I'm concerned – the direction of the game.

[jabokai]

I don't see why you could think that. OK, so your perspective on PvP seems to be a minority one. A sizeable minority, perhaps, but still a minority. With the transponder ident model, you will be able to fly with and immediately identify those whose PoV is the same as yours. And you will fly with, but not immediately identify those that disagree. If FD instead kept the permanent ID on approach from the alpha, significant numbers have made it clear they would feel that they have to go into single player mode or private groups.

All that is only from the isolated (and let's face it - old and diehard) people on the forums... I don't believe for a second that we're representing the gaming world at large in here.

 

[Daeron]

It means nothing but "the game in the game" and pretty much every single multiplayer game in existance has some kind of metagame. It's basically a synonym for "strategy".

Examples of metagaming in some popular multiplayer games:

Dota2/LoL: Which heroes do you pick to counter the other team. Which items do you purchase, which order and when do you purchase them? Which ability combination is good for defeating the other players?

Counter-Strike: Which player do you send where. Which positions do you hold. How do you manage your money per round. Where do you throw your grenades. Which strategy do you use to assault a map location. How do you counter the strategy of the other team?

StarCraft: Which build order do you use to respond to what you know about the other player. Which composition of units do you use, which combination works for this situation and this particular map. Which strategy can you use today because tomorrow everyone will know how to defeat it?

Quake: Which route do you go down when you spot your opponent. Which items do you try and pick up and which items do you deny when they re-spawn. Which weapon do you use at this very moment and why?

ED will have metagaming too. Someone will come up with a maneuver that gives them an upper hand in combat. Then it will be popularized and someone will come up with a counter maneuver. Congratulations... metagaming.

My definition of metagaming include elements that goes beyond the physical representation of the gameworld. It is in the word itself. "Beyond" the game. To say metagaming is synonymous with strategy, is to narrow one single aspect down, and quantify it based on a singular aspect in a sea of possibilities.

Real world elements that takes you out of the game setting, will also take you "beyond" the game. Strategy is neither here or there. It belongs in the game, as well as out of game. It is what you base it on, that creates the definition, external sources might not go "beyond" the scope of the nature of your game(world), but they can go beyond the scope of what the game intended mechanically or naturally. Suddenly two different aspects emerge, based on the same origin! So with all due respect, metagaming is *not* synonymous with strategy, for that is a more ageless and encompassing aspect, influenced by the flow of information, more than anything. Information flow is not a metagame concept by itself. It depends on the variables involved.

In short, metagaming represent elements that take you beyond the format of the game, but exchange of ideas is not technically outside of the scope of the game. For we simulate what we already are, so technically you might supplement what is given, or exploit the intention of what is given. Both synonymous with strategy. But it doesn't mean the game should come with support reflecting any of those strategies. That is what I mean by (not) including metagame elements in the game. If it clearly does not belong there, it should reside in the external format. To exploit or expand on. That is half of the 4X right there. Strategy for ya!

 

[Malicar]

All that is only from the isolated (and let's face it - old and diehard) people on the forums... I don't believe for a second that we're representing the gaming world at large in here.

With age comes wisdom, with experience comes confidence...

 

[madmechanic4u]

my gosh u guys... game aint even up yet! i just want to see what its like before i have any opinions on anything lol

 

[Mazhurg]

With age comes wisdom, with experience comes confidence...

Could play it differently:

With age comes Alzheimer, with experience comes habit.

 

[Daeron]

Not in my book. And not according to Wikipedia, either:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagaming
The important points there are the 'outside the game' and 'beyond the rules' bits. I think that making a decision on action to take based on whether the ship is a PC or an NPC is metagaming. I think that what you described is strategy - as you said.

Wish I had seen this a little earlier!

 

[Malicar]

Could play it differently:

With age comes Alzheimer, with experience comes habit.

Lol so true but I'm not THAT old! David is older than I am but I'm almost old enough for Fleet Commander. As for PvP I served in several Eve wars and play WoW on Kil Jaden PvP server. I just hate griefing mechanics and cheaters. I love the rest of it though... Private coop sessions will be a nice diversion. I hope single does not require online.

 

[technome]

my gosh u guys... game aint even up yet! i just want to see what its like before i have any opinions on anything lol

How very dare you! This is the internet. It's compulsory to form dogmatic opinions based on the extrapolations of your interpretations of minimal quantities of real data and then present them as the ultimate objective reality.

