Player control of systems/structures in Elite? A (hopefully) definitive poll.

[talshiarr]

The other busy Eve/Elite thread is full of opinions all over the spectrum so I wanted everyone to get a better sense of what the overall sentiment is. Obviously there's even more finely grained amounts of control than what I gave options for, so if you're of an "other" opinion, please post it.

I'll put my cards on the table and say that while I'd certainly like more responsive player feedback and perhaps slightly increased influence over some aspects of the background political and economic systems, I don't want to see player corps/guilds/whatever you want to call them owning stations or system governments because by design that eliminates solo and private groups from the equation unless they simply don't see those open-world stations. Such stations would have to be in presently unpopulated systems and could conflict with something FD themselves have in mind. I don't think players have any business being able to destroy NPC-run stations, or blockade traffic either.

 

[Maccus]

Why does it have to be like EVE? Can't it be something, I dunno, with a unique identity of it's own?

 

[talshiarr]

Why does it have to be like EVE? Can't it be something, I dunno, with a unique identity of it's own?

It doesn't. That's what poll options 1 and 2 are all about.

 

[Defacto]

It doesn't. That's what poll options 1 and 2 are all about.

I think it's meant as a rhetorical question.

I really don't think that this is what FD should spend their resources on. There's so many possibilities to follow, and so many necessities that are not in the game yet, with the game suffering for it. I don't think the game would do better for the things that this features brings with it, but I do think that it will do worse for the problems that will come with this feature (as with any new feature).

 

[WO-One]

I agree with the E philosophy of one person in one ship (you can own as many as you like but only fly and control one at a time).

So using that as a basis, if a player can afford to buy a station, they should be able to buy it, but all you can do is sit in the chair, it does not fly about or do any of the wonderful things we can do, see or go, let's face it, you'd soon get bored!!!!

However I'd like to be able to join station factions the same way you can join the main factions when in a combat zone.

 

[Daffan]

I like how the top option is the NPC-simulation is fine as is

What npc simulation?

The trading simulation is non-existant. Missions respawn when you relog. The factions don't even change % half the time. Where is the simulation? It's all locally based on your own PC.

 

[emailformygames]

I agree with the E philosophy of one person in one ship (you can own as many as you like but only fly and control one at a time).

So using that as a basis, if a player can afford to buy a station, they should be able to buy it, but all you can do is sit in the chair, it does not fly about or do any of the wonderful things we can do, see or go, let's face it, you'd soon get bored!!!!

However I'd like to be able to join station factions the same way you can join the main factions when in a combat zone.

Honestly being air traffic controller for a station kinda sounds like fun... Would have to manage the que and give a docking ship a big enough landing pad plus you would have to watch for any infractions and you'd get to blow people up who are trespassing! Come to think of it I would probably be willing to pay for an expansion like that in the future - call it Elite: Dangerous - Traffic Controller

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

If the poll had quoted the background sim as specified in the DDA, rather than the half baked thing we have now, it would have been more useful.

 

[anikaiful]

A mix between 2nd, 3rd and 4th option. "Guild" decals and such, ayep - FD could get a lil' bit of revenue with those, too (all decals and anything player-created artwork has to be moderated anyhow, IMO).

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

I get a good laugh whenever I see all of the FUD boil to the surface as soon as anything regarding EvE is mentioned.
|
Had the OP said player organizations with the ability to play as independent factions or to work for the big three, expanding inhabited space and building stations, everyone would have had a good chin scratching session over the benefits before someone posted something along the lines of "We don't need to be like that nasty 3 letter word" and then the mob mentality would set in.
|
Folks, it has nothing to do with Eve Online. Players are naturally social and naturally work together to build societies. Putting these elements in any game makes it, you guessed it, compatible with human nature.

 

[Drexel Viehbock]

bah...

Seriously? NO, just no! Mmmmkay?

 

[talshiarr]

Hey, at least I didn't mention that other nasty TWO letter space game !

 

[Robert Maynard]

Folks, it has nothing to do with Eve Online. Players are naturally social and naturally work together to build societies. Putting these elements in any game makes it, you guessed it, compatible with human nature.

.... and, human nature being what it is, those social structures would soon be capable of being quite anti-social - something that I believe DBOBE is trying to avoid in this game.

 

[CMDRKNac]

I would really like to be some of those who can set their bar so low that they are fine with what we got... a buggy non-sense bare bones background simulation in-top of a glorified grind game. Basically a life-less non-game which has no lasting value or depth to it. That people can even consider voting that option blows my mind about either the fanaticism, state of denial or simplicity (pick one) of part of the player base.

I really hope FD sets their bar a bit higher though.

 

[Phaaded]

LOL, the majority of people vote that the background sim is fine as is. They obviously have no idea what the state of the game is.

 

[Jezzah]

LOL, the majority of people vote that the background sim is fine as is. They obviously have no idea what the state of the game is.

So true it's painful. Likely that many have not played long enough to really appreciate how shallow it is.

 

[Defacto]

LOL, the majority of people vote that the background sim is fine as is. They obviously have no idea what the state of the game is.

I certainly do, but I interpret ''as is without such features'' as what was promised in the DDF and not something else. Do you think there is a poll choice that closer reflects this opinion?

 

[rapace]

I voted the last option, is a good idea

 

[Jezzah]

I certainly do, but I interpret ''as is without such features'' as what was promised in the DDF and not something else. Do you think there is a poll choice that closer reflects this opinion?

Forget the DDF that is a work of utter fiction which FD will cherry pick from rather than implement as evidenced several times now since release especially by Michael Brooke's in his usual terse manner.

 

[CMDRKNac]

I certainly do, but I interpret ''as is without such features'' as what was promised in the DDF and not something else. Do you think there is a poll choice that closer reflects this opinion?

The ignorance of the player base is bad then, because it only gives FD space to under deliver and sets the bar really low. And answering your question directly: "No ownership of structures/government, but perhaps more player influence in affairs and prices." would be more appropriate, because right now is a joke.