"Getting it": A Definitive Discussion

[JeffRyan]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP about how this is basically a roleplaying game, whether each player intentionally approaches it that way or not. I do think there are a few extenuating circumstances, which complicate the idea that "you should follow the rules of the society in which you now find yourself."

The first small complication is that the game starts every single player with a gun in their hand. Some people will buy this game without doing much research first, so they won't know in advance the depth it has for doing things besides killing other ships. Taken on face value, the game does pretty much say "go out and kill something" from the very first frame.

I don't think that should change, given the focus of the earlier games in the series and the worldbuilding concept that you're entering a dangerous Galaxy. But I think we have to go a little easy on people who follow the lead the game gives them, right from the start. Maybe there will be more guidance in the final game, possibly a different focus in the tutorials? But this problem will still exist to a degree. Put anyone in a sandbox game or RPG with a gun in their hand, and it generates expectations for what the game is about.

There should be plenty of knuckle-slapping by the Authorities in the starter systems to reinforce the "social contract" in those systems, but in a way, it's fighting the initial impression the game gives you.

The other complication is that while I agree, in general, with the premise that we should follow the rules of the society in which we find ourselves, those rules will change across the gradient from civilized core systems to a relatively lawless and sparsely populated frontier. And then beyond, into deep space. Players will be able to choose where they want to operate along that gradient, including out on the fringe where there will be no rules aside from the ones you adopt for yourself.

It's going to be fascinating to see how that plays out, because the most antisocial form of PvP, the type even many PvP-focused players don't condone, almost requires being close to the core systems where new players are learning how the game works, and where it's a "target rich" environment compared to the outer fringes. Out on the true frontier, you're likely to meet only the more hardened ships and pilots. There might be an informal "Code of the West" adopted in those areas, where you don't lightly take on another pilot in combat without good reason, and some risk. Interesting times ahead, I think.

Nice post. Well thought out. +1

 

[Ydiss]

I think the generally higher maturity of this community promises that, by-and-large, the game community will have a decent core. But who here didn't, at some point while playing Frontier, save the game, launch and try to destroy as many Police Vipers as they could?

I did. I even tried to destroy the station

The difference is, there were no consequences to this as I simply got bored and then reloaded the saved game. In ED, there are consequences.

I can't wait to see them in action and be a part of it. I'm looking forward to meeting commanders who are noble, friendly and up for cooperating to fight alongside but I'm equally looking forward to seeing some chaos and making enemies. I'm not so interested in whether there will be a player-made code of conduct. I'm even less interested if people will attempt to enforce that code outside of the game, on the forums. I've witnessed enough of that in other PVP games, where half the game was spent arguing with the opposing faction on the forums about whether someone did a dirty trick, or did something "without honour" to win or evade death.

Everyone has a code, we're all free to live by it in ED. And die by it, as well. So long as it's within the rules of the game, I can't wait.

 

[bonsek]

I think it all comes down on amount of research and own expectation before paying to participate in testing of the game mechanics, not the full game.

How much does one have researched about Elite the game/beta and it's offerings? Is it one trailer, a post in other forums, read just the marketing lines on the homepage, a friend told you about it, watched one Nav-beacon video on youtube, read a preview on the beta on a game blog, played all of the series and etc.

And also what kind of expectations you've set before jumping in the beta. You might have read it's MMO and suddenly you expect Elite to be something that you are use to when playing MMO. You've seen a video of a PvP fight on youtube and maybe you have expectations of other PvP games with leaderboards, game lobbies, etc. You heard/read groups and you've played EVE and now you expect guilds and such.

So I kinda "get" it why people might not "get" it. Elite has amazing feel and atmoshpere for flying a space ship, looks amazing and fights amazing and people really want to see the same stuff from other games attached to it. I can see an EVE person would love if EVE had the flying/fighting mechanism of Elite, CoD player would want space shoot em up, warcraft rpgers would want dragons in space.

So when people come with set expectations and limited research, and their expectations are not met, then they might not "get" Elite.

Just my observation.