 

[Cosmos]

I don't see why you could think that. OK, so your perspective on PvP seems to be a minority one. A sizeable minority, perhaps, but still a minority. With the transponder ident model, you will be able to fly with and immediately identify those whose PoV is the same as yours. And you will fly with, but not immediately identify those that disagree. If FD instead kept the permanent ID on approach from the alpha, significant numbers have made it clear they would feel that they have to go into single player mode or private groups. So then you would not only make their experience worse, but would not improve yours: you will still fly with and immediately identify those whose PoV is similar, but not fly with or interact with those that felt they had to run away. Looks like a lose-lose to me. Unless someone comes up with a brand new 'thinking out of the box' solution to this dilemma, the transponder indent looks to be by far the least bad option.

Well hey I've said I'm willing to give it a go, then again I don't have much choice, but I still think its mistaken and in fairness as stated in the KS FAQ we were informed that we'd be able to easily identify other players from NPCs.. However, I do understand your side of the argument too. Yeah I like PvP of course not gonna hide that. I've had some great experiences of the years in that sort of environment and met some great people along the way in many online games, some of which I met as adversaries and many of which remain friends to this day.

But in line with what Zynaps suggested its not actually just the PvP element of the game that concerns. It was obvious from the KS that David made it clear that destroying other peoples ships shouldn't be a regularity and whilst I think thats a little too safe I got on board with the project with the understanding we'd at least be able to see who other people were in the game. I don't think its too unreasonable of me to have that expectation when it was clearly defined in no uncertain terms.

 

[Cosmos]

my gosh u guys... game aint even up yet! i just want to see what its like before i have any opinions on anything lol

True but its gonna be a bit late to change things once they are fully implemented which is why we have discussions about the game now and put forward our views.

 

[madmechanic4u]

LOL i forgot its the the internet way!

 

[Malicar]

Well hey I've said I'm willing to give it a go but I still think its mistaken and in fairness as stated in the KS FAQ we were informed that we'd be able to easily identify other players from NPCs.. However, I do understand your side of the argument too. Yeah I like PvP of course not gonna hide that. I've had some great experiences of the years in that sort of environment and met some great people along the way in many online games, some of which I met as adversaries and many of which remain friends to this day.

But in line with what Zynaps suggested its not actually just the PvP element of the game that concerns. It was obvious from the KS that David made it clear that destroying other peoples ships shouldn't be a regularity and whilst I think thats a little too safe I got on board with the project with the understanding we'd at least be able to see who other people were in the game. I don't think its too unreasonable of me to have that expectation when it was clearly defined in no uncertain terms.

Just scan your targets and realize your going to have to work for it unlike other games that troll innocents by giving away their locations and info. You will eventually find some hubs to hunt near etc. Won't be as bad as people think with a huge player base all connecting dynamically. Plus it's very early still and things are subject to change.

 

[metatheurgist]

All that is only from the isolated (and let's face it - old and diehard) people on the forums... I don't believe for a second that we're representing the gaming world at large in here.

That may not be a bad thing....

 

[zynaps]

Your understanding of the term seems to be a bit mistaken. Metagaming is actually gaming *around* the game, not inside it.

An example is using knowledge that your character would not have within the game to get a result, such as using maps or cheat sheets provided on the internet. Another example would be using out of game chat clients in a game where the ability to chat to other players is limited by proximity.

Well, my understanding of the term comes from being a (I guess hardcore) online multiplayer gamer. Even though I'm approaching 40 now I have a couple of thousand hours logged in CS:GO, Dota2 and SC2 combined over the last three years (all highly competitive games) and I follow the pro-scene and esport aspects of those games quite rigorously. In the online multiplayer communities the term "metagaming" means something similar but still different from what the Wikipedia entry describes.

Here's a link that describes how us "onliners" use the term: The urbandictionary definition of metagaming

The highest level of strategy in many complex games, metagame refers to any aspect of strategy that involves thinking about what your opponent is thinking you are thinking.

Metagame comes into play in any game where no single strategy is dominant and opposing sides are aware of multiple strategies that can succeed dependent upon opponents' actions. In order to perform at the highest level, it then becomes necessary to think about what your opponent thinks you will do (which may depend on what he thinks you think he thinks he will do, etc.) and to make decisions based on clues regarding what level they are thinking on.

