I agree, there are to many people trying to make Elite into something it was never designed to be.
Idea: Player corporations could be treated as an in-game faction
- Thread starter Fangrim
- Start date
I agree, there are to many people trying to make Elite into something it was never designed to be.
What an insightful and helpful post, which is extremely well written and fun to read *sigh*
Elite is swimming against the tide of increased social gaming and, worse, is self limiting the lifespan of its own product. When you have that big anaconda, explored everywhere until you're burnt out and have a gazillion credits in the bank, what do yo do?
A natural progression is to form a trading company, a navy or a cartographic society. People clump together, it's the nature of the beasts.
In short, we are asking for a game that Involves that other natural human impulse - politics!
How that can be fitted into a solo pilots experience is not a great puzzle. We are expected to be pawns in the universe, so why not extend that to being pawns of each other?
Please reply with intelligent arguments that aren't, essentially, go play something else. We are not asking for something completely different, but for an extra, an entirely optional extra, layer.
A natural progression is to form a trading company, a navy or a cartographic society. People clump together, it's the nature of the beasts.
In short, we are asking for a game that Involves that other natural human impulse - politics!
How that can be fitted into a solo pilots experience is not a great puzzle. We are expected to be pawns in the universe, so why not extend that to being pawns of each other?
Please reply with intelligent arguments that aren't, essentially, go play something else. We are not asking for something completely different, but for an extra, an entirely optional extra, layer.
When people say they 'want to make a difference', what exactly are they expecting? All that can ever happen is for stations/systems to flip sides. What can this mean for the universe? Some trade goods get rarer, some become prohibited, some commanders find themselves on the wrong side of the law in the system. What else can change under the current system, without an almost complete redesign?
.
What was the main complaint about the earlier two games? That the universe was sterile and didn't change. I had hoped that the background simulation system in E: D would have a greater role in providing interesting things going on in the universe, rather than it all having to be player driven.
.
What was the main complaint about the earlier two games? That the universe was sterile and didn't change. I had hoped that the background simulation system in E: D would have a greater role in providing interesting things going on in the universe, rather than it all having to be player driven.
Last edited:
I want to feel like I am doing something for someone. PC faction, NPC faction, doesn't really matter to me. Getting some acknowledgement that what you do has an impact, and you get something to show for it.
My suggestion doesn't require a complete redesign. It simply adds something that's already present in the game, with the difference that it's player based.
Factions are already here, and have been since day one. Why can't we have something that people can connect to and care about?
As I've written several times before in this thread, if player created factions are a no-go for people, at least let us get something from allying with an NPC faction.
Right now nothing you do changes anything, anywhere. You do the same unimportant stuff over and over.
Once you have enough credits, there's not much left to do, progression-wise. There's nothing to fight for, just some random factions who you've forgotten all about the second you leave the system.
Players have tried influencing the background simulation (Lugh for example), and this turned up to a big fat nothing.
Frontier sold this MMO with a huge dynamic universe.
A universe that's dynamic in a very status quo way. Sometimes a faction gets the upper hand somewhere, but what does that get you? Nothing.
You can spend your entire day trying to ally yourself with a faction, helping them get dominance, and all your troubles amount to is the station and faction ships turning green.
Whooop-whooop! <golf clap>
Last edited:
The game as it stands is just the start, you have been told this, show some patience and let the devs do their thing.
You carry on doing what's fun for you in the game. As if the 'conda, exploration screenies and credit balance says you've somehow "beaten" the game. It doesn't. If it's still fun for you to fly whatever ship you got around the ED galaxy, doing whatever you want to, who's to say you can't do that?
For you maybe. That's not how I'm playing. Just as well for me too, because I'm going to get a lot more long-term fun out of it than you are since I'm not seeking some artificial endgame.
Beyond what's in the game already, don't need 'em, don't want 'em. A more fully developed background sim would be good and you'd have your politics, just without players leading any faction.
Because forcing others to play your way is anathema to FDs vision. You want a game that does that, go find it or write it or start your own KS campaign to pay and have somebody else do it.
Only one line merited a "play something else" response, the rest got "real answers" (although the play something else response to that one line was quite genuine). Bottom line, you are asking for a radical change in gameplay, to suit your own preferences. You shouldn't be surprised if others, with different preferences, happen to like the game as it is and tell you to go pound sand.
No thanks I choose to play this game because I am not beholden to play the way a corporation would sanction, I have many choices of path progression and can be as social or unsocial as I wish* but the core design allows me choose my own path, and not just be a pawn in someone else's game...
*( yes the in-game comms are both clunky and a bit broken, and need attention "finger crossed on 1.1 too fix this 90% )
Indeed, Ive never wanted ED to be like other games, and even if it were to have clans, crafting and player owned stations it still wouldnt be like any other game.
