work whatsoever again, being deceptive by omission, for your analogy to work it wouldn't be possible to get a refund on Steam. So therefore the price of admission is effectively zero.
No, having to have a payment method, buy something, request a refund is not a zero cost. Cost is not just about money spent. Cost is in effort expended as well. Designing a system that requires users to create accounts and setup review periods before they can post and other steps would be a cost that is higher than say a system that just requires you to provide an email address (and never even bother validating it).
The act of purchasing and refunding precludes many younger children. The filtering effect of putting hoops to jump thru is not insignificant.
I don't think you can state that as fact, but you do you.
I can, because Star Citizen is doing fine. It's doing better than it did the year before and the year before that. Elite is not and has never "taken their lunch". Elite is in no position to look like it would ever take their lunch. No man sky players dont care about elite dangerous foot gameplay. Who's left that would care?
You're trying to paint star citizen players as attacking elite out of fear but there is nothing to suggest why that fear would exist.
Maybe if star citizen was dying, that would cause players to be desparate and try and improve their situation by making alternatives look worse ..but that's not what is happening.
If there is a competition, star citizen seems to be doing pretty good when it comes to player confidence in their game. They seem to have no trouble getting them to continue buying stuff. Regardless of how much of their game exists.
Which people? The general population of the Outer Hebrides? Sure, I'm certain they don't care much about Elite Dangerous. This is the sort of disingenuous tactics that you continue to employ. But let's define 'people' so we can be on the same page; I'm talking about players of Elite and space games in general, which would be within the spehere of those who like Elite, Star Citizen, and games like it, including to a greater or a lesser degree, No Man's Sky, X4, Space Engineers, Empyrion etc..
Your group of people is limited to space game players and you're suggesting these players of these other games (who aren't also elite players) are attacking elite because they want elite to fail so their game can be best?
You think this conspiracy is large enough to outnumber the actual elite playerbase in their own reviewing of their game. You think there's enough of them to do all of this simply because they're haters.
That's a huge amount of faith in A. the players not owning most if not all of those games, B. them caring about how successful another game that isn't really an alternative to the one they're playing is , and C. that they'd be stupid enough to take it out on something that is already being negatively reviewed.
Instead of taking this logic leap of faith that there is a conspiracy of haters out to get elite, we have tangible huge numbers of actual players telling you they dont like odyssey.
That sentence doesn't make sense. Specific reasons can be made up for anything and if you then close off any possibility of other reasons then I guess you can declare that you are right. You have shown multiple times that you will ignore and omit anything that doesn't align with your own narrative.
Repeat, repeat, it's like a mantra. Read what I have written before.
When you dont address the holes in your own conspiracy theory, repeating the points is all that can be done.
What is the point of a conspiracy theory that is not necessary to have existed for the same outcome to occur?
Yeah, just like what you said about Covid not hurting the dev community. Whatever works to keep the narrative in your mind consistent.
Not what i said at all, i said it was not a mitigating factor in the odyssey launch. Which is what you said it was.
You can't pretend like i'm warping your statements when you can't remember your own.
Odyssey's launch happened after a period of alpha tests and then happened in may 2021. Covid lockdown for most tech businesses happened around march in 2020. That's not a reason why the launch was released before it was ready to be released. It's not a reason why it was released with tons of bugs that were identified prior to launch. It's not a reason why new bugs that were fixed in previous releases were reintroduced. It's not why it's half as fast as horizons. It's not why there were bad game designs implemented that had to be removed. It's not why servers crashed under the reconfiguration of a split environment.
It's not responsible for any of those things. so it's not a mitigating factor in it. At worst, covid would create delays in releases.
I see what you are doing here, but again, necessity isn't a requirement for psychopaths to do what they do and obviously this 'necessity' is an arbitrary litmus test that you get to define, and then redefine like you have been.
So there is a pool of psychopaths playing star citizen that are just waiting for a bad launch so they can surreptitiously pile on bad reviews. But these same psychopaths are totally unwilling to attack the base game?
It's not an arbitrary test of logic here. It's extremely basic common sense. If these people are behaving the way you are imagining they are, why would they do something that wouldn't matter when they could have done the same thing to the base game that would have actually mattered?
and yes, this is a repeated question because it's a logical inconsistency that their conspiracy theory stands on and why it makes no sense.