 

[Titus Balls]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP about how this is basically a roleplaying game, whether each player intentionally approaches it that way or not. I do think there are a few extenuating circumstances, which complicate the idea that "you should follow the rules of the society in which you now find yourself."

The first small complication is that the game starts every single player with a gun in their hand. Some people will buy this game without doing much research first, so they won't know in advance the depth it has for doing things besides killing other ships. Taken on face value, the game does pretty much say "go out and kill something" from the very first frame.

I don't think that should change, given the focus of the earlier games in the series and the worldbuilding concept that you're entering a dangerous Galaxy. But I think we have to go a little easy on people who follow the lead the game gives them, right from the start. Maybe there will be more guidance in the final game, possibly a different focus in the tutorials? But this problem will still exist to a degree. Put anyone in a sandbox game or RPG with a gun in their hand, and it generates expectations for what the game is about.

There should be plenty of knuckle-slapping by the Authorities in the starter systems to reinforce the "social contract" in those systems, but in a way, it's fighting the initial impression the game gives you.

The other complication is that while I agree, in general, with the premise that we should follow the rules of the society in which we find ourselves, those rules will change across the gradient from civilized core systems to a relatively lawless and sparsely populated frontier. And then beyond, into deep space. Players will be able to choose where they want to operate along that gradient, including out on the fringe where there will be no rules aside from the ones you adopt for yourself.

It's going to be fascinating to see how that plays out, because the most antisocial form of PvP, the type even many PvP-focused players don't condone, almost requires being close to the core systems where new players are learning how the game works, and where it's a "target rich" environment compared to the outer fringes. Out on the true frontier, you're likely to meet only the more hardened ships and pilots. There might be an informal "Code of the West" adopted in those areas, where you don't lightly take on another pilot in combat without good reason, and some risk. Interesting times ahead, I think.

+1 sir, good post.

As to your last point - we did actually see this "Code of the West" in Beta 1 - it was called Freeport (and before that the Aulin Apocalypse).

Many players declared that this would be the area that PvP combat took place, from plenty of different groups in the game - a social contract was formed within the mechanics and constraints provided by Frontier at the time. We chose one system, out of the 55 - that meant everyone else had 54 systems to go play in (yet for some people this was still too much). This was due to it being an anarchy system and having a rather loose NFZ and in the end the PvP here was both consensual and non-consensual.

In regards to the former I know many players like myself enjoyed 1v1 and group combat, testing out the likes of the Eagle and Viper. It's how loadouts and tactics were discovered, and provided emergent game play - something Frontier have been striving for all along.

In regards to the latter, the issue was that people entered an anarchy system but didn't expect that there would be actual anarchy - and when there was they instantly went straight to accusing everyone of being griefers by association of being in the system.

In some cases, you could say this was possibly valid - I certainly know of two commanders (who some accused of being aligned with our group but were in fact known enemies to all of us) who would sit with Cannon Vipers right outside the docking port and shoot anything that moved. Certainly towards the end of Beta 1, with no new content in around 2 months people were getting bored and just wanted to shoot anything that moved.

Some groups however did RP it and have rules like contacting players to drop cargo first before shooting. This at least is in the spirit of the game. Some had rules like No Siderwinders/No Haulers. If you had your hardpoints open, regardless of shooting first you were a valid target.

Some followed the rules, some didn't - it was a lawless time, but there were a few of us trying to establish at least a code of conduct. As we move out in to the game I do certainly hope we can continue to do this.

I should also point out that within the warzones PvP was also consensual by the nature of the area you were in.

Anyone shooting players outside broken NFZs in non-anarchy systems, yes I would class them as potential griefers (without seeing the evidence of what actually happened).

 

[JeffRyan]

I think it all comes down on amount of research and own expectation before paying to participate in testing of the game mechanics, not the full game.

How much does one have researched about Elite the game/beta and it's offerings? Is it one trailer, a post in other forums, read just the marketing lines on the homepage, a friend told you about it, watched one Nav-beacon video on youtube, read a preview on the beta on a game blog, played all of the series and etc.