I never wished for ED to be centeralized around social aspects, but from the beginning it was marketed as a multiplayer, coop "fly with your friends" kind of game and such I would have at least expected some connectivity and interaction between players. (aside from a completely useless 1-to-1 chat)
If players could start factions, or at least join current ingame factions, take part of faction based news and have quick ways of communicating with other faction members (through a central faction social hub) it would satisfy alot of us wanting it, without in any way affecting gameplay for those not wanting it. Its a solution that would work to satisfy both sides of the discussion, and cant be hurting the game in any way as far as I see it.
Hell, one of the main aspects of the game is trading, and we cant even trade between eachother.
While ago I gave eve a shot. It has basically everything id ever wished for in an MMO, except for first person hands on controls. I want to have the "sim" feel of sitting in the cpit, not point and click. So needless to say, i didnt last long.
If eve was controlled just like ED is, through a cockpit first person view, with hotas and trackIR...Then id probably be playing it until the end of time. (with restriction to not having enough experience to know what other possible issues might be)
Ive played/tried just about every major MMO game since early 2000s and the only 2 ive stuck with any noticable time was Neocron and Planetside. Both featuring hands on gameplay from a first person view.
I dont know if people believe social gaming features automatically means that the game needs to be accessible and casual, easy to play for everyone, because that isnt true. Implementing social features and faction gameplay into ED wouldnt make it into a "WoW in space".
The feeling of progress is something that is attractive to all but possibly a very small minority of people.
Everyone likes to know they acomplished something, and enjoys a practical proof of this acomplishment.
On paper ED seems to offer alot of progress to the player; We have ranks in three different careers, we have loyalty towards different factions, and we can earn credits to buy better equippment and ships.
But in reality, aside from the credits this "progress" doesnt do a whole lot. I never felt any different being one rank or the other in any of the careers.
Being allied with a faction makes them green on the hud, but little more.
Credits is always nice, and upgrading the ships is a source of joy but it doesnt take a whole lot to reach a "level" of wealth where more income becomes almost excessive.
The variety of ships and their equippment is small enough that after a couple of weeks of active playing (or months of casual) youll have everything you need and the hunt/need for credits is gone.
So, with credits taken out of the progress equation, your back to the above two. Loyalty and ranks that do little to nothing for you.
The sense of progress stops.
Influencing factions ingame (if they ever get it to work properly) is an extremely slow process and requires the collective work of tens or even hundreds of players to make a significant change, and even then the process is hardcoded to happen over the course of weeks. All this is for good reasons, and falls much more realistic into the game, but it all also takes away alot of the possible sense of progression a player might get.
Now, I dont (repeat DONT) want a single player to be able to change a system over the course of an evening, but point is the process is so slow that a player never gets to feel that their deeds ever acomplishes anything.
The player is "just another commander" in a world of commanders, but maybe our actions SHOULD count a little more then the AI. After all, the AI wont have a game to play if we dont
No arguments - this is definitely FD's position. But does anyone find it odd that the universe is divided into factions that the players can never really be members of?
And that's fine. You wouldn't be forced to play differently at all. It's a big universe, even in open and a private citizen should be able go keep his nose clean and out of factional interplay.
We're only asking for some of the much requested depth to be added as an entirely optional extra.
Addenda. An example.
Say a player's faction owns a station. Unlike Eve there are no gates to camp, players can jump to anywhere to escape and there is even the option to go into solo. Any interaction must, perforce, be voluntary.
Last edited:
Not at all. Remember, these aren't just 'factions' of the type that we recognise from other MMOs. These are massive governmental organisations. Sure, in RL, you could join the labour/democratic or conservative/republican parties but the chances of you ever being in a position where YOU as an individual could do anything are very very remote. FD recognises this reality and recognises it in the game by not even giving you that chance. If they did then it would be some other game, not ED.
So what's the point in having them, if nothing you do has any effect at all? And nothing they do have any noticeable effect?
Right now, it's not worth it to do any missions for any factions, except for Federation/Empire/Alliance reputation. Might as well just have 3 factions then, one for each government. Why bother with 1-5 factions per system, if they're just there for the 3 main governments?
They add almost nothing to the game as it is now.
Last edited:
A slight adaptation would be, rather than player corps appearing as a faction you instead can align yourself to an existing faction. (No need to vet names - you simply pick a side and declare allegiance to it)
Nothing extra would be required in terms of missions as you're simply doing the ones that exist already.
Works for solo / group / open .. no need to restrict it to just open.
If the major factions go to war (possible) then you are already sucked into it through your choice, more so if you become KOS to an opposing faction.
Also gives players a hard choice - you were allied to both Fed and Empire; they're at war - pick a side. (The one you don't pick becomes hated - you were their friend but stabbed them in the back)
Discounts should run across the board anyway : Hated by a faction and the costs are more; allied with a faction and the costs are (slightly) reduced on a sliding scale according to your ingame rep.
