Guilds in Elite Dangerous

[Asp Explorer]

why are player "guilds" getting mentioned on Galnet?

Because those players actions affected status in-game.

Why are they supported in Canon and Law, but not in feature? Why can a wing not have a three letter tag? Why can a bunch of wings not affiliate via a tag? How would that change anything, if they are already working together using tools outside of the game? All I would want is a tag and a chat window. I dont know why anyone would want there own "mode", as that is what pvt group is. As for clubbing seals, well it happens anyway. Unless the whole guild is full of psychos, you may find some guilds will attempt to control the behavior of its members. Players DO get mentioned on leaderboards, in Community goals, on Bounty Boards, in the news feed.

Yes it does happen, as these players have an effect in-game.

You claim this does not happen..

That does not happen as guilds do not exist in-game, but as outside structures. If they work at the moment, why bother including anything else?



What about those that do? You admit it wont impact on your play, but you vote no, why? To spite those that DO want to play in this manner?[/QUOTE]

 

[Kayweg]

Indeed, but like I said it's an emotive argument being put forward against, not a logical one. People are scared of 'stuff' and so they over react. They're space conservatives

Hang on a sec here, a majority of existing MMOs HAVE guilds/clans/corporations etc., to me it appears NOT having them is progressive and HAVING them is conservative ?

 

[Ghostickles]

I voted no because I have no interest in that kind of game play

but you vote no, why?

Indeed, it seems the conversation has gotten ahead of itself

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Because those players actions affected status in-game.

Why bother including anything else? To make the game better, to facilitate improved interaction and immersion between players?..

 

[Roybe]

Some people would do it purely out of spite, just as groups exist to seal-club single players "because they can".

Just to re-iterate, it's not something I would personally do, but the opportunity certainly exists for those who want to grief guildies for their sweet, sweet tears.

And the 'griefed' players move to private mode. Not an issue.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

And that's the thing. Once you get the guilds into the game, the next thing is "we need to own stuff or there's no point to guilds". Then it's "we need to control the security forces in the system since we own the stations" etc.

Indeed and this is pretty much confirmed by the 46% of people in the poll linked earlier who feel there needs to be guild only content.

 

[Renegade Roach]

? I was not damning you at all. If social tools were all that would fall out of it you would get no complaints from me.

I was being a little tongue in cheek, re your 'claim to be' comment I don't see why Frontier couldn't implement social tools (for want of a better term) along with a firm commitment not to introduce territorial and structural control, at least in civilised space. Once you get out beyond the bubble I can't see how it would upset people anyway. If a group wanted to 'dominate' a cluster 15,000ly from the nearest human system good luck to them. Not entirely sure what they would do out there other than mine, explore and pray for Thargoids to relieve the tedium but I'm getting off topic.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

but you vote no, why?

Indeed, it seems the conversation has gotten ahead of itself

And I maintain it is not a good reason to vote no, since he admits it does not affect HIS gameplay, despite the fact it would improve the game for others. That is what my post was bout, but pleas, feel free to be ignorant and ignore the extra points I made

 

[Roybe]

Hang on a sec here, a majority of existing MMOs HAVE guilds/clans/corporations etc., to me it appears NOT having them is progressive and HAVING them is conservative ?

In this game the 'conservatives' are hearkening back to gameplay that was popular in the 1980's. They do not want to bring this game fully into the 21st century.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Hang on a sec here, a majority of existing MMOs HAVE guilds/clans/corporations etc., to me it appears NOT having them is progressive and HAVING them is conservative ?

It is conservative to say "I want Elite to stay the way it is because all I fear change". They are frightened players with friends will interdict them and attack them, in an open PVP game...

 

[Asp Explorer]

Why bother including anything else? To make the game better, to facilitate improved interaction and immersion between players?..

Ah, but better for whom? The apparent minority of players who want this stuff? Polls suggest you are the minority, you'll have to prove it to the devs that this is not the case. The devs should, quite rightly, devote more dev time to what the majority of players want to see in the game, and so far, it's not guilds.

Let's see what they say next week - we may both be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Roybe]

Indeed and this is pretty much confirmed by the 46% of people in the poll linked earlier who feel there needs to be guild only content.

It's just that 46% believe the fallacy.

 

[Renegade Roach]

Hang on a sec here, a majority of existing MMOs HAVE guilds/clans/corporations etc., to me it appears NOT having them is progressive and HAVING them is conservative ?