And also what kind of expectations you've set before jumping in the beta. You might have read it's MMO and suddenly you expect Elite to be something that you are use to when playing MMO. You've seen a video of a PvP fight on youtube and maybe you have expectations of other PvP games with leaderboards, game lobbies, etc. You heard/read groups and you've played EVE and now you expect guilds and such.

So I kinda "get" it why people might not "get" it. Elite has amazing feel and atmoshpere for flying a space ship, looks amazing and fights amazing and people really want to see the same stuff from other games attached to it. I can see an EVE person would love if EVE had the flying/fighting mechanism of Elite, CoD player would want space shoot em up, warcraft rpgers would want dragons in space.

So when people come with set expectations and limited research, and their expectations are not met, then they might not "get" Elite.

Just my observation.

Agreed. So far the trailers haven't helped. The combat side of Elite makes for great eye candy, but it doesn't really encapsulate what Elite Dangerous /is/. That's why I'm not saying 'people who don't get it never will'. I think the onus is on the game and not the forums or posts like mine to educate them via narrative measures which fortunately are being put in place.

What has been amusing to me is seeing people go 'It's all griefers!' in Alpha 2 to 'There isn't enough for pvpers' in the current build. And both groups were right! It's the balance of the narrative measures that'll make or break this game.

It does have potential!

 

[Ydiss]

To put some perspective on it, not many of us got elite until we played it. Or a friend told us how to play it.

 

[Origim]

I replied to the other thread and I'll reply in this one, but differently. Here, I'll address is form a "roleplaying" perspective, and I'll again compare it to X3 series.

The game world in Elite does not feel alive. It feels awfully randomly generated. The key to a successful randomly generated game is that it gives a world that feels alive, not that feels randomly generated.

In X3, you felt like everything had a purpose. Random pirates would attack stations, and that fleet of patrol ships would come to defend you. The world felt connected, you felt like you could change it -- and you could, by building stations, destroying stations, becoming a leader of entire sectors, etc.

In Elite, those random nav point ships serve no purpose. They just circle around. Resource points are a zone of endless meaningless NPCs fighting another meaningless NPC (same with conflict zones). They have no meaning! There is no way to feel connected to the world because you can't alter it.

Now, the devs have been saying they have PLANS for that living world, but everyone can have plans for everything, the point is we so close to release and the game does not have all of those features that would make it whole.

If Elite was to be a sandbox, it is a sandbox with only two buckets of sand, not enough to play with. You CAN pretend you are this front line, revered explorer setting off an an EPIC VOYAGE, but it is all pretend, you are just some guy, in some Asp ship you grinded for hours towards, who just installed a couple of modules, and are going to do more grinding, to pretend like you're something awesome.

Where's your crew that you hand picked for this epic mission? Where is your home research station that you built, from which you will set sail? Where is that subspace scanning array that you set into orbit around a binary star which showed you there is an anomaly worth investigating 300 light years away, prompting this epic voyage? It is in your head, and your head only. It is a shame, because with Elite, it could've been real.

 

[Titus Balls]

I replied to the other thread and I'll reply in this one, but differently. Here, I'll address is form a "roleplaying" perspective, and I'll again compare it to X3 series.

The game world in Elite does not feel alive. It feels awfully randomly generated. The key to a successful randomly generated game is that it gives a world that feels alive, not that feels randomly generated.

In X3, you felt like everything had a purpose. Random pirates would attack stations, and that fleet of patrol ships would come to defend you. The world felt connected, you felt like you could change it -- and you could, by building stations, destroying stations, becoming a leader of entire sectors, etc.

In Elite, those random nav point ships serve no purpose. They just circle around. Resource points are a zone of endless meaningless NPCs fighting another meaningless NPC (same with conflict zones). They have no meaning! There is no way to feel connected to the world because you can't alter it.

Now, the devs have been saying they have PLANS for that living world, but everyone can have plans for everything, the point is we so close to release and the game does not have all of those features that would make it whole.

If Elite was to be a sandbox, it is a sandbox with only two buckets of sand, not enough to play with. You CAN pretend you are this front line, revered explorer setting off an an EPIC VOYAGE, but it is all pretend, you are just some guy, in some Asp ship you grinded for hours towards, who just installed a couple of modules, and are going to do more grinding, to pretend like you're something awesome.

