Indeed. True also for forums.
Going against your own word - "infiltrators" please note
- Thread starter Rampant
- Start date
Indeed. True also for forums.
Great idea, but if I blocked everyone with toxic negativity on the forums, I'm not sure who'd be left!
Too many people still trying to bring an EVE like meta game to Elite Dangerous, after all these years.
A private PVE group is exactly what it says on the tin, noone is, or should be, signing up for anything else.
FD get enough marketing out of these kinds of events, they should really give something back...like a properly designed PVE mode players have asked for since year dot.
A private PVE group is exactly what it says on the tin, noone is, or should be, signing up for anything else.
FD get enough marketing out of these kinds of events, they should really give something back...like a properly designed PVE mode players have asked for since year dot.
Yup. Let's wrap this up. There's virtue in a quickie.
Not before I gave my 2 cents
player group IS a dedicated PvE mode if the group owner decides it is. If someone ignores the rules, you can kick him or her out of the said group.
Stop asking for features that might add dev time that is much more needed elsewhere like fixing the damn netcode to increase the overall stability of the game, be it in Open, PG or even Solo.
Damn guys... are y'all so insecure about yourself that your ego gets blasted when you lose a few pixels due to some internet kid wrecking your stuff? grow up dammit.
Has the PG's booted all those involved?
So far it's just a conspiracy theory.
A truthful answer would be much better.
I only know of one person who infiltrated the group, and he was quickly expelled. As far as I know, all of the carnage is/has been taking place in Open, hence my comment. There's a lot of hysteria being drummed up over this, but as far as I can tell it's baseless.
The weird thing about this post is that it bears no resemblance to the truth.
It mentions the "gap between reality and carebears" being wide.
I guess that's me being called a carebear.
But actually, the exact opposite of what is written is the truth. I'm simply highlighting that there is no gap between what I originally wrote and reality. People going against there word is what is happening *in reality* when they go against the agreement they made *in reality*.
A player enters into a *deal* when they join a PG. The *player*, the *human*. Not their character.
So what this post highlights is the wide gap in thei poster's understanding of what responsibility a *human player* accepts when joining a PG and the wide gap between acceptable human behaviour and the game world of let's say "when one clicks on Open".
It couldn't be a simpler concept to understand. The *accord* a person has struck between themselves and other players - the guarantee that a person will behave within certain limits, a guarantee that they have given *before being allowed to click on that PG*. If that person does not intend to behave in the way the PG *demand*, then that person is a deliberate liar and cannot be trusted. Thus has nothing to do with the in game character. The deal is between players.
Why is this such a difficult concept for some to understand?
Yours Aye
Mark H
Stop with the weasel words. It is a categorical truth that if a person lies to you, then they are a liar. There is no black and white here. A lie is a lie. Simple.
A premeditated lie is a premeditated lie.
In the context of this video game, any player who gives a premeditated lie cannot be trusted. Black and white. No shades of grey.
Sometimes I think that some people are posting to "defend" or "excuse" some player's lies. But that won't work, because you can't "defend" a lie or a liar. They either are a liar - and demonstrably probably so - or they aren't. I'm not moralising. Just stating a fact. Arguing with any amount of weasely words us irrelevant. It will never change the fact that a person who lies is a liar.
Thanks for your understanding
Mark H
What a dull, binary world you live in.
It isnt. However, what people are trying to explain to you is that 'lying when playing a computer game' doesn't mean someone can never be trusted, with anything, ever, as you claimed. Or that games are 'sacrosanct'. It just means they lied when playing a computer game. This obviously is a very Big Deal to you, and it has been for many years. I dont know why, and unlike you, I wont speculate on what this means about you as a person.
Sometimes when a mate asks me to guard their beer in a pub they take too long to return. And you know what happens then? I sometimes don't guard their beer. No, the opposite: I drink it myself. I lied. I broke the sacrosanct promise I made in the holiest of places: a pub. I made an agreement, there was an accord, and in the vilest way did I turn my back on those in their time of need. I. Drank. Their. Beer. Not in a game. In real life. Knowingly. Sometimes even with some level of planning involved.
Judge me Father, for I have Sinned.
You post has no point?
9 years Military Police qualify ?
Yes I expect it does (unless you were cyber). Do you mind saying what flavour?
I'm sure nothing will happen in the PG. I mean, if I was in the PG I'd take great care to be in something a bit sturdier than a lawn chair with an fsd strapped to it just in case, but I don't think any moles are hidden in the group, so don't be so worried. It'll be fine
What a troll
Whoa... that is just sad. Zero integrity.
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Just like it's dishonest to equivocate all lies/contexts, so I guess that would make said person a liar and not to be trusted as well.
And since everyone lies, no one is to be trusted.
Genius!
Less than none.
That should be obvious. Applying for a private group and choosing mode are off-game player choices. I mean, of course you can get yourself into a non-PvP group pretending to be a nice fellow and then shoot people, but that actually makes you a jerk (since stronger words are not allowed here). Like a 100% without any excuses about your murder hobo ingame character.