It's so interesting to see the double standard as to what goes for you and those who engage with you.
What double standard? The launch was universally bad. it was not just in the news around reviews but it garnered apologies from the founder. Negative reviewing is a guarantee. This would have happened if only the players existed. At launch there was easily more players negatively experiencing the dlc than those who positively experienced it.
I think it's more relevant to ask what your goal is, I mean, I'm here on the Elite Dangerous official forum as a player and supporter who enjoys the game and looks forward to new developments, and you........?
No, your goal is trying to undermine the player's feedback to the studio and other players by suggesting that they're not the players feedback.
I'm responding here because that theory just doesn't have any legs to stand on.
Psychology is wonderful, isn't it? I personally think that if people gave Odyssey a fair shot they could conclude their own feelings on the matter, and honestly I think the tone surrounding the expansion would be a lot less harsh as a result of it. Whether I liked it or not, I wouldn't be telling people to not go near it, check it out and see for oneself. I'm not lord and dictator of taste like you and others are coming across as.
So in your imaginary world, reviews would be banned and everyone would have to go in blind. That world just gives rise to the one where reviews exist. Because people dont want to go in blind. Reviews aren't something companies put on customers. Reviews are something customers create out of their own demand for them to exist. The very players you think should "give it a fair shot" demand that reviews exist for the very purpose of not having their time or money wasted in the venture of figuring out things themselves.
But the players who see these reviews are not all stupid idiots as you would have them be. They can tell if reviews sound fake or nonsensical. They can utilize more than one source for reviews to mitigate any kind of poisoning by a targeted interested party. They go on youtube, they look at the steam reviews, they look at reddit.
If they're all saying for the most part that there are problems and it's bad, then it's not unexpected for players to avoid ever taking the chance. These places (steam reviews, etc) do not exist in a vacuum. Users dont just go by 1 and stop.
When you have a marriage of all of these different ...separate repositories of customer feedback telling you the same thing, you will tend to believe it, and likely should. With Odyssey, this was negative, overall.
Darth Ender has spoken, all must take heed. lol.
You should, i'm right.
You keep defining these restrictions like they actually exist in reality.
I'm not defining the restrictions of your conspiracy. You are. You're just not mentioning them because they aren't internally consistent and make your conspiracy theory look ridiculous.
You're replying to a point i was making about why your conspiracy even matters. It only matters if it constitutes a rating changing portion of the reviews. That's not a restriction i'm making, it's one you made by stating that this conspiracy exists and matters. If it didn't constitute a size of reviews large enough to change the rating, then it wouldn't matter if it existed or not and we wouldn't be talking about it.
The reason this isn't consistent is because we have widespread evidence that actual players were having negative experiences and reviewing the dlc that way and that the number of players sharing this experience is too large for some concerted stealth organization of psychopaths to marginalize the actual players.
Moving the goalposts again.
i dont think you know what that term means.
Moving a goalpost is when you change what passes a test or meets a goal based on changing requirements as the old ones are lost / refuted.
that's not what happened. I've never changed my reason for refuting your mitigating circumstance statement and i've never redefined why covid is not a mitigating circumstance for odyssey's launch.
You somehow took your information that covid slows down creative collaborative work and conflated that to be an excuse for why odyssey was launched the way it was. Nobody ever stated that covid doesn't cause delays. A delay is not what everyone is negatively reviewing here.
Again, you are making a major sweeping assumption that you speak for the 'players', which in itself would preclude you from any serious debate. Which ones are we talking about, the one's who watch Yamiks or the one's who got Elite to a Mostly Positive rating on Steam?
No, my comment was in the context of players who are doomsaying. Stating that doomsaying is due to them having lost confidence is not a sweeping assumption. Unless you think they can actually tell the future.
It was not a statement about all players. You're too busy trying to chop up posts and defend a defenseless conspiracy theory that you're not keeping track of what the snippets are actually in reference to.
And because that fits your narrative, you believe it and tell others it's so as well. Even though that's just like your opinion, man.
Again, we're still talking about doomsayers. what is a doomsayer other than someone who spouts doom pessimistically as a way to avoid the disappointment that brought them to doomsay?
We're not talking about my opinions. This was all a snippet in reference to doomsayers and what they are.
And you're there to help them cope, are you?