Where's your crew that you hand picked for this epic mission? Where is your home research station that you built, from which you will set sail? Where is that subspace scanning array that you set into orbit around a binary star which showed you there is an anomaly worth investigating 300 light years away, prompting this epic voyage? It is in your head, and your head only. It is a shame, because with Elite, it could've been real.

I'll also copy my reply from that thread, and add to it a little but only the bit that is relevant to here:

Where I agree with you is where many others who are earlier backers might not, in that for the game to still be here in 10 years then yes there needs to be much more progression and more player effect on the background simulation. And by that, yes I do mean eventually players will have to be able to take some ownership of space, or at least be able to build within that space. However it needs to be finely balanced so it doesn't become like "the big blue doughnut".

I don't think it ever would - the space in this game is too vast and there is no way to do effective choke points that would make having vast empires in any way meaningful - just look at the current space we play in - it's a mixed hodge podge of different types of systems and for the most part you would find different groups and individuals going out in many different directions that for them to intersect would take a vast amount of resource that I don't think this game can supply.

The only other thing I'd add to this, and this isn't a criticism of Frontier - but I think as a development team they have been mollycoddled by a vocal minority in the DDF who have lead them to believe that everyone will want to play the game a certain way. I think they'll be in for a shock when the general public get hold of this game - and if they want to keep them they'll have to adapt fast to a changing climate - especially as their main competitor starts to take shape - nostalgia can only provide so much staying power. I suspect the DDF gene pool might get a new injection in some way like a once a year CSM-style vote in, or via some kind of trust where people can bring value to it (rather than having the shouting mobs).

If the shareholders (as in actual shareholders, not people who donated via Kickstarter) see value in it then this game could become as big as any other MMO if Frontier want it to be and are willing to invest in it and trust their player base.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I suspect the DDF gene pool might get a new injection in some way like a once a year CSM-style vote in, or via some kind of trust where people can bring value to it (rather than having the shouting mobs).

No - please, just no. If they didn't back, tough biscuits.

I do agree with having no shouting mobs though.

 

[Titus Balls]

No - please, just no. If they didn't back, tough biscuits.

I do agree with having no shouting mobs though.

I wanted to back at the time - unfortunately due to life I was not able to and could only afford to when Premium Beta became available (I didn't upgrade to Alpha because there was no DDF access at that time and I spent the money on a X55 instead).

It doesn't mean I still don't love this game and want it to succeed.

Like genetics, if the pool isn't replenished every once in a while then things get stale and inbreedy. I know some DDF members will not like this (I have my own inner circle contacts who are more sympathetic to my views and tell me things - think of me as Lord Varys but with cojones). If they want this game to succeed they may have to accept this.

 

[Adept]

Grear stuff Jeff and Zenicetus.

I disliked the Freeport antics, but I'm willing to believe Titus when he says the ganker vipers were his enemies as well. If Frontier are successful with the consequences for actions, then I welcome any gentleman pirates with flair, style and a code

 

[foxpur]

In X3, you felt like everything had a purpose. Random pirates would attack stations, and that fleet of patrol ships would come to defend you. The world felt connected, you felt like you could change it -- and you could, by building stations, destroying stations, becoming a leader of entire sectors, etc.

I hasten to point out that X3 Beta you started in a small ship floating in empty space near a nav beacon. So, mind perspective.
(Note I'm on the term working on the X3:TC Babylon 5 edition.)

 

[Asp Explorer]

If they want this game to succeed they may have to accept this.

Those that didn't back to DDF level, they simply have to accept this.

People can't expect to gain retroactive access to something which was plainly and clearly advertised as being limited in duration.

DDF comprises a varied but obviously self-selected body - if Frontier think that it needs added to, it's up to them to open it up again, and for those interested to stump up the cash.

 

[Viajero]

... DDF comprises a varied but obviously self-selected body - if Frontier think that it needs added to, it's up to them to open it up again, and for those interested to stump up the cash.

