In game travel - the critical flaw?

[Lestat]

Sometimes it is. Mostly it isn't.

I haven't yet done any of the Guardian stuff because it looks a bit laborious, but at some point it's going to tickle my fancy and I'll do it. Just because I currently don't want to play that part of the game (as I wouldn't enjoy it) doesn't mean it needs changing. The correct attitude, for me, is "don't play that part of the game".

Hay I salute you. It is your choice. If you ever need help Just ask.

Exactly, that is what I thought all normal people did! For example, I have no interest in PowerPlay, Squadrons, or PvP, so I have just not done any of those activities. Yet I am not on the forums 'suggesting' changes to any of those three activities on the off chance that the changes I suggest might make those aspects of the game more attractive to me. There is enough in the game to keep me occupied, heck my 'to-do' list grows each week.

Same here. Unless they ask to have Open get more credit vs Solo or Private.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Its not a suggestion to change its griping about change and wanting an almost universally popular upgrade rolled back in some cases by people who have never even tried it.



Nobodies saying you can't propose them, you however are definitely stuck in a rut of saying people shouldn't oppose them.

It works equally both ways or your argument immediately falls flat, which it already has done. Its not a persuasive argument its an indication you lack one when you demand your own freedom of speech whilst wanting other people limited in that area.

I can’t see how you could have misconstrued by argument any further than you have.

The OP didn’t come up with a suggestion, in the suggestions forum, but I never actually referred to his case as the impetus for my gripe. I made a general statement about suggestions and the people who respond in the way I mentioned.

By telling people who make suggestions that instead they should just not play that part of the game, you’re effectively telling them not to make a suggestion.

Lastly, I made no general demand for freedom of speech, but rather just established some parameters for valid discussion of proposals.

 

[Lestat]

You know I have always use mechanics in the game to help you. Galaxy map/System map. Or even take the risk and take a mission knowing it might be too far. You can always discard that mission.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

I am beginning to wonder if you realise the scope of your proposed change? It isn't like suggesting a weapon gets changed or a module gets a nerf/buff to make it more appealing. What you are asking is a radical change to the fundamental core of the game, the very way we all play it. Jumping is the game, if your aren't jumping between systems you aren't playing the game. And you want that to change because you feel it is boring. Well it is supposed to be boring, it conveys the vast distances we are travelling. We aren't dropping around the corner, we are flying Light Years. Some people play the game to only that, to get as far away from humanity as they can. They don't care if they are jumping once a minute, it is the journey they look for, the chance of discovery, of wonder, of people the first human to see some unique feature.

I think you have me confused with the OP. I didn’t make that suggestion.

However, you’ve responded to the specifics of the suggestion/gripe, which is a completely valid and productive way to address it. That’s what I’m encouraging.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Goal posts moved.

I already stated that criticism on the specifics of a proposal is perfectly valid. You don’t have to agree with any suggestion. What I’ve taken issue with is people telling those putting forward ideas, that they shouldn’t do so, and should just choose not to play those parts of the game, or in some cases telling them to go play a different game rather than making a suggestion.

Problem is, at some point that is the correct answer. If the only way you're going to enjoy Elite is if it more closely resembles a different game, then maybe you* should be playing that game instead?


* generic 'you', not you specifically.

 

[Stigbob]

I can’t see how you could have misconstrued by argument any further than you have.

The OP didn’t come up with a suggestion, in the suggestions forum, but I never actually referred to his case as the impetus for my gripe. I made a general statement about suggestions and the people who respond in the way I mentioned.

By telling people who make suggestions that instead they should just not play that part of the game, you’re effectively telling them not to make a suggestion.

Lastly, I made no general demand for freedom of speech, but rather just established some parameters for valid discussion of proposals.

Play the games and parts of games you enjoy is good advice.

Wanting people limited in what they can and can't say limits any valid discussion.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

I think you have me confused with the OP. I didn’t make that suggestion.

Out of interest, what was your suggestion? I think it's getting lost in the signal/noise and we're now up to 32 pages..!

 

[Stigbob]

Good thing I didn’t call anyone any names then, but rather identified a category of behaviour, and pointed it out.

Let the mods know if you think that's whats happening, we both know why you haven't done that already though.

 

[Ca$hback]

When you don't recognize your confirmation bias but exclude arguments based on it it's time for reflection.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Problem is, at some point that is the correct answer. If the only way you're going to enjoy Elite is if it more closely resembles a different game, then maybe you* should be playing that game instead?


* generic 'you', not you specifically.

That’s their choice to make, though it seems that they like the game enough to go to the trouble of coming up with ideas to improve it.

As to it resembling other games, well that’s something that can happen if such suggestions are implemented by the developers, in which case, Elite would become a different game. Technically though, every change changes the game, just some more than others.

However, I don’t see it as invalid to suggest something that would change the nature of the game. It may be a horrible idea, but it’s as valid as any suggestion, with valid meaning submissibal as a suggestion on the forum, and not meaning something that should be implemented.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Play the games and parts of games you enjoy is good advice.

Not in response to a suggestion for change. Obviously the person who went to the trouble of coming up with an idea and submitting it on the forum knows very well that they can choose not to play that part of the game, or even play the game at all. So what purpose to throw that in their face when they’re making a suggestion, other than to intimate that they shouldn’t be making such a suggestion?

Wanting people limited in what they can and can't say limits any valid discussion.

That is demonstrably untrue. If for example you conduct a meeting with a specific purpose, and aiming for an outcome, you want to discourage off topic tangents, and forms of interaction that will derail the discussion, so that you can ensure the discussion remains valid at all.

Calling a meeting just so those in attendance can tell you that you should rather not call the meeting instead, is not going to result in a valid discussion.

 

[Sir.Tj]

After reviewing the thread I'd say it's run its course so I'm closing it.