? No, i dont take it upon myself to try and un-doomsay doomsayers. Doomsaying the game has been part of the game since the offline game was cancelled in kickstarter.
The best way to help them is repeatedly prove them wrong. Then they become a marginal aspect of the playerbase that can be ignored. Rather than a growing population.
Maybe it goes back futher than that, like never learning how to cope when things don't go exactly your way.
No, i dont think doomsaying in elite has any direct connection to doomsaying in other aspects of life. Why would it?
doomsayers dont generally start out being doomy. They become it. That would negate it extending outside of scenarios where such circumstances dont occur similarly.
It's not like it's a matter of simply not having something go your way. Most gamers are accustomed to games not going their way all the time. They're not all doomsayers. It's not a plague across all games.
Then I guess you're just doing those folks a favor by ensuring that label sticks? Also, I'm a doomsayer now? lol.
The label is not what makes them a doomsayer. The doomsaying is what allows them to be labeled a doomsayer. This isn't like a US political party where you have to sign up. Labels dont make you what the label is, doing what the label represents does. Who called you a doomsayer?
The "You're" was not a You, Fizzatron You're. It was a non-specific "You're" defining the label. Like when you say, you're a criminal when you break the law. I'm not saying, you fizzatron are a criminal now.
Then let me be clear that there was no implication of that in what I said coming from me, that's all you. When appraising anything, context can make a significant impact on how we make our evaluation, it's so basic that I have a hard time believing it even needs to be said. To suggest that I believe people should lie is quite the reach and frankly laughable.
Below is the quote being responded to here you made regarding a comment i made about
Elite has made steady progress but is still building the foundation, y feature may frankly be more relevant to implement after x feature, notably, full atmospheric worlds, ship interiors, fauna & flora etc, which all benefit from the implementation of onfoot mechanics ahead of them. And some of the features that need fleshing out will get the attention down the line, but maybe the vocal minority are blinded by the fact that x niche mechanic (but no less important in the bigger picture) that needs work comes at a cost of y big feature that the majority (including them) want implemented first. Again, development resources / time equation, directly tied to finance via purchases of the game.
Something to build on is acceptable to most gamers. What we're used to with elite though is that these mechanics will either remain as they are forever once released, or it will be years before they have anything built on them. so these things have to stand on their own, because they're rarely if ever going to be quickly followed up with additional polishing touches.
your statement reads as a directive for players to consider everything fdev puts out between now and a fully realized virtual galaxy we have full reign over to be accepted - however those steps are delivered because that's allowed because it's not complete and shouldn't be expected to be anything more than some incomplete step on the path to completeness.
Instead, in reality, where a company asks to be paid for parts of a game, it should be the player's expectation for that part to be complete to what it's marketed as, and actually functional ideally, an improvement over what they had before. there's no need to consider the bigger picture here. There shouldn't be any need to except in driving hype for the next release.
Make no mistake Darth Ender, I'm not seeking your approval or to win you over, it's your world of negativity and I'm glad I'm not part of it, though maybe one day you will rise out of it. I was offering a different perspective, evidently it isn't one that you are open to consider and my life goes on regardless. I gave you some benefits of the doubt and have tried to be reasonable but I see that it is a waste of time as has been already mentioned. No hard feelings on my end, but I think I'm ready to bring this little exchange to a close, I think I've made my points as clear as they need to be. o7
I'm not creating a world of negativity. The negativity exists entirely independent of me. The only disagreement is that you think it's from a cabal of psychopathic star citizen players and I think it's just from players who paid for odyssey either directly or thru pre-purchases.
Your perspective is not just a a meaningless conspiracy theory like fdev withholding info on console odyssey being cancelled to garner a few holiday sales just cuz they could or maybe to avoid other financial repercussions from that news before the holiday season. It's also a direct attack on the player's voice. You're conspiracy theory is an undermining of the opinion of players knitpicked only when that opinion is negative. it's why it deserves to be discredited for the obvious nonsense it is. The opinion of players was voiced across all of the available media, those who were positive and negative. There was just far more negative, and there are numerous objective reasons for them. All a conspiracy such as yours can hope to do is erode the effectiveness of players feedback because it's not about uncovering an actual impact that happened, it's just a goto option to discredit posts or player comments whenever that rating/review/poll contradicts what you want it to be.
![Afterglow [SecB]](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/38/38904.jpg?1659821716){kind=avatar}