Didnt read the whole thread yet but this got my attention. Any sign of that going to happen? Or were you guys just hypothesizing?

 

[JeffRyan]

Didnt read the whole thread yet but this got my attention. Any sign of that going to happen? Or were you guys just hypothesizing?

Hypothesizing fortunately. There was a similar movement a few months back. We don't need another CSM.

 

[EAGLE 5]

Bravo pero` le regole in Sicilia.....

 

[Viajero]

Hypothesizing fortunately. There was a similar movement a few months back. We don't need another CSM.

Argh... I understand. But I wouldnt mind though

 

[Sumkawps]

Argh... I understand. But I wouldnt mind though

PB backer, and I would mind. FDev have done a great job with the DDF - it's self selected (strongly invested long-time and long-term project backers), gives valuable external insight, but has largely figurehead status.

When asked, most of them say so, too, and with a wry smile.

On topic - when we see the background sim in its fully implemented form, many will have no choice but to "get it", finally. Inevitably, the layering of reputational consequences on top of the (as yet partially) implemented crime and punishment mechanics will impact player behaviours in lots of ways. We'll see a deluge of whiny posts then too, just as we have seen at every stage towards completion of the vision. Happily, the deluge is always generated by a minority of forum warriors prophesying doom unless FDev [make x feature like I want it to be].

Just like at every stage so far, I shall enjoy my /popcorn, and then go back to enjoying a game that shows every sign of being a deep and engaging title in the true spirit of the Elite series. Kudos to FDev for maintaining their vision, it makes for a great game.

 

[Titus Balls]

Argh... I understand. But I wouldnt mind though

Well from what I've been told (and I'll use simple numbers here for explanation).

Say there were 100 people signed up for the DDF. When the Kickstarter first happened, all 100 were pretty active.

As time has gone by, most of those people have stop actively participating. You're maybe down to 50-60.

Now, some of those people have become frustrated with the direction of the DDF, while some feel it's no longer worth actively posting for various reasons.

So you're maybe down to 30 active members - that's 30% of the original backers.

A lot of these backers are what you might call "risk averse" and for example with a topic like "griefing management" currently active in the DDF, you can guess what way the wind is blowing for anyone who likes PvP when a good set of these people think ALL PVP == GRIEFING, as has been demonstrated time and again on the forums.

Edit: The thing is I am giving the DDF here possibly too much credit - this is Frontier's game after all, and all the DDF is really is what you could call an "advisory board" who have no final say - but that doesn't mean they don't wield power.

Edit 2:No consensual PvP is Griefing, and no all non-consensual PvP is griefing (pirating, bounty hunting, etc). For the former the infinite freedom should apply and it should effect no one elses game. In the latter case, there should absolutely be in game consequences for this. This last part is a BIG BIG part of "getting it". If you think me sneaking up behind you, scanning you with a K-Warrant Scanner, or Cargo Scanner and seeing you as a valid target for me to open fire on is griefing then this really isn't the game for you - especially as NPCs are designed to do this too.

My hope is that Frontier have been sensible about the whole thing - we absolutely do need anti-griefing measures for genuine instances of people using exploits or becoming abusive through play to other players. But in a game where you advertise Infinite Freedom and where one of the selling points it ...bounty-hunt, pirate and assassinate your way across the galaxy. - if it's a multiplayer game but you can only attack computer controlled NPCs, then it's really missed that point.

The thing is, PvP isn't actually that an important part of the game - even to the likes of me - but by creating such an active, negative feeling against it on the forums these people have made it the topic du jour for many people who do enjoy it as part of a healthy gaming diet.

 

[Cmdr Snuffler]

At the moment hardly and "rules" are implemented.
This means randomly killing anything you see just results in a fine, which you can easily clear...big whoooop.

However, from now to release a lot of functionality will be added.

Here's the DDA Forum, with a huge list of topics and mechanics to be implemented:

http://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=36

In this forum you will see this one, Criminality:

http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6276

If you read this you'll see that if you break these social rules expect the ED universe to come down on you like a tonne of bricks. The same as in Jeffs killing the king example.