The 'conservative' jibe is towards those who attempt to prohibit anything which they fear. Interestingly many of the arguments used on this are reminiscent of those used against giving women and black people the vote, or against the legalisation of drugs. It's kind of pointless arguing because conservatives, by their very nature, can't adjust or cope with more liberal paradigms. They can only have their opinion changed by experience and realising that what they feared maybe wasn't so bad after all.

 

[Ghostickles]

but you vote no, why?

And I maintain it is not a good reason to vote no, since he admits it does not affect HIS gameplay, despite the fact it would improve the game for others. That is what my post was bout, but pleas, feel free to be ignorant and ignore the extra points I made

Nah mate, it the best reason. Casual player, really not concerned about it, why vote yes, likes it as is. Its respectable and honest.
EDIT: Not seeing any benefit to it would not be a reason to vote yes, nor is there any obligation to help a cause for which one has no interest.

 

[Asp Explorer]

And the 'griefed' players move to private mode. Not an issue.

Oh I meant single players in Open griefing guildies by whichever method. If it makes guildies cry and move to Solo - that would just be delicious, but wrong

 

[Renegade Roach]

Ah, but better for whom? The apparent minority of players who want this stuff? Polls suggest you are the minority, you'll have to prove it to the devs that this is not the case. The devs should, quite rightly, devote more dev time to what the majority of players want to see in the game, and so far, it's not guilds.

Let's see what they say next week - we may both be pleasantly surprised.

The polls suggest nothing. The population of this forum is also tiny in comparison to the alleged player base. Anyway, who the hell makes decision based on popularity other than bad politicians? Decisions should be based on good arguments and, where appropriate, facts.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Ah, but better for whom? The apparent minority of players who want this stuff? Polls suggest you are the minority, you'll have to prove it to the devs that this is not the case. The devs should, quite rightly, devote more dev time to what the majority of players want to see in the game, and so far, it's not guilds.

Let's see what they say next week - we may both be pleasantly surprised.

Yeah, like the minority of players who wanted to wing up lol. The same care bears are coming out of the woodwork to prevent players from teaming up. If they are that scared, they should go play solo. The devs should spend their time making the game the best they can, within their own vision of the game, not pandering to people who fear change. As for next week, I hope I am surprised. Between this argument, and the instant shield recharge hack, and the whining about people logging, I am getting pretty sick of the drama...

- - - Updated - - -

Oh I meant single players in Open griefing guildies by whichever method. If it makes guildies cry and move to Solo - that would just be delicious, but wrong

And this would be a valid response, I agree. We would see lots of emergent gameplay if we allowed people to express their affiliations. Fighting back hard against guilds trying to establish power would also be fun gameplay.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

In this game the 'conservatives' are hearkening back to gameplay that was popular in the 1980's. They do not want to bring this game fully into the 21st century.

It is the very fact that Elite is faction-based rather than guild-based which makes Elite what it is. You're trying to use "bring it into the 21st Century" as justification. Simple fact is - Elite: Dangerous has a background simulation based on faction control - NPC at that. Guilds are next to pointless.

 

[Renegade Roach]

Yeah, like the minority of players who wanted to wing up lol. The same care bears are coming out of the woodwork to prevent players from teaming up. If they are that scared, they should go play solo. The devs should spend their time making the game the best they can, within their own vision of the game, not pandering to people who fear change. As for next week, I hope I am surprised. Between this argument, and the instant shield recharge hack, and the whining about people logging, I am getting pretty sick of the drama...

Largely the same people who also railed against any kind of local chat since it would ruin immersion, lead to unbearable spam, somehow cause Elite to die.

- - - Updated - - -

It is the very fact that Elite is faction-based rather than guild-based which makes Elite what it is. You're trying to use "bring it into the 21st Century" as justification. Simple fact is - Elite: Dangerous has a background simulation based on faction control - NPC at that. Guilds are next to pointless.

Currently the factions are all but meaningless. We can hope that will change but claiming they are essential to the nature of the game is plain wrong. Just as it is wrong to claim that guilds are next to pointless. That is merely your assessment of their worth to you.

 

[Asp Explorer]

That's just it - good argument and facts for guild introduction have not so far been presented to the satisfaction of everyone.
All these comments about "fear" are absolutely laughable. Telling people that they should play solo or die is hardly giving them incentive to play open.
As for local chat, I immediately disabled it, and now voice comms too.
As for the drama, that is relative.