I'm aware that metagaming can be applied to the real world as well but us "online gamers" usually use it to describe evolving and emergent strategies and counterstrategies. A game which has a changing metagame is a game that doesn't get boring quickly since there's always something new to learn.

I mean there's plenty of megacorps that are "metagaming" the tax office as we speak but as an online gamer when someone says they don't like metagaming I take it they like predictable games with little replayability

All in all just a misunderstanding it seems

 

[Nicodemus]

But in line with what Zynaps suggested its not actually just the PvP element of the game that concerns. It was obvious from the KS that David made it clear that destroying other peoples ships shouldn't be a regularity and whilst I think thats a little too safe I got on board with the project with the understanding we'd at least be able to see who other people were in the game. I don't think its too unreasonable of me to have that expectation when it was clearly defined in no uncertain terms.

In EvE the players were told that Titans would be something that a corporation would only really have 1 of due to the expense and the time invested in getting it. The player base however made a mockery of that and you now regularly can see some corps field 10 plus at a time.

In time the player base will begin to mold the game, you may find that players will interact more with each other as the game develops and rivalries begin. Let the game get made, then help shape it by playing it. Who knows, in a few years time we could see a major interstellar war begin between the various factions that was a result of player involvement.

 

[Cosmos]

Well, my understanding of the term comes from being a (I guess hardcore) online multiplayer gamer. Even though I'm approaching 40 now I have a couple of thousand hours logged in CS:GO, Dota2 and SC2 combined over the last three years (all highly competitive games) and I follow the pro-scene and esport aspects of those games quite rigorously. In the online multiplayer communities the term "metagaming" means something similar but still different from what the Wikipedia entry describes.

Spoiler

Here's a link that describes how us "onliners" use the term: The urbandictionary definition of metagaming



I'm aware that metagaming can be applied to the real world as well but us "online gamers" usually use it to describe evolving and emergent strategies and counterstrategies. A game which has a changing metagame is a game that doesn't get boring quickly since there's always something new to learn.

I mean there's plenty of megacorps that are "metagaming" the tax office as we speak but as an online gamer when someone says they don't like metagaming I take it they like predictable games with little replayability

All in all just a misunderstanding it seems

Thats how I understand it and I have the same gaming background as you and in the same age group. I tell you one thing, SC2 is a bloody hard game. I think the largest barrier to that game is developing ones skills enough to be able to enjoy it. I had to stop playing that in the end, the cheese drove me up the wall.. I've never gotten so wound up over any game. Its a great game but seems not for me, at least if I wanted to maintain my sanity.

 

[zynaps]

Thats how I understand it and I have the same gaming background as you and in the same age group. I tell you one thing, SC2 is a bloody hard game. I think the largest barrier to that game is developing ones skills enough to be able to enjoy it. I had to stop playing that in the end, the cheese drove me up the wall.. I've never gotten so wound up over any game. Its a great game but seems not for me.

Same. I've stopped playing it almost entirely because of stress and ladder anxiety. I feel I'm too old to learn new tricks. Sometimes I dabble in 4v4 fun games, usually after numbing myself with a few pints

But back on topic; The transponder issue is largely a moot point. Personally I don't care much and the reason why comes down to experience. We humans are good at seeing patterns and most players will after a short amount of time be able to tell NPC from PC in a matter of seconds based on behaviour alone.

Transponder and identification aside; Can't the debate of PvP and PvE simply be solved with binding your characters to one of three tiers: single player offline, pve/co-op (via invite) and finally, full online mode with pvp?

 

[Adept]

Client side data is a scary thing in today's world.

Client side data just can not be. I can't imagine any way to make that secure and reliable. Your ships state of repair, your funds, cargo, Elite status... all of that has to be dealt with by the server. I can't see anything else working.

 

[Cosmos]

Same. I've stopped playing it almost entirely because of stress and ladder anxiety. I feel I'm too old to "learn" new tricks. Sometimes I dabble in 4v4 fun games, usually after numbing myself with a few pints

Ladder anxiety is an odd concept which I experienced too. Its quite a stressful game I found.. To be a grandmaster is a pretty exceptional achievement.

 

[Mazhurg]

Client side data just can not be. I can't imagine any way to make that secure and reliable. Your ships state of repair, your funds, cargo, Elite status... all of that has to be dealt with by the server. I can't see anything else working.

Well, while it does increase traffic, it probably could be done in concert with other connected clients as peer verifications. Even then I can see all sort of issues and obstacles in validating the data.