Lead Designers advice on dealing with griefing (part 2)

On topic... Xbox, we had the recent contacts tab briefly after 2.3 went live, but it soon disappeared. Anyone shed any light on why this is? PS4 players have it still. Is it simply redundant because of the Xbox Live blocking method? I've never heard an explanation for its sudden disappearance.
 
I wouldn't be too hasty with the block list.

Avoiding becoming a victim by playing the game rather than using the block list can be a lot of fun and satisfying too.

Sure it can be frustrating if it doesn't go your way but being patient and watching what is going on and finding a way around it is exciting for me. I'm even friends with some known unscrupulous cmdrs so I am more likely to encounter these situations lol.
 
On topic... Xbox, we had the recent contacts tab briefly after 2.3 went live, but it soon disappeared. Anyone shed any light on why this is? PS4 players have it still. Is it simply redundant because of the Xbox Live blocking method? I've never heard an explanation for its sudden disappearance.
I believe the contacts list was causing game crashes.
 
Someone didn't read all the way to the bottom...
...and probably doesn't care either.

Disclaimer: I'm a Soloist and never likely to play in Open.

However, I do think that the Block/Friend lists do allow fine-tuning of the player experience and I would have no qualms about using them if I were in Open.

Just my opinion.
 
To me, this thread is just a rehash, one not entirely needed. In between the jabs, and misdirections of the initial thread, all of the pertinent issues were brought up, and tossed around. Unless you consider this some kind of PSA, it's closer to a thumb in some player's eye, than a real discussion.
 
The whole "block" concept is pretty interesting. Is there somewhere we can collectively build a list of all the KOS murder hobos and griefers? That way instead of forcing all the players to go to solo of mobius, we can slowly push them out of open? Every time before logging in, we could enter a list of players to block. I'd do it if it meant reclaiming open for the community.
 
To me, this thread is just a rehash, one not entirely needed. In between the jabs, and misdirections of the initial thread, all of the pertinent issues were brought up, and tossed around. Unless you consider this some kind of PSA, it's closer to a thumb in some player's eye, than a real discussion.
Not really, testing is still ongoing and we've also had very recent input from our xbox brethren. Which could beg the question do we need block effectiveness parity across all platforms.
 
In the words of David Braben "What would I want from a game ?, I want to be able to play a great game without being griefed by teenagers. But having said that I do want a feeling of risk out there"

About 7 minutes in.
Jaw-droppingly hilarious quote there from Dave. He manages to insult a sector of his playerbase (PEGI 7 this, remember) in demonstrating his assumption that only 'teenagers' will be indulging in the behaviour he's talking about, I mean what, is he OK with being griefed by adults, whilst also saying that he wants a 'feeling of risk out there' - presumablyh this 'feeling of risk' is referring to a roleplay risk that he can imagine is present rather than an actual risk such as the risk of being attacked by another player?

As for the premise of your thread here stigbob, if it was solely pitched at what you refer to as 'station griefers' by which I assume you mean the players ramming other players who are speeding and can't be bothered using the mechanics provided by the game world to avoid harm, or missiling playes as they leave the station, or laying mines inside it, all of which are actions that the game allows, or provides in-game sanctions for, I'd still think it was on dodgy ground to be honest, but I can at least see how you've constructed your mental case for it based on the fact that a lot of players moan about those things.

Simply encouraging players to block other players who may want to oppose their actions at a CG though is genuinely disgraceful in my opinion because it has nothing whatsoever to do with griefing. You can quote Sandro all you like mate because his comments are about griefing and you are not describing griefing according to the terms of reference that anybody I know who has played games with any sort of frequency this millennium would recognise. You are literally describing gameplay and nothing more.

If you disagree with that, I'd like you to explain to me where Dave's 'feling of risk' is supposed to enter the equation in flying cargo from station A to station B with no risk whatsoever of bneing attacked by a player because you've blocked them on the misunderstanding that to attack you is griefing.

I'll include my usual disclaimer here. You will not find anybody who is more vehemently opposed to genuine griefing in games than me, it is a plague on online gaming and nobody should be expected to tolerate it. Players choosing to attack other players in a game which allows that is not griefing. What particularly iritates me about this is that every time someone falsely throws that term around, it actually detracts from the seriousness of genuine griefing, for example people being given serious racial abuse, sexual slurs, real-life death threats or threats of violence in-game and individual players being specifically targeted for continual harrassment with the aim of forcing them to stop playing the game altogether.

None of that meets your criteria for you reporting this post by the way because I haven't said a single word about modes. As far as I'm aware, none of it is in breach of any forum rules either.

Slight off-topic interjection:

OP was in communication with the mod team and was given the go-ahead to try a Mk2 version of the original thread.
Have to be honest, I'm also fairly astonished that the mod team are encouraging and supporting a thread which seems to be based in one player's understanding of a gaming term which seems to be vastly at odds with the commonly accepted one, especially in view of the reported consequences of excessive use of the block and the difficulty it can cause with instancing for other players who would not have any problem at all with the activities of players that another player may block.

I genuinely can't think of another game I've played where this kind of thing would happen, I just find it all so very odd.
 
Last edited:
Have to be honest, I'm also fairly astonished that the mod team are encouraging and supporting a thread which seems to be based in one player's understanding of a gaming term which seems to be vastly at odds with the commonly accepted one, especially in view of the reported consequences of excessive use of the block and the difficulty it can cause with instancing for other players who would not have any problem at all with the activities of players that another player may block.
Perhaps the OP successfully argued that, until the original thread was hijacked by certain members of the forum, the thread was calm collected and serving a really good purpose.

I genuinely can't think of another game I've played where this kind of thing would happen, I just find it all so very odd.
Ah, Elite is not any other game. It's unique.


Sorry OP, I was off topic there. I'll try not to do it again. I might even succeed.
 
Someone does you foul then by all means block them. But to search Youtube etc and then block any and all is going a bit far.
 
Inb4 that one guy pops into the thread insisting that griefing its breaking/ violating the EULA lol.

That said i really dislike blocking and play in Open with no one on my block list. I can always high wake away afterall
 
Inb4 that one guy pops into the thread insisting that griefing its breaking/ violating the EULA lol.

That said i really dislike blocking and play in Open with no one on my block list. I can always high wake away afterall
It's not an EULA breach.

But neither is blocking him after he's finished you.
 
Top Bottom