Still gives people a reason to care
--
In all it's what some of us have been saying - no to player owned things (for now at least) but yes to being able to join something ..
A slight adaptation would be, rather than player corps appearing as a faction you instead can align yourself to an existing faction. (No need to vet names - you simply pick a side and declare allegiance to it)
Nothing extra would be required in terms of missions as you're simply doing the ones that exist already.
Works for solo / group / open .. no need to restrict it to just open.
If the major factions go to war (possible) then you are already sucked into it through your choice, more so if you become KOS to an opposing faction.
Also gives players a hard choice - you were allied to both Fed and Empire; they're at war - pick a side. (The one you don't pick becomes hated - you were their friend but stabbed them in the back)
Discounts should run across the board anyway : Hated by a faction and the costs are more; allied with a faction and the costs are (slightly) reduced on a sliding scale according to your ingame rep.
Still gives people a reason to care
--
In all it's what some of us have been saying - no to player owned things (for now at least) but yes to being able to join something ..
Indeed!
NPC or player faction, I don't care really. OP was just the original idea.
Anything to make me feel like I matter to a faction, and the faction matters to me.
Anything to feel like I matter really ;o)
Last edited:
What are you expecting could change? How would you change it? Becoming allied to a faction and helping them achieve dominance in a system could change the generated mission list is suppose - offering different types (and more lucrative ones). The station could give you a trade discount on commodities, ships and components. They could give you a virtual medal or commendation (as FFE did for the faction missions). Give you access to 'tuned' equipment. What else?
.
As for 'random factions forgotten about as soon as you leave the system' I actually think this is one of the things I like about the game, the feeling that there are 100s or 1000s of groups or corporations out there - even if they are proc.gen. identikit ones. As a lone trader, should I care where my pay-check comes from, beyond 'I've helped them out in the past, they'll give me a discount'.
.
And 'there's nothing to do except gain credits'. This version of Elite is no different from any of the other three in that regard. As a major backer, what did you think would change?
Influencing factions ingame (if they ever get it to work properly) is an extremely slow process and requires the collective work of tens or even hundreds of players to make a significant change, and even then the process is hardcoded to happen over the course of weeks. All this is for good reasons, and falls much more realistic into the game, but it all also takes away alot of the possible sense of progression a player might get.
Now, I dont (repeat DONT) want a single player to be able to change a system over the course of an evening, but point is the process is so slow that a player never gets to feel that their deeds ever acomplishes anything.
The player is "just another commander" in a world of commanders, but maybe our actions SHOULD count a little more then the AI. After all, the AI wont have a game to play if we dont
I agree that I'd like to see the background simulation working, and I do fall into the category of players having little over the underlying systems, without mass intervention, as I believe that does mane for a more realistic, immersive, believable system. I definitely don't believe that players should 'count' for more than AI (members of the pilot federation or not
). All should be equal - I'd love to see the AI dominating the bulk of the simulation (ship numbers on the station screen for example). But this is stymied by the p2p nature of the game (lack of NPCs and persistence of NPCs due to bandwidth issues) in the first instance, and the scale of the galaxy in the second (necessitating sweeping abstractions). Bottom line I suppose is I'd rather 'live' in a believable, simulated, uncaring universe as a backdrop to my activities, than have me and my friends be the 'chosen ones' of the galaxy..
*EDIT* I do believe that E: D needs more choices and consequences, that have long-term impact on the player, e.g. if I join a large organisation like the Federation, the should exclude me from high ranks in the Empire, and should make me mistrusted in their space (subject to trade penalties, further system permit restrictions etc.). Conversely, it should give bonuses in Federation space etc.
Last edited:
I can't disagree with you that the game was marketed as a co-op game and besides from limited ability to play with my friend, it's not what I expected out of the box.
But wings are coming. I think it should have been a priority to have this at launch but have had fun without it and am glad it's now a focus. I am reasonable enough to understand why it's late. Along with a number of other features. FD aren't a huge multi million Dev. I've tempered my expectations to that fact. Because of this, I've been pleasantly surprised by the quality so far.
That is true.
The question is: shall we await anything from these main factions then? Not really.
What the main question could be is to ask for player created organizations where these goals can be met and what provides ways to play our creativity.
ED is a game ( I guess) so if there's the same scale to meet in every aspect like in real life, why play and not live real life then
Don't get me wrong: it's a great feature to have large scale factions which change very slowly as they are like whales in politics. But in a game players may look for the psychological excitement for more rapid gameplay and where they can take effect on the world other than increasing a bank balance and where the game world responds to them accordingly. That's a reason why it's worthy to spend time playing together in an artificial world.
And that's what ED doesn't seem to offer (yet).
I wouldn't mind the big factions because they are really not my scale to affect. That is something FD can manually manage like it is happeining now.
But let's get some tools we can be creative with - that's the motivation behind gaming. (I mean above 6